"What is wrong" was already asked....

The majority were not given back. Some were destroyed in front of their owners. One story mentioned a pearl handled .22 cal pistol given by a father to a daughter, that was smashed in the street.

 

I had to use one of my guns yesterday. A gang of grey squirrels been stripping a maple tree near the house of all it's bark, about the top 20' of it is down to white wood, every branch. These must have been the lazy squirrels that didn't hide enough acorns to get through the winter. I'm not too good with a slingshot, sure hope the gov'ment don't come for my guns.

 

I saw that one on the video, made me mad that they smashed the guns on the spot. At least they didn't beat up the people like they did that little old granny....ol' granny did look a bit wiry though.

 

What guns? I thought you gave them all to your neighbors?;0) Reminds me of that story about the Liberal driving through Montana. See's a man with a tie dye rainbow t-shirt, peace sign on the back, being attacked by a bear. Suddenly, out of nowhere, three Montana hunters show up, shoot the bear, and rescue the man. The Liberal is so impressed he stops his car runs down and tells the men what a brave, and fantastic, rescue he just witnessed, and how everything he had heard about Montana conservatives hating liberals must be a lie. He leaves them with his heart felt thank you and jumps back in his car to continue his trip. "What was that guy yammering on about?" asks one of the Montana hunters as he dusts off the man with the tie-dye shirt and checks him for punctures and scratches. "I am not really sure" says the second hunter "He was talking pretty fast". The third hunter says "are you guys about done cleaning up our bait?"

 

All this stuff about driving to Indiana from Chicago is BS! You can't buy a gun out of state at a reputable shop. Can you buy it on the street? You bet. Is it legal? Not if you're from out of state. Can you buy a gun on the street in Chicago? You bet your "we're not the problem butt!". I'm sick of Chicago blaming Indiana for their crime rate!

And also, the US isn't the only country suffering from mass shootings. I'm looking at you Canada...

 

Well, since you brought Canada into this and are apparently looking...let's all have a look!

I haven't actually compared shootings in Canada and the US before. Wikipedia has a list for each country. I'm not sure how complete these lists are but I'll use the data and then everyone who disagrees can find reasons to exclude it. If there is better data around, I am curious to see how it looks.

So here's a couple of lists of shootings since 1980- US on the left, Canada on the right:

There are some obvious differences. It looks like a bigger list for Canada, but it isn't. It's actually a bit tough to compare the data, because depending on what you consider to be a "mass" shooting, perhaps virtually all of the Canadian shootings but one should be excluded. If one person is shot in a school in Canada, it's on the list. I guess the Canada list is a list of killings of more than one person, or any fatal shooting in a school.

If you draw the line at, say, 10 people, the Canada list only has one item for a total of 15 people, while the US has 21 for a total of 422 killed. There is roughly 10X the population in the US so you would expect more for sure, but the data clearly shows far more than 10X the mass shooting fatalities, and also far worse individual mass shootings.

You could move the limit down to 5 people, but I would imagine the list would get pretty long for the US if you actually had this data, and even longer if you used the same criteria of "more than one person, or any fatal shooting in a school."

So, what does the data say to you?

Why would shootings in Canada produce so many fewer fatalities? We don't have people carrying guns all over the place to bring down the crazies. Everywhere is a gun-free zone where these shootings are rife. You would think it would be mass-killing heaven here.

I think we are largely similar people. Similar lifestyles. Similar opportunities. Similar problems. So what is the difference?

 

Everything I read says "long guns" only

 

The US is a completely different situation than any other country. Plain and simple guns have ALWAYS been part of our society. That won't change. There are currently over 300 million legally owned firearms in the US. It wasn't originally intended to be discussed at all in the constitution but was added as an amendment to appease people and get the votes necessary.

That said, this current argument/situation has less to do with guns than gummie bears. If you start to argue about guns, you've been distracted. The end point of that argument is "NO GUNS", except the government. Start there and work backwards.

But, since guns are the culprit in so many killings, even in Canada and chicago, where they're soooo illegal and hard to get shouldn't we try to protect the kids? Guns laws...well, didn't you already win that argument? Aren't guns already outlawed in schools? When did that happen? WHY did that happen? Was there an incident or was that a concession? Where do most mass shootings happen, even in Canada?

