Political Crossfire Forums

Obviously reducing the number of firearms by making ownership illegal would reduce the number of firearms possessed by criminals. This is axiomatic and inarguable.

The only credible argument on this point is accepting the deaths caused by firearms and arguing that the benefit outweighs the harm, like Winchester and Eynon do. Anything else is just lying to yourself.

Seems like what we have here is actually a perfect demonstration of why gun control laws make no sense.

Per Exploited, they can only work if the country infringes upon the sovereignty of other nations. Sounds like a better approach needs to be taken where people are less motivated to use guns for doing bad things. Then it really won't matter what your sovereign neighbors do within their borders. Or Canada could take a hands-on military approach to make the world a safer place by interrupting sovereignty to create favorable political environments. It has worked out well for us....

I'm new here but I already like Medius.

Motown, this forum is trying to transition away from the sort of place where posts like that are welcome. I think you should take a step back and evaluate how you can try to improve on your performance to date.

Try to focus on substantive responses instead of attacking the poster. If you quote somebody, you should try to refute the assertions they made using facts or logic instead of personal attacks.

I know you can do better, and I hope you will do better moving forward. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.