Are stricter gun laws, BANS coming to the land of the free?

[Test Monsterone]

No offense test.
But your leftist cookie cutter argument is just plain wrong.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/...the-u-s-stands


In the United States, mass shootings receive the most attention by the media and therefore, many attribute the high gun deaths to mass shootings. However, mass shootings are only responsible for a small number of overall gun violence deaths in the United States. More than two-thirds of gun deaths in the US are suicides.

Brazil has the highest number of gun deaths in the world, with a total of 43,200 out of the 250,000 worldwide – a gun death rate of 21.9 per 100,000 Brazilian citizens. The United States has the second-highest number of gun deaths with 37,200 but is number 27 with a death rate of 12.41 per 100,000 Americans

When counting gun deaths per 1000 people. And rated by county. The united states is like number 30. And most nations ahead of it have far stricter gun laws, even outright bans.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ths-by-country

I get that you believe your leftist doctrine deeply. I respect it even though I disagree. But the data is clear in this case . Gun laws don't keep guns out of the hands of criminals, nor do they make anybody safer from gun violence. As the data proves, nations with gun bans/laws do not make citizens safer from gun violence nor affectively eliminate deaths by gun violence.

There are simply too many other factors aside from guns themselves that factor into the equation to say that banning guns is an effective, legitimate solution to gun violence. The data clearly shows this.

Logically, how can owning more guns lead to less gun deaths? I never said anything about the percent of suicides vs homicides. I simply said that in countries where there are no guns, there are hardly any homicides by gun. I don’t need any statistics for that, it’s just common sense.

I said I believe people should be able to own guns for protection. I said that ARs are responsible for many of our mass shootings (compared to a shotgun or hand gun). Banning ARs will lead to less successful mass shootings, but will not eliminate them. And finally, I said that gun ownership in America is a reality and deaths by guns is also a reality we must face as a result. I didn’t say we should ban anything.

You do this a lot - creating arguments about things nobody said. I’m not a leftist, I’m a free thinker and make my own mind up. You wouldn’t win any arguments in a debate because you can’t stick to the point and don’t actually listen or read what the person is saying.

[Hughinn]

Logically, how can owning more guns lead to less gun deaths? I never said anything about the percent of suicides vs homicides. I simply said that in countries where there are no guns, there are hardly any homicides by gun. I don’t need any statistics for that, it’s just common sense.

I said I believe people should be able to own guns for protection. I said that ARs are responsible for many of our mass shootings (compared to a shotgun or hand gun). Banning ARs will lead to less successful mass shootings, but will not eliminate them. And finally, I said that gun ownership in America is a reality and deaths by guns is also a reality we must face as a result. I didn’t say we should ban anything.

You do this a lot - creating arguments about things nobody said. I’m not a leftist, I’m a free thinker and make my own mind up. You wouldn’t win any arguments in a debate because you can’t stick to the point and don’t actually listen or read what the person is saying.

I understand where your coming from. I did hear what you said. No guns means nobody gets killed by guns. In a perfect vacuum maybe thats possible. But in reality, guns exist and cannot be totally eliminated among any population on earth by any law or statute.

The data I provided to shows the fallacy in your statement that gun laws and banning certain weapons can meaningfully reduce gun violence. The evidence is clear.

If your only point is that if in some hypothetical world where there were no guns, then nobody would ever get killed by gun violence, the I'd have to agree that in such a hypothetical scenario your point is right.

But no place such as that exists. And likely never will. Therefore, like the evidence shows, banning guns or certain gun types does not meaningfully accomplish anything to reduce deaths from gun violence

And thats not creating an argument, it's examining what you said. And showing with statistical evidence that you're mistaken. It's admirable to want to prevent gun violence. But as the data shows, bans and laws is clearly not the answer

I also apologize if I offended you with the remark of being a leftist. It's wrong to make such assumptions. I shouldn't have