I own several guns, Glock 42, Winchester 22LR, Winchester 12 gauge, AR-15. I consider myself liberal and progressive. Don't get me wrong I really like shooting my guns, but I don't value the 1 time a month I go shooting my AR over the lives of children. If the US implemented a buyback program I would gladly do that for the greater good of our children.

I think its ridiculously too easy for people to get guns and I am all for stricter regulations even if it means I no longer qualify to own mine.

slush8'Banning a certain firearm or certain size magazine might stop a few mass shootings, yeah. But at what cost?'

I mean what! Read what you have just written, then go back and read it again until you get some sense of morality. If you think people's right to a certain gun trumps children's and innocent people's safety you may need to rethink your mindset.

Sandyhook, Pulse, Las Vegas, Columbine, Parkland were all carried out using AR-15s

Mental Health and AR-15s. There's a link here. Spend money on mental healthcare and ban AR-15s

Banning the sale of them doesn't do jack. There's so many that the only way to EFFECTIVELY stop mass shootings is to round up EVERY SINGLE AR (and AKs, which do more damage) and large capacity magazine in the country. Have you given any thought to the millions of dollars it would cost to get the legislation passed to make this possible? I guarantee it would go to the supreme court. It would cost millions (maybe billions taking into account the efficiency of our govt) before it even takes place. Then once the $&^%show of rounding up all the guns begins it will cost hundreds of millions more. And you know what, I bet more people would die in the actual confiscation of the firearms than have been killed in mass shootings in the past century. It would be an actual war. Banning the sale of new ARs doesn't fix the "problem." You have to do something extreme to stop this madness. Argue that.

milk_manBan the sale of new semi-automatic firearms or ban them altogether and make it illegal to own one?

The sale of new ones would be a good start. Probably limit resale of existing, not sure how that would go. Have owners report that they own them possibly make them go through something similar to people that own fully automatic weapons go through in order to keep them. Something along those lines.

TOAST.The sale of new ones would be a good start. Probably limit resale of existing, not sure how that would go. Have owners report that they own them possibly make them go through something similar to people that own fully automatic weapons go through in order to keep them. Something along those lines.

I actually do like the idea minus making them go through what it takes to own an automatic. The only problem is that unless you make it a crime to own it, tons of people don't want the government or anyone else to know what firearms they own

TOAST.The sale of new ones would be a good start. Probably limit resale of existing, not sure how that would go. Have owners report that they own them possibly make them go through something similar to people that own fully automatic weapons go through in order to keep them. Something along those lines.

The critical piece of information that you and most others do not understand (and certainly no disrespect to you) is that an AR is an entirely modular rifle. As such, simply "banning ARs" is tremendously difficult. Anyone at all can purchase the required parts, a few basic tools (hand tools), and build an AR in their own home in the course of a few hours. No technical or machining knowledge is required. Here's a walkthrough: https://www.midwayusa.com/general.mvc/index/how-to-build-ar-15-rifle

I believe there are a few NSers who have built ARs. I hope this clarifies things a bit for you and helps you understand why "banning ARs" is nowhere near as simple as it sounds.

iFlipThe critical piece of information that you and most others do not understand (and certainly no disrespect to you) is that an AR is an entirely modular rifle. As such, simply "banning ARs" is tremendously difficult. Anyone at all can purchase the required parts, a few basic tools (hand tools), and build an AR in their own home in the course of a few hours. No technical or machining knowledge is required. Here's a walkthrough: https://www.midwayusa.com/general.mvc/index/how-to-build-ar-15-rifle

I believe there are a few NSers who have built ARs. I hope this clarifies things a bit for you and helps you understand why "banning ARs" is nowhere near as simple as it sounds.

Wow that's a good point, I didn't think of that... It's one thing to ban the weapon, but to ban all the parts necessary to build it would be near impossible. I guess if they banned anything it would be the action itself. Kind of funny that in Minnesota and other states the lower is what you have to be 21 to buy. Even tho it doesn't contain anything mechanical

iFlipThe critical piece of information that you and most others do not understand (and certainly no disrespect to you) is that an AR is an entirely modular rifle. As such, simply "banning ARs" is tremendously difficult. Anyone at all can purchase the required parts, a few basic tools (hand tools), and build an AR in their own home in the course of a few hours. No technical or machining knowledge is required. Here's a walkthrough: https://www.midwayusa.com/general.mvc/index/how-to-build-ar-15-rifle

I believe there are a few NSers who have built ARs. I hope this clarifies things a bit for you and helps you understand why "banning ARs" is nowhere near as simple as it sounds.

