POLITICS Virginia a testing ground for 2020.

I am not a cop. I'm assuming you know or think not many, and thought it was rhetorical.

 

Ah. So no guesstimate?

 

There are great intellectual arguments as well regarding the volume of guns, gun ownership, and gun fatalities. This is why the gun lobby shut down gun research for more than a decade. So you could make this quip.

 

Tools still work no matter who's shed they are from.

 

But let's say every single one of them was illegally possessed. How does this favor "everything is fine as is" as a position? Or support a claim to "this is what a well-regulated militia meant"?

 

Why won't you estimate IP? C'mon. You are a smart feller, you can take a stab at this.

 

If every last one of them were illegally possessed, how would the current gun laws being proposed in VA help stop the problem?

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe the reporting of stolen firearm, maybe puts a small dent in it. But how else?

 

It got shut down because the research was being highjacked for political agendas.

It’s 30,000ish a year.

A few thousand due to violence once you strip away suicide, accidents, and justified violence.

You can also make a great intellectual arguments for having all the guns too. Not too hard to look at Hong Kong and Iran and see the true value.

 

Because the *legally* possessed firearms don't tend to be as likely to be involved in these crimes. It's the opposite take of "if you illegalize guns, only criminals will have them." Well, what if there weren't a bunch of guns readily available at all times and in any number? What if it was all treated more like a car than like a lamp?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/murder...le-nationwide-murders-trend-lower-11546615178

One of the laws proposed in VA is a limit of one hand gun purchase a month per individual. This will keep people from being professional handgun mules to circumvent DC laws. For example. And it will rarely impact any law-abiding citizen. When it does, it will be more akin to a mild inconvenience.

 

Why strip aside suicide and accidents? That sounds like a political agenda right there.

 

Let’s do London and Australia and see how that actually went

 

Ah, so I lose my right to purchase firearms because of others crimes?

 

Very well? It went very well.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/18/world/london-us-cities-homicide-rates-comparison-intl-gbr/index.html

https://www.theguardian.com/news/da...arm-laws-reduce-gun-deaths-heres-the-evidence

 

Because it’s been demonstrated that it doesn’t change from countries that don’t have gun ownership.

Men are good at punching that ticket, even if a gun isn’t available

 

No. You actually don't. You can buy any hand gun you like, every 30 days, or as many bolt action rifles as your heart desires.

 

So London didn’t just pass New York City for the first time since like the 1800’s and knife attacks have gotten so bad that the mayor of London didn’t say no citizen had a need to even be packing a knife

 

Why am I limited? What if I do want to buy one a week? I'm not the bad guy. Why should I be punished.

 

Where has this been demonstrated? Peer-reviewed research finding the opposite of what you claim is what led to the banning of federal money on this kind of research: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/guns-and-suicide/

Because it became political to do research on firearms.

 

Apples to apples: the murder rate is much lower in London. Now you're getting political, wanting to compare knife murder rates in a discussion about murder and guns.

 

Also, you are talking about cutting off the supply of guns. If you are cutting off a supply, that means, well, geez.