Why do kids like to play computer games that are nothing but death and destruction?
I don’t think you are helping your case with this example.
Why would they stop running? Do dead bodies clog up the air filter? Seriously?
This statement in no way answers my question regarding firearms and homicides.
Do you think a car hitting a person does no damage to the car?
Sure it does. People use fire arms to commit crimes because they want to. It gives them satisfaction.
Sure…if everybody stood perfectly still and near the road so that the vehicle(which is armor plated) didn’t take on any other damage, and they were able to go to and through about 70 or eighty bus stops in a row without someone calling the police.
And you are filming “Deathrace 2000 2-The Dumb And The Deadly”.
Again, not helping your cause.
Unlike someone breaching a school building a driver in a vehicle leaves the scene of the crime. The police arrive, throw some yellow tape up and start investigating. Meanwhile the person can continue on a rampage until the police figure out it’s a rampage and can track down the right vehicle.
If you focus on methodology then you miss causality. If a person wants to kill then focusing on how they kill does not resolve the problem.
In lieu of other weapons, amirite? Even though other weapons are easier to procure.
Dude, your points are pointless. I’m done.
If that is what you actually think would happen, and no more, then I’m with @Railer13.
I used computer games for a reason. If someone is striking out against society then it’s likely they will choose the method that most infuriates people.
People who play computer games that involve shooting up the enemy must do it for some kind of satisfaction.
Making bad analogies and assertions on message boards?
Clearly you never lived in Los Angeles:
Man they said a man at a funeral home just shot a pallbearer. I guess they’ll have to put in a snitchbox and search everyone at the door.
I see news reports of police arriving at the scene of violent crimes all the time with no immediate resolution of who did it or where they went. Many are never found
look at 9/11. I was at work looking at aviation weather when I first heard about it. At the time I said something to the affect “you can’t accidentally hit the tallest building in NYC on a clear day. That was a deliberate attack”. How long did it take to stop the attack? Forever. They couldn’t react fast enough. Not 1 gun used.
How long has it taken to stop a shooter at any school where the shooting location is known? It takes forever to establish what is happening and there is no way of knowing ahead of time a vehicular attack is an ongoing event and if so, when and where will it happen again. It could be another bus stop. It could driving into a room full of people. It could be next week in a stolen vehicle.
Even if you could take every gun away on the planet you’re still stuck with people intent on murder. The problem is a social one and so is the resolution to the problem.
I can’t imagine this going anywhere:
Title: Governor Newsom Proposes Historic 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution to End America’s Gun Violence Crisis
Gun Grabber!!
Slippery Slope!!
We have the same problem in the UK - just without the added guns.
People who are just charged but not found guilty as assumed innocent in America. I see no reason to change this. However, in some cases Red Flag laws cover your second point.
Well, it would not end the gun violence crisis, Not even close.
The first three are already in place in many states, but by no means has gun violence stopped. And in CA so called “assault weapons” are banned.
And this loaded line- * Barring civilian purchase of assault weapons that serve no other purpose than to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time – weapons of war our nation’s founders never foresaw.
The AR15, etc do serve other purposes- they can be used for hunting or home defense.
One estimate has 44 million of these in the USA, and clearly not even 1/100000 are used to kill people.
Mind you , I would not be opposed to a ban on further sales of such. While indeed they can be used for hunting and home defense, they are better choices in each case. Just dont expect any significant drop in homicides, such weapons are used in around 1% of murders in the USA. Nor would I be opposed to having most of his ideas be Nation wide. But dont expect any miracles.
Here are some interring articles by Politifact
and here is one that comes on point-
• *Data shows some correlation between looser gun laws and higher gun homicide rates in a state, and vice versa. *
• But that relationship does not always hold true. Many states with relatively loose gun laws also have low gun homicide rates, and some states with tighter laws have relatively high gun homicide rates.
• Experts say gun laws are one of several factors that play a role in the gun homicide rate
So, Newsoms impossible idea might help a little, but by no means would it End America’s Gun Violence Crisis !!!
Again I ask- what reasonable gun control idea does anyone have here that would actually significantly reduce violent crime?