Do you think the government just wants to take your AR-15's?

[StevieNix]

I only want to talk to those that are gun savvy. So imagine that you're a horrible monster that feels the need to kill children. You have two semi-auto hand guns with a satchel full of loaded magazines. Do you think you could ONLY kill 19 kids in an hour, or 900 kids?

I don't get this fetish the libs have with the AR-15. A bullet is a bullet.

The second amendment wasn't about hunting or even home protection. It was about keeping the government in check. Just look at California. The government worships criminals.

[Surely]

I am sure that the AR-15 would only be the beginning. You can dress up a 10-22 to look like one of those “nasty “ guns. Almost any semi automatic rifle can be dressed up.
I think that people are watching way too many shoot ‘em up movies and thinking that everyone can own a fully automatic weapon that carries an endless amount of ammunition. You know. The ones that never need to be reloaded.
So maybe the movies need to be made to use single shot 22’s!

[StevieNix]

They want all the guns, so they can bring in the new world order. The problem is that the libs already treated cops like shit, and threatened to defund them. What incentive is left for a cop to come to your rescue, or take your gun? None. I love cops. I bought my first car from a cop. It was a groovy VW bug.
There's no way in hell that the cops will come for your guns. They joined the force to serve and protect, and they get shit on constantly by the left. I live in a big city, and you can now drive 100 mph through a school zone. This is all courtesy of Saint George Floyd.

[shortster]

No I am pretty sure the government wants to take away all the guns. But likes to demonize the Armalite-15 because it sounds and looks scary.

[StevieNix]

And that's a brilliant place to start.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V2BHxtYRHU

[JustiReno]

It’s an assault rifle and people straight up say it’s for protecting against the government

[StevieNix]

@JustiReno

What's your definition of an assault rifle?

[shortster]

I think that term is dumb. It is like saying I have a stabbing knife.

[StevieNix]

And that idiot won't define it, because he can't. I heard a comedian talking about what a "hate crime" is.

What is it? If a white guy hit another white guy in the head with a baseball bat, it wouldn't be a hate crime.
A hate crime has to involve a black person. Why?

[JustiReno]

Semi auto or fully auto magazine fed rifle. Try causing mass casualties with two revolvers you twat

[JustiReno]

And I can call you a dirty white pig because we have free speech, but I think if I call you that n punch you in the face it would be a hate crime

[shortster]

https://youtu.be/WzHG-ibZaKM

[JustiReno]

theync.com/...ting-at-a-buffalo-ny-supermarket.htm

[NotThatSerious]

The idea that "the government wants to take your guns" is an opinion held primarily by people who are not politically sophisticated or whose political opinions come directly from right-wing media figures. Anyone clinging to the idea that there is some cabal of politicians plotting to disarm the public needs only to look at the overturning of Roe to understand the length and breadth of political maneuvering required to affect such a massive restriction of individual rights. Roe took 30+ years of serious effort on the right before it could be gutted. The ostensible left in this country has no comparable long-term strategy to deal with guns, to capture the courts, or to achieve a constitutional amendment to reform the second amendment. Personally, I find the way people fetishize guns to be odd. But the thing that I find objectionable is illogical opposition sensible gun reform proposals based solely on fear mongering from the gun lobby and its media shills.

[shortster]

I think that it actually comes from the fact that the natural inclination of government is to control its citizens' lives. And that the ownership of guns is a huge stop gap towards the government becoming too controlling. It is why the 2nd Amendment exists in the first place. You only need look at the law that just got struck down by SCOTUS to understand that there is a portion of people in government who do want to abolish gun rights. First that such a law whereby you had to justify why you needed to exercise your right to the government; and that government was denying the vast majority of these claims. Next that it was a 6-3 decision by the court. Finally that a large number of politicians outside of New York (since it is their law they would obviously be critical of its removal) who are critical of the court's decision.

[NotThatSerious]

You clearly either did not understand my point or are too committed to your errant belief to accept it. There is no threat to gun ownership in the US. Period. And if you disagree, the burden is on you to show proof.

[JustiReno]

@shortster so can I have a fully equipped F-16 or build a nuclear silo if I can afford it?

[shortster]

@NotThatSerious I pointed to a specific event; and you pointed out nebulous actors and used ad hominem. So I have to come up with more evidence of my point while yours is without reproach? Hmm, if that is the way you want to argue your point I see no value in continuing the conversation.

