Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
Really? If it was harder for this guy to acquire firearms, that wouldn't have reduced his ability to commit this mass shooting? Sure, maybe he'd use a knife or another weapon instead if he was truly hell-bent on killing gay people, but there certainly wouldn't be 50+ fatalities in that scenario.
So you agree that stricter gun control would reduce gun violence in the US. Why are you still arguing with everyone else in this thread then?
|
1. Logically an assault rifle costs thousands of dollars. A pressure cooker or box cutters are exponentially cheaper so no I do not think gum restrictions will make it efficaciously more difficult to perform acts of violence.
2. I'm not arguing. I see a radically complex problem that requires extremely high level of analysis. With the way things are unfolding with ISIS, Islam and the entire shifting geopolitical landscape I see multiple potential aggravating factors none of which are guns. Restrict guns, go nuts. I don't care.
I'm not arguing against that. If the purpose of the discussion is to understand the source of terrorism and the ways in which it can be reduced isolating guns as the root source of causation identifies less than 10% of the variables in my estimate.
Gun restrictions seem reactionary where we really need a more pragmatic objective viewpoint.