Guns, private possession of which are guaranteed by our Second Amendment, are viewed as the backstop to all our other rights.
The question is not which is better, more murders or fewer guns, but which is better, fewer murders or not being toothless against a government we already hold in suspicion.
One of our founding fathers once said "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Also, real change has already happened. Some of us, in not wanting to vote for Hillary, remember the now defunct "'Assault Rifle' ban" which her husband passed, which largely targeted civilian firearms based on either appearance, or having too many useful features. Features such as a folding stock, detachable magazine, or, get this, a barrel shroud. (A barrel shroud is used because rifle barrels get warm when you use them. It provides a spot to hold the gun, around the barrel, without burning your hand.)
We've long lost some things.
A previous president managed to get firearms that were made too inexpensively taken away, which raises the barrier of entry for first time gun buyers.
A previous administration got suppressors declared controlled. You can still get one, but it's probably about like getting a gun in Europe. A large chunk of change for the permission, a lot of red tape, and you can't travel with it.
Short barreled rifles cost extra. With extra red tape.
Sawed off shotguns are illegal.
You have to be 21 to have a handgun.
There are parallels in history of the government taking away a people's right to possess the means to defend themselves. They tend to end...messy.
46
@real-cool-cat
Guns, private possession of which are guaranteed by our Second Amendment, are viewed as the backstop to all our other rights.
The question is not which is better, more murders or fewer guns, but which is better, fewer murders or not being toothless against a government we already hold in suspicion.
One of our founding fathers once said "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Also, real change has already happened. Some of us, in not wanting to vote for Hillary, remember the now defunct "'Assault Rifle' ban" which her husband passed, which largely targeted civilian firearms based on either appearance, or having too many useful features. Features such as a folding stock, detachable magazine, or, get this, a barrel shroud. (A barrel shroud is used because rifle barrels get warm when you use them. It provides a spot to hold the gun, around the barrel, without burning your hand.)
We've long lost some things.
A previous president managed to get firearms that were made too inexpensively taken away, which raises the barrier of entry for first time gun buyers.
A previous administration got suppressors declared controlled. You can still get one, but it's probably about like getting a gun in Europe. A large chunk of change for the permission, a lot of red tape, and you can't travel with it.
Short barreled rifles cost extra. With extra red tape.
Sawed off shotguns are illegal.
You have to be 21 to have a handgun.
There are parallels in history of the government taking away a people's right to possess the means to defend themselves. They tend to end...messy.