LA Times Admits Australian-Style Gun Control Would Do Nothing

I see no one backs you up on this fanciful dishonest tale you create because you are upset we don't believe your claims that you don't support gun bans. Since I have never called for blacks to be disarmed, your silly argument has no merit

 

You can run from your plan.....but I will always remind you. I am still waiting for you to post a SINGLE post of where I advocated a gun ban. LOL

 

First off, this is about mass shootings, as in someone shooting random people in a short amount of time. Second, you mean to tell me that up until the buy back, it was perfectly legal or at the very least very common for people to go around and shoot indigenous people?

 

It sure happened. That is a simple fact

 

No, we shouldn't. And even if we should, we can't. It's black letter Unconstitutional.

 

F*** the constitution.

 

Such a law would be blatantly Unconstitutional, both on a plain content reading, and perhaps more importantly, based on the Heller decision being extended to long guns.

 

Sorry, that's not how things work. Perhaps it's best you find somewhere else to live.

 

No, I like it here, you can move though if you'd like.

 

The single biggest law change to reduce homicides in general, not just by firearms, would be to end the War on (some) Drugs.

 

Bull!

Hoddell street Milperra, Queen Street, central coast massacre Strathfield massacre to name a few

And do not even start to go there with the slaughter of the Indigenous inhabitants. Just north of where I live 200 men were killed, south is where 150 skulls were sighted

 

And where is that plan working currently?

 

I believe in the Constitution. You do not. That makes you Unamerican, and unworthy. I once swore an oath to defend and protect her to the point of giving my life if necessary. That oath came with no expiration date.

 

No, your biggest impact would be to mandate some responsibility. Too many child deaths. Mandate that guns should be locked away when not in use. It would also address your horrible gun suicide rate

 

Unimpressed. I don't believe you know what real sacrifice is. Further, the Constitution was written over 200 years ago, things change.

 

First off, the title says gun deaths were lowered by the buy back and yet most of the article was dedicated to mass shootings and only one or two paragraphs mentioned anything else. Second, the article mentions that after the buy back, suicides dropped by 80% or so and they back it up with this study.

http://andrewleigh.org/pdf/GunBuyback_Panel.pdf

What the article failed to mention or purposely left out was the fact that within that very same study, there's a graph showing that suicides by guns were on the decline already and in fact the drop rate after the buy back shows little to no difference than before the buy back.

LOL. Apparently you didn't read your own article. At best the article is stating that the results of the buy back program was inconclusive.

Again, the studies they site say there's is little or no correlation.

Excerpt:

That study also has the same graph that shows that gun deaths where on a steady decline long before the buy back was implemented.

 

Well he did said state sponsored genocide as an option.

 

Who did?

 

So you're going to stand here and say that killing indigenous people just for the sake of killing was legal in 1995 and that the buy back program stopped it?

 

Then move out of our country.

 

What does just for the sake of killing mean? Isn't that exactly what Stephen paddock did in Vegas?

 

You move out of my country.

 

Lol. You hate the constitution yet you won't leave because you like the benefits the constitution gave you?

 

Yeah but it wasn't legal. You're trying to prove me wrong about Port Arthur being the largest mass shooting by including state sponsored genocide to make your point. This is why no one takes you seriously.

 

No.