Try the political quiz
@B8RW3HN Agreements7mos ago

In 2023, 46,728 deaths were caused by guns

If we were able to check backgrounds, we could reduce this number and keep thousands of people from dying.

+
Expand

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Domestic Policy?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

20 Replies

 @B8SJ6R2 from Colorado  disagreed…7mos7MO

It’s your second amendment to be able to hold a firearm. Yes it can be prevented but no one should have to give up your right to bear arms

 @B8RXZ7YIndependent  from California  disagreed…7mos7MO

Most of the deaths by guns have been caused by people who illegally own firearms. These people did not have to go through the background check process.

 @B8SVVPX from Kansas  disagreed…7mos7MO

people are already getting hurt from guns and if we take it away or harder backround checks on certain people makes it harder for innocent people to defend them selves theives and thugs will still be able to get the guns easily but the common man wont be able to get one to defend outself and most of the people dying are people that dont know how to handle guns and just dont know how to shoot mostly thugs.

 @B8VZNZ5 from Missouri  disagreed…6mos6MO

I would say we need to not sell guns to immigrants without valid ID or any information on background with or without proof. More periodic check-ins would do major works in future preventatives for these actions.

 @B8VYVSV from California  agreed…6mos6MO

I agree. If we check the background of others and have them take a mental stability test, we could prevent many deaths

 @B8VYVSV from California  agreed…6mos6MO

I agree. If we check the background of others and have them take a mental stability test, we could prevent many deaths

 @B8VJZL5 from California  agreed…6mos6MO

In my personal opinion, I believe that we should make gun control restrictions VERY limited. Very thorough background checks, and especially the mental health of the individual wanting a gun, as we need to make sure that this person is in the right state of mind when having a gun that they will not have bad intentions while in their possession.

 @B8V9D42 from Virginia  agreed…6mos6MO

Yes I do. If we actually checked backgrounds and implemented limitations this wouldn't happen to the extreme that it has.

 @B8V38T4 from Kansas  agreed…6mos6MO

Yes, I agree. There are so many shootings that kill not only our next generations but loved ones who have their own lives and families. The fact that their lives were taken because of something preventable is so mind-boggling. They should never have died.

 @B8SKV3V from Maryland  agreed…7mos7MO

I feel like the person who was behind the gun shouldn't be the only one to blame. The guns should also be something to blame but checking someone background might help causing less deaths.

 @B8S8TWT from Pennsylvania  agreed…7mos7MO

I agree. As long as people go through the full process of getting background checks and firearm licensing, this should help prevent people from violence and ensure the safety of the American people.

 @B8S6L8WNo Labels from California  agreed…7mos7MO

Yes, if we put more restrictions and laws to help making gun buying more challenging, we can figure out with are more likely to own and who shouldn't own guns to help make our country more safe.

 @B8S47SGPeace and Freedom from Wisconsin  agreed…7mos7MO

I agree because if you make them take a mental test then you can know if someone should be allowed to own a gun or not.

 @B8RZKXL from California  agreed…7mos7MO

I agree with this statement, there should be stricter rules to aquire guns, but should not take away the 2nd amendment

 @B8RYDWT from California  agreed…7mos7MO

The ability to purchase a gun should come with extensive background research. We shouldn't allow just anyone who is of age to purchase a weapon.

 @B8RYXZZ from Texas  agreed…7mos7MO

I agree. People are dying from bullets almost every day, and lawmakers should've done something about this long ago.

 @B8RYQ3G from Kansas  agreed…7mos7MO

I agree with this statement because if some has a criminal background, they should not be able to buy a gun

 @B8RYKFH from Kansas  agreed…7mos7MO

I disagree with this comment, I think if it were harder to obtain a gun, then it would be harder for others to kill. There will always be malicious people, but not always guns.

 @B8RW653  from Georgia  agreed…7mos7MO

I agree with this comment. If we were to make it harder to obtain a gun by doing background checks, then there would be fewer mass shootings and therefore fewer deaths.

 @B8RY8S3 from Kansas  agreed…7mos7MO

I do agree - guns have become highly unregulated in this country, and checking backgrounds or at least adding some sort of wellness test could reduce so many deaths.

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

About this author

Learn more about the author that submitted this agreement.

@B8RW3HN

Last activeActivity3 discussionsInfluence1 engagementsEngagement bias100%Audience bias100%Active in
Counter Arguments  1 Disagreements  1 Agreements  1
PartyUndeclaredLocationUnknown

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

Israeli Bombings Kill 2,300 In Lebanon in 3 weeks

Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.The Israeli military has ordered people living in more than a quarter of Lebanon to flee, according to a UN calculation, as its fight with the Iran-backed Shia militant group Hizbollah threatens to engulf the Mediterranean country.Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.More than 1mn people have fled their homes in Lebanon in under a month, according to its government, a dramatic forced movement of the population in a country of only about 5mn inhabitants with a land mass smaller than the US state of Connecticut. Israeli forces began a ground offensive in south Lebanon two weeks ago, in their fourth invasion of the country in under five decades. They had already destroyed large parts of the densely populated southern Beirut suburb where Hizbollah had its headquarters, and killed many top militant commanders in air strikes, including former leader Hassan Nasrallah.Rema Jamous Imseis, Middle East director of UNHCR, told journalists in Geneva that “over 25 per cent of [Lebanon is] under a direct Israeli military evacuation order”. “People are heeding these calls to evacuate and they’re fleeing with almost nothing,” she added, saying that 80 per cent of the shelters opened by the Lebanese government — mostly in schools — were now full.

▲  1012 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies