Is it time to talk about guns?

Can you tell me why, if there's no difference, folks get so upset about the prospect of banning the AR-15? Logically, if they're both the same and are equally dangerous, we might consider regulating both. The 1994 assault weapons ban restricted the “manufacture, transfer and possession” of certain semi-automatic weapons and large capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Of course, the loopholes and grandfather clause limited its effectiveness, and it was allowed to expire.. But it can be done. Seems to me that given the recent rash of mass shootings using them, restricting them shouldn't be off the table.

 

More irrelevant memes. Are these ones we're not supposed to take seriously, that you're just giving us for the yucks? How mass chairings have we had lately?
What was the body count? What kinds of morons are responsive to this crap?

 

Or better yet. Neither.

 

Most responsive? Clearly you.

 

GEEZ, I didn't know Beto was a burglar. O’Rourke was arrested in 1995 at University of TexasEP on a burglary of building charge, which was later dropped. According to O’Rourke: "That happened while I was in college. I along with some friends were horsing around, and we snuck under the fence at the UTEP physical plant and set off an alarm. We were arrested by UTEP police. ... UTEP decided not to press charges. We weren't intending to do any harm,". This mugshot was originally dug up by a political opponent in in a political attack ad. Does it seem a bit deceptive? Can you think for yourself, or do you just rely on somebody else's canned memes to do your talking." DELIBERATELY MISLEADING!

 

Did Biden arm the Taliban and ISIS? What evidence do you have to back that up? Are you resorting now to making up inflammatory stuff to back up your position? PROVE IT!

 

TWO CAN PLAY THIS GAME!

 

Guns Must Not Be Used For Self-Defense, Canada’s Trudeau Insists | The Daily Wire


Guns are for hunting and target practice, but never for self defense, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said this week, continuing his crusade against firearms.

Trudeau, who is pushing a sweeping measure aimed at freezing the sale, purchase, or transfer of handguns in Canada, told the Pod Save America podcast his country takes a completely different view of firearms than its southern neighbor.

No one in Canada has a right to defend themselves, their family or their property with a firearm, Trudeau declared.

 

I'm not a gun nut. I desperately don't want to live in a society where everyone has guns aimed at others. But I don't like the idea of anyone, especially a president, telling me I don't have the right to defend myself. I generally do not respect criminals, especially when I or my hypothetical family are their targets, and I intend to do whatever it takes to thwart their wrongdoing. Guns are on the table for that.
I understand the good Canadian president's intent. I'm generally agreeable with his policies. Maybe there is something in the long run in purging guns from society. But I really resent him for taking way a means of personal defense.
That said, I think it's incredibly irresponsible to have firearms and not be trained in proper use. Owning them should be something like owning an automobile, especially with mandatory training that includes theory as well as use. The false sense of security of having a potentially lethal weapon can lead to counterproductivity.

 

Given the grip of the gun culture in the U.S., I think it would be impractical to consider abolition of firearms as a means of self-defense. (Although it seems to have worked in Australia). Personal survival is a basic human instinct, although threats to it are often misperceived or exaggerated. Studies by the Harvard Injury Control Research Center found that Most purported self-defense gun uses are gun uses in escalating arguments, firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense, and guns in the home are used more often to intimidate intimates than to thwart crime. Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

Even so, I think the emphasis should be on reasonable restriction rather than abolition or criminalization of protective actions. In D.C. v. Heller, Justice Scalia told us that the right to bear arms is not absolute. The Second Amendment does not grant the “right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever for whatever purpose” (p. 2816). Among “presumptively lawful” regulatory measures are laws that (1) prohibit carrying concealed weapons, (2) prohibit the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, (3) forbid the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or (4) impose conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. And he notes that the Court could also find “support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons” (Id., at 2816, 2817). In a footnote, Scalia says the list of presumptively lawful measures “does not purport to be exhaustive.”

 

Florida mother charged with manslaughter after her 2-year-old son fatally shot his father - CNN

A Florida mother of three has been charged with manslaughter after her 2-year-old son got hold of an unlocked handgun and fatally shot his father in their home, authorities said.

Ayala was convicted of felony grand theft in 2016 and was on probation with the Florida Department of Corrections, status that prohibited her from possessing a firearm, the affidavit states.

 

The purchase of a weapon would automatically be denied if someone said

I’m purchasing this weapon for self defense ?