Imagine that an AR-15 was not used in the Santa Fe shooting

@FreeSpirit1 But unlikely he'd have killed ten and injured ten with any of those.

@HerKing what if he killed 7 or 4?

@FreeSpirit1 i agree. I am merely pointing out that an AR was not used

@FreeSpirit1 Then it's still murder, your point? The point is, is the quota hasn't been met yet. It isn't even close. If it was a problem, something would be done, nothing will be done, so clearly it isn't a problem

@HerKing my point is people kill and what tool they use is irrelavent,the end result is dead people

@HerKing I love this argument. Guns, knives and baseball bats have been around in this country together for 150 years. Let’s count the mass school killings done with bats and knives.

@FreeSpirit1 But you're alright with that?

@HerKing of course I'm not alright with that. What kind of question is that? Do you think anyone who believes in the right to bear arms thinks killing people is ok?

@FreeSpirit1 Well obviously you like the option of being able to do so. But your argument is disingenuous at best. The thing about the 2nd amendment brigade is they 'forget' what the original purpose was and technically, still is. It was also conceived at a time when flintlocks were the most advanced firearm available. Not the modern version that can offload dozens of rounds a minute.

And in case you're wondering, yes, I can shoot. I was military trained. But if in the unlikely event the 'gummint' was going to take yer gurns, they wouldn't even need to break into a sweat.

@HerKing 🤦

@FreeSpirit1 I take it you do bear arms in the event the Government decide to overthrow some nebulous entity?

@HerKing I have a firearm for personal protection and a rifle for hunting. Untill the 2nd amendment is repealed I'm going to keep them.

@luckranger71 right...it's so much more palatable when someone goes on a stabbing rampage.

@BizSuitStacy

@luckranger71 are you sure about that? I thought we were both being sarcastic.

@HerKing the Puckle machine gun was patented 73 years before the second amendment was drafted.

@FreeSpirit1 I don't think he could have killed nearly as many people with a baseball bat or a bow and arrow. (Or even a bow and several arrows) Also i doubt he would have had the confidence to try. Or were you being sarcastic?

@HerKing there was a mass knifing at a school in China late last year where I believe 8 or 10 kids were killed. And let's not forget the three worst mass murders in US history. 9/11 with airplanes, OKC with an ANFO bomb and the Happyland Social Club with 84 dead from a half gallon of gasoline.

@redredred Whatabout....it's the usual response. Another shooting today, but this one in Indiana. Nothing to see. And nothing is amiss. Not a problem. Too many doors? Mental illness? Too much red paint? Video games? Anything but easy access to firearms.

I've had easy access to firearms for over fifty years. I know dozens if not hundreds of others who have too. None of us have hurt anyone. The issue is software, not hardware. Fifty years ago very few Americans were psychotropically medicated 24/7. Today nearly half are. You tell me what's changed. It isn't the guns.@HerKing

@redredred And of course you can show that near 50% in peer reviewed papers? The USA doesn't have more or less a mental illness problem than any other western industrialised nation. Not only that, but it's using mental illness and those who suffer with it as a scapegoat. Most mentally ill people are not aggressive psychopaths. More often than not they're the opposite and are the victims and stay that way because of the ignorance of others.

There are far more guns now than there used to be. 3% of the US population own 50% of the civilian held guns in the USA. The vast majority of the population don't have guns, the NRA represents about 5 million people, there are about 320 Million people in the USA...How is it they hold so much power over the Congress and the current POTUS?

You think rope manufactures or knife grinders have so much sway? No of course they don't, but every time another mass (or even ANY) shooting occurs, people like you say it isn't guns...Well, if the fucking gun wasn't there the fucking shooting wouldn't take place. And no, they wouldn't find an alternative. There is absolutely no evidence to show that.

Then explain why the gun homicide rate today is half what it was in 1994. Were there more guns in 1994? Your logic says more guns cause more homicides so there must have been more guns in 1994 then there are today which puts you in the position of explaining away the multiple years of record sales while obozo was president.

Explain@HerKing

@redredred Explain to me how the death rate in the whole of the UK was under 40 last year... They have gun regs. They were made tighter after the school shooting in 96. What an irony eh? Obama came to power and all the gun nuts went crazy thinking he was gonna take yer gurns...all it did was increase gun sales..You ever wondered why the NRA wants armed teachers in schools? Guess who puts money into the NRA.. Clue. It isn't the publishers of children's books.

I'm still waiting for the paper on this nugget:

"Fifty years ago very few Americans were psychotropically medicated 24/7. Today nearly half are."

So you can't or won't explain the drop in gun homicide rates with the concomitant huge increase in gun ownership. That fact invalidates all of your argument. You're unwilling to face that so you divert the discussion.

Explain@HerKing

@redredred you are exactly right! The gun grabbers love to make the claim, more firearms = more firearm homicides. Yet they cannot explain how the firearm homicide rate has decline 50% over the last 25 years while the number of legally owned guns has nearly doubled.

So...they change the subject to firearm homicides in the UK pointing to draconian gun legislation implemented in 1997 after the Dublane massacre.

Here's the part that jerking @herking fails to see or mention. After the Firearms Act of 1997 was implemented, the homicide rate in the UK sky rocketed 60%! Whoops. The homicide rate has remained above its pre 1997 rate ever since...although they did manage to get it closer to those rates by hiring more police, and actually arming some of the police with guns in the areas in which gabg violence is particularly bad.

Sadly, violence is on the rise again, as we recently saw reports of how the homicide rate in London recently surpassed that of New York city.

And to be clear, we've never said more guns = less crime.
However this evidence proves that more guns DOES NOT increase crime.

In other words, the problem is not the gun.