Two problems there, ballistics are good to identify the type and caliber but not much else. For example they could tell you it is a 9mm Glock but not much else. For the national registry, the example of how it would work is the NFA system and that registry is a complete mess. The ATF has lost records, unable to provide copies or even tell if a gun was legally registered. Similar to the NFA you would have old folks who own a gun not respond to any buyback or grace period then die in 15 years. They hand down the gun to a relative who has no idea it needs to be registered trying to find out how to change ownership when they are in fact in possession of an illegal weapon. That is with a decade of buybacks and registering. You would probably have to have two generations of amnesty and buybacks.
Oh I fundamentally understand the Constitution and how civil rights in this country have limits and restrictions. I also understand the differences between personal choice and murder. These are facts you've willfully chosen to ignore. You lose on all the facts and stats so play the freedom card. It's such tired, boring rhetoric.
Extensive background checks, rigorous gun safety / gun training courses, mandatory psychological evaluations. In principle, do not give benefit of the doubt.
Good points on how to reduce gun violence: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2015/1205/Five-ways-the-US-can-reduce-mass-shootings
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4647470757001&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>
How often has a law-abiding, gun-carrying citizen stepped stepped in during an attack like this and saved lives? I'm not disputing this particular argument, but I'm genuinely curious if this is something which there is good evidence for. For you, is it a matter of public safety first or a matter of protecting civil liberties? Does one take precedence over the other in your mind? Are you opposed to society enacting stricter gun control laws if there is good reason to believe that it will significantly reduce gun violence/deaths?
I am still waiting on an explanation to this ridiculous comment. Where did you come up with this? Either quote my ignorance or STFU.
This is how Gun nuts react to things they disagree with: http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/radio-host-erick-erickson-takes-shots-new-y/npcyL/ This is a leading conservative voice by the way. Wow. So responsible and really makes you wonder how stable these guys are.
What is hilariously ignorant about that cartoon is that both show a depiction of a person with the military rifle of the time in their hands...of course it's not surprising that fairly obvious fact would go right over the head of an anti-civil liberties nut. Seriously you could re-label the picture "Soldier 1770" and "Soldier 2015" if you wanted to make a statement about how people in the military today need better PT or about how people in the military today are having to carry too much into combat and not change anything else about the picture.
In the 1700's a gun couldn't wipe out 30 civilians. It couldn't even kill a person most of the time. You had to have people line up in a long row and fire together. They never imagined out of control mass killings like we see. I doubt the 2nd Amendment would be as it is had our founders been able to see into the year 2015.
Yet even with the mass killings that we see today rifles are uses in less murders than knives....face it, your position on assault rifles, and the 2nd amendment as a whole, is born from ignorance.
NRA is country's oldest/largest/most effective civil rights organization membership is only $25 and you get a free duffel bag https://membership.nrahq.org/5245/default.aspx?src=bg&ek=Y5AJ101P&gclid=CPKHs_X3xckCFchFXgodzRYMZQ
There are far more deaths from semi-automatic and automatic guns than knives - I like how you have to repeat nut-wing talking points to try to appear semi-smart.
Sure, if you want to lump in handgun deaths to justify a position against assault weapons.... There are on average 5 times as many deaths from knives than from all rifles combined in the US every year....yet all we hear about is how dangerous assault rifles and extended mags are. It's a position out of ignorance.
Knives have killed far more people than terrorism - guess that means terrorism is not that big of a deal. Your logic has major holes in it.
