Sure - “we” can do whatever we want to do, but repealing a constitutional amendment, besides being a bad idea, is a very involved process that stands 0% change of succeeding, so why suggest it? Unless, of course, you’re suggesting to just ignore the law of the land. If your basis for objecting to a law is that it was…

So you’re going to ignore the fact that a citizen did intervene and likely saved lives in that church or elsewhere by shooting the attacker and 1) preventing him from retrieving more weapons and 2) getting away with all of the additional firearms he had in the car to shoot up somewhere else? Shit, at least save that…

Perhaps you are the problem as you complain about what other’s say yet offer no insight of your own as to how to solve the issue. Certainly you’re not contributing anything of value - perhaps just trolling.....

True, they didn’t - at least not to the extent of the US. Also, their solution, which would be unconstitutional in the US, had no effect on their violent crime rate and their gun ownership rate in 2010 was right back to where it was before their gun confiscation program. It is almost like they learned something we’re…

This idea has been floated about but there are several issues with it. One is that not everyone is going to purchase a gun legally and another is that these exams can’t be foolproof. For example, police officers go through such an exam and not all of them turn out to be saints. Also, some people are clearly sane but…

That’s possible, or they may realize that people in the US doesn’t have the attention span/interest level to be dedicated to the longer term solutions that would really work. Simple gun regulations aren’t going to magically work now when they haven’t worked before, so that means we need to deal with poverty, mental…

Really? Ah excellent, since your insulting the person that proposed that there was no solution, that must mean that you have one. Excellent! Lets here it......

Because our focus has always been on quick, easy solutions, which is regulating the tool used to commit the crime. We fail to realize that many obtain that tool illegally, or simply use another tool to commit violence with. The issue isn’t the tool, it is the deranged lunatic using the tool to commit violence. When…

So your solution is to ignore the constitution of the United States? Ignoring the obvious fact that criminals, by their nature, don’t obey the law and this would be the only ones still owning firearms, causing the crime rate to skyrocket, I think that those opposed to firearm ownership better think of a better…

This was proven false when Obama said it and it is just as false now. You would be better-off stating that it is a problem unique to the US among first world countries. That at least would be closer to the truth. However, it still doesn’t present a solution - it simply identifies and isolated data point.

It is estimated that 39% of the US households own firearms. That number, along with the number of carry permits (concealed carry in most states) has been increasing lately.

You know who is going to turn in their guns right? The people that aren’t committing crimes. Criminals know that they can make a lot more than $1,000 with their firearm by keeping it and using it to commit robberies. Likewise, people that own firearms for sport or self-defense aren’t going to sell theirs unless it is…

This is untrue, no matter how hard you want to believe it. If you could wave a magic wand and make guns disappear in any country then yes, the gun violence rate would go down, but violent crime will be unaffected or, worse, increase as more people are unable to defend themselves. The violent crime rates for countries…

This is untrue and people need to stop repeating it, trying to make it true. Violent crime was already declining before the isolated, yet tragic, Port Arthur incident. The rate continued to be the same after the gun confiscation (the buyback was really a confiscation, it is just you were given a few dollars when you…

Heroic? No, disrespectful yes, but there is nothing heroic about it. However, she is well within her rights to express her opinion and I’m pretty sure that the 1st amendment allows that opinion to be directed at the government and not prohibited by the government.

Among the issues he mentions are paint imperfections, a dusty touch screen...

Yeah I’m not seeing it either. I know the knee-jerk reaction (particularly on the Gizmodo family of sites) is to blame Trump, White Supremacists, Republicans, etc. but I don’t see how they play into this.

Well, there is no proof of collusion, bribery, etc. so.....? It may have not been the best decision by Puerto Rico, but they are also bankrupt, so their decision making skills could be seen as questionable. Also, being bankrupt, maybe some larger utilities passed or didn’t bid in fearing that they wouldn’t get paid.…

Why is there a resistor at all in parallel to the SDC? If the SDC is a basic RC circuit, then the resistor would be part of the SDC and be in series with the capacitor. Maybe the resister is for bleed-through to ensure that there is always some peril? Perhaps I’m over-analyzing this...

Good intentions, but you can regulate “stupid”.