[shortster]

@JustiReno yes. They are actually selling decommissioned missile silos in Kansas.

[JustiReno]

No seriously if you can have an AK why can’t I have a tank? Doesn’t feel safe with so many mil spec weapons on the streets I at least want a bullet proof hummer with a machine gun

[shortster]

I am serious. Just because you own a tank doesn't mean that you can go around killing people or violating traffic laws. So you still have to be a responsible tank owner.

[JustiReno]

Everyone in America should own a hummer with a machine gun cuz white people Ne we fight that’s only a black people thing

[WhiteSteve]

The thing that bugs me out is, I watched the video of the kid who shot up the grocery store in Buffalo. I’m not exactly sure what kind of gun he had, it appeared to be some sort of high-powered semi-automatic rifle. Anyway…the ease and speed with which he mowed people down was simply shocking. Watched him kill 5 people in the first THREE SECONDS. 5 down and dead/dying before anyone even knew what was happening. And the stopping power was insane. I’d have thought you’d get shot and maybe writhe around on the ground groaning or something…. nope, with less than a few bullets each, these people were just absolutely wiped out. Bullets hit them, and they were instantly down and out, and only the first girl was a direct headshot, the rest looked like body shots, so I was very surprised to see these people killed so quickly. And the only reason there weren’t more fatalities was because there weren’t more people. Everyone outside got murked in literally three seconds, and he could’ve caught ten bodies in five seconds or less if there were more people, I’m sure of it. Easily could’ve clipped 20 before the “good guy with a gun” could even identify the situation, draw their gun, and locate the shooter.

I went down a rabbit hole of videos of people being shot that night. Saw some very disturbing stuff. Saw a video from Chicago where three KIDS (these guys must’ve only been 15 or 16) got ambushed in a small kiosk of some sort with nowhere to run, the shooter emptied his pistol into these kids who had no move other than hit the floor and crawl over each other hoping one of the others would catch the bullets. Honestly didn’t know pistols held so many shots, but he definitely emptied the clip, and still, one kid survived. But that pistol, at close range and with no exit for the victims, didn’t do anywhere near the damage the Buffalo kid’s rifle did. These kids were writhing on the ground like I’d imagine, they just got out to sleep with headshots eventually since the shooter had them dead to rights. But that definitely demonstrated to me that it’s not just “a gun is a gun is a gun”, there’s definitely levels to this shit.

[StevieNix]

I have no idea what you point is.

[WhiteSteve]

My point was basically the final sentence: after studying videos of people being shot with different weapons, not all guns are created equal. I saw one kid kill only 2 of 3 targets with a pistol at extremely close range, and the victims were basically trapped in a 6x9 foot glass box (looked like it may have been a small takeout restaurant lobby with just an order window, no seating area). The kids were crawling over each other as this guy just let off his pistol from side to side, trying to hit all of them. I didn’t count the shots (no sound on surveillance camera, only saw the flash from the shots), but he definitely let off nothing less than 20-30 shots. Because he was so close, the shooter caught at least one of the kids in the head, and I think the neck, as an instantaneous puddle of blood literally spilled on the floor in one split-second, but I think the kid already got put to rest by then. The whole ordeal was probably about ten seconds, maybe 15. And at point blank, with all that time, he still looked to have only killed two of the three. So for a reference point let’s call that two bodies in ten seconds, an average of one fatality per five seconds of shooting.

[WhiteSteve]

