1. If the right has it their way, basic firearms training will be taught on HS and general education college courses. Of course the left doesnt want that as all of their argument about gun control will fall.
I was mearly pointing out that guns arn't banned or illegal in the UK, Australia ect..
And in a previous comment I pointed out that.
It's not about gun laws but rather gun culture.
In the US you view guns as a means to protect you from your government and your neighbour. You get no training and no expectations of responsibility
In Switzerland guns are to protect your country and your neighbour. And you trained and held in a position of trust
Additionally in countries with lax gun regs, they don't view that as a verse from the bible so they have a more rational less zelous view of ownership and reasonable and productive debate were the rights of ownership Vs public safety was settled a long time ago.
In other words it's not gun laws per see that is the problem, a rational society has rational gun laws lax or restrictive. It's the terrible premise your gun rights are based on.
2. About UK and Australia, see previous post. Good luck owning a gun on those places. You cant even own the thing and use it for self defense (not even pepper sprays in UK lol)
3. 2nd amendment is highly regarded because people understand the value of the U.S. constitution. Historically, without guns, US will stay as aUK territory. And the framers make it because they do not want another UK to rule over them. Its been said many times that the 2nd amendment protects the 1st. Its not a terrible premise like you say. When crap goes down, we resolve it ourselves, not ditch the country to be refugees. Historically speaking too, many blacks in slavery and abolition used guns and pro 2nd amendment as well...
The problem is we cant even get to that point, because of all the virtue signaling the left does. Most of the gun laws we have right now usually should be enough, aside from inept government effing up as usual (this killer should not have bought guns in the first place for example, but the air force didnt do paperwork... as usual).
See, this is a valid argument. There's no need to argue both ways. You can say that the people's right to defend against a potential tyrannical government is worth the loss of life caused by the prevalence of guns. You don't have to argue that it helps against tyrannical governments AND causes zero additional deaths compared to a world with total gun control.
If that's the clear divide, both sides can argue honestly from that point. Determine how many innocent and criminal lives a year gun prevalence is worth, and come up with policies that help reduce gun deaths without making them more vulnerable for the government.
For example mandate guns to be stored in saves with a 3-day timer. Plenty of time to get your gun when US-Hitler is elected, but also enough time to cool off when your neighbor scratched your car. Or, at the very least say you want no further laws, and accept the deaths caused by it without wining.
I mean, look at the bottom post. Sorry but some people will even dispute the 2nd amendment... without comprehending US culture or basic understanding of how guns work (like many typical anti gun sentiment in general).
FYI japan in ww2 hesitated to do a land invasion in mainland US because of the 2nd amendment alone. The government also knows they cannot win with against a armed citizenry. Thats not even counting the possible defectors.
As an Australian it’s hard to comprehend the US’ general obsession with guns. The 2nd amendment seems ridiculous.. as if citizens with their guns stand a chance against the military the government has at their disposal. The “unconstitutional” idea of changing it gets brought up. It’s literally an amendment, so why not progress with the times?
Even if some sensible gun control or buy backs were applied, the argument seems to be that it won’t automatically stop gun deaths. No, not straight away of course. It would be several generations probably with how ingrained gun culture seems to be in the country. Really that would need bipartisan support though, and like it’s been said, unfortunately with the current political parties and corporate structures the US runs it seems impossible, and any bipartisanship is a pipe dream.
And look at your argument again, we wont stand a chance against the military so we just go in the times, and bend over taking it up the butt and say daddy government? This is the perfect reason why people wont give up their guns. Even if they are about to lose (which they wont), people will rather freaking doe and go down fighting than bend over. This is the mindset that go us out of slavery in the civil war, and won 2 world wars. Dont underestimate patriots.