Thread: Potential Ban/Brady Bill part deux?

Originally Posted by Sailor

That is what i meant with my statement. The uprising ended tragically, causing probably bigger death toll that wouldn't have happened without. But that is 'what if'. I'm not trying to offend you or anyone.

You see, i have nothing against guns per se. I own some, and work with them. Practice at least twice a month and pass the annual test to stay on my job. I see no glory nor savior in them.
It's the willingness to see a gun as a solution. Not just 'bad guys' but 'good guys' as well. Of course society has to respond the thread it has to deal everyday, but what just makes people shoot each other.

We have a lot of guns in this country. Still gun related violence is almost zero. Not all cops carry guns.
How many guns you need until you can reduce the gun related violence/accidents into zero? The question lies not in the number of guns but willingness to use them.

Still the idea of people successfully rising against government is bs. People without external help against organized and disciplined army? Fairytail. In every civil war it's civilian against civilians. 'A good way to get rid of the neighbor you do not like'.
Probably our civil war was that much later that people at least learned that taking a gun against leaders, elected by a vote, would lead only into nation divided in two. Real killing starts after battles have been fought, just like in Warsaw uprising. It's the terror and revenge of those who won against those who were innocent.

Part of the issue with low gun violence is that in a country of people that has existed for thousands of years the population make up is 99.5% Sweeds(sp) or Finn's. Much the same as Japan( with very low gun violence) in being nearly 100% of the original people. You have thousands of years to work for a low violence country. The US is a melting pot, less than 500 years from the beginning, with only a few thousand years more to reach a less violent state.