that's a lie. My claim is that guns give you a tactical advantage that you wouldn't have if you didn't have a gun. that's 100% fact that you cannot dispute that's why you're saying I'm claiming some moronic straw man that you fabricated. Because you can't win this argument. You move the goalposts you lie you're dishonest you post dishonest studies. You do this out of desperation instead of just admitting you're wrong because you don't want to believe you live under an oppressive government. Keep this in mind, your government in Canada assuming you're Canadian, demands that if someone holds you at gunpoint you have to let that person kill you. That's not liberty.
You have 1/10th the shootings we do per capita. You also have 1/10th the population density we do. Our violence and gun violence rates outside of the ~1% of both of our most densely populated areas are actually the same. Its an urban problem, not a gun problem. Which is why Canada got rid of its long gun registry a decade or more ago. Inner city gangs with handguns are responsible for the bulk of shooting violence in both our nations. Rural folks with rifles commit violence on a scale that scientifically classifies as anomalous.
So much for the Oath they take ey? First the 2nd goes. When that does, the Military must comply with the Constiution. I am well aware that unless and until the 2nd goes, there will be much discussion (and many deaths, mass slaughers) just like we are having. Doing nothing is not an option. Nothing has not worked. You have demonstrably tried that. Doing the same thing over and over and getting nowhere is the definition of ???????
I am presently convinced that what 'you' are doing now (nothing) is clearly not working. No-one has even tried to convince me that there is a better solution than the Australian (and now NZ) precedent. There are some things that small Nations can get right you know.
I let my membership lapse after the NICS debacle. I don't miss the glossy 8x10 advertisements either. Expensive as all get out. And hiring celebrities to stump for the NRA? Absolutey wasteful.
obviously not or more would of had them if you think it's so easy, then let's just apply the same machine gun laws to assault weapons
Have you met anyone who has such an idea on their "Wish List" or are you just stretching the elasticity of Fact and testing its resilience? see Book of Thesaurus: Particularly "Absurd" (as a conclusion)
so what religion was the shooter, did they say? people were saying he might be Muslim, were they right?
Not many. Though automatic weapons were banned the same way marijuana was. Not by votes, but by bureaucratic overreach. Regulatory agencies regulated both, using precisely the same catch-22 tax-stamps, until they were effectively illegal. You don't seem concerned that your metric for banning certain guns would eventually, innevitably ban all guns.
it would not ban all guns, hand guns and rifles will never be banned in this country, just guns like machine guns and assult rifles used in mass murders and yes, the war on drugs was a failure, just like the war on alchol that came before
Thats a revised (and lefty) attempt to change the meaning of words. The left is big on that. In fact, thats the lefts thing. Don't know which is sadder-that many lefties don't notice the change, or that lefties reflexively change definitions to suit them. No answer is a pleasant one. "Search lights so they say, but I can't see them in the night".
If POTUS attempted to deprive us of our rights, how would the military respond? How COULD they respond.
Nope, stereotype fail. And it's 'your'e' as in Your'e not one of those careless and reckless drivers who rarely comes to a complete stop, thinks turn signals are merely a suggestion, uses high beams as a matter of course, drives over the speed limit, drives while texting and speeding, eating...etc and is generally a deadly hazard to all users of the road, are you?
