If the Government took most of our guns would we be any safer?

ask the Apache and Navajo...

Not no but, Hell no!
https://giovanniworld.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/biggun_edited.jpg

No.

Oh, Hell no!

My answer is no and there are a lot of reasons that support my answer.

I think it's funny when conservatives can't argue a simple point.

IN this case the point is gun laws should be a little tighter so that the wrong people don't have an easy time getting guns. But you either did not have skill or desire to argue against that. I don't blame you i't hard to make an argument against that.

So instead you made up a fake, phony argument, to argue against. It's an argument that nobody is making and has no realistic place in the debate.

"Should the government take MOST OF OUR GUNS AWAY".

Now nobody is making this argument
Nobody is suggesting it
Liberals disagree with taking everyone's guns away.

So why waste everyone's time arguing against a proposal that NOBODY ANYWHERE has proposed?

Do you not have the skill to make a case against reasonable regulation of gun purchases, sales, and carrying laws?

No! We would all be a lot safer if we would all go on line and buy the material to make revolving barrel high power lasers rifles right know before someone removes all that good stuff. From the public!


Guns run out off bullets but 12 barrel lasers rifels while a bit expensive to make will erase a team from in front of your house when they come to demand your guns from you!

It's not science fiction it's about 35 thousand to make. Learn and do while you still can.

Only an idiot would think more guns or even less guns solves the problem of safety in the US!
The problem is often defined as-
Gun Violence
If you take away the gun- violence still remains.
Add more guns (Gun violence gun) and a portion of the problem doubles.
But take away the violence and guns are no problem!
Gun violence gun- happens any time an active shooter is shot or shot at. It is pretty much accepted that to stop a violent act- violence must be used. It I called meeting force with like force. As long as the violence has a gun in it- the only opposing force of recognized strength to neutralize it is a gun!
Factually as long as gun technology remains- those that want to commit acts of violence will have them!
Iran for one is more then will and capable of supplying weapons to any one who will fight our government!

Let's flip that question around. If having guns is somehow safer then why is it that we haven't seen a drop in violence in the US even though it has the most guns of any developed country?
Why aren't places like Uganda and Afghanistan safer than places like Japan, Sweden, and the UK? They have many, many more guns, but at seems like the killing is much more common there. Now tell me; where would you rather go? I'd go with the Sweds any day.
Do you realize that since the Sandyhook shooting in 2013 more people have died from only mass shootings than the American deaths in this current war? And it's not just by a small margen either. 20 times more people have died here from mass shootings in 3 years then all of the solders who've died in this 15 year war. This country has become a war zone and we are all so numb to it.

No one is suggesting the taking of guns from law-abiding Americans. What is being suggested is tightening the laws to keep guns out of the wrong hands. For example, people who are on the terrorist watch list and cannot fly as long as they are on that list can still purchase guns. Common sense says that this should not be the case but Republicans in Congress voted down a law that would have made it impossible for a person on a terrorist watch list to buy a gun. The NRA wields so much power over Republicans that this and other common-sense measures cannot be adopted.

less lives would be taken

people would fight instead like they did back n da days

Of course. There is a definite correlation between having a gun and shooting and not having a gun and not shooting.
Unfortunately it's not that simple. There is that pesky Constitutional protection.