Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by kazenatsu, May 1, 2020.
With suppressors? LOL
And those who support such a cultural shift, are now finding out that the culture they support can and easily will turn on them. Such as the case of the harvard graduate who lost a potential job in response for posting a video online threatening to stab anyone who told her all lives matter.
Is it even known on the part of yourself why sound suppressors are subjected to such regulations in the united states?
During the time of the great depression, game wardens were upset with how animal poachers who were simply trying to feed their families were being let off by sympathetic juries, made up of individuals who understood the plight of those who were simply doing what they needed to do. So the game wardens petitioned the united states federal government to restrict the sound suppressors the poachers were using, subjecting them to onerous burdens most simply could not comply with at the time. That way any prosecution for poachers would be at the federal level, and even if juries sympathized with the poachers, they would still be convicted for illegal use of a sound suppressor.
In short, simple, uncomplicated terms, the restrictions on sound suppressors came into existence out of petty spite, rather than any pressing need relating to public safety.
Yes, we don't catch them quickly enough. We don't punish them enough.
USA has the highest Incarceration Rate in the World.
Why is that? Do you think that there are thousands of assassins killing thousands of people out there?
These are legal in the UK, in France, in the Nordic countries. What do they know that you don't know?
And a lot of those imprisoned are there for victimless drug crimes. That needs to change.
From the back of envelope calculation that an American baby, born today
and living average life expectancy, will see 8,000,000 shootings, and nearly
3,000,000 gun fatalities.
That's what I mean about "loose" guns being a serious issue.
The anti-GM lobby would have GM tech banned over a single death. Here
we are talking about three million deaths.
Thanks for informing me. Now can you provide your own statistics, with links?
No. You made a false claim.
You are correct. I did a search..
Every year, 114,328 people are shot. Among those:
37,603 people die from gun violence
13,380 are murdered
76,725 people survive gunshot injuries
34,566 are intentionally shot by someone else
22,926 died from gun suicide
3,554 survive an attempted gun suicide
478 are killed unintentionally
510 are killed by legal intervention
1,376 are shot by legal intervention
310 die but the intent was unknown
4,471 are shot but the intent is unknown
529 women are killed by their husband or male dating partner**
The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What ultimately, meaningful difference, does such actually make? Why are firearm-related deaths such an overwhelming issue that simply must be addressed above all other issues that lead to or otherwise result in the death of others?
You are retreating in your argument. To most people "so what" isn't a statement they would
contemplate. These figures are numbing - but they are ones you just get used to, just as you
get used to massive increases in Covid.
It is a valid statement to make when one presenting facts and figures believe they somehow prove whatever point they are attempting to make. Even if the citation presented on the part of yourself were indeed factually correct, why does such matter? Why is it so important?
The united states is facing enough problems as it is. Widespread homelessness, unchecked invasion by illegal aliens, an ongoing pandemic that shows no signs of ever stopping and may indeed become part of the new normal, governmental corruption at all levels, the people turning against each other and seeking to harm them on the basis of what word is used in what sentence, inadequate healthcare, widespread addiction to illicit narcotic substances and overdose-related deaths attributed to such, and a myriad of other crises.
So explain precisely why the united states should take focus and finite resources away from those particular and pressing problems, all to try and address the subject of firearms, all in the desperate hope that attempting such will somehow result in fewer deaths in one category or another.
Well, it's like saying "America is facing problems with homelessness, guns, drugs, aliens, corruption etc..
so why should we worry about pandemics"? You need to treat each issue separately.
Please demonstrate that AK47's and AR15's are designed to kill people.
Thank you for demonstrating that you cannot provide a rational, reasoned argument for us to change our constitution re: firearms..
These figures approach statistical zero when compared to the >423,000,000 guns in the US.
Legal firearms ownership is now being compared to a pandemic on the part of yourself?
Do you endorse disarming the police and military?
The police yeah for the majority. Not every cop needs to have a gun. The military are already disarmed when they're not on deployment or training.
So, you're on record saying that the police and military ought not to be armed?
Can't you read?
Yes, I can read. I don't agree with you that the police and military should be disarmed. In fact, I don't think anyone should be disarmed.
Separate names with a comma.