Don’t call people hillbillies and hicks, it’s offensive.
A huge number of those guns are not intended for war, killing humans or the commission of crime. A .22 caliber rifle is not a weapon of war. It’s simply not useful for killing humans effectively. It can do that, but so can a hammer. Huge numbers of rifles and shotguns are not of sort intended or useful for war, murder or crime. I have a pair of bolt action, single shot .22 rifles, two single shot break open shotguns, a muzzle loading rifle, and a .44 cap and ball pistol. Plus one I’m not listing.
That’s seven guns, a huge stockpile, but only one is remotely the sort of thing you would choose to defend yourself, or as a weapon if you were going to do something wrong. Sure the rest off them would be a better choice than a hammer. Lumping a 1932 .22 caliber rifle in the same category as an AK47, which is what these sort of statistics do, isn’t entirely useful or accurate. I don’t think most people do it to be deceptive though.
Amen, let’s pass a constitutional amendment which clarifies the right to keep and bear arms. I can see the argument that as currently stated it allows me to own what constitutes a modern infantry weapon, an assault rifle. I like to make the smart-assed argument it should entitle me to own a single shot flintlock pistol and a flintlock musket, as well a sword or tomahawk, but I don’t think that’s politically viable.
I’ll vote for one which makes sure people can own the guns they want and need for sporting uses. Allows for people to own guns to defend themselves and their property. (Though statistically a bad deal, as I said, not everyone is at the same risk of accident or of attack.)
We should ban handguns, they are real problem, it’s that simple.
Banning assault rifles is an emotional issue, it clearly only affects a tiny percentage of even gun crime, and none of the mass shootings would have been less tragic if the shooter had a nice spiffy 18 shot pistol. Those incidents are really a part of the suicide problem rather than the homicide problem. And we won’t reduce them until we look to help people who are in trouble and mentally ill, rather than hunting for monsters. Because they weren’t monsters, they were troubled and suicidal.
If you want you can say they became monsters when they went on those shooting sprees, sure. I view them as their own victims and another piece in the tragedy.
Foreign gun control really isn’t that relevant, Canada is more similar to America in real terms, has a lot more guns than those places, and a lot less crime. So it isn’tt just the guns.
Citing Great Britain in these arguments is always a bad idea, you’re less likely to die as a result of the violent crime you are far more likely to be a victim of there, which is not a selling point to a lot of people.
Also, KNIFE CONTROL, a crime against humanity, not the violation of human rights, but the violation of common sense, it’s an atrocity of stupidity. Never be seen in public on the side of this sort of idiocy. Sticks and stones are next on the list I’m sure, and once they come for the screwdrivers, then the island will collapse into darkness.