America's Gun Violence

mcgruff10

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

http://reason.com/archives/2017/10/03/automatic-weapons-are-already-heavily-re

The history of federal machine gun regulations is well-covered at the website of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Regulation began with the National Firearms Act of 1934, which imposed a $200 tax on the manufacture and transfer of "shotguns and rifles having barrels less than 18 inches in length, certain firearms described as 'any other weapons,' machineguns, and firearm mufflers and silencers" at the federal level (states and localities have always been free to impose their own restrictions). According to the ATF, "As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms."

The law was amended in 1968, and then again, in particular, in 1986. The latter revision was to "prohibit the transfer or possession of machineguns. Exceptions were made for transfers of machineguns to, or possession of machineguns by, government agencies, and those lawfully possessed before the effective date of the prohibition, May 19, 1986."

So for civilians, the only legally available automatic rifles in the United States under federal law come from the fixed pool of such weapons that existed on May 19, 1986. With a limited supply, shrinking at least a bit over time through attrition, prices for legal machine guns have no place to go but up. A glance at Gunbroker.com, an online listing service (with actual transfers handled by licensed dealers), reveals prices starting in four figures and rapidly going to five for individual weapons.

Purchasing and owning any NFA firearm, including automatic rifles/machine guns requires undergoing a background check and entering the weapon in the National Firearm Registration and Transfer Record, which is "the central registry of all NFA firearms in the U.S. which are not in the possession or under the control of the U.S. Government," according to the ATF National Firearms Act Handbook. This handbook is an excellent resource for familiarizing yourself with the federal regulation of automatic rifles/machine guns and other NFA firearms. You might want to put aside some time if you decide to peruse it since, including preface and appendices, the book is 220 pages long.

Which is to say, short of outright prohibition, automatic rifles are subject to just about every rule and restriction that has been proposed by opponents of easy civilian possession. If the weapon Paddock used in his rampage was legally acquired and owned, it was done so in accordance with laws intended "to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions" in such firearms in the words of federal regulators themselves.

But what if Paddock's weapons were illegally acquired, or illegally converted to automatic, or were semiautomatic weapons mistakenly identified as machine guns?

they weren't. they were purchased legally, which is the whole point. 

correct but from what we know right now, one was modified to be automatic.  

eddiec

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Since 1994 personal gun ownership in the states has gone up 59% but homicides by guns has dropped by 49%... there's absolutely no correlation between the amount of guns and homicides by gun.

also, the weapons he used yesterday were NOT automatic rifles, they were modified to be.  The difference is that since 1932 when automatic rifles had been outlawed, there has only been 3 crimes involving automatics on US soil.  3.... not including yesterday obviously since they weren't automatics.

I personally think that there's no reason a civilian should be able to purchase an assault rifle and they therefore should be outlawed.

Yes, but are these new gun owners or previous gun owners just buying more guns?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Since 1994 personal gun ownership in the states has gone up 59% but homicides by guns has dropped by 49%... there's absolutely no correlation between the amount of guns and homicides by gun.

also, the weapons he used yesterday were NOT automatic rifles, they were modified to be.  The difference is that since 1932 when automatic rifles had been outlawed, there has only been 3 crimes involving automatics on US soil.  3.... not including yesterday obviously since they weren't automatics.

I personally think that there's no reason a civilian should be able to purchase an assault rifle and they therefore should be outlawed.

There are countless studies that convincingly yield results disputing your statement here.

HughFreakingDillon

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Since 1994 personal gun ownership in the states has gone up 59% but homicides by guns has dropped by 49%... there's absolutely no correlation between the amount of guns and homicides by gun.

also, the weapons he used yesterday were NOT automatic rifles, they were modified to be.  The difference is that since 1932 when automatic rifles had been outlawed, there has only been 3 crimes involving automatics on US soil.  3.... not including yesterday obviously since they weren't automatics.

I personally think that there's no reason a civilian should be able to purchase an assault rifle and they therefore should be outlawed.

gun ownership is by far the highest in america as compared to other developed nations. (88 guns per 100 people, second place is 54 guns per 100, and it's Yemen. YEMEN)
americans are 25 times more likely to be murdered by a gun than any other developed nation. 

conclusion: this statement "there's absolutely no correlation between the amount of guns and homicides by gun" is FALSE. 

mace1229

mcgruff10 said:

Jason P said:

They are saying he used a legal device called a "bump grip" that allows a semi-auto gun to do this ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtEGonNmvuQ

It uses the recoil of the gun to reset the trigger which would take some practice to get used to. 

For $1K you can buy a semi-auto and a legal mod that is almost as effective as an illegal machine gun in today's world (as witnessed a few days ago)

If they make the gun automatic then they are illegal.  I'm almost positive there have been no new automatic weapons made since 1986.  

Not necessarily. I've seen versions of those, it isn't anything that is considered part of the gun, or even a gun modification. Like the original post said, it allows you to use the recoil to reset the trigger. Essentially allows you to hold the gun in such a way that you are attempting to hold the trigger down, but controls the recoil just enough to back off the trigger to the point it resets so in technicality it isnt considered fully auto because you technically are letting off the trigger after each shot. It has the same effect as if you just rapidly pull the trigger yourself, just does it 5 times faster than humanly possible.
I don't know how you could make something like that illegal, could be done with a shoestring. I agree it should be illegal if there's a way to, but do you ban shoestrings within 10 feet of a firearm? Instead I would support magazine limits on assault rifles to 4 or 5 rounds and a real "fixed" magazine.

chadwick

i believe everyone in switzerland own a gun

https://youtu.be/QDAiHzC-u4s

Jason P

mcgruff10 said:

Jason P said:

They are saying he used a legal device called a "bump grip" that allows a semi-auto gun to do this ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtEGonNmvuQ

It uses the recoil of the gun to reset the trigger which would take some practice to get used to. 

For $1K you can buy a semi-auto and a legal mod that is almost as effective as an illegal machine gun in today's world (as witnessed a few days ago)

If they make the gun automatic then they are illegal.  I'm almost positive there have been no new automatic weapons made since 1986.  

It's not automatic because the finger is technically pulling the trigger due to the recoil.  But it is as fast as full auto.

CM189191

chadwick said:

i believe everyone in switzerland own a gun

.more like 1 in 4

josevolution

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

I saw a quote online today (again, one of those quotes with someone's picture next to it, so the veracity can easily be questioned) that said "I don't feel sorry for those people....most country music fans are republicans and gun owners anyway". 

YIKES. 

I usually don’t use this term, but what a dumb bitch!  

lol yeah she's a graduate of Columbia University book smart but dumb socially ....

chadwick

https://youtu.be/gLKOA4wpZO4

PJ_Soul

tempo_n_groove said:

PJ_Soul said:

mattsl1983 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mattsl1983 said:

I guess I'm an idiot because removing all guns seems like a no brainer to reducing violence and improving society. How could it not? This is no longer primitive times so why do we still think and respond primitively? How much of the food the average person eats in a given year is actually procured via hunting in some way? Seriously, I don't know, but it can't be more then 5%. Yet, we're not doing anything about guns because of hunters and hobby shooters? 

Five percent of the US is roughly 16 million people. 

It is our right to own guns.  If we can control illegal guns and get them off the streets then we could mildly entertain the idea of a gun ban or further limit who has access to them.  But a gun ban does nothing to address the gun problems we have.  You are just taking away from legal owners and rewarding illegal owners.

Right. It's the obsession with guns that has to stop..... that will take several generations if Americans start actually working on it today. But they aren't, so obviously there is no solution in site. I don't have any hope in America working this problem out in any of our lifetimes. I think it will just get worse, actually. And I always fear that this problem will slowly bleed into Canada as well. It hasn't yet, but I still worry about it.
As for the hunting/food question... I think there are very few people in the USA who actually have to hunt in order to eat. 5% seems like a very huge number to me if we're talking necessity.

Please explain this "gun obsession" that keeps getting thrown out.  I really don't understand it at all.  It's a term that I really don't get.  

I'm just talking about the fixation that America has on guns. The one that causes them to rabidly claim that it's their god given right and to resist regulation, the one that makes gun stores and gun shows common place, the one that has guns being sold in department stores, the one that inspires people to cheer on a fucking politician running for office who pulls out a fucking pistol during a campaign rally, and the one that makes it legal to carry guns to political rallies or stalk Muslims outside of their mosques with a gun hanging off a shoulder, and the one that inspires people to proudly pose with guns for their Christmas cards and facebook pages .... FYI, those things are really, REALLY not normal at all in other developed nations. Yes, American citizens are obsessed with guns compared to the rest of the world.

You just took the worst situations and painted everyone whom is a firearm enthusiast with one big broad stroke...  Bravo.

No I didn't. That is just what you decided to assume I meant. Maybe just assume I'm not an idiot or insane and it will read different. I think if you do that, it will be clear that I'm obviously pointing out indicators that show that America is different compared to everywhere else. These indicators definitely show that America has a gun obsession in relation to the rest of the world.

PJ_Soul

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

ledvedderman said:

I'm no hunter. I hate guns. I hate that my 9 year old son has guns and hunts with his step dad. Having said that, where I am in southern IL, deer hunting is quite important for over populating concerns. Do people use that as justification to hunt when they know nothing of what curbing the population really entails? Yes. But it's still important. So it serves a purpose in theory. So, while you don't agree with it Soul (like me), it's not as simple as just not liking how animals are killed. 

I am aware of the culling theory... and I strongly disagree with it, just because that argument boils down to humans thinking they matter more than the wild animals in the area do. I don't give a shit if humans are inconvenienced because they have encroached upon the animals' habitat. I don't care if the deer snarl traffic (build more crossings for them) or eat everyone's vegetable gardens because they didn't fence it well enough. Yes, I am an avid wild animal welfare advocate, and I'm aware that my views might seem extreme to some, but that's fine with me. Besides, nature tends to take care of these things, if only people would give it the opportunity to. And even with dangerous wild animals in populated areas, I strongly disagree with killing them. I think every single effort should be made to relocate them, and if I have to pay more taxes for that to happen, I'm happy to do so. If the authorities could shoot a bear or cougar dead, then they could have shot it with a tranquilizer dart. No excuses work for me unless we're talking about a mauling/attack situation, literally (obviously all bets are off during animal attacks, and FWIW, I think if someone lives in an area where a bear or cougar (or whatever) attack is a valid concern, carrying a gun for protection is perfectly fine).
But really, that isn't all that relevant to me at the end of the day, because these hunters who use culling as a justification to go sport hunting are still going out to kill for pleasure. Culling is just a convenient excuse to talk away the fact that they are murdering wild animals for fun. I think people who do that have a bit of a screw loose (and some a really big, really lose screw, like those fuckers who go to Africa and kill endangered species like the fucking Trump sons do - that is purely psychopathic IMO). Sorry hunters, but that's just how I feel.

yeah, I've never understood the whole "controlling the (insert animal here) population" argument. nature, as you said, takes care of it on its own. always has. long before humans were here. humans need to stop fucking with nature as if we're the caretakers of the earth. we're not. 

I think this is just another in a long list of weak arguments for gun ownership. 

The problem is that humans have already changed the ecosystem by introducing invasive species/poor farming practices, cities, etc.  In many of the southern states, wild hogs (an invasive species that man introduced to the country) have cause millions upon millions of dollars of damage to agriculture and have destroyed the habitat for other animals as well.  Same with pythons in Florida.  If deer overpopulate, there is something called Chronic Wasting Disease that will wipe out entire populations of them.  Some invasive species will even overpopulate and bring diseases like the plague or rabies into domestic areas.  There are plenty arguments for wildlife population control that I have not mentioned here.  Myself, I am a hunter.  I usually harvest two deer a year and it feeds my family almost all year long.  I hunt wild hogs because they destroy my family’s farmland that is used to produce wheat, livestock feed.  If you are simply against farming and ranching, then do not even bother commenting because I will not respect you from the start...sorry.
As far as the “three guns is all you need” comments...You obviously know nothing about hunting.  Different calibers are used for different animals.  Who are you to decide what someone else needs to protect their home/land or feed their family?  Animal rights activists are often the ones responsible for fucking the environment by releasing wolves into areas that they do not belong, invasive species of fish into lakes, etc.  I would say that hunters have actually contributed to the environment way more than your average PETA supporter, if by nothing else purchasing hunting licenses which funds go towards habitat restoration efforts.  Get off your high horse...

PETA supporters?? PETA is just full of complete nutcases. Using PETA in any argument just doesn't work, since no really reasonable person agrees with what they do. And you're mistaken about a lot of other things in this post (LMAO, what kind of gun advocate sites are you reading where they have managed to convince you that hunters and cullers do more good for the environment than environmentalists?? And you think it's great that hunting license fees go to the habitat restoration of the animals you use that license to kill? Okie dokie. That is some twisted logic. How about just donate to habitat restoration without killing the animals?). But in any case, as I've said, it all boils down to one thing: Killing a wild animal and feeling anything other than sorrow is disgusting.

brianlux

PJPOWER said:

brianlux said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

ledvedderman said:

I'm no hunter. I hate guns. I hate that my 9 year old son has guns and hunts with his step dad. Having said that, where I am in southern IL, deer hunting is quite important for over populating concerns. Do people use that as justification to hunt when they know nothing of what curbing the population really entails? Yes. But it's still important. So it serves a purpose in theory. So, while you don't agree with it Soul (like me), it's not as simple as just not liking how animals are killed. 

I am aware of the culling theory... and I strongly disagree with it, just because that argument boils down to humans thinking they matter more than the wild animals in the area do. I don't give a shit if humans are inconvenienced because they have encroached upon the animals' habitat. I don't care if the deer snarl traffic (build more crossings for them) or eat everyone's vegetable gardens because they didn't fence it well enough. Yes, I am an avid wild animal welfare advocate, and I'm aware that my views might seem extreme to some, but that's fine with me. Besides, nature tends to take care of these things, if only people would give it the opportunity to. And even with dangerous wild animals in populated areas, I strongly disagree with killing them. I think every single effort should be made to relocate them, and if I have to pay more taxes for that to happen, I'm happy to do so. If the authorities could shoot a bear or cougar dead, then they could have shot it with a tranquilizer dart. No excuses work for me unless we're talking about a mauling/attack situation, literally (obviously all bets are off during animal attacks, and FWIW, I think if someone lives in an area where a bear or cougar (or whatever) attack is a valid concern, carrying a gun for protection is perfectly fine).
But really, that isn't all that relevant to me at the end of the day, because these hunters who use culling as a justification to go sport hunting are still going out to kill for pleasure. Culling is just a convenient excuse to talk away the fact that they are murdering wild animals for fun. I think people who do that have a bit of a screw loose (and some a really big, really lose screw, like those fuckers who go to Africa and kill endangered species like the fucking Trump sons do - that is purely psychopathic IMO). Sorry hunters, but that's just how I feel.

yeah, I've never understood the whole "controlling the (insert animal here) population" argument. nature, as you said, takes care of it on its own. always has. long before humans were here. humans need to stop fucking with nature as if we're the caretakers of the earth. we're not. 

I think this is just another in a long list of weak arguments for gun ownership. 

The problem is that humans have already changed the ecosystem by introducing invasive species/poor farming practices, cities, etc.  In many of the southern states, wild hogs (an invasive species that man introduced to the country) have cause millions upon millions of dollars of damage to agriculture and have destroyed the habitat for other animals as well.  Same with pythons in Florida.  If deer overpopulate, there is something called Chronic Wasting Disease that will wipe out entire populations of them.  Some invasive species will even overpopulate and bring diseases like the plague or rabies into domestic areas.  There are plenty arguments for wildlife population control that I have not mentioned here.  Myself, I am a hunter.  I usually harvest two deer a year and it feeds my family almost all year long.  I hunt wild hogs because they destroy my family’s farmland that is used to produce wheat, livestock feed.  If you are simply against farming and ranching, then do not even bother commenting because I will not respect you from the start...sorry.
As far as the “three guns is all you need” comments...You obviously know nothing about hunting.  Different calibers are used for different animals.  Who are you to decide what someone else needs to protect their home/land or feed their family?  Animal rights activists are often the ones responsible for fucking the environment by releasing wolves into areas that they do not belong, invasive species of fish into lakes, etc.  I would say that hunters have actually contributed to the environment way more than your average PETA supporter, if by nothing else purchasing hunting licenses which funds go towards habitat restoration efforts.  Get off your high horse...

Wrong.  Don't talk about things of which you have little or no knowledge. 

Oh I have plenty of knowledge in this area and that portion of my comment is most definitely correct.  They are the same ones that try to load deer into their cars in Yellowstone to “save them”.  I have several aquantances in the forest service that have stayed what I just did.

Forest service.   Ahhh, right...

tempo_n_groove

PJ_Soul said:

tempo_n_groove said:

PJ_Soul said:

mattsl1983 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mattsl1983 said:

I guess I'm an idiot because removing all guns seems like a no brainer to reducing violence and improving society. How could it not? This is no longer primitive times so why do we still think and respond primitively? How much of the food the average person eats in a given year is actually procured via hunting in some way? Seriously, I don't know, but it can't be more then 5%. Yet, we're not doing anything about guns because of hunters and hobby shooters? 

Five percent of the US is roughly 16 million people. 

It is our right to own guns.  If we can control illegal guns and get them off the streets then we could mildly entertain the idea of a gun ban or further limit who has access to them.  But a gun ban does nothing to address the gun problems we have.  You are just taking away from legal owners and rewarding illegal owners.

Right. It's the obsession with guns that has to stop..... that will take several generations if Americans start actually working on it today. But they aren't, so obviously there is no solution in site. I don't have any hope in America working this problem out in any of our lifetimes. I think it will just get worse, actually. And I always fear that this problem will slowly bleed into Canada as well. It hasn't yet, but I still worry about it.
As for the hunting/food question... I think there are very few people in the USA who actually have to hunt in order to eat. 5% seems like a very huge number to me if we're talking necessity.

Please explain this "gun obsession" that keeps getting thrown out.  I really don't understand it at all.  It's a term that I really don't get.  

I'm just talking about the fixation that America has on guns. The one that causes them to rabidly claim that it's their god given right and to resist regulation, the one that makes gun stores and gun shows common place, the one that has guns being sold in department stores, the one that inspires people to cheer on a fucking politician running for office who pulls out a fucking pistol during a campaign rally, and the one that makes it legal to carry guns to political rallies or stalk Muslims outside of their mosques with a gun hanging off a shoulder, and the one that inspires people to proudly pose with guns for their Christmas cards and facebook pages .... FYI, those things are really, REALLY not normal at all in other developed nations. Yes, American citizens are obsessed with guns compared to the rest of the world.

You just took the worst situations and painted everyone whom is a firearm enthusiast with one big broad stroke...  Bravo.

No I didn't. That is just what you decided to assume I meant. Maybe just assume I'm not an idiot or insane and it will read different. I think if you do that, it will be clear that I'm obviously pointing out indicators that show that America is different compared to everywhere else. These indicators definitely show that America has a gun obsession in relation to the rest of the world.

You are correct that these are NOT normal actions and most gun owners don't do this stupid shit.

If I'm reading into it wrong then my apologies but it looks like you think all gun owners do this or it happens all the time where it's all just a worst case scenario.

mcgruff10

Jason P said:

mcgruff10 said:

Jason P said:

They are saying he used a legal device called a "bump grip" that allows a semi-auto gun to do this ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtEGonNmvuQ

It uses the recoil of the gun to reset the trigger which would take some practice to get used to. 

For $1K you can buy a semi-auto and a legal mod that is almost as effective as an illegal machine gun in today's world (as witnessed a few days ago)

If they make the gun automatic then they are illegal.  I'm almost positive there have been no new automatic weapons made since 1986.  

It's not automatic because the finger is technically pulling the trigger due to the recoil.  But it is as fast as full auto.

True true. You got me.  

Kat

Country Stars React to Las Vegas Shooting: ‘I Cannot Express How Wrong I Was’

By NIRAJ CHOKSHI and JOE COSCARELLI OCT. 2, 2017

Caleb Keeter of the Josh Abbott Band, which was part of the weekend lineup in Las Vegas, said he had changed his mind on the need for gun control after the shooting. Credit Amy Harris/Invision, via Associated Press

Read the latest on the Las Vegas shooting with Tuesday’s live updates.

Country music artists and other performers expressed words of sympathy as well as frustration over gun violence on Monday as they mourned the mass shooting at a Las Vegas concert. One guitarist who played there said that the killings had changed his views on gun laws.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/jason-aldean-vegas-shooting.html

tempo_n_groove

mcgruff10 said:

Jason P said:

mcgruff10 said:

Jason P said:

They are saying he used a legal device called a "bump grip" that allows a semi-auto gun to do this ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtEGonNmvuQ

It uses the recoil of the gun to reset the trigger which would take some practice to get used to. 

For $1K you can buy a semi-auto and a legal mod that is almost as effective as an illegal machine gun in today's world (as witnessed a few days ago)

If they make the gun automatic then they are illegal.  I'm almost positive there have been no new automatic weapons made since 1986.  

It's not automatic because the finger is technically pulling the trigger due to the recoil.  But it is as fast as full auto.

True true. You got me.  

But it is "altering" a firearm which is illegal to do.  You might be allowed to buy something but can't put it on the gun unless you have a class 3 stamp.

dignin

PJPOWER said:

chadwick said:

dignin said:

America giving itself a giant pat on the back today. Trying to find the positive in the massacre and sweeping the truth under the rug.

The truth is America needs to start banning these military styled weapons and pulling them off the streets and out of peoples homes. Otherwise these massacres will not stop.

You want a hunting rifle, great. Take proper training courses, have background checks and register that rifle. That's all any sane person needs. No civilian needs a handgun or shotgun, let alone an AR-15.

why no shotgun? i grew up hunting with my dad & his dad. my first shotgun was a kid's model single shot.  

Seriously, you do not hunt birds with a rifle.  That line of thought gives the NRA grounds to say “see, they do want to take away all of your firearms.  Give an inch and they will take a mile”.  “No shotguns”... my eyes almost rolled out the back of my head.

Keep those eyes rolling. If you can't hunt with a single rifle maybe its time to take up a new hobby. I have a few friends and family members who are avid hunters who seem to do just fine with one rifle and a compound bow. But it's about the hunt and the food for them, not getting their jollies off with a big gun.

Also don't hide behind the NRA, your statements on here over time make where you stand clear.

As long as you can have your toys these massacres will continue to happen and you will never be able to wipe the blood from your hands.

brianlux

Kat said:

Country Stars React to Las Vegas Shooting: ‘I Cannot Express How Wrong I Was’

By NIRAJ CHOKSHI and JOE COSCARELLI OCT. 2, 2017

Caleb Keeter of the Josh Abbott Band, which was part of the weekend lineup in Las Vegas, said he had changed his mind on the need for gun control after the shooting. Credit Amy Harris/Invision, via Associated Press

Read the latest on the Las Vegas shooting with Tuesday’s live updates.

Country music artists and other performers expressed words of sympathy as well as frustration over gun violence on Monday as they mourned the mass shooting at a Las Vegas concert. One guitarist who played there said that the killings had changed his views on gun laws.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/jason-aldean-vegas-shooting.html

I saw this elsewhere and thought it was great as well.  To bad 59 people had to die and many hundreds traumatized for life for someone to get it. 

PJ_Soul

tempo_n_groove said:

PJ_Soul said:

tempo_n_groove said:

PJ_Soul said:

mattsl1983 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mattsl1983 said:

I guess I'm an idiot because removing all guns seems like a no brainer to reducing violence and improving society. How could it not? This is no longer primitive times so why do we still think and respond primitively? How much of the food the average person eats in a given year is actually procured via hunting in some way? Seriously, I don't know, but it can't be more then 5%. Yet, we're not doing anything about guns because of hunters and hobby shooters? 

Five percent of the US is roughly 16 million people. 

It is our right to own guns.  If we can control illegal guns and get them off the streets then we could mildly entertain the idea of a gun ban or further limit who has access to them.  But a gun ban does nothing to address the gun problems we have.  You are just taking away from legal owners and rewarding illegal owners.

Right. It's the obsession with guns that has to stop..... that will take several generations if Americans start actually working on it today. But they aren't, so obviously there is no solution in site. I don't have any hope in America working this problem out in any of our lifetimes. I think it will just get worse, actually. And I always fear that this problem will slowly bleed into Canada as well. It hasn't yet, but I still worry about it.
As for the hunting/food question... I think there are very few people in the USA who actually have to hunt in order to eat. 5% seems like a very huge number to me if we're talking necessity.

Please explain this "gun obsession" that keeps getting thrown out.  I really don't understand it at all.  It's a term that I really don't get.  

I'm just talking about the fixation that America has on guns. The one that causes them to rabidly claim that it's their god given right and to resist regulation, the one that makes gun stores and gun shows common place, the one that has guns being sold in department stores, the one that inspires people to cheer on a fucking politician running for office who pulls out a fucking pistol during a campaign rally, and the one that makes it legal to carry guns to political rallies or stalk Muslims outside of their mosques with a gun hanging off a shoulder, and the one that inspires people to proudly pose with guns for their Christmas cards and facebook pages .... FYI, those things are really, REALLY not normal at all in other developed nations. Yes, American citizens are obsessed with guns compared to the rest of the world.

You just took the worst situations and painted everyone whom is a firearm enthusiast with one big broad stroke...  Bravo.

No I didn't. That is just what you decided to assume I meant. Maybe just assume I'm not an idiot or insane and it will read different. I think if you do that, it will be clear that I'm obviously pointing out indicators that show that America is different compared to everywhere else. These indicators definitely show that America has a gun obsession in relation to the rest of the world.

You are correct that these are NOT normal actions and most gun owners don't do this stupid shit.

If I'm reading into it wrong then my apologies but it looks like you think all gun owners do this or it happens all the time where it's all just a worst case scenario.

Again, if you just assume that I'm not nuts, that isn't how it will come off. I take it for granted that everyone here will know that not all descriptions apply to everybody. I mean, come on man, I think you know me well enough to know that I don't think every single gun owner does any of the things I listed. That would be so unreasonable, I'm surprised it even crossed your mind. I think it was clear that I was using those as examples of the indicators of America's gun obsession. I said that such things don't happen in other countries, not that everyone does them. That they happen at all is the whole point of my post.
But let's acknowledge a couple things: there are plenty of instances where gun owners show up to rallies and protests with guns slung over their shoulders - I'm not talking a every day occurrence, but that is only because those rallies don't happen every day - and there are a LOT of gun owners in America who pose with guns for photos (for Xmas cards less often, but we both know it's done), and it is actually 100% true that gun stores and gun shows are common place in America - I don't know why you would suggest that those are extremes or worst case scenarios. That really aren't. Yes, the Mosque thing is, and the politician with the gun on stage is, but just that fact that they happened at all and arrests weren't made highlights the point I was making. I mean, so does this: tons and tons of photos online, all with different people in them, of children with guns. That isn't normal either. Of course that doesn't mean every gun owner does that. But it means something about American gun culture, and I think trying to pretend it doesn't is dangerous.


Not normal.


Not Normal.


Not normal.


.... There are literally millions of American children who are taught to love guns man. That's not normal.