be mad all you want, but if you try to take my rights away, you will be shot

>I'm trying to find a story in Iraq and Afghanistan where they shot down a hellfire missile with small arms.

No one is saying that, however the missiles have operators (who are human) and the operators have friends and families (who are human). The missile isn't what an efficient or effective guerilla would target.

>How will you fight the US Navy parked a good 200 miles off the coast and launching a tomahawk to blow up a neighborhood full of "rebellions" during this hypothetical Civil War?

Are you actually stating that you believe the US Government would indiscriminately level civilian neighborhoods using missiles during a hypothetical civil war? And if so, are you indicating that you would support the actions and legitimacy of said government?

Ok but you still haven’t answered how YOU are going to disarm civilians ? Are you going to personally disarm the police once civilians are disarmed?

Gun ownership is banned in Brazil and Venezuela. How are their gun crimes so high? Could it be gangs and cartels?

You two could use some traffic school.

It does not take utopian ideals to attempt to solve problems. Just the will to try.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country

Depends on your age.

You’re describing a utopia. Those don’t exist. Gangs will still have their guns, so will cops. So again I’ll ask, what is your logic? Disarming law abiding citizens won’t solve the police killing civilians issue OR the gang violence issue. If other countries have “solved” this issue, why do they still have murders ? Rapes? Crime ?

Edit more importantly how are YOU going to disarm cops?

>Fine, whatever works.

Great, then drop the 'Assault Weapons ban' rhetoric, because that did not work, and would not be effective today.

Heres a video about an actually viable gun control strategy, based on actual indicators of who the 'Bad Guys' with a gun are.

You may notice that CT implemented points 1 & 2 to some extent in their Sandy Hook reforms.

I don't think most cops should carry guns either. Plenty of civilized countries manage that way. Just imagine a world where cops aren't prepared to instantly kill people because they don't have to assume everyone's armed to instantly kill them first.

So you want cops to be the only ones with guns when they confiscate guns from civilians? Sorry just trying to understand your logic..

Yeah I have to visit a few. My husband felt that centers were also too industrial but then was concerned about home daycare--security being one of the top factors but that's always a concern with a center too. Thanks so much for sharing your experience!

You definitely have to visit a few, ideally talk to some references, etc. but it can be a wonderful option and actually cheaper. I was the opposite - I only wanted a home daycare and didn’t want a center at all. Centers felt too… industrial? Centers have advantages like many provide preschool options for 3s and 4s and they also are able to remain open even if a teacher gets sick. But I prefer the small size of our home daycare - max 6 kids. (Which also means less germs.) She is open early enough for me, a high school teacher, and provides meals, too. Some centers do, some don’t. Some homes do, some don’t. She’s basically family to us now. My son has been with her 2.5 years. Now, home daycares won’t have the bells and whistles like apps and cameras and Face ID technology at pick up though lol.

I haven't really looked into the home daycare situation. Hubby has some concerns but I will look into it more.

Seriously? Guns are the last straw for freedom? A tool that serves no other purpose than to kill? Yikes....what a shitty country to live in if this is what we have to resort to

Pricing is good but timing is not if you’re looking to start that soon. People put fetuses on the wait list. 211 web site would also have home daycares listed.

I'm not looking for zero crime. That's living in real utopia. But I am looking to lower the rate of homicides and violent crime which I think is an achievable goal.

By enacting a buyback program and putting guns out of circulation, I don't expect results in the following year. Gun culture is so heavily ingrained in US culture and society, it'll take a generation or two to see results. But it's better than the trajectory we're on.

The US also suffers from fundamental issues so you have people resorting to crimes, sometimes violent, which is less seen in other developed countries including our neighbors above us. Nobody will have the need to resort to crime if their basic necessities are taken care of. But American taxpayers funding a better quality of life for fellow Americans? That's not patriotism, just crony socialism.

I'm trying to find a story in Iraq and Afghanistan where they shot down a hellfire missile with small arms.

How will you fight the US Navy parked a good 200 miles off the coast and launching a tomahawk to blow up a neighborhood full of "rebellions" during this hypothetical Civil War?

They’ll do that if there is an object in the middle of the road that needs to be removed. The cop will stop traffic, remove/move the object to the shoulder and then carry on. Also seen police slow/stop traffic in this manor when construction crews are setting up/closing lanes. I wouldn’t call this “crazy” have seen it a few times.

[deleted]

“Babe on my way to work some asshole cop was blocking the road but I sped around him”. Imagine telling on yourself like this.

My mother works for the customer service side answering phone calls. Sadly most of her time is taken up by people who refuse to use a computer or people who are disputing a 100 dollar check they didn't get years prior.

Criminals will still find ways to smuggle firearms in so that wouldn’t do anything except keep only CRIMINALS armed. I don’t think that’s what you want. You can’t group armed law abiding citizens who are not harming innocent people in the same group as deranged mass shooters who are clearly criminals.

>Having guns to defend against tyranny is another popular but dumb take. If America goes into a Civil War, there's no way a neighborhood of armed civilians is putting an Abrams tank out of commission or shooting down a hellfire missile from a drone. Whoever has vast control of the military and their armament, wins...and that's probably the government which is (partially) funded by the same gun owning civilians via taxes. Absolutely hilarious that they arm their own government with superior technology while holding disdain for it.

This take seems to conveniently forget Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

It always is.

"But but killings went down while it was in force!"

Yeah, and they had already been on a downward trend while there is also no evidence to show that it specifically correlates to the banning of any models or features.

>Some states still don’t even have background checks at gun shows

As much as the media loves to spout out "gun show loophole", the gun show part is more or less irrelevant; It's "private seller vs FFL".

A private sale, in a majority of states, doesn't require a background check. If you want to buy from an FFL, however, you need to go through a background check, and that's federal law. The latter applies even if you are at a gun show, meaning that anyone legally in the business of selling guns has to background check you even if you're a friend or next door neighbor.

And technically private sellers aren't supposed to be selling guns for business/profit, though the interpretation of that is up for debate; rather, they can downsize their collection.