1ºDonna Weatherman I have looked at those other countries....and not one of those countries that has ban guns has seen an over all reductions in suicides violent crime or homicides as a result...
Japans crimes rates stayed the same and today they have one of the highest suicide rates in the world...When the UK all but ban gun theor over all homicide rate went up 20% and was 20% higher for the next decade....only recently returning to pre ban levels...
Nothing was solved amd nothing got better ....the only thing that was actually accomplished was a reduction in people rights and freedoms..
But your brilliant answer would be to revert back to being subjegated under authoritarian government control / rule....where in it is acceptable to preemptively or blanketly punish the innocent whole of society (who have done nothing wrong) by taxing reducing restricting or eliminating the individual rights and freedoms of everyone (without individual due process of law) based on the hanious acts of the criminal minority...
If that is what you seek...you can pick one of those subjegated authoritarian sheep pens and go....cause legally and constitutionally that can simply can never happen here...
2ºKevin Woodward he’s in custody. It’s not like they need it to help find the suspect…
Studies are very clear on what many mass shooters seek, fame and attention. Not to mention, studies are very clear on how this can impact the psyche of other potential mass shooters. One prominent study from Professors Jennifer Johnston and Andrew Joy found that “media contagion” can help make mass shootings more common. “Unfortunately,” said Johnston, “we find that a cross-cutting trait among many profiles of mass shooters is desire for fame.” The rise of such a trait in mass shooters, she claimed, rose “in correspondence to the emergence of widespread 24-hours news coverage on cable news programs, and the rise of the internet during the same period.” Johnston recommended a media pact to “no longer share, reproduce, or retweet the names, faces, detailed histories or long-winded statements of killers, we could see a dramatic reduction in mass shootings in one to two years.”
There are also more studies that support a similar conclusion.
3ºWhy the @$%& should millions of responsible, law-abiding, American gun owners, a good portion of them being NRA members, who NEVER even pointed a firearm ranging from a pistol to an assault rifle at another human being UNLESS for either self-defense or the defense of other people be considered pariahs of society all because 1) A small number of sick, violent @!%&s who strict gun control laws COULD NOT STOP from committing heinous crimes with firearms because either they don't give a @$%& about obeying those laws along with the laws against seriously injuring or killing other human beings or numerous people like relatives, friends, co-workers, classmates, teachers, law enforcement officers, or medical doctors CONSTANTLY IGNORE warning signs before a shooting massacre happens, and 2) Those gun owners learned the lesson from other unfortunate gun owners living in Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada and QUICKLY SPEAK OUT about their strong gun rights after a shooting massacre instead of staying silent while the anti-gun crowd whips up hysteria across the USA to have those gun rights restricted or completely banned? >:(
4ºQUICK FIREARM LESSON! Firearms, including assault rifles, are listed in two SEPARATE categories: 1) Full automatic firearms which FIRE LARGE STREAMS OF BULLETS AS LONG AS THE TRIGGER IS HELD. Due to horror stories during the Prohibition Era where rival bootlegging gangsters shot at each other with full automatic Tommy guns and wind up injuring large numbers of innocent bystanders, the U.S. government passed laws restricting full automatic firearms to ONLY responsible, law-abiding, Americans who successfully filed extensive federal paperwork and passed an extensive background check. 2) Semi-automatic firearms which FIRE ONE BULLET PER ONE TRIGGER SQUEEZE. These firearms make up 80% of the firearms responsible, law-abiding, American citizens can more easily purchase depending on local state laws concerning a written gun safety test, a background check, a waiting period, and the brand and number of firearms and ammunition allowed to be legally purchased. The same semi-automatic firearms the anti-gun politicians want to ban from responsible, law-abiding, American citizens. (Rolling eyes)
5ºRay Caleb statistically not true....not at all...years....
There is actual no data to show a correlation between the number of guns in circulation in reference to gun crimes or gun deaths....
In the 80s and 90s when there were half as nam guns in circulation.....gun crime was 20% higher thannot is today....
And despite more than doubling the number of gun in circulation annual gun death have remained fairly consistent in relation to the population for more than 50 yesrs....
So...if the "more guns more bodies" theory was to have any validity gun crime and gun deaths today woukd at a minimum have to be twice that of the 80s and 90s.....not less..
