And with all due respect ... what does the above contribute to the discussion of the justification for "a level of gun control"?
It appears to be a generally accepted statistic that there are more firearm "assaults" in this country with handguns than with the misnomered "assault weapons." So like so many efforts on the part of Liberals to use government to restrict citizens' activities they use inaccurate labeling to "propogandize" their effort, just like Conservatives to in their narratives to "sell" their agenda.
An old legitimate saying is: "Bad facts make bad laws."
The current events in the "new wave" of firearm hysteria fits.
Stopping the retail purchase of ANYTHING doesn't stop possession! It just increases the price or creates an environment for smuggling, robberies, and burglaries. So, if one doesn't stop possession they don't stop the potential of the crime.
Can you say "Prohibition"?
Originally Posted by LexusLover
I think there are more people killed with bare hands than with AR-15s and all other rifles combined annually, just to add to your point. Oh and don't forget knives...
And here's a real interesting point
Europe had more mass shooting deaths than the U.S. and firearms are far more heavily regulated in Europe
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/sorry-despite-gun-control-advocates-claims-u-s-isnt-the-worst-country-for-mass-shootings/
https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/
Heres the real question for you common sense gun law folks.
Are you okay with someone being killed with a shotgun?
No, right?
Then why is it common sense to just ban AR-15s ?
Obviously the conclusion you will come to is that all guns mus be banned.
The only issue is that what you've only achieved is disarming law abiding citizens.
Bad guys still have them. Bad guys will still kill.
Good guys won't have guns to stop them.