It clearly is an indicator that something is wrong with the US since it sticks out like a sore thumb.
I’m pretty sure many politicians have been agitating for assault rifle bans for years and not getting anywhere.
Not all ‘thinking’ is the same.
It’s not good enough to say we can’t solve the problem because it is too complex and too difficult.
That doesn’t make sense.
You take the small step that deals with the immediate problem first.
So homicide rate has nothing to do with guns, it’s about wealth inequality. As it’s almost evident in places like LA, Chicago etc that are home of extremely wealthy people who think that everything is going fine, and extremely poor people who end up using violence as a way to go by.
If that’s the case, then creating jobs and improving the chances* of unemployed people of finding a position, seems like a good day to reduce crime in general.
- = importing the 3rd world to have endless people willing to work at minimum wage or illegally isn’t a way to increase employment rate, it just provides companies with an endless source of…let’s say “workers who’ll do anything for a paycheck”.
2 Likes
That’s a mischaracterization. You are right, it isn’t good enough to say that we can’t solve the problem because it is too complex. That is not what I said. I said that it is a complex issue, and, as a result, we should study this issue in depth so that we make good, well-informed decisions. Demanding better thinking does not mean we shouldn’t take actions. It means we should think about how to implement the best course of action.
Nothing to do with freedom. Freedom of what? Freedom of the possibility getting killed by a gun?
The US is in many ways unique. On all sorts of measures, it looks like it ought to be a third-world country: complex and oppressive business laws and taxation, a history of widespread corruption and violence, and a large underclass living in poverty (or in jail). And yet somehow it manages to be one of the most successful countries on the planet.
It’s a fascinating case study for political theorists.
As for using wealth as an indicator of violence - it’s doesn’t have much practical value, does it? Observing that X correlates with Y is only useful if you can (a) show causation and (b) have some straightforward means of manipulating X to influence Y in the desired direction.
1 Like
That’s right. Freedom isn’t real freedom if you can’t taste the lead in your gut
1 Like
I would agree that when people were going west a few hundred years ago they needed a gun or rifle for protection and hunting. In this age if you like to hunt you can get a license for a hunting rifle, or a handgun for home protection. Assault rifles are not needed.
4 Likes
We don’t have a political system nor public discourse capable of addressing this issue.
Banning, ‘common sense’ legislation and ‘national conversations’ are all code for ‘we have no idea what to do’.
If any of you were Supreme Chancellor and had absolute power to handle this in whatever way you wanted, could you solve it?
Hell, no two of us here are able to agree on any particular detail and we, presumably, have a lot more in common with each other than a random selection of Americans.
Guns are tools. It depends on the problem. To say we never need it is naive. I look at today and all throughout history. We live tittering on the edge of chaos, all the time. Natural disasters, man made disasters, collapse of economies, martial law, collapse of government. They happen. They happened in the past and they’re happening today. It is foolish to believe we are sheltered from it. Some of the people against the modern tool of assault rifles are often the loudest critics of current leaders in how corrupt, incompetent, racist, fascist and Nazi like, etc. But don’t think we should arm ourselves just in case?
The historical truth is, governments are the most prolific killers in history. We saw it at Tiananmen Square, we saw it at WW2, we saw it Saddam. And we also see that the government is often incapable of helping us. We see it with milita war lords in Africa like boko haram, ISIS, the Taliban which the US is actually encouraging The Afghan government in dealing a treaty with them after like 2 decades of war. We see it in Venezuela. We saw instances like during the LA riots where Korean store owners were targeted and the police did not help them so they used assault rifles to protect themselves and their stores.
I get assault rifles are scary for most. However Most of us have been the fortunate minority to never see these terrible things. They are a modern weapon for modern problems we face. We as individuals have the right to own them to defend ourselves. And we as individuals are solely responsible for our safety and fate.
Yet in Taiwan possessing even a 22 pea shooter gets you very harsh sentence, if not death. And the Taiwanese people prefer it that way.
I don’t see the LY changing that anytime soon.
Seems like you read this article:
https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/why-american-citizens-need-assault-rifles
Pretty much the same arguments you posted.
An assault weapon has one purpose: to make it easy to kill people.
It surprises me that you, a declared Christian who should value human life about all else, is defending such weapon.
I can’t open it. Maybe EU or Italian censorship. I can’t open some sites idk why.
Yes. They do. Therefore I want to defend myself against those who wish to do me harm.
Because life is precious. I will defend mine because I’m ultimately responsible for mine. Unless you can guarantee no one will have any weapons.
Just this weekend, these guys kill Christians by the hundreds.
It sounds like the same reason that DPR and more other countries want/keep to have nuclear weapons.
2 Likes
It wouldn’t solve anything anyway. Having an assault rifle doesn’t mean you will win a gun battle. The other guy will probably just get an even bigger gun or more guns.
So who should have assault rifles?
History is full of examples saying you’re wrong. And you don’t get to decide that for other people. You live on a island with statues that are monuments to my point. CKS had bigger and more gun and retreated here. And then decades of brutal martial law.
In the current US?
Sure, or in general?