We'll allow guns for mass shootings and repopulate by banning abortions

Not everyone can. It's illegal for convicted felons and minors to possess firearms in the US and I think it's weird reading about atrocities makes you happy.

Guns are banned in New York and Chicago. Murder rates are through the roof and gun violence is something that happens every single day. But guns are banned.....? You can "ban" guns all you want but that only hurts the people like myself who are perfectly law abiding people who want to own some protection in the worst case scenario that we encounter some time in our lives where we need to use it. A criminal does not give a shit in the least if something is banned or not, they will still get it and use it regardless of what the "law" says.

99% of gun owners want nothing to do but protect themselves. I and most others don't want to hurt anyone but don't threaten us and expect to get an apology!

Abortions - There are obviously lots of angles that this is being portrayed but one of the ones that gets overlooked completely is that this should NEVER be a decision of the federal government. A person should be able to choose to do so or not to do so but it is up to the individual. It's also something that should be determined at the state level. There can be states that for whatever reason want to outlaw it, or there can be states that choose to allow it. It should not be something a federal government or court should have a say in because it's none of their damn business. I don't think federal officials need to get involved in state and local policies like this. That's not the job of the federal government.

One thing that this highlights though, and one thing we should pay attention to instead of getting as emotional as foodie is in this one, is the money behind it all. There is a LOT of money to be made by keeping abortions legal. It's a significant part of the healthcare racket going on in the country. If something is pushed so heavily, you can guarantee yourself that it's backed by significant amounts of money.

It's also an easy dividing line, which is the other unfortunate side of it.

Retort...

My oppine...

It is OK to murder them in the womb, hell even during birth in some states.

Oh by the way. The Supreme jerkoffs in that now Banana Republic Muricas dictatorship court. They did not ban anything. Duh, They are making it a states issue. Ya'll can kill kill kill. You just might have to travel to one of those states where they defund the po-po, BLM and Antifa rule the streets, and people who illegally posses firearms kill 20+ every weekend in the progressive liberals gun free cities... (Cough cough shitcago)

But madness takes over when the (formally hospitalized crazzies) mentally ill GUN (yep, the gun did it) the firearm walks into an unprotected school building and slaughter children that have been outside of the womb for several years.

An SUV ran over 50+ people at a parade. Not one call for banning SUV's. No calls for vehicle confiscation.

What a downvote clownboat world we live in where the banks, state and federal buildings, courthouses, political whorehouses in D.C. etc. Are protected by guns, gaurds, and such. But anyone can walk into a building containing our most precious, the innocent.

I am not 100% against abortion. I do not want our tax dollars used for drive thru abortion clinics that some use as an extreme form of contraceptive. I believe abortion (just like vaccines) should be a private decision between a doctor and the woman patient ooops my bad. Men can now have periods, breast feed, and use the ladies room... Clown World out of control. Thanks Bill Clinton for defunding mental hospitals to balance the budget. Now these crazzies run the show. Are on every street corner. And getting their hands on fire arms. The very same fire arms they will still use even if you "try" to take mine.

Common Sense ain't really all that common anymore is it...

Hiya, how nice of you to stop by! I was quite overwhelmed with the sense of 'stupid' a few days ago, reading about mass shootings and crazy abortion laws! America: Shiny on the outside, rotten on the inside ;-)
Good to hear we can agree partially! Luckily we don't have to agree on everything.

You know, I will probably never understand an american's view on guns. They do not protect you, unless maybe you carry one 24/7 on high alert, but that's no way to live. In any other given case, you're probably not close enough to your gun to even use it for protection. I also don't see why you'd want them as a hobby, but I'm not a man and as a female, a little lower on that whole testosterone thing. At the very least though, even if only for a hobby, I think you'd need LOTS of better rules than something like 'Oh hey, you're 18? Here, buy this gun on a whim without any checkup at all', which seems to be the case in a couple of states?

I know I feel a lot safer in my country, where there are various checkups and you can't own a gun unless you keep it in a safe and only once you've spend atleast a year frequenting a gun range, using one of theirs which stays on the gun range. I think you're even obligated to continue frequenting one and there can be checkups at home for how you keep your gun. You're not allowed to carry guns on the street here, nor bigass knifes. I think maybe you can get away with a pocket knife, but I'm not entirely sure about that one... More knifes amongst kids is a troubling development here though, so I hope we can turn the tide there.

If military and law enforcement possess firearms, I think everyone deserves the same right

I honestly don't see why. They carry them, because they are needed for their job. I would think they get checked out mentally and they will be well trained for this. If they tend to misuse them, maybe the US should work on a better hiring policy for these professions. And maybe a random police officer shouldn't carry a gun without question (I don't think they do in our country), but then I'd lean towards taking away guns from them, instead of releasing even more into the general public. What does a random citizen need a gun for? If there aren't many guns around in the first place, you won't need one either. Here, petty criminals can't get a hold of guns. Here, disturbed people can't get a hold of guns. Organized crime can, but they don't go around causing random mass shootings. They either shoot rival criminals, or on a very rare occasion, one innocent person for a very clear motive. All very bad, but well thought out and very few random victims, as opposed to what a deranged mind can do on a whim.

