Every single time, I keep hearing these common themes: * “thoughts and prayers” * “2nd Amendment” * “Guns are not crazy, people do” I mean like, wtf. It is people lives. Is that hard to make background check stricter for gun purchases? If the system works, there should’t be that many people died from mass shootings. It is crazy that we now accept it is “normal” in the US. The US is a great nation, but this needs to be addressed and stopped. I could not imagine being at work and get notified there is a mass shooting at my kid’s school. /endrant
Who accepts them as normal? This sounds more of a gun grabber talking point, than actual public opinion. What people are unwilling to do is place feel-good unconstitutional restrictions on an enumerated right to treat symptoms rather than causes. How would you make background checks stricter without infringing upon the rights of lawful citizens engaged in lawful activity? Of the recent mass shootings, where did government fail on the background check?
My arguments are as following: 1. If it is not normal, the People or majority of the US probably should ACT to make changes. 2. The government did not fail because the current BG check is flawed. Look at the number of mass shooting occurrences happened in the last 10 years. The causes are because we assumed that people are not crazy. People are crazy. That’s why we have prisons. So “Guns are not crazy, people do” argument is naive in a way that the current system assume guns will be in good hand. My point is it is okay to own guns, but not at the expenses of mass shootings.
Your analysis is simplistic and shows a lack of understanding as to the amount of regulation that actually exists around guns. If someone one is crazy, there is a legal process to strip them of their rights. Allowing arbitrary definitions without due process isn’t a realistic solution.
Heroin kills more people than guns why aren't we doing something to stop heroine to cross the border?
Most of these are being done by young men on prescription drugs handed out to them by drs.
So why allow such folks an easy access to guns?? This is just a plain stupid excuse to use to justify gun rights
I think you mean why allow them easy access to mind altering medications? Why isn’t there mandatory monthly psych evaluations for people on these meds? There are already laws that take guns away from people that are crazy. The problem is identifying crazy people, not selling guns.
Because: - it's rare despite the media hysteria - it's actually still at historical lows - some of the "solutions" like cosmetic bans are complete nonsense - existing measures are in theory effective but enforced poorly, and people would rather clamor for new laws than to get the current legal "tech debt" sorted out That said it's possible to have effective gun control without compromising the right to bear arms, though it doesn't drive media engagement numbers as much.
France banned guns. Guess what happened in 2016? Extremist attacked crowed with a truck, resulting 86 death. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
Guys, I did not mention any “ban guns”. My point’s the current gun law is obviously weak OR not properly enforced.
Making it harder for lawful citizens engaged in lawful activity to exercise an enumerated right is a ban for those that are impacted by the restriction. You sound like the folks that claim they don’t want to ban abortion, they just want to make it really hard to get one. Or, the folks that don’t want to disenfranchise voters, just make it harder to vote.
Right, we need to inspect all vehicles passing between state borders 🙄
Because it's even more horrifying to disarm the population and let only the government be armed.
Yeah the rest of the developed world lives in constant fear of subjugation from their government and America is the safe haven. Lol the brainwashing of many Americans on this issue is truly truly remarkable.
Why single out the “developed” world?
3 things: 1) nobody considers them normal. But we point out the hypocrisy in the way liberals get angry about these publicized shootings, but not in the 90% of other gun murders that happen with gang/other violence in inner cities. And by the way, those other murders happen with illegal guns. Banning assault rifles will only eliminate a few percent of all gun deaths. 2) We need to focus on issues that are making people go crazy, not on the guns themselves. Today it’s guns but who knows if it could be drones in 20 years. You will never be able to ban/get ahead of the criminals. You ban guns, then the only ones who will have guns are the criminals. You think any gang member in Chicago is going to give back weapons, or listen to cops? Hell no. 3) I’ve thought about what I would do if a mass shooting occurred in the spot where I was. And at the very least, I would want a gun for extra safety. And you probably would, if you were helpless without it.
Lmao the way you single out Chicago.. Well done kid
1) Gang violence is an issue with many more economic and social factors at the root of it than random mass shootings. It’s a symptom of a bigger economic issue, and the left focuses on those plenty. 2) There’s no need to prevent all crime. If you make these mass shootings less frequent, that’s still worth it. And there are plenty of other countries that we can look to see that consistent gun reform accomplishes that. 3) Cops wouldn’t agree with you. Good guys with guns aren’t statistically likely to make a difference in these scenarios. What’s worse is, the police have no way to tell which armed person at the scene is a good guy. You having a gun in that scenario puts you in more danger when the police arrive.
What’s this sound like? https://mobile.twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/1157746149257883648 Thoughts and prayers to me!
Got an actual point you’d like to share with the class?
Awesome username 👍