^^^would refuse to give up his gun even if it meant saving the life of a child. |
Yeah, but kids with guns existed for ages. It's only recently that this became a real problem. But some people would rather dance in the blood of dead kids to push their (unrealistic I might add) agenda, than to actually figure out the problem, and a solution. Ban guns. Oh, that'll solve it. Like the complete and total ban on heroin solved the heroin epidemic, or how the complete and total ban on murder solved school shootings. But no, instead of finding the cause, let's dance in blood to push something we already wanted anyway even though there's zero evidence it'll work (wasn't DC a gun-free zone?). |
I'd refuse to give up my ability to protect my kids because someone had a theory that making me and my family defenseless would stop crazies from killing people. |
How’s that working out for you? |
False premise. Try again. |
Yeah, some non-partisan institution should investigate gun violence. OH WAIT, THERE IS A LAW AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT FUNDING THAT THANKS TO NRA LOBBYING. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/10/04/gun-violence-research-has-been-shut-down-for-20-years/?utm_term=.34b35e2b3647 |
| Why would an AR 15 not be legal? Because they scare liberals? That doesn’t seem like a very good reason to make something illegal. Whether it be guns, free speech, or anything else for that matter. |
Pretty well. The gun nuts are finally losing for once. |
One of us is going to be right and one of us is going to be wrong. Obviously, I believe I am going to be right and it’s going to work out great for me. |
Stop thinking small. Why are nuclear warheads illegal for individuals? 2ND AMENDMENT! |
Obama's CDC report concluded that "gun violence' is a statistically a nonissue, and that firearms are used defensively to protect people FAR more often than they are used in crime...... |
False. The language restricts promoting gun control: "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control." The reason is that the CDC was, pretty egregiously, coming up with their goal (promoting gun control), and working backwards to justify it. There is nothing preventing them from studying it. But when they were told to stop using federal dollars to try and undermine peoples' civil rights (something I hope we can agree shouldn't happen), they lost interest. Hmm. Also, didn't Obama allow the CDC to research "gun violence" or whatever after Sandy Hook? But they didn't. They just want to push gun control, not science. |
Delusional. Average citizens wielding guns has never protected or stopped anything in America. You may have your handful of anecdotes or the random YouTube video of something like a shopkeeper shooting wildly while some thugs run away but in aggregate it is all for nothing. America actually has *more* violent crime per capita than modern industrialized nations that have gun control. |
There's nothing that specifically says it should be. The 2nd Amendment doesn't specify what kind of arms one can keep and bear. |
The teens who took issue with my skin color and surrounded me might disagree with you. You seem smart, so I'll let you guess what it was that made them disengage. It's all anecdotal until it's not. |