Should the gun law be banned in the us?

Original post by jesswalton888

I thought you said the murder of millions of individuals was in the USA's culture? lol. I have answered your question, if you were reading my answers properly. The reason is what this whole debate is about, the reason why guns should be banned and to stop people from buying them is to PREVENT MILLIONS of innocent civilians within the USA to be killed by firearms. There really is no necessary reason to own a gun other than sport and for authorities use. Guns are not needed for protection, the UK make do without them, why shouldn't America? We're in the 21st century, why are you still holding on to what America's culture was like within the 1800's?

You haven't once answered how you would remove 300m firearms from circulation. These are fire arms currently in public hands, how would you get these back. You can't not sell them to people, people already have them in their homes.

I think you're grossly overstating how many people die in firearm related deaths. 2/3 of Firearm related deaths are suicides. Take that into account, you're talking about 500,000 firearm related deaths in the last 50 years, that weren't self inflicted. I'm not saying that's insignificant, just far less than you're suggesting.

So you've already added another reason to own a gun, for sporting purposes, now all they have to do is join a club, and they can buy a gun. That's what the NRA is.

The UK doesn't have the same history of gun ownership as the US. Part of the american constitution is the right to small arms. You're talking about changing one of the building blocks of their nation.

Reply 42

jesswalton888

OP

13

Original post by Tubbz

You haven't once answered how you would remove 300m firearms from circulation. These are fire arms currently in public hands, how would you get these back. You can't not sell them to people, people already have them in their homes.

I think you're grossly overstating how many people die in firearm related deaths. 2/3 of Firearm related deaths are suicides. Take that into account, you're talking about 500,000 firearm related deaths in the last 50 years, that weren't self inflicted. I'm not saying that's insignificant, just far less than you're suggesting.

So you've already added another reason to own a gun, for sporting purposes, now all they have to do is join a club, and they can buy a gun. That's what the NRA is.

The UK doesn't have the same history of gun ownership as the US. Part of the american constitution is the right to small arms. You're talking about changing one of the building blocks of their nation.

I have stated that it is virtually impossible to remove every gun to be removed from US civilians possession. But there are steps to take that would eventually lead to this. What happens when they run out of ammo? If it is made illegal for ordinary citizens to buy a gun, then they can't buy ammo either. Therefore making their weapon that they posses with no ammo, useless. It would not be an overnight process, it would take years. But there must be a starting point. Yes, I mention people that die from firearms, because that's what the worldwide controversial debate is about, if guns did not kill innocent people and if people had taken the possession of having a life-threatening weapon seriously, there wouldn't be a problem, would there?

Reply 43

04MR17

Volunteer Section Leader

22

Yes.

Spoiler

Reply 44

save millions? over how long exactly?

Reply 45

Original post by Drewski

The UK hasn't had 200+ years of engrained gun culture to counteract.

You're talking about fundamentally different views of society. You can't make it as simple as you're trying to.

You can restrict certain types of weapons, sure. Limit ammunition. But you can't simply ban the lot, it wouldn't work.

It's difficult to understand why any civilian has the need of a military assault rifle and why those are allowed to be kept in homes in suburban areas, let alone in the hands of teenagers with personality disorders.

Despite their gun culture, it's clear they could do better at restricting such things. The reason they don't is not primarily cultural, but primarily due to the immense vested commercial interests of the gun industry lobby, channelled through the NRA and maintained by a compliant Right that appears to repeatedly place profit above human life, even the lives of children.

The young people who died in this and other schools are victims of a political system based on greed, profiteering, corruption and a decaying, broken, diseased political system.

Reply 46

Original post by Tubbz

The UK doesn't have the same history of gun ownership as the US. Part of the american constitution is the right to small arms. You're talking about changing one of the building blocks of their nation.

It never used to be a building block. The ammendment was invoked in the postwar era by a gun lobby eager to sell weapons systems to street hoodlums and was part of empowering black neighbourhoods to kill each other, along with other things like a deliberate policy of introducing drug addiction which the CIA and FBI conspired in. It may sound old, but for example in cities, hardly anyone had a gun in the US prewar. The original ammendment is being distorted by interpretations from a supreme court that didn't want to face down the gun lobby, it was only ever intended originally in the context of war against the British in a country of rural villages. The founders would have been astonished to see the daily mayhem caused by mass civilian gun ownership in modern American cities.

Reply 47

Original post by Fullofsurprises

It's difficult to understand why any civilian has the need of a military assault rifle and why those are allowed to be kept in homes in suburban areas, let alone in the hands of teenagers with personality disorders.

