I can live with Americans having the right to own guns for hunting, sport and self defense.
I am forever curious as to why the NRA refuses to budge on:
1. restricting certain types of guns that are clearly not needed for hunting or sport or self defense.
2. The types of people allowed to own guns.
It seems logical that we would experiment with restrictions on guns. I wonder what the homicide stats would look like if restrictions were in place? Please don't point to Chicago. That analogy doesn't work.
We need new legislation and creative enforcement of that legislation. We've got to try something and whatever that something is needs to be enforced throughout the country consistently, and not simply in cities that tend to vote blue.
I'm sure this topic has come up here before and some of you have covered ad nauseum already but I can not see for the life of me why the NRA will not budge on anything of substance. Nor can I understand why politicians seem bought and sold when it comes to the NRA. My guess is they know who funds their campaigns.
I yield to you redscapers who are much more adept at arguing this topic than I am, to comment here.