//He is pugnacious, bullying, dismissive, belittling and abusive.//

Perhaps, but he is forthright and direct, for which I must give him credit.

Meanwhile, his more cunning and weaselly lackey, leoj, is trying his hardest to divert & deflect by blaming it all on those naughty journalists. Because shooting the messenger is always a good solution to a problem. Never mind the fact crazed gunmen aren't frequently going on rampages in countries that print/air these sensationalist stories but don't allow every Tom, Harry or Dick to readily acquire vast arsenals of high-powered semi-automatics.

Are the NRA paying you to spin for them, leoj, or do you just do it voluntarily, providing charity to poor, put-upon wealthy arms merchants?

All the gun freaks can come up with is sneers, without a single constructive suggestion that would spare the lives of the 30 thousand-plus Yanks shot dead every year, and without a single admission that their lives are worth sparing. It's pretty clear who our enemies are.

Toni Lavis,

Always happy to oblige with the link again. Scroll down through it, there is more than one page. Although the very first page top left does give what you ask.

http://www.reportingonmassshootings.org/

Julian,

"All the gun freaks can come up with is sneers, without a single constructive suggestion that would spare the lives of the 30 thousand-plus Yanks shot dead every year, and without a single admission that their lives are worth sparing. It's pretty clear who our enemies are"

"How many people were killed by guns in 2015?
All shootings: Some 13,286 people were killed in the US by firearms in 2015, according to the Gun Violence Archive, and 26,819 people were injured [those figures exclude suicide]. Those figures are likely to rise by several hundred, once incidents in the final week of the year are counted."

Where did you get the figure of thirty thousand?
Are they Steele's 'Homicides' or do you just exaggerate on general principles?

"The solution is quite simple, have a binding referendum of the American voters on changing the Constitution ref. reversing the Second Amendment.
Then abide by the democratic decision.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 7 October 2017 6:21:30 PM"

Was that not a constructive suggestion?

//The solution is quite simple, have a binding referendum of the American voters on changing the Constitution ref. reversing the Second Amendment.//

Unnecessary. The 2nd Amendment just says 'the right to bear arms', not 'the right to bear whichever arms you want, with no strings attached'. The American Government just needs to stipulate tighter restrictions on which particular arms may be borne by civilians, and the manner in which they may be borne.

Toni,

The American Government already does ban certain arms from civilian use, notably machine guns and all other arms capable of automatic fire, including 'assault' rifles.
It would be hard to justify banning pistols, rifles and shotguns as they were the arms that were in common use at the time.
As for the method of bearing them the only options are openly or concealed and that doesn't leave any leeway