How To Argue For Gun Control.

Yeah you could. For one you can pull the trigger roughly 300 rounds per minute and for another, bump fire can be accomplished without and modifications.

 

That has little to do with whether or not they cooperated with the police during the protest even if it's all true. As for ANTIFA, from what I've found, you were correct that they had a permit. However, that doesn't mean they didn't initiatethe violence.

 

Could you give a link to that. I couldn't find it anywhere in the ruling. The closest I got was the dissenting views of the minority.

 

How can there be enough motivation to get harden criminals to show up to a bunch of cops knowingly without jeopardizing tge justice system as a whole? The only way I can think of is by saying "we won't arrest you if you have warrents or drugs" which will be in violation of the justice system.

 

Your assuming a lot! You keep bringing up criminals as if they're the only ones who are the problem.

Also, I think MeAgain is correct. If you make the buy back more effective and combine that with efforts to limit access in general by requiring permits for all types of guns you are making the decision worthwhile to not own a gun.

The reason to disarm people is the rate of homicides caused by guns.

 

I think you are confusing the cyclic rate of some semi-auto rifles as opposed to actual practical firing rate.
You ever try to unload a full magazine of an AR15 or AK that fast?
sure you can do it, but accuracy sucks big time. Reason they dropped full auto mode in favor of 3 round burst mode in military usage.
You can still go full auto, but will probably not hit a damn thing and get slapped upside your head by whomever is in charge.
A bump stock allows the action of the recoil to essentially reset and drive the trigger into your finger. It also absorbs some of the recoil energy thereby increasing accuracy.
I seriously doubt you or most could actually pull a trigger that fast, as I have tried in the past.
I've tried a trigger modification on an AR that increased the firing rate, but accuracy was seriously impacted.
Trying to achieve a bumpstock type of action without any mods means you will end up in the dirt on your ass, have a bruised shoulder and will drop the weapon.
Pretty clear you have little or no practical experience or knowledge about this stuff, so why you keep arguing over it?

 

Statistically they are. Are we to assume everybody is guilty until proven innocent?

So you're for disarming the law abiding?

Which will be substituted with other means. Like the bombings and vehicle uses in Europe.

 

That was the point I've been making for awhile.

Doesn't that violate the basic manual of arms when dealing with long guns? On a normal rifle or shotgun, you want the stock firmly against your body to provide stability. With a bump stock or bump fire without modification, you're loosely holding the grip or stock to allow the reciol to pull the trigger for you. As thisvideo shows, bump fire is extremely inaccurate.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=15s&v=D6oaRAgdslE

Actually I do.

 

DRI sez through a song:


Automatic weapons were meant for the war
But here they are right outside your front door
Gangs and thieves are armed to the hilt
Ready to kill without the quilt

Lock and load
We need gun control
We need gun control

A shot rings out from down the street
The gangs are restless from all the night heat
The cold, black metal has made them insane
Killing each other is part of the game

Lock and load
We need gun control
We need gun control

The barrel of a gun at the back of your head
Your money or your life is all that he said
Do you want to die or live to be old
Don't think twice about gun control

Lock and load
We need gun control
We need gun control

We were given the right to bear arms
When our land was all ranch and farms
The law is old and in need of updating
There's no time time for hesitating

Lock and load
We need gun control
We need gun control


I agree with them

 

I couldn't find anything within your three links that said the ruling overturns previous interpretations. In fact, in your second link it said this:

"(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 , nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252 , refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47–54."

 

Actually, shotguns require a lot more accuracy than what is portrayed on tv.

Actually, as demostrated in the video I linked, automatic fire (simulated or not) misses more than it hits and that's repeated out of the battlfield. Soldiers are not mowing down hundreds of people at a time. If automatic fire is so affective then why they only issue one or two to a squad whilethe rest carry M4s with 3 round bursts which they hardly use?

 

Mac

The thing is that it is obvious you don’t have any rational or reasonable arguments to back up your stance only statements that you repeat over and over, which means there can be no debate of the topic, it seems to me that at the base line your views are faith based not reasoned based, honest debate is only possible if both sides accept reason.
So the question now is why do you hold onto these deeply flawed views that you know you cannot defend from criticism what is it about your education and character that has made you so blinked and close minded.

In this investigation your views on racism are interesting.

You are a black person, or rather you claim to be a black person. But you seem to think that racists that would have no problem (if they were able) in taking the rights away from black people even to the point of re-enslaving or killing black people can in your view be fine people.

What is more you seem to think that nothing should be done to counter their viewpoint - that black people are inferior to white people - that since they are otherwise fine people and that the belief that black people should in their views be exploited or exterminated, is too slighted a defect to be addressed.

This is a social problem like the need for gun control and like gun control you seem to want to ignore it.

Is this another case in which you hope your god will at some point intervene and put things right?

And of course this reply speaks volumes to what I said above about you seeming to believe you do not need rational or reasonable arguments to back up your views – that to you belief trumps any rational thought.

 

And the previous post above leads me to something I read over the weekend – it seems that some people opposed to gun control have so far parted this the rational the reasonable and of reality itself that they believe that gun incidents like Las Vagas (and someone told me Sandy Hook) are made up events. They believe that these things have been set up by the ‘government’ to convince Americans that there is a need for gun control, they believe that the ‘government’ hires ‘crisis actors’ to play at being shot at, at being injured and for faking deaths.

As such these anti-gun control 'patriots' target the injured and mock the grieving.

[SIZE=11pt]Braden Matejka survived a bullet to the head in the Las Vegas massacre. Then, the death threats started coming.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]“You are a lying piece of shit and I hope someone truly shoots you in the head,” a commenter wrote to Matejka on Facebook, one week after a gunman killed 58 people and injured hundreds more. “Your soul is disgusting and dark! You will pay for the consequences!” said another. A Facebook meme quickly spread with a photo of him after the shooting, captioned: “I’m a lying ****!” [/SIZE]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/26/las-vegas-shooting-conspiracy-theories-social-media

I’m not sure Mac (and the other opponents of gun control) are that far gone, but their abandonment of the rational and reasonable in favour of belief seems to me to suggest they are following that road.