Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You were trying to make a case that these guns cause just a small percentage of deaths, that is not reasonable in any way.
What are the conservative proposals other than anything but gun restrictions. They have no interest in simple things like banning AR-15's for 18 year olds and universal background checks and reverting to their one door proposal.
Prove me wrong in numbers. Take the overall homicides by guns in the country and break it down by weapon style and give the %. That's the only way to prove me wrong. We deal with facts not emotions.
We have 400 million (est.) handguns and 20 million riffles. That's 5% total. Assault weapons of all kind are used by less than 7% overall homicides. In 2019, the FBI DATA shows that 13,922 total homicides by guns, 10,258 by handguns and 364 by riffles including assault riffles. That's 3% all gun deaths.
If you are serious about gun homicide you would ban handguns first NOT AR-15. The numbers are 1 sided.
Last edited by SanJuanStar; 06-05-2022 at 09:17 PM..
A good man with a gun was prevented by Uvalde police from taking out the gunman
What do you know? Just brilliant.
I'm starting to think that the Police Chief was called by the DNC, and told "There's going to be a shooting, please don't interfere... we need this distraction!”
First off, driving is a right not a privilege. Everything is a right unless it's prohibited by law. But that doesn't matter. Because all rights, including the Bill of Rights have limitations.
You can't shout fire in a crowded theater, you can't slander other people, you can't have a religion where you sacrifice human beings, etc. Likewise the Second Amendment can have any number of limitations placed on it, and no not all rights have to be protected equally at the same age. Age limits have to be set accordingly to the maturity level needed for that activity. A 16 year old voting can't harm anyone. A 16 year old with an assault rifle can harm a lot of people. Which is a violation of those people's rights. Your rights end where somebody else's begins.
Driving is not a protected right, nor is it an implied right. You can be denied permission to drive for any of a number of reasons, and said permission can be rescinded for just as many. You have the right to travel, not to drive.
Voting has caused far more deaths than firearms. Hitler was elected, and we've had our share of Presidents, Senators, and Representatives who forgot the nonaggression principle and sent our people off to try to kill more of them than they killed of us. Every person who ultimately decided to have the Civil War was elected, for that matter.
You are correct, rights end at the next person's nose. All of the things you listed as proscribed are disallowed for a reason. They infringe upon the rights of others and are done with the intent to cause harm to others. That's what all the rights which the founders protected have in common. You can't perform any of them with the intent to do harm.
However, someone owning a firearm does not affect you in any way whatsoever. None. Zero, zilch, and nada. My owning a firearm does not harm you or infringe on any of your rights. It does not make you any less safe for your neighbor to perform the act of possessing a firearm. There are actions which can be taken with a firearm that could infringe upon or harm you, but those are already prohibited by law, no matter what tool is used to perform that action.
The act of owning or keeping a firearm is not harmful in and of itself. There is zero wiggle room in the phrase "shall not be infringed," because the act of owning a firearm does no harm in and of itself and therefore cannot be prohibited. Likewise the term "bear" in the 2nd protects the right to carry said firearm for peaceful or defensive purposes. Neither action is done with malice or intent to harm, and is therefore not an offense against anyone else's rights.
The right to keep and bear arms does not interfere with any of your protected rights, any more than the other protected rights interfere with each other. It never comes close to your nose.
Has anyone heard anything new from the investigation? It's been a roller coaster of a day and I'm behind on news.
Prove me wrong in numbers. Take the overall homicides by guns in the country and break it down by weapon style and give the %. That's the only way to prove me wrong. We deal with facts not emotions.
We have 400 million (est.) handguns and 20 million riffles. That's 5% total. Assault weapons of all kind are used by less than 7% overall homicides. In 2019, the FBI DATA shows that 13,922 total homicides by guns, 10,258 by handguns and 364 by riffles including assault riffles. That's 3% all gun deaths.
If you are serious about gun homicide you would ban handguns first NOT AR-15. The numbers are 1 sided.
Both semi-auto handguns and rifles are both a problem, your argument is that AR15’s are not a problem because they are a smaller percentage of homicides. Both are candidates for restrictions but to say AR15’s are fine because they make up a smaller percentage of killings avoids the fact that they are the weapon of choice in a majority of the mass shootings in schools supermarkets, schools, concerts.
There is not one good reason anyone needs to possess an AR15, not one.
Both semi-auto handguns and rifles are both a problem, your argument is that AR15’s are not a problem because they are a smaller percentage of homicides. Both are candidates for restrictions but to say AR15’s are fine because they make up a smaller percentage of killings avoids the fact that they are the weapon of choice in a majority of the mass shootings in schools supermarkets, schools, concerts.
Again, show me the numbers. I'm saying by the numbers that the AR-15 is not the crisis the anti-gun crowd are pushing. If We go by your hysteria We have to ban all weapons and you should start with handguns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
There is not one good reason anyone needs to possess an AR15, not one.
Spoken like a person that doesn't know about guns. That's your opinion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A good man with a gun was prevented by Uvalde police from taking out the gunman
