Truly a great contribution to the discussion. Worthy of being recorded in the Jedi Archives.
...even the freaking Obamas have pointed out that "those people" need guns.
http://time.com/4172374/michelle-obama-gun-control-town-hall/
But please, continue to tell the Obamas about their Rambo Fantasies.
Obama is smart, and knows not to say it if he wants it. Hell, I'd do the same thing! But the ultimate goal is to do whatever we can to reduce firearms in the country. Period.
The problem is that the (very) current climate is around restriction and banning, rather than training, registration, waiting periods, universal background checks. Now I want to strangle the NRA for opposing those, and most gun owners are perfectly fine with those kinds of changes. (Worth mention; even if you removed all gun related homicides from our homicide rate, it would still be higher than the total homicide rate for most of the countries we compare ourselves to).
And the bolded is what I suspected you'd argue for. It's meaningless for most mass shootings. Stuff like Sandy Hook? Your response is "wow, that sucks." People who legally own weapons can shoot a lot of people in a short amount of time. If it's their first offense, then a background check is pointless. Training would just make them deadlier. Registration is great if we want to know whether the shooter owned the gun he used to murder a lot of people with, but that's not much comfort to the dead or their families. A waiting period eventually ends, and people determined to kill can wait.
And I still want all of those things! But they have a shit ton of flaws, and notably, they do nothing at all for the shootings that we pray over every fucking year. All it boils down to is more moments of silence and more dead people. Over a fucking firearm that you don't need.
Can anyone tell me why it's illegal to own a rocket launcher or a tank? It's all just property, right? Or do we restrict ownership of things because they're dangerous to society?