The individual parts still need to be manufactured and correct me if im wrong but the firing mechanism components would still solely be used for a semiautomatic firearm. Are single shot ARs a thing and if it is i wouldnt have a problem, my gripe is solely with semi automatic firearms and any magazine that holds more than 6 shots.

TOAST.The individual parts still need to be manufactured and correct me if im wrong but the firing mechanism components would still solely be used for a semiautomatic firearm. Are single shot ARs a thing and if it is i wouldnt have a problem, my gripe is solely with semi automatic firearms and any magazine that holds more than 6 shots.

You are correct, the "lower" is the part that is usually purchased with a serial number to make it legal. However, this can very easily be gotten around. I'm not sharing any secrets here - this information is all very widely available online. To circumvent the serial number/possible traceability of an AR, one may purchase what is known as an "80% lower." This is explained here: https://www.80-lower.com/blogs/80-lower-blog/how-to-build-your-own-ar-15-legally-and-unregistered

Essentially, it would be tantamount to impossible to ban the manufacture and sale of AR parts. What could potentially be banned is semi-automatic, non-rimfire rifle ownership. The problem with this is that long guns (rifles, shotguns) are not registered. A law that forbade the ownership of semi-automatic, non-rimfire rifles would immediately make criminals out of literally millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans. Gun owners are very, very unlikely to surrender their legally-acquired rifles. Making criminals out of good Americans through legislation must be carefully considered. Unfortunately the media does not present the above information, simply calling for a ban on ARs without any insight into what this would actually entail.

iFlipThe critical piece of information that you and most others do not understand (and certainly no disrespect to you) is that an AR is an entirely modular rifle. As such, simply "banning ARs" is tremendously difficult. Anyone at all can purchase the required parts, a few basic tools (hand tools), and build an AR in their own home in the course of a few hours. No technical or machining knowledge is required. Here's a walkthrough: https://www.midwayusa.com/general.mvc/index/how-to-build-ar-15-rifle

I believe there are a few NSers who have built ARs. I hope this clarifies things a bit for you and helps you understand why "banning ARs" is nowhere near as simple as it sounds.

Yeah but you said it yourself. “Most others do not understand”.

youre right, most people don’t understand. And you’re also right, anyone could purchase the parts, but most don’t realize they can do that, and maybe building a rifle will spark some questions with the people around them if there are any.

i still think we should make it harder to get guns/parts for guns.

iFlipYou are correct, the "lower" is the part that is usually purchased with a serial number to make it legal. However, this can very easily be gotten around. I'm not sharing any secrets here - this information is all very widely available online. To circumvent the serial number/possible traceability of an AR, one may purchase what is known as an "80% lower." This is explained here: https://www.80-lower.com/blogs/80-lower-blog/how-to-build-your-own-ar-15-legally-and-unregistered

Essentially, it would be tantamount to impossible to ban the manufacture and sale of AR parts. What could potentially be banned is semi-automatic, non-rimfire rifle ownership. The problem with this is that long guns (rifles, shotguns) are not registered. A law that forbade the ownership of semi-automatic, non-rimfire rifles would immediately make criminals out of literally millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans. Gun owners are very, very unlikely to surrender their legally-acquired rifles. Making criminals out of good Americans through legislation must be carefully considered. Unfortunately the media does not present the above information, simply calling for a ban on ARs without any insight into what this would actually entail.

It's not the AR that is the problem. Just gotta ban high capacity magazines for all rifles, that's all. limit them to 5 rounds, no exceptions.

eheathThis is a HUGE thing that pro-gun people try to exploit and its absolutely bullshit. We need to update the 2nd amendment to reflect current society, thats the real problem here. You could have 100 automatic rifles in your house, it's not stopping the US government.

You mean my 12 gauge isn't gonna win a revolution for me?

RusticlesIt's not the AR that is the problem. Just gotta ban high capacity magazines for all rifles, that's all. limit them to 5 rounds, no exceptions.

Someone could do exactly what these mass shooters have done with 5 round mags. You just have to carry more and be able to drop them quick. But yeah it is a much more feasible idea to ban the sale of new "high" capacity mags. I put high in quotations because a 30 round mag is tiny compared to a 60 round drum

milk_manSomeone could do exactly what these mass shooters have done with 5 round mags. You just have to carry more and be able to drop them quick. But yeah it is a much more feasible idea to ban the sale of new "high" capacity mags. I put high in quotations because a 30 round mag is tiny compared to a 60 round drum

Not a liberal, just wanted to chime in and say there is no way an untrained teenager is drop swapping fast enough to get the same amount of bullets down range as a larger magazine would allow him to.

