Ok so there are people still harping about sandy hook and the batman shooting so I just wanted to post this and make it known. I hope some of you will use atleast some of this information. Rifles each year kill less than 500 people, that is rifles of ANY type. Most gun violence is due to gang on gang violence or gang related violence. Thugs do NOT get their guns legally. If guns were banned why would they turn them in, after all they dont follow the law. Why could more guns not be imported from mexico? Mexican cartels have no problem smuggling large amounts of cocaine across the border, or under it. Not only that but it seems these people have no memory of the crazy people who used bombs to kill people, most of the time much more successfully. I will post some examples, forgive me for using wiki but you can google the names/ information and verify that it is right. (I did with some of them just to be sure)
1910, 1 October: Los Angeles Times bombing by a member of the International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers Union killed 21 people and
injured an additional 100.
1955, 1 November: A bomb aboard United Airlines Flight 629 explodes killing all 44 on board, seen as a copycat incident to Canadian Pacific Air Lines Flight 108.
1962, 22 May: Continental Airlines Flight 11 explodes and crashes near Unionville, Missouri, killing all 45 on board (the only initial survivor succumbed to injuries later in hospital) after it was determined to be a suicide committed as insurance fraud.
1920, 16 September: Wall Street bombing killed 38 people and wounded 300 others
There are even more, so my question is, why are they so unrealistic with these laws. Law abiding people dont go around shooting people for their amusement. Even if guns were banned its NOT hard to make a bomb, just look at all the 13 year old kids on youtube playing with high explosives. Do they really think they are going to stop horrible events by banning guns? I have a question tho. They bring up that the gov has tanks and planes and etc and that we would stand no chance, I disagree adamantly, I use syria, afgan, iraq and vietnam as an example but is there anyother examples i could use (that dosent leave a bad taste in my mouth? I have nothing but the utmost respect for veterans and our fallen soldiers along with thoes currently in uniform)
1910, 1 October: Los Angeles Times bombing by a member of the International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers Union killed 21 people and
injured an additional 100.
1955, 1 November: A bomb aboard United Airlines Flight 629 explodes killing all 44 on board, seen as a copycat incident to Canadian Pacific Air Lines Flight 108.
1962, 22 May: Continental Airlines Flight 11 explodes and crashes near Unionville, Missouri, killing all 45 on board (the only initial survivor succumbed to injuries later in hospital) after it was determined to be a suicide committed as insurance fraud.
1920, 16 September: Wall Street bombing killed 38 people and wounded 300 others
There are even more, so my question is, why are they so unrealistic with these laws. Law abiding people dont go around shooting people for their amusement. Even if guns were banned its NOT hard to make a bomb, just look at all the 13 year old kids on youtube playing with high explosives. Do they really think they are going to stop horrible events by banning guns? I have a question tho. They bring up that the gov has tanks and planes and etc and that we would stand no chance, I disagree adamantly, I use syria, afgan, iraq and vietnam as an example but is there anyother examples i could use (that dosent leave a bad taste in my mouth? I have nothing but the utmost respect for veterans and our fallen soldiers along with thoes currently in uniform)
Last edited: