General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: MENTALLY ILL MENTALLY ILL MENTALLY ILL [View all]Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)then their access to guns would be easy, quick and unimpeded. So, why should a solution target the non-threatening but ignore the factor that actually leads to rampage killings?
Heck, this debate has gotten so disingenuous that those seeking an assault rile ban are seeking to ban a weapon that was not used in Aurora, Sandy Hook, Fort Hood, Arizona and was already illegal during Columbine. However, prior to these rampages people, including people in positions of authority were sounding warning alarms. It seems that few if any of these acts are spontaneous.
Banning guns is not legal and yet those who want to ban guns give the same sad excuses as those who want to perpetuate the War on Drugs, which were the same excuses that brought us Prohibition. The mere deabte of a gun ban has sent sales skyrocketing, proving the demonstrable absurdity of the idea.
And think about that. They're buying because of the idea of a ban. That means they will not be surrendering their weapons and if you try to force them you will validate their every talking point about "gun grabbers" trying to impose tyranny.