I guess it makes the world more bearable for you if you label everyone and make sweeping assumptions about their beliefs. 60% of Americans want too see stricter gun laws, this includes people across political parties. A large majority would like bans on assault weapons, which includes the armalife AR15, also know as the M16 in the military. You can argue the 2nd amendment, but I really don’t see our forefathers supporting such a weapon that is being used to kill mass citizens. I’m not a right wing or a liberal, I’m a citizen who is sick and tired of people abusing the 2nd amendment and using it against other innocent people, including children. How much worse does this have to get before something is done to help mitigate these senseless horrors?

If "gun control" laws worked Canada would be a pretty safe country. Oh wait, it is!

You keep blaming the AR 15 , ok let’s say they round up all the AR15s and destroy them. Do you think the next person that decides they want to commit one of these acts will say “ no more AR15s oh we’ll never mind” wishful thinking. That person is going to grab a .22 rifle that is semi automatic. The same outcome different weapon. Than we will have to give up or .22s the basic hunting rifle…. My point is this ban this type gun than ban that type gun, where does it end? On the other hand f we harden the security of our schools and put armed gaurds to secure the school grounds , that is a more doable idea.

I’m not against also hardening security at schools. This doesn’t just happen at schools. Five years ago 49 people were killed at a night club. We’ve had mass shootings at grocery stores churches and on and on. Where does that end? No ban will eliminate this, but we can help to mitigate it. Military type assault weapons, which are weapons designed to kill large amounts of people are for the military. Hunting rifles are not affected by this and I don’t see that ever happening.

I have a cousin who's a cop in London Ontario, Ca. who told me a lot of crimes go unreported and he cited that their press isn't free to report on crime unless it gets government permission.

If people actually do the research you can find info that isn't widely seen and never gets reported by the MSM.

From https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/gngs-cnd/index-en.aspx

Gun violence in major cities in Canada has been a growing concern, especially in Toronto, Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver and Montréal.

Gun violence is also more prevalent among street gangs that involve primarily young men less than 30 years of age.

The Drugs, Alcohol and Violence International (DAVI) study, a joint Canada-U.S. effort, provides important evidence about the relationships between gangs, guns and drugs in Toronto and Montréal. A total of 904 male students (grades 9 to 12), school dropouts and young offenders were interviewed. The results indicate that:

There is a correlation between gang presence in schools and the availability of both guns and drugs in schools.
18.7% of boys (ages 14 to 17) in Montréal and 15.1% in Toronto have brought a gun to school.
School dropouts who get involved in drug selling are at higher risk of being involved in gun-related violence.

---------------

How safe are Canadian schools when between 15 and 20 percent gang members ADMIT to bring guns to school? How many DIDN'T admit they had brought a gun to school?

While "law abiding" Canadians may not break gun laws, or have have guns that they aren't allowed to own, aren't involved in criminal activities.

The number of school age boys who have brought guns to school is troubling......and they are the SAME kind of people who wouldn't care about "gun restrictions" in the United States.

And there is no denying that Mexico, Chicago and NYC have shown that criminals don't care about gun laws.

And the idea of being able to sue gun manufactures for crimes committed while using their product that is produced legally is as ridiculous as suing a liquor manufacturer for health issues or death from using their products or an auto company for a crime or death resulting from the use of their products.

Taking away the rights of responsible people won't stop criminals from committing crimes, stop irresponsible people from from driving recklessly or drinking excessively.

Biden and Harris have talked about finding the "root cause" of foreign nationals entering the country illegally. Maybe they should try finding the root cause of the increase of hate in the country. Perhaps go back 40 years and look at what societal changes, the change in what kids have been exposed to, or not exposed to, that has caused the increase in crimes and violence.

Let’s go back to Mexico’s gun problem. Did you know that estimates show 70-90% of the guns used come from the US? We, along with other countries like Nicaragua, basically supply the cartel.

And as far as Canada goes, the number 1 source of illegal guns in Canada is the US. All roads point back to the US.

Guns don't kill people, people kill .
Anyone who wants restrictions on guns should start with Governments eliminate their guns including all law enforcement and military first. They use guns daily to kill people.

You are right, guns don't kill people, it's the bullets that kill people, and usually that bullet is set off by somebody firing a gun. So why do people not talk about restricting bullets? If they just want to own guns for target practice make the bullets non-leathel.
It would be silly for the cops and military not to have guns, do you think this is Europe and they are going to run around with Billy clubs? It's kill or be killed, and they are trained to kill to stop the threat. If you don't want to get shot then don't commit a crime. Just like in any profession their are a few bad apples like Mohammed Noor that shot right in front of his partner and killed Justine Damon, but the majority of the shooting are justified.

