Hiku said: I did say that, so the focus of your reply makes sense. But I wasn't trying to suggest that mass shootings is the only problem associated with US gun laws. And the list you provided topped Norway at #5. A country that has had one mass shooting in 1144 years. Over USA that has had 16 just in the past 8 years. |
There are plenty of U.S states that have never had a mass-shooting in the hundreds of years they existed as well. They have populations similar to Norway. I don't see the point. In fact, this goes to show that it can happen anywhere, even the least likely places.
Well inaction doesn't require an argument or proof. It is the natural state to buy and sell guns. And there is a natural demand for them. People want guns for various reasons. Action is what requires evidence and an argument. It is like, if you said "why shouldn't we ban certain speech? What is the argument?" When there are 300 million guns in the country, the prohibition is not going to drastically affect the supply of guns to criminals. In fact, most law-abiding gun owners likely wouldn't give up their guns regardless. You don't understand the mentality of gun-owners. There are people with entire bunkers filled with arsenals. Do you think they are going to listen to a mandatory buyback? In fact, Canada had a buyback program that has mostly failed. http://thebelltowers.com/2014/07/21/gun-buyback-programs-a-lesson-in-futility/ If Canada can't do it right, with a much more lenient gun culture, more restrictions, and fewer weapons, how can the U.S? I don't know why you mentioned Bill O'reilly like he is some authority on anything: he's an idiot.
Australia is really only one data point, and not even a good one to look at for the U.S. It has no bordering countries, it has a low population, it has a low gun ownership rate, it doesn't have the same gun culture the U.S had, it is less diverse, etc, etc. It is not technically, economically, or logistically feasible to reduce the over 300 million guns in the U.S to a small enough supply that the prices on the black market would rise substantially. Rifles in general (including "Assault Rifles" or "Assault-style Rifles") make up about 5% of all gun homicides, so just banning them would do practically nothing.
Again, I say, you know nothing about the gun politics here in the U.S if you think Australia's solution is applicable. Mandatory buybacks just will not go well with anyone, and they won't work because the supply of weapons is way too large.