Please show your source for Aussies murdered in the USA each year. Your source for visitors to Australia is dated (data ends in 2003, study published in 2006). Doesn't necessarily reflect Australia today. From what I can gather, our murder rate for tourists is similar to yours. per this Quora article (all the numbers seem reasonable), between 2012 and 2015, That's 1 in a million tourists, which isn't much different from the 0.9 in a million tourists you claimed in 2003. https://www.quora.com/How-many-tourists-have-been-murdered-while-visiting-the-United-States
As are most violent crimes. Very few violent crimes are committed against total strangers. Those that do shock us.
Very true, however GCA's have a different angle, they wish to eliminate the ownership of firearms by the law abiding, including law enforcement, by their actions and words they have clearly indicated they have no interest in disarming criminals because criminals are needed to provide them with the blood, bodies and statistics to further their cause. They are truly some very evil people promoting a cause that will only result in the deaths of many law abiding people, and I believe some of them know that which is really sick, but in the end it is all about control of a populace. History has repeatedly demonstrated what gun bans eventually result in, that being total control of a population and the murdering of anyone who does not toe the governments line and the GCA's are a willing part of that program.
I picked assault rifle, had to make a few assumptions, I figured he was a liberal so more than likely he would not know how to use an AR15 and would shoot the gun backwards and kill himself as the first victim.
Did you reply to the correct thread? This is not about banning guns. Did I make the thread title too tricky?
Or like the Parkland shooter have a feed jam, and not knowing how to clear it, just dump the rifle blend in and flee the scene.
No your thread is about developing reasons for banning guns, I guess you tricked yourself by doing so.
No, it's asking you that if a nutter picked up a weapon and went to the mall, did you hope he picked a knife or an assault rifle up. Those who can't comprehend the thread title are really in the wrong thread.
And I have already answered that question. Those who produce a thread title, that is not definitive, are opening their thread to all sorts of opinions and have no grounds to complain about them, you caused that problem not I. Your thread is click bait so get used to what you receive from the wording of it's title. By the way using the term nutter is a clear indication of the narrative you have already subscribed to.
punishment ends when the sentence ends, you want a longer punishment you increase the sentence.... simple, no need to violate the 2nd amendment (but I guess not everyone really supports the 2nd Amendment)
That negates the need for Red Flag laws, if someone was sentenced for a violent crime under most Red Flag laws they meet the requirements to have their firearms confiscated.
Wrong. Convicted felons loose consideration for many jobs; the right to bear arms has NEVER been considered absolute by ANY Supreme Court decision. You never knew that ?
If these individuals are considered to be too dangerous to ever be allowed to legally own or possess firearms, then they are too dangerous to ever be allowed free back into society. The matter is that simple.
It is a simple question, which one do you prefer he had picked up. Change the word nutter to an office worker, wearing a suit with a degree and has everything to live for. Choose the character, perpetrator, villian description that you wish. He's very upset, he's gone home, he's picked the weapon up and gone to the mall to cause a massacre, to get revenge. And the really really really simple question is, did you hope he picked a knife up or an assault rifle because he was going to go with one.
Well, you’ve convinced me. Knife or AR15, that either can happen is justification for me to continue being armed.
It’s a transparent leading question people refuse to answer because they see the biased motive behind it. But, it is one where you can spin non answers to one of the two themes you’ve exhibited in your history of posting; you can use it, as you are implying, to disparage Americans.
The flip side of your “poll”, if a bad guy is intent on public havoc in an enclosed space would you rather A) be an unarmed sheep waiting slaughter? B) have a firearm about you for a semblance of resistance?
I'm from the UK, so I would have to imagine I'm in a violent gun country. So I would choose my shot gun, but, it's locked up in a secure cabinet at home, I don't go shopping with a gun. See, I can answer questions, can you? Would you hope the guy picks up a knife or assault rifle?
