Why Americans like rapid firing rifles so much? Because of personal defense or fear of tyranny?

I'm not talking about the little guns that you can hide in the glove box but those big ones that you have to hold with both hands. Why do you need them?

If its for personal defense, you're an idiot and if your entire defense strategy depends on having a big gun that can shoot lots if bullets quickly, you are missing chromosomes and are not responsible enough to have such a weapon.

If its because you're scared of tyranny, if I was some kind of dictator, I'd want you to have lots of guns simply because I could then send in my army with helicopters and long range weaponry.

When the constitution was written, guns were primitive compared to today. You couldn't go into a class room and kill 30 children in less than a minute with one. Also, the English were a problem back then but these days the English don't want to be in charge of USA. Seriously, if you offered us your country, we wouldn't want it.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Heartlander · 80-89, M

All firearms are dangerous. Even the little ones in the glove box.

Last I checked, the murder rate in London now exceeds the murder rate in New York City. Violence has less to do with firearms and everything to do with hate and the rhetoric that promotes violence.

[quote]Seriously, if you offered us your country, we wouldn't want it.[/quote]

I was a frequent visitor to England probably before you were born. My impression was that the people there were very accommodating, pleasant and respectful.

Apparently that has all changed.

1GHOST · M

@Heartlander props man !!

1GHOST · M

I'd just like to say ...didnt WE throw you out ?
With the use of guns ??

bijouxbroussard · F

@Heartlander But how would you compare the number of shootings nationwide between the two countries ?

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@Heartlander London is not having a great year - but the real story there is that NYC has made tremendous progress, its murder rate is down 90%+, and it's now the safest largest city in America. Their homocide numbers are the best they've been since ww2.

Heartlander · 80-89, M

@bijouxbroussard Shootings and murder rates aren't the same :) In some places the weapon of choice is nail-bombs. I'm a big fan of British TV and their murder mystery programs, and it seems there that the weapon of choice is poison.

I just checked the murder rates by nation and by state and by and large, murder rates in the upper Heartlands states are about the same as for Canada and Western Europe. The people in the Dakotas, Iowa, Nebraska, etc all tend to have no objection to the 2nd amendment.

As you move south, the murder rate tends to increase until reaching Louisiana which gets the prize as most murderous state in the US (rate wise). A further break down of Louisiana shows that the murder rate there is driven by Orleans parish.

So, my question of the day is: Why are the people in New Orleans, LA 20 times more likely to murder someone than the people in Fargo, ND?

Heartlander · 80-89, M

@1GHOST :) Yes, Some of my ancestors engaged the British at both Yorktown and the famous battle of New Orleans, where my French speaking ancestors evened the score from when the Brits took their homes and cattle in Acadia.

1GHOST · M

@Heartlander Hmmm some of your ancestors .....dang guess we missed our chance on that one .....😂

Heartlander · 80-89, M

@QuixoticSoul Thanks! And yes, better to celebrate NYC success than London's failure.

I lived there briefly in the early 1970's and was otherwise a frequent visitor. I think it at one point had descended to official "shit-hole" status. Given the choice of a week in Manhattan or a week in Saigon in the middle of that war, I would have picked Saigon as a place where I felt safer.

1GHOST · M

@Heartlander yeah the 70s would not have been good .