Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds
Because as I've stated to you numerous times:
The US doesn't have the money to commit to the worlds largest buyback program.
Criminals don't care about your buyback program and will not give up their firearms.
The US has a constitutionally protected right to own firearms, the countries you bring up as successes (debatable btw) do not.
You are on board with revoking rights of Americans. Prepare to feel public resistance and non-compliance.
So why are you against objectively viewing these obstacles and trying to find a resolve through other avenues other than just a useless blanket ban?
|
Point #1 - Yes, they have constitutionally protected rights. Guess what? You used to have the right to own slaves. That was amended. Laws become outdated, and something that was relevant before can become silly in today's world. The right to own guns needs to be amended since
America has demonstrated time and again they can't handle them.
Point #2 - I do not feel sorry for the white Americans in suburbia who will have their rights violated with a new law. There is no compelling argument to have guns so easily accessible. Like I've said before, guns are very easy to get a hold of in America because of the laws that currently exist. I would bet anything that the Aurora shooter or Sandy Hood shooter would not have been able to acquire the weapons they had if the USA has gun laws identical to Canada's.
Point #3 - Anything short of sweeping changes of gun laws nation-wide will be ineffective. With less guns in the nation, and the erasing the very easy way of acquiring guns, criminals will feel the effects. The prices of dangerous weapons will increase to price levels that will necessarily reduce gun violence levels.