search results matching tag: Gun violence

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (36)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (1)     Comments (118)   

Biden Closes Gun Show/Internet Background Check Loophole

bobknight33 says...

This will do nothing.
If you want to stop gun violence.
Keep those who commit these crimes in jail.

Another feels good do nothing law that Democrat party will use to circle jerk each other.

Thoughts and Prayers vs Drowning

cloudballoon says...

I'm a Christian, and I absolutely detest American "thoughts and prayers"-ism. It's done so much damage to America (or abroad) and not just passively let evil deeds to keep happening, it also created and justified many of those deeds. Especially on gun violence, it's downright vile and the 2nd amendment "interpretation" (more like ignoring 100% of the context and 80% of the text before & after "right to bear arms").

This toxic combo of "thoughts & prayers" and "rights to bear arms".... is this "American Exceptionalism"? It happens to no other countries, and I don't see many of their government are less "democratic" or "free," nor its citizens have less rights.

The passivity of whole "thoughts and prayers" is NOT what Jesus said, nor what Jesus wants its followers do. If people read the NT, then they'll know Jesus is more of a SJW progressive/activist than what half of the US - the right leaning people - say Jesus is.

Oh, the all-too-easy "my heart breaks for..." whatever tragedy a politician/faith leaders heard and then DON'T do anything that they can help bring legislation to minimize said tragedy? Just as bad and hypocritical.

What gives a "law abiding" citizen the right to bare mass killing machine guns? Or owning hundreds and thousands of ammo in a home? For self-defense? Is that necessary? Really it's just a twisted sense of entitlement/freedom or some kind of nihilistic fetish. You know, I have the crazy "Borat" idea that if I'm an American (I'm Canadian, so I don't have the "right" to do anything directly), I'd troll the far-right Republican cultists using my Christian "credential" to demand my right to bear ANY arms... like anything from bombs, grenades to tanks, fighter jets and nuclear missiles as a private collection as long as I can afford it (Hooray, Capitalism!). It's my freaking "God"-given right! Carry the selective 2nd amendment reading to the extreme to see how ridiculous the status quo already is! ... But the thing is, I'm not sure anymore if there already IS a critical mass of far-right crazies that really believe what I said make total sense.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Incorrect, you have for years now undeniably (by honest people) been hell bent on exposing all fantasy Democratic fuckery you either made up or believed without evidence… and hell bent on hiding and denying the 99% of anti democratic fuckery that comes from Republicans.

If there are piles, why can’t you find more than one actual case for every 100 I offer you of Republican death destruction and debauchery?

You spend plenty of time and hatred on your silly fact free replies, that’s self evident in your dishonest often racist, allways hateful posts. Pretend you don’t, it only makes you more dishonest. Better, you completely waste your time posting them here where absolutely no one will be fooled, we all know how silly and dishonest you are. I get the benefit of learning a little something every time I debunk some nonsense propaganda you posted.

I have plenty of time, early retirement debt free is nice, but the posts you refer to are simply replies to your hatred and lies. It’s true, I do hate lies and liars, but I don’t spend much time on you. 5 minutes to research and reply while watching TV more often than not. I know the same takes you an hour, usually without the research part. That’s the advantage of actually knowing things. It’s true though, it still takes longer to debunk the fact free stupid lies you spout than it does to spout them….or would if I didn’t think you type at 15 wpm…and I never just disappear when I’m proven wrong (largely because you’ve never proven me wrong about anything salient, but others have and I’m happy to admit it, even thank them).

The economy ALWAYS does better under Democratic control, always worse under Republicans. Laws always become more draconian, more one sided, and more unfairly applied under Republicans. In my lifetime, business always takes precedence over citizen’s rights, health, or even life under Republicans. Your leader actually called for suspending the constitution because he lost the election…and you STILL ridiculously claim Republicans are better. Just absolutely asinine even from a brain dead slug like yourself.

You watch OAN propaganda and believe all of California is skid row, every bit of it, and nothing can convince you differently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP

If you can find someone to explain these statistics to you, you’ll see California adds >$93k per person to the economy, N Carolina < $64k per person, and Cali is over 15% of Americans economy, N Carolina 3%. I guess MAGA doesn’t like success.
I live in a state with the biggest, most robust economy in America, that more people want to move to than any other state if they can afford it, where there are services for the indigent and mentally unstable and a >$30 billion SURPLUS last year…more than your state’s entire budget.

