I don’t think the issue is that people love guns more than kids but many have no confidence that more gun laws are going to significantly affect gun violence. Further restrictions on law abiding gun owners may have a “trickle down” effect on criminals I suppose, but in a place that currently has 400 million firearms, is it really going to make any difference? And any difference has to be weighed against the real effects of restricting freedoms for hundreds of millions of people.
Banning alcohol would reduce drunk driving deaths along with a whole host of other problems in the country…
Hell, banning road bikes would reduce roadway deaths… But at what cost to individuals?
I do see your point, and I think the intent is noble, but unrealistic.
(the following references the generic “you”, not anyone in particular)
Someone wins the lottery: it just isn’t you.
Someone is a victim of gun violence: it just isn’t you.
Some school is attacked by a gunman: it just isn’t your school.
Meanwhile, people waste an enormous money on lottery tickets, buy lots of guns that keeps the gun industry in business (propogating the irrational fears of gun violence and somehow needing to keep the gubmint in check), and spend a ton of money and resources, while traumatizing kids, on SROs, hardened schools, active shooter drills, and the like.
It won’t be long now before kids who grew up with Active Shooter Drills in school start running for and being elected to Congress, if they haven’t/aren’t already
Get enough of them in one place, and things could change for the better
In the Heller decision, the Supreme Court said “…the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon. There are many reasons that a citizen may prefer a handgun for home defense: It is easier to store in a location that is readily accessible in an emergency; it cannot easily be redirected or wrestled away by an attacker; it is easier to use for those without the upper-body strength to lift and aim a long gun; it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police. Whatever the reason, handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid”.
Currently, the Snope case is in front of the Supreme Court, just a few weeks away from conference. It should be granted certiorari in January.
By the end of June 2025, I expect that they will say something similar to what was said in Heller and Bruen. Modern semi-automatic rifles are in common use for lawful purposes and cannot be banned.
The Ocean State Tactical case could be decided at the same time and say that high capacity magazine bans are unconstitional.
Usually I can easily understand your point but you’ve lost me a bit on the post above.
If the point is that people just don’t think the bad things happen to them, I can use that logic to justify having firearms for self defense, against 2 and 4 legged threats.
Or seatbelts, or security systems, or any number of things that are unlikely to be utilized by any individual.
This is not true. Most cops that carry rifles have 30rd mags. At this moment, I have an AR racked in my patrol car with 4 30-round magazines. This is the norm.
Should be some give and take, e.g. as best as I can tell almost no gun owners have anything whatsoever to do with a “well-regulated militia”. Maybe we should make belonging to one necessary to own a gun?
The Constitution is almost like the Bible where people pick and choose what parts seem to matter and what parts don’t, so they can come up with some sort of justification for their beliefs.
That’s it. A poorly written amendment coupled with deeply flawed SCOTUS rulings has resulted in hundreds of millions of guns in the US. Due to these grave errors, there really is no way to correct the issues and there is always going to be gun violence in the US. An evil monster was created and there’s no way to stop it. All that’s been tried are bandaid measures.
