Why is it Easier to be a Mass Murderer in the USA than in Europe?

1st these weapons are not designed to kill mass amounts of people. And 2nd they are and can be for defensive use!

I don't know why people think that is what this particular gun was made for is mass shootings?! That is a ridiculous statement.
This gun can also used for hunting. You "can" shoot this gun one shot at a time. I am assuming you do not shoot guns?
So, an XD that has a magazine that holds 16+1 round is for mass shootings?

I wish people that have no knowledge of weapons would take a gun class! Or at least look up normal people with guns who have saved others who didn't have one. The media doesn't cover that!
I hope this posts correctly, I haven't been here in a while, some things have changed!

 

"I hope I do one right. Answer, is the Answer Obama? And was it Pelosi who said you have to pass it to see what is in it?"

 

You get it....but you got it wrong as usual. Out of 480,000 visa overstays in 2015 ICE actually arrested less than 2,000. Please tell us why you think they would do any better of a job at keeping guns from the hands of terrorists? Out of $90 Billion dollars in Medicare Fraud the Government recovers 5% or less, please tell us why you think they would do any better of a job at keeping guns from the hands of terrorists? Please answer in detail before you make any other false allegations.

 

When gun violence breaks out in Europe tens of millions of people die. Such is not the case in North America.

 

How hard is it for you to get drugs?

Now realize that the same is true for black market guns. It's simply a matter of price not difficulty.

 

Don't you find it unbelievable that this has to be explained to people who are allegedly adults? Good grief!

 

The legally accepted definition of what constitutes a mass shooting/killing is at least four people killed during the same incident. There are those seeking to change the qualifications to lower the threshold, and increase the count of what they consider to be mass shootings.

 

“War in Afghanistan takes its toll on Pakistan's local weapons manufacturers
The local weapons industry in Pakistan's recalcitrant northwest has seen a sharp decline in the last three decades. Now, weapons from all over the world are readily available in the local market at knock down prices.

Elyas, 11, prepares the last stage for a Kalashnikov in a small arms factory in Darra
It began in the 1980s when Soviet forces invaded Afghanistan. Russian weapons, far superior in their design and performance, started appearing in local markets of Pakistan's tribal areas, and demand for locally-manufactured guns fell drastically.” Author: Shamil Shams, Editor: Grahame Lucas Deutsche Welle ,|War in Afghanistan takes its toll on Pakistan's local weapons manufacturers, 8/2/11. http://www.dw.com/en/war-in-afghani...kistans-local-weapons-manufacturers/a-6431430

Only the very uninformed think that powerful military weapons are hard to obtain now. When there was a shortage 11 year olds ere able to manufacture them from scratch in small workshops.

Guns are a very old technology now. There ave become a very doable DIY project.

 

That may be the USA standard. It's not necessarily the same as other nations which are equally legally accepted and valid. The average American mass shooting comes close to Britain's annual shooting tally. Australia's legally accepted definition is five dead, excluding the killer. Like Britain, they have had no further mass shootings since the introduction of gun controls.

 

Apparently $500 and a few hours time is all you need in certain areas of Belgium. I have seen cannabis dealers here in prohibitionist Australia who have glocks. It's not like the government is going easy on heroin and methods, if they cannot stop the trade in these they cannot stop the trade in firearms.

This is all a moot issue anyway. You can already 3D print an operating firearm, 20 years from now we'll all have access to high quality firearms with a few minutes time and $30 of aluminium. This debate is over what we do before all our policy becomes entirely irrelevant.

 

Make the punishment of carrying a gun in public harsher. Hunting one shot rifles exempted (I don't care what the real name of guns are before anyone points it out) Registered gun dealers are exempted. Anyone found carrying is punished as if they actually intended to use it. Anyone supplying a gun is given the same punishment

 

I emphatically disagree.

When anyone can print a gun in their own home, gun control becomes irrelevant. The state will move to control of gunpowder. You can't print that.

 

You plan on changing the Constitution?

 

That is not a problem to my suggestion. Let people make as many that they like. Just severely prosecute them if those guns are found outside their private properties

- - - Updated - - -

Firstly, why not? There have been many changes to your constitution.

Secondly, my suggestion is that guns can still be owned but only stored on private properties which is still in line with the constitution.

 

Europeans are literally sitting ducks.

 

But they don't believe it they are (*)(*)(*)(*)ing brainwashed. They think the literally millions of Soviet weapons in the former eastern block simply disappeared. No they are for sale on your own black market.

 

Quite sad. Now just wondering how many attacks it will take them to realize they need to be able to protect themselves. Their lands are changing and they are still stuck on cloud 9.

 

Meaning what precisely?

 

Its ridiculously easy to buy guns on the black market. ISIS easily got Soviet AK-47s on the European black market. In our big cities where crime is a way of life the vast majority of all gun homicides are committed by convicted felons. In Baltimore the number is 70%, 70% of all gun homicides in Baltimore are committed by those already convicted a felony. These ex-cons whi commit most of the murders annot legally buy a gun so how do they get them.

Given your avatar I'd say you have bought a lot of drugs on the black market. Guess what it's not harder to buy guns.

 

Hello, begging the question.

If high gun ownership and ease of access correlates with higher murder rates, then please tell me why the murder rate has dropped to about a third of what it was 25 years ago, while gun ownership has skyrocketed, and gun rights have been greatly strengthened.

Also, why do we really care about what other industrialized countries do? This is just the argumentum ad populum fallacy.

- - - Updated - - -

You mean, treat anyone who would defend themselves as if they themselves were the vile murderers they wished to stop?

- - - Updated - - -

Becauze there is no good reason to treat people wishing to defend themselves as if they were vile murderers. In the last few decades we've greatly increased gun rights and ownership, yet the murder rates have dropped dramatically. Clearly the correlation your argument is predicated upon doesn't exist.

 

What's odd is that Western Europeans, with the exception of the Swiss, feel they shouldn't be allowed to protect themselves.

 

Yes. If that criminal became that vile murderer, whether the victim was armed or not would not have made any difference - he would have been dead before he had the time to even think about reaching for his gun

 

How do you know this? There have been many occasions where potential victims were able to defend their lives successfully. It would be great to have the opportunity to defend ourselves and our families from violent criminals, wouldn't you agree?

 

Sounds like a sci-fi fantasy. Want to explain just how that's supposed to work out like that?

 

Pray tell what nonsense are you seeking to claim?