Guns don't get a free ride. No one has ever said they do. We have laws to buy them, laws to carry them, laws to cover ammunition sales, laws to address possession issues. But again to bring up that annoying little ditty that the gun lobby sings, Forks did not make Rosie FAT. Address the socio-economic problem WHILE aggressively going after gangs and drug traffickers and the problem will CONTINUE to drop.
There are several issues wrapped in this single argument. First, I am not advocating that all guns be turned in. Or, necessarily, that new laws need to be written and enacted to address the ownership of "reasonable" kinds and numbers of gun. I am motivated by the defense of the distorted (my opinion) interpretation of the words in the second ammendment to mean anyone can own any kind of weapon as long as you call it a gun. I don't think that is the context of the words and their intended meaning. Otherwise I should be allowed to buy a scrapped SSN688 Class sub for its scrap value, but intact. And a bunch of other heavy military stuff. The words in the second ammendment are being stretched out of context every day by the NRA and gun lobbies on this issue. It would be far more constructive to negotiate some new words and have a debate, a vote, and if it passes, live with the new words.
Now, I also concede Rosie gets fat by eating, and she would eat with her hands to get fat if there were no forks. I get it. I don't think the socio-economic problem is inadequate training of kids to use guns safely.
NOTE that 56.5% of all gun deaths are suicide so using the 30,000 number is a bit misleading. 12863 is still too high.
This is a pointless argument and could be sustained endlessly with more pointless bullshit. Nearly every town in America has had a gun murder in the last five years. We all actually have had a neighbor or closer person involved in some kind of gun event that went wrong for someone. If 12863 is still too high, lets confine ourselves to that number. The point is shitty things are happening to more people every year that involve guns than in the past. It is a growing problem, with no sign of effective control. Yes it is a socio-economic problem, at least part of which is the belief by some small minority that they are going to solve their immediate socio-economic hardship with a gun.
As for folks who support firearms addressing the socio-economic issues, apparently you are unaware of all the camps that the NRA, DU, Sportsmens Leagues and youth centers around the country support. I know that when I taught range classes and USPSA classes I had several other instructors that I worked with that did nothing but teach skeet shooting and target shooting and gun safety at inner city camps all over the country.
I appreciate the time role models are spending teaching the next generation of gun advocates about how to safely handle guns. It is far better than if they didn't. I just don't for the life of me mcbear, understand how that is solving the larger socio-economic problem.
As for discussing strict enforcement of current laws. You can be sure it is a high priority topic at NRA and other organizations. They are the groups most interested in insuring that gun ownership gets back to the good name it used to have before is was cooped by gangs.
I would suggest that if we go examine the record of the development of every gun control legislative inititiative there would be precious little support from the NRA and other gun ownership advocating groups. It is clearly not in their best interests to defy these laws once they are passed, or continue to rail against them or encourage anyone else to defy them. But support their effective enforcement? I would like to see broad evidence of the NRA active support of efforts to limit distribution of illegal ammo and guns.
You say "Gun control laws are not enforced for reasons". What reasons? Why?[/QUOTE]
I am parroting other's claims that the laws that exist are suitable, they just are not enforced (sounds a lot like the immigration issue?) and would like to know why they are not enforced myself. The claim was made this time (but there is always someone willing to make this claim from the pro-gun ownership without limits side in any argument) by Fast55 a few posts ago. But my point is, if there is a law on the books, and it is not being enforced, there is a reason
. I do not claim to know what it is, and I think I suggested the situation be examined to ferret out the reasons. Laws in general, but gun control laws especially, are not ignored across the land by some inadvertent accident.
And, while Rosie probably would be just as fat as she is now if no one had invented forks, I would venture a guess that the kids and teachers who died in last year's Virginia Tech shootings would have faired a lot better if Cho had a knife, or several knives, or a tire iron, or some other hand held weapon.