6ºManuel Martinez that's actually two stereotypes in one that should be avoided (1. That minorities can't be racist, and, 2. Since minorities can't be racist, then the only racists are whites). Neither stereotype is true, but both are used by whites and minorities to make the other group look bad. I mean, isn't that why you asked the question (to make Blacks who say it look bad)? And isn't that why some Blacks say it (because they think it makes whites look bad)? In actuality, a racist person is just a racist person on their own until they surround themselves with other like minded people. An entire group of individuals from one race can't be included or excluded as racists based on the whole group's race alone. Individuals who happen to be racists make up their own racist subset of their original groups.
7ºChristine Parker Thank for your immaterial TDS segue but have you ever had an original thought? I have real issues with "red Flag Laws." There is no way to do this without opening up clear violations of HIPPA. Do we really want the government to have routine access to mental health records? What would stop a prospective employer from asking if you’ve ever been denied a gun permit? It would happen. But who gets to define what the parameters of what “mentally ill” enough will be? Would a leveraged faked restraining order issued 10 years prior during a divorce for the sole purposes of financial extortion be enough? Will it be enough to wish that your wife or husband was dead in a marriage counselling session? (like that’s never happened) And once that completely arbitrary decision is made, who will checking the box on some form or screen that will deny someone their 2nd amendment rights? Some cute little Councilor? Psychiatrists? Will we get due process to contest it? How could we guarantee their unbiased assessment and how could we know that they wouldn’t have their own little brainless political anti-gun agendas woven into the process? It’s really easy to say Mentally ill people shouldn’t be able to own guns until we start defining it or convienly not defining it. Would people who really need help then stop going to professionals for fear knowing that their sessions are no longer private? That’s when we find out it that it turns into an invasive slippery slope to crack open HIPPA for big brother. B|
8ºJames Tony Lewis Here you go. Woke Progressiveness is the ability to obscure reality, hijack and redefine language and to demonize anyone who doesn’t willingly chose to suffer from their convoluted, naive version of the “Emperor’s New Clothes Syndrome.”
Examples of Woke progressive seizure and mutilation of words and concepts.
1.) >>>FREEDOM OF SPEECH; is defined as; only the freedom to agree with a Woke Progressive Liberal or liberal minority group; as everything else is defined by the Liberal Media and minority groups as Hate Speech or Rhetoric. Progressive liberals and minorities erroneously believe that they are allowed to prevent any group they don’t like from speaking using their Unconstitutional “Hecklers Veto,” which is available only to them. They are of course, 100% wrong as no such right exists....
2.)>>>RHETORIC: Anyone whose spoken or written ideology disagrees with that of Woke Progressive Liberals or minorities. For Woke Progressive Liberals and minorities rhetoric is always referred to as a simple expression of their Right of Freedom of Speech.
3.) >>>HATE SPEECH; anything said that contradicts Woke Progressive Liberals or minorities (real or imaginary) especially when it is factual. One man’s hate speech or group is another man’s NOI, BLM or KKK. For Liberals and minority groups Hate Speech is always redefined as their basic Right of Freedom of Speech.
4.) >>>RACIST OVERTONES CARD; anytime someone disagrees with a minority by presenting irrefutable facts that makes a Woke Progressive or minority uncomfortable. They have no real response, so the labeling of truth or the process of deliberation as containing “Racist overtones” is a desperate attempt to illicit misplaced white or other guilt and shut down a particular path of uncomfortable factual debate. For Woke Progressives and minority groups, it is impossible for a white person to say anything that does not have some RACIST OVERTONES because of some imaginary white privilege.
5.) >>>RACISM AND THE PLAYING OF THE GOOD OLE’ FASHION RACE CARD. Knowing that no factual statement, principle or observation can ever possibly be racist, if the “Racist overtones” card was ignored and you still stand your ground through the chanting or screaming with facts instead of histrionic emotions, the idiotic Race Card is sure to follow. Woke Progressives and minority groups are under the misconception that they have an immunity from saying or doing anything that can be construed as racist, so don't try to play the RACE CARD on them or the mindless chanting and screaming will escalate to a point of physical violence.
Note…This only applicable to “accepted” minorities who vote in lockstep for Democrats. For all Conservative minorities refer to numbers 1.) or 2.) above. Conservative leaning minorities are not considered to be authentic minorities because they have taken responsibility for their own lives and haven’t partaken of the self-victimization cool aide.