Despite their gun culture, it's clear they could do better at restricting such things. The reason they don't is not primarily cultural, but primarily due to the immense vested commercial interests of the gun industry lobby, channelled through the NRA and maintained by a compliant Right that appears to repeatedly place profit above human life, even the lives of children.

The young people who died in this and other schools are victims of a political system based on greed, profiteering, corruption and a decaying, broken, diseased political system.

a good starting point on this would be to note that "military assault rifles" are few and far between in civilian ownership...no matter how many times you hear Democrats talk about all the assault rifles remember that most of them know Jack **** about guns

Reply 48

Miss.Unknow

18

I support a gun ban, but i do acknowledge that it's pretty impossible considering how many Americans already own a gun at home and that many would strongly oppose it. Maybe having tighter gun laws would work.

Reply 49

Original post by Miss.Unknow

I support a gun ban, but i do acknowledge that it's pretty impossible considering how many Americans already own a gun at home and that many would strongly oppose it. Maybe having tighter gun laws would work.

Because that's working so well in DC and Chicago. Also the Texas shootings last year show that there is a problem in the application of existing gun law, I would suggest that needs sorting out before adding any more given how easy it is to get around what is already there (hint, you lie on the paperwork)

Reply 50

Miss.Unknow

18

Original post by Jammy Duel

Because that's working so well in DC and Chicago. Also the Texas shootings last year show that there is a problem in the application of existing gun law, I would suggest that needs sorting out before adding any more given how easy it is to get around what is already there (hint, you lie on the paperwork)

Yeah i agree, it's quite a complicated situation. They should sort their current gun laws before implementing more.

Reply 51

Original post by Jammy Duel

a good starting point on this would be to note that "military assault rifles" are few and far between in civilian ownership...no matter how many times you hear Democrats talk about all the assault rifles remember that most of them know Jack **** about guns

The youth in this latest rampaging mass murder of innocents seems to have had little trouble getting hold of one.

Never mind though, the important thing is that Colt made some solid dough selling this awesomely dangerous weapon to a kid.

Reply 52

jcrosful

1

Gun violence is unlikely to end in the U.S. Looking at the tendency from last 15 years, do not be surprised if these things will keep happening frequently, even more than now.
I have had conversations with friends in America, and guns are so much into their culture that makes this problem a very complicated one to solve. One example, take a look at the guns they send in Walmart. Coming from Spain I was utterly surprised by seeing the normality of such things.

Reply 53

According to the appropriately named 'Tombstone Tactical' online gun store (no ambiguity as to gun owner motives there), the price of the mass-killing weapon, the Colt AR-15, used in the latest school massacre, is roughly US$1000.
https://www.tombstonetactical.com/catalog/colt/m4-ar-15/rifles/

We can assume that ammo is fairly cheap, but let's take a guess at $1 a bullet.

Thanks to this information, we can now set a definitive price on the life of an American child. The US child is valued at approx. $60, or roughly £45.

This is what the United States political machine believes, anyway.

America regards itself as a special exemplar to the world and wishes to export these 'values' to us.

Reply 54

Drewski

19

Original post by Fullofsurprises

It's difficult to understand why any civilian has the need of a military assault rifle and why those are allowed to be kept in homes in suburban areas, let alone in the hands of teenagers with personality disorders.

While I agree, the issue is the genie is out of the bottle. Even if you restricted new ones from entering the system, you're just relying on the goodwill of owners to return the ones bought legally.

Best will in the world, that's not going to happen.

So there needs to be a plan B.

Reply 55

Tubbz

Original post by Drewski

While I agree, the issue is the genie is out of the bottle. Even if you restricted new ones from entering the system, you're just relying on the goodwill of owners to return the ones bought legally.

Best will in the world, that's not going to happen.

So there needs to be a plan B.

Plan B will be extremely difficult to enforce as most of the people you will be asking to administer a forceful removal, will be the people who fall into the gun owner category.

Oh yeah, go and grab his guns, we promise we won't take yours after.

Reply 56

Original post by Fullofsurprises

The youth in this latest rampaging mass murder of innocents seems to have had little trouble getting hold of one.

Never mind though, the important thing is that Colt made some solid dough selling this awesomely dangerous weapon to a kid.

Do you have any proof they had an assault rifle, or are you just saying it's an assault rifle because you don't actually know what one is?

Reply 57

Ladbants

No I don't think they should be banned. I think assault rifles and large magazines should be banned though. Shotguns, hunting rifles should be legal. And pistols as well.

Reply 58