Defense, sport shooting...so that makes at least three valid purposes.

“There is no common sense.”

Up to 25 years? There’s no good reason to let him out if he did, in fact, murder her

Fortunately for the country, there is still enough support to keep the legal protections of this right in place.

“Here’s a thought: if you have to keeping holding your breath and hoping that a monstrous act of gun violence doesn’t make your legislation look politically unpalatable at best or monstrous at worst, it’s a very bad bill, and you should stop fighting for it.”

You’re delusional. In fact, no mention was made in my posts of any particular method of separation.

There’s never a perfect way to do something like that, but the flaws are a hell of a lot less than those inherent in NOT respecting the right of self-determination

Nope, they don’t bring all the investment they made in the other 80% along with them.

You mean the 20% they provide? There’s your answer.

So still struggling too much to answer me? Maybe one day you’ll be up for adult discussion

That would really miss the entire point. Why should Person A get to decide if Person B gets to be independent?

Ah, so it is ANSWERING that scares you so much.

Wait, so he addressed the actual evil involved, expressed condolences to those suffering as a result, and thanked those who helped instead of bickering about political issues...and you think that’s a BAD thing?

Yes, that’s exactly how sporting firearms are designed.

Killing is certainly what is wanted with hunting.

That is one important purpose

There is no honestly denying that firearms serve valid purposes.

So you reject the concept of personal responsibility. YOU wanted to discuss necessity, then got upset when I mention it.

So you blame me for your failure to read. I illustrated that you don’t believe need should be the determining factor.

Why do you petulantly lash out at others instead of discussing the topic?