[/quote]
No doubt, I am glad you have acknowledge that notion. Freedom of Speech is extremely important in any society, but so to is factual information. I respect your opinion but disagree.
I might just note, because I feel so strongly about such an issue.
This is an organisation that defends the Second Amendment rights over the lives of individuals through mass shootings and through this provides extensive funding to attempt to manipulate politicians to support a weapon in which is contributing to these attacks. [/quote]
"This is an organization that defends Second Amendment Rights..." --- Absolutely 100% true
"....over the lives of individuals through mass shootings....." --- the lives of those killed in mass shootings are the sole responsibility of the one pulling the trigger on their weapon of choice.... the shooter is the criminal. The firearm is an inanimate object & can't perform on its own. More than 99% of all firearms sold to law abiding gun owners will never be used to commit a criminal act.
Gun laws only affect good people, while those same exact gun laws are only held in complete & total disdain by bad people, who are responsible for 100% of all the heinous crimes committed using firearms. Take out your anger on them......Ask those in government to be more strict when punishing criminals for crimes already on the books in the hopes of lowering future incidents.....feel strongly about that!
Lowering incidents is the only attainable goal, because eliminating incidents completely is absolutely impossible.
Human nature will never let that happen.....Human nature will never only breed good people........evil will always find a way, but punishing the good because evil exists gains nothing....
[/quote]
Firstly. Thank you for affirming my statement and thus on that note I will expand as to why I and so many disagree with the Second Amendment. This is a document which is 225 years old, a document that no one individual can seem to grasp meaning from because of the plethora of interpretations made, a phrase in which only two other countries have in their Constitution. Quite simply there is not any legislation in place that is 225 years old, because original documents are reformed and altered. It seems many see a seal on the Second Amendment. Why?? because those who a pro gun are so caught up in their right to own a gun, they fail to see the rights of others to life and a livelihood. It is the Second Amendment which is allowing these hideous firearm crimes to happen.
Secondly. It is the responsibility of the individual pulling the trigger no doubt but can you not agree the firearm plays a part in the act. Answer this....if a "criminal" didn't have a firearm would it have caused as much damage?? The premise of the point is you reduce the risk by removing the weapon. Sometimes in life things have to be given up for the greater good, in this case it is for the lives of so many. The rationality behind your notions is simple and I never alluded to such notions as a gun having living qualities.
Parkland Shooting- FBI gets blamed
Las Vegas Shooting- Mental Health gets blamed
Pulse Nightclub Shooting- Terrorism gets blamed
It seems everything else gets blamed, which is no doubt a contributing factor, everything but the firearm. It gets discussed but nothing gets pursued. How many more deaths have to occur until a solution is reached?? It simply doesn't matter in the current circumstances.....if you going to use such figures it can be said that 99% of drugs get sold to people who will utilise them to get gain a high., not utilise them to cause death.
Thirdly. Just because something is legal does not mean it is morally right. The fact is morals seem to be negated in such circumstances. It may be legal in Australia to have sexual intercourse with a sixteen year old (the age of consent) does not make it morally right. Same goes for drugs that are illegal in some US states, using them does not validate morality.
"Lets support a weapon, with the primary purpose of inflicting harm or causing death in which is being used to kill over 34,000 people and injure over 80,000 in the US each year"
Fourthly. Never stated it was a living, breathing object. Can you not affirm it is contributing to the deaths? As fore mentioned the fact is a gun's primary purpose is to inflict harm or cause death (last time I checked a car, petrol, matches and the like did not have that primary purpose)
I pose this....if someone died from a drug overdose do we suddenly not blame the tool but just blame the person?? The tool used is always a contributing factor, as is the person. If we are not blaming the tool, the cause of death would not be a gunshot wound.
Please don't blame human nature......it is the individual, the tool and the background of that individual which are to blame.
Forum
Pages: 