Red states are going the wrong direction. Consistently more gun violence, far worse economy, worse unemployment (hardly bad thanks to Biden though), more welfare, more draconian laws, less freedoms, fewer rights. The right has drug their populations down like a lead balloon. You like to point to “democratic cities” but hide when it’s pointed out that states make gun laws and red states are MUCH worse.

You are NOT an independent, bob. Why would you lie such a stupid blatant lie? You are HARD CORE MAGA.
You would want that for your state because having more money and freedom are GOOD THINGS….unless you’re MAGA I guess. Derp.

bobknight33 said:

That's because I'm not hell bent on exposing Democrat fuckery.
There are piles of fuckery on the left - If one were to look.

There is more important things to do in life.

You have nothing to do in life except stew in you hatred. This is self evident in you posts.

All one needs to know is that Democrats are more wrong in how America should be run.


You live in a state totally run by democrats and it is going in the wrong direction.

Most cities in the US are Democrats run and also running in the wrong direction.

Why, as an independent. who votes Republican want that for my state?


Somehow you can't see that.

Grave Diggers “Can Hardly Keep Up With Demand"

newtboy says...

Your point?
States with highest gun violence rates
Mississippi -- 28.6 per 100000
Louisiana -- 26.3.
Wyoming -- 25.9.
Missouri -- 23.9.
Alabama -- 23.6.
Alaska -- 23.5.
The list, and trend continues.
Republican states consistently have higher gun death rates, the top ten states for gun deaths are all Republican led….so much for blaming Democrats.
Republicans don’t care. The #’s point this out horrifically and consistently.
Republican states also don’t care about keeping the lights on or having running water in their cities anymore…I’m looking at you, Texas and Mississippi. Florida has abandoned education in favor of far right wing indoctrination for children (maybe with field trips to Epstein island with the ex president if they’re good and pretty and will sign a binding NDA).

(Pretty chicken shit to claim Dems don’t care, while Cons block every attempt they make to solve the issue, but you do you.)

Um….did I EVER advocate gun free zones, or even indicate I think they’re possible in America? I don’t think so. Why must you always fight windmills and paper tigers? It doesn’t make you sound sane.
It would be excellent…if it were possible. No one is hunting inside city limits, if no one had guns, no one would need guns. It’s not possible unless we take drastic, unconstitutional actions (or change the constitution like the founders intended).

There aren’t enough gun regulations when a schizophrenic person can legally buy as many guns and as much ammo as they wish, and so can murderous gang members who served their sentence/probation.

They DO need MUCH better enforcement of existing gun laws, we agree there. If laws were applied consistently regardless of the perp, there would already be less gun crime. The problem with that being prisons are so overcrowded they simply cannot house more, and most police seem to not be interested in or capable of legal crime-preventative policing, so making illegal gun possession/use come with harsher sentences simply isn’t going to happen….and has never worked to stop crime.

They also need to remove “loopholes” (intentional back doors) that allow mentally ill and violent criminals to legally purchase firearms with absolutely no background checks and no paperwork. Seems to be a no brainer, but your ilk calls that “terkin’ er guns” (I have to believe because you know you’re all insane and can’t pass mental health screenings), not sane regulation.

No surprise you think more draconian punishment is the answer….how’s that been working out? Not great. Countries that focus on rehabilitation of convicts instead of simple housing for profit have recidivism rates near zero, unlike the US.

Using a gun in the commission of a crime already comes with pretty harsh penalties, btw….often turning misdemeanors into felonies just by having it, not using it.

Prison reform is one part of any functional answer, not more, bigger, worse prisons for longer sentences. Funny, you thought the same when Jan 6 defendants started being rounded up and denied bail…odd you cared about all those ANTIFA and BLM activist though. 😂

bobknight33 said:

Philly PA is a Democrat city/ state..
Democrats don't care. You #'s point this out.

2016 277 murders in Philly
2020 500 murders in Philly.
1990 500 murders in Philly.
2022 300 murders 2/3 of the way.

