Gun Control & RKBA

I don't want a Republican/originalist SCOTUS, but that's what your side gave us so I'll take what I can get. I mean, you flat-out state in this thread that your ultimate goal is to make private gun ownership a tightly-controlled privilege extended by the states.

And the firearms industry is a for-profit manufacturing sector just like any other. And if they're so rich, why is Remington in bankruptcy protection?

1. Rifles (of all types) account for about 5% of gun-related homicides annually and 2.5% of homicides overall, a proportion that has been consistent for decades.
   
   
2. Banning new sales of a subset of rifles can't lower the homicide rate by 50%, when rifles only account for 2.5% of all murders.
   
   
3. Banning "assault weapons" in 1994 only banned future sales of "assault weapons". "Assault weapons" already owned by Sept. 14th, 1994 were legal and in circulation already.
   
   
4. The number of "assault weapons" in circulation remained largely fixed during the 10-year period of the Federal AWB yet the homicide rate dropped in half.
   
   
5. Since "assault weapons" were replaced with "almost but not quite assault weapons" in sales after Sept. 14th, 1994, the homicide rate should have stayed steady.
   
   
6. The homicide rate been climbing the past decade or so despite some of the biggest states enacting more gun-controls laws after the Sandy Hook massacre.
   
   
7. The major reason the murder rate took a dive in 1990 (4 years before the Federal AWB) was because a generation earlier women gained control over their reproductive organs via widespread availability and use of birth control: the Pill, the IUD, condoms, and abortion. Fewer children were born into social situations where a life of crime and poverty was likely. In the 1990's, as young violent criminals were killed, went legit, went to prison, or went on to non-violent crimes, they were not equally replaced by fresh, new up-and-coming violent teenagers.
   
   
8. The minor reason was that at the same time women were controlling when, where, and how many kids to have, we also took lead products out of gasoline and paint. The levels of airborne lead plummeted and kid's toys and furnishings no longer had lead paint on them. The generation born after about 1974 wasn't poisoned with lead. Since lead poisoning makes kids dumb, short-sighted, and violent, there were fewer kids that saw street violence as a career and took another, more legit, direction.
   
   
   Your attempts to stop violence via the hardware method are not only ineffective, they are anti-effective because they prevent social progress.
   
   They prevent social progress because they put Republicans in charge, and Republicans are evil. They are kleptocratic theocrats whose social policies guarantee high crime rates.
   
   In fact, I'll be that the reason the crime rate is jumping up is that it's being driven by red states that, 15-20 years ago started to severely curtail birth control methods, abortion services, and comprehensive sex education. Now those unwanted kids being born into bad situations are becoming young adults, and young adults are the most likely to commit violent crimes.
   
   Why are those states red? The answer lies in your mirror.