You guys realize that buy back programs are usually voluntary, so the people selling back are once again normal, not sick in the head, types of folks. They would have to make it REALLY enticing for all Americans to sell back their semiauto weapons. Like pay 500% more per gun than its purchase price would probably convince most people, but these buyback programs are unaffordable at this scale. And there will still be holdouts on selling. People are going to say, well my gun isn't going to be in a mass shooting, so what is the point of taking it? I mean it's not like guns have legs to walk and pull the triggers themselves. Consider that back in 2013 (sorry couldn't find more recent data) Americans owned legally more than 300 million guns, which I'd bet at least half are semiauto. That number is probably double now.

And what happens when we take away all semiauto weapons? Well.... People will start using shotguns (like the navy shooting) and bolt action rifles (like the Texas University shooting way back when) and knives or even learn to make bombs from household items or start running folks over with cars. These events will continue to happen regardless of the tool used to inflict damage.

We need to focus on mental health. Yeah yeah yeah you can say there were 200+ mass shootings, but really those numbers include gang activity and domestic violence. The news'criteria for a mass shooting is any shooting where 2+ people were shot or died. Those numbers aren't what makes the news and what's spurring these debates. The mass shootings that make the news and are causing panic about ar-15s are caused my crazy people with deep psychological issues, many of which had plenty of warning signs (except the Las Vegas guy). They are few and far between, but also terrible when they happen. Fix mental health and accessibility to guns and you'll fix this problem.

No shit. The reason switzerland requires its citizens to own guns and still has the lowest murder rate in the world is bc they are almost completely conservative/libertarian and this engenders responsibility.

NSdiedWOdlnNo shit. The reason switzerland requires its citizens to own guns and still has the lowest murder rate in the world is bc they are almost completely conservative/libertarian and this engenders responsibility.

Snopes says you're wrong, but A+ on the fake news attempt.

I don't understand why it is a right to bear arms a thing in the first place. I get self defense, but why didn't we just pass laws that gave police less power to balance with the people vs giving people more power. We don't elect random people into office because they aren't qualified, same should be with guns. If I was the president, I would just get rid of all guns, including police officers besides maybe a certain amount of chiefs per capita or something. Only issue is that there have been so many guns produced that people have easy access to them. Therefore, gun bans won't work, rather the opposite would. My friend suggested that we give old unemployed veterans who are mentally stable a gun and staff two or three of them in every school. It is so sad that this is an issue, maybe i will just move to Europe or Canada or something

The.FishIf I was the president, I would just get rid of all guns

You clearly have absolutely no comprehension of how our country's politics and laws work.

The.Fishmaybe i will just move to Europe or Canada or something

You clearly have no understanding of how Europe's and Canada's immigration policies work.

iFlipYou clearly have absolutely no comprehension of how our country's politics and laws work.

You clearly have no understanding of how Europe's and Canada's immigration policies work.

tbh idk why i even posted because i knew i would get destroyed

Part of me wants to cogently and respectfully talk through the mass shooting issue with people on all sides of the debate (which is clearly impossible), and part of me just wants to see a worldwide battle royale where everyone is handed a 1911, and last human standing wins. It's what we fucking deserve at this point, that's for sure.

The.FishI don't understand why it is a right to bear arms a thing in the first place. I get self defense, but why didn't we just pass laws that gave police less power to balance with the people vs giving people more power. We don't elect random people into office because they aren't qualified, same should be with guns. If I was the president, I would just get rid of all guns, including police officers besides maybe a certain amount of chiefs per capita or something. Only issue is that there have been so many guns produced that people have easy access to them. Therefore, gun bans won't work, rather the opposite would. My friend suggested that we give old unemployed veterans who are mentally stable a gun and staff two or three of them in every school. It is so sad that this is an issue, maybe i will just move to Europe or Canada or something

This is a Constitutional Amendment. The President can't just say "no more guns." It is one of our founding rights under the Constitution. This is bigger than just a single President or Congress. I'm genuinely curious as to what "give police less power to balance" and how that would result in less gun violence.

Your analogy with elected officials is dead wrong. We have a president that has no political qualifications what so ever and he got elected (not making a political post as to whether or not I like the guy) its fact that he has no political qualifications.