By comparison, the Buffalo shooter had a high-powered rifle of some sort (I don’t care what the name of it is, whatever it is, it’s insane that civilians carry them). As I detailed before, he killed FIVE people, in THREE seconds, and it easily could’ve been more if there were more people available. And as opposed to the Chicago shooting, it looked like fewer bullets and less lethal accuracy did the job. Like the Chicago kids ate like ten bullets each, they got absolutely riddled, horrifying to watch, and one was still moving pretty well at the end. The Buffalo kid? Steps out of the car, IMMEDIATELY and FROM THE HIP he put two bullets in a chick’s head from like 15 feet away. It was like this two-bullet sound of “doot-doot”, in a split second, and you’d see another body drop, no matter where they were hit. So the killing power of this gun, even to a layperson unfamiliar with guns, was CLEARLY superior to the pistol the Chicago shooter had. So I disagree with your stated premise of “a bullet is a bullet”…. I mean, I’m not expert, but aren’t there different calibers? I’d assume bigger bullets create bigger holes and more blood loss, making them more lethal? What about special types of bullets, like hollow-tips? Those explode on impact, no? Causing, again, a more devastating wound than a normal bullet that would just penetrate and lodge itself in you or just pass clean through, without exploding? I’d think someone was a sick fuck if they even went deer hunting with a gun and ammo like that, holy shit, what the fuck, man. I’ll just never understand the desire to do that level of damage to another sentient being, whether you’re on the offensive, acting in self-defense, or even just hunting game animals…. I’ll simply never understand the desire and fascination.

[JustiReno]

I agree with you @WhiteSteve AR n AK to pistol or shotgun is wild comparison when you seen it in action never saw buffalo shooter video did see New Zealand guy n believe that video in Chicago with the people in the gas station at night

[StevieNix]

I blew a deer in half with my aught six. I haven't hunted since. It doesn't seem like much of a sport to me. I hated it. Once the deer have AR-15's, then we can call it a 'sport."

[ChrisMaster69]

The thing is when you say here, quote “I don't get this fetish the libs have with the AR-15. A bullet is a bullet” unquote.

A bullet aka ammunition is ammunition is really wrong. It means a huge world of different. The 5.56mm round was not really adopted for outright killing a person.

This has been found to be the case in Afghan and Iraq, where they don’t bother with their wounded.

Hence the US military move to 6.8mm, this new round is “designed” to kill not create a casualty.

Also the 2nd amendment was not about keeping the government in check, it does not say that any place.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt2-1/ALDE_00000408/

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. The link above raises a nice point about well regulated Militia…

Quote “Further, the Court found that the phrase well regulated Militia referred not to formally organized state or federal militias, but to the pool of able-bodied men who were available for conscription.”This means that only those able to pass the military fitness test should really be allowed to bear arms. As if you are not “able bodied “ you have no ability to serve in a militia and thus a reason to bear arms. Also a pool of able bodied MEN…

[StevieNix]

Thank you, but a more concise answer would have been better. Yes or no.

[ChrisMaster69]

Well no they don’t.

As no one is stupid enough to confuse a weapon type without referencing it’s ammunition type and type of fire.
Banning them would basically mean the US banned a weapon that was available in the UK lol.

[JustiReno]

We never moved to 6.8?

[ChrisMaster69]

@JustiReno www.thedrive.com/.../heres-everything-we-now-know-about-the-armys-new-squad-rifles

www.defense.gov/.../

[JustiReno]

Hmm interesting guess I was wrong

[ChrisMaster69]

@JustiReno basically it was found 5.56mm is great for wounding but does not have stopping power in combat, 7.62mm was deemed to heavy in weight but 6.8mm having same power is good for killing.

What this likely means on the streets in 5-10 years is 6.8mm being used in place of 5.56mm.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

Guns aren't the most dangerous weapons out there. I have a CDL. And you don't need a license to steal a fuel tanker and drive it into a parade or a sports stadium.

My dad used to work with nerve agents. They have been illegal but that didn't stop someone chucking them in the NY subway system.

And what was the worst mass murder in recent memory? 9/11. They used a stolen airplane they didn't have a license to fly.

The "Democrats" cover the shootings on the news every day and let violent criminals go without a trial because they want more. I heard some liberal local news station from Georgia say "one person was killed in a mass shooting in Harlem today" THATS HOW HARD THEY TRY TO FIND A "Mass shooting"

One guy was shot in Harlem, mass shooting. But kill 300,000 innocent people with drones and we're "fighting terrorism"

Banning guns won't help. Criminals don't follow the laws. Their guns aren't registered.

Notice every politician is guarded by men with guns but the left REALLY doesn't want the schools to be?

I don't think they just want to take people's AR's. Shit, if I was locked in a room with 19 children and a pencil it wouldn't take me 45 minutes to strangle every one of them. But if I was there and I had a gun, I would have shot the basterd before he could kill someone's child.

