If you don't have empathy for the problem then by all means ignore the actions that's being taken in an attempt to rectify the problem. By no means is a buyback going to solve the issue tomorrow but it certainly isn't hurting this man or anyone who's against the idea.
If this man truly wanted to "point out the flaws" with this program he simply could've made the drive and speak his mind at a city council meeting, email, leave a voice mail to the party in charge of the program.
There's no shortage of apathy in this country and exploiting a public system rather than coming together to find a solution seems counterproductive.
By all means, let's disarm prohibited persons though. But can you can stomach the "disparate impact?"
It's even more comical when firearm manufactures record their most profitable years when Dem's control the white house.
You're straying rather close to intellectual dishonesty here. I think you're well aware there are some people in the USA who very much do want to force people to give up their firearms. Furthermore, similar groups have largely succeeded in other countries. That's why it keeps getting argued.
> It's even more comical when firearm manufactures record their most profitable years when Dem's control the white house.
I don't get the joke. What's funny about a perceived future shortage pushing demand forward in time? We saw the same dynamic with toilet paper in 2020. I suppose it's kind of funny that the perception of a shortage then creates a shortage, but somehow I don't think that's what you meant.