I think Banning "assault rifles" (Ar15, Ak47, etc) won't work because criminals don't give two fucks about gun laws and there was an "assault weapons" ban from 1994 to 2004 and it did not do anything to stop mass shootings (Columbine happened in 1999) if yall don't agree with me that's okay because the wonderful part about America is you can have differing opinions and share them

Source

https://www.nraila.org/the-truth-about-so-called-assault-weapons/

Report Highlights

Non-Hispanic black Americans perish from firearm-related homicides at higher rates than any other race in the U.S.

• Firearm-related homicide rates among non-Hispanic black Americans rose from 19.4 per 100,000 in 2018 to 30.4 in 2021, then declined to 16.3 in 2025.
• Those aged 20 to 24 had the highest gun death rate among non-Hispanic black Americans from 2018 to 2025: 75.1 deaths per 100,000.
• Non-Hispanic white Americans accounted for the largest share of total gun deaths (including homicides, suicides, unintentional, and legal intervention/operations of war) at 64.8%, while non-Hispanic black Americans accounted for the largest share of gun-related homicides: 70.5% between 2018 and 2025.

Full report available at Ammo.com

You can now find all six of the SAF factsheets I've created, and any that get posted in the future, on this page.

These are useful references for some of the most common topics that arise in the gun policy debate, with many more to come. They all include their sources so you can check my work.

These only matter to the extent they are shared to or used in discussions with those who are persuadable on this issue, otherwise it's just cool-looking PDFs for the choir to read. So feel free to share them, or use the information presented in them in your discussions.

So far we've covered:

1. How antigunners were hilariously wrong on all of their post-Bruen predictions of doom;
2. How California adds huge expense to exercising the Second Amendment;
3. Debunking the "leading cause of death for kids" stat the antigunners love to cite;
4. How Americans with carry permits are the most law-abiding demographic around;
5. A one-pager comparing the proposed burdens of the SAVE Act (called "Jim Crow 2.0" by its opponents) with the much more severe burdens of getting a carry permit in New York City;
6. Another one=pager comparing how murder has fallen faster in the US than in Canada, even though they banned handgun sales while we expanded carry rights.

Vive le 2nd Amendment. Here's what happens to the disarmed. Remember how Europeans used to sneer at us?

https://www.reddit.com/r/cringereels/s/eFqdw2xArf

The mods at that place removed it. Can't handle the truth I guess. However, I am on the job.

Alternate source

https://www.reddit.com/r/sadposting/comments/1xbwue7/this_breaks_my_heart/

Opinion: link

From Judges Walker Elrod (G.W. Bush), Willett (Trump I), and Wilson (Trump I):

We determine that switchblade knives qualify as “Arms” and are covered by the “plain text” of the Second Amendment. Because the regulation implicates the amendment, the government bears the burden of establishing that the FSA comports with well-established principles of the Second Amendment and its regulatory tradition. The government fails to meet its burden. Specifically, the FSA’s restrictions on the introduction, manufacture, transportation, and distribution of switchblades fail step two’s “how” analysis.

The FSA addressed a perceived societal problem: the interstate flow of switchblade knives. In response, the FSA sought to ban this activity. Heller and Bruen also dealt with regulations that purported to deal with “perceived societal problem[s].” And in both cases, the Supreme Court rejected those regulations as inconsistent with the Second Amendment’s principles, which were “intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs.”

Come for the legal analysis of Heller / Bruen, stay for the long introductory paragraph from the judges talking about the history of the Federal Switchblade Act and Rebel Without a Cause (1955).

Not a gun case, but still a very important second amendment case. If you thought federal law was antiquated and ass-backwards, try reading through the FSA and current application of it. The law has to go.