No, the problem here in the US goes much and much deeper than that.The problem is that the ‘ special ‘ interests of companies and large interest groups are given priority over public and national interest. Election Companers are-knowingly-so long or even made permanent and so expensive that politicians have become the wileless slaves of their lenders.
As a result, the ‘ special ‘ interest groups, of which the NRA (National Rifle Association) is a very powerful one, are forcing the Poltici to take all sorts of measures that do not exactly benefit the security of the citizen and are contrary to all the interests of the country.They say, for example, that unstable people with a proven fixation on violence must have access to weapons of war. That that demands the lives of innocent schoolchildren is only nicely taken into account, because that means that the teachers now have to be obliged to also possess and bear arms. That only increases the arms sales and that is the importance that politicians should (should) serve. How much innocent blood that costs is irrelevant.
The weapons themselves are not the problem. Weapons in the hands of sensible people are not so dangerous, but the power of the NRA is life-threatening, especially because they now also have Russian contacts and armed militias at their disposal.
In the picture below, the number of firearms is owned by citizens per capita.For the US, this is on more than one weapon per citizen. That’s ‘ r so at least 300 million. Yikes… The only country that comes close is Yemen, and they have a considerable time in the civil War.
The answers already written for this question are good that capitalism is the cause of this epidemic at the expense of the citizens.
The NRA (National Rifle Association) has recently had its own television channel where it can advertise weapons as much as they want. Patriotism is to be express by buying weapons. This has become more recent, and the number of weapons per household only increases.
I am quite cynical about this domestic policy of the US somewhere. It Is undoubtedly bad for the Americans themselves, but perhaps a relief for the rest of the world.If the armaments industry cannot wear its production to its own population, it may be lobbied for distribution to other areas. So more arms trade and more war. It Is perhaps the least bad option that all those murder weapons remain in the middle, however gruesome it is for all those American children who have to be afraid that a fool could just shoot their school in a hurry.
In 2018, on average, one school per week was hit by ‘ N shooting.[1
Thanks for the A2A.
Yeah, she does have a big problem with weapon and I don’t think that can be solved because there are too much money involved with many people, especially the politicis.And as long as the money is in the hands of the Politici’s ‘ countries ‘, the problem will never be solved.
But the problem is also with the ordinary citizens and their relationship with their arms.We can imagine that they need a weapon in many places because the country is so big so they must protect themselves. But should she also bring an assault weapon to Mcdonald’s?! So as long as American citizens can’t agree on what to do, the problem will just get bigger.
I think they have a weapon problem, but that is not a turnkey solution.
If you ask me, their background checks should be done more thoroughly.
Clear rules on storing and transporting weapons can also be a little better. And a little form of registration may not be bad either.
Where I am not in faith is the unpacking of weapons.This will result in only the “bad guy’s” with weapons.
Education education and more education.