re: How do so many Americans have a fundamental misunderstanding of the 2nd amendment?

quote:

---

Stricter gun laws result in fewer guns.

---

Nope.

Now I'm sick

quote:

---

We don't need to.

---

Stick to that stupidity.

quote:

---

immediate spike in pistol attacks after AR's are banned?

---

Sudden spike? There are already far far far far more handgun attacks than ar attacks.

But hey. Bitchatl doesn't deal with logic. Only emotions.

quote:

---

he's speaking of the founder's beliefs

they believed that the population should have access to the same weaponry to prevent authoritarianism

---

When part of a well-trained militia, sure. Not just because they feel like less of a man if they don't own 12 guns.

quote:

---

irrelevant

---

Relevant when it overturns your point.

quote:

---

which of these countries has a 2nd Amendment limiting their governments?

---

Not relevant when recommended reforms would not violate the 2nd Amendment.

quote:

---

name me a fundamental right from the words of our Constitution regulated as much as the 2nd Amendment

---

The Amendment that comes just before the 2nd.

quote:

---

nope

---

Yep. We can prevent deaths, and do so without harming anyone's fundamental rights, but you and your ilk refuse to allow it. You're complicit in these deaths.

quote:

---

So researchers feel that access to guns and the desire to be a pop culture icon plays a bigger part in deranged lunatics deciding to kill large amounts of innocent people than, say, the massive amount of SSRI's being pumped into our population combined with the fact that it costs about $500 to talk to a shrink for an hour? Doesn't sound to me like you're reading very credible studies.

---

Researchers control the variables you are mentioning. And throwing out random possibilities (like blaming SSRIs) is not very logical or useful in debate and/or solving a problem. The elephant in the room is the obvious cultural differences between the U.S. and elsewhere.

quote:

---

And if fame is such an issue, then why aren't you people lobbying to silence CNN and Fox News from plastering every attack all over every TV screen in America? NO ONE gets a tangible benefit from that, aside from rich TV execs, unlike firearms. Why not start with mental health, greedy TV networks, and other common issues, then move along to gun laws? Why start with them? Because you don't want to help anyone, you want to spite conservatives.

---

No one can control the culture of desiring fame. And if the national media ignored the shootings, there would be no pressure on lawmakers to change anything, there would be no motivation for schools to improve security measures, and nothing at all would change...and when nothing changes, the embarrassment and the pain of these occurrences continues.

Fewer guns means fewer gun related deaths. Stricter gun laws result in fewer guns. This is the "liberal" argument in a nutshell.

quote:

---

Sudden spike? There are already far far far far more handgun attacks than ar attacks.

But hey. Bitchatl doesn't deal with logic. Only emotions.

---

Well I mainly meant in the "mass attack" sense. But you're right the only reason the AR has been used lately is because it's the most effective. As soon as it's gone, the next man up (the next best thing) will take its place. Lives saved, per BamaAtl!

quote:

---

You're complicit in these deaths.

---

More hyperbole douche!

quote:

---

after Heller and the makeup of the Supreme Court, you likely will

---

I'm not sure things like universal background checks, or even things like ptp laws and registration would fall fully afoul of the court. They're human, too.

Even Scalia admits 2A isn't absolute, after all.

Imagine if RBG and the rest make it, then the conservatives start dropping. Things change fast. And if Democrats win the Senate in November, Trump gets no more Supremes - have to let the voters decide.

quote:

---

Exactly. You and your ilk refuse to ban cigarettes. You're complicit in the half million deaths each year due to cigarettes. And most importantly, you're complicit in the 46 thousand people who don't smoke and still die due to second hand smoke.

---

This argument is a logical fallacy, in its purest form. It's called false equivalence. And the fact that this is the core of your argument means you have no argument at all.