In light of the recent attack in San Bernardino, should there be stronger gun control legislation?

  • Yes, definitely so

    Because it works and has worked everywhere in the world. The United States has the highest violent crime rate in the world. Even more than China.

    If you argue that it's poverty and mental illness that is the cause, then you should support Obamacare and the expansion of the welfare state in order to alleviate poverty and social injustice; but if you don't and you don't want gun control; you can't have it both ways: either poverty is the cause or the proliferation of guns is the problem.

  • Yes, it should be really hard to get a gun.

    1. Make it harder to get a gun by making it almost as hard as getting a pilot license.

    2. Only high school graduates should be able to get a gun and they need to be screened and background checked before getting it.

    3. Anyone who has committed a single violent crime should not be permitted to have a gun.

    4. The penalty for owning a gun illegally should be harsher to squish the numbers in the black market. It should be over a few years in jail depending on the type.

  • Yes, I believe in light of the recent attack in San Bernardino that there should be stronger gun control legislation.

    Yes, I believe in light of the recent attack in San Bernardino that there should be stronger gun control legislation. The United States has a mass shooting crisis unmatched by any other first world country and the root of it appears to be unusually easy access to guns. Many other countries have cut their gun violence occurrences drastically by tightening their gun control legislation. Australia has banned guns altogether and has one of the lowest rates of gun violence in the world as a result.

  • Why do assault rifles need to be legal?

    Forget San Bernardino, gun control legislation should be stronger across the country. Random acts of violence would be much less tragic if it weren't legal to have thousands of rounds of ammunition, high powered rifles and access to multiples of guns. Limit the body count going forward and just let everybody have an old six-shooter.

  • How many of these mass murder occurrences does it take?

    Let us be clear, no one is trying to take anyone's right to bear arms but the general public should not have access to Ar-15 rifles or any other semi-automatic weapons. Who are you protecting yourself from with something like that? These guns are too readily available and are falling into the hands of criminals, psychopaths, and other deranged people. The screening system we use is obviously not working. A ban would stop everyone from getting a hold of them.

  • We must acknowledge our past, but not attempt to hide from our past.

    Slave ownership is a disgraceful element in the United States of America's History. We, as people, must be aware of our past, study our history, and attempt to learn from our mistakes. We must be aware of all elements of our history, in order to learn from our history. Unfortunate, hateful, and disgraceful aspects of our history cannot be whitewashed.

    The facts are: Isaac Royall was a slave owner. Isaac Royall is said to killed slaves by burning them to death. He also donated land to what would become the Harvard Law School. The Harvard Law School Seal, in part, contains three bushels of wheal. The three bushels of wheat are also contained in the Royall family crest. The Harvard Law School Seal was designated in 1936. Harvard has not attempted to hide these facts. Harvard conducted a study into this history in 2011. The study was titled: Harvard and Slavery: Seeking a Forgotten History.

    The history of the United States has different eras. What was acceptable in 1936, may not be acceptable now. If Harvard were to designate a seal for any of it's departments now, The university would not choose one linked to a slave owners family. However, in 1936, attitudes were different and I would think the university didn't even consider the future ramifications of honoring Isaac Royal.

    These issues should be used as a source of debate. We can acknowledge our past, without agreeing with, or approving of, our past. We cannot change history. We can use even the most egregious parts of history to facilitate discussion. Those discussions can lead to positive outcomes in the future. Harvard should, and has, acknowledged the history of it's law school's seal. Harvard has ownership of the seal. Harvard can determine, by it's actions, the true meaning of it's seal. Yes, the history of the seal is linked to a disgraceful period of our history, but the future of the seal can be very bright and positive. Take ownership of the seal.

  • No! Gun free zones are the most shot up places.

    If one person had a concealed weapon, the attack would have been prevented. Gun free zones are the most shot up places because the shooter knows that he is the only one with a weapon and can go unchallenged. Since 2000 a majority of shootings (92%) have taken place inside a gun free zone.

  • NO! This proves the need for more people with guns!

    If even ONE person had a ccw (concealed weapons), the Muslim extremist scum could have been stopped before they killed or hurt anyone! People go on shooting sprees in gun-free zones BECAUSE they know that no-one has a gun to stop them! Guns are like a parachute. If you need one, but don't have one, you'll never need one again!

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.