many on the left point out charlies comments on gun crime, school shootings. this has nothing to do with any of that because it was a political assassination. this is not gun violence in the colloquial sense. you could ban guns fully and there would still be political assassinations using rifles because these people are either enabled by high level political forces or highly motivated in an idealistic, political manner and will do whatever is necessary to get a rifle unlike most common criminals.

▲

paulryanrogers 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Assassin by gun is objectively more difficult in a country that bans them outright. His ardent support for private gun ownership contributed to the continuation of a nation filled with more guns than humans.

	▲	snovymgodym 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I do think the United States needs to overhaul its firearms laws, however: There are very few countries that ban firearms outright. The type of weapon used in this attack was a bolt-action hunting rifle. You can buy that sort of weapon on the basic firearm license in Canada, the UK, Australia, Germany, Norway, Sweden, etc. The entire gun debate in this country which usually revolves around tightening restrictions on handguns and semi-automatics is not really relevant to this case. Virtually nobody running for public office, even among Democrats, is talking about a total ban on private firearms ownership.

▲

smt88 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]