Half the refugees dying was merely an exaggeration, but lots of refugees died on their passage to Europe, most of the deaths are cause by the boats capsizing at the Mediterranean. As for the "less drastic problem", I was hasty for my choice of words, but what I meant was the the problem would be more manageable. Anyways, if refugees turned up at your doorstep, would you help them, or would you neglect them and decide they are someone else's problem? That's the problem with the Gulf Countries, they turned away refugees in need of shelter, food and water, forcing them to take a long and dangerous passage through Egypt, Libya and finally the Mediterranean, before reaching Europe, where people would actually welcome them in. Lots of them died on their way, take for example that drowned three year old Syrian kid who washed ashore on one of Greece's shores.
OK. There were attacks at Paris. But I dare you to count at the amount of french mulsims are terrorists compared to the OK ones: Less than 1 or 2% are terrorists.
For those of you who say that Banning ALL Muslims isn't discriminatory: Okay, so what if we decided to remove all Jews from the US because one man shot down a whole building of innocent unarmed people (This is a made up story, a "What if"). That's basically what you are saying. You are blaming one radical EXTREMIST group, which makes up a SMALL percentage of the population, for a whole group of people. You also argue that you want to remove illegal immigrants, and to remove them you need to get rid of an entire group of people. Guess what, you are generalizing these people. Okay, moving on to gun control: Most Americans have the ability to go to a to a gun store and purchase a gun. Some of these gun store have a vey light background check system and some LACK the very presence of a background check system. What we want to be accomplished from gun control is to have stricter restrictions to who can buy a gun. There are some people on the no fly list that can purchase a gun. What is a possible benefit of someone who is on the no fly list to purchase a gun? Especially of those who aren't even citizens. And these people aren't buying guns in the black-market they buy them LEGALLY! That's the scary part! You would argue that our second amendment needs to be protected. Guess what, in the US we allow this to happen. Our second amendment isn't under attack. I'd also like to point out that we have people, normal Americans, who own semi automatic and automatic riffles to feel protected from threats. We wouldn't need to feel as scared if we had stricter restrictions on the people who could buy a weapon to kill mass amount of people. These high powered guns are meant to kill many people in a short amount of time. Don't get me wrong, I believe people should be allowed to keep weapons in their home to feel safe, but not high powered weapons that are meant to kill in the masses.
Although, as i said, the amount of good "redugees" compared to terrorists is very low. My city is accepting 20k refugees, they started making them come, and nothing bad happened...
Gun regulation does not always mean complete removal of them. For example in my country (New Zealand) guns are highly regulated but people still own them. And the majority of shootings in NZ are hunting accidents of course we get the occasional nutcase and I get that the US has a larger population but I think regulation would be good. However a total ban won't work like as you said it will mean only criminals have them. But your statement that registering them will mean they are confiscated is unlikely to happen.
I never said all the Muslims are terrorist. Its not about how many good refuges come in vs. how many bad ones come in, its about making a very easy passage way for terrorist to enter the country. ISIS is a large group that has many people it can send over to these countries accepting refugees.
How is taking away guns gonna make it safer? It's not gonna stop people from getting them. And once again, read our amendments. We have the right to bare arms.
*bear true gun control supporters only want to take away guns with no purpose other than to spray and prey (i.e. heavy semi-autos) not pistols or rifles
Not saying is a good or right thing to do, but it kinda makes ISIS enter the city a little harder... That's all I say.
If no one has guns, it is proportionally safer than people owning guns. Our amendments have flaws, can't deny that. We need to regulate guns more than ever, assault rifles and DMRs should be banned, but small arms rifles and handguns can be legal to own.