They don't want to take our guns. They want to take our freedom. The good guys with guns make that much much harder so they are trying to start there.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

If it was about safety, they would bring back the 10 speeds and highschool shooting teams.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

School shootings were a lot less common when half the guys had a rifle in their truck and there's a pretty obvious reason for that.

[StevieNix]

The 911 dudes did go to flight training school, but they told the instructor that they weren't interested in the landing part. That should have been a clue.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

Lol.
But I bet they didn't graduate.

[WindAtMyBack]

If the goal is to kill as many people as possible, and a lot of people are crowded closely together, and they stay there letting you shoot them, then you could probably kill more with an AR-15 than with hand guns.

But that's not going to happen. As soon as you fire the first shoot, they are going to scatter. That means you have to find targets one at a time. Even if you can do that quickly, ANY gun that's not a single shot weapon can keep up with it. So the gun will make very little difference. It doesn't matter if it's a semi-auto rifle or a 150 year old revolver, it will be able to keep up.

The anti-gunners don't want to take AR-15s. They want to take ALL guns. They will chip at it a little at a time, every time having some kind of excuse.

Back in the 60s it was about "Saturday might specials" which were cheap hand guns. The anti-gunners said that banning them would solve every problem. Over the years it's been one thing or another. Every time there is an excuse for doing it. Every time it didn't do what the proponents claimed it would do.

But we knew 40 years ago that the plan was to chip away a little at a time, with each chip seeming like it's not a big deal. We knew that the ultimate goal was to take away all guns. This is one reason why gun owners have taken such a hard line, even in cases when the proposed law seemed fairly reasonable. That's because we knew that it was not just that one thing. We knew it would be one little thing then another little thing, until there was nothing left.

We knew that 40 years ago. And that is exactly what has happened since then. That is still happening. A total gun ban is a total gun ban, even if it happens a little at a time. So don't give an inch because lots of inches make a mile.

[NaultD]

I'm anti gun for the most part. With the tragedy of any and all gun deaths comes a chain of events that any one link could be broken that will avoid tragedy before it happens. Planes, cars, work safety has the same philosophy including proper gun safety that not one cause is to blame a tragedy but one cuting of the chain can prevent a tragedy. Amarican gun culture lacks any self awareness to keep there own and others safe.

Realistically the government is only going to make it harder to buy new guns. Most gun deaths are suicide bought within a crisis situation. Putting a waiting period can cut the chain of tragedy. Murder is a similar situation, a waiting period can cool some hot tensions cutting the chain of tragedy. We could have better information but gun lobbyists bribed our government from any data gathering for the cdc

Also your guns won't do jack shit to a carpet bomb from drones. Texas if it secedes will look like the middle east. Just attack the already failing power grid summer or winter. How ironic would it be if Mexico set up concentration camps?

[hypojoe]

You are right i dont know if you know of bonnie and clyde but prior to there little spree the government deemed the BAR to be way to dangerous for non military use and so the government rounded all of the BAR's up and keept them locked up and gaurded it did not stop them from getting there hands on them and in the end the police ended up using that gun to kill them its all about control from income taxes to abortion to gun control how free are we know and they keep beating it into our heads that its to protect us , these are the same people that arranged the 9/11 bullshit a country that attacks itself so they can get more and more control the government does not care about us whatsoever plain and simple they got the media distracting the public with mass shootings and killing and crime while behind the sceens carrying out there agenda the whole reason the nsa collected all that data was to put a lable on you as either a threat, or a non threat or someone who will comply or will comply via re education once you have been re educated and deemed as a non threat then you will be placed in a high density human habitat those terms are all from the agenda 21 book that was written by the EU free to download and now called agenda 2030

[blissinanarchy1]

I understand any bullet will kill. But a 5.56 semi auto platform is much more dangerous than a pistol round. I’d rather be shot at by a man with a Beta C drum mag pistol than a 5.56. The wounds of a pistol round are much more treatable, less powerful so cover is more in supply. Cover that may stop a pistol bullet may not stop a 5.56 or 7.62. For example. I was grazed below my collar bone with a pistol round. There’s a chunk of bone that sticks out a bit. If it was a 5.56, huge possibility that piece of bone would’ve been obliterated and I would’ve died. 5.56 rounds are much more likely to go through armor (AR plates do exist, yes.), or travel through one victim to another. HOWEVER. I do not call a 5.56 Semi auto rifle an assault rifle. The original AR15 that was made FOR the military, redesignated the M16 was. The AR15 type rifles nowadays (Most aren’t rifles, but actually carbines) have no selector switch, or undermounted grenade launcher.

