NRA logic: Solution to the drug problem, is to make sure everyone has drugs. Bad guys are going to score drugs anyways
Pretty sure gun deaths are down. You just hear about them. They haven't gone up. All those people who say news reporters shouldn't mention the guys name is BS. People want to know. Its your job to report the news not be moral police. Otherwise people will just move on to the next guy.
When the **** is it ever the time to talk about this? It's always "Too early" or "Too soon." I guess we'll wait for the next one to actually figure this out.
Idk the details here but you could easily kill a bunch of people until one person that may have one would come to the rescue and it's still not a guarantee. Weren't you the one said that knives are basically the same as guns? LOL.
Hey dude... You never answered my question! What kind of heat do you think Jesus would carrying he was alive today? Glock? .357??? Kinda curious to know and figured you were the expert to ask. Thanks!
The war on drugs is a different topic. Places like the Netherlands have way lower usage rates than America even though it's legal to buy whatever.
I don't have time to get into this but for all those who say that the answer to stop a guy with a gun the answer is to arm more people should see the exercise that 20/20 put on simulating a classroom shooting with participants also armed with some even experienced with firearms. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ezzskoEB0Gc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Don't be silly. Jesus wouldn't need a gun. But I'm fairly certain that the Prince of Peace would neither desire to have innocents slaughtered like lambs.
Oh no, I totally get that. It's just that demographic treats the gun problem one way, and the drug problem a totally different way. They seem to think zero tolerance works in one situation, while any regulation or ban for another object will never work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLCusJEvPuM <iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cLCusJEvPuM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> I love the way Our President says "I've been to [the town of the shooting]. There are good people there." It just strikes me as so... I don't know, ironic that he has to mention things like this. "thoughts and prayers... are not enough" [BRACE YOURSELVES FOR EXECUTIVE ORDERS]
What I would like to see is that anyone who buys a gun takes a 10 hour safety course. During that course in addition to gun safety people fire revolvers, semi-auto pistols, a shotgun, and some type of rifle. Anyone who wants to pass legislation on guns, should take a 100 hour safety course. They should learn the safety measures and fire the types of guns their legislation would affect. This would keep people totally ignorant of guns from telling other people about them. It might also instill a bit of respect and standard safe practices amongst all gun owners. It won't be 100% effective. Nothing will. But it might help. It will also boost the gun economy because of the safety course requirement which might help the NRA to not go full out in blocking the issue.
Trained officer in gunfight hit their intended target on avg at just 18%. 72% of the time they miss. I can't imagine the # for those not trained regularly. In a crowd, under extreme stress, if you miss 72% of the time, how much more damage will you be causing?
You'd be surprised how many of us WITHOUT training are better shots than many officers and those with training.
The slippery slope argument is such a cop out. First we enact common sense gun restrictions, next thing you know....CONCENTRATION CAMPS. We have to enact at least some common-sense gun restrictions. We have to do something. Wackos live in every country, but only in the US can they so easily purchase guns. Why can't we at least close the loopholes in existing laws like gun-show and online-purchases? Common sense restrictions like that are nowhere NEAR banning your precious guns.
I've always been pro-private firearm ownership, or as I like to think of it, against forcing people to outsource their security. I've also worked part-time at a range when I was an undergrad and was very enthusiastically into competition shooting and hunting when I was younger. But with that said, many gun owners I've seen practiced unsafe gun handling and showed a remarkable ignorance about, and as you point out, many anti-gun politicians have written some terrible legislation, and I suspect with noble intentions, that makes it clear that they know nothing about firearms. Forcing first-time gun buyers to take mandated safety courses seems reasonable to me, and involving the NRA on the legislation seems smart, especially since teaching gun safety used to be what the NRA was largely about before it decided to join the culture war.
It is solely because of that. Up until a few decades ago, the 2nd amendment was always interpreted as only giving state militias the absolute right to bear arms, not individuals. Then a group of nutjobs took over the NRA and started fighting for a different interpretation. In 2008, they won in the Supreme Court (DC vs Heller). Gun control regulations were struck down. You get a gun! She gets a gun! Everybody gets a gun! Then the massacres started, and they effectively used them to fuel sales. "Quick, buy a few guns before the government decides to ban them." "Quick, buy a few guns, because you need to defend yourself from the next massacre." Self-perpetuating insanity. It is time for mass protests, "Black Lives Matter" style, but on a much bigger scale. It is time for Americans turn out to the streets in large numbers and demand that enough is enough. Only a major grassroots movement will succeed in breaking the hold these merchants of death and violence have over America.