 

Guns were a part of every country. The others just had the good sense to ban them and the results speak for themselves. There is no need for an individual to have a gun other then hunting or sport target shooting. No the second amendment does not say you can, read it. If you think you need a gun to protect yourself from the government or anyone else for that matter then we live in a different country or you have way to many enemies. It would be nice for gun owners to for once stand up and say that "they like guns" and stop with the excuses. Admit they are dangerous and take responsibility for being part of the problem. The next step would be to stop resisting all restrictions on ownership. If guns were highly regulated and restricted, we'd all be a lot safer. Lastly stop with the "law abiding" gun owner bs. Everyone is law abiding until there not. Every gun owner is one trigger pull away from a horrible accident or a crime. Guns provide the means.

 

Thanks for helping make my point. That's why this isn't an argument about how to help solve the problem. It's only about banning guns. So, now that we're there, how do you propose to take them? This isn't a challenge about "take them from my cold dead hands", far from it. What needs to happen is honesty which you have given. You want no guns. So, since there are already millions...just in the US, how will you go get em?

Also, you might want to delete this post.

"Every gun owner is one trigger pull away from a horrible accident or a crime."
...omg....what about bumpstocks!?

You just labeled millions of people as murderers in waiting. I think you might have overstepped. What with all the military folks, collectors, COPS, government officials, etc...

Technically, you're admitting to being a criminal as well. Now we just need to figure out which type you are... If we're all just criminals...well, then we need someone to decide who should...wait..no...this is starting to take a nasty turn isn't it....

 

Now, since we're all squared away on what the issue is, lets open the discussion to reasonable and feasible solutions to nutjobs (every gun owner in the world) entering our schools and other gun free zones.

Go....

(this argument reminds me of a few years back when people were opposed to sex education in schools. Some were so upset and opposed to teachers bringing it up. Then we distributed condoms and discussed their usage. People were upset. The argument against them was, "...don't stick your head in the sand, it's going to happen! At least this way we'll protect them!" Yes, they yelled that

 

Arm the schools!

 

??????????????????????????????

 

Any truth to this and the reason for lack of real government produced statistics in the US?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/wor...-calls-to-dismantle-barriers-to-gun-violence/

 

And is this all fake? If so, where are the real stats:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts

 

Here are the Statistics Canada stats for 2016:

Firearm homicides increase for third year in a row

For the third consecutive year, there was an increase in both the number and rate of firearm-related homicides in Canada. In 2016, there were 223 firearm-related homicides reported, 44 more than the previous year. This represents a rate of 0.61 firearm-related homicides per 100,000 population, the highest rate since 2005. In 2016, 54% of firearm-related homicides were related to gang activity. This compares with 43% in the previous year, and represents the highest proportion since 2009. The largest increases in the number of gang-related homicides committed with a firearm were reported in Ontario (+22) and British Columbia (+12), with the majority of these occurring in Toronto and Vancouver. With a total of 30, Toronto saw 18 more gang-related homicides committed with a firearm than in 2015. Vancouver's count increased by 6, to 16.

That is from this document produced by our Federal Government statistics agency. Anyone know where to get the US numbers so we can dispel some fake news?

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/171122/dq171122b-eng.pdf

 

My state constitution provides, “The right of the citizens to bear arms, in defense of themselves and the State, shall not be questioned.” My state-issued carry permit lists “self defense” in the box labeled “reason for carry.” I had to go through a lengthy process to obtain the permit, including a records check, providing references, and interviewing with a police officer. I have used a gun twice to defend my wife and myself from would-be attackers, who were strangers to us. Fortunately, I did not need to pull the trigger either time. The sound of the slide being pulled back and the sight of a red laser dot were enough to make them turn and walk the other way. In both instances, we called the police, who showed up about ten minutes later, took our statements, and said they would investigate. Nothing ever came of the investigations. One of the investigating officers told us we were well within our rights to defend ourselves, and having a gun was the only reason we did not end up badly harmed or dead, since the police could not have arrived quickly enough to defend us.