Less the better

less in the hands of criminals or law abiding citizens?

Both

explain please. why both?

Cause then less people would shoot each other

Other first world countries have relatively fixed the gun violence issue. Get rid of guns.

The UK hasn't had a school shooting since the dunblane massacre in 1996, when they decided children's lives were not worth people owning firearms.

They have less than 1/5 of the homicide rate as the US.

We can fix this issue, any excuses given are... well just that, excuses.

People aren't pro gun. They are pro school shootings.

Most people Europe cannot understand why guns seem to be so available in the United States, with all the mass shootings. I think Canadians also have access to guns but somehow the culture appears to not encourage fire arm use.

Basically they are intended by design as murder weapons. When everyone has them individual and mass murders are an inevitability. I'm not even surprised anymore.

Criminal is an act not necessarily a status, someone can be totally law abiding then murder for any reason. The US seems to be stuck in a loop of deaths with no intent on stopping them. The 'criminals will have them anyway' argument ignores how other more regulated countries don't have the same extent of issues.

I do not own a gun and would not feel safe around someone who does.

im pro gun, and with how America was built i think it is sadly impossible to change that, my thoughts are that you can build, buy, or make a gun illegally, no matter how hard the government trys bad people will have guns in their hands.

And simply put, that is proven false. Gun violence is all but nonexistent in many European countries.

The United States itself is by FAR the world's largest supplier of guns. You are saying we cannot solve a problem that we are the largest contributor to.

Pew pew

fine, even then, why should it be solved with lies the government says to take back guns? you cant excuse biden saying bs to scare the us people, its not the way to do things and it never will

dont come to America then. almost everyone i know 14 and up has a gun

>People aren't pro gun. They are pro school shootings.

what an incredibly asinine take.

wow...

Less for law abiding citizens. Criminals should still have guns

What lies? That guns are the leading cause of death among children and teens? Or how about if you take out homicides related to firearms the US is exponentially closer to the homicide rate of the European countries that have restricted access to firearms?

European countries average around 1 homicide per 100k population, the US currently averages around 5 per 100k population, and without firearms the US would be down around 2 homicides per 100k population.

yep, lets just ask all the criminals to give us the illegally owned guns nicely

Other countries have figured out the solution to school shootings. Supporting "gun rights" is to support school shootings continuing to happen.

Gun people can keep on their holy crusade, but they have to accept that they are cock gobbling the leading cause of death among children and teens.

"a 9mm can blow the lung out of the body" let me find that dumb one about how fast an AR 15s bullet can go, then a couple others i forgot. one sec.

I see.

So supporting the right of people to be able to drink alcohol means I support drunk driving deaths and deaths from alcohol abuse.

as I said, asinine.

The fuck are you talking about? You think some random offhand statements about the exact capabilities means that the government as a monolith don't understand that guns are deadly?

Firearms are deadly. All of them. Never point a gun at something you don't intend to destroy.

Again, firearms are the leading cause of death among children and teens in America.

I don't intend to. That place is crazy

Guns are only intended to destroy. They serve no other purpose.

Alcohol has plenty of non destructive and deadly capabilities.

Asinine counterpoint.

suicides mostly, what take it away and let them kill themselves with knifes? im not saying that the government does not know that guns are deadly, im saying they are handling it horribly

Alcohol is literally poison.

According to the CDC roughly 50k people die every year from gun related deaths. Roughly 2/3 of them are suicide.

Meanwhile, there are over 150k alcohol related deaths each year. Three times as many people die from alcohol and what purpose does it serve? Does it improve social cohesion? Does it promote healthy lifestyles? What good purpose does it serve?

Can you use a beer to defend your home and your family? Can you use a bottle of whiskey to kill invasive animals that harm your livelihood and livestock?

Guns are instant and assumed to be relatively painless. That's why they are the preffered method for suicide. Same reason they are the preferred method for homicide. So having increased access to guns does increase the suicide rate.

We banned alcohol in the 20s, it didn't take. Other countries have banned guns today, it takes pretty fucking well.

You can't just mix some fruit juice and yeast to make a gun. Guns don't just "happen" by accident from leaving some fruit juice in your cellar for too long.

Alcohol is social lubricant that has been around for thousands of years. Firearms are literally made for one purpose, to destroy things.

I don't believe people are truly "anti-gun", what anti-gun people truly believe is that only they should be able to control firearms. This might seem like a contradiction, as anti-gun people don't own firearms, but the reality is that they're wealthy enough to simply outsource their violence rather than carry it out themselves, and their virtue comes from that degree of separation between themselves and the poor or disenfranchised they suppress.

>This might seem like a contradiction, as anti-gun people don't own firearms,

False, people who want gun control own firearms. 71% of Americans want stricter gun control. There is huge overlap there, but owning a firearm doesn't mean that you want to continue seeing children die in school shootings. Many people are willing to give that up, like they have successfully in other countries.

>but the reality is that they're wealthy enough to simply outsource their violence rather than carry it out themselves,

Democrats represent the least wealthy demographics.

>and their virtue comes from that degree of separation between themselves and the poor or disenfranchised they suppress.

The least wealthy communities are the ones most harmed by gun violence.