Whatever the total was when the sun set on Umpqua last Thursday. As I said in the other thread I'm done defending this right. There are other ways to allow citizens to enjoy the same privilege they enjoy now. It simply needs to be something you qualify for and not something you are born with. No different than driving or CCW or FFL.
And to be clear. You are taking the stance that no number of firearm deaths could ever make you consider converting this right to a privilege? If the next Harris and Klebold manage to kill every soul in in the school and thy line up 500 coffins you're going to hold firm.
Honest question: How many bodies would it take for you to reconsider your stand? How many citizens need to die before you would consider amending the constitution to allow for gun ownership to be reduced from a right to a privilege?
https://www.google.com/search?q=isis&safe=off&biw=1920&bih=943&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0CAgQ_AUoA2oVChMItomRqoG2yAIVR0qOCh0efgBN#safe=off&tbm=isch&q=isis+terrorist Im not going to post the images here but Ill leave that google image search for anyone who wants to look. Simple search "isis terrorist" I see lots of fully automatic weapons, some rockets, grenade launchers, a tank or two, trucks with heavy (large caliber) machine guns. A long damn way from a bolt action 30-30 and grandpa's S&W .45
edit: And our military has to tip toe around the region and be sure not to kill anyone's goats. A military coup on our own soil would be much less concerned about out relations with the Kingdom or what Putin is going to do. Subsequently it would be far more swift, brutal, and indiscriminate.
I have two responses to that. First lets assume a large portion of our armed forces oppose this military state as you suggest. Then they will throw down the government with military grade gear and politely ask you to take your Ruger semi auto rife home and stay out of their way. Secondly, those thousands of rank and file soldiers who are stateside when the hammer falls will either be the first set of targets or will be rendered ineffective by being cut off from their Command and Control. Its ridiculous to think that this would be a single rouge general. The threat you are worried about is one that would take place at the highest levels of our military and would have taken into consideration this very issue and have a strategy.
Either way, your rifles, pistols, and shotguns are not part of the calculation any more than the swords owned by private citizens are.
Can we not just drop this facade of a reason? IF our government decided to impose military rule over us all of the guns in private ownership wouldn't even slow them down. Against countries with billions of dollars worth of military grade weaponry our armed forces are completely capable of bushing them aside. You think a hundred guys with Glocks and Semi-Auto .762s stand a chance against a platoon of our average GIs? Much less against any of the air based weapons/platforms they could bring to bare. If you want to hold on to the notion that we could, with civilian weapons, oust a tyrannical government then you have to say that private ownership of a blackhawk and a bunch of hellfire missiles should be ok. And for that matter I should be able to walk into Walmart and buy a Browning M2 and a few belts of ammo.
As a former member of the NRA, a registered Republican, a gun owner, a hunter, and a hobbyist...
I just cant do it any more. I cant honestly say that my "need" to have a small arsenal is anything but a way to show off my salary. The guns were expensive and the amount of ammo I go through isn't cheap. Some of you big cock Rambo types might take your .223 AR and 1911 up against a platoon of soldiers backed up with armor and air support but I cant pretend that I would. If surrendering all of my weapons except a hunting rifle and shotgun (and registering and licensing those) genuinely moved us forward to a point that these mass killings/shooting were a once a decade tragedy instead of once every few months Id do it.
So you need more than a shotgun and a rifle for what? I mean my home defense weapon of choice is my Mossburg 500 12a Mag not my Glock, my Tarus, or my Sig or even my Ruger carbine. And when it comes to hunting I never pack my handguns. Its actually funny that the things I own in the name of home and self defense are really just toys that I take to the range periodically to put 50 bucks through the chamber. I think its time we put the 2nd amendment to the ultimate test. Put it to the people. If the majority want to keep it than so be it. If on the other hand the majority believe its past its usefulness then it will go away as it should.
And it only took one more page before someone chopped a single sentence out of a larger point and tried to change the meaning of what I said. And on top of that you managed to even misread and misrepresent that. There is private ownership of firearms in the UK FYI. They are licensed and regulated but people have them and the hunt with them and they kill vermin with them but they don't kill each other with them in anywhere near the numbers we do.
More cynicism... I keep seeing this idea of mental heath checkups and I just want to trow some numbers at that. Like I said previously I was attached to the mental health industry for the past 15 years so I know some things about that field. We were one of the largest MH certifying board in the country and we certified around 60 thousand counselors & therapists. Our certification was a voluntary one so we didn't have everyone and in fact had only between 20 and 30% putting the total population at around 250,000. If we double that number to include Psychiatrists (very rough and likely exaggerated number) that puts us at half a million MH professionals. Now a full time work year is 2080 hours and since they have other responsibilities beyond seeing patients its accepted that only half of their time are they in appointments with patients or 1040 hours. That's 520,000,000 hour long appointments per year. Current US population is 318,000,000 (give or take a few thousand) and there about 88 guns per 100 people in the country. But we know that that doesn't mean that 88% of the 318 million have guns. This article puts the percentage closer to 35% of individuals reporting they own a gun. So lets go with 30% of 318,000,000 or 9,540,000. If we need to see each of those folks twice a year (and of all of the counselors I know will tell you that you don't know much of anything about the person for a few visits) that's an additional 190,800,000 patient hours the system has to absorb. Which translates into another 184,000 MH professionals. Again basing it on my experience the universities pump out about 15,000 newly minted masters and doctorate level folks each year in these fields and that number is largely offset by people leaving the field so that kind of growth could take decades. Simply put the system cant handle having to see every gun owner twice a year without substantial change, and twice a year is hardly enough for a MH professional to make an honest evaluation of the mental stability of the individual.
No offense taken because I am fairly cynical on the issue that we can (or will) do much of anything. And then I'm very optimistic that what is difficult and expensive today will be cheap and easy in another 5 years.
I grew up with guns. I own a bunch of them. I would support a repeal of the 2nd amendment along side of an amendment that provided the nation with a much narrower privilege that could be used to accommodate sportsmen. Dispose of the right to own firearms and replace it with a system similar to whats used in the UK.
Short of that you have to look beyond the guns themselves and look at what makes the people resort to these types of extreme acts