Because you aren't thinking big picture guy. We have laws because of the stupidity of others. People aren't that smart in America so you make heroin legal right? That leads to passing out so the kids have access to heroin. It means more people are driving stoned. It leads to all other shit irresponsible people can't handle. That's why we have laws.
If you want to take your clothes off and run down the street naked, it should be legal right? Come on man, this is dumb. You have to have rules in a society or all hell breaks loose.
We have laws to protect our rights and property. Kids already have access to heroin, possibly more the way things are because there aren't much more repercussions for selling to kids, while there would be if they wore sold by an above the board business. People are driving drunk, yet we've already banned alcohol and seen the disaster that was. Banning drugs has a cost as well. Crime is higher. A child getting killed in a drive by shooting fought over drugs is an innocent victim in every sense of the word, someone who willingly shoots up heroin isn't. If you're worried because people might drive while high, then you should be trying to ban alcohol.
How is protecting a kid from a reckless parent protecting a person from themselves? Or how is protecting drivers on the road from a meth head protecting people from themselves? Explain that to me.
It's not the feds job to prevent stupidity? Really?
So the guy that kidnaps a 14-year-old girl and drives her all over the US to have sex with her, that's ok? I mean, most of us would consider that a stupid move by a pervert right?
Guitarjosh- I mean no disrespect honestly and I truly believe your a responsible gun person. That’s not my argument but I have had a hard time with this issue for 1 glaring reason. I do not think this can be prevented in the future if more we don’t get more strict on our gun laws. It is a question of when it will happen again not if it will happen. Saying it’s a mental health issue may be correct but the amount of crazy people in this world isn’t getting smaller. If we want it to stop action has to be taken and in a more serious way than just saying the person is a wacko.
It absolutely shows the need for one. They fire the smallest bullets that are least likely to over penetrate and hit an innocent person in another room or house. Shotguns take too long to load, don't hold as many rounds, and have a nasty recoil. An AR-15 is much easier for a small person to handle. Again, you must take into account that you'll realistically need to hit each each attacker multiple times, and you need to take misses into account. It's quite realistic that to stop 4 attackers, you'll need over 20 bullets when you factor in misses and hits that aren't to vital areas.
There really isn't much difference between the lethality handguns and rifles at a close range. Rifles have an advantage when shooting from a greater distance, but getting shot by a 9mm at 5 feet will harm you just as much as being hit with a 5.56.
No disrespect taken. The issue I have is that at close range, an AR-15 isn't more deadly than a handgun, and handguns are much easier to conceal. Most mass shootings are due to handguns, and that's one of the main reasons. Most of the mass shootings involving AR-15s also involve the element of surprise, like walking into church, sneaking in the back door of a movie theatre, having a sniper's nest set up in a hotel room to fire at a densely packed crowd, driving up to the entrance of a school, walking into a class room and opening fire. Banning AR-15s wont stop the problem, people will just use handguns.
Why hasn't there been an effort to beef up security at schools after years of mass school shootings?