I just don't see the use of so many dangerous weapons spread out amongst the general population. There are too many stupid and/or troubled people amongst us to make this a good idea.

_{But I also know the US already screwed up with so many guns in the country and I wish you good luck in correcting that mistake.}

P.S.: I'm not sure I'll reply again, because starting a new job soon! Gonna be tiiiiiired 😴😴😴
Thanks for pitching in though! I think Americans and Europeans will mostly just be too far apart on this subject.

My very first girlfriend. She quit school to have a child.

Thankfully she was not still MY GIRLFRIEND..! LMAO

You really got your shit together brother. We are like minded. 100%.

Thank You.!

Hi, thanks for pitching in! As I wrote in another reply, I think Americans and Europeans will be too far apart on this subject to really understand each other. This will probably be my only long reply, as I am starting a new job this week and I think I'll need a break from any other mental activity, so sorry in advance!

the fact that we own them and continue to increase the numbers that we own is one of the most significant things that we can do to keep governments and tyrannical people in check.

I know this goes very deep for US citizens, but as an outsider, I don't really understand this way of thinking. We don't have a massive amount of firearms in the EU and somehow our governments haven't really become any more corrupt or tyrannical than the one in the US. I think that yes, there are plenty of corrupt people in power everywhere, but we tend to look at the 'big, bad government' as one, soulless entity. What we forget is that there are many layers of a great variety of people that make up the government. What makes you think that a few corrupt politicians will be blindly followed by the entirety of the army and/or police force? There are many layers of defense inbetween, in the form of people with brains and thoughts for themselves, before the entirety of a civilization will be under threat from its own goverment. I just don't see how Americans think that this is a big threat. As opposed to the loss of lives of many innocent people thanks to troubled minds getting their hands on a gun so easily. That is an actual threat which has already happened quite a lot. And that threat won't be solved by adding more guns. That threat should be addressed through very rigourous gun laws with many checkups and waiting periods, aswell as periodical checks while someone owns a firearm.

_{How in the world the US will get a hold on all of the guns already in circulation is another question alltogether though...}

A gun will only protect you if you happen to have it on you at the time of a threat, which, either you don't, or you have a civilization where everyone walks around with guns. I would never feel safe in such a civilization, because too many people are stupid, disturbed and/or hotheaded. It's way too risky. I am all for handing well tested and well trained law enforcement the necessary tools to defend citizens, but I think that's where it should end. If they tend to misuse their weapon, look at your hiring policy, training and mental health checks. Don't arm the entire nation. Furthermore, if a deranged person isn't able to get his/her hands on a gun in the first place, there will be one less mass shooting that needs a gun to stop it after many innocent lives have already been lost.

General police officers don't hold guns in my country. Thing is, with so few weapons amongst the general public, they don't need them either. We don't have mass shootings, because a deranged person isn't able to get their hands on guns here. Organized crime might, but they don't go around causing mass shootings.

On the subject of abortion, you say:

Personal choices in what we do with our bodies (abortions, medical procedures, treatments) is absolutely not one of them nor should it ever be. That is up to the person and their care providers.

Then you say:

States have much different demographics and that should influence whether or not something like abortion is allowed.

Those two don't match. It's either up to the person and their care providers, or up to the general public through any level of government, state or otherwise.

I wouldn't ask my wife to ever get an abortion and I would be pissed if she got one and would try to talk her out of it but at the same time it's someone's ability to choose whether or not to have one.

Agreed. It might be a difficult choice for the maybe-future parent(s), but the the ultimate decision is for the owner of the womb it concerns. Not a decision for random bystanders.

Before I wrote this very unnuanced piece, I read about one state deciding that it is a crime to have an abortion from day one. That, to me, is crazy. Sure, I can understand people's point of view about a limit somewhere along the pregnancy and very clever, very scientifical minds can tell you all you need to know about the stages of a clump of cells towards something that resembles a little human towards a tiny human that can take a breath on its own. But in the state of a clump of cells, no one but the woman it concerns should have a final say. She should definitely talk to her partner if he's in the picture. She should definitely talk to a health care professional and anyone she feels she needs to talk to. She should get all the help she needs to make a difficult decision. In no way, however, should the political color of the people around her decide what she can do with her clump of cells. Let alone call her a crimal for doing so.

I agree with you 100% that the oversexualisation and objectification of women in today's society isn't a good thing. Kids should focus on kids stuff and not consume (unrealistic) sexual media content at a young age. However, I think a school is a good, safe environment to start teaching kids about these things and I think the age to start should be the age at which kids tend to come in contact with, think about, or experiment with their sexuality. In today's society, that might be sooner rather than later, but denial won't keep them safe. Teaching them how to respect one another and teaching them about options to be safe while potentially exploring their sexuality just might. Teaching them, in a very broad way, how unrealistic media content is should also be a part of education. It could just help against various mental issues kids face today, aswell as the objectification of women.

Anyway, I wrote too much! Like I said before, I probably won't again, because a new job is mentally taxing enough, but again, thank you for conversing with me! We don't have to agree on everything and I think in this case, we can just be happy that you live in your neck of the woods, while I live in mine. They both seem like a fine fit :-)