Posted on 03/27/2021 2:55:01 PM PDT by rktman
On Friday’s “PBS NewsHour,” New York Times columnist David Brooks said that the only way to have a meaningful impact on gun violence is to decrease the number of guns in the U.S., something countries like Australia have done.
Brooks said, “[T]he more I look at it, and I’m not alone in this, the more you conclude that the simple problem is we have too many guns in America. There’s upwards of, some estimates, 350 million guns in this country. And so, when you get a lonely young man who’s detached and sociopathic, getting a gun for that person is not hard. And so, we spend a lot of time on these things like background checks and assault weapon bans, and that’s fine. But a lot of effort has been put into things that aren’t that effective. We just have to have a debate on how do we reduce the total number of guns in [the] country? And other countries have done this, Australia and others, through buybacks and other things. It’s obviously super difficult politically. But, to me, it’s the only way to have a meaningful difference.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Brooks is no journalist
Blue eyed blond Nordic white privilege
Didn’t Brooks used to be a conservative?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No, he only played one on TV.
What this guy has actually done is reveal the true thoughts of the American leftist. First, those ugly evil semi autos with hi-cap mags. Then we'll see a crowd of folks murdered by a shotgun, then revolvers and so on.
It will never stop. Britain banned firearms, then they experienced an explosion in knife attacks, they banned certain types of knives and altered others with blunt tips, then thugs were using co2 pellet pistols, then they restricted access to pellet pistols.
It will never stop until we are completely disarmed.
They use the sights on the top of the guns, not sights on the side of the guns.
...We just have to have a debate on how do we reduce the total number of guns in [the] country...
___________________________________________________
Ya gotta love how Leftists like Brooks just ooze with deceit when they talk. Does anyone think that a Leftist is content with merely debating “How to reduce guns?” The implication from his statement that reducing guns is already a done deal and that we merely have to discuss the “how?”
He’s such a poncey little cuck.
Brooks is wrong.
The only true way to have a meaningful impact on gun violence is to decrease the number of democrats.
Well, Obama and Holder tried exporting guns but that didn’t work out so well. We definitely need to tackle drugs, mental illness, glorification of violence and societal ennui but we are generally reaping the whirlwind from the wind sowed by decades of devaluing life, beginning with abortion and continuing through depersonalizing people by forcing them into identity groups to serve as faceless sacrificial victims to politicians and race panderers.
Reduce the number number of anti constitutional Politicians and make the whole country safer.
Don't forget Jeffrey Toobin.
Otherwise he'll just have to sit around and play with himself.
We also need fewer David Brookses.
Most confirmation bias ever! Toobin doing himself to a map of Texas going blue. Wow.
I’d like to believe that Netanyahu would throw Toobin into prison if he exercised his rights. It’s the least he deserves.
I think reducing something else would have a much larger impact.
ML/NJ
Too Many Guns???
There are more guns than people and trillions of round of ammo.
If legal gun owners were the problem, the existing government would have far more fear and respect for the people.
He used to play one in NYT columns. In other words--no, he was never really a conservative.
I sometimes talked to him at a regular gathering for NYC conservatives decades ago. When he admitted he wasn't pro-life, I knew he wouldn't be identifiably conservative for long.
Regardless of the perceived number of “surplus” guns. Reaching that reduction would require obtaining millions of guns currently in civilian hands. Buy back programs even if mandatory would not reduce the number of guns substantially. Look at the experience in New Zealand where there is no Constitutional right to bearing arms. Many New Zealanders have chosen not to turn in their guns. Reducing the number of guns in the US would by necessity sooner or later require forceful taking of guns by government agents with predictable armed resistance.
Keeping the death penalty would help.
I understand the concern of innocent people maybe being executed and that is a major factor to consider.
However, these days, with DNA testing and video evidence, and other stuff like that, it’s less likely to happen.
So, some liberal Canadian a-hole who lives in NYC spouts off about guns. His opinion on this is just what America needs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.