D
Deleted member 429137
Guest
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/16/o...-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0
It's an article that starts out powerfully and doesn't pull any punches all the way through.
It's definitely worth a read.
“America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms,” one spokesman for Al Qaeda said in a 2011 recruitment video. “So what are you waiting for?”
Few places on earth make it easier than the United States for a terrorist to buy assault weapons to mow down scores of people in a matter of minutes.
It's an article that starts out powerfully and doesn't pull any punches all the way through.
Other effective measures include universal background checks to intercept people who are legally barred from gun ownership, like those convicted of domestic abuse and the mentally ill; and limits on magazine capacity, which some states have already enacted. Mr. Mateen was able to kill 49 people largely because the assault rifle he was using could fire 30-round clips as fast as he could pull the trigger. No civilian anywhere should be allowed to have that ability.
What makes the legislative inaction all the more maddening is that there is general public agreement in favor of attempts like these to reduce the bloodshed. An overwhelming majority of Americans — including gun owners and even N.R.A. members — support universal background checks, while strong majorities want to block sales to suspected terrorists and ban high-capacity magazines.
And yet the N.R.A. rejects these steps, even though it says that terrorists shouldn’t be able to get guns. Instead, it clings to the absurd fantasy that a heavily-armed populace is the best way to keep Americans safe. That failed in Orlando, where an armed security guard was on the scene but could not stop the slaughter.
It's definitely worth a read.