Dem 2020 Presidential platform: Ban 'assault weapons'!!!!'

[2aguy]

It's a simple fact that those advanced countries which have stricter gun laws than us have much, much, much lower homicide rates. This is a fact which is willfully ignored and denied by the likes of you.

Assume that gun laws actually have an effect on homicide rates (and not some other factor). You would be advocating the sacrifice of liberty for security, right?

.

I would be advocating protecting our rights by ensuring guns are only in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

If we keep doing things your way, it is just a matter of time before the death toll rises so high that America will repeal the second amendment..

How about 26 years of increasing gun ownership....

Nope. A smaller percentage of Americans own guns than 26 years ago.


Here's how it works:

Ten people own one gun each for a total of 10 guns.

Several years later, 2 people own 10 guns each for a total of 20 guns.

That's what is going on.

The percentage of Americans who own guns is much lower than just a few decades ago.

No, moron......fewer Americans are reporting owning a gun to nameless callers on the phone........

Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.


There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

---------------


Gun industry, Bloomberg media square off over female gun owner data

Putting a pin in the balloon of rising female gun ownership, the Trace, a journalism start up funded by Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety, consulted the General Social Survey. A project of the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center, the GSS has conducted a sociological survey since 1972 to collect historical data on everything from government spending to race relations.

When it comes to gun ownership by women, the pollsters noted the number has averaged about 11 percent over the past three decades with slight dips, to as low as 9.1 percent in 1989, and slight increases, to as high as 13.7 percent in 1982.

“There’s been no meaningful directional change in the percent of women owning guns,” said Tom Smith, the director of the GSS.

However, the National Shooting Sports Foundation on Thursday posted a rebuttal to the article, citing the GSS itself was flawed when it came to gun data– much as they did last yearwhen the survey noted a decline in gun ownership numbers despite eight straight years of increasing firearms sales that set all-time records.

The NSSF contends GSS isn’t actually counting the number of firearms in each household. Rather it is enumerating the number of individuals willing to talk to a stranger at their front door about how many firearms they own. The two concepts, holds the trade group, are vastly different.

“It is a staple of gun control politics to work to diminish both the size and the ever increasing diversity of the firearm-owning American citizenry,” noted Larry Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “The Trace provides just the latest example.”

Besides noting the trade group’s own studies in female gun ownership rates, the NSSF also bemoaned the outlet for discounting previous articles in the mainstream media.

“The Trace also asks its readers to discount CBS News, Fox News, Ad Age and dozens of local reporters nationwide (collectively, a ‘credulous press’) who have actually gone to firearms retailers and ranges to report that they see evidence of more and more women buying guns and taking up target shooting as a recreational activity,” wrote Keane.

 

[g5000]

This brainless chant of "outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns" is just so much bullshit.

What the gun makers don't want is for demand for guns to drop and impact their bottom line. That's what this is really about.

If we tightened up our controls, and ensured only law abiding citizens had access to guns, then demand for guns would drop precipitously.

Just like if we get opioids under control, then the pharma companies would be making a lot less pills.

And our death rate would plunge.

That makes no sense at all you moron....... if law abiding people don't want a gun, they won't buy a gun....criminals will always need guns to defend their turf......

If law abiding people don't want a gun, the gun makers will still flood our country with guns!

That's what is going on with guns and opioids. It's absolutely amazing you dolts have not figured that out.

Moron....if law abiding people aren't buying guns, then criminals will be the only ones buying them, and demand will drop......criminals are not 320 million people.

The number of law abiding citizens buying guns is not 320 million. In fact, a much, much smaller percentage of Americans own guns than before. Less law abiding citizens are demanding guns.

And yet the market is being flooded.

Like I said, it is absolutely stunning you dolts haven't figured out that if law-abiding demand drops, and the market is still flooded, then a LOT of that tsunami of death is going to end up washing into the hands of the wrong people.

And that is why our homicide rate is far, far, far higher than the UK and Canada and other OECD countries.

How much actual demand is out there and what facts do you have supporting that claim?

If demand is down, sales would reflect it.

.

Chart Of The Day

]

 

[2aguy]

It's a simple fact that those advanced countries which have stricter gun laws than us have much, much, much lower homicide rates. This is a fact which is willfully ignored and denied by the likes of you.

Assume that gun laws actually have an effect on homicide rates (and not some other factor). You would be advocating the sacrifice of liberty for security, right?

.

I would be advocating protecting our rights by ensuring guns are only in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

If we keep doing things your way, it is just a matter of time before the death toll rises so high that America will repeal the second amendment..

