Soldato
This is exercising your rights. You might think its crazy, but to some people it's important. I personally think it's childish and over the top, but this person has every right to do so.
Firearms are used defensively between 500,000 to 3,000,000 times per year.
Yeah that's David Hemenway, citing himself, funded by an anti-gun group (Joyce), doesn't provide numbers, uses ridiculously tiny sample sizes.
Firearms are used defensively between 500,000 to 3,000,000 times per year.
It's really weird that you don't get reliable independent figures when IIRC the federal government is basically banned from collecting most of the useful stats on gun violence and usage. IIRC there was a law/regulation banning the CDC from doing studies into it for 20 years (and such studies tend to take years to do properly).Yeah that's David Hemenway, citing himself, funded by an anti-gun group (Joyce), doesn't provide numbers, uses ridiculously tiny sample sizes.
Yeah that's David Hemenway, citing himself, funded by an anti-gun group (Joyce), doesn't provide numbers, uses ridiculously tiny sample sizes.
YupThats a vague statement considering what constitutes "defensively". Is that someone defending themselves from getting shot. Is that police drawing their weapons. Is that a nutter waving his gun around because someone cut him off in traffic and he felt threatened.
Read through the CDC report for yourself? Draw your own conclusion.Thats a vague statement considering what constitutes "defensively". Is that someone defending themselves from getting shot. Is that police drawing their weapons. Is that a nutter waving his gun around because someone cut him off in traffic and he felt threatened.
The war on normal people owning guns is the same as the war on drugs, it's not an overnight fix with how pro gun people debate about it.
It will be a decades long process, but less guns on the street every year.
IIRC the actual flow of the guns tends to go the other way.In the US there will not be fewer guns on the street every year. Even if that did happen it would create a different problem, the guns would come over the border from Mexico and the criminals would be having a great old time.
I’m not talking about now though, I’m talking about Berry’s hypothetical situation of guns being banned and reducing numbers on the streets.IIRC the actual flow of the guns tends to go the other way.
Why bother risking smuggling illegal weapons across one of the most actively patrolled and checked boarders in the world, where they're looking in detail for things that are much smaller and harder to find than a gun (drugs), when you can cross a state line, go to one of the many many dodgy gun shows or shops and buy a gun that will either do what you want without any issue, or can easily be modified and not have any worries about boarder inspections.
From memory the Mexican government has actually tried suing US gun manufacturers and sellers because they can trace so many of the weapons the drug cartels are using direct to the US as there are far fewer checks on stuff leaving the US than entering it.
Are you saying that the second potential problem is greater than the current and very real problem? Because that would seem idiotic in the extreme.In the US there will not be fewer guns on the street every year. Even if that did happen it would create a different problem, the guns would come over the border from Mexico and the criminals would be having a great old time.
Not sure where you’re getting the impression that I’m saying that? Just pointing out that banning guns wouldn’t end all the problems.Are you saying that the second potential problem is greater than the current and very real problem? Because that would seem idiotic in the extreme.
Just mandate that civilian arms are limited to revolvers, lever-action rifles, single/double-barrel shotguns, varmint rifles... basically most things technologically available pre-WW1.
Don't see why the pro-gun folk would be mad since that's the 'good times' and those are the manliest of weapons.