sc94597 said:
Dgc1808 said:
Mass-shootings are definied as incidents were 4 or more people are shot, not killed, just shot. I don't like the idea of being shot either. Last year, America had on average more than 1 mass-shooting a day. Only the biggest are really covered on mainstream media. Incidents where just 1 or 2 people are killed aren't really covered on the mainstream media. With each high profile mass-shooting/killing we get more gun sales. This makes it even easier for guns to end up in the wrong hands due to our crappy laws that allow stuff like the "gun show loophole", which increases the rate of mass-shootings we see.
I'm not for a complete ban on all guns. I'm just for better regulation and banning certain types of weaponry. I still don't get why I can walk into a store right now and walk out with an assault rifle same day, but I have to wait 3 days if I want a pistol. I don't get why we have a list of people that we can ban from planes because they're suspected terrorist but these same people are more than welcome to buy assault weapons.
|
And they are still only about 1.5% of shooting incidents. I'd be more worried of heart-disease, cancer, dieing in a car accident, etc than becoming a casuality in a mass-shooting to be honest. But to each their own.
By the way, assault rifles are illegal to own for the vast majority of people in the U.S, per the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, and you won't get one in a day. I think you mean "assault weapon" which is a catch-all term for any semi-automatic weapon that looks scary. Also people shouldn't be banned from planes nor purchasing guns without due process. You see a problem, and want to make it worse. I see the problem, and think that it shouldn't exist (people being banned from travel without due process being the problem.)
|
I pointed out the no-fly list as an example of screwed up priorities on the part of our lawmakers.