How about 26 years of increasing gun ownership....

Nope. A smaller percentage of Americans own guns than 26 years ago.


Here's how it works:

Ten people own one gun each for a total of 10 guns.

Several years later, 2 people own 10 guns each for a total of 20 guns.

That's what is going on.

The percentage of Americans who own guns is much lower than just a few decades ago.

You are such a moron...

you asshats believe if you lie about how many people own guns, your anti-gun politicians won't be afraid to pass new gun laws.....your entire strategy is based on lies and emotion......not facts, reality or the truth.

NBC Poll: Does Gun Ownership Increase Or Decrease Safety? Anti-Gun Activists Won't Like The Results.

nearly 6 in 10 Americans believe that getting guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens increases safety.

"In the poll, 58 percent agree with the statement that gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves," NBC News reports. "By contrast, 38 percent say that gun ownership reduces safety by giving too many people access to firearms, increasing the chances for accidental misuse."

------

NBC notes that the overall result is a "reversal" of the findings of a 1999 survey that found that 52 percent of respondents believed gun ownership reduced safety. The more positive perspective on gun ownership is partly reflected in gun ownership trends: "47 percent of American adults say they have a firearm in the household, which is up from 44 percent in 1999."

 

[2aguy]

That makes no sense at all you moron....... if law abiding people don't want a gun, they won't buy a gun....criminals will always need guns to defend their turf......

If law abiding people don't want a gun, the gun makers will still flood our country with guns!

That's what is going on with guns and opioids. It's absolutely amazing you dolts have not figured that out.

Moron....if law abiding people aren't buying guns, then criminals will be the only ones buying them, and demand will drop......criminals are not 320 million people.

The number of law abiding citizens buying guns is not 320 million. In fact, a much, much smaller percentage of Americans own guns than before. Less law abiding citizens are demanding guns.

And yet the market is being flooded.

Like I said, it is absolutely stunning you dolts haven't figured out that if law-abiding demand drops, and the market is still flooded, then a LOT of that tsunami of death is going to end up washing into the hands of the wrong people.

And that is why our homicide rate is far, far, far higher than the UK and Canada and other OECD countries.

How much actual demand is out there and what facts do you have supporting that claim?

If demand is down, sales would reflect it.

.

Chart Of The Day

]

Yes....I took that apart in one of my last posts....you moron....

Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.


There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

---------------


Gun industry, Bloomberg media square off over female gun owner data

Putting a pin in the balloon of rising female gun ownership, the Trace, a journalism start up funded by Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety, consulted the General Social Survey. A project of the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center, the GSS has conducted a sociological survey since 1972 to collect historical data on everything from government spending to race relations.

When it comes to gun ownership by women, the pollsters noted the number has averaged about 11 percent over the past three decades with slight dips, to as low as 9.1 percent in 1989, and slight increases, to as high as 13.7 percent in 1982.

“There’s been no meaningful directional change in the percent of women owning guns,” said Tom Smith, the director of the GSS.

However, the National Shooting Sports Foundation on Thursday posted a rebuttal to the article, citing the GSS itself was flawed when it came to gun data– much as they did last yearwhen the survey noted a decline in gun ownership numbers despite eight straight years of increasing firearms sales that set all-time records.

The NSSF contends GSS isn’t actually counting the number of firearms in each household. Rather it is enumerating the number of individuals willing to talk to a stranger at their front door about how many firearms they own. The two concepts, holds the trade group, are vastly different.

“It is a staple of gun control politics to work to diminish both the size and the ever increasing diversity of the firearm-owning American citizenry,” noted Larry Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “The Trace provides just the latest example.”

Besides noting the trade group’s own studies in female gun ownership rates, the NSSF also bemoaned the outlet for discounting previous articles in the mainstream media.

“The Trace also asks its readers to discount CBS News, Fox News, Ad Age and dozens of local reporters nationwide (collectively, a ‘credulous press’) who have actually gone to firearms retailers and ranges to report that they see evidence of more and more women buying guns and taking up target shooting as a recreational activity,” wrote Keane.

 

[Rustic]

 

[2aguy]

Actually, those anti-gun people aren't celebrating that day, they wish this country had never been created. They truly are sick and twisted human beings.

 

[miketx]

It's a simple fact that those advanced countries which have stricter gun laws than us have much, much, much lower homicide rates. This is a fact which is willfully ignored and denied by the likes of you.

Assume that gun laws actually have an effect on homicide rates (and not some other factor). You would be advocating the sacrifice of liberty for security, right?

.

I would be advocating protecting our rights by ensuring guns are only in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

If we keep doing things your way, it is just a matter of time before the death toll rises so high that America will repeal the second amendment..

At that point the death toll will skyrocket....be there.

 

[iceberg]

No surprise, right?
Every Dem who spoke on guns in the 2 nights of debate declared the need to ban 'assault weapon' - to save our schools, to save our kids, shopping malls, movie theaters, gay bars, etc. It's almost as if this little bit of leftist dogma is chiseled into their souls.

A question for those who agree with the candidates:
If there is, as they claim, a NEED to ban these guns, if banning these guns is, as they say, NECESSARY for the safety of whomever - what does a ban on the manufacturer and sale of new 'assault weapons' accomplish?

An assault weapon ban by itself would accomplish little. The 12,000+ gun homicides each year are mostly murder by handgun.

It's a simple fact that those advanced countries which have stricter gun laws than us have much, much, much lower homicide rates. This is a fact which is willfully ignored and denied by the likes of you.


Just like the opioid manufacturers, the gun makers of America have flooded the market with more guns than are wanted or needed by legitimate gun owners. They both know they are responsible for the mass deaths which have been happening for far too long.

"I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun." - Donald Trump, The America We Deserve

MAGA!

Lol
No amount of frivolous control laws will save a single soul, political correctness has made you fucking retarded. So shut the fuck up you sorry ass motherfucker

All you poor saps can do is whine and cuss and lie in the face of the simple fact that stricter gun control laws would tremendously reduce the homicide rate in America.

MAGA!

U.S.: violent crime rate graph 1990-2017 | Statista

it's been going down since 1990. this would seem to fly in the face of what you're saying.

 

[iceberg]

This brainless chant of "outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns" is just so much bullshit.

What the gun makers don't want is for demand for guns to drop and impact their bottom line. That's what this is really about.

If we tightened up our controls, and ensured only law abiding citizens had access to guns, then demand for guns would drop precipitously.

Just like if we get opioids under control, then the pharma companies would be making a lot less pills.

And our death rate would plunge.

That makes no sense at all you moron....... if law abiding people don't want a gun, they won't buy a gun....criminals will always need guns to defend their turf......

If law abiding people don't want a gun, the gun makers will still flood our country with guns!

That's what is going on with guns and opioids. It's absolutely amazing you dolts have not figured that out.

Moron....if law abiding people aren't buying guns, then criminals will be the only ones buying them, and demand will drop......criminals are not 320 million people.

The number of law abiding citizens buying guns is not 320 million. In fact, a much, much smaller percentage of Americans own guns than before. Less law abiding citizens are demanding guns.

And yet the market is being flooded.

Like I said, it is absolutely stunning you dolts haven't figured out that if law-abiding demand drops, and the market is still flooded, then a LOT of that tsunami of death is going to end up washing into the hands of the wrong people.

And that is why our homicide rate is far, far, far higher than the UK and Canada and other OECD countries.

without cherry picking where things fall -

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

we're #90. granted a lot of the other countries are not that developed and yes, it is higher than it should be. russia however is twice as high. from what i understand, they are pretty strict also. however they come in at #42.

you're quick to name call then come up short on your selected facts. how about we attack more on issues, less on people. and yes, i need to include myself in that statement as well.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Because of gun control laws . It’s still a weapon of war .

This is a lie.

No it’s not . You gun nerds love to make semantics arguments .

The reason AR’s are not automatics is because the manufacturers wouldn’t be able to legally sell them to the public . So they basically tweek the war weapon so it can pass. It’s still designed to kill lots of people .

/——/ Next Libs will want to ban this military style assault vehicle.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And?

It is not SOLD as an assault rifle, so what the fuck is your point?

.

that everyone who says it is not an assault rifle are lying scumbags, brainwashed super duper. Just like all your other media....

that everyone who says it is not an assault rifle are lying scumbags, brainwashed super duper. Just like all your other media.


You mean like the Encyclopedia Britannica......your own link?

The AR-15 is an example of an assault weapon in the article LOL unbelievably brainwashed dupes....

Moron......you said that the definitive definition came from Britannica......you linked to it in your post........and the AR-15 does not match that definition.....

Stop mixing booze with your meds....

The encyclopedia and dictionary have no legal significance.