You want Philly to be a gun free zone?

Sorry can do that.
There are enough gun laws.

Need to make the punishment for improper gun use that causes these occurrences extremely harsh.

Hayes: NRA "Good Guy With A Gun" Theory Failed In Real Time

luxintenebris jokingly says...

can only speculate, why a mental health assessment is a threat to some Texans.

someone gave me a clue w/this question...

"How many Texans does it take to screw in a lightbulb?"

Answer: more guns.

yeah - I know - not ALL Texans. but still...too many.

mark the date & check back in a year. w/the new gun laws Abbott signed (7 IIRR), gun violence (i.e. aggravated assaults)* will be up, I wager, by 20% (bottom end).

[throw in legalizing open containers and it's back to the good ole days of 'killer miller' & king fisher**.]

*AK's permits ^71% the first year; MT ^ ~30%.
** note where he lived and died

newtboy said:

In Texas, a violent criminal record is no roadblock, anyone can buy and concealed carry a gun (or several) no matter their criminal record or mental health status thanks to Gov. Abbot.

Hayes: NRA "Good Guy With A Gun" Theory Failed In Real Time

newtboy says...

Source?

I know these are bullshit statistics Bob, because there have been 212 already this year with over 250 deaths in 5 months. Nice try, another easily debunked lie.

Edit: There we’re another 9 killed (and 63 more injured) in 14 mass shootings just this weekend, including 6 kids under 15 in just one.

the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey puts the number of citizens who prevent crimes by using guns much lower than 2.5 million the NRA often claims -- about 67,740 times a year….and in the vast majority of those they never shoot those guns.
Edit: The CDC report you cited said maybe 108,000 times per year guns were used in defense, not 750000- 1.5 million….but noted the statistics they used were incomplete and unreliable….and also noted that accidents and suicides alone vastly outweigh any positive statistic.

the Violence Policy Center statistics showed that in 2012, there were 259 justifiable self-defense homicides in which victims turned the tables, not 2 million.
They also show the theft of about 232,000 guns each year -- about 172,000 of them during burglaries. That’s a ratio of one justifiable homicide for every 896 guns put into the hands of criminals. Is that what you call “successful policy”?

By the end of 2019, there were 417 mass shootings in the U.S., according to data from the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive (GVA), which tracks every mass shooting in the country. Thirty-one of those shootings were mass murders. What is your definition of “mass shooting” because it’s clearly not any time 3 or more are shot by one person.

Abortions account for 0% of deaths each year….but it was targeted with outrageously regressive misogynistic laws that make women incubators without any rights including no rights to contraception. A bit more draconian than having to get a background check to buy guns, don’t you think?

On average, more than 360 people in the USA are shot every day and survive – at least long enough to get to a hospital.
In 2017, some 39,773 died from gunshot injuries, an average of nearly 109 people each day. Per capita, this is significantly higher than in other industrialized countries. The rates of gun homicide are much higher in states with higher gun ownership. More guns equate to higher crime and murder rates, not lower. That is consistent over time.

No, bob….that’s according to the NRA, not the CDC….unless you count any crime stopped or caught by police because they all have guns, but that’s not what you claimed.

900 mass shooting fatalities in what timeframe bob?

Where do you get these insane statistics bob? Your behind?

Bob, no country slaughters more of its citizens than the US thanks to guns.

It’s almost 3 times as likely someone in your home will be shot if you have a gun.

In 2020, 54% of gun homicides are suicides. (Pew)

Again, cite your sources. I know you can’t because it would be too embarrassing for you to admit they came from THE NRA, Glen Beck, or some other nut job liar….or straight from your own ass.


bobknight33 said:

*fake statistics*
^

Gun Laws: Jon Stewart Interview w/ Former ATF David Chipman

newtboy says...

15% of all violent crime is domestic violence. It stands to reason then that 15% of killings are direct domestic violence, if not far more.
Nearly 50% of women killed in the us are killed by their intimate partner.
Guns are involved in over 50% of intimate partner homocides.
That’s guns in domestic violence cases accounting for 25% of femicides (women killed).
It’s impossible to give an accurate number for violence tangential from domestic violence (ie shot by police, collateral injuries, suicides, etc) but it’s far from zero.

https://ncadv.org/STATISTICS

https://efsgv.org/learn/type-of-gun-violence/domestic-violence-and-firearms/

The National Gang Center under the Department of Justice based on annual surveys of local law enforcement agencies tallied 11,934 "gang-related" homicides in the U.S. from 2007 through 2012. The FBI reported 93,253 total murders during the span. Comparing the numbers, the Center estimated that "gang-related homicides typically accounted for around 13% of all homicides annually."

