Trump needs to put a real second amendment advocate on the Court

Cherry picking? Which part? My experiences in Belfast growing up, were just that. I was responding to the notion that banning guns, eliminating the supply, would eliminate the problem of gun violence and suicides by gun. I didn’t get to my experiences working South of the border in countries with as restrictive gun laws and how easy it was to acquire guns for protection. As for the gun violence in Belfast at the time I was there, you have no clue, nor what were the drivers of fear behind the evolution of their anti-gun laws.
As for the CDC report, did you bother to read it? In large part, it discredited the conclusions of many of the anti-gun biased studies the Left keeps citing to support their anti-gun campaign. And there were a number of counter observations identified by the report, which particularly addressed the Kellerman study which was the original source of showing an association between the risk of being murdered and owning a gun which was continually, and is still cited, by the Left; it wasn’t multiple case controlled studies and Kellerman’s study was also not case controlled, it was a biased design from the get go and itself was deeply flawed as has been repeatedly discussed in various threads in which you participated... in his study, living alone was shown having a high association of a risk of being murdered.
The fact is, Obama had hopped the CDC study would provide support for his anti-gun agenda; it didn’t come close, so it was largely buried.
Not a single nation multi discipline study, including the 2013 CDC one nor the extensive 1993 study resulted in conclusions supporting the anti-gun agenda that has continually been sold by the MSM.

 

Banning guns would reduce murder and suicide rates.

 

rapists have penises. Drunk drivers have cars, arsonists have gasoline, perverts have cameras and computers. The proper response to crime is to punish criminals-not deprive millions of items that are useful to own, in the idiotic belief that those who commit serious felonies will obey bans on materials

 

no-but it certainly would reduce our freedom and cause millions to be slain if the government tried to enforce it

 

15 to one odds he is a leftwing voter and sees gun bans as a way of attacking people who don't vote for the politicians he hopes are in office

 

Allowing guns is similar to allowing Fentanyl -- this drug never acts by itself.

 

You missed the comparison Turtledude was making. We don’t ban commonly useful things because of the misuse of a small minority. The toxic dangers of Fentanyl are widely known and the non-prescription use of Fentanyl is already banned. Guns do have both legitimate use and benefit among the majority of owners as evidenced by the ownership of nearly 500 million firearms by over 125 million gun owners, with but a microscopic few that misuse them. Wishing they were gone is tantamount to wishing people wouldn’t hurt each other; ain’t gonna happen.
BTW, one of my favorite street names for Fentanyl is ‘Drop Dead’. Sure, I want some.

 

except fentanyl has almost no useful purpose and our various governments don't issue it to thousands of people

 

Based on the latest Democrat and leftest anger, I think your wish has come true.

 

And so it has happened.

If the Democrats pass an assault weapon ban in 2021, it will immediately be challenged all the way to the Supreme Court. 6-3 if Roberts votes correctly or 5-4 if he wants to be a traitor. Either way, another assault weapon ban won’t last long enough to enforce.

 

You note later that just owning a gun increases the risk of homicide. Since 1986, the homicide rate decreased 42% while the number of guns increased by 200 million guns. Did the gun ownership rate decrease by 42%?

Like this one?

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506

Why do those studies never look just at gun ownership by lawful citizens but include criminal possession, which is likely to increase one's chance of being killed?[/quote][/QUOTE]