But the availability is disproportionate to the criminal (and negligent) usage.
You’re stating it as though there’s a direct correlation between number of guns and the number of gun deaths. Like if you plotted a line graph you’d get a nice neat trend line angling up at 45 degrees. There’s not. Our violent crime rates are trending down. Gun ownership (read as number of guns) is steadily increasing.
Australia banned guns and saw their violent crime rates increase across the board. Is it related? I don’t know that’s for people better at math than me to figure out. It’s worth noting though. Because nothing happens in a vacuum.
Other countries do have poverty and drugs… But we do it bigger and better. We don’t have a social safety net like other countries have. We don’t make it easy for the suicidal to see any reason to carry on or get help. And I’m sorry, but there aren’t meth labs providing the doses that are destroying rural and suburban lives in other countries like we’ve got here.
I want things to be better. I’m a social liberal. But growing up in a rural area is a completely different worldview than 80% of Americans have because they live in cities.
Out here, we don’t have police, we have a county sheriff, and response times, even in emergencies, can be like thirty minutes. Not everyone has the luxury of just letting the police deal with it. The police don’t patrol our streets.
The second amendment is there. Tough. Deal with it.
Also, decades of court decisions and other precedents are all there too, affirming one’s individual right to be armed, and striking down overreaching legislation.
We don’t have to be engaged in this debate. It’s over, and the gun side has won. But like I said, I want things to be better and safer for everyone.
And you call me names and insult me.
Good luck with that.