You should be able to own assault rifles, rocket launchers and even a tank if you can afford one and pass their tests.

US Fatality Statistics (2010) Septicemia: 34,812 Cancer: 574,743 Diabetes: 69,071 Major cardiovascular diseases: 780,213 Influenza and pneumonia: 50,097 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis: 31,903 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis: 50,476 Renal failure: 44,362 Complications of pregnancy and childbirth: 12,128 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Transport accidents (car, plane etc.): 37,961 Falls: 26,009 Accidental discharge of firearms: 606 Accidental poisoning and exposure to noxious substances: 33,041 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Intentional self-harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms: 19,392 Intentional self-harm (suicide) by other and unspecified means and their sequelae: 18,972 Assault (homicide): 16,259 Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms: 11,078 Assault (homicide) by other and unspecified means and their sequelae: 5,181 Drug-induced deaths: 40,393 Alcohol-induced deaths: 25,692 Injury by firearms: 31,672 Total deaths: 2,468,435 Gun related deaths: 31,076

[quote] Point is, learn the definition, because if you don't agree with some sort of gun control, you basically believe in anarchy. [/quote] /facepalm Also as someone once said [quote]"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." [/quote] I wonder how many will know who.

'Freedom -blam!- yeah!' Is why crime rates are so high.

Anti gun people always say that gun prohibition will decrease crime rates. Meth is illegal, but it is still widely sold. The same thing will happen with guns. Criminals will still have access to them. And that means that law abiding citizens will be defenseless.

[quote]I don't want to pull the race card, but someone please justify this.[/quote] Our brains are -blam!-ed up. I'm reminded of an article that I read that looked at lawsuits and found a higher acquittal rates the more people were effected. We care more about individuals than the masses. It's almost like we just simple can not comprehend thousands or hundreds of thousands of people hurt every year.

Do you think the government wants citizens to have any power for themselves? The government will keep making gun control stricter and stricter until it is impossible for ordinary citizens to own guns. The proposed liability insurance mandate is an example.

It's still the government having control over us

Unfortunately, much "gun control" proposals as of late, include things such as restricting magazine size, banning guns with collapsible stocks, pistol grips, and other minor things. this accomplishes nothing and only serves to piss off and annoy gun owners, by inhibiting the use of their guns. I agree with things like background checks, and things of that nature before being able to get a gun, but alot of what's been going around lately, is either "hur dur, ban guns with this or this attached, durrr" or rawrrrrr ban all guns blarrr!"

Guns are good = http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163785/Phoenix-boy-14-shoots-intruder-pulled-gun-babysitting-siblings.html Enough said.

I wonder if anyone notices that the background checks that we have to go through to get a firearm. That's a form of gun control. I'm more for stronger gun control. I can literally go up to a gun store, ask them for a rifle and they'll just give it to me without question.

I know exactly what gun control means. Its not about guns, its about control. Look at every other country in history that has attempted gun control or other forms of weaponry, and see what happened to them.

Because people like Senator Frankenstein in California actually want a ban on all weapons in the US. They can't get that so they ban and try to limit the access to any firearm they can. They still want a universal ban on all firearms though. I don't like gun control because it's still a limit on the second amendment. If there was a large push to limit the first amendment in order to make it illegal to offend people, would you support it? I mean, it makes people feel nice and safe and it's not a ban on speaking. Dumping my lolGun Control folder: http://imgur.com/a/JBwxT [quote]Thousands of people who live in cities are killed by guns each year (including hundreds of children), and the public makes a huge display of Newtown. I don't want to pull the race card, but someone please justify this.[/quote]Because the media tells them to make a huge display of Newtown. The government doesn't actually care about what happened there, but they see it as a way to scare people into thinking that "this could happen where you live, this could be your children". It's all to scare people into thinking that guns are super scary things that have no place at all in our world. Look at the CSGV, they use the deaths of people who died because of firearms and they use them for their own agenda, they don't give two shits about any other victim because they can't use them for their own goals. [quote]Point is, learn the definition, because if you don't agree with some sort of gun control, you basically believe in anarchy.[/quote]lel no. Please, learn the definition of Anarchy before trying to use it against people. Saying that the government shouldn't have any intrusion into what firearms we should have access to is not the same as saying that there should be no government. Don't go throwing red herrings into the mix.

Gun control will never work. If someone wants to, they will always be able to get a gun and use it for something illegal. Simply put. Guns at this point are so deeply embedded within america. That anyone who thinks that they have any chance at "Controlling" them. Needs a reality check. What we are seeing now is politicians trying to polish up their public image in order to push their other agendas.

The past century has been increasingly intrusive gun control. Why is it not reasonable to think they will eventually ban guns all together? Many of the legislators proposing the gun control bills have publicly stated they eventually want a ban on less deadly weapons. The causes have yet to be addressed. The only thing that has been proposed are legislation that MIGHT reduce death in shootings which are in themselves very uncommon. And the the media reporting on shootings makes copy cats incredibly likely. In fact, Lanza committed the shooting just after the mall shooting in Oregon which likely set him into motion to commit the killing.

Unfortunately, in the recent debates "gun control" has been equated with banning certain types of firearms. [quote]Tens of thousands of people who live in cities are killed by guns a year (including hundreds if not thousands of children)[/quote]Uh. . . only 10,000 per year. And less than 4% were under the age of 17.