Anonymous #3 9w

Not disagreeing with more in depth gun control laws, but the way to stop violence and shootings in this country are to address the social and economic issues perpetuating said violence

2

Anonymous #3 9w

He legally purchased two firearms after his misdemeanor charge

12

Anonymous #3 9w

Frankly a great argument for reducing the total amount of guns in circulation. It is harder to obtain guns when they are less accessible. Take the UK, where violent people have to resort to stabbing because there aren’t many guns. And it’s a lot harder to stab numerous people.

15

Anonymous #5 9w

yes vaccines only stop 99.9% of cases but not all deaths so we should not use vaccines. they just dont prove that they stop all deaths! its not worth it! doesnt eliminate the problem!

19

Anonymous #5 9w

I wouldn’t call banning someone with a previous charge related to unlawful possession of a firearm to buy guns to be an “arbitrary/unnecessary” restriction

8

Anonymous #4 9w

The UK simply doesn’t have the amount of guns as the US does, it is why gun control works because not anyone who wants to go on a killing spree can easily obtain one illegally. People don’t realize how many unregistered firearms there are in this country, anyone who truly wants to harm people can easily obtain a gun through illegal means

0

Anonymous #2 9w

dude like this deadass might just believe that take unironically

8

Anonymous #5 9w

And it’s not just one case where a law might have prevented it. A place in my hometown, two miles from my house, was shot up by a man with an AK-47, which are legal to purchase in my state.

6

Anonymous OP 9w

A school the next county over from my hometown had a mass shooting as well. The perpetrator was in possession of a gun one of his parents had purchased. Safe gun storage laws or laws preventing a gun from being in the same household as a person proven to be violent or mentally unstable could have prevented this as well.

6

Anonymous #6 9w

I’m a strong supporter of vaccines actually, science has proven their effectiveness. Back to the argument, I simply believe there are much greater means of countering gun violence. Solving socioeconomic issues through universal healthcare, fixing racial disparities, etc, would solve the issue of why gun violence happens in the first place drastically. Simply banning the sale of guns overlooks several nuances our country has that other countries don’t

-1

Anonymous OP 9w

Again, I’m not arguing that no guns laws should be in place, I fully agree basic gun laws should be in place. The individual who shot up virginia tech did so with only pistols, no AR or high caliber rifle was used and he killed 32 people. If we simply ban pistols too it’s much easier than one would imagine to obtain a firearm through illegal means still

2

Anonymous #5 9w

I’d want us to do all of the above tbh. But instead we are just doing nothing.

1

Anonymous #5 9w

Banning guns doesn’t erase the 500 million guns in our country overnight, many of those guns are off the radar entirely. People arguing we should look at other countries who don’t have this problem don’t realize that they have never even had this problem before

4

Comment Deleted

0

How would a constitutional ratification remove 500 million guns in our country

-2

Comment Deleted

0

I’m genuinely asking this: How are law abiding citizens supposed to protect themselves from armed criminals after that point?

0

Comment Deleted

0

Call the police for them to show up 20 minutes after you’ve already been shot.

2

2/3 of these examples took place at a school so I think you may be just talking out of your ass

1

Anonymous #5 9w

Hey so from the data, ARs are not the main source of shootings, though they are often sensationalized because they are scary looking. The vast majority of shootings (both mass and not) are conducted by pistols since they are concealable relatively controllable, and relatively inexpensive. If you want to really cut down on mass shootings, you‘d restrict pistols and hi-cap mags first, not ARs.

1