[StevieNix]

Why didn't you answer the question?

[blissinanarchy1]

Yes, I think the government wants to take away AR-15s. I think there are personally some people OUTSIDE law enforcement that would do geniune good with one. Even those law abiding civilians though, only 1 in a 1000 got the training, level headedness, and preparation to actually to stop violence.

[StevieNix]

I bet those dead kids in Texas disagree with you. I would have gone in with my two.38's. Win, lose or draw, I would have done my best to save them. Wouldn't you?

[Fromdusktilldawn]

what if the pistol rounds were hollow points or it was a.44 magnum revolver

[blissinanarchy1]

Everybody thinks they’d do something in that situation. I highly doubt most would.

[blissinanarchy1]

@Fromdusktilldawn Hollow points are meant to not penetrate, they stay in you for stopping power. Reason being, with adrenaline running, unless you get hit in the head or spine you aren't dropping right away. Hollows were made to knock you on your ass. And a.44 isn’t going to be shot nearly as fast as any other semi, whether it’s a rifle or pistol round. Wouldn’t be efficient for rapid fire.

[StevieNix]

Hollow points explode inside of you.

[Fromdusktilldawn]

the irony is, that there are a lot of companies developing rifles that kinda bend the law. Just google AR-15 pistol, basically an 5.56 rifle but as a pistol

[StevieNix]

@Fromdusktilldawn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V2BHxtYRHU

[blissinanarchy1]

You’re thinking Black Anvil rounds. Any round you have will of course fragment when they hit something hard, like bone. Hollow points are designed to basically flatten and be softer when they hit you. Like I said, with adrenaline, you aren’t dropping immediately like Hollywood shows unless you get hit in the head or spine. You might get filled with an entire magazine but take three minutes to die. Hollow points are to knock you down, so when you don’t die immediately, you’re still incapacitated and not capable if shooting back in the mean time. Black anvil rounds are designed to fragment inside of you like a grenade to sever any arteries it can, damage organs, etc. They are typically not hollow, but not completely filled either.

[StevieNix]

They are.223 caliber.


How many kids could you kill with a 44 mag? The cops gave him an hour to kill. I'm shocked that it was only 19 kids.

[blissinanarchy1]

.223’s are a very similar round to 5.56. In fact, the original AR15, by ArmaLite, was created in.223 Remington. This is the AR-15 that was automatic and re designated the M16. But yes, black anvils come in.223 as well.

[Fromdusktilldawn]

this.223 gun is legally a pistol

[blissinanarchy1]

@Fromdusktilldawn I hate how they classify weapons with rifle rounds as pistols. It overcomplicates what you’re talking about. Or even pistol round weapons as rifles. SMGs are called rifles… PDW’s are called rifles… just call them what they are. SMGs and PDWs. (SMG, sub-machine gun, which are not always automatic, are longer guns with higher capacities that use pistol rounds). (PDWs are smaller guns, utilizing rifle rounds)

[cute_short_nerd]

AR-15s are designed to spray bullets for little accuracy. They are useless unless used to cover ground soldiers like intended. If you want a gun for protection aim for something less bulky with better accuracy. Never hold a gun unless you're going to shoot it and only shoot in non fatal areas if you can help it and wait for law inforement to arrive. Put your weapon away from you and tell the police exactly what happened and make sure your attacker is detained and the case can then go forward. Police are no longer required to read your maranda rights, the right to remain silent to not incriminate yourself. KNOW YOUR MARANDA RIGHTS. carry a legal registered weapon and license.

[Whatever2929292]

If I was a teacher I would want to own one. Not have it to where children could get it but have a gun safe in the classroom... Then if someone wanted to come into my classroom BANG BANG BANG and the perp will be dead before any kids or and school factuality would be dead.

[whiskeyontherocks]

Your right
But they don’t just want your guns republicans and democrats want your autonomy, individualism, your wealth, your opinion.
All I have seen is how politics has become a race for authoritarian control over the masses to move the country further from the common ground.

