There is a tremendous amount of Propaganda levied against firearms for individual protection. The very term "Gun Violence" is in itself a piece of word Propaganda to demonize firearms. We cannot succeed in defending our Rights if you let them control the terminology. There is no such thing as "Gun Violence". Firearms are inanimate objects, they have no capacity for violence without an external force. For example, there are typically an average of around 30k deaths each year where a firearm is involved in the USA. In a population of 350 million plus people with over an estimated 400+ million firearms in civilian hands, this is a very tiny percentage. Half or more of these "Gun Violence" are self inflicted suicides ( serious suicidal folks tend to succeed with or without firearms, so this number is not likely to be changed through firearm reduction methods). This reduces the rate of firearm related deaths to approximately 15k. Out of the remaining 15k, roughly 80% are involved with the illicit narcotics trade, meaning criminals ( who will have firearms regardless of laws, it is kinda the definition of a criminal to disregard inconvenient laws). If we exclude drug related homicides we are left with approximately 3k firearm related deaths. This includes deaths that are the result of Law Enforcement, Legal Self-defense shootings and other lawful acts which only account for a hundred to two hundred deaths per year. This leaves us with about 2.8-2.9k deaths per year due to firearms usage. Repealing the 2nd Amendment will save approximately 3k lives per year. However, the remaining ~3k deaths are usually murder. Does anyone think that the motivation behind a murder will be mitigated by the lack of a firearm? Look up the rate of deaths by blunt objects. Look up the rate of deaths by knife or edged weapon. Look up the number of annual drownings, vehicle accidents, medical malpractice. All of these things account for more needless death in the US than firearm homicides. Knowing that homicide tends to happen regardless if a firearm is available means that virtually nothing can be done to mitigate them. Perhaps the time, money and energy could be utilized to mitigate some other cause of needless death? So why the expense of all these resources? It damn sure isn't about saving any lives, so you have to ask, "Why is it so important that they take guns away from law abiding citizens?". Virtually everyone here knows the answer to this. Educate yourselves to the facts and discover the motivation behind our enemies. This is the way to defend our Human Rights. If anything, we should be pushing to make self defense a Universal Human Right for the entire world.
There is a tremendous amount of Propaganda levied against firearms for individual protection. The very term "Gun Violence" is in itself a piece of word Propaganda to demonize firearms. We cannot succeed in defending our Rights if you let them control the terminology. There is no such thing as "Gun Violence". Firearms are inanimate objects, they have no capacity for violence without an external force. For example, there are typically an average of around 30k deaths each year where a firearm is involved in the USA. In a population of 350 million plus people with over an estimated 400+ million firearms in civilian hands, this is a very tiny percentage. Half or more of these "Gun Violence" are self inflicted suicides ( serious suicidal folks tend to succeed with or without firearms, so this number is not likely to be changed through firearm reduction methods). This reduces the rate of firearm related deaths to approximately 15k. Out of the remaining 15k, roughly 80% are involved with the illicit narcotics trade, meaning criminals ( who will have firearms regardless of laws, it is kinda the definition of a criminal to disregard inconvenient laws). If we exclude drug related homicides we are left with approximately 3k firearm related deaths. This includes deaths that are the result of Law Enforcement, Legal Self-defense shootings and other lawful acts which only account for a hundred to two hundred deaths per year. This leaves us with about 2.8-2.9k deaths per year due to firearms usage. Repealing the 2nd Amendment will save approximately 3k lives per year. However, the remaining ~3k deaths are usually murder. Does anyone think that the motivation behind a murder will be mitigated by the lack of a firearm? Look up the rate of deaths by blunt objects. Look up the rate of deaths by knife or edged weapon. Look up the number of annual drownings, vehicle accidents, medical malpractice. All of these things account for more needless death in the US than firearm homicides. Knowing that homicide tends to happen regardless if a firearm is available means that virtually nothing can be done to mitigate them. Perhaps the time, money and energy could be utilized to mitigate some other cause of needless death? So why the expense of all these resources? It damn sure isn't about saving any lives, so you have to ask, "Why is it so important that they take guns away from law abiding citizens?". Virtually everyone here knows the answer to this. Educate yourselves to the facts and discover the motivation behind our enemies. This is the way to defend our Human Rights. If anything, we should be pushing to make self defense a Universal Human Right for the entire world.