| mai said: Whenever these kind of things happen it goes the same route in public discussion. Knee jerk reaction is to ban all guns, then advocates show up explaining why it won't help (and to extent they're right), eventually it comes to ridiculously if happens to catch attention of some politician and typical sentiment being: "are you aganist consitution?", -- given all this constitutional mythos surrounding 2nd amedment, the self-obvious answer is "of course not, god forbid" -- though nobody probably remembers why actually the amdment was ratified and how it's relevant today. And the issue becomes dormant... until next time. While the issue is amount of guns that people have relatevily easy access to (legally or not as in this case), it's probably in hundreds of millions range now. Well, how could you even possibly ban smth as massive? The idea is to lower access to the guns getting them out of people's hands, which is not possible without national wide gun confiscation program of sorts. Who got balls for this? And it'll probaly cause more turmoil than problem it solves. Despite how horrible it may sounds but those victims are statistically negligible, smth in the range of ten thousands killed yearly if I'm not mistaken. Well, car accidents are in the same range I believe. So you should probably get used to this. |
...Or we could go after the root causes of crime and murder in America.
I think that'd be far more effective. But that's just my opinion.
There's a reason that crime rates in America vary between sub-European levels and as bad as the worst nation(s) on Earth.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
