that you dont' know why those studies are bogus is hilarious. They have been debunked dozens of times correlation DOES NOT = causation for starters and the most damning of all in the last 30 years we have added 200 million guns to our supply and the rate of gun violence has DECREASED
So it is an infringement to make ammunition expensive, but it isn't a ban, it isn't stopping somebody buying the stuff if they can afford it. Good source of income for the public purse, that's not silly.
Every bit as much as making it expensive to vote. It isn't a ban, it isn't stopping somebody voting - if they can afford it.
You're repeating yourself and you are not providing a coherent argument. Your comments are rants, and rants arise from the fog of emotion/anger, etc, which is rarely objective and accurate. Clearly you are not interested in a objective argument. If you can't take what I say without twisting it, where you repeat the same bogus narrative over and over, I have no choice but to put you on ignore. Naturally, you are going to twist that one, too. Do whatever the hell you want, but listening to your drivel, well, let's just say I've had enough and we shall leave to the electorate to decide this issue.
There you have it. It is legal and possible to tax ammunition at 100$ per bullet. If that gets voted for it happens, if it doesn't get voted for it doesn't happen. Guns not banned, the second amendment continues.
I did-its drivel and the facts concerning decreasing rates of gun violence have been posted DOZENS of times on this board. I tire of being asked to repeat stuff that anyone who wants to discuss this issue should already know
no it's not legal and not possible under our constitution. you are confused again-you think ARMS only mean GUNS. major fail on your part
your arguments are fairly worthless and repetitive too. We get the fact you want to ban guns. we get the fact that you don't like the politics of gun rights advocates. And guess what, those who want to ban guns do not have the power to stop those who own them from owning them.
you dont' get the fact that it is unconstitutional why suggest stuff that even most six grade level students understand is unconstitutional
Yes, you're right. And please be gracious enough to recall that my pithy aphorism was provided in response to YOUR pithy aphorism in Post #290. Opinions, dear Patricio, are like buttholes -- everybody's got one....
If you had read it, you would have found the right information. For every 10 percent increase in gun ownership in a state, research shows the rate of mass shootings goes up 35 percent. That information will take you the source of it's claim. Where's your study/source to your claim? You need to back up your opinion.
Oh really? Do arms include privately owned nuclear weapons? Is there any tax to pay on the purchase of any kind of weaponry? Are guns sold free of any tax?
correlation not causation and that is totally destroyed by this fact (and we had a spike due to COVID) https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/ The gun murder rate in the U.S. remains below its peak level despite rising sharply during the pandemic. There were 6.7 gun murders per 100,000 people in 2021, below the 7.2 recorded in 1974. from an anti gun source https://www.thetrace.org/2023/03/guns-america-data-atf-total/ increase in firears and let's be honest, whining about crime rates is just a facade because public safety has no real part in what motivates leftwing gun banners.
I have to wonder about the accuracy and honestly of data from a site with a name like "project unloaded".
Look-if you don't understand what arms are covered by the second, I really don't have time to get you up to speed and your posts appear to be trolling now
yeah it's complete bullshit they factor suicides in with murders to inflate numbers they pretend those who commit murder and are undeterred by the laws against murder will somehow be deterred by a malum prohibitum law against gun ownership. Gun banners see safe storage as an evaluation based on houses with unsupervised children or unknown adults being present. They dont' admit that say a guy living by himself (or in my case, my wife visits by my adult son-both of whom have CCW permits and are professional level shooters with hundreds of hours of formal training) can store firearms far differently than a guy with 3 grade school kids. So If I have an AR 15 in my office unlocked, in a house with cameras and alarms and heavy dead bolt doors-that is plenty secure. However, the gun banners like that biased site, would claim that weapon is not properly stored because those assclowns have a one size fits all definition
Did you deliberately miss the point? Or do you believe a $1000 tax on voting does not infringe he right to vote?
How does anyone know the increase in the number of firearms in the vast majority of states that do not require the registration of firearms?
d 1) domestic production 2) export licenses 3) FBI background checks any new gun legally introduced into the US has to be sold with a background check unless it is to governmental agencies.
more importantly,, the crocodile tears about crime statistics is irrelevant to the gun banner motivations
