After the eighth school shooting in seven weeks – some gun control proposals

Sorry, I think you might have missed several of the questions that I asked. Would you like me to restate them for you?

 

Something to consider from Scientific American More Guns Do Not Stop More Crimes, Evidence Shows

 

Even when you live in an urban area like Boston, the police still take at least 15 minutes to get to you after dialing 911. In that amount of time, they’ll make it in time to chalk your dead outline before rigor mortis sets in.

Your other opinion is having a ways and means of defending yourself

 

Also from Scientific American More Guns Do Not Stop More Crimes, Evidence Shows

 

One more... More Guns Do Not Stop More Crimes, Evidence Shows

 

And another viewpoint on the 2nd Anendment Repeal debate.

'There'll Be a Civil War': Watters Blasts John Paul Stevens' Call for 2nd Amendment Repeal

 

Nice cleavage! So Fox.. As for Jesse Watters, isn't he the Fox commentator? If he knew anything about the amendment process, he'd know that it's next to impossible to get an amendment through without ovewhelmingly strong public support. So not to worry. I do worry though about people who talk about civil war at the drop of a hat. Some people tried that once. Didn't work out.

 

About as easy as getting one repealed. You did pay attention to the part about Trump being the one that would be able to have an easy go of taking over an unarmed population didn't you?

Yeah Cal is inching closer to it themselves. Another great product of a progressive left Utopia.

 

Not

I don’t believe your views have been censored – in fact I wish the gun lobbyists would express their views in an open and honest way without all the evasion, misdirection and actual lying that seems to be their modus operandi.

I mean look at all the repetition of stuff already covered in one shape or another as I keep asking why not address the already outstanding criticisms rather than repeat the same crap over and over.

 

Ironically that event you referred to was the only time in American history where large numbers of Americans took up arms against an over reaching government - in that case the over reach being the governments attempt to end the ability to own other human beings. When the second amendment was written those humans the millitia fought to keep enslaved were 3/5 of a person. Just thought that was an interesting bit of trivia to what you’ve already added to the discussion

 

Exchange student arrested in Pennsylvania for allegedly 'threatening to shoot up' high school: Police

 

Quite an arsenal. Lots of ammo, no gun found. And the point is? I'm glad the police moved in and arrested him. I think there was probable cause, even if he was "kidding'.

 

The point is they acted on the threat he posed BEFORE he acted on it. Instead of making excuses as to why he shouldn't have been stopped beforehand. He was acting in a threatening manner. He was detained. A very simple concept.

For years before 9-11, if you uttered the word hi-jack on a plane, you got at the least detained. It stopped the word hijack being uttered.

 

We already have some guns that are illegal. That is the case because there was a time when we said OK even though you can have a gun this type of gun or weapon is especially dangerous so the Second Amendment does not apply. That's why you can not own a nuke or a tank unless it has had its guns removed. Then you have a gigantic car that eats gas but you can have fun on your own land. I have seen gun owners who did this. But of course their intent was to give it a gun again if needed.

Gun owners did not try to overthrow the goverment they accepted these laws and surprise decades latter you can still have many types of guns. More kinds then other countries such as Switzerland would dream of allowing. I mention that country because it's always a pro gun example of a place where shootings are rare yet guns are allowed.

What has changed? The NRA has gone from a club to a lobbyist group that caters to paranoid fantasy. Long term this paranoia and refusal to compromise will do more to undo the second than any march. If gun owners want to keep it they need to be willing to give a little and not obsesses over it being the end of the world.

Clearly they feel they are ready for war tomorrow with what they have. And a vast majority of the military is the kind of person who probably loves America and it's people. The goverment is Republican and always listens to the NRA. So what is the fuss about?

 

Why would that matter if neither the amount of mass shootings or casualties wasn't affected by the ban? That's like banning Lamborghinis for 10 years, do a study that shows that banning Lamborghinis did nothing to reduce vehicle deaths by speeding, and then claiming that we needed to make the ban longer to reduce the sale of Lamborghinis.

It doesn't allow the banning of commonly owned weapons or weapons readily available to the common soldier either.

Ok. I'll be waiting.

Irrelevant. The point is about need, not what are they designed for. Cars are in fact for transportation, so are buses. Yet I don't see a massive push for everyone to switch to public transportation.

The laws regulating whether or not a car is street legal comes down to politics and whether the vehicle can perform safely. If we apply that to guns, the only laws that will exist is making sure they don't blow up in your face.

Guess you haven't heard of 3D printing or 80% lowers. Plus even if those things didn't exist, there are more guns in America than people. There is absolutely no way to track down a take even half of those weapons without serious repercussions.

We certainly do. With how small it is and the magazine capacity, it's more of a sure way to kill a few people at a time with lots of bullets rather than killing lots of people.

On a gun that you have to hold it by the magwell?

The M1 Garand has a barrel shroud too. The only purpose for barrel shrouds is for full automatic firearms. If it's on anything else it's mainly there for looks.

Assault weapon is a made up term.

All firearms are designed the same, to shoot projectiles at the owner's intended target. Are you saying someone with a hunting rifle can't kill anyone?

Why limit me to those options? That's like the Parkland school limiting everybody to clear backpacks.

What you consider and what is actual reality ate two different things. High capacity is any magazine that provides more rounds than what the original magazine was designed for. Standard capacity for a Glock 17 is 17 rounds, standard capacity for an AR 15 is 30 rounds, and standard capacity for most modern pistols is 15 rounds. BTW, what makes 10 rounds ok but 11 indicates that you want yo be a mass shooter?

Thay would be any gun available in the market. From beginner .22s to .50 BMGs.

Evidence?

You are not the arbitrator on what I deem necessary for my defensive needs first of all. Secondly, every firearm action and feature was at one point used for the military. Bolt action, if I remember correctly, was designed by the military because using a lever action rifle was hard to use when firing from a prone position.

Like what?

Yeah when the guy is 3 feet away from you. Even if you're right, a traditional stock is more apted for that than one with a pistol grip. Don't believe me? Pick up a toy gun (if you don't have real guns) with a pistol grip and one without and see which is easier to hold while hip shooting.

They are already lawful. In fact my local gun store sells them. The problem is that you have to go through a lengthy background check to get one. Also suppressors are good for hunting or defending yourself while indoors.

You don't say. And here I was thinking they used it to make sandwiches.

But we don't see that today. In fact using a bayonet makes you prone to having ypur weapon taken away.

Again, you are not the arbitrator on what I need or don't need and again, every feature and action has been used by the military and in fact some benigning features like bolt action was actually created by the military.

If you're fending off multiple attackers or putting multiple rounds in just one attacker then yes, you do need something to minimize recoil.

I don't deny that, but the list is stupid for the reasons I stated.