Reducing it to lower than negligible? More people die from lighning strikes each year than from mass shootings. I don't want to pass a law making it illegal to be outside during a thunderstorm, or mandate that everybody have a storm shelter. More people are murdered with blunt objects than "assault rifles".
What does a background check do? Force people that want to commit murder to buy their weapon on the black market? There hasn't been ONE argument that would actually do anything to prevent Sandy Hook.
This is nothing more than a political debate, and political debates rarely offer solutions. The side of the issue you are on is more important than the effectiveness of the actual policy. It's all about re-election and the campaign platitudes they can use to convnice you to vote for them. I support "gun control" sounds so good in certain districts.
If there were ONLY 300 or 400 deaths a year that could be prevented by requiring seat belts, would you ignore those lives in favor of your "FREEDOM" excuse?
The numbers clearly show that pistols are the weapon of choice for murder... but those numbers can be reduced dramatically with just a few restrictions. If federal gun laws matched NY pistol laws, there would be an immediate reduction of pistol deaths. Tracking all pistols from manafacture to disposal in the USA would help a great deal in reducing gun deaths and solving pistol murders.
REASONABLE PEOPLE CAN COME TO REASONABLE AGREEMENT ON GUN LAWS. Unreasonable people will of course resist even good gun laws.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If there were ONLY 300 or 400 deaths a year that could be prevented by requiring seat belts, would you ignore those lives in favor of your "FREEDOM" excuse?
The numbers clearly show that pistols are the weapon of choice for murder... but those numbers can be reduced dramatically with just a few restrictions. If federal gun laws matched NY pistol laws, there would be an immediate reduction of pistol deaths. Tracking all pistols from manafacture to disposal in the USA would help a great deal in reducing gun deaths and solving pistol murders.
REASONABLE PEOPLE CAN COME TO REASONABLE AGREEMENT ON GUN LAWS. Unreasonable people will of course resist even good gun laws.
ONLY BECAUSE THERE ARE GUNS....human's will do their own demise or someone else's, with or without guns...you seem to equate 'saving lives' with gun removal.....that's funny....it's not logical...humans function with a depth beyond the removal of an object. they just pick up another for the purpose they seek.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
If there were ONLY 300 or 400 deaths a year that could be prevented by requiring seat belts, would you ignore those lives in favor of your "FREEDOM" excuse?
If there were only 300 or 400 a years saved by murder caused by hands and fists that could have been prevented if people had to wear padded gloves, would you ignore those lives in favor of FREEDOM excuse?
Please, your bar graph assumes that restricting handguns will not increase murder committed in a manner listed under the other 5 categories. If murder by handgun goes down by 50% and each of the other categories goes up by 10%, you have the same number of murder. You assume by removing one tool of murder, the other tools will not be used.
Please, your bar graph assumes that restricting handguns will not increase murder committed in a manner listed under the other 5 categories. If murder by handgun goes down by 50% and each of the other categories goes up by 10%, you have the same number of murder. You assume by removing one tool of murder, the other tools will not be used.
Absolutely correct. Murder requires a reason to be committed.
Removing access to a gun will not make the reason a person desires to kill, suddenly cease to exist. The self justification already exists in the mind of the person looking to kill. The weapon is just a tool.
The only way to stop a person from committing murder is to find the reasons and eliminate the reasons people feel it's OK to kill.
Absolutely correct. Murder requires a reason to be committed.
Removing access to a gun will not make the reason a person desires to kill, suddenly cease to exist. The self justification already exists in the mind of the person looking to kill. The weapon is just a tool.
The only way to stop a person from committing murder is to find the reasons and eliminate the reasons people feel it's OK to kill.
It's learned behavior from box and friends.
kind of difficult to do with a standing volunteer army that is trained to 'get over' that hump of thou shalt not kill (regardless of religion they all have this directive) so that the war machine can continue on in the name of 'justice' again----ASSAULT WEAPON LINGO IS MILITARY SPEAK..NOT LEGAL SPEAK......I can assault you with an iron pan.. it's an assault pan....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
summary execution of citizens on American soil has even crept into the fashionable column, if the "government" says they are terrorists
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
The numbers clearly show that pistols are the weapon of choice for murder... but those numbers can be reduced dramatically with just a few restrictions.
Veteran suicide and police suicide total over 3,000 per year. Almost all are handguns."... but those numbers can be reduced dramatically with just a few restrictions."
If there were only 300 or 400 a years saved by murder caused by hands and fists that could have been prevented if people had to wear padded gloves, would you ignore those lives in favor of FREEDOM excuse?
Please, your bar graph assumes that restricting handguns will not increase murder committed in a manner listed under the other 5 categories. If murder by handgun goes down by 50% and each of the other categories goes up by 10%, you have the same number of murder. You assume by removing one tool of murder, the other tools will not be used.
It's probably true that if all pistols were to suddenly dissappear, that many of the same murders would still occur by other means. BUT, Pistols are a unique weapon and many of those murders would not occur if no one owned pistols. I saw a report a few years back that showed how pistols lead to many murders that happen soley because a pistol was present. One case was of two men who were friends for years, who went out drinking and playing pool much of the night. These best friends, both very drunk, and one carrying a .38 snub nose, got into an arguement over whether the man moved the cue ball as he was lining up for his shot. They shouted and yelled, then shoved then a few punches, then a shot and one was dead.
If the pistol were not present, they wouln't have gone home and got their rifle or shotgun or a baseball bat... it would have been over and they would have been friends again, just as in the past when they would have these drinking related arguements.
In this case and many others on the show, the pistol being present caused the death.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
