America takes awful care of its citizens, some other countries certainly do better. I wish we’d focus more on addressing the root cause issues that push people to commit violence instead of superficial actions like banning weapons, though. Even if all guns disappeared overnight, the conditions that incentivize violence would still be around.

I interpreted Donjuanme’s comment as sarcastic, where “no way a background check would’ve stopped this” implied that they thought a background check wasn’t performed, but if it would’ve been, this murder wouldn’t have happened.

Not everyone who commits a violent crime with a gun has a previous record of doing that, or other indicators that would fail a background check for that matter. Not a lot of anti-gunners seem to remember that though, which is partly why I interpreted the comment that way.

I don’t care more about guns than dead kids, stop intentionally misinterpreting my opinion and arguments. Respond to my arguments intelligently and provide counterpoints so we can better understand each other. So far, you’ve provided nothing constructive.

You say that guns are “fucking murder machines” then in the same comment state that the guns we have are too weak and useless to use against an oppressive government. Pick an argument and stick with it.

If our government is launching drone strikes against me, then they’re launching drone strikes against you too. We’re on the same side here, except if push ever comes to shove, it sounds like you’ll lay down and lick boots while others fight for you. If you’re not ok with living in a dictatorship, the least you can do is not actively get in the way of the one check/balance that the people have against our government’s military.

Gun ownership isn’t a right for Ukrainian citizens. Imagine how it felt for citizens in Mariupol, Donetsk, or Kyiv during the first few weeks of the invasion. I’m not suggesting that lone “muh guns” rednecks would save the country from a military invasion alone, but I’d bet my ass that most people who lived this would’ve been safer and fewer citizens would’ve died if they were armed and able to defend themselves while evacuating and seeking safety. The Ukrainian government backtracked and shipped citizens in Kyiv and a few other cities guns and ammo afterwards, but because gun ownership was outlawed before that, no one was trained on how to use them so they were effectively useless.

This is what you’re fighting for. A disarmed, helpless society that’d rather feel safe than be safe. It’s the same fear that ushered in mass surveillance and the complete degradation of personal privacy in the name of counter terrorism. People cheered for it.

It’s possible to have a well-armed society that isn’t rife with murderers; your grandparents lived it. Maybe we should refocus on making our society worth living in again for the marginalized people perpetuating violence. Give gang members and hopeless people an honest way to earn a livable wage, provide free and good access to mental and physical healthcare, revamp prisons so they reform instead of punish, reduce carbon emissions so our children won’t choke on their air… But you can’t boil that down into a headline as short and sensational as “children murdered because people can buy murder machines.”

“Guns are far better killing machines vs any other method you can come up with.”

Murder is murder. Banning guns doesn’t get rid of violent people, so assuming nothing else changes, we’d at best have 5 dead children instead of 8 or something. Sure it’s an improvement, but not a solution. I don’t feel that’s with it given the tradeoffs.

“Countries that ban them do not have the same rates of shootings and when they do have them are a lot less deadly.”

I’m sorry, but no shit. “Country that bans cars sees no more deaths by car accidents.”

“Blaming it on the lack of welfare is misdirection.”

I’m not blaming it on lack of welfare, I’m mostly blaming it on our decreased quality of life. Since you’re ignoring that mass shootings basically didn’t exist 60 years ago when Americans had comparatively unfettered access to guns, then look at any poor country today and their violent crime rates. When moral, legal avenues for leading a fruitful and happy life are unobtainable, then people will resort to illegal means to make that happen. This is nothing new.

“The Constitution does not need to be amended, it just has to be read. Are you in a well-regulated militia? No? You don’t get a gun. Go join up the National Guard if you want one.”

Well-regulated meant well armed and functioning, and the National Guard is a branch of the military, which is literally what a militia isn’t. Sounds like you need to read it.

"And if you think your shotgun is go to stop a dictator you will have to excuse.me while I laugh too hard to type. "

What makes you think that dictator will be on your side? If you think our current political climate is bad, itll pale in comparison to the one your kids will grow up in if Trump wins. Roll over and let your kids suffer if that’s what you want, I’d rather fight so they don’t have to.

Gentle reminder that poor rice and goat farmers have won almost every conflict against our military the last 60 years. Regardless, if our military ever goes whole hog on us like you’re suggesting and starts bombing your neighborhood, I’ll be sure to message you to ask if you’re still licking their boots. Chances are, you probably will.

There is no obvious solution.

If guns magically disappeared overnight, the people who would indiscriminately kill children would still be around. They’ll just run kids over with their car during recess, lock the doors and mix a ton a bleach and ammonia, run in with an axe, or anything else. People are creative.

We can point to Australia, Canada, or England as “proof” that banning guns = stopping murder, but people conveniently forget that they also have universal healthcare, a higher income compared to cost of living, free or cheap education, etc. These conditions breed fewer people with motives to kill indiscriminately.

The US government can continue trying to ban guns, which would start with amending the Constitution, and would end with police going door to door to round them up because most people won’t comply.

Gun control has only gotten stricter over time, yet indiscriminate shootings have only gotten more frequent. If you feel that isn’t explained by our decreased wages, social cohesion, and overall quality of life, then how else would you explain it? My grandparents could mail order machine guns to their front door, yet school shootings never happened. They could also support a family of 4 with a single parent working right out of high school, which js hilariously unimaginable today. Is that coincidence?

We’re also 12 months away from a potential dictatorship, yet people are still callling for their own disarmament. Some people think gun ownership is nuts, but I think not owning a gun right now is nuts. They might be ok with not protecting their family, but I’m sure as hell not.