Also, no law-abiding citizen NEEDS a gun for self-defense. They may WANT it, but the reality is, nobody NEEDS one.

TheHamburglarAlso, no law-abiding citizen NEEDS a gun for self-defense. They may WANT it, but the reality is, nobody NEEDS one.

Bull shit. I live in a rural area. If I call the cops to come and help me, realistically they are 30 to 45 min out if I'm lucky. Same with Fire and EMS. I have a gun for the same reason I have a first aid kit and a fire extinguisher. Do I need an AR, no. I'm ga damn surgical with my 12 gauge. Now that being said. Am I worried about someone coming out to my property and starting shit.....

Na... But if they do.... I have a rep to uphold.

All I want is a Gay married couple to be able to protect their weed crops with guns.... Is that too much to ask?

The.FishI don't understand why it is a right to bear arms a thing in the first place. I get self defense, but why didn't we just pass laws that gave police less power to balance with the people vs giving people more power. We don't elect random people into office because they aren't qualified, same should be with guns. If I was the president, I would just get rid of all guns, including police officers besides maybe a certain amount of chiefs per capita or something. Only issue is that there have been so many guns produced that people have easy access to them. Therefore, gun bans won't work, rather the opposite would. My friend suggested that we give old unemployed veterans who are mentally stable a gun and staff two or three of them in every school. It is so sad that this is an issue, maybe i will just move to Europe or Canada or something

To protect yourself from a tyrannical government....thats why we have the second amendment... have you ever read a fucking history book. When you ban automatic weapons, which are already banned illegal i might ad... what do you think it's going to do - Clearly nothing since people can get their hands on them without much trouble. Then remember as you begin to take away more and more pretty soon all guns will be illegal and then we're all really in trouble because the bad people will still have them and you will not.

snowpocalypseBull shit.

I'm talking about towns and cities, where violence crime/mass shootings occur. Country blumpkins live by their own rules, but nothing happens out there anyways.

Also how many times have any of you living in the middle of nowhere actually needed to utilize a firearm in self-defense from another human? Animals are another story, but human?

Why does it matter to you? A lot of people still use rifles to hunt and eat with. And it's never bad to have something to defend yourself just in case.

TheHamburglarAlso how many times have any of you living in the middle of nowhere actually needed to utilize a firearm in self-defense from another human? Animals are another story, but human?

zuesWhy does it matter to you? A lot of people still use rifles to hunt and eat with. And it's never bad to have something to defend yourself just in case.

Just curious. A main pro-gun argument is that it's necessary for home protection/self defense.

I live in LA, in a crowded neighborhood with pretty damn high violent crime. I've been in many potentially unsafe situations over the past few years, and never have I felt a gun was necessary for my own protection. There are many other ways to stay safe, ideally be smart, be alert, and keep your mouth shut. I fucking love guns, but firearms for self-defense is really a bullshit argument.

It only takes one unfortunate event to wish you had one, and to appreciate them.

TheHamburglarJust curious. A main pro-gun argument is that it's necessary for home protection/self defense.

I live in LA, in a crowded neighborhood with pretty damn high violent crime. I've been in many potentially unsafe situations over the past few years, and never have I felt a gun was necessary for my own protection. There are many other ways to stay safe, ideally be smart, be alert, and keep your mouth shut. I fucking love guns, but firearms for self-defense is really a bullshit argument.

zuesWhy does it matter to you?.

Also this pisses me off. What does it matter to me? Sorry, I’m sick of turning on the news and seeing another school shot to shit by a legally-purchased gun. Gun control is not THE answer, but it’s a fucking start, and that’s what you pro-guns retards need to admit.

zuesIt only takes one unfortunate event to wish you had one, and to appreciate them.

You are so fucking stupid it’s baffling

TheHamburglarAlso, no law-abiding citizen NEEDS a gun for self-defense. They may WANT it, but the reality is, nobody NEEDS one.

A gun would've been really fucking nice when I had two bangers sticking a shotgun in my face and they took everything I had on me.

LiquorLanchA gun would've been really fucking nice when I had two bangers sticking a shotgun in my face and they took everything I had on me.

No, you'd be dead.

