> Last year there were 36 unintentional shootings by children of all ages in Texas.
Considering how many are intentional shootings by children of all ages this is, this is a non-story the same way the sky is blue and water is wet.
Considering how many are intentional shootings by children of all ages this is, this is a non-story the same way the sky is blue and water is wet.
Oh good grief. It is NOT a non-story. It should NEVER HAPPEN AT ALL.
But, sure, let's just keep normalizing this instead of fixing it.
> Homicides involving firearms are less common in the UK compared to those involving knives. There were 29 homicides by shooting in the year ending March 2023, representing 5% of all homicides.
the UK (population 68 million) has 7 less MURDERS BY GUN IN TOTAL, than Texas (population 30 million) has CHILDREN SHOOTING PEOPLE, SUBCATEGORY: ACCIDENTAL.
https://aoav.org.uk/2024/does-the-uk-have-a-knife-and-gun-pr....
Also, nations that are islands have a much easier time eliminating guns from their borders, once the populace agrees that they should be.
The sad part is that the U.S. has a huge population of people that still don’t think anyone else’s rights to the pursuit of happiness and peace take precedence over their constitutional right to own guns, and if Sandy Hook didn’t move the needle then I don’t see what will.
But even if they agreed to take that action my first two points pose a pretty impossible logistical task to actually remove guns from our society
Sandy Hook is just one reason why I don't own a AR-15 or other semiautomatic firearms. I'm of the opinion that no civilian (police included) needs a semiautomatic.
But I've got a .30 lever-action rifle. I usually only load it at the range. I usually only fire it at the range. I've never even aimed my weapon at another human being, despite occasionally being tempted.
I see no reason why I should allow my rights to be abridged because other people abuse theirs. The needs of the many might outweigh the needs of the few, but I do not accept that they can outweigh the rights of the individual.
At the very least, a ban on semiautomatics and bump stocks sounds like it'd reach bipartisan appeal.
I think you're assuming that Republicans are still capable of bipartisan compromise. You'll have to pardon my cynicism given recent history.
but if we wanted to do it logistically we are capable of much bigger things than removing guns from society. give everyone X amount of time to return them and then make being caught with a gun punishable by minimum of 45 years to life. once the deadline expires make a few highly publicized arrest and that’s that…
The thing is, the anti-gun people are simply unwilling to do this because their position isn't nearly as popular as they believe. There's nothing stopping them from going through that effort other than fear. If 80% of the population really did agree with them, passing an amendment to repeal the 2A should be a no-brainer for any politician that wants to get re-elected.
If majority of these 80% of people were single-issue voters and this was THE thing they cared about, it would take few election cycles but eventually this issue would carry enough clout that things would get done... of course it never will be though...
They are not fully banned here but about the only thing you can get without too much hassle in the UK is a shotgun and you need a license.
https://everytownresearch.org/maps/notanaccident/
The 36 number is inflated, as it likely includes teenagers with intent.
For those downvoting the parent comment, please do some critical reading of the article. It's conflating "children of all ages" with "toddlers". This is an absolutely trash article.
How many traffic fatalities is too many? If we lowered the maximum speed of cars to 20 mph, and that reduced fatalities by 90%, would that be worth it?
All things in life have a trade-off.
Traffic fatalities are reduced by reduced speeds, and countries in Europe tend to limit quite heavily maximum speed in urban areas so... Yes, reducing speeds to 20-30mph in most cases is worth it, the US should adopt that.
Highways can have increased speeds as they are designed for it, here in Sweden it's limited to max 90km/h in urban perimeters (~55mph) but sometimes down to 70km/h, up to 120km/h outside urban areas (~75mph). Unfortunately speed limits aren't the solution though, better driver education, better urban design which naturally limits speeds, and stricter enforcement/punishment of traffic violations all build up to safer traffic.
Traffic in the USA is murderous, reminds me much more of my native country (Brazil) than any other developed country I've ever driven at.