If Mort Divine ruled the world

Well the left's argument seems to be "lack of guns = lack of gun deaths", so it's not like they are saying no guns = no violence
 
Well the left's argument seems to be "lack of guns = lack of gun deaths", so it's not like they are saying no guns = no violence

Well, if gun bans indeed led to a lack of guns, that statement would be trivially true, but still irrelevant. The sort of irrational aversion to gun violence over other sorts is kin to the irrational aversion to "scary looking" guns over guns with equal or greater power/capacity/utility.
 
Maybe.

I think the discussion entirely lies in the right to defend yourself (and level out the playing field for women, minorities, smaller men) & accepting (but minimizing through certain venues) vs. banning guns (which would, best case scenario, remove gun violence from America) but disproportionately affects minorities/women/small men to regular acts of violence
 
Women are a significant source of the most recent explosion of CCW applications by raw numbers, and I know when I went to get mine, the classroom was prob 40% women and at the sheriff's office I was the only guy in line vs like 8 women. I think GOA and the NRA aren't long from posing it significantly as a "woman's rights" issue. :tickled:
 
The gun ranges here are filled with slogans and memorabilia appealing to the female market. In small groups I'd still say the majority of people are male (or maybe male/female couples), but when you get those bringing their whole families, you get everyone from grandma to the youngest daughters shooting. fwiw I've also noticed that it's Hispanics and Asians that make up much of the female population there, although that might be more economic (upper-middle class area = upwards-mobile minority families and lazy white families).

Also, while a small anecdote, I've overheard more women on campus mentioning that they own a gun than men. Perhaps it's because men are more paranoid of being seen as potential spree killers or something, and if I actually asked around I'm sure I'd find figures in line with usual statistics, but it seems to be less and less of a male-only thing these days.
 
I have no idea what the racial demos are, but Hispanics are generally pro gun so...Yeah, it's becoming "empowering" for women to have a gun, while too many white guys in Urbania are scared of being seen as having any power outside of purchasing power.

Edit: Here's a funny one for this thread: My Tex-mex/mestizo inlaws are major Trump supporters. Of course they are either legal immigrants or descendants of. Probably a sort of "We did it, fuck these Rio swimmers" sentiment.
 
i-love-my-new-hand-held-wireless-device.jpg
 
National Review:

A gendercrat at the University of Tennessee recommends that UT's faculty and students discharge such old-fashioned pronouns as he/him/his or they/them/their and instead adopt gender-neutral replacements, such as xe/xem/xyr(and there are other, even more Scrabble-friendly variants). According to the university's Pride Center, the first thing a member of UT community should say upon being introuced is: "Oh, nice to meet you, [insert name]. What pronouns should i use?" We'll admit that it beats "What are you majoring in?".

-----------

In the 1930s, Yale divided itself into residential colleges in an effort to imitate Oxford and Cambridge. The colleges, however faux-old, are handsome structures that help break up the monotony of institution life. The professors who preside over their affairs are called masters. Now Stephen Davis, Master of Pierson College, has announce that he will not use the honorific "master" because of "the racial and gendered weight it carries". A glance at Professor Davis's curriculum vitae shows that he is an M. Phil(Yale, 1995), an M.A.(Yale, 1993), an M.Div.(Duke Divinity School), and yes, a B.A., or bachelor of arts(Princeton, 1988). Also, Davis means "son of David," while Stephen comes from the Greek for "crown," which, while not gendered, is certainly hierarchical. Get to work, comrade.