The clown at your 8 year old birthday party has a job. Does he get to own an AR-15? Instead of a clown at the party there should have been an Exorcist.
Pay attention....
In order to get a job as a prison guard there is a very detailed process they deal with, and it take time. Same thing with being a cop, Well in order to own a weapon like a AR15 you must qualify, Not everyone will make it, and this will elimate street thugs and idiots and low rent people accomplishing nothing in life.
A weapon like that has no business in the hands of cronic losers and problems with society. A home owner who has things to protect, ok cool.
Pay more attention....
In many states a hair dresser has to have more hours in training for cosmetology license than a police officer or prison guard. Most police officers will likely not ever fire a weapon while on the job. In the case of Uvalde they won't even go into a School while a shooting is going on. Got that.
I know this comes as a shock to constitutionally ignorant people (like you) but the SCOTUS doesn't exist to confirm incorrect assumptions about the constitution (even if they occasionally do because they were purchased by the right wing)
I never said anything about complete bans. I said subject to regulation. And lines wouldn't be drawn arbitrarily. We can make judgements on a case by case basis.
You guys are the ones with the absolutist agenda. Stop projecting.
How do guns make the country better for you and everyone else compared to a country like New Zealand that barely has guns and has way lower gun crime/shootings?
How can guns make the country better if guns have become the number one cause of death among 1-19 year olds?
How is it better? Because we are free to own guns. That’s better to me. maybe you should move to NZ. And since we are using examples, Hitler and Stalin also outlawed guns. So does North Korea.
You needn't be so defensive, it's just a question. You didn't really say why it was better apart from "because it is".
If something caused the deaths of a lot of children and was a leading cause of death, more so than for example childhood cancer, I don't get why you wouldn't want to change that.
PS I'm not saying that I think gun ownership should be illegal or outlawed, so I don't see why you're mentioning Hitler, Stalin and North Korea. Oh wait, I do. Even though I don't want guns to be outlawed and used an example of a country where they aren't outlawed or illegal, you brought in those examples to try and twist the argument.
According to the Supplemental Appendix to underlying NEJM letter, the vast majority of guns deaths for 1-19 year olds are black victims, and the vast majority of the 2020 increase are black victims as well. This is at the same time that several media companies (e.g., NYT, CNN, NBC) were encouraging black people to arm themselves for self-defense purposes against the police and other alleged white racists.
The NEJM article doesn't break down the statistics by age -- i.e., and e.g., there is no breakdown for 5-6 year olds versus 18-19 year olds, who are considered adult in the US. That is an odd omission as the data clearly exists. In fact, the whole category 1-19 is an odd grouping, and seems designed to suggest higher numbers of child victims, when the likelihood is that most were adults (18-19).
The timing of the article with the Uvalde tragedy is likely an attempt to pretend that increasing gun deaths for children is because of random school shootings, but those numbers are a very small percentage (probably 1%) of the totals. But the racial statistics show this is what it has always been -- gang violence in black neighborhoods. Many gun regulations have been specifically aimed at that problem, but none seem to have had much effect. Furthermore, society doesn't seem to care. Liberals try to ignore statistics on gang violence in black neighborhoods because it contradicts other exaggerated causes of theirs, and many conservatives don't mind when one gang member (presumptive criminal) shoots another.
The age range is too wide. 18 and 19 year olds are adults so shouldn't be included IMO. They should have the age range as 0-17 for it to make sense. It may not be the leading cause of death for that age group.
A researcher has analyzed deaths in children and teens and showed that in 2020, guns were the #1 cause of death in 1-19 year olds in the USA. A jump of 29% the year before. Why are Americans killing so many American children with guns?
How can the Deadly Novel, "Coronavirus," not wreaked its fatal destruction among among our children too, especially the majority of whom are unvaxxed and-- except in hellhole Philly-- unmasked?
In NYC, Democrats mask toddlers and only toddlers because... "Science."
I never said anything about complete bans. I said subject to regulation. And lines wouldn't be drawn arbitrarily. We can make judgements on a case by case basis.
You guys are the ones with the absolutist agenda. Stop projecting.
“Maybe the 2nd amendment should only apply to guns manufactured before say 1787 and anything modern should be subject to regulation”
What type of illegal regulation do you want? The first part of your statement implies that my second amendment right be limited right off the bat. Do you really think the founders would want a gun invented in 1790 banned? Where is the cut off? I’d rather not have arbitrarily drawn lines decide where my rights end.
A researcher has analyzed deaths in children and teens and showed that in 2020, guns were the #1 cause of death in 1-19 year olds in the USA. A jump of 29% the year before. Why are Americans killing so many American children with guns?
It doesn't seem like you understand what arbitrary means. We can ban a gun if it's destructive power is grossly excessive for the purposes of hunting and self defense. Lines are always being drawn. Your 1st amendment right does not permit you to make verbal threats of violence. Alcohol is legal and heroin is not. These are not arbitrary lines. They're based on a consensus of what is best for society as a whole.
It doesn't seem like you understand what arbitrary means. We can ban a gun if it's destructive power is grossly excessive for the purposes of hunting and self defense. Lines are always being drawn. Your 1st amendment right does not permit you to make verbal threats of violence. Alcohol is legal and heroin is not. These are not arbitrary lines. They're based on a consensus of what is best for society as a whole.
So we just have to assume that you don’t know what you are talking about then. You cannot ban a gun if it is “grossly excessive.” You lefties love to come up with vague terms and try and diminish peoples rights based on them.
A researcher has analyzed deaths in children and teens and showed that in 2020, guns were the #1 cause of death in 1-19 year olds in the USA. A jump of 29% the year before. Why are Americans killing so many American children with guns?
The gap between vehicular deaths and firearm deaths is certainly narrowing. But the leading cause of death among U.S. youth depends on how you slice the data.
