Don't let the gun nuts frame the debate

[geckosfeet]

35. ?

The fact is that they have nothing, and they know it.

Nice one. What does that even mean? The second amendment and over 200 years of judicial rulings and legal writings is nothing? oooooooookkkkay.

gun nuts are just people who have been indoctrinated

Unlike the author of the level headed and objective analysis in the OP

It's about passing sane laws to reduce or even eliminate (yes, it's possible. See: Japan) gun violence

You mean eliminate guns. Just say it. This is the thing that pisses me off about the grabbers. It's always about reducing this and reducing that. What they really want to do is get rid of the guns but for some reason are afraid to come out and say - so they reframe their own thinking (I think it's called cognitive dissonance) to try and convince everyone that's it's all about reducing violence.

You can walk around at night in any city in Japan and feel totally safe. Totally, completely safe. Nobody is going to shoot you there.

And in a US city you feel otherwise?

Here are some facts:
2/3 of gun deaths are suicides. Of the remaining deaths, a very large percentage (between 60% and 80% depending on the source and year) are gang and drug related, much of it concentrated in major cities with very strict gun laws. If the goal is to save lives, it would be much more fruitful to attack the causes of violence (and depression in the case of suicides) than to focus on guns.

Also consider that 10 times as many people die from tobacco each year, than are killed by firearms. 40,000 people die from second hand smoke related causes.

Roughly 100 deaths due per year to mass shooting events. According to the Insurance Journal, 200 people were killed by hitting deer with their cars. That's more than double the number of mass murder deaths.

Yet mass shootings seem to be the most popular type of tragedy leveraged by the grabbers to get an emotional foothold. Gun owners and non-gun owners all agree that an untimely death is tragic. The loss of innocents due the rampaging of madmen is even more horrific. Thankfully these kinds of tragedies are extremely rare in our country. Again, if the goal is to save lives, it would be much more fruitful to attack the causes of violence and mental illness than to focus on guns. Focus on education, economy and health services.

To reiterate - the second amendment has over 200 years of judicial precedent and rulings associated with it. I see nothing in your "reframing" that nullifies any of it.