Why not just ignore the thread instead of opening it up and reading it? Why not just ignore the tread, instead of opening it up and getting irritated? Why not just ignore the thread instead of opening it up and reading it? Why not just ignore the thread instead of opening it up and getting irritated? Why not just ignore the thread instead of opening it up and getting irritated and starting a pointless f-ing new thread to mandate what others should do?
I think the terrorist using a truck to kill 80 and wound 200 made a pretty strong argument. All the previous gun related attacks (terrorist and non terrorist) don’t even remotely come close to that
It’s like Bloomberg trying to fix obesity by banning large sodas. Because that’s the problem. There is definitely no way that could be circumvented, I’m sure everyone lost a lot of weight. Or you could say the obsession with AR’s which account for about 1.5% of non-suicide gun deaths in the US is like ordering 6 big macs with fries and a milkshake… and a diet coke.
It’s also like saying you have a genetic disposition towards chemical addiction. Instead of addressing the unhealthy addiction you quit smoking, but only to start using crack and started patting yourself on the back for your healthy choice.
There are a near infinite number of equally effective methods available to terrorists. Trying to control their activities by playing wackamole with possible tools (which isn’t without cost as they serve actual purposes to the US) is inneffective vs pursuing the issue at the source.
Gun control as a counter to terrorism is ineffective because of the nearly unlimited alternate (and equally effective means) of conducting mass killings as well as the fact that having outright AR bans does not seem to have helped at all in preventing terrorists in France from using them at every turn. Not to mention that the VT shooting (#2 in effectiveness) used no high capacity magazines or ARs. So I really question the efficacy or whether we’re just distracting ourselves with a placebo.
ARs are less than 1.5% of overall gun deaths so banning has nothing to do with gun control, never has, never will.
That gun control has distracted people’s focus because of an unwillingness to be honest about what the source of the threat is or maybe we’re just not sure how to address the source.
Let me add, that my focus here is on AR / high capacity bans. If we’re talking about more stringent standards and background research on all gun purchases, then I would support that.
I think the bigger issue with the AR specifically is the fact that it doesn’t really have any other useful purpose, other than “mass shootings” at human targets. If you accept that as true (and I don’t know who would argue), then there is really no good reason for a non-police or military force to own one. Ergo, why NOT ban them?
FYI - I don’t own any guns at all, and I have no dog in this fight.