I'm Pro-Gun: Change my Mind

Yes, I am glad we found common ground. "By the way you mention that assault weapon can also be used for hunting. But this is wrong. A hunters don't need an AR-15 to hunt down animals. Assault weapon are not hunting rifles. Most often hunters use Snipers and shotgun which it's much more suitable for hunting." Read this article-https://www.brentonusa.com... You still haven't answer this- What is the definition of a so called "assault weapon"? "Do you also need a fully automatic machine gun to hunt animals ? Of course not. These weapons are weapon of war. Hunters don't need to have an weapon of war." Machine guns are illegal, ever since 1933. What is a "weapon of war"? Ar-15's and rifles are semi-automatic weapons, which is basically every gun like a handgun. Pull the trigger once, a bullet comes out. Pull it again, another bullet comes out. It has the same basic functionality of a hunting rifle or handgun. "You mention that assault weapon can be used for self defense. But why not use hand guns instead ? Besides Second amendment guaranteed the right to bear arms but it doesn't protect weapon of war." Handguns are used mostly for concealed-carry. people can use AR-15's for home defense, and mostly to protect against a tyrannical government. What is a weapon of war? An AR-15 has little difference to any other handgun or other gun, and the 2nd amendment does protect the right to own one. "There was also federal law banning assault weapon in the year between 1994 to 2004 and we saw much fewer mass shooting than it's today. After the year 2004 the law was expired and we saw and surge of mass shooting and death toll. Mass shooting has become more deadlier than before because of the law was expired." Um, no. https://tcf.org... Also, the murder rate did not go up after it expired. the ban did nothing on mass shootings or murder rates. It steadily declined during the ban, and ever since it expired, the homicide rate has remained virtually the same. So you can't say murders declined because of the assault weapon ban; Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.(https://www.infoplease.com...) "You also mention that cars kill more people than guns which may be true. But according to the recent statistic , gun death are now becoming as common as vehicle accidental death." Can you site that please? Gun murders are far more common than gun murders and gun deaths.(https://crimeresearch.org...) "In Japan for example, one of the strictest gun laws in the world, being killed by a gun is just as common as being killed with lightning strike. The probability of gun death is 1 in 1000,000 which is very very low." That's Japan. And i don't care about gun murders, I care about all murders. "But Japan has fewest guns per capita which make them the safest nation." Site their murder rate please. "You said that banning assault weapon won't solve murder which it's true. Assault weapon are responsible of only 1 % of all crimes. It's true that most criminals use handguns but the reason why this weapon should be banned is to reduce or prevent mass shooting." So why would we ban them if it has no affect on murder rate? Over 70% of incidents in mass shootings are done with handguns, shotguns, or revolvers.(https://www.statista.com...) Should we ban handguns too since they are the main culprit? "It's has been very clear that people who want to kill a of people often use assault weapon. And things like bump stock and high capacity magazine even make mass shooting more deadlier." Only 30% are done with all rifles(look at statistics above). Bump stocks can be banned i guess, sure. The magazine doesn't have anything to do with it though. Handguns don't carry as much as rifles, but they are used in the majority of mass shootings. Plus, you can put new clips in, because most shooters would agree it is very heavy to carry 30 bullets. "All these has been proven to reduce dramatically death per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. Shouldn't we have the regulation on guns also ? Why not ?" Gun regulations don't decrease the murder rate. "Gun control doesn't deprive the right to bear arms. It doesn't violate Second Amendment. It's a typical nonsense slippery slope argument from gun lobby like the NRA. Gun control just ensure that we are safe and there is more regulation on guns." It does, because the 2nd states you have the right to bear arms. Banning "assault weapons" which you still haven't defined, or any other gun, is a violation of the 2nd amendment. They are necessary for home defense and mainly to protect against a tyrannical government. Why should law-abiding citizens have to sacrifice their basic human right because of what some dumb criminal did? It is not their fault, neither is suicide by other people. If you give an essential gun to the government, the chances are you won't be able to protect yourself as well against a tyrannical government who now has your gun, because AR-15's are more effective t long range than handguns, and more accurate. Why would you give the government your gun when they were the exact people designed to protect against? Also, a question that you still haven't answered yet- DO YOU TRUST THE GOVERNMENT AND TRUMP ADMINISTRATION?