zlacker

>>david9+(OP)
I'm mildly curious what the reaction to this will be compared to the reaction to other recent political murders, like the Hortmans, or of Thompson.

That said, I think people need to recognize that in many aspects what's happening is connected to societal issues that gun control and gun regulations will have very little impact on - remember, even in Japan somebody could make some kind of battery ignited home-made shotgun and kill Shinzo Abe.

>>Glypto+mV
> remember, even in Japan somebody could make some kind of battery ignited home-made shotgun and kill Shinzo Abe.

Countries with strict gun control enjoy far lower rates of firearm accidents, suicides, and murders. IMO it's clearly worth the tradeoff. Very few of us live in a place where only guns can solve our problems.

The fact that occasionally someone goes to great lengths to kill doesn't mean we should make it easier for everyone.

>>paulry+AZ
> Countries with strict gun control enjoy far lower rates of firearm accidents, suicides, and murders.

So let’s define what your definition of strict gun control is. Also, if you want people to care more, stop including suicides because it drastically changes the numbers.

>>tekkni+Oa1
Suicide would be more rare if guns didn't make it so easy.

>>paulry+Wh1
suicide is championed by progressives outside this country, and machines have been built to increase nitrogen to give a comfortable death. the left is not against suicide, they are finding reasons to disarm people. this is why they will lose, their arguments are not rational.

>>tekkni+Ka4
Are some progressives championing well regulated suicide (requiring verification and waiting periods) for people who are suffering? Compared to unregulated, ubiquitous, and uncounted firearms which enable suicide+murder+accidents as simply as pointing and pulling a trigger?

What exactly is irrational?