Will this stock market madness affect cards?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by gawaintheknight

Sure, because all the European countries with stricter gun control laws, to say nothing of Japan, Canada, New Zealand or Australia, have much higher murder rates than the United States. Everyone knows that, right?

Criminals do not obey gun laws. Can you understand that if someone will kill another person, they are not going to respect laws that tell them they can't have their gun? For that matter, can you understand such a person is also not going to pay attention to a paper sign on a door that says "Guns not allowed?"

It is incredibly naive to think we can be just like Europe if only we can pass more gun laws. Law abiding people, by definition, obey such laws. Law breakers, by definition, do not. So liberals would have increased restrictions on law abiding people being able to defend themselves, they would weaken law enforcement, while criminals would sit there with big grins on their faces. So much easier to rob, beat, and steal from people when liberals have rendered them utterly defenseless.

18 murders in Chicago just this weekend. Do you really think a few more gun control laws would've prompted those murderers to stop, reconsider, and turn in their weapons instead?

[gawaintheknight]

I do not think that "we can be just like Europe if only we can pass more gun laws." I was responding to the argument that stricter gun control would make America like the Wild West by showing that other countries manage to have both strict gun control and much lower homicide rates among both the police and the general public. We would obviously need to transform our society in a lot of other ways too.

Originally Posted by Mark17

Criminals do not obey gun laws. Can you understand that if someone will kill another person, they are not going to respect laws that tell them they can't have their gun? For that matter, can you understand such a person is also not going to pay attention to a paper sign on a door that says "Guns not allowed?"

It is incredibly naive to think we can be just like Europe if only we can pass more gun laws. Law abiding people, by definition, obey such laws. Law breakers, by definition, do not. So liberals would have increased restrictions on law abiding people being able to defend themselves, they would weaken law enforcement, while criminals would sit there with big grins on their faces. So much easier to rob, beat, and steal from people when liberals have rendered them utterly defenseless.

18 murders in Chicago just this weekend. Do you really think a few more gun control laws would've prompted those murderers to stop, reconsider, and turn in their weapons instead?

[gawaintheknight]

Is it your position that gun laws are the only laws criminals don't obey? Because if your point is that criminals don't obey laws, it would seem to follow that we should not bother passing laws against murder, robbery, arson, jaywalking, etc. because criminals won't obey those either. And the same political party that argues that we can't stop gun ownership with laws seems to think that we can stop drug use and abortions with laws, although that may not be your position.

Also, there are many many cases of people who were not previously criminals committing offenses with guns - for example, roommates who have never committed crimes start to argue, the argument escalates, the gun is right there and someone ends up dead. Or people get drunk and someone decides to mess around with a gun - "don't worry, it isn't loaded" - and someone gets shot. Someone forgets to lock a drawer and their child finds their gun and tragedy happens. Many suicides happen because there's a gun that's handy and it seems like a fast and easy way out. None of these people were criminals before the gun was fired. Some of those people would find other weapons - less deadly ones - but not all of them, and the consequences would be less severe. If the gun isn't there, things end differently.

But I acknowledge that this is a pointless argument on my part because over the course of the last few decades the country has been flooded by guns and I don't think there's any realistic way to do anything about that now. We as a society have decided to accept school shootings and mass murders and serial killers in exchange for the "freedom" everyone has to get access to weapons. When Sandy Hook happened and nothing was done I gave up hope for change.

Originally Posted by Mark17

Criminals do not obey gun laws. Can you understand that if someone will kill another person, they are not going to respect laws that tell them they can't have their gun? For that matter, can you understand such a person is also not going to pay attention to a paper sign on a door that says "Guns not allowed?"

It is incredibly naive to think we can be just like Europe if only we can pass more gun laws. Law abiding people, by definition, obey such laws. Law breakers, by definition, do not. So liberals would have increased restrictions on law abiding people being able to defend themselves, they would weaken law enforcement, while criminals would sit there with big grins on their faces. So much easier to rob, beat, and steal from people when liberals have rendered them utterly defenseless.

18 murders in Chicago just this weekend. Do you really think a few more gun control laws would've prompted those murderers to stop, reconsider, and turn in their weapons instead?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by gawaintheknight

Is it your position that gun laws are the only laws criminals don't obey? Because if your point is that criminals don't obey laws, it would seem to follow that we should not bother passing laws against murder, robbery, arson, jaywalking, etc. because criminals won't obey those either. And the same political party that argues that we can't stop gun ownership with laws seems to think that we can stop drug use and abortions with laws, although that may not be your position.

Also, there are many many cases of people who were not previously criminals committing offenses with guns - for example, roommates who have never committed crimes start to argue, the argument escalates, the gun is right there and someone ends up dead. Or people get drunk and someone decides to mess around with a gun - "don't worry, it isn't loaded" - and someone gets shot. Someone forgets to lock a drawer and their child finds their gun and tragedy happens. Many suicides happen because there's a gun that's handy and it seems like a fast and easy way out. None of these people were criminals before the gun was fired. Some of those people would find other weapons - less deadly ones - but not all of them, and the consequences would be less severe. If the gun isn't there, things end differently.

But I acknowledge that this is a pointless argument on my part because over the course of the last few decades the country has been flooded by guns and I don't think there's any realistic way to do anything about that now. We as a society have decided to accept school shootings and mass murders and serial killers in exchange for the "freedom" everyone has to get access to weapons. When Sandy Hook happened and nothing was done I gave up hope for change.

right if protests were not happening there may not have been rioting...stores were just there.. and also people died, people will also die from Covid. Everything comes with costs. People want their 'freedom' on both sides of the aisle it appears. I believe more people are going to die from covid stemming from spread from protestors then the number of kids killed by guns...we will see

Giving up certain freedoms for non criminals to give up their guns comes with a cost. Its a not free lunch

you do know that you are just as likely to die from a stab wound then gunshot..crazy people can shoot people, they can also poison us in mass or send bombs in mail, crash vehicles..plug one hole with your finger, 2 more holes burst out.

can make it a bigger crime to have wrongful gun ownership and to the illegal sales of arms or wrongful sales...i would start there