Researcher John Lott stated that the U.S. has a high homicide rate compared to other developed countries because of “drug gangs.”
According to the National Youth Gang Survey Analysis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Gang Center, and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, most gun homicides are not related to gangs.
A December 2020 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report by the CDC of 34 states, four California counties, and Washington, D.C., found that 9.7% of homicides in 2017 were gang-related

So, 25%+- of all women killed (and a similar number for men one assumes) vs 9-13% for gang violence (including tangential)…but you want to focus on “inner city gang killing” (read “black thugs”) as if it’s 90% of homocides and domestic violence death is non existent.

Again, you devolve into making up fake racist statistics to turn any issue into a racist argument. This is where you fail every single time. Fail to say what you really mean. Fail to be honest. Fail to offer true statistics. Fail as a human being….you completely racist liar.

Downvote your comment because as usual you ignore the topic, likely didn’t watch the video, and make up statistics to be a blatantly lying, unapologetic worthless piece of racist excrement.

How can you possibly be so stupid you thought no one would call you out on these easily debunked blatantly racist lies, Bob?

bobknight33 said:

OF all the killings per year how many are domestic violence?

1%
2%

OF those domestic violence what % are from guns, Knifes , other?
Evil White conservative owners are the problem? No bias here.

What about the 90+% gun violence ? inner city gang killing?
This is where you start.

Down vote since it not about any meaningful discussion of root causes.

Gun Laws: Jon Stewart Interview w/ Former ATF David Chipman

bobknight33 says...

OF all the killings per year how many are domestic violence?

1%
2%

OF those domestic violence what % are from guns, Knifes , other?
Evil White conservative owners are the problem? No bias here.

What about the 90+% gun violence ? inner city gang killing?
This is where you start.

Down vote since it not about any meaningful discussion of root causes.

Chicago July 4th weekend - nearly 100 people shot

newtboy says...

@bobknight33, why won't you quit me?

I won't insult you by pretending you mean what you say, or that it makes any kind of sense at all.

600000 Covid deaths you don't care a whit about, suddenly 16 gun violence deaths are an issue for you? Lol. Don't buy it for a picosecond.

BSR said:

I think you crave @newtboy attention.

An Important Lesson

Digitalfiend says...

Out of curiosity, what is BLM's stance on all the black lives being lost to gun violence in places like Chicago? I see no mention of this serious issue on blacklivesmatter.com or blacklivesmatterchicago.com. Heck, it's not even listed on BLM Chicago's "10 Demands of BLMCHI": https://www.blacklivesmatterchicago.com/10-demands-of-blmchi/

With all of the media attention BLM is getting, funding through donations, and general momentum behind the movement, why not focus on things that might actually make a difference? Instead of pouring energy into removing statues, put that effort into PSAs, social media, etc about how terrible the gun violence is in some of these cities. Try and come up with ideas to address it. Invest those resources into getting to the root of the problems that face these communities. I guarantee statues and police brutality are probably pretty low on the list of *real* issues facing the black community. What about poverty/homelessness, lack of economic opportunity, gang activity/influence on youth, guns, drugs, the challenges of low income single-parent homes, etc. Those seem like more important issues for a well funded organization like BLM to be focused on.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

wraith says...

Thank you for your reply Harlequinn.

I beg to differ: The rate of gun deaths in the USA is only low when compared to countries that are either active (civil-) war zones or basically run by drug cartels. When compared to other, similar developed countries, it is at least 4 times as high (when excluding suicides/accidents) .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
I would call that a significant deviation from the norm and stand by my use of "staggering".