Yeah, they do, since words mean what they mean, and legal definitions are unlikely to make those meanings broader, rather than narrower. Besides that, "assault weapon" is not a legal term at all. It's even less useful in a legal sense than it is in a general English sense, because it's a made-up phrase that means whatever the hell the user wants it to mean at the moment . . . kinda like the word "fair".

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is a lie.

No it’s not . You gun nerds love to make semantics arguments .

The reason AR’s are not automatics is because the manufacturers wouldn’t be able to legally sell them to the public . So they basically tweek the war weapon so it can pass. It’s still designed to kill lots of people .

Go look up the Hughes Amendment, then show me ONE AR15 sold to the public with select-fire capabilities. For 30 years, the AR15 could have been sold to civilians as a select-fire weapon, but NEVER WAS!!!!

Question for you, Timmy:

The Ruger AR variant fires the 5.56/.223 round.

The Ranch Rifle (also Ruger) fires the 5.56/.223 round too

Which of the two weapons has the higher rate of fire?


For Reference:
Rate of Fire: the frequency at which a specific weapon can fire or launch its projectiles. It is usually measured in rounds per minute (RPM or round/min), or rounds per second (RPS or round/s).

Gun nerd. What are they designed for ?

Lol
Varmints

Oh sure. That’s what they are designed for . That’s why people buy them. Hunting rabbits and squirrels.

Typical gun nut bullshit .

People buy them to fire projectiles at whatever target they feel the need to fire projectiles at.

The fact that YOU, personally, would not hunt varmints does not automatically follow to "Therefore, it's a silly idea that no one anywhere would ever do."

 

[Cellblock2429]

This is a lie.

No it’s not . You gun nerds love to make semantics arguments .

The reason AR’s are not automatics is because the manufacturers wouldn’t be able to legally sell them to the public . So they basically tweek the war weapon so it can pass. It’s still designed to kill lots of people .

Go look up the Hughes Amendment, then show me ONE AR15 sold to the public with select-fire capabilities. For 30 years, the AR15 could have been sold to civilians as a select-fire weapon, but NEVER WAS!!!!

Question for you, Timmy:

The Ruger AR variant fires the 5.56/.223 round.

The Ranch Rifle (also Ruger) fires the 5.56/.223 round too

Which of the two weapons has the higher rate of fire?


For Reference:
Rate of Fire: the frequency at which a specific weapon can fire or launch its projectiles. It is usually measured in rounds per minute (RPM or round/min), or rounds per second (RPS or round/s).

Gun nerd. What are they designed for ?

Lol
Varmints

Oh sure. That’s what they are designed for . That’s why people buy them. Hunting rabbits and squirrels.

Typical gun nut bullshit .

/——/ I’m gonna make a wild guess here, but you never lived on a farm, otherwise you’d know better.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The NSSF contends GSS isn’t actually counting the number of firearms in each household. Rather it is enumerating the number of individuals willing to talk to a stranger at their front door about how many firearms they own. The two concepts, holds the trade group, are vastly different.

That is the dirties bunch of trickery bullshit EVER.

Because gun owners routinely tell total strangers at their front door how many guns they own.



We MUST put down this fraud and strengthen gun rights. We are at complete and total war.

.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No it’s not . You gun nerds love to make semantics arguments .

The reason AR’s are not automatics is because the manufacturers wouldn’t be able to legally sell them to the public . So they basically tweek the war weapon so it can pass. It’s still designed to kill lots of people .

Go look up the Hughes Amendment, then show me ONE AR15 sold to the public with select-fire capabilities. For 30 years, the AR15 could have been sold to civilians as a select-fire weapon, but NEVER WAS!!!!

Question for you, Timmy:

The Ruger AR variant fires the 5.56/.223 round.

The Ranch Rifle (also Ruger) fires the 5.56/.223 round too

Which of the two weapons has the higher rate of fire?


For Reference:
Rate of Fire: the frequency at which a specific weapon can fire or launch its projectiles. It is usually measured in rounds per minute (RPM or round/min), or rounds per second (RPS or round/s).

Gun nerd. What are they designed for ?

Lol
Varmints

Oh sure. That’s what they are designed for . That’s why people buy them. Hunting rabbits and squirrels.

Typical gun nut bullshit .

/——/ I’m gonna make a wild guess here, but you never lived on a farm, otherwise you’d know better.

Timmy is a prime example of why we DON'T want metropolitan areas dictating laws and policies for the entire country. He's a gormless urbanite who's helpless to do anything for himself, and who is so out-of-touch he doesn't even know it's POSSIBLE to be self-sufficient, let alone that many people actually do it.