Chicago, where this message board is based, just surpassed last years record of gun deaths by having it’s 436th gun related homicide. This link is from local Chicago CBS, not some ‘gun nut’ site. It is a few weeks old so I’m sure the number must be higher today.
Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun policies in the US. Yet that does not seem to be having any effect on gun violence, why?
Other large urban areas also show a correlation between restrictive gun policies and a greater number of gun deaths. Why?
Large urban areas without severe gun control do not show a similar level of gun deaths, Why?
The US is not the UK, nor is it Canada, or the European Union, and it never will be. Arguements that refer to the UK or Canada are non sequitur, they are irrelevant to the US.
Can anyone, anyone, show a large urban area in the US where gun restrictions have reduced gun deaths? Anyone? These issues are not a problem in rural areas where most law abiding people own firearms, just in cities where they don’t.
If you are going to convince gun owners that new restrictions will produce the desired results, then point to an example of where this has worked, what was the new policy, and why did it work.
Because you can’t. I also find it amusing that in all of these anti-gun threads the most vocal posters are those that don’t even live in the US. Why are you even commenting on our 2nd amendment? It doesn’t apply to you. The US constitution was written at a time of great desire to separate from European policy. And it empowers the people in a way that your society does not.
I think that is what really just grates on your ass.