You compare gun deaths to deaths from car crashes. Others have already pointed out that one of the main differences is that cars are not tools for killing that are put into public hands and furthermore, since I asked you the question (that you did not answer): "Is the reason for the Second Amendment worth the amount of gun violence in the USA?", my follow up question would be: I can show you the (financial, societal, etc.) benefits of cars (i.e. individual travel by car) for the society, what exactly are the benefits of private gun ownership?
(Whether cars are really worth it, is a whole other discussion.)

Regarding suicide rates, this seems to be a compelling argument until you notice that suicide rates in some, equally developed countries and some lesser developed countries are higher than in the USA and that the number of gun killings that are not suicide is still way higher than in comparable countries (see above).

I do not think that gun violence in the USA can be blamed on mental health issues though <irony>unless you count gun/power fetishism among mental illnesses </irony>.
Edit: Saying that whoever commits an act of gun violence must be mentally ill is tantamount of saying that any criminal must be mentally ill and thus not responsible for his/her actions.

<aside>
One nice observation about this gun fetish (not by me, I think it was Bill Burr): Another common argument pro guns is that people are in it only for home security, if that were the case you would have tons of photos of people with their new door locks or magazine-covers with girls in bikinis in front of security doors.
</aside>

I applaud your stand on public (mental-) health policies though.

Now to your main question:
Have I ever encountered interpersonal violence against me or others?
Yes, but not on a level that bringing lethal force to the situation ever seemed warranted. Thankfully. One obvious reason for that is that I live in a country where I don't need to expect everyone else to carry a gun.
Would it be possible that I would think otherwise, if it would have been the case? Yes.
Would I be correct in thinking that way? No.

To explain: I am not a friend of passive aggressive "stand you ground" thinking. The sane response chain is: 1. Try not to let yourself be provoked, 2. try to de-escalate, 3. try to evade/flee, 4. try to defend yourself.....And of course: CALL THE COPS!

Does that harm my male ego? Yes.
Does that matter enough to me for me to risk killing another human being? No.

harlequinn said:

Thanks for the good questions.

a) yes
b) yes
c) no
d) yes
e) n/a

If you exclude suicide, the USA doesn't have a staggering rate of gun deaths. It is high compared to some other western countries, but on a world rate it is still very low.

When looking at public health (which is the reason for reducing gun violence) you need to be pragmatic. What will actually give a good outcome for public health? In this case there are about a half a dozen things that kill and maim US citizens at much higher rates than firearms do.

E.g. you are much more likely to be killed in a car crash than murdered by someone with a firearm. Cars by accident kill more people in the USA each year than firearms do on purpose. That's some scary shit right there. Think about that for a second, cars are more dangerous than firearms and people are not even trying to kill themselves or someone else with one. So as an example, you'd be better off trying to fix this first.

Or fix the suicide rate in the US. People aren't in a happy place there.

Obesity kills more people. Doctor malpractice kills more people. Etc. But these are hard issues to tackle that will cost billions or trillions. The low hanging fruit is firearms.

Free health care and mental health care, a better social security system, and various other means would all have magnificent outcomes on everyday life in the USA. But again, they cost a lot and require a paradigm shift.

Have you ever encountered interpersonal violence against you (i.e. had someone attack you)? Or have you maybe worked in a job where you often come into contact with people who have been attacked? I find people change their mind after they realize that they were only ever one wrong turn away from some crazy bastard who wanted to hurt them badly.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

harlequinn says...

Absolutely there is a distinction.

And because of that distinction, and the fact that vehicle collisions kill more people by "accident" (we call them accidents but a significant amount of them end up being charged with reckless/careless driving) than firearms do on purpose, I think that vehicles are very dangerous.

"There is an answer to stop gun violence only when guns are not your answer."

I like the cut of your gib. Too many Americans see violence (no matter the tool used) as a solution to their problems. When you humanise the problem, you see that we need to change people and their lives rather than arbitrarily restrict tools (guns) that are 99.99% used for lawful purposes.

BSR said:

There is a clear distinction here. Auto accidents and the like do not have an intent to kill. It's about those that target innocent people.

There is an answer to stop gun violence only when guns are not your answer.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

BSR says...

There is a clear distinction here. Auto accidents and the like do not have an intent to kill. It's about those that target innocent people.

