6 ms·

Your comments belie a pretty strong ignorance of American gun culture. This isn't a numbers game; there is a large portion of the population that would not comp

by gw 9y ago

Your comments belie a pretty strong ignorance of American gun culture. This isn't a numbers game; there is a large portion of the population that would not comply with a confiscation program, and would resist using (you guessed it) firearms. Many of the strongest supporters of the second amendment are in the military and police. It boggles my mind that the same people who denounce involving our military in middle eastern quagmires, would propose igniting such a civil war domestically.

yongjik 9y ago
This is a numbers game, and a long-term game. I'm sure there are Americans who would rather shoot a police officer than give up their guns, but I believe their numbers are dwindling. Societies change. After all, gay marriage or a black president was unthinkable only a few decades ago. Personally, I kinda see the point of having guns if you live in the middle of nowhere eighty miles from the nearest police station. So I'd say, let them keep their guns. No reason to give them more political ammunition. For the majority of Americans (by population, not area), guns make much less sense. If American cities are infested with shootings, it's not because gun control doesn't work. It's because the American government is bought out by NRA lobbyists so they don't try hard enough. It has proven be a tough battle for Americans to coerce the government into action. But, hey, nobody said fighting your government would be easy, did they?
- LyndsySimon 9y ago
  > I'm sure there are Americans who would rather shoot a police officer than give up their guns, but I believe their numbers are dwindling. You're wrong. Furthermore, communities across the US are becoming more locally homogenous. It's not going to be a person here or there you'd have to deal with, it would be entire communities.
- junkscience2017 9y ago
  we aren't interested in hearing who you think "deserves" a gun, it is a RIGHT
- refurb 9y ago
  It's because the American government is bought out by NRA lobbyists so they don't try hard enough. If you mean "bought out" in terms of actually bringing voters to the polls over this issue you'd be right. Like it or not, people against gun control are more likely to vote on that issue in the US than people for gun control. The NRA has over 11 million paying members. That's almost 3% of the US population, probably over 10% if you just count adults. That's a powerful voting block.
  - GiorgioG 9y ago
    > Like it or not, people against gun control are more likely to vote on that issue in the US than people for gun control. This is why I voted for Trump. Hillary was guaranteed to shit all over my gun rights. Trump is proving me right - he's been largely ineffective and despite all the bellyaching, isn't really doing much harm (oh boy, I know I'm going to set off a shitstorm now.) But net-neutrality! But LGBT rights! If you look at what he's said and the practical effect of what he's done...it's basically a no-op.
    - GiorgioG 9y ago
      Lazy downvoters who can't be bothered to explain the downvote - nice
- GiorgioG 9y ago
  > If American cities are infested with shootings, it's not because gun control doesn't work. It's because the American government is bought out by NRA lobbyists so they don't try hard enough. Yes you're so right. I mean Chicago is literally a war zone and has some of the strictest gun control laws in the land. Clearly this is the NRA's fault. What bugs me is that this kind of thinking comes from watching/reading CNN, NYT, WaPo push the anti-gun agenda and people just gobbling it up with no actual experience with gun handling/ownership. In general the state of the news media in this country has reached a new low. I try to watch all the news channels to get a broad set of opinions on things in general. What I get instead is, either the president is brilliant, or the president needs to be institutionalized. Or that guns should be banned outright, or that kids should be taught to shoot before their 1st birthday. There's absolutely no objectivity these days. Maybe it's always been that way but it sure didn't feel like that 25 years ago.

by gw 9y ago

yongjik 9y ago

This is a numbers game, and a long-term game. I'm sure there are Americans who would rather shoot a police officer than give up their guns, but I believe their numbers are dwindling. Societies change. After all, gay marriage or a black president was unthinkable only a few decades ago. Personally, I kinda see the point of having guns if you live in the middle of nowhere eighty miles from the nearest police station. So I'd say, let them keep their guns. No reason to give them more political ammunition. For the majority of Americans (by population, not area), guns make much less sense. If American cities are infested with shootings, it's not because gun control doesn't work. It's because the American government is bought out by NRA lobbyists so they don't try hard enough. It has proven be a tough battle for Americans to coerce the government into action. But, hey, nobody said fighting your government would be easy, did they?

LyndsySimon 9y ago
> I'm sure there are Americans who would rather shoot a police officer than give up their guns, but I believe their numbers are dwindling. You're wrong. Furthermore, communities across the US are becoming more locally homogenous. It's not going to be a person here or there you'd have to deal with, it would be entire communities.
junkscience2017 9y ago
we aren't interested in hearing who you think "deserves" a gun, it is a RIGHT
refurb 9y ago
It's because the American government is bought out by NRA lobbyists so they don't try hard enough. If you mean "bought out" in terms of actually bringing voters to the polls over this issue you'd be right. Like it or not, people against gun control are more likely to vote on that issue in the US than people for gun control. The NRA has over 11 million paying members. That's almost 3% of the US population, probably over 10% if you just count adults. That's a powerful voting block.
- GiorgioG 9y ago
  > Like it or not, people against gun control are more likely to vote on that issue in the US than people for gun control. This is why I voted for Trump. Hillary was guaranteed to shit all over my gun rights. Trump is proving me right - he's been largely ineffective and despite all the bellyaching, isn't really doing much harm (oh boy, I know I'm going to set off a shitstorm now.) But net-neutrality! But LGBT rights! If you look at what he's said and the practical effect of what he's done...it's basically a no-op.
  - GiorgioG 9y ago
    Lazy downvoters who can't be bothered to explain the downvote - nice
GiorgioG 9y ago
> If American cities are infested with shootings, it's not because gun control doesn't work. It's because the American government is bought out by NRA lobbyists so they don't try hard enough. Yes you're so right. I mean Chicago is literally a war zone and has some of the strictest gun control laws in the land. Clearly this is the NRA's fault. What bugs me is that this kind of thinking comes from watching/reading CNN, NYT, WaPo push the anti-gun agenda and people just gobbling it up with no actual experience with gun handling/ownership. In general the state of the news media in this country has reached a new low. I try to watch all the news channels to get a broad set of opinions on things in general. What I get instead is, either the president is brilliant, or the president needs to be institutionalized. Or that guns should be banned outright, or that kids should be taught to shoot before their 1st birthday. There's absolutely no objectivity these days. Maybe it's always been that way but it sure didn't feel like that 25 years ago.