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

I think the debate about what type of guns should be allowed is pretty academic. Even revolvers (6 bullets) have speed-loaders. Get two guns and enough ammunition and you'll be able to kill a whole lot of people. And I don't see the good old Glock going away soon. The fact is you don't need all that firepower to be a danger to society.

 

I think less guns is a viable answer to our dilemma o

I disagree. It's more dangerous to have hi capacity magazines and clips, or semi-automatic firing assault weapons, than it is to have whatever regular gun. I'm not totally against guns. I was raised friends with a family whose children I played with frequently and they were gun owners. They were really into hunting and were members of the NRA. I lost touch with them long before I found any interest in political matters. But I'm aware that not all gun owners are reasonable like they were. As Meliai has pointed out, stockpiling guns is a very strange behavior. I think that mentality, the gotta protect my second amendment rights at any cost mentality, is part of the NRA's gimmick. I don't buy it and neither should anybody else.

If they were to amend the constitution to disallow semi-automatics, what then? Tantrum? Or to re-implement the assault weapons ban that was in place in the 1990s. It doesn't make any sense what some of these people seem to suggest they would do. I've heard people in this very thread with a "come and take 'em" attitude. There are pictures on the internet of people flying flags and toting guns. It's absolutely ridiculous.

 

Namecalling doesn't make a lot of people scared for their lifes on a daily basis when they go to school or work.
People who get their panties in a twist when others arguing for better gun control often say stuff like we all have to listen to eachother and care what others want too.
Seems to me that in that regard the people who crave keeping everything the same want to have their cake and eat it too. While the ones who are with those scared kids (and many adults as well of course) are actually the considerate, reasonable ones.
No one should have an unneccesary fear of getting shot on their way to school (to the point a heavy bulletproof backpack seems a sensible precaution), in a gay club, at a concert or just anywhere in public.

 

Lol I think you do. But just in case you're really oblivious: these discussions have spawned again after a disastrous mass shooting (8 one this year already). Look up the statistics on which kind of people commits those predominantly.

 

Sure it's more dangerous to have AR-15s and big mags. But if someone shoots you with a simple handgun you'll be just as dead. Just immagine I buy two simple guns and a bunch of ammo. Easy to conceal, quick to draw. Then I go to a mall or a McDonalds or a school and start unloading on soccer moms and their kids. Don't you think I could rack up a body count of ten real quick? If you really want to you can make it happen in any number of ways. Hell you can go steal a car and run over people.

People stockpiling weapons is what gives away the real problem. It's the mentality, this so called "gun culture" that is the real problem. People think they need to defend themselves from the government, from the Russians, the Chinese, whatever. Nobody can get it in their heads that the fucking Chinese will roll right over some stupid hillbilly with a couple guns.

The second amendment is about the only thing that people hang on to. The sacred constitution. That thing can't be touched.

 

Yeah this has been covered. It has been more white males that have participated in mass shootings. Never denied that. I'd be happy to purge them from my race in an instant. But they aren't the only source of mass shootings. Only the oblivious thinkers try to convince us its about white men that own guns are the problem. 17 kids are dead at the hands of a Latino in this last case. He should have been stopped from all the warning signs that were clearly there. And he should have never been able to buy the gun that killed the kids. That isn't a white man with a gun problem. That is a systemic failure that needs to be fixed.

 

wow, such infant temper tantrums i have never seen before....when someone even thinks about gun control....their security blankets get threatened.

 

Cruz was his adopted name... No idea what his birth name was, nor his race.

 

I agree that a simple handgun will kill a person, but not as many people as quickly, and that's where I'm saying we should draw a line.

 

I will answer your question since you have such a hardon for it. The answer is hopefully and probably never. I cant imagine a time when that would be necessary with the way our system works, and a major key to that system is the 2nd amendment. If we have guns, we never have to use them. Thats the idea.

I do not think that banning AR15's is a middle ground or a good option. All rifles combined kill 1/8th that of handguns and 1/4th that of knives According to the FBI. How reasonable and rational is your argument now?

 

I disagree. The person responsible wouldn't have killed so many people if he didn't have an assault weapon. A background check would be good too, but what is the use of a background check on a 19 year old anyway. Half the time they don't even have an adult record. You can't rely exclusively on a background check system. You have to consider the weapon of choice in addition to the person using it. Again I draw examples of other countries that have all but eliminated gun violence. There are more vehicle attacks in some cases. There are knife attacks. But not gun violence. If someone wants to hurt people, they will. Let's make it hard as heck to do it!

 

You're right about handguns. But those are not being used in the latest instance of our mass shooting epidemic. I think banning something is a show of good faith that we are no longer going to tolerate these sorts of things. All this mumbo jumbo about "law abiding citizens" goes in one ear and out the other for me.

 

The texas military base shooting a few years back took place with hand guns. The VA Tech shooting took place with handguns. Each killed far more than the recent shooting. We cannot go creating knee jerk legislation based on feelings and disinfo or to use a ban as a gesture of our morals is just disgusting.

 

C

Comparing violent crime across different countries is misleading because they have different standards for what violent crime is. Gun crimes in the USA have been on the decline. Dont you already know that background checks are already required by federal law for ALL firearm purchases. People with opposing viewpoints will listen to you more if you actually know what youre talking about.

 

Not true. Again. Many standard semi auto handguns hold close to 20 rounds, the magazines can be changed very quickly (bet you dont know what that really means) and in practice have killed far more people at a time in mass shootings than many AR15 mass shootings. Especially when its easy to carry multiples. Two handguns and you have 25% more bullets than an AR15 and both have semi auto fire.

 

The thing about AR15s, though, is they're more efficient at killing people, so they become involved in mass shootings like Margory Stoneman Douglas school shooting. Machinist said: "If we have guns, we never have to use them. Thats the idea." That's the fantasy. That's the insanity.

 

We either need to modify the Second Amendment or ban anything other than muskets.

We have 18th Century gun laws legislating 21st Century guns.

Are we seeing the problem here?

 

So you're suggesting that the reason gun crime went down in Australia after the ban is because the Aussies have different standards for defining violent crime. The implication is that Australia and other countries have looser standards for defining violent crime, and what would count as violent here wouln't hit the radar screen in other countries. How do you think the standards across different countries, like Australia, Canada, or the countries of western Europe differ from ours? Can you be specific, or did you just make that up?

 

Its not fantasy. Its in the bill of rights for a reason. Two problems with your stance on AR15's: the second amendment is not about hunting. Fully auto guns are already illegal. You cant say that an AR is too deadly and no o e needs one. Second, reference my posts above. Handguns have frequently been used to kill more people than ARs in mass shootings. Including the most recent.

 

Are you suggesting the USA implement a confiscation program as Australia did with their so called buy back?