I'm sorry there must have been a misunderstanding. I don't recall saying that those 80 million people were going to kill anyone. Just that there is a higher chance of a killing happening and that that many people owning a gun, an object with one purpose, is a bit much for a single country. Now I can see that the concepts of what I am saying are far from your level of comprehension and that you shall not be swayed from this (misguided) stance. If you claim that these people who own a gun are not bad people and will not use it to kill or hurt then you don't need the gun. And please don't claim that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. I say this because the logic is rather simple. If no one had guns, then you won't need to use them in that "righteous" context. I also know that you haven't said that (Something you seem to struggle with) but I can predict that may have been one of your theories/reasonings.
There is no misunderstanding, and don't try to troll me with your unintelligable "my concepts are far from your level of comprehension" crap; you trust that 80 million people will abide by a law putting their guns away, but you don't trust them to own a gun. It's really silly of you.
But hey, so let me get this straight. You also think the government has no need for guns? I mean, obviously, your government must be filled with good people that won't harm or hurt anyone, right?
I'll turn the tables around, had you watched the video you would've realized how easy it is to pick & choose your stats. All throughout the United States where guns are banned or regulated the hardest, crime rates are up through the roof. Detroit, Atlanta, Washington D.C. (before the SCOTUS ruling against the gun ban), Los Angeles, & even throughout New York. You name it. Well, I'll go with Atlanta since I was born in the neighboring city, Kennesaw.
During the 1970s, Atlanta was beginning to see increases in gang activity. The mayor of Atlanta brought in strong gun regulations. According to your logic, that should decrease crime rate. False, because of the mayor's actions, metro-Atlanta & particularly Macon is now one of the world's largest ghettos and likewise one of the single-most dangerous ghettos in the world, also home to America's biggest drug smuggling rings. During the 1980s, where I was born - Kennesaw - the mayor made gun ownership mandatory. Despite all the gang-related activity outside of Kennesaw, both it and gun-related activity dropped all throughout Kennesaw.
Then during the 1990s, my stepmom was almost raped. Almost? So what prevented it? She was armed & trained with at least a 9mm & various other guns. My ex-fiance, a British, was raped when she was 17. In Britain. It'd never have had happened if she owned a gun. Same true with any other woman, as a matter of fact.
But it's okay, so long as no one can get a gun and let's just stop manufacturing guns altogether? No, I have a better idea. Why don't you be an example instead of shoving your foolish choices upon other people? The way I see it, the lot of you should wear a sign that says "I am gun free and I think guns are wrong & cowardly." Think I'm joking or trolling? Not one bit, some gun owner out there inevitably is going to waste resources defending someone like the gun control nuts and you'll just scold them about how you were doing just fine without their assistance when it would otherwise be put to better use defending him or herself had said person known who hates guns.
Then on the other hand, even if you got rid of all the guns - you won't see a decrease in criminal activity. There are plenty of people twice my specs that have no problem killing. People that kill cops for sport, that'll do it even without guns.
Then, we still have your governments. The very institution that is the cause for the need of gun ownership to begin with.
) his/her opinion like its the only one around.