[EarthRealm]

Humans aren’t Monsters
Humans are weak Puny creatures
That die by the smallest of things, they run around with there head Cut off Create problems just so they can complain they don’t take any sort of Responsibility
And blame everyone else for there Problems. A monster doesn’t do any of those things.

[EarthRealm]

And monsters don’t Use Guns they Can destroy buildings and run super Fast and Have Super Strength.

[driven159]

the government doesn't have the resources to take everyone's guns and I think we need to keep government in check even more now if you are a good shot and the police act as they did in Texas then a person could kill the same amount of people with any gun or even a knife you can't stop a crazy person that is not on the radar

[StevieNix]

Or a hammer. Thanks for having a brain. Most don't have those.

[Anonymous]

It looks scary to them. That’s literally all it is. That and they think AR stands for “assault rifle” when the name of the company is Armalite.

[StevieNix]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V2BHxtYRHU

I love this guy.

[Curmudgeon]

And in terms of caliber, magazine capacity and rate of fire, it's a deer rifle. it just looks scarier somehow in their minds:

[Redstang88]

Actually the original configuration is illegal in many areas because it’s too UNDERpowered

[StevieNix]

Curmy, my uncle had a.223 for gopher hunting. They would dig holes in his property and leave a mound of dirt. When he went to cut hay, his cutter would hit the mounds of dirt and dull the blades.

My dad gave me a.30-06 for deer hunting. I had to have a rubber thing on the butt to keep my shoulder from being pulverized. That fucker kicks like a mule. I shot ONE deer and then gave up hunting. It was a cute doe, and she was eating grass. I about blew her in half. A comedian once said that hunting is the only "sport" where the other team doesn't know they're playing. I realized that what I liked about hunting was the camping part. Cooking and trying to make do in a rough situation, is awesome.

And to this day, when I can't sleep, I put on sounds of rain on a canvas tent. (YouTube) It knocks me out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEBl9ZQXloE

[BLP11520]

They want them I own one. My son bought it for me. I like 9mm pistols and my shotguns better. I was in the military and my M16 was lighter than my AR 15. It takes about 10 or 12 parts to make an AR15 full auto , you can't just file a few parts down. I shot expert with the M16. I do not shoot as often I just do not have enough time. Killing children is demonic , there is evil in the world. The thought of pointing a gun at a woman or child is revolting.

[StevieNix]

I have a deer rifle and three pistols. I pray I never need them in self defense.

[BLP11520]

Exactly, I have loaded guns in 5 places.

[StevieNix]

Hopefully you'll never need to fire them.

[spartan55]

An AR15 is no more deadly than any other semi automatic rifle. You make an argument that a shotgun is more deadly, but you never hear about those being banned.

[StevieNix]

I never made that argument, but whatever. Dead is dead.

[spartan55]

I meant to say 'you could' hypothetically.

[JustiReno]

A shotgun isn’t a semi automatic rifle

[spartan55]

@JustiReno
Shotguns are available in either pump action or semi-auto... so you're wrong.

[JustiReno]

I need to shut up here im pretty tired. But yeah semi auto shotgun is pretty dangerous too, especially something like saiga with a clip

[spartan55]

Hell, there are some with drum magazines that hold 20+ shells.

[humanearth]

They want all guns
There are going to take them by force
Then they are going to kill us
Then who is ever left, they will be forced to live in totalitarian world with no freedoms

But get this, they will love it

[StevieNix]

History is repeating itself.

[humanearth]

Yeap

[Avicenna]

The leftists want to take all privately-owned firearms, at least the ones that law-abiding people have

[StevieNix]

But they love when criminals have them.

[Avicenna]

Absolutely.

[Redstang88]

I don’t get it either. Give a competent shooter any old deer rifle and there would be a lot more dead than there ever is at these shootings. The guns used have nothing to do with it

[StevieNix]

Exactly. Finally, someone with a brain.

[Guy__]

I could kill people with a portable nail gun. Will they take it away from me?

[StevieNix]

Or even a hammer. It's all a big excuse. This is step one of the Marxist play book. They love criminals.
I was listening to the radio earlier, and some guy was arrested 122 times for shoplifting. How is that even possible? Iran would have cut both of his hands off. Singapore would have beat him to a pulp. China would have put a bullet in his head and made his family pay for the bullet. But in America, we seem to love these criminals.

We blame the guns, but not the shooters.