Friend of mine posted this today

"When people say “you can’t take away our guns,” first of all, you sound like a whiny little brat. Second of all, that isn’t even close to what we mean when we say we want gun control. Gun control means we want every person who wants to own a gun to get a permit, go through an extensive background check, and be required to properly secure their weapons so they aren’t accessible to children. We want the legal age to buy a gun to be the same as it is for tobacco, alcohol, and weed. We want yearly registration fees (like a car) because owning a gun is a privilege, not a right. We want every gun owner to have to take a test before they buy a gun (like a driving test) so they know how to properly use their guns and secure them when they aren’t in use. We want stricter penalties for those who don’t have their guns properly secured and those people who lend a gun to their friend who hasn’t been properly vetted. Is that so hard? Or is that too much of a hassle and children’s lives aren’t worth it for you to jump through a few hoops?"

Who disagrees? Law-abiding, responsible citizens should be unfazed by stricter gun laws.

Yeah you dipshits can downvote me, still waiting on a cogent argument as to why stricter gun laws are a bad idea, other than MUH FREEDUMS

TheHamburglarI'm talking about towns and cities, where violence crime/mass shootings occur. Country blumpkins live by their own rules, but nothing happens out there anyways.

Whatever legislation is or if anything is passed it needs to cover everyone. If someone can go one county over to get around something it defeats the point of having anything.

iFlipYou are correct, the "lower" is the part that is usually purchased with a serial number to make it legal. However, this can very easily be gotten around. I'm not sharing any secrets here - this information is all very widely available online. To circumvent the serial number/possible traceability of an AR, one may purchase what is known as an "80% lower." This is explained here: https://www.80-lower.com/blogs/80-lower-blog/how-to-build-your-own-ar-15-legally-and-unregistered

Essentially, it would be tantamount to impossible to ban the manufacture and sale of AR parts. What could potentially be banned is semi-automatic, non-rimfire rifle ownership. The problem with this is that long guns (rifles, shotguns) are not registered. A law that forbade the ownership of semi-automatic, non-rimfire rifles would immediately make criminals out of literally millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans. Gun owners are very, very unlikely to surrender their legally-acquired rifles. Making criminals out of good Americans through legislation must be carefully considered. Unfortunately the media does not present the above information, simply calling for a ban on ARs without any insight into what this would actually entail.

I agree that passing something that makes millions of citizens criminals is not a good idea. Also didnt realize that most shotguns can hold 8 shells because when i hunted as a kid you were only legally allowed to have 4 shells in a time. I think something needs to be done about semi automatics and i think that it is somewhere between what I'm saying and something less extreme. I also agree with what you suggested earlier. Unfortunately i dont have time to really dig into this research further but i would think that our government should be able to come up with something that can start to decrease the amount of these we see every year, it wont happen over night but its never too late to start something.

TheHamburglarYeah you dipshits can downvote me, still waiting on a cogent argument as to why stricter gun laws are a bad idea, other than MUH FREEDUMS

Honestly I am not sure why you are being down voted. You said it yourself, law abiding citizens will still be able to own guns, you'll just have to jump through a few more hoops. I am 100% okay taking the time and making sure everyone else takes the time if it helps.

At this point, I know nothing will get done, especially with our current president. So I guess lets see how many more mass shootings will occur in the next few years:)

TheHamburglarYou are so fucking stupid it’s baffling

This is exactly why we are down voting you. You ask a question about why anyone would own a gun. We answer you, then you say anyone that doesn't agree with you is "fucking stupid." This is the type of "us vs them" that will not solve this. You disregard my concerns, because I live in a rural area thus calling me a country bumpkin...... If you read any of my other posts you would know that first and foremost I am a father. If I could wave a magic wand a get rid of all guns I would. I also agree with gun registration for all. Training for all and, like drivers licences, renewing with stipulations where they can be revoked. What I have a problem with is some dude that doesn't know me or my life to tell me I'm fucking stupid because I hunt, target shoot and have a gun in my house hold. By your view point, I should throw out all the life jackets on my boat because no one has ever drown while on my boat. I will not call you fucken stupid but I will say your thinking is flawed.

yea lets ban guns just like we banned drugs.... Better yet lets ban murder. Because all that worked great.

STFU banning anything never solves the problem. Take the guns out of 99% of good citizens hands because of the few bad ppl won't do jack shit. Lets ban alcohol and fast food too because those cause way more deaths than guns do.

Surrounded by dumb liberals on this site

zuesyea lets ban guns just like we banned drugs.... Better yet lets ban murder. Because all that worked great.

STFU banning anything never solves the problem. Take the guns out of 99% of good citizens hands because of the few bad ppl won't do jack shit. Lets ban alcohol and fast food too because those cause way more deaths than guns do.

