Ok_Salamander_1633 t1_je0c2ch wrote on March 28, 2023 at 2:34 PM

Reply to comment by Resident-Log6503 in Cops at kickapoo by doctorbaloney4204

OK … so let me ask you a few “simple” questions.

We have roughly the same number of guns, per capita, now that we had in the 1950’s. Why is gun violence so much more prevalent now than it was then?
How ‘exactly’ would you get rid of the guns? Even if you could get past the legal and constitutional issues, you still have somewhere around 400 million guns in America. How are you going to round up and take those weapons from 150 million people who are not going to be exactly “happy” about giving them up?

Assuming you still support the rest of the Constitution, just not the 2nd Amendment, to so it legally would require judges to write warrants, and law enforcement to execute searches and seizures. This would either require tens of thousands of additional judges and LEO’s, or it would clog the system for decades.

Even if you somehow got past all the legal, Constitutional, and logistical obstacles of confiscating guns, you would still have at least 100 million or more, now illegal guns in circulation. Criminals, by definition, don’t tend to follow laws.

So end the end, what would this do to help prevent gun violence? It’s very easy to fall into the “Do Something!” mentality when we see tragedy like this. But I have yet to hear a single person than can offer a logical explanation of how any form of sweeping gun control could be carried out, nor can they explain how it actually prevent a bad person from doing bad things.

The simple cliche “if you take away the guns, only criminals will have them” really is true.

We need to fix our broken society. We need to stop hating each other. We need to teach our kids to respect each other, respect the laws, and to value life.

MiwestGirl t1_je17rs5 wrote on March 28, 2023 at 5:56 PM

I’m the 1950’s they did have all of the automatic rifles. Also the gun organizations were not political lobbyists as they are today. The ban on automatic rifles significantly reduced gun deaths until it expired in 2004. Most cities murder records were set in 1991. St. Louis being one of them. Even today St. Louis still has less murders than it had in the early 90’s. The numbers don’t lie. Less automatic rifles equal less murders. The three countries with constitutional gun rights all have high gun death rates. I think going back to what we had between 1994 and 2004 is the way to reduce gun deaths. It worked once and can work again.

22TopShelf22 t1_je2vj2d wrote on March 29, 2023 at 12:32 AM

You've got to remember the thought process of the people here. If you present facts or rational statements, they block your posts. They hate facts. They simply aren't capable of thinking rationally or in a lot of cases, they're not capable of paying taxes, because they suck on the government tit.

Resident-Log6503 t1_je0t7hi wrote on March 28, 2023 at 4:24 PM

I definitely agree there is a societal problem that needs fixing but that’s only part of it. Without guns a disturbed person is not able to go and shoot up a school or other public place and now down innocent people - they just can’t. In the 1950s there was not wide access and availability of assault style weapons. Other countries have managed to have strict gun laws and they work. Strict gun laws are not the same as ‘no gun laws’. The right to bear arms is a very dated statement that comes from a time where people had to defend their property for legitimate reasons that no longer exist today. Other countries have managed to have strict gun laws and they work. Strict gun laws are not the same as a ‘no gun law’. The fact that it might be difficult or that people wouldn’t like it is no reason to just throw up our arms and say it can’t be done. I’m sorry but civilians do not need AR-15s… you just don’t. These shootings that are happening in the US are often mass casualty events because of the ease of access to these types of weapons where the attacker does not have to stop and reload.