There is an answer to stop gun violence only when guns are not your answer.

harlequinn said:

Yes, they have lower rates. But the point isn't that the rates are the same (they're not), the point is that the rates are low enough to not have an immediate fear of them. An immediate fear would be unwarranted and irrational.

E.g. you probably don't fear dying every time you hop into a vehicle because it has a relatively low risk of killing you (even though the risk is much higher than that of being killed in a homicide by firearm). Having an immediate fear of it would be irrational.

You probably don't fear dying in a general accident (i.e. including all work place and public accidents together). Even though it represents about 170,000 deaths a year (an number so large it makes the topic of firearms deaths look like a joke), it is still a relatively low risk. Having an immediate fear of it would be irrational.

This is not to suggest that these things are not to be respected. We must try and reduce all mortality and morbidity. But you need to be effective at it. This is public health. You choose the method that will have the largest effect.

For example, you will have a bigger effect restricting sugar intake to reduce diabetes deaths, which outnumber homicide by firearm deaths by about an order of magnitude.

The majority of the 40k firearm deaths consist of suicides. There is an important distinction between homicide (the topic) and suicide. Don't mix them up if the topic is homicide by firearm.

Go look at what is actually killing people:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_06-508.pdf

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

harlequinn says...

Thanks for the good questions.

a) yes
b) yes
c) no
d) yes
e) n/a

If you exclude suicide, the USA doesn't have a staggering rate of gun deaths. It is high compared to some other western countries, but on a world rate it is still very low.

When looking at public health (which is the reason for reducing gun violence) you need to be pragmatic. What will actually give a good outcome for public health? In this case there are about a half a dozen things that kill and maim US citizens at much higher rates than firearms do.

E.g. you are much more likely to be killed in a car crash than murdered by someone with a firearm. Cars by accident kill more people in the USA each year than firearms do on purpose. That's some scary shit right there. Think about that for a second, cars are more dangerous than firearms and people are not even trying to kill themselves or someone else with one. So as an example, you'd be better off trying to fix this first.

Or fix the suicide rate in the US. People aren't in a happy place there.

Obesity kills more people. Doctor malpractice kills more people. Etc. But these are hard issues to tackle that will cost billions or trillions. The low hanging fruit is firearms.

Free health care and mental health care, a better social security system, and various other means would all have magnificent outcomes on everyday life in the USA. But again, they cost a lot and require a paradigm shift.

Have you ever encountered interpersonal violence against you (i.e. had someone attack you)? Or have you maybe worked in a job where you often come into contact with people who have been attacked? I find people change their mind after they realize that they were only ever one wrong turn away from some crazy bastard who wanted to hurt them badly.

wraith said:

@harlequinn:

Putting the legal concerns (It is in the constitution, so we have to heed it) aside, what do you think about the Second Amendment?

Was it meant to enable the people to
a) defend against foreign incursion (in lieu of a standing army)?
b) defend against an oppressive government (as a militia)?
c) assume police duties?
d) defend themselves (in absence of police)?
e) none of the above? (Please state what you think its intended meaning was.)

For your selected reason/s given above, does it/do they still apply today?

What do you think is the reason for the staggering amount of gun violence/deaths in the USA when compared with other countries?

Is the reason for the Second Amendment worth the amount of gun violence in the USA?


Full disclosure:
I am genuinely interested in your answers since you seem to have given this some thought (an impression I frankly do not have about bobknight33) .
I am not from the USA and against any form of private gun ownership except under some very rare circumstances.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

wraith says...

@harlequinn:

Putting the legal concerns (It is in the constitution, so we have to heed it) aside, what do you think about the Second Amendment?

Was it meant to enable the people to
a) defend against foreign incursion (in lieu of a standing army)?
b) defend against an oppressive government (as a militia)?
c) assume police duties?
d) defend themselves (in absence of police)?
e) none of the above? (Please state what you think its intended meaning was.)

For your selected reason/s given above, does it/do they still apply today?

What do you think is the reason for the staggering amount of gun violence/deaths in the USA when compared with other countries?

Is the reason for the Second Amendment worth the amount of gun violence in the USA?


Full disclosure:
I am genuinely interested in your answers since you seem to have given this some thought (an impression I frankly do not have about bobknight33) .
I am not from the USA and against any form of private gun ownership except under some very rare circumstances.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon