Short Take: What can we can do to reduce gun violence in America?

[Dargil]

Banning weapons and restricting their features do nothing toward reducing gun violence. With 350 million privately owned firearms in America, the only consequence of banning them would be their owners turning them on banners themselves. If you want a real insurrection, that is the express route. Liberals obsess on finding "root causes" which is a means of delaying or preventing action on an issue; like an Environmental Impact Study, seeking Root Causes is just a tactic to delay prevent the lawful use of private property.

But here are actions that actually address Root Causes and can accomplish the purpose of reducing gun violence.

Stop having a revolving-door justice system that sees criminals instantly back on the streets.
Enforce existing gun laws against actual criminals.
Enable Stop and Frisk with reasonable suspicion.
Encourage fatherhood, which significantly decreases crime.
Discourage abortion, especially in inner-city communities, because abortion tells young people that life has no value. If a mother doesn’t care about a baby’s life, why should anyone else care about the value of life?
Encourage the Judeo-Christian faith, not as run through leftism, but as built around the anti-murder values of the Noahide laws and the Ten Commandments.
Close the border through which violent criminals, especially cartels, are coming.
Declare the flood of illegal aliens as an invasion and deploy the Military within the USA and Mexico to stop it.
Teach gun safety in schools and give children responsible outlets for handling guns. This was also common in America when gun crime was much less.

[Lliam]

There isn't even much of a gun problem in the U. S. but it is hyped up by those whose goal isn't to save lives but to disarm American citizens.

They always compare it to other countries, but use ambiguous qualifiers like "industrialized" or "high-income" countries. Even then, they cherry pick countries for comparison and leave other modern countries with strong gun control laws and high gun violence out.

Beginning in 2020, when the covid terror campaign and "mandates" began, gun-related homicides began to rise from about 15,000 or 16,000 per year to over 20,000. That should be an indication that societal problems, not the existence of guns, is to blame.

But even 21,000 isn't a high number when one considers other causes of death. Around 40,000 people die from accidental falls, 40,000 from accidental poisoning, 40,000 from vehicular accidents. What about lifestyle-related deaths (unhealthy food and lack of exercise), and exposure to environmental toxins? What about illegal drugs? What about prescribed drugs? What about deaths caused by preventable hospital error?
From Dec 2020 to early July 2021, the number of covid vaccine related deaths reported to the CDC was 11,000. It is known that fewer than 10% and as few as 1% of vaccine injuries get reported, so there were at least 110,000 in just 1.5 years. Naturally, those numbers are highly disputed.

The FBI says that 80% of firearm-related homicides are gang related. So, even now, only about 4,200 firearm-related homicides are NOT gang-related.
How do we get rid of gangs and gang violence?
How many gangsters use legally purchased firearms?

Over 80,000,000 honest gun owners aren't going around shooting people.

Even still, 21,000 firearm-related homicides out of 330,000,000 citizens and 450,000,000 people in the country at any one time equals a very low chance of being murdered with a gun.

There was a huge spike in gun crime during prohibition. It dropped after prohibition was repealed. Maybe we should look at our approach to the illegal drug problem. Removing the profit for gangs would certainly decrease gun violence.

Another problem is the increased use of psychoactive drugs to control the behavior of children. The stated side effects of many of those drugs include dysphoria, hopelessness, devaluation of life, self-depreciation, compulsive behavior, low self-esteem and suicidal thoughts.
Many mass murderers have been on such drugs, but the medical and pharmaceutical industries deny causation.

And then there is the problem of poverty. People who can't afford basic necessities will turn to crime just to survive. Hopelessness, itself, can drive people to violence.

[Snakeyes7]

Shoot back when a shooting breaks out and figure our what is causing people to go berserk like this.

Guns don't make people do this otherwise the majority of "gun deaths" wouldn't be suicides. There is obviously something wrong with the people who use them.

[Dargil]

I think the familiarity of"Kill em All" computer games plays a part.

[Snakeyes7]

I don't think that's true.

That would only be a problem if regular people cannot tell reality and fiction by default. Maybe it is different with children but I think even they can tell to a certain degree, just not as well as adults.

Pretty much every advancement of entertainment has been blamed for the evils of the world like comic books and dungeons and dragons but there was never any merit behind them because evil somehow always existed since humanity began. Assuming we never learn from this pattern, I assume things like VR or AI will be next on that chopping block. Actually the creators of a lot of the AI models politically correct the shit out of them so I think the AI thing has already started.

Even back in the 60s we have had documentation that any bad behavior stemming from childhood was from them witnessing other people doing it, usually their parents or guardians, to them or others.

[Dargil]

Mass shooters are not regular people.

[Snakeyes7]

Exactly, you need to be a special kind of sick in the head to commit such actions, which is why discussing anything but helping them with this sickness in the mind is a waste of time.

[Anonymous]

Oh geez I read that same ridiculous argument about abortion on prolife forums. You really think criminals give a s**t whether life starts at conception and whether abortions occur. Mass shooters are killing born humans, even children that are viable outside the womb. Perhaps if people actually took lessons in empathy and actually taught their children about caring and helping others that need. I do agree that Christian values would help, people actually caring for others and doing what they can to help those less fortunate and instilling those values in their children. What's more having a society that works for everyone and not just the elite would help as well.

[ohsheeT]

If we are honest with each other it starts with parents it starts with bringing up your child in the right way

A lot of people won't agree with this but that's okay

We watch TV commercials and they show somebody eating some type of food watermelon or steak

We watch somebody buying this beautiful car

And in that moment it makes us hungry are in that moment we dream of the color of the car.

It's a subliminal message and it happens to every single one of us whether we know it or not

You watch kids playing video games now
And in the video game they're killing people they're cutting people's heads off they're brutally destroying somebody and you watch that every single day 20 times a day 50 times a day..

And all of a sudden you get angry at the world and all those thoughts cross through your mind.

In the video game the character lives on the other people that they killed comes back to life because it's a new game it's a new moment and I don't think these kids understand a lot of this so if they were to take out their anger with somebody who knows what they're thinking

Guns are guns guns kill people people kill people in an act of war or self-defense

It's not meant to be for mental ill people brainwash people people who are angry to go out and just kill other people like a video game

I would like to know with these younger kids.
What makes him do what they do there should be a study on it
Do their parents leave them on their own do their parents give them quality time do their parents verbally abused them
Somewhere somehow it's the way that they are taught or the way that they are brought up that makes them do what they're doing
I really would like to see a study on it

And then you have the people who are down and out and they just get kicked harder and harder as they're down and I think they just finally get tired of it and they snap

It's one thing after another after another they can't get a break and people just keep kicking them and kicking them until one day they just said enough.

But in our society whether it's on TV movies in the news
The way to get Justice is to snap LOL these people feel a sense of relief when they do what they do
the anger has just built up and built up .

But somewhere inside their brain they can't find themselves to talk themselves out of it that's what I don't understand.

We are all different people we all have different stress levels we all have different coping mechanisms.

Depending on who you are and how you were raised and what you do in each and every day life and how you deal with stress and how you treat other people and people treat you I think that's what it's all about

Our society has become like Donald Trump we can say and do anything we want we think we're right and we can get away with it that's bullshit

The sad part is is one day we are all going to need a weapon I believe. And that is because our government has taken us to the breaking point
And all their manipulations and all the things that they do to put people against people I'm pretty sure one day will happen and that's really sad because it's not meant to be that way

So if you know somebody in a bad way you should talk to them talk to their parents get them some sort of help make them understand that what they do in the way they see things is not the right way

I remember in high school you had a problem you're going to use your hands and beat the f*** out of each other you don't get a weapon and go kill them because you're pissed off that's just wrong but that's what society shows that's how people handle things so that's what people do and that's just wrong

[strateguy632]

we need to read between lines.. dnc uses disguises for agendas to hide. for example what to call "bullying people by anger and shouting" not to say n word nor he nor she... liberal sounds like liberty but no liberty to speak any word or opinion about ho mose xu al

many conservatives have guns, the way to target conservatives is to blame Republicans for crime instead of the criminals who did the act directly.

look at chicago the dnc has no concern for victims of crimes, the talking points about crime is only a failed camouflage to target conservatives while giving too much unwarranted authority to government.

federal "aid" is a disguise to pump tax budget out of the country instead of helping citizens inside with homeless tent cities. i recall in 2016 trump pished for less federal aid out of u. s. the same disguises as aid and liberal are used for guns as above.

calling "health care" to abortion that doesn't HEAL any illness unless the fetus is cancer, is the same camouflage as the other issues.

[monorprise]

Not only will banning guns not work and quite possibly lead to a civil war in America.

Guns will probably regardless become even more common as micro-manufacturing makes it easier and easier for everyone to make them and other such weapons.

Violence is going to happen regardless of the tools that take place because violence reflect underlining cultural, social, economic, and political conflict between people that can't be reconciled among them peacefully.

This is either because one or both parties don't want it to, or have no means to. Thous wishing to blame the gun are barking up the wrong tree the burning of which even ignoring the impracticality and consequence of such an effort will not solve the problem.

It is not the tool that commits the crime its the people, and it is the people that need to be addressed.

We have far too many people with sever mental illnesses walking around, to make the world safe for such people even if possible would require turning it into a prison for everyone else.

We also have far too few fathers around raising kids, both in absolute number resulting in a one of the greatest demographic crisis in history but also in radio.

Marriage has largely been abolish culturally just as it was abolished legally decades ago. There is nothing that really binds parents to the care and support of their spouse and children anymore but now all but extinct cultural pressure.

This institution needs to be reintroduced and set firmly upon the propose of children alone.

[goaded]

"Banning weapons and restricting their features do nothing toward reducing gun violence." That's an extraordinary claim.

The rest is equally wrong.

What's the point of your plan to "Enforce existing gun laws against actual criminals.", if you're going to keep relaxing existing gun laws (against the wishes of most Americans)?

"Enable Stop and Frisk with reasonable suspicion." Suspicion of what? Carrying a concealed firearm? Like Florida recently made legal for everyone without the need for a licence.

[Exterminatore]

Banning weapons. I know. Just what the people who have been heavily propagandized by the oligarchs who run the world and it’s media would want. Wouldn’t want any of those cattle resisting. No chance the media displays mass shootings in America to spur on copy cat crimes right? There’s no way the oligarchs who run America would want guns outlawed so they can implement total control without fear of reprisal right? There’s no way they influenced people like you via lies and propaganda to willingly get on the wagon right?

Sure wouldn’t want anyone defending life and limb from violent attack. Violent criminals are people too right? I love that about you leftists. How you’re more concerned with the safety of those who would commit violence for the sake of evil than their potential victims.

You really have no concept that evil even exists do you?

Oh wait. Yes you do. Trump is evil. Right? That’s what you were told to believe and do.

[goaded]

I'm sure you'd like to believe that a small band of plucky armed civilians could rescue the country from a dictatorship, but that's not the way it works.

The way it works is a group build political power based on lies until they can get rid of all those irritating democratic elections, or at least pass laws that make them ineffective and claim they're only valid when they win, stolen otherwise.

Usually, they're supported by violent people who terrorise everyone else. Like "observing" voting places while carrying guns and wearing outfits that declare whose side they're on.

They might threaten election officials, normal citizens who believe in democracy, or their families causing them to resign, so that they can be replaced by partisans, who don't.

That's what's happening right now in the US. And, yes, it is evil. We've seen it happen before, in the 1930s.

[Agagagagaga]

“ I'm sure you'd like to believe that a small band of plucky armed civilians could rescue the country from a dictatorship, but that's not the way it works.”

That’s literally how it’s worked several times throughout history. I could give numerous examples, but as it was the job of your teachers in Doucheland to educate you I can’t be bothered to right their wrong.

[goaded]

@Agagagagaga No, it's because you can't. However, peaceful protests by unarmed civilians with majorities supporting them have worked to introduce democracy and reduce corruption. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_revolution

It worked in Serbia, Georgia, Adjara, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan (2005), and Armenia, but were put down in Belarus, Moldova, and Russia.

Going armed against the government is the only excuse they need to kill everyone involved. The only armed coups that work are when the military do them, and you rarely, if ever, end up with a better system.

[Agagagagaga]

@goaded I guess it didn’t work out for the Americans and Revolution... or for the Bolsheviks and their Communist Revolution. Huh?

[goaded]

@Agagagagaga 1766 and 1917, right? That's two times, not "several". No tanks, no aircraft, no attack helicopters, no instant communication. Both were also an uprising by the majority of the people who had had no say in how they were ruled.

In the American revolution, both sides were evenly matched, the British homeland was thousands of miles away, and the French and Spanish helped the revolutionaries.

[Agagagagaga]

On 2 December 1956, 82 men landed in Cuba, having sailed in the boat Granma from Tuxpan, Veracruz, Mexico ready to organize and lead a revolution. The early signs were not good for the movement. They landed in daylight, were attacked by the Cuban Air Force, and suffered numerous casualties. The landing party was split into two and wandered lost for two days, most of their supplies abandoned where they landed. They were also betrayed by their peasant guide in an ambush, which killed more of those who had landed. Batista mistakenly announced Fidel Castro's death at this point. Of the 82 who sailed aboard the Granma, only 22 eventually regrouped in the Sierra Maestra mountain range.

By January of 1959, a “plucky band of armed civilians” had rescued Cuba from Fulgencio Batista, a right-wing dictator. And replaced him with a Left-wing dictator: Fidel Castro.

That was some “plucky band of armed civilians.”

[goaded]

@Agagagagaga So you're saying when a “plucky band of armed civilians.” takes over a country, you end up with a dictatorship? I think that's probably right.

They mounted a coup against a dictator who took over with the help of the USA when he realised he wasn't going to win an election. The majority of the country was against him.

[Agagagagaga]

No... did the Americans end up with a dictatorship?

Are you always this retarded? I mean I know you’re stupid, but uh, you’re being especially dense.

[goaded]

@Agagagagaga Go ahead, attack the messenger. The American revolution was not "a small band of plucky armed civilians", it was an army and navy of tens of thousands of fighting men and supported by two empires against a distant foe.

The six successful pro-democracy revolutions I listed were all in the last 30 years and were largely successful because they were not armed, and they could document what their government was doing to them and broadcast it in real time.

[Exterminatore]

@agag

Agree.

[Exterminatore]

@agag

Well said.

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

At current time the Americans have no say. We are ruled by an oligarchy.

This was NOT how it was initially. It was a land of liberty.

[Exterminatore]

@agag.

@goaded is just confused. The only revolution he knows of was on Jan 6th. The real “insurrection.” The insurrection of insurrections. A complete coups. One in which literally nothing was accomplished but a dude sitting at Pilosi’s desk. The day would be revolutionaries showed up at the US Capital clad in Buffalo horns and blue warpaint. The true chosen attire of all would be revolutionaries. Not one senator was harmed. All those crazy gun nut 2nd amendment loving people showing up to overthrow the government with NO FIREARMS. Their plan? To mill about on the floor of Congress taking selfies. Not that that the crowd was loaded or guards removed cattle guards so they could get in, or the Chief of Police of Capital Hill blue the whistle on a bunch of things. No. To him, that was a revolution. All that stuff you mentioned was fiction and proves why no one should own guns as they could never stage a successful revolution anyway, unless it’s Jan 6th.

[Exterminatore]

*crowd was loaded with feds. FBI was there in mass. Look up videos of him testifying before Congress.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore Bullshit. You can vote. You can try to find better candidates through primaries. You can run for office yourself. You're ruled by the law. If you don't like the laws, try to get people who will change the law elected.

As to Jan 6, that some people weren't being violent (although all those who went to the Capitol were there to try to stop the count), or that some police were in on it, does not mean there wasn't an attempt to stop the certification of Biden's win. There have been more than a dozen successful convictions for seditious conspiracy, multiple different juries have come to the same conclusion having seen the evidence and heard the defences of the accused. They were guilty.

[Exterminatore]

Nobody is arguing about laws. I’m just agreeing that yes, aga is right. There have been successful revolutions, and he didn’t even mention the French Revolution, so your point against an armed populace is inaccurate. I’m speaking strictly objectively.

The entire Jan 6th thing was complete BS. Watch this:

https://youtu.be/w1gc9Desq1w?si=V0CQ-KV71fzjV-UR

[BoopBoopBeep]

The Battle of Athens (sometimes called the McMinn County War) was a rebellion led by citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the local government in August 1946. That couldn't have happened with a disarmed population.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore I'm not going to watch an attempt to whitewash what I saw in real time with my own eyes. Besides someone already posted it.

A century or two ago people won armed revolts, these days people win without weapons by proving the vast majority of the population support them. Look at India in the 1940s.

[goaded]

By the way, by your logic ("there were feds there so it was because of the feds"), BLM was all a setup by them and the BLM protesters are all innocent.

[goaded]

@BoopBoopBeep Nor could the Wilmington insurrection of 1898 or the Tulsa race massacre, which were pissed off minorities. When you have an armed mob come to power they become an armed mob with power. When an unarmed majority force changes, you usually get what the majority want.

Reading about the McMinn County War, the techniques of the bad guys have a remarkably familiar flavour. "A state law enacted in 1941 reduced local political opposition to Crump's officials by reducing the number of voting precincts from 23 to 12 and reducing the number of justices of the peace from fourteen to seven (including four "Cantrell men")"

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

White wash? What are you talking about? Did you watch Senator Ted Cruz asking the 2nd in command in the FBI if there were FBI in the crowd and if they incited the violence and her response was “I can’t answer that?” Dude, the only acceptable answer to that and most of the rest of his questions is no.

You must be a CIA plant on this site or something. Nobody can be that brainwashed. Not only did I do an awesome satire piece in talking to aga that makes a few important points, I posted a video with info about all the various federal agencies involved in this scam and their numbers from various news sources and video of 1 witness testifying to Congress and video of Senator Ted Cruise questioning the 2nd highest person from the top in the FBI who repeatedly answered: “I can’t answer that” to almost every question when in fact the only acceptable answer to those questions is “No.”

No one is this indoctrinated or stupid. You must be working for some intelligence apparatus I swear. That’s point blank proof of a government coverup to wrong doing on Jan 6th.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore Of course there were FBI in the crowd, at Jan 6 and throughout BLM, they'd be derelict in their duty if they weren't there. Their job is to observe potential terrorist groups and stop actual terrorist attacks. Your problem is that you think they're partisan, when the truth is that they were probably more against BLM than Jan 6 (police let rioters in on Jan 6).

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

Uh ha. And if they were there how come she did not answer “no” when asked if they committed any of the violence?

Anyway, we’re talking about an armed populace and armed revolts and not Jan 6th so I don’t want to disrupt the topic.

You said there have been no modern revolutions. Didn’t Francisco Franco also stage an armed revolt in Spain which lasted for years and ended up with him being head of state? An entire civil war was fought in Spain as a result of this.

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

Correction. Not committed any of the violence but rather incited any of it. But again, I don’t want to get off topic.

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

Didn’t Hitler gain control of Germany after a coups. They didn’t even use many weapons in that one.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore Who said what?

Define "modern". Most people would exclude 100 years ago.

And, again, Franco became a dictator. That's not a desirable outcome. Unarmed protests bringing about regime change are better than armed mobs taking control. Democracy is better than Autocracy.

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

Another purpose of an armed populace is not only a revolt if the government becomes tyrannical, it also guards against political murder.

Germany. Nazis.11 million murdered
Russia Bolsheviks. 25 million murdered.
Communist China. Communists. About 65 million murdered
Cambodia. Khmer Rouge 2-4 million murdered.

This is just a very small selection of mass political murders that have taken place in the last 100 years or less. What do they have in common? All extreme left wing ideologies and no armed populaces.

It’s funny. As soon as the Jews acquired arms they resisted against the Nazis. Like in the Warsaw uprising which was unfortunately unsuccessful and at Treblinka which was successful and they burned it to the ground.

Please tell me how an armed populace is not a good thing.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore Treblinka: "700 Jews launched an insurgency that lasted for 30 minutes"

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

Spain under Franco was a U. S. ally, and frankly there is some legit good he did for that nation. Many there now fondly remember his rule as they have done documentaries about the return of fascism in Europe. That by the way is a direct cause of the out of control situations caused by far left wing politics in Europe. Although he was a fascist and I certainly don’t approve of everything he did, he did at least accomplish quite a bit of good.

The point also is not if he was a dictator or not but that an armed revolt took place and succeeded and you stated there were no examples of an armed revolt and armed populace being successful so I’m just providing more cases where they did in fact succeed. For the better or for the worse. It is historical fact you can’t deny it happened.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore "Didn’t Hitler gain control of Germany after a coups. They didn’t even use many weapons in that one. "
No, the Nazis had a minority part in government, either staged a fake attack or took advantage of a real one, and got someone in power (like Pence almost did) to give them control of the government. (Mussolini had his supporters march on Rome and was installed as Prime Minister by the King.)

[goaded]

@Exterminatore Clearly we have different definitions of "successful". Mine is that the people of the country get what they want. Installing a dictator you can't vote out is not what most people want.

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

Treblinka. 700. 30 min. Yeah and? They were already starved and diseased, at least the leaders prior to stealing weapons and guns. They were facing well armed, well trained and well equipped SS Totenkampfverbande and succeeded. Bear in mind only the Sonderkommandos, we’re armed really. Like maybe 20-40 of that 700. Treblinka was strictly an extermination camp. The Sonderkommandos were the only semi permanent inmates. Their jobs were to eliminate the bodies. Everyone else was 100% exterminated on arrival.

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

I’m not stating good or bad outcome. Simply if the armed revolt was successful in its objectives or not.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore Look, I admire the people in Treblinka who tried to make a difference, and I despise the people who put them there. My point is that if you're up against a well trained military and you fight them, you're fucked. If you want regime change today (assuming Musk doesn't turn off your link to the world), unarmed and en masse is the way to go.

I do care if the outcome is good or bad. Peaceful, unarmed, ones result in good outcomes more than the others.

Democracy is better than Autocracy (or any other -cracy).

[Exterminatore]

@goaded

Alright I can work with that. Bear in mind I am not calling for an armed revolt currently nor do I advocate one currently.

There are plenty of other ways. I do not think voting is the answer. At least in America they put in one empty suit after another who are just whores for corporate money.

Civil disobedience is an option. A national “strike” where no one works, no one pays taxes, and we shut it all down until we get changed. Perhaps nation wide massive protests. I don't know. All I know is voting, and talking about the problems are not working and we’ve given that plenty of time. Something needs to be done. Violence is always a last option, but it is an option that can be listed with all the others. I just don’t think it’s necessary right now or going forward until all other options are exhausted.

As far as the argument of modern militaries being so much better equipped as to make resistance futile. I’d rather die free than a slave. I’d rather die on my feet than live life on my knees.

No resistance = guaranteed defeat.

Resistance = no worse off than no resistance, so should it ever go that far, yeah, better that then not.

We need term limits for Congressmen. We need to cut out the bribing and corruption. We need them representing the people, all of them, not just the predator class at the top. We need responsible spending immediately. All I know is writing letters to our representatives and shouting at them, and voting is not changing anything so maybe taking advantage of the right to peaceably assemble and protest en mass coast to coast is what needs to happen next. I don't know. All I know is we need change now.

[Exterminatore]

This is the face you make: 💀 when they take away private firearms ownership.

[goaded]

@Exterminatore You can own almost any firearm you can in the US in the UK or Germany, the difference is that they're controlled.

Don't you realise that most of the problems you see in the government are seen by the left as well?

A national strike would involve unions. They're simply organisations who fight on behalf of their members. Occasionally, they need to hear "no", but so does the government.

Citizens United (that essentially legalised bribery) was a terrible decision; would you vote in your state to pass a constitutional amendment to overturn it?

Term limits in Congress wouldn't be so terrible, but maybe age limits, instead? Those aged out can mentor and advise younger candidates.

[Exterminatore]

@ goaded

You can’t own any firearm you please here. Many are illegal. It depends on the state. I think the UK and Germany are even stricter than our strictest state.

I do know those on the left see these problems. We need to unite with them to solve them.

I didn’t know what to call my concept so I call it a national strike. Meaning not labor unions but every citizen refusing to do anything at all and to stop paying taxes and just freeze everything until we get their attention and get some change.

Never heard of citizens United.

Constitution amendments require a 2/3rds vote in Congress for an amendment to be added, repealed, or altered. Only Congress is allowed to vote on such a matter, not the populous.

I don't know about age limits for Congress but I’m definitely in favor of mental functioning being a factor in mandatory stepping down from a position. We have a president with dementia. That is unacceptable. Mitch McConnell had what appeared to be a stroke on live tv. I strongly doubt his mental abilities. Diane Feinstein also has dementia I believe. That is unacceptable. If there is something going on where the brain is not functioning properly as in the cases of those three there needs to be provisions to have them step down and another person from their party fill in the remainder of their term. It is absolutely insane we have all these people with very serious mental deficits running our country.

[Grond21]

If you remove the 5 cities in America that have the highest gun violence, then per capita, the US gun violence placement drops from the high 20s down to the 187th place out of all the countries in the world. So the clear answer is get rid of the gangs and democratic mayors

[goaded]

I think you're misinformed. Can you name those five cities? The UK has around 40 firearm murders a year, with a population of 66 million. Texas has a population slightly less than half that (29 million), and had 1,409 firearm murders in 2019.

[goaded]

For completeness, the total number of murders in the UK in 2019 was 650. Texas had approximately 4,000.

[rigmarole]

Improve culture in urban areas. The major gun violence issue in the USA is really just Black male youth. If you fix them, you fix the problem. The Black community's issue is a lack of parenting. This is because the Black community has subscribed to Maxist Socialism/Black Communism since the early 1900s. Socialists always destroy the family unit and mass violence is clearly the end product of that social system. Remove the socialism from the culture and you fix the violence issue.

[rigmarole]

Yuri Bezmenov a KGB defector has argued for decades that the primary counter to socialism/communism is religion. So if you want to uno reverse that shit, you need a religious revival in the Black community. They need to get back in church and become more family/community oriented so that they start to raise their children right and start to take care of and improve their own community. That said, it takes a good 15 years to change directions.

[Andres77]

Nailed it. We’re in the top ten countries for gun violence in the world. If you remove St. Louis, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles and New York were 193.

[strateguy632]

@Andres77 actuly 11 is not top ten and lag behind east Europe but yeah remove democrat cities with liberal prosecutor , then the rate in u. s. is changed by far.

[exitseven]

Everything you say makes sense. where I live there is a mandatory jail sentence for either a year or 6 months for possession of an unregistered gun. This is not enforced because it was all gang bangers who were getting lugged for this so it was racist.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Gun registration is illegal in my state. The government shouldn't know where to go to confiscate weapons like they did in Louisiana.

[exitseven]

@BoopBoopBeep I don't have a problem registering firearms. I think that government employees will omnot have the guts ymto try and disarm an American citizen in his home

[BoopBoopBeep]

After Katrina, amid the numerous murky and extrajudicial marching orders announced in often-confusing language by both local and state officials, on September 8th Police Superintendent Eddie Compass declared that:

“No one will be able to be armed… Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns” during the looming forced evictions about to unfold throughout New Orleans.

[exitseven]

@BoopBoopBeep Did anyone really give up their guns? Did any cops even try to diary anybody?

[BoopBoopBeep]

@exitseven
Not sure, but if there's a national emergency and all the corresponding looting going on and you're even thinking that's a good idea... like the saying goes, "send bachelors." I'm sure there are places where people would say "shucks this is unfortunate" and hand in their guns. I've lived a buncha places where it doesn't play out that way because law enforcement and the citizenry have a mutual understanding that what one side says is merely a recommendation to the other side. I don't want to be on either side of that field if that comes around again.

[captain_voidwalker]

Simple, have everyone carry a gun. An armed society is a polite society.

[goaded]

Give everyone in the US a single-shot, unreloadable pistol on their 18th birthday, with their social security number stamped on the bullet. If they can prove in court they used it in self-defence, defence of someone else, or of the country, they get a new one.

Other than that, you should need a good reason to have one, and that doesn't include "I'm scared".

[captain_voidwalker]

Or we could just let people have thiet constitutional rights after all Hitler was a huge fan of gun control, your not a nazi are you

[goaded]

An armed society is not a polite society, it's one terrorised by the people who are most likely to use their guns.

[captain_voidwalker]

You realy need to stop letting the media brainwash you about guns. Go to a gun range or a gin club and meet and talk with some actual gun owners. The ones using guns to terrify people are the ones who aren't going to obey any gun laws in the first place. Most gun owners are very responsible and safe with thier firearms and keep them purely for self defense. And everyone has a right to self defense.

[goaded]

Just about every murderer who uses a gun is a "responsible gun owner", until they pull the trigger. Maybe you should try living somewhere that isn't awash with guns and see how much nicer it is not to have to worry about some idiot trying to shoot you.

[captain_voidwalker]

I live in an area where about everyone is armed and our crime rate is damn near 0.
And if those people didn't use guns they'd just use a knife or a baseball bat or hell just thier bare hands. Infact the most common methods of murder is committed with people bare hands. You gonna chop everyone's hands off so you can feel safe. My constitutional rights aren't dictated by your irrational fear of an inanimate object like a gun.

[goaded]

"Infact the most common methods of murder is committed with people bare hands"
Not in the US. There, 75% are with firearms. And the murder rate is far higher than any European country, unless you count Russia (which isn't really Europe) or Lichtenstein (which had 2 murders one year).

[captain_voidwalker]

If you factor out Chicago, newyork, and Los Angeles. The murder rate in the rest of the US isn't that much. Those 3 cities suffer from absolutely terrible leadership. And wouldn't you know it's illegal to posses a fire arm in all 3 of em.
Also you statistics are way off. In the US about 21% of murders are with a fire arm. 12% with poison. 15% with cars. 11% with blades 27% with blunt force instruments such as hammers or bats. 41% are committed with unarmed methods such as strangulation or blunt force trauma.

[goaded]

Yeah, that's not true, either. Those three cities have a total population of 14.8 million and had 1,673 murders in 2021. That's 11.3 murders per 100,000 population. Above the country's average, the same as the state of Delaware, but better than Georgia, Arkansas, Maryland, Tennessee, Illinois, Missouri, South Carolina, New Mexico, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and DC. There are literally dozens of US cities with higher murder rates than those three combined.

And no, my number was too low, not too high. 81% of murders in the US involve firearms https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm :

"All homicides

Number of deaths: 26,031
Deaths per 100,000 population: 7.8

Source: National Vital Statistics System – Mortality Data (2021) via CDC WONDER
Firearm homicides

Number of deaths: 20,958
Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.3"

Where did you get your numbers?

From 1999-2005, there was a total of 523 homicidal poisoning deaths. That's a rate of 0.026 per 100,000 each year. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19514882/

[BoopBoopBeep]

@goaded "Give everyone in the US a single-shot, unreloadable pistol on their 18th birthday, with their social security number stamped on the bullet. If they can prove in court they used it in self-defence, defence of someone else, or of the country, they get a new one."

So when two guys came in my mom's house she should have asked them to line up? Or the two guys recently that posed as maintenance at that apartment complex and tried to kick in the door with an AR15 on the other side? All you need is one shot? You see a lot of people drop after one shot? If it's to the face yeah, I'll give you that. I saw a guy take 15 5.56 rounds one time and was still shooting back. Drugs are a MF.

[goaded]

@BoopBoopBeep "tried to kick in the door..." "tried"? Isn't it funny how home defence publications in the US sell you tools to kill people and not stronger doors and locks?

So, you're a crook outside a door with your illegal firearm that you've been lucky enough not to get caught with so far, and you know that you've just woken up the people inside and that each of the adults has a gun and a bullet. What do you think will happen if you finally do manage to break down the door?

[Dargil]

That is why there is so much Yes Ma'am and No Ma'am in The South. Too impolite to someone's mother or father and, Boom.

[goaded]

@Dargil Bless your heart.

[Dargil]

@goaded Good Idea, Adolf.

[goaded]

Oh, you sound just like a stupid German I met.

[goaded]

Do you know what the statistics on firearm murders are?

[BoopBoopBeep]

@goaded I don't want a stronger door to keep them out. I want them dead. That way they can't kick in someone else's door. There are consequences for bad life choices. I never had to shoot the same guy on two different days.

That also doesn't address the two guys coming in my mom's house when she was there alone.

[Dargil]

@goaded I am, thanks.

[goaded]

@Dargil You are the stupid German I met? Or you am the statistics on firearm murders?

[captain_voidwalker]

I love how he thinks his rant about firearm murders is some kind of argument. Your just proving that around me are a lot of criminals packing heat. So all the more reason for me to do the same

[goaded]

@captain_voidwalker Where did you get your massively incorrect statistics? LMAO at "21% of murders are with a fire arm" in the US.

You just proved that you're terrorised by people you think are more likely to use a firearm than you are. Just like I said. Try living somewhere where the chance of getting shot is literally one in a million or less. You might find it nice.

[captain_voidwalker]

I get them from an average compiled from 7 major city police departments.

[captain_voidwalker]

Also no thanks I'd rather live somewhere where I can shoot back the next time a hitler or stalin comes goose stepping through my neighborhood. Step one towards genocide is always disarming the population. Europe is hardly the paradise you think it is they're already on step 2 to genocide which is curtailing your free speech.

[goaded]

" I get them from an average compiled from 7 major city police departments. "
Sure you did. Links?

We know what to look out for, America seems to have forgotten and is heading towards a dictatorship. (Cue your DARVO and saying it's Biden and not the guy who refuses to accept the results of elections.)

[captain_voidwalker]

The fact that you think trump is a tyrant and not the guy literally is trying to prosecute the former president, his legal counsel, and now public figures who supported him says all I need to know about you. You need to crack open a history book so you can learn what real tyranny looks like because the biden admin is currently doing a damn good reenactment of 1930s Germany

[goaded]

So, so far you've predictably proven that

* your stats are made up to hide the truth about firearms being used in over 80% of murders

* You're afraid of other people with guns (criminals and the government)

* You've fallen for the idea that enforcing the law against someone who tried to steal an election is worse than trying to steal an election

Trump's lawyers broke the law with him, that's why they're all indicted (or listed as unindicted co-conspiritors). They lied in court, which is why they've been disbarred. I don't know who you mean by "public figures who supported him".

[DummyThiccFeraligatr]

We have to begin with the root cause: why do people here (and in any country) want to kill their fellow citizens? And why is this desire more pronounced in some places than in others?

Ban the intention, and the tool becomes moot.

[Surely]

The way to get started. Would be to enforce the laws already on the books.
But then Hunter would be in jail by now. So we will need to find other ways!

[Anonymous]

dont do anything. Everything is fine. The massacres are psy ops. Designed to get americans to give up their guns. Ignore them

[jmsinaz]

We could shoot to death all gun owners. Logical, right?

[Exterminatore]

Start shooting back.

[goaded]

... doubling the gun violence.

[Exterminatore]

Initially, then sending a message the next guy who does a mass shooting won't get to lift weights in jail, but instead will die a violent death where they stand.

Do you think that may discourage doing people from engaging in mass shootings? If their vile plans were to be interrupted in such a manner? If they perceived someone my stop them?

[goaded]

How many mass shooters have gone to prison?

[Exterminatore]

How many mass shooters should have had their lives ended violently at the same time and place they committed the crime?

[goaded]

Most of them, often by suicide. Tell me again how the risk of being shot will scare them into not acting.

[Exterminatore]

It will. When they don’t get to choose when it happens.

[Mrz6789]

Eliminate criminals or become slaves.