Surrounded by dumb liberals on this site

Fuck then leave! I'm so tired of all this Liberal vs right wing bull shit. We are all just trying to live our lives. All you are doing is making yourself sound uninformed. Listen to each other and learn from other people. This is the only way we are going to survive as a nation. You sound like a 4 year old throwing a temper tantrum. We use to be a Nation of compromise. The right solution might not be what you want or I want but we need to have a logical discussion instead of jumping directly to name calling. A healthy debate in what we were founded on and until we can get back to a healthy discourse we will continue to divide until conquered.

I am having a logical discussion... When we banned drugs what happened? could you still find them? Why would banning guns be any god damn different. It's a joke how people think gun control would do anything in terms of preventing people from getting what they want. We have the second amendment for a reason. To protect ourselves from a tyrannical government... or more likely today to protect ourselves from tyrannical maniacs. Automatic guns are already banned. It's just super easy to convert a single shot to an automatic.

You're trying to turn a mental health issue into a gun issue. STOP. Stop prescribing drugs to 8 year olds. stop bullying kids because they're different. stop hating on people who don't agree with

and stop trying to take away peoples rights just because you don't agree with them.

snowpocalypseFuck then leave! I'm so tired of all this Liberal vs right wing bull shit. We are all just trying to live our lives. All you are doing is making yourself sound uninformed. Listen to each other and learn from other people. This is the only way we are going to survive as a nation. You sound like a 4 year old throwing a temper tantrum. We use to be a Nation of compromise. The right solution might not be what you want or I want but we need to have a logical discussion instead of jumping directly to name calling. A healthy debate in what we were founded on and until we can get back to a healthy discourse we will continue to divide until conquered.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people!!!

zuesyea lets ban guns just like we banned drugs.... Better yet lets ban murder. Because all that worked great.

STFU banning anything never solves the problem. Take the guns out of 99% of good citizens hands because of the few bad ppl won't do jack shit. Lets ban alcohol and fast food too because those cause way more deaths than guns do.

Surrounded by dumb liberals on this site

Snowflake alert

Haha are some jimmies rustled? Toughen up you fruits

Similar to the Drug War, stricter gun laws won’t stop the problem, but it will make illegal guns harder to get and much more expensive. I think it’s a long-overdue start. Legal and responsible gun owners shouldn’t be worried, and if a few minor inconviences regarding your firearm addiction could minimize future mass shootings, then shouldn’t we push for harsher federal legislation on who can buy firearms and what can be bought (How would you guys feel if all magazines sold in stores suddenly capped at 5?)

No, gun control is not THE answer, but it’s AN answer, and stubborn 2A defenders need to acknowledge that guns ARE part of the problem. Other developed countries have violent video games, mental illness, but far, far fewer shootings. I know you guys are smart enough to connect the dots here.

TOAST.Whatever legislation is or if anything is passed it needs to cover everyone. If someone can go one county over to get around something it defeats the point of having anything.

Agreed. Federal legislation is required. Illinois has strict gun laws but adjacent states have very loose laws, and the theory is that it’s easy to move them locally and sell them illegally.

zuesSTFU banning anything never solves the problem.

lol no

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/02/15/australia-hasnt-had-fatal-mass-shooting-since-1996-heres-what-did/340345002/

TheHamburglarAgreed. Federal legislation is required. Illinois has strict gun laws but adjacent states have very loose laws, and the theory is that it’s easy to move them locally and sell them illegally.

"Theory", but remember how many guns exist already in the USA and how easy it is to get them from Mexico. Remember the fast and furious operation to track guns and how well that worked. Truth is guns are everywhere and are impossible to track. There's more guns than people in the USA. Even if they are banned, they aren't going anywhere. A buyback is fiscally impossible, so guns will still exist and just get shuffled between owners. Even if the USA bans all guns, they will still exist and more will still be smuggled across the border.

IsitWinterYet17"Theory", but remember how many guns exist already in the USA and how easy it is to get them from Mexico. Remember the fast and furious operation to track guns and how well that worked. Truth is guns are everywhere and are impossible to track. There's more guns than people in the USA. Even if they are banned, they aren't going anywhere. A buyback is fiscally impossible, so guns will still exist and just get shuffled between owners. Even if the USA bans all guns, they will still exist and more will still be smuggled across the border.

And yet none of that makes a good argument against stricter gun laws. Make them as hard and expensive to obtain and transport illegally as possible. Do you disagree?