3 ms·

I'm astounded at how adamant many Americans are when it comes to even discussing gun control.

by Cyph0n 10y ago

brightball 10y ago
That's because the US homocide rate is at a 51 year low according to the FBI while gun ownership is dramatically higher. We've had 2 terrorism incidents and we need to be addressing what could have prevented them. Every time an incident happens that gets on the news we see this song and dance about implementing gun control policies that wouldn't have stopped the incident being used to push them. That means that Democrats aren't trying to solve a problem. They are simply waiting to use national tragedies to push an agenda. Solving a problem looks like "here is how this happened and here is a policy that will make sure it doesn't again." Democrats have not proposed anything along those lines in the last 8 years.
- whatok 10y ago
  Agree with this 100%. No gun control law would have prevented this from happening in America solely because we have quite a few guns here. If not procured legally, he easily could buy a gun illegally. Constitution aside, if there was a way to magically disappear every gun in America and then enact complete gun bans I might be willing to entertain to the notion. Otherwise it's just a bunch of posturing to me.
  - pigpaws 10y ago
    the problem then would be that only the 'important' people would have guns. I don't see any politicians giving up their security details. I don't see Diane Feinstein or Chuck Schumer giving up their 'concealed carry' licenses. Its a classic "Do as I say, not as I do." If they can carry in their overly restrictive states, why can't the electorate? don't they have the same rights? No? because political elitism. Even in that bastion of fascism, NJ: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/lawmaker_let_nj_legislators_judges_carry_handguns.html http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/lawmaker_let_nj...
- Cyph0n 10y ago
  The Orlando shooting was not a terrorist attack in the commonly used sense, as I assume you're referring to that. The fact that the homicide rate is lower than it was doesn't mean it's at an acceptable level. Now I don't know whether or not gun control is the solution, but the issue needs to be discussed and not dismissed because with "because history".
  - brightball 10y ago
    An easy way to start a discussion is with the words, "How could this have been prevented?" That has not happened.
  - whatok 10y ago
    Assuming all the background on him is factual, it absolutely was a terrorist attack on the gay community. Don't know how you can spin that one.
    - Cyph0n 10y ago
      I assume he was using the word "terrorist" as it has been used by the media over the years, not in the correct sense. Going with the latter, yes it was clearly a terrorist attack. Going by the former, it was not - the attack was basically homophobic in nature, perpetrated by a closet homosexual who frequented that same gay bar and had no contact whatsoever with the Muslim community.
      - ende 10y ago
        You have to be muslim to be a terrorist?
        Cyph0n 10y ago
        Of course not, but I'm talking about the Orlando shooting which was initially thought to be perpetrated in the name of Islam. I'm a Muslim myself btw.
  - LyndsySimon 10y ago
- ende 10y ago
  Let's add to that the song and dance focused specifically around "assault rifles", which kill less people per year than knives, blunt objects, or bare hands. (The vast majority of gun deaths are by handgun, and are either suicides or gang violence.)
LyndsySimon 10y ago
That's OK. I will say that the GOP blocking these proposals is one of the very few times I've felt like anyone in the legislature is actually representing my beliefs.

I'm astounded at how adamant many Americans are when it comes to even discussing gun control.

by Cyph0n 10y ago

I'm astounded at how adamant many Americans are when it comes to even discussing gun control.

That's because the US homocide rate is at a 51 year low according to the FBI while gun ownership is dramatically higher. We've had 2 terrorism incidents and we need to be addressing what could have prevented them. Every time an incident happens that gets on the news we see this song and dance about implementing gun control policies that wouldn't have stopped the incident being used to push them. That means that Democrats aren't trying to solve a problem. They are simply waiting to use national tragedies to push an agenda. Solving a problem looks like "here is how this happened and here is a policy that will make sure it doesn't again." Democrats have not proposed anything along those lines in the last 8 years.

whatok 10y ago
Agree with this 100%. No gun control law would have prevented this from happening in America solely because we have quite a few guns here. If not procured legally, he easily could buy a gun illegally. Constitution aside, if there was a way to magically disappear every gun in America and then enact complete gun bans I might be willing to entertain to the notion. Otherwise it's just a bunch of posturing to me.
- pigpaws 10y ago
  the problem then would be that only the 'important' people would have guns. I don't see any politicians giving up their security details. I don't see Diane Feinstein or Chuck Schumer giving up their 'concealed carry' licenses. Its a classic "Do as I say, not as I do." If they can carry in their overly restrictive states, why can't the electorate? don't they have the same rights? No? because political elitism. Even in that bastion of fascism, NJ: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/lawmaker_let_nj_legislators_judges_carry_handguns.html http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/lawmaker_let_nj...
Cyph0n 10y ago
The Orlando shooting was not a terrorist attack in the commonly used sense, as I assume you're referring to that. The fact that the homicide rate is lower than it was doesn't mean it's at an acceptable level. Now I don't know whether or not gun control is the solution, but the issue needs to be discussed and not dismissed because with "because history".
- brightball 10y ago
  An easy way to start a discussion is with the words, "How could this have been prevented?" That has not happened.
- whatok 10y ago
  Assuming all the background on him is factual, it absolutely was a terrorist attack on the gay community. Don't know how you can spin that one.
  - Cyph0n 10y ago
    I assume he was using the word "terrorist" as it has been used by the media over the years, not in the correct sense. Going with the latter, yes it was clearly a terrorist attack. Going by the former, it was not - the attack was basically homophobic in nature, perpetrated by a closet homosexual who frequented that same gay bar and had no contact whatsoever with the Muslim community.
    - ende 10y ago
      You have to be muslim to be a terrorist?
      - Cyph0n 10y ago
        Of course not, but I'm talking about the Orlando shooting which was initially thought to be perpetrated in the name of Islam. I'm a Muslim myself btw.
- LyndsySimon 10y ago
ende 10y ago
Let's add to that the song and dance focused specifically around "assault rifles", which kill less people per year than knives, blunt objects, or bare hands. (The vast majority of gun deaths are by handgun, and are either suicides or gang violence.)

LyndsySimon 10y ago

That's OK. I will say that the GOP blocking these proposals is one of the very few times I've felt like anyone in the legislature is actually representing my beliefs.