technotime's JumboTweets
- This is probably going to piss a bunch of people off, even a lot of my friends and quite possibly my relatives too. I don't think very many people will agree with me. However, it is how I feel and I feel very strongly.
Please don't give me a rash. Everyone has an opinion. Not everyone can listen to a differing opinion. So don't read it if you can't allow for a different opinion. I hope some can and do, and please don't post or respond with negativity!
On gun violence: The US has lots of guns and gun owners and possessors, but not the most of every country in the world. But it is incredibly easy to obtain a gun here, legally or not. Consider this blog from the Washington post:
"The dubious distinction of having the most gun violence goes to Honduras, at 68.43 homicides by firearm per 100,000 people, even though it only has 6.2 firearms per 100 people. Other parts of South America and South Africa also rank highly, while the United States is somewhere near the mid-range. Still, America sees far more gun violence than countries in Europe, and Canada, India and Australia, which is perhaps how it gets its bloody reputation among comparatively peaceful nations.
When a person kills another in the United States, though, he or she generally uses a gun: 60 percent of U.S. homicides occur using a firearm, which is the 26th-highest rate in the world. (In other gun-permeated countries, such as Finland (45.3 guns per 100 people), only about 19 percent of homicides involve a firearm.
Guns don’t always kill people, it seems, but they certainly play a role."
People kill people, guns don't kill people.....is absolutely true. Guns kill when they are used by people, they don't kill by themselves-
but people in the US do have super easy access to guns, without any licensing, back ground checks, or anything at all to prevent anyone, criminal, crazy or not to get guns.
I really believe less access means less people killing people. It's pretty simple bet. No, it's not going to stop killing. It's not going to stop senseless murder. But, it is likely to put a dent in the numbers- and over time, prevent access to guns to more and more of the criminal sect and the mentally ill.
I have nothing against honest, decent, law-abiding gun owners, or collectors or hunters.
But, like anything valuable, dangerous and collectible, why not require stringent requirements for obtaining a gun?
I know, I know, criminals don't get their guns through any legal channels.
However, I truly believe if we had a stronger system in place in order to acquire a gun, it would eventually make access to obtaining a gun more difficult and expensive for those inclined to bypass the system. Mentally ill included. Maybe there could be a background check question, something like "Has anyone living in or visiting your home or in any contact with anyone in the family been diagnosed or suspecting of any mental illness?"
That wouldn't catch them all, not even close, but could be a start. We have to start somewhere. If there were a question like that, if it only prevented 1 whacko from access to a gun, we've accomplished safer life from that 1 whacko.
Gun collectors, hunters and gun owners should have nothing to fear and a better title to gain. Maybe they could just get the background check and license or whatever else is to be involved to keep their current collection. It should make them even more coveted and valuable, even ultimately elevate the status, since it should start to weed out any that don't clear the process.
Current and future owners and collectors and hunters should still be able to collect and own for protection any guns in their possession or in the future- except assualt rifles and guns for mass destruction. I believe they should be banned. If nothing... <<<<<< N.B from Jumbotweet: auto-truncated at 4K characters on index page - Click here or on the "view" link to see entire jumbotweet! http://www.jumbotweet.com/ltweets/view/12212
17 people like this