Doubtless that will be spun as a good news pro gun story but it's really not. A man is dead, a woman will live with the trauma of having killed someone, the witnesses will be traumatised, and the system which was supposed to prevent the gunman possessing that weapon has failed.
This also shows the total failure of bans and the futility of trying to introduce one. The shooter was already banned from owning a gun, but he had one. Do you really think another ban on top of the law, and his individual ban would have had him thinking he shouldn't have one?Doubtless that will be spun as a good news pro gun story but it's really not. A man is dead, a woman will live with the trauma of having killed someone, the witnesses will be traumatised, and the system which was supposed to prevent the gunman possessing that weapon has failed.
Doubtless that will be spun as a good news pro gun story but it's really not. A man is dead, a woman will live with the trauma of having killed someone, the witnesses will be traumatised, and the system which was supposed to prevent the gunman possessing that weapon has failed.
Not going to argue with that as I agree with you.
Even if the US banned guns there are so many of them floating around that I doubt it would make any real difference.
A small glimpse into the thinking of some of the pro gun folk: https://www.youtube.com/c/Iraqveteran8888 some of the "gun gripes" videos show their thinking and distrust/paranoia re authority
Not disagreeing as such, but it's common to see the States portrayed as an undifferentiated nation of gun nuts, where in fact gun owners are a shrinking minority, a minority of the minority are NRA members, about 3% of gun owners own about half the guns, and gun controls have majority support. It's a nation being held hostage by a loud and powerful minority.
I suppose you agree with Farage and would like to see hand guns, pump action shotguns and semi-auto rifles "un-banned" in the UK?The answer is to drop the ban nonsense
No it doesn't. It shows the futility of introducing a ban in a country where you can go to a local arms fair and buy weapons with cash.This also shows the total failure of bans and the futility of trying to introduce one. The shooter was already banned from owning a gun, but he had one. Do you really think another ban on top of the law, and his individual ban would have had him thinking he shouldn't have one?
Guns are banned here and in most of Europe, yet criminals kills eachother with guns, so he does have a point. Apart from the more obvious point the Us isn't the uk, if you get something in the national government you have the indivudual states that can create loopholes, own laws and so on. Hell Obama never really managed to create a health care system and that is how crazy it may sound less contested than a weapon ban.No it doesn't. It shows the futility of introducing a ban in a country where you can go to a local arms fair and buy weapons with cash.
You need to introduce *actual* gun control before bans can work.
In the meantime...
This is deadly to children in the US and is banned.:-
View attachment 1387
But this is fine:-
View attachment 1386
There is another point; by not having guns freely available in society there are fewer mass shootings of children in school.Guns are banned here and in most of Europe, yet criminals kills eachother with guns, so he does have a point.
Whilst i agree a outright weapon ban would be the best option, i also think it not going to happen, not for the coming 10 years at least, so the second option much more restriction on the type of weapons sold how they are sold etc
unless you plan to abolish your armed forces in 10 years time