@SW-User “[b][i]the right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed [/i][/b]”. Sorry but the 2A saw that coming and made sure no subjective test would interfere with an American’s right to own a gun . The laws on the books just need to be enforced. But libs don’t want that ... they want the gun issue front and center to blame conservatives with.., even though most mass shootings are committed by deranged libs or the terrorists they allowed into the country .
SW-User
@TexChik You will be one of the first to have your mental health checked because what you posted makes no sense.
@SW-User it makes perfect sense , you just don’t want to hear it . And who’s going to decide who is mentally unfit ? You? Hahahahaha! You’re the deranged lunatic that thinks she can just suspend the constitution on a whim. Gun control is a moot point . The constitution has protected our rights and there are 80 million gun owners in the US that enjoy those rights .
@SW-User The problem with “regulating guns” is that “bad guys” don’t care about regulations. Any infringement on gun ownership will only result in less responsible, law abiding citizens having guns... Yeah, bad guys are bad. It’s not guns that kill people.
@TexChik I read what you posted. But the reason it makes no sense is that many mass shootings are not politically motivated. It all comes down to the individual who had some mental health problems or looked up to former mass shooters and wanted to surpass their kill score. It's all in fault of the glorification of Mass shooters and the lack of mental health services in the states. And who will decide who is mental unfit? I don't know psychiatrists?
Plus not many immigrants that move to this country commit mass shootings. You or I am more likely to die in a mass shooting committed by another U.S. citizen than by an immigrant. Plus I'm not saying suspend the constitution, regulation of guns is not suspending anything. You can still own guns, just some weapons will not be available, such as Ak-47, automatic rifles, assault rifles. Why have those?
@SW-User the shootings at the Washington congressional baseball practice ... political . Most mass shooters if the last 10 years were democrats.
SW-User
@jerMIguy yeah when John Howard took guns away from law abiding Aussies in 1996 , home invasions, domestic violence, and the criminals don’t give a shit a out gun laws. There’s still drive by shootings in South Weatern Sydney and there was the Gangland war in Melbourne from 1997-2006 which left a body count of 29 and all were killed by gun shot wounds. I believe that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. But we all know the real purpose of gun control right? Look at this history
SW-User
@jerMIguy Well true, people do kill people. And the gun is the most effective thing to kill people with. However, even law abiding citizens want some form of gun regulation on certain types of guns. Regulation does not mean all guns are taken.
SW-User
@TexChik Which were small fractions out of many that were not politically motivated.
SW-User
@jerMIguy Oh yeah and about the gun free zones. Not all mass shootings have taken place in gun free zones. But keep on being paranoid.
@SW-User ...and what about car owners? More than 37,000 Americans are killed every year in car crashes far more than by guns (the majority of deaths by gun being suicide) committed by reckless or incompetent drivers.
And what is your threshold? Over 4,000 Americans die from drowning in the bathtub. Is that number acceptable or should we regulate or ban bathtubs and replace them all with showers? Are you saying 30,000 deaths is unacceptable but 4,000 is?
BTY nearly all serial killer in your country use knives and/or hammers, a number as large as 1,800 per year. Should people undergo a psychological evaluation before owning a knife or hammer (you think that's funny? Read what is happening in London)?
Sorry facts are inconvenient things especially when you haven't really thought out what you are proposing.
The fact is mass shootings AND serial killings are MENTAL HEALTH problems and the result of social collapse. You cannot fix either by new laws though that is always the easiest nd totalitarian first response which keeps from having to deal with the real problem which is not the gun/knife/hammer/ but the person using it and the culture creating them. Fix that problem and not take away the rights of the innocent.
@Abrienda Even driving a car is regulated to some extent. When one is pulled over for DUI or reckless driving, their license is revoked until a certain time. Not with guns.
Well yes. 30,000 deaths from firearms is more alarming than 4,000 deaths as a result of bath tub drowning. Many of which were accidental from the lack of supervision, taking drugs or having a seizure. Which all can be worked out by making sure young children and people with a history of seizures are always supervised when in the tub and not taking medication that can cause impairment. Simple as that.
Funny thing is with knives and hammers, that does not out beat murder by gun. For sure there is a problem with knife attacks in Britain which had 3.26 homicides in 2017 done by a knife but you can pretty much outrun a man with a knife than a man with gun. In the U.S. there have been 34 homicides as a result of a firearm, more than Britain's knife attacks. Plus you are more likely to survive a knife attack.
Well I agree, it is apart of a social collapse. However, the mental health issue can be fixed, it's just many politicians do not want to.
I have all of those weapons ...legally of course. None of our guns have jumped out of the vault and gone on a killing spree . Again .... [b]you [/b] don’t get to determine what I can or can not [b][/b]have in my collection. The full autos are a novelty , but have nothing to do with what I’m interested in , which is marksmanship .
And as for you uniformed nonsense about immigrants not shooting people in this country ... you should live on the border or in sanctuary cities like LA . 85% of their shootings are by illegal immigrants. Your liberal mantra has no business here. And , if you were truely concerned with saving lives ... you’d want to stop abortions . 1.2 million per year in the US alone every year . Yet we saw how the nit jobs reacted when they feared the new Supreme Court nominee would keep you from Killing babies. Semantics and priorities @SW-User
SW-User
@MarineBob To be honest, if the U.S. government was to ever become tyrannical you guys would loose that uprising. The U.S. government can just use drones to take ya'll out if needed. No need for soldiers to fight on the ground.
@SW-User Yes but is your problem deaths or the number of deaths? I am asking how many deaths are you willing to accept? Are deaths by serial killers using knives and hammers just one of those things but gun deaths are different? The mayor of London is now directing his police to confiscate all knives they come across including banning store from selling them. As for DUI who is more dangerous... me at home with my Glock put away or someone driving drunk on the road at 100 km an hour at night? Why should he keep his car but I not my gun? Please tell me why a person who wishes to buy a car should not go through the same process you wish for a person buying a gun? You know of course the greatest number of people killed in France by Moslem terrorists was in Nice with a truck...same in Berlin. Should trucks also be considered a deadly weapon?
Oh yeah, I forgot...no one ever killed anyone else...there were no “mass murders” before guns were invented. That’s right! Why didn’t we think of that sooner. Banning guns will work! Just look at history...murders and mass murders have only happened since guns were invented. Whew. I’m sure glad we got that sorted. Lol. Goodness.
