I ask that if you can not be civil to just move along here.
Ok... Hear goes nothing...
Lost life due to violence is a horrible tragedy no matter what tool was used. Be it a gun, knife, bomb, blunt object, ect. I doubt you will find a single person on either side of the gun debate to argue that. But can we please not blame the tool used? . Im a horrible speller and have crap grammer but i admit im at fault. not my pencil, pen or keyboard. I do not feel any gun or gun parts ban will have any "positive" effect on gun related homicides. I feel it will honestly make things worse due to law abiding citizens will be the only people to comply with any such ban. Meanwhile the criminals will still have the banned tools to now further do damaged. Look at some cities and states that have some of the strictest gun policies and there gun crime is far worse than The more relaxed cities or states. Look at chicago for example. I do feel we can do better but doing something does not mean your doing the right thing. Cocaine, heroin, crack, lsd, pcp, ect are all illegal but still flood our cities, schools and neighborhoods so simply making something illegal wont stop the issue regaurdless of what is being banned.
in the USA
Im 12 times more likely to be stabed than shot.
A rifle in general is used for arround 1% of violent shooting (though the media loves to jump all over it). And 80% is gang or drug related. The 19% ballance is everything else, suicides included.
Lifes saved by guns is drastically higher than lives taken. (Most times just brandishing a firearm will make a would be attacker flee for example)
On average 30,000 lives are taken by gun a year. But take out the suicides and that Number drops to 11,000 people. Still its a big number and that is horrible but lets look at lives saved. That number is
500,00 to 3,000,000 lives "saved" by use of gun according to the CDC
https://www.google.com/amp/s/townhal...120%3famp=true
Your view on the 2018 assault weapons ban proposal
So assault weapons are typically demonized as military style weapons by the media and people who dont know any better. But looking into the proposal they are trying to vastly broaden the allready lose term.
In this bill here are some items they are after.
10rd capacity or less. Most threats take more than 1 shot. On average from a pistol that count is 6 shots per threat, so 2 attackers you should have 12 rounds. This is due to you adrenalin and nerves making your hands shakey in a situation of life and death as well as a pistol round is not very effective. Its slow moving compaired to a rifle and does not create a big wound channel.
most pistols would be deemed a assault weapon as many semi automatic pistols hold more than 10rounds. My wifes glock holds allmost double that.
Barrel shrouds..... Ok why? It keeps you from touching a hot barrel, so.......
Threaded barrels. So no more muzzle breaks to reduce recoil i suppose. (Yeah, i know they want no suppresors but those are rear, expensive and come with a extensive backround check and paperwork)
No vertical grips. Helps with accuracy and egonomics so yup lets get rid of those. We do t want people to hit what they aim at and must like stray rounds flying around. And who cares if you have arthritis or carpal tunnel.
I dont think any of this will help anything
Now as i have said, i do think we can do better to lower gun related crime even if it will likely be traded off for knifes at the best case.
80% recievers require no ffl paperwork so a person not allowed to own a gun can buy that and then finish the machining process and assemble the firearm. I myself would like to try it but i feel that you should need to go through a ffl dealer to get one. This way it helps keep firearms out of the hands that should not have them while not infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens. I would be happy to use non lethal ammo "if" i wouldn't have to worry about having a lawsuit against me for defending myself or my family.
Please feel free to add any ideas that you feel will help keep guns out of the hands of criminals without infringing on law abiding citizens. Untill then we will never reach a common ground on this debate.
Ok... Hear goes nothing...
Lost life due to violence is a horrible tragedy no matter what tool was used. Be it a gun, knife, bomb, blunt object, ect. I doubt you will find a single person on either side of the gun debate to argue that. But can we please not blame the tool used? . Im a horrible speller and have crap grammer but i admit im at fault. not my pencil, pen or keyboard. I do not feel any gun or gun parts ban will have any "positive" effect on gun related homicides. I feel it will honestly make things worse due to law abiding citizens will be the only people to comply with any such ban. Meanwhile the criminals will still have the banned tools to now further do damaged. Look at some cities and states that have some of the strictest gun policies and there gun crime is far worse than The more relaxed cities or states. Look at chicago for example. I do feel we can do better but doing something does not mean your doing the right thing. Cocaine, heroin, crack, lsd, pcp, ect are all illegal but still flood our cities, schools and neighborhoods so simply making something illegal wont stop the issue regaurdless of what is being banned.
in the USA
Im 12 times more likely to be stabed than shot.
A rifle in general is used for arround 1% of violent shooting (though the media loves to jump all over it). And 80% is gang or drug related. The 19% ballance is everything else, suicides included.
Lifes saved by guns is drastically higher than lives taken. (Most times just brandishing a firearm will make a would be attacker flee for example)
On average 30,000 lives are taken by gun a year. But take out the suicides and that Number drops to 11,000 people. Still its a big number and that is horrible but lets look at lives saved. That number is
500,00 to 3,000,000 lives "saved" by use of gun according to the CDC
https://www.google.com/amp/s/townhal...120%3famp=true
Your view on the 2018 assault weapons ban proposal
So assault weapons are typically demonized as military style weapons by the media and people who dont know any better. But looking into the proposal they are trying to vastly broaden the allready lose term.
In this bill here are some items they are after.
10rd capacity or less. Most threats take more than 1 shot. On average from a pistol that count is 6 shots per threat, so 2 attackers you should have 12 rounds. This is due to you adrenalin and nerves making your hands shakey in a situation of life and death as well as a pistol round is not very effective. Its slow moving compaired to a rifle and does not create a big wound channel.
most pistols would be deemed a assault weapon as many semi automatic pistols hold more than 10rounds. My wifes glock holds allmost double that.
Barrel shrouds..... Ok why? It keeps you from touching a hot barrel, so.......
Threaded barrels. So no more muzzle breaks to reduce recoil i suppose. (Yeah, i know they want no suppresors but those are rear, expensive and come with a extensive backround check and paperwork)
No vertical grips. Helps with accuracy and egonomics so yup lets get rid of those. We do t want people to hit what they aim at and must like stray rounds flying around. And who cares if you have arthritis or carpal tunnel.
I dont think any of this will help anything
Now as i have said, i do think we can do better to lower gun related crime even if it will likely be traded off for knifes at the best case.
80% recievers require no ffl paperwork so a person not allowed to own a gun can buy that and then finish the machining process and assemble the firearm. I myself would like to try it but i feel that you should need to go through a ffl dealer to get one. This way it helps keep firearms out of the hands that should not have them while not infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens. I would be happy to use non lethal ammo "if" i wouldn't have to worry about having a lawsuit against me for defending myself or my family.
Please feel free to add any ideas that you feel will help keep guns out of the hands of criminals without infringing on law abiding citizens. Untill then we will never reach a common ground on this debate.
Comment