6 hours ago, LosLobo said:

True you cannot fix stupid.......

Banning motor vehicles is a false equivalence.

The motor vehicle has become existential to modern life; the gun is unnecessary.

Guns are Necessary for safety, self defence against Crims & hostile parties that try to steel ones property or to prevent/stop a crim raping or harming ones family .

If every household had guns there would be Less crims running around ,they would thinks twice before they start their crim activities to harm or steal .

9 hours ago, bannork said:

You can't compare guns and cars.

A car's primary function is to transport people from A to B which is what happens in nearly every instance. Any accident is indeed that, an accident ( except for madmen) and is not the main purpose of a car.

A gun's primary function however, is to harm or kill an individual or animal. That is its purpose. Not the same as a car.

It's not the guns purpose it's the Stupid People that are the problem .

Guns can't kill it's the people who use them .

3 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

The murder rate only drops for the first year, then it grows to more deaths than there were before the ban, with few exceptions.

I find that hard to believe—do you have any evidence to support that claim?

6 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Guns are necessary for many things. if you mean in anyone's hands besides the police and armed forces, then it comes down to guns should only be in the hands of responsible citizens. The trouble with that is that they aren't being totally responsible if they just leave them around for a child to find, a teen to use in shootings, or someone to steal for criminal acts. A lot of the shootings can be curtailed by that alone, along with arming people in all schools, which would stop all shootings before they start, or before many are killed.

The more responsible, legitimate gun owners there are, the less random shootings will take place, as most gun owners in the west are hunters and target shooters, and it's rare for one of them to go and shoot innocents. If a criminal thinks someone is armed, especially in a house, the less chance they'll try anything, even though some don't care.

'Guns should only be in the hands of responsible citizens'.

How is that going—and when will it change unless US citizens like you do something about it?

But as you well know as a past gun dealer, it seems there are vested interests in prolonging this abomination for power, politics, and money.

Firearms are now the leading cause of death for children and teens in the US, with roughly 4,000–5,000 deaths per year and about 20,000–30,000 non-fatal injuries.

By comparison, in Australia, firearm deaths among children and teens are rare (typically a handful per year), firearms are not a leading cause of death or injury in any youth group.

The difference isn’t just rhetoric—it’s reflected in the outcomes.

2 hours ago, digger70 said:

It's not the guns purpose it's the Stupid People that are the problem .

Guns can't kill it's the people who use them .

A stupid person can kill with a knife but....... at a much slower rate than with a gun.

A gun enables a stupid person to kill many more people.

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

'Guns should only be in the hands of responsible citizens'.

How is that going—and when will it change unless US citizens like you do something about it?

But as you well know as a past gun dealer, it seems there are vested interests in prolonging this abomination for power, politics, and money.

Firearms are now the leading cause of death for children and teens in the US, with roughly 4,000–5,000 deaths per year and about 20,000–30,000 non-fatal injuries.

By comparison, in Australia, firearm deaths among children and teens are rare (typically a handful per year), firearms are not a leading cause of death or injury in any youth group.

The difference isn’t just rhetoric—it’s reflected in the outcomes.

People don't own guns for political or power purposes, besides those who are already controlling personalities that join the police force or military. Most are for hunting. Target shooting is fun and many also do that. The rest are wanting for self defense, as they have saved many lives when a citizen has one and a criminal attacks. Responsible means exactly that. Knowing your firearm, keeping it out of reach of anyone else, and using it properly when it's needed, hoping it never will be. In the wrong hands is where things go wrong, along with those hell bent on suicide.No one will ever take away American's guns, so it's up to the owners and judges to keep things from getting out of hand.

39 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

People don't own guns for political or power purposes, besides those who are already controlling personalities that join the police force or military. Most are for hunting. Target shooting is fun and many also do that. The rest are wanting for self defense, as they have saved many lives when a citizen has one and a criminal attacks. Responsible means exactly that. Knowing your firearm, keeping it out of reach of anyone else, and using it properly when it's needed, hoping it never will be. In the wrong hands is where things go wrong, along with those hell bent on suicide.No one will ever take away American's guns, so it's up to the owners and judges to keep things from getting out of hand.

Obviously, logic is not one of your stronger points—your straw man fallacy, red herring, anecdotal reasoning, overgeneralisation, false equivalence, category error, selection bias, and unfalsifiable claim did not go unnoticed.

Brandolini’s Law (the Bull*** Asymmetry Principle) suggests:

'The amount of energy needed to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it'.

So I will leave it there.

Enjoy the rest of the day.

2 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Obviously, logic is not one of your stronger points—your straw man fallacy, red herring, anecdotal reasoning, overgeneralisation, false equivalence, category error, selection bias, and unfalsifiable claim did not go unnoticed.

Brandolini’s Law (the Bull*** Asymmetry Principle) suggests:

'The amount of energy needed to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it'.

So I will leave it there.

Enjoy the rest of the day.

I'm wondering if some learn assuming from others here. You know nothing about me but this logic isn't one of my strong points is an ignorant thing to say seeing you don't know me. That you're prejudiced against guns is obvious, but that you haven't any logical answers also is. Is this only because you are against guns and I'm for them?

I have given sound reasons for the ownership of guns, and provided what might help lower the amount of deaths, and have done this all along. That I sold guns has me understand full well what they're all about, as well as using them for over 50 years with no accidents.

When you try and use words, it's best to make sure they match the situation, much as a certain troll does here , using the same words to describe people that disagree with him, with none being accurate.

I haven't distorted anything here but stated facts.

Personal experiences are indeed factual data, so you can't dismiss them.

I never say always when it comes to gun use, as people are individuals and some aren't capable of being responsible gun owners.

Keeping them out of those types hands is the problem, and always will be, no matter if all legal guns were banned or not.

Where am I comparing apples to oranges , or false equivalence as you stated?

Again, I stated ways to make guns safer. If you want to add your reasoning how that can happen in the US, let us know, as there are millions of gun owners who are waiting, and they'll never be banned there. Otherwise you're pissing in the wind.

11 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

There is a system in place, that 'may' have prevented the murders. Also a hole in the system, as Louisiana doesn't mandate voluntary mental assistance to be reported, to prevent firearm possession, only if court appoint mental treatment.

Wife should have reported treatment to officials, ASAP, as the shooting occurred the day before divorce court hearing.

Someone should have seen this one coming ... oops. From AI ...

2 hours ago, KhunLA said:

There is a system in place, that 'may' have prevented the murders. Also a hole in the system, as Louisiana doesn't mandate voluntary mental assistance to be reported, to prevent firearm possession, only if court appoint mental treatment.

Wife should have reported treatment to officials, ASAP, as the shooting occurred the day before divorce court hearing.

Someone should have seen this one coming ... oops. From AI ...

The commies would have put him in a Gulag !

america is a horrible culture, with horrible people.