4 ms·
Looks like the 200K number is from just part of the buyback. That was from memory in an article I read. But either way, 650k to 1 million doesn't change the poi
by merpnderp 11y ago
Looks like the 200K number is from just part of the buyback. That was from memory in an article I read. But either way, 650k to 1 million doesn't change the point much.
As for door to door raids and stop and frisk, that's the only way to get guns out of american hands. How do we know this? Because many cities and states have had draconian gun laws in the past. There have been buy back programs by the dozens. None of them worked. Just life France and much of Europe, guns are easy to get in restricted jurisdictions.
And why would you think telling people they have to turn in their guns will work? They won't even register them when required by law.
http://www.newsmax.com/US/new-york-gun-registration-law/2015/06/23/id/651912/ http://www.newsmax.com/US/new-york-gun-registration-law/2015...
- dalke 11y agoI did not say that a buyback program was the solution. (Nor did Australia limit themselves to a buyback program; it was part of a national effort.) I asked why Australia didn't have the horrors that you predict would happen should Australian-like gun control laws be put into place in the US. Your only answer seems to be that the US has too many guns, so therefore can't change. (Which sounds like a bank which is "too big to fail", so we have to keep feeding it taxpayer money.) > that's the only way to get guns out of american hands That's irrelevant. As I demonstrated, only about 1/3 of the guns got out of Australian hands. Why would anyone think those same laws would get 100% of the gun out of American hands?