Who are you speaking of? The right to bear arms is already heavily regulated and has been for a long time. Perhaps you could cite a post advocating zero regulation?

The power of political language. That one little mistrustful and irrational slipperly slope "argument" blocks almost all the middle ground.

I was looking for something more substantive than a picture. Perhaps a quote or a link where that outlandish statement you made is supported. Specifically that the 2nd amendment should remain pure and free from regulation and also that that was the only amendment that should remain pure and free of regulation. I do agree that there are many in the NRA that are unreasonable and resist even common sense regulation. I also believe that there are many who would like to ban guns completely. These fringe groups are outliers and do not represent the views of those who advocate reasonable restrictions on guns or those guns rights advocates who recognize the need for stricter legislation.

You don't think there aren't any people who think they should be able to own any gun they want without restriction?

lol at you

Wtf does that first sentence mean? Did you miss the part where I asked you to back up your claim?

Pretty sure LirvA's position is that he should be able to own any weapon the US military is allowed to use.

First off, it's not my statement.

And "some" does not mean all. I don't have any cites, but I would bet that there is a statistically significant percentage of gun owners who would say that the second amendment means that they should be able to own whatever gun they want without restriction.

Virtually no one supports zero regulation of firearms. Why defend what's obvious flyberbole as literal?

What percentage of all gun owners in your opinion would classify as a restrictive free liberal fearing 2nd amendment gun nut?

Probably similar to the amount of gun control advocates that want a full gun ban.

Well if that's the case then it's super relevant since half this thread has been whining about gun bans.

Yeah its probably pretty close between those who want elementary school teachers packin heat and those who want all guns banned. Both groups are insane but both groups in my opinion are getting larger as well.

Why attack what's obvious flyberbole as literal?
2% (totally pulled out of my ass)
Probably less

Still less than people whining about gun nuts

So, more guns = more murder/fear/suffering, but gun folk don't care because they want their guns. We can put a wrap on this thread.

This has been a succinct look at one side of the coin, yes.

Though more guns do not necessarily equal more murder, more guns do not necessarily mean less murder.

The other side of the coin is the more left leaning posters seem to not think of the occurrences of guns being used in a positive way for self defense.

For example in 2011 the FBI data shows 16 people died from a firearm in Alaska, how many do you think defended their life with a firearm? More than 16?

What ratio (of deaths to life saving occurrences) justifies more lenient laws towards firearm ownership for vetted lawful citizens? What ratio justifies tougher firearm laws?

Is AK data going to extrapolate well?

Great answers goofball.

Here is what you must ignore to tout your current train of thought:



1) How many times are firearms used every year to save lives or prevent a violent crime?


Vs.


2) How many times are people killed with firearms every year?

+

How many people are shot and injured every year?

Is there where we get small, self reported, surveys extrapolated out to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of self defense uses per year?

That's what is done in gun violence reports itt

That's how the FBI gathers it's data?

Somebody gotta be tracking how guns are doing in our society the correct way. Fools gonna fool.

Of course we can watch out all by our little selves with the right search terms looking for incidents across local media. Not science, duh. But something.

I am looking for a figurative number of lives saved and crimes deterred to theoretically override the obv negative side of lives lost or injured by firearms in unjustifiable ways.

I dunno, 12?