Orlando. Isn't it time for banning fire arms in the US ?
Almost every day there is a mass shooting in the US. A mass shooting is 4 or more people shot. (http://www.shootingtracker.com/)
Australia banned guns. Result - no more mass shootings.
It's so simple. Less guns on the street, less mass shootings.
Isn't it time to act and ban guns ?
It is important to note that Australia did not "ban guns" though they have banned all semi-automatic rifles and all semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns, as well as having a tightly restrictive system of licensing and ownership controls.
To say that they have ended mass shootings is a bit preemptive since those who intend to do such things will plot and plan the means to accomplish their goals and they will do so for a long time.
The following link is an article that would be hugely helpful to discussions on this issue: http://time.com/4172274/what-its-like-t … n-control/
Thanks for the article. I can understand hunting lisences, but to me it seems dangerous to give people in cities a license.To many people cramped up, accidents happen too easily. Restricting licenses does have an effect on mass shootings. So why not?
Why not should be answered in light of the truth. It is not true that almost everyday there are mass shootings in the USA. There are indeed far too many, and the issues need to be addressed, but only in light of truth about surrounding facts.
Unfortunately it's true, take a look at https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data for the facts.
The majority listed there are unknown shooters related to gang/crime activity with drugs/alcohol being prime factors, not what most typically consider mass-shooters. However, respecting drugs/alcohol/gun laws is never on any of their the agendas.
Banning firearms wouldn't be any more successful that prohibition was to stopping people from drinking alcohol.
We have class 1 drugs that are illegal and felonies to use, and yet we have the drug cartel smuggling in billions of dollars of these drugs.
Making something illegal doesn't really result in the illegal thing being stopped. Take iLLEGAL Aliens, crossing the border illegally is a crime, how did that work to stop the illegal crossings?
Peter Says "Result - No more mass shootings"
"Less guns on the street, less mass shootings"
What it would mean is that law abiding citizens wouldn't have any guns, but they wouldn't be committing crimes with them in the first place.
The prisons and jails are filled with people that had and used guns, both legal and illegal. Many of them are gang members, and these are the people that kill even to get initiation into a gang.
The US is not Australia, New Zealand, Canada, or GB.
They have small populations, people aren't rushing to get into those countries.
Although the terrorists find it comfortable to blow things up in GB.
So do you want terrorists to switch from shootings, to blowing things up? Simple store bought chemicals can be made into IEDs.
Most mass shooting gunman aren't terrorists but psychopaths. It would help a lot if they couldn't get their hands on a gun that easy.
Don't compare alcohol with firearms. One bullet is deadly one beer isn't.
I guess not. Why is it that in Europe there are far less mass shootings? Simple, it's harder to buy fire arms.
Criminals will always get there hands on guns, but you should not encourage them to buy guns legally.
Europe is where they use gas, and explosives.
France has the strongest gun control and yet it is plagued with terrorists.
Europe has too many problems to discuss here.
Plagued with terrorists ! Are you trying to tell me there is everyday a terorist atack in France.
Anyway, the subject is mass shootings, not terrorists. And mass shootings are committed by psychopaths not terrorists in most of the cases.
Are you denying the fact that the Muslim Terrorists are not the ones we are talking about. France has more terrorist attacks than the US, and it is 1/5 the population.
Muslim Terrorists may be psychopaths, but they are also Muslims,&they are the
Brad , Im talking about mass shootings not terrorist attacks. most mass shootings aren't terrorist attacks but Lunatics in the possession of a firearm.
Then why did you reference Orlando in your ? And all the mass shootings in the world are a very small % of gun owners. But terrorist attacks no matter how small is an attack on the country, and Muslims are the most common of these terrorists.
Actually, I heard that the homicidal rates in Australia are higher now than before. So the banning didn't really save peoples lives, did it? It's not the guns we should ban, it's the terrorists.
Literally millions of Americans own AR-15s and they aren't shooting up nightclubs. There must be a middle ground that doesn't involve banning them
1. Banning guns doesn't stop Muslim terrorists from killing people; look at the Brussels bombing, Paris bombing, Boston Marathon bombings, etc.
2. Banning guns doesn't prevent Muslims from killing people more mundane ways, like the French policeman stabbed the same day as the Orlando shooting and atheists regularly hacked to death by Muslim mobs in Pakistan and Bangladesh.
3. Banning guns leaves women vulnerable to rape, when only a gun equalizes force between her and a would be rapist. Telling women to pee on themselves, cry and blow whistles is telling them to be terrified victims, when empowerment means the ability to kill a would-be rapist.
by My Esoteric 6 months ago
The following ideas would, I think, go a long way to REDUCE (not eliminate) mass killings in particular and death by gun overall.1. Heavily regulate ownership of any weapon classified as "semi-automatic", whether pistol or rifle. 2. Heavily regulate possession of any magazine over 10...
by Christin Sander 5 years ago
When is the right time to talk about gun control - NOT banning guns, but sensible controls?Why is it whenever the subject of gun control is brought up people get so hostile and angry about protecting guns at all costs? Do you need an assault weapon to hunt or protect your family? Isn't...
by Mike Russo 5 months ago
Our thoughts and prayers are with you and the victims is not enough to stop these senseless killings.
by Castlepaloma 13 months ago
I was told by a few gun fans that hammers kill more people than guns. Personally I could not beat a man into a hamburger. Or Hamburger hill would be grossly rewritten. If someone challenge you to death duel, would your choice weapon be a hammer or a gun? I rest my case. Trump speeches is Mr....
by Josh Ratzburg 2 years ago
What are your thoughts on gun control?With the recent mass shooting in Oregon, it makes me think that there needs to be better gun control laws. "But criminals are still going to break laws and get guns, so you're really just controlling law-abiding citizens" ... maybe, but how many of...
by Mike Russo 9 months ago
Ask the 59 people who were killed and the 525 people who were wounded and all of those who were traumatized by this horrific event, if we need gun control. Why does any civilian need access to assault weapons? The problem is the mentally ill are an unknown quantity until after they commit the...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|