Gun ownership is (a) far too numerous and (b) not the main issue
Its the TYPE of guns and the access to them that is the source of the concern, and to be honest I have heard nothing cogent other than overthrowing an imaginary facist government that may or may not exist in the future
If such high grade weapons are allowed then what is the issue with increased qualification/security to own them? I have not heard one single logical argument against this. Merely bleating the "2nd ammendment says so" is not logical
This thread is not going to solve any world problems, it is more a case of trying to understand a viewpoint.
If "The 2nd ammendment says so" is your argument than you have to accept "Mexico bans guns" as being every bit as valid as a counter point because you are then just talking about Legal idiosyncracies of an individual country
When the type of gun that gun opponents want to ban (the AR-15) just so happens to be the best-selling rifle in the USA, and it has for years, the "far too numerous" argument SHOULD apply to banning that "type of gun" just as much as it applies to banning guns in general. And when guns like the AR-15 are used in about 2% of gun crime, as opposed to handguns at 80+%, the "not the main issue" argument SHOULD apply to the AR-15.
I understand that - but the nature and sheer scope of the offences between the two types differ so vastly that the legislation is being considered/debated
The difference between a domestic homicide and a serial killer is a similar ratio; which one is a more frightening prospect?
As I said this is an issue that gets emotive on both sides. I am somewhat atypical in that I am a gun advocate who also believes in tighter controls/greater testing. I do not consider that unreasonable nor unnecessarily imposing.
I understand your point and you come from a different background and bring a different view. I don’t disrespect you view and it has more support in the urban areas (major cities) and much less in rural areas (smaller cities and country).
Seung Hui Cho (the Virginia Tech shooter) killed more than either the Aurora shooter or the Sandy Hook shooter. He used two handguns. The Dunblane shooter also used solely handguns. When shooting unarmed civilians, a handgun is just as effective for mass-murder as a modern sporting rifle. The difference is more symbolic than practical. The belief that it'd be harder, or impossible, to conduct a Sandy-Hook-sized mass shooting if the AR-15 was off the market simply isn't accurate.
You don't think the fact that a large proportion of the guns used to kill people in Mexico are purchased through legal channels in America? That Mexico's gun problem is partially caused by America's lax gun control laws?
The US bombs Pakistani villages for less than that.
Maybe. Have not read any numbers about % of guns in Mexico being purchased legally in US.
The post I quoted was saying the murder rate in Mexico is due to extreme gun control laws. My point was: hogwash.
Where the guns came from makes no difference.
Mexico has a cartel violence program, not a Colt problem. Take US-purchased guns out of the situation and the violence isn't going to stop, or change significantly. The same cartels would kill the same people, just using rifles of Chinese or Russian manufacture instead of American.
Look at Africa. Would you say that African civil wars are an "ethnic strife problem" or a "Kalashnikov problem"? Most people say the former. In Mexico, the dispute is drug cartels, not ethnic factions, but the point remains the same. We don't blame African civil wars on Mikhail Kalashnikov and his company; we blame them on the root cause of the violence.
A bill currently working its way through the Colorado legislature would, on its face, make essentially all pump-action and semiautomatic shotguns on the market "assault weapons" and illegal to buy or sell.
Here's the problem. Under the law working its way through the Colorado legislature, an assault weapon includes a shotgun that can carry more than eight rounds *or can be easily modified to do so*. Pump-action and semiautomatic shotguns use tube magazines that are easily extended. Although my gun carries four 2.75" shells in the tube and one in the chamber, the basic design of any pump-action gun means that I could screw on a tube extender for another four or five shells. Hence, under the Colorado bill, THIS has now become an "assault weapon," even if you don't actually attach a magazine extender, and buying or selling one would mean serious jail time: