SpikeTerm

The UK/ Australia never had similar mass shooting rates to the United States. One should only compare a country to itself, before and after a gun confiscation. The mass shooting in Australia was a statistical anomaly, you cannot credit that to gun control. In fact, you also need to look at overall homicide rate and violent crime rate. After the gun confiscation/control in the UK, their homicide rates increased as well as their violent crime. Everyone feels bad, and everyone says "No one will do anything about this", so what is your specific proposal? Many people want to ban AR-15's, but the deadliest school shooting in U.S history was done with 2 pistols, the Virginia Tech Shooting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_shooting "Assault rifles" only commit 1% of gun homicides each year, should't we look a the bigger picture here with statistics? The 2 safest states in the United States are Vermont and New Hampshire, they have the least restrictive gun laws in the country. AR-15's, and AK47's have been in civilian hands since the late 1950's, but mass shootings have only occurred in the past 2 decades, my point is that there are many other factors. The largest factor is not gun laws, or gun ownership rates. The collective gun ownership rate per household has declined in the last decade, while mass school shootings have increased.

The statistics you hear about United States school shootings are extremely misleading. There was a number being passed out by the media, the 18 school shootings within 2 months. They included situations like a BB gun shooting out a school bus window, a person committing suicide on a school parking lot after school hours, and a school resource officers gun going off into the ground because a little kid pulled the trigger. Be careful what you hear from the media, ect.

Visual V, Radiance V Your computer will run LSPDFR pretty well.

I always seem to see people in the UK/ Australia extremely misguided regarding the issue of firearms. Firstly, you had a mandatory buy back program, a CONFISCATION. Your mass shootings were a statistical anomaly so I don't believe that the manditory buy back program made anyone safer after all gun violence in Australia was already dropping before the buy back program. In the U.K for example, after they confiscated guns, the homicide and violent crime rate went up. You have to compare a country to itself before and after guns are removed. Secondly, the Constitution is not old, it is valuable. Some countries don't even get to exercise their right to free speech. If you say something that offends someone you can face legal repercussions. Finally, more people protect themselves each year with firearms each year than kill. 33,000 die each year, this statistic is thrown out there without anyone actually breaking it down properly. 2/3 are suicides, and the homicides are generally caused by gangs, police shootings, justified home defense, and accidental discharges. Far more then 11,000-13,000 are protected each year by guns than killed, more than 33,000 too. Australia doesn't even have a second amendment....that's why you have to compare a country to itself.

More people die from knives each year than "assault rifles", but anyways the government often fails to protect. I understand that if you remove all guns less people will die from guns, but it is important to look at violent crime rates, regular homicide rates, and even rapes. After the UK confiscated guns, their overall homicide rate increased. Some countries who enact gun control don't prevent criminals from getting them...it's a complicated issue for sure and there are many factors involved.

I don't see why that would be a good thing, and a happy situation for a citizen. You can't use weapons for self protection? That's a scary law...after all criminals wouldn't obey all of those laws. A government is controlling how you store your weapons in your home, and if it's loaded?! That seems like government over reach to me....

I certainly agree it is strange, almost cult-ish. What do you mean you have other weapon laws?

I agree, it is strange to bring weapons in a church but where do you get the words "weapons of war"? This term is used to make AR-15 more scary, in fact they are not used in war. They are civilian variants, meaning they cosmetically look the same but are semi-automatic. Historically there have been bolt action rifles in war, no one refers to them as "war guns", what gun isn't a "war gun"? Never the less, I agree it is strange...but the outrage over the type of gun is silly.

I agree that it isn't normal to see people doing this, but what makes the AR-15 more traumatic for people to see than other guns? I realize that they are used in publicized shootings but they only account for 1-2% of gun homicides in the United States. What is the real issue at hand, that's the question?