Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNeither the House or Senate have 5% of members who would vote to......
Ban guns or collect existing guns.
Any discussion about that is ridiculous!
An Assault rifle is no different than a hunting rifle when it comes to killing people.
This guy wasn't using an automatic weapon.
Most mass shooters get their gun legally.
Every shooting these discussions come up and people do not realize nothing is going to change because of the Second Amendment and you can't confiscate people's property.
The real solutions is to find out why we are such a violent country.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 661 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Neither the House or Senate have 5% of members who would vote to...... (Original Post)
Logical
Jun 2016
OP
jaysunb
(11,856 posts)1. No...the REAL solution would be the proper interpretation
of the 2nd Amendment.
JudyM
(29,275 posts)2. You have a solution to reduce the violence to such an extent that easy-buy guns aren't a problem?
merrily
(45,251 posts)3. The solution is public funding of elections, so our "representatives"
at least try to represent the majority of citizens and not simply their largest donors.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)5. And the best way to implement public funding is by electing the candidate with the biggest donors
Do I have the pragmatic moderate centrist "reasoning" about right?