Name calling? Obtuse is an adjective. It means slow to understand. If me calling you willfully obtuse is name calling, then I am truly sorry. I am of the opinion that you are intentionally failing to recognize core truths because they invalidate parts of your argument. I didn’t call all those people ignorant and obtuse. Just you. Only you are advocating, here and now, that firearms don’t matter a bit in the face of a large professional army. Only you are advocating that missiles ignore physics to only kill one person in a group. If descriptives are name calling, then ouch, that’s got to be rough for you out in the world, buddy.
Drones shoot missiles. Into buildings, or weddings if that’s your thing, and they never just kill one chosen person unless that person is far enough away from everyone else that the explosion and shrapnel don’t reach anyone else. I can’t believe that I have to explain what missiles are and what they do. For soft targets, they use the Hellfire missile. Soft targets are unhardened buildings. This missile has around a 20 pound payload of explosive depending on the model used. That’s going to leave a mark no matter what. Your new drone must be some new top secret stuff that is only going to be used against Americans. Good to know.
I provided no less that three common knowledge examples of groups beating the largest military in the world at the time with nothing more than common hand weapons plus whatever they could steal. You still maintain it never happened. Okay then.
Smart guns. Companies have been trying for decades to get them to work. Hasn’t happened yet, movies and certain states legislation notwithstanding. Legislation has nothing to do with it. Colt and Smith and Wesson have been trying since the mid-90’s. They can make it work once, then the stress of it firing disrupts the circuits. Another company made one a few years back that would fire, but it would fire with or without the $400 RFID watch. Oops.
Oh boy, background checks. If a person walks into a gun store or a gun show, and buys a gun from a dealer, they HAVE to undergo a background check. No exceptions. No wiggle room. It happens. And it happens in Wyoming or Connecticut. When the survey that you are implicitly quoting was given, the results were that the 90% wanted this very thing. The people who wrote the survey asked leading questions and certain people misrepresented the results. This is known as a Bad Thing in the statistical world and if someone were doing actual research rather than media fodder, any review board would have thrown out their survey.
If you think that it’s the availability of guns that is the leading factor in violence, it’s not. It’s poverty. Rich people tend not to shoot each other. People without options are more likely to.
What lies are being told by this oh so mighty gun lobby? How much money do they throw around each year? You perceive something that doesn’t really exist as having so much power. It’s not the gun lobby that consistently trounces gun control at the national level each time it comes up. It’s millions of voters. What regulations are you proposing that are going to help? Many states have the “strict background checks” and it’s not really helping. Not to mention that the last national “strict background check” law was written so oddly that if I left my rifle in a safe at my father’s house to go out of town for one week, we were both guilty of a felony punishable by 5 years.
I don’t need to know your opinion on gun ownership, because that’s just something for us to argue over. You support Ladd Everett. This man swore up and down that the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War 2 was perfectly okay because the government said that it was. He also has some choice opinions on the forced relocation/genocide of Native peoples. He thinks that the government can do no wrong, ever. He’s not a crusader for safety, he’s a statist who thinks that once the dust settles, he will be the one holding the clipboard.