With your logic why aren't the bullets being charged with murder?

America is a Republic, the US Government is a legislative democracy.

A republic is self governing, whether an individual or a Corporate Body Politic.
As such in america the individual who has not knowingly, willingly, voluntarily with an intelligent act entered into an agreement to become subject to the jurisdiction of Corporate Body Politics has every right to procure what ever kind of fire power they desire, without the consent of or knowledge of Corporate Body Politics ( Governments).

Citizenship of this republic requires one to follow federal, state, and local laws. What you describe is why illegal immigration is such an issue.

Is ignorance bliss? HYE read the legal definition of " citizen" in a Blacks Law Dictionary?
I was born in america, not the US. I am not a citizen, and is recorded as such within the Federal Gov, and State of North Dakota!
Law books state " US citizens are debtors", aka indentured servants.

Label away. Tell me, what would you rather do? Watch the news, and see another school shooting?

Or read about the teachers who shut their doors, kept another school shooter out and away from their Children?

I'll criticize any teacher that doesn't use their heads.

I agree, but some here assume criticism is blame . To secure the schools and other public places would remove gun ban talking point from their agenda. So they pretend to believe banning certain weapons is the only way to stop mass shootings. They have that and the upcoming abortion ruling to drum up support for the mid-terms, but only dismal news about the economy and the increase in crime all around the country and the influx of people come here illegally and getting incentives to come here.

They keep going back to schools, blame the teacher for not locking the door. It happens more places then that. Even after you say this they deflect & say the same thing over & over. I agree with everything you're saying. Nobody needs war weapons, period.

It can, and does, happen anywhere, but it’s hard for some to move past that because it doesn’t neatly align with the “just close the door” ridiculousness. If they want to have a military weapon, join/re-enlist, I’m sure the military would be happy to have them.

Historically the NRA has backed every major gun law passed in the last 80 years. Additionally the United States Constitution in Amendment II says "shall not be infringed". The US Federal government is specifically prohibited from making ANY firearms laws. Because the Federal government IS specifically prohibited from making any gun laws, Amendment X says so are states and municipalities. It is your RIGHT to peacefully own whatever you wish. I want my constitution followed. Not part of it. Not most of it. Every word of it. As it was written a full 12 years BEFORE the ratification of the US Constitution the Declaration of Independence is protected under Amendment IX. I want it followed too. Insurrection a d armed revolt are also our right when government becomes destructive to the natural rights of man. Such as the right to peacefully immigrate wherever you choose. The right to criticize police amd government freely without reprisals. The right to not be a tax slave. The right to self defense in the manner of your choosing. The right to not be spied upon and under constant electronic surveillance.

The police in a 4 year span have killed more Americans than have died in EVERY mass shooting this country has ever had combined. Let's ban the police. Hammers according the the FBI's own statistics are used in more homicides each year than rifles. We should ban those too. And we shouldn't stop there, since heart disease and auto crashes each take more lives each year than guns do in America, we'll make those illegal too.

The ONLY thing needing banned is government itself.

Meh...
I've been called worse, by better.

Absolutely NOWHERE does the United States Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence state education to be a right. Especially public education. Funding public education is THEFT. If you can afford a child then you should be able to afford a private school for them or homeschooling. It's not my responsibility to fund your child's education any more than it is your responsibility to fund my children's education.

Is it your argument that all basic rights have to be written in the U.S. constitution to be recognized as such?

That's not accurate. There are many basic rights that are not included in the U.S. constitution. The right to vote, for example. The right to remain silent, the right to a fair trial, the right to a jury of your peers, the right to procreate, the right to privacy, etc. During Covid how many people were complaining about their rights being taken from them, when asked to wear masks in school or to get vaccinated? Obviously, things are going to come up that the framers of the constitution would never have predicted 200+ years ago. It would be very short-sighted to claim that all basic rights have have been written in the constitution in order to be considered a right.

Furthermore, education is treated as a state-protected right. Every state constitution contains some language (some more detailed than others) that mandates the creation of a public education system.

To quote you: " Funding public education is THEFT. If you can afford a child then you should be able to afford a private school for them or homeschooling. It's not my responsibility to fund your child's education any more than it is your responsibility to fund my children's education."

That's a really over-the-top comment. Most Republicans I know do support having a public education system over having an illiterate country. A population that is better educated has less unemployment, reduced dependence on public assistance programs, and greater tax revenue. Education also plays a key role in the reduction of crime, improved public health, and greater political and civic engagement.