>Would you support the military and police also being disarmed?" - Nope. Not a reader of history, then. Cool.
>it's a small number. Yes, it's a small number. 900 children die in the US each year due to drowning. Ban deadly assault pools!
> Background checks, red flag laws, stop straw purchases, registration of private sales They have that already.
> No need to take the guns away but make every gun used in a crime traceable back to its owner. MOST guns used in crimes are not legal guns nor is the criminal entitled to hold it.
"military style" includes things like submachine guns (these are not rifles) which you need a highly specialised license to own legally.
There's the "gun show" argument; only a dumb criminal would legally purchase a firearm, since, it's registered to their name. Which you name above as a great regulation. Seems like it works, look at the stats. Less than a percent of guns used in crimes were purchased at a gun show.
By the way - school violence - tiny proportion of firearm violence and violence in general. It's such a tiny amount they have to give you an interpretation caveat.
You're nearly as likely to be assaulted at school as a near your house; but 36 times less likely to be shot at school. (Probably with a pistol in either case)
"think of the children" Most homicides against children are committed with firearms. Mostly, with handguns.
If someone steals a car and commits a crime with it, does that mean we need further restriction on law abiding vehicle owners? That would be insane.
So, basically, if you were to get your way and the guns you don't like are banned and the people you don't like having the specific guns you don't like aren't legally allowed to have them, it would drop firearm crime by at best 1.5%.
Big deal. Why are we punishing law abiding citizens again?
>They are designed to kill people. They have no other function in a civilised society. 1) Sports shooting is a thing, a perfectly civilised thing to do. AR is a popular product group that lots of people use. If you would like to make an argument about "what is a good activity for people to enjoy" eh, good luck with that argument. Aren't you ostensibly a liberal? Weird take. 2) Pistols are designed to kill people. Rifles are designed to shoot things far away which may be people or animals.
AR pattern rifles aren't specifically designed with shooting people in mind.
Explain how, exactly, if you disagree. In what way, specifically, does it have advantages over comparable rifles platforms chambered in the same cartridge. Good luck with that one.
In fact as I mentioned in previous posts in an urban and criminal setting rifles are less effective and difficult to conceal due to physical size.
And you can tell that this is the case because.. most firearms crimes are not committed with rifles.
You're still not making a good case for focusing on weapons used in a tiny number of cases.
