zlacker

>>david9+(OP)
I have become something of a statist over the years and I apparently annoy a whole lot of people, when I argue for not upsetting the status quo much further. Needless to say, this obviously is not a good thing if you share that perspective with me. This is actual political violence. And it has little to do with guns. If someone really wanted to get to the guy, one would. The issue is further societal deterioration in basic standards.

Let me reiterate. Violence is not the answer for one reason and one reason only. Once it starts and everyone joins, it will be very, very hard to stop.

edit: be

>>iugtmk+0e
Yes - makes me think of the assassination of Shinzo Abe.

The gunman made his own gun, in a country with ultra-strict gun laws. The Unabomber made his own bombs. The Seattle mall Islamist knife attacker refused to stay down after being shot multiple times.

My takeaway: political terrorists are particularly motivated. Secondly, gun laws slow them down but don't stop them.

>>dogwea+gm
Why does a law have to be 100% to be considered worth having?

>>Braxto+3n
It doesn't need to be 100% effective, but it needs to be effective enough to make up for the downsides.

>>joseph+Ao
There are whole continents of countries showing how effective gun control is. At this point you've got to be ignoring it on purpose.

It's not some statistical difference between almost no violence and no violence. It's night and day. Orders of magnitude. Teens walking back from parties through the middle of the city at 1 am with their parents permission vs clan wars.