[quote=masukuma][quote=hardwood][quote=hardwood][quote=masukuma][quote=sitaki.kujulikana][quote=masukuma][quote=hardwood][quote=masukuma][quote=Ngalaka][quote=sitaki.kujulikana][quote=masukuma][/quote]
but in all those cases, cars were not banned,fertilizers were not banned, shoes were not banned, why would guys want to ban guns.[/quote]
Which guys!!
What I have heard is campaign for tougher (common sense) gun laws.[/quote]
I wonder sometimes... one cannot gamble or drink alcohol until they are 21 but can get a gun as soon as they click 18? surely!! some of these laws don't make sense.[/quote]

They USED TO make sense if you look at American history. During the days of colonization/expansionism on the american continent all adults (>18s) needed to have guns to deal with stubborn native Americans aka red indians, rebellious black slaves.....and bisons and bears. Thus the gun was a basic tool for survival. After the conquest, and the end of slavery, Americans especially those in remote outposts needed guns to protect themselves from criminals and beasts and thus the provision for guns in their laws and constitution. It was security first, phombe later.[/quote]

[/quote]
Never understood what that experiment was meant to show, everytime a monkey goes up the others suffer, so why let one greedy one try to get the banana if the others will suffer, I think they are in order to beat those who try to make them suffer, ama whats the pont, if a guy overlaps the other motorists should stop him, if a guy steals money meant for a road the other guys should beat him up since they will suffer, ama how is it supposed to work.

anyway back to the topic, the gun has been central to the american way of life, even to this day, farmers need guns for protections, thugs need guns to do whatever they do with them, the young black men need guns to use in their rap music videos, the gun is still central and one of the tools that still holds the vast america in place.[/quote]
it's meant to tell people that while some actions WERE legitimate at a certain time... the situation that dictated the actions changes but humans keep on doing those actions in a ritualistic manner. in this case:

Do all adults (>18s) need to have guns (replace it with 'full automatic gun') to
-deal with stubborn native Americans aka red indians
- rebellious black slaves
- bisons and bears.
- is the gun was a basic tool for survival?
- are Americans in remote outposts still in need guns to protect themselves from criminals and beasts?

History is one thing! people used to get married off at 8-9 years because life expectancy was like 22 years old... Do you keep the same practices?


[/quote]

People still need guns for personal protection and recreation (shooting as a sport). Even in Kenya, have you seen how people rush to the courts when their gun licenses are withdrawn?[/quote]


I tend to agree with those who say that guns do not kill people, it's people who kill other people. Guns are just tools used to kill other people. They are just tools like knives which can kill. The fact that all homes have knives/pangas doesn't mean that knife crime and murders are high. So more gun ownership doesn't mean there will be more gun crime.[/quote]
I think the debate right now is... since guns unlike knives can cause real damage to huge groups of people (mass shootings) - why not regulate them better? Why not have background checks for ALL gun sales to weed out people we don't want having guns? that's the point of the image I put up... why not regulate it better?[/quote]

Because it will go against the US katiba. The second amendment protects the right of the american people to keep and bear arms.

[quote=Impunity][quote=hardwood][quote=tycho][quote=hardwood]More guns. Seems the more the merrier. They are now arming 6yr olds......

[/quote]
When ISIS trained children how to shoot it was called 'radicalization'. What about when it's the United states doing it?[/quote]
Waah. Wacha @alphadoti sees your comment. You have really incited him.[/quote]:-d [/quote]
Actually, I started reading from top, and when I reached that post, I said "Wah, is this serious"... and I almost replied...

I continued reading downwards and so glad @tycho has asked exactly what I wanted to ask!

[quote=AlphDoti]I posted last year that, a big war is gonna take place sometimes in the future.

I now see some people are leaving it to chance, they are preparing, they are training their kids on the arms...

Wow unto the negro man who is laughing here... The last laugh will be on you... What have you trained on! Can our kids defend their lands? Or it is gonna be a wokover![/quote]

homosapiens and your guns... you think training your kids in the use of small arms will stop tanks or bombs? tuwache kujidanganya... the only use for these weapons is shooting at criminals but not armies

[quote]Consequently, in the UK gun ownership stands at around 6.5 guns per 100 people, compared to 101 guns per 100 in the US. After the 1997 laws were passed, gun amnesties encouraged people to hand in weapons, and the government purchased 162,000 guns and 700 tons of ammunition from citizens, costing them $200m.

Once owning a handgun is illegal, it means that anyone who owns one is a criminal. The minimum sentence of 5 years for possession of a firearm discourages criminals from using guns when committing crimes. A Londoner is as likely as a New Yorker to be robbed in the street, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

According to government figures, in the UK in 2015/16 there were 1528 robberies involving illegal firearms, and 110 burglaries involving illegal firearms. Of all firearm offences for that year, 1250 resulted in some sort of injury, and 26 resulted in deaths.

In the UK, most police are not armed. Specialist firearms units, formed currently of 6278 armed officers, respond to incidents involving guns. In 2017, UK government figures show that there were 15,705 operations involving police firearms units. This figure represents a slight rise on the previous year, but is down from 23,181 in 2009. Any time the police discharge a weapon, an independent inquiry is held, regardless of whether anyone was harmed.

In 2017, police officers discharged their weapons in only 10 of the 15,705 armed operations, a much higher number due to the rise in terror attacks that year.

British Police hardly ever fire their guns (UK Police Report)
Gun deaths in the UK tend to be around 50–60 per year, for a population of 52m people. The American population is 6 times larger than that of the UK, but gun deaths are about 160 times higher.

The UK is far from perfect, and has its own problems with crime. Knife crime and occasional gun crime make the headlines, especially in parts of London. But since banning guns in 1997 it has become incredibly rare to be injured by a firearm, let alone to be killed by one. Average criminals do not use guns because they risk both a mandatory 5 year prison sentence, and being shot. Civilians don’t need guns to protect themselves, and the police are mainly unarmed too.[/quote]
https://medium.com/@tswriting/why-the-uk-has-no-guns-a345601b6a11