So, will more guns help the gun violence and mass shootings problem, or won’t they?
You seem to want to pick and choose the people who are allowed to have them. I recall an amendment that brooked no such restrictions.
Your response makes it unclear whether you’re with me on Team Guns.
The Second Amendment is limited to those legally eligible to possess firearms. That excludes a large part of the population starting with minors, the insane, drug users, and those convicted of disqualifying crimes.
No, I’m not with you in the least, I’m on the side of people with common sense and a grip on reality.
Well, I want more guns. Clearly, you want something else.
Thanks for the discussion. I learned so much.
You don’t actually believe anyone is buying this do you? Seriously?
Okay, I’ll set a number. Each man, woman, child, and baby, each of whom should get proper training, needs ten guns.
Only then will gun-related crime, such as mass shootings, decrease, because we’ll have so many more guns, you see.
It’s the best solution.
No one other than anti gun zealots has ever offered such an argument.
I guess I’m just left assuming what your answer to my question is.
I don’t like to spend a lot of time going back and forth with someone who won’t answer, so enjoy your evening.
Which of these words exactly are you having trouble with? Be specific.
Guns in the hands of responsible people stop or deter crimes up to 2.5 million times a year but no one in their right mind would ever seriously suggest that “arming everyone” would do anything positive except for the funeral industry.
The direct answer to the direct question part. Never mind. I know that I won’t get one.
It’s no biggie.
How is this not a direct answer?
Guns in the hands of responsible people stop or deter crimes up to 2.5 million times a year but no one in their right mind would ever seriously suggest that “arming everyone” would do anything positive except for the funeral industry.
Thanks. That was an excellent reply.
It had already been posted, I just copied and pasted it again for you since you missed it the first time.
Yes, and it was excellent every time.
No, but I once was known as Samtheman. 
Ten is not “a lot.” Ten is a wannabe or a piker. I thought you meant 50 or 100 was “a lot.”
But then again, it’s pretty obvious that you don’t know much about the topic … you’re just here to stir things up.
Paranoia on display. Seems to be a theme going here.
