Okay, I know [i]for sure[/i] that it's extremely stupid of me to get involved in this conversation, but you do understand the concept of why there is the claim that individuals in the minority group aren't capable of oppressing the majority group, right? Also, I think you mean to say "men" are the only sexists (not implying that as a fact, but I think you mistyped, since gay men are entirely capable of being sexist). Or possibly, straight people are the only ones capable of suppressing others based on sexual preference? I'm actually not sure what point you were making there, now. And wait, do you really not understand why people think if a population is disarmed then less people will get shot?

It's called sarcasm. and yes... "less" people may get shot, but our gun laws are to protect the people from the government. Hitler had Austria (I think) register their weapons ... then he confiscated them. then he took complete control. Easier to take over a disarmed community.

Oh I'm sure he understands why people want want the population disarmed, he just thinks it doesn't make sense. Probably because of the US second amendment and the fact that when you take away guns from civilians, they're left helpless because criminals can still get a hold of guns because they don't respect the law.

But, and I'm sure you've heard this before, that argument is not an argument against gun control, it's an argument against all laws. It's basically saying, "Criminals will commit crimes so why bother?"

There's a town in Kentucky I think. 98% of it's population is armed... crime is almost non existent. Proof is there, but our political party wants us to feel helpless so they can control us more. it's actually easy to see if you're looking.

Switzerland is one of the most armed countries in the world and it also has extremely low gun related violence. However, Japan has some of the fewest guns per capita and has almost nonexistent gun violence. Australia instituted sweeping gun control reform almost two decades ago and it had an immediate and profound effect on gun related violence, homicide, and increasingly common gun massacres (since the reform, there has been a dramatic drop in mass shootings in Australia). There is evidence on both sides of the issue. It isn't black and white, and there are very significant examples that support both arguments. But there are reasons for these things. Switzerland has mandatory military service, and the entire country has a strong ethic regarding gun safety and ownership responsibility. In addition, the government keeps extremely tight control over ammunition, and civilian access to ammo is closely monitored and regulated. Their crime rate regarding crimes that involve firearms does not just boil down to "their population is very armed."

Also in Switzerland, every person must enlist in the military for one year. That also has an effect. More psychological than anything. In america we are more divided by every little thing. Switzerland, everyone is a military trained citizens.

I do believe I mentioned mandatory military service. It was in an edit, though, so it's possible you just missed it.