konceptjones
The one between three and three.
You’re being intellectually disingenuous if you think the US isn’t also the leader in the types of shootings you’re trying to delineate here.
Take all those others out and the US is still multiples more deadly than most developed countries.
To also note, you know what dude meant when he said legally.
1st line: I made no such comparison. I said that a country that supposedly has no guns in the average citizen's hands still has a gun violence problem. Whether this country or the next is a "leader" in that type of violence is moot. The point is there shouldn't be ANY gun violence in England because the average citizen cannot legally own a gun, and yet the problem, regardless of how small or large, still persists.
2nd line: Didn't mention any of that either.
3rd line: Go back to the post I replied to. I highlighted the last line as that was the ONLY thing I was responding to and NOTHING MORE. He didn't say "legally", I did because it make a difference. The kid was illegally in possession of a firearm, which is the ONLY way a kid gets their hands on a gun and there's simply nothing that can be done about that. Whether he steals it from his parents closet (theft = illegal) or makes his way to the hood and cops from Bruhman (underaged purchasing a gun on the street = illegal) it makes no difference; he got it illegally therefore this:
it's not rocket science to try to find a way to limit access to guns.
is truly meaningless because you cannot legislate your way out of criminal activity by it's very nature: They don't adhere to the law therefore laws cannot prevent this type of activity. If you could this would be one f the the safest countries on the planet.