Tell this to the people of Washington D.C. and Chicago. If they are criminals with a gun, they would be arrested whether their gun was registered or not. Let's not resort to name-calling. You refer to law-abiding citizens as morons?
I don't think you are right. For instance, Lanza's mother was going to have him institutionalized and Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter was on the books as someone that would not have passed a background check if the State had forwarded the info to the FBI two years earlier like they were supposed too.
This is a fantasy. The black market would explode. I have no interest in getting rid of firearms. I have an interest in seeing our laws enforced.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. They would certainly become a detriment to society if banned. - - - Updated - - - There are many other factors involved in that equation. Population being one of them.
Gun ownership in the U.S. is at an all-time high, yet violent crime has been decreasing. Murder peaked in the 1800's, and is at a low point now in modern history. I agree with your observations. The family unit is disintegrating, and so is society.
Let's say I go to a park frequented by smokers. If I draw a circle on the ground within the park and erect one "no smoking" sign inside the circle before walking away, would you expect that this will have any effect? Probably not, as there is nothing to stop people from ignoring the line and bringing their cigarettes in from outside my circle. Let's say I surround the entire park with a 10' electrified fence manned 24x7 with guards and guard dogs around an area, then ensure a decent sound system constantly pipes "no smoking" messages through the area... Would you say this stands a better chance of remaining smoke-free? Probably, though a few rare REALLY determined smokers might occasionally sneak a pack in... This illustrates the difference between the security segregating Washington DC and Chicago from their surrounds vs the security segregating the US from Mexico. You can't compare one to the other. Controls in an unsecured area will never be as effective as controls througout a nation. Some people obtain guns before they become criminals - whether it's days before or years before is really irrelevent. Have you ever sat in traffic for more than 5 minutes and not thought of SOME of the people around you as morons?
Actually, the below link will take you to a map showing homicide or murder rates per 100,000 population around the world. Homicide is defined as unlawful death purposefully inflicted on a person by another person. The US has a higher rate PER CAPITA than any other 1st world democracy in the world. http://chartsbin.com/view/1454
There is no such thing as an "assault weapon". It is a political term, not one of any meaning with regard to weapons.
I am truly trying to look on the bright side of things and be positive, because I don't see any changes, truthfully. You know, "always look on the bright side of life". Lanza was crazy and his mother was just as crazy or worse (the apple doesn't fall far from the tree)..you can't outlaw crazy.
Now that is just being steriotypical again. If you had a gun, you got road rage, would you use it to express your anger? No? Do you just think your so much better than everyone else who owns a firearm? You veiw us gun owners as wannabe cowboys or something. That is certainly not the case. Yes accidents do happen, but compared to the 50-60 million + owners of firearms it is but a tiny sliver. You are just showing that the reason you want them gone is that you know nothing about firearms or shooting them therefor you are afraid of them and want them gone.
Isn't it amazing how everyone can agree that someone who goes on a shooting spree (like Lanza) is crazy.... AFTER they go on a shooting spree. BEFORE the person (like Lanza) goes on a shooting spree, a lot of people INSIST that people (like Lanza) have a RIGHT to as many firearms as they want of whatever type they want... Sounds like a problem.
More of the "projection" argument again... The fact is that people DO make different decisions under similar circumstances. You have chosen to purchase firearms, whereas I have not. I got into disagreements with my mother as a teenager and didn't kill 20+ people, Lanza made a different decision. I cannot make the assumption that all people will act as rationally as I might choose to. The fact is that some people with road rage HAVE chosen to express their anger with firearms. You say that the occasional accidental death doesn't matter because it represents a small percentage of all gun owners.... Whoopee. Thousands of civilians dying every year still matters when it is totally avoidable and totally unnecessary. How many school shootings would be acceptable to you? As for my knowing nothing about firearms, I believe I may have picked up a bit of familiarity with them during active duty service in the USMC...
Show me the statistics. Why are there so many illegals then? Well now, if we could predict the future, then this might work. Unfortunatley, you cannot prosecute someone before a crime is committed, and you cannot treat someone as a criminal before they become one. I do not want to live in a police state. Are you referring to gun owners as morons?
It comes down to determination to carry through legislation - if illegals were deported as soon as discovered then would it not be a good deterrent? Same with guns - there are laws on the books stopping illegal importation but apparently, according to "Mayors against ILLEGAL guns" the NRA has been blocking the enactment of those laws by blocking tracing http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/9/c1/6/1017/3/access_denied.pdf
Possibly because statistics show that access to firearms increases the use of them - sort of a "duh" statement but one that is often overlooked OK Take "road rage" two guys start at it one pulls a gun because he is feeling threatened by the other and the other one does too - next thing both shot http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/10/15/peds.2012-2481.full.pdf
Yeah, you mentioned ONE: the large population in the US. Given that I provided PER CAPITA information, population is not a contributing factor. Got any more (other than gun proliferation)?
Then we should be deporting illegals as soon as they arrive. If there are laws on the books, then it is up to the Obama Admin to enforce them. Also, it was the Obama Admin that "lost" several thousand guns down in Mexico. - - - Updated - - - Like I also said before, the Obama Admin has been slacking on gun law prosecutions to the tune of 48%. This seems to be a common theme with Obama: ignoring the rule of law.
He can not do everything at once - a better question is what is congress doing other than kowtowing to the NRA who is lobbying to have these laws either repealed or inactivated - - - Updated - - - He can not do everything at once - a better question is what is congress doing other than kowtowing to the NRA who is lobbying to have these laws either repealed or inactivated
When they were debating allowing concealed carry here in Florida, examples like you listed were heard from the anti- crown loudly and often. "Blood will flow freely through the streets!!!" Only thing is, it hasn't happened. Homicide in FL is WAY down since we enacted CCW, and we now have 1,000,000 permit holders. Very, very few ever get revoked, and when they do, it's typically not related to a gun incident.
Well, if valid concerns can be ignored in relation to a proposal, and the validity of a proposal can only be measured retroactively, why not implement the same controls as in Australia and judge their worth in a few years... Right...
Ok, let's exchange experts... "Ecologic analyses have suggested a link between the prevalence of gun ownership and rates of homicide and suicide (68 ) and between regulations restricting access to firearms and rates of homicide and suicide (912). Although these studies are useful in demonstrating an association between access to firearms and rates of homicide and suicide at the aggregate level, it is not possible with this methodology to adequately assess whether access to a gun increases the risk of a violent death at the individual level. To address these limitations, previous researchers have used case-control study methodology to evaluate the relation between gun ownership and risk of a violent death in the home. For example, Kellermann et al. (13, 14) examined the relation between gun ownership and injury outcomes. After they controlled for a number of potentially confounding factors, the presence of a gun in the home was associated with a nearly fivefold risk of suicide (adjusted odds ratio = 4.8 ) (13) and an almost threefold risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio = 2.7) (14). Other case-control studies have also found an increased risk of suicide for those with firearms in the home, with relative risks ranging from 2.1 to 4.4 (1519)." http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full and here's a bonus prize related to suicide: "There are at least a dozen U.S. casecontrol studies in the peer-reviewed literature, all of which have found that a gun in the home is associated with an increased risk of suicide. The increase in risk is large, typically 2 to 10 times that in homes without guns, depending on the sample population (e.g., adolescents vs. older adults) and on the way in which the firearms were stored. The association between guns in the home and the risk of suicide is due entirely to a large increase in the risk of suicide by firearm that is not counterbalanced by a reduced risk of nonfirearm suicide." http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923
Congress does not do much. Right now they are giving Obama more spending power so that he can screw us even more for generations to come. His Admin is also continuing the lies about Benghazi. Stay tuned...
A) This hasn't got a d@mn thing to do with gun control... B) What has he done that's worse than when GW tried to start WW3 with the middle east by randomly picking a country and attacking it? Or was that to find Bin Laden? Or was that because of WMDs?... Move on.
