But Phats' argument is that we have too many guns to do any sort of gun control. So, let's bring down those numbers. Lets see what things look like with 200 million guns instead of 340 million. Americans bought 19.5 million guns last year. How about we limit that to 10 million?
A Republican Tried to Introduce a Commonsense Gun Law. Then the Gun Lobby Got Involved. After a sheriff’s deputy was murdered in a Denver suburb, Colorado state Rep. Cole Wist took action by sponsoring a red flag bill. It likely cost him his seat. ProPublica spoke to Wist about the harsh realities of gun reform. https://www.propublica.org/article/...sense-gun-law-then-the-gun-lobby-got-involved
One the worst insults I have seen following the death of 19 schoolchildren in Uvalde. Disgusting and grotesque. He praises guns and then calls out the victims names at the fucking NRA convention. He can't even pronounce their fucking names. And that fucking bell. Grotesque. Also he's not the president.
Is anyone surprised Trump can't pronounce Spanish names? Marco Rubio is having a sad because Miami Heat honored the dead and asked attendees to contact their senators and vote. Should we send him thoughts and prayers?
I think his argument actually has some merit - it will take a while to reduce the number of fire-arms the US has, we have been collecting them for hundreds of years. That's why the ammunition angle makes a lot of sense. Guns are a lot less deadly when they do not have ammunition.
According to your link New Zealand had committed $130 million by that articles date to their gun buyback. It's estimated they have roughly 1.5 million guns . Here in the US that would be 400 million guns, or an initial investment of $34.4 billion. However, they had only received 15k guns at a cost of $20 million... So, $1333 per gun? Whoa boy.. $533.2 billion... Obama was nearly laughed out of office for trying to budget $300 million for gun control.... Even the cheaper side ($34 billion) of this proposal is 100x more than the US has even joked about spending on gun control. And that got them 15k guns in 6 weeks. Or 2.5k per week... That's 130k per year. It would take them over 12 years, assuming they can keep up that pace... Which they obviously can't... I'd be surprised if they got 10% of that the following year... And Australia's buyback program didn't seem to have the cost numbers, but they apparently collected 1 million guns in a year, but it didn't change the trajectory of their intentional homicide rates for at least a decade and that's if you can even say the trajectory changed at all due to that policy... Hell most of that could be attributed to getting off of leaded fuel.. Oh, and after all of that theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/15/new-zealand-ardern-flags-further-gun-control-reforms-after-firearms-charges-peak Sorry, just read that real quick between practices, but there is no chance the US is going to spend the kind of money that it would take, when the result would be removing the rights of citizens, while killing a booming industry. Only to watch there be no change in violent crime or murder rates. Which will get anybody who supported it thrown out in the next election and the policy reversed. You honestly think we're going to keep that up for 10 years? Not a chance... That's political suicide.
I'm not opposed to trying any of that... However, do we have the public will? Is Texas going to do their part? Indiana? Florida? Montana? My point is that we don't have the desire to take that course of action. So to keep hammering away at increasing restrictions on laws abiding citizens will get us nowhere.
Not really... I think gun control may work to varying degrees, if we could get on the same page about it. But we don't have the political will to implement any of the typical suggestions as law, and even if we did, we certainly don't have the political will to make them work nationwide...
Sweet. Society doesn't want to change. So the answer is we accept the killing of kids because of an antiquated law and shit gun culture. That's what it comes down to
Not once have I said we should accept it. I don't know why you guys keep implying that. I've offered many solutions that I believe have a far higher chance of being accepted by the right. Thereby a much greater chance of working overall. No, I do not believe we'll ever reduce the number of guns in this country by mandate. Certainly not enough to prevent random psychos from killing people. But we have options available to us that could save more lives and improve more lives than any gun control ever has.
Yeah one of those options is common sense guns laws that would require better background checks and banning of certain types of guns that are nothing more than military style assault rifles made for killing people. Another law that could help would be holding people accountable for the way they store their guns and ammunition. It's pretty simple.
Just makes no sense. Are you advocating banning a type of gun solely because of what it looks like? So we're going to ban the black one because it is black? Do you think that makes it more dangerous? Expanding background checks isn't going to happen. The Supreme Court is likely going to restrict states rights to enforce gun control. So why not consider alternatives. The people digging their feet in on both sides refusing to consider alternatives are equally to blame for the failure to act, IMO.
