Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How about outlawing gun sales by mail? If the gun range President found his answering machine message so disturbing as to ban him, surely if he had been required to walk before an individual, that they could tell he was disturbed enough not to sale him a gun.
Way to many nuts buying guns through the mail.
Which has been against the law since the 60's except curio and relic firearms. You can order a gun from mail or online but it must be delivered to a FFL where they do the legal transfer. But, yet again people will say people buy them through the mail and delivered to the doorstep and too many will just believe that to be the case. But what anti-gun people would hope for by using that misinfo is to ban sales from mail or internet from even going to a FFL which does NOTHING to prevent illegal sales but they aren't concerned with illegal sales as much as they are concerned with banning legal sales although they can't admit that.
its not apples and oranges because you say so. The only thing that may not be spot on is that it is much more likely that someone would have been shot who was not intended by some ccw holder. Cops had clear day light, CCW would have had dark tear gas filled theater, Cops had no innocent people with in 70 feet or more, there were hundreds of people with in 30 feet, cops were trained for this, Most CCW holders have about 8 hours of speed book training and about 15 min of shooting, not training to see if they can hit a target at 15 feet under the most calm of circumstances, I would bet most if not all of the ccw holders do not have training in stress filled dark tear gas filled shooting with people 5 to 30 feet away. So if its apples and oranges it that it would be much much harder for someone in the Colorado situation to have accomplished anything but shooting more innocent people. It is just stupid to think otherwise. I am a CCW holder and have been for over 20 years. I shoot at least twice a week and its not rocket science to see that it would have been very difficult to do what you suggest if not impossible.
So after all the wild ranting from the "mob" the truth is starting to show. In fact one person could have taken this person down. Just like in the thread I posted a few minutes ago about a very similar incident that happened at a church in Colorado where someone there who was carrying stood up and shot the guy and only two folks were killed instead of who knows how many.
Most people don't realize you've got to be trained before you get most (not sure about every states laws) concealed weapons permit.
There are idiots with guns who probably would have shot an innocent bystander, but even then, one or two accidental deaths was better then 12 dead, and 59 others shot.
Really? How about a few gallons of gas and a lighter or maybe a chain saw?
All of those have other uses besides killing people. Actually that's misleading to say "other uses" because killing people isn't one of their uses at all
Which has been against the law since the 60's except curio and relic firearms. You can order a gun from mail or online but it must be delivered to a FFL where they do the legal transfer. But, yet again people will say people buy them through the mail and delivered to the doorstep and too many will just believe that to be the case. But what anti-gun people would hope for by using that misinfo is to ban sales from mail or internet from even going to a FFL which does NOTHING to prevent illegal sales but they aren't concerned with illegal sales as much as they are concerned with banning legal sales although they can't admit that.
The news didn't say he went to someone to get it, they said they were mailed to his house.
Now, that might be an individual sale, which is perfectly legal. I'm against even that, I think individual to individual sale should be regulated and forced to be done before a third party
Most people don't realize you've got to be trained before you get most (not sure about every states laws) concealed weapons permit.
There are idiots with guns who probably would have shot an innocent bystander, but even then, one or two accidental deaths was better then 12 dead, and 59 others shot.
My wife got her ccp here about two years ago. She rarely carries hers with her but if she's going out at night by herself she does. I'm pretty sure she would have taken a few shots at this sob if she were in that situation if there wasn't a clear exit. Nobody really knows what they would do in a situation like that but all it takes is one to end it. As the link I posted earlier shows all it took was one person to stop a slaughter that would have ended up like this one or worse back in '07 in Colorado but those who want to continue singing the song that having somebody shoot back would have stopped nothing continue on. They seem to hate guns and will die if need be at the hands of some criminal with a gun waiting for the police to show up to prove it.
And just for the record, I think restricting all gun carry is stupid, for any city or community. Emboldens criminals and the mentally disturbed to do things like this.
From what I've seen, the community in which this theater is, has no concealed carry permits.
Everyone thinks they could be a hero in a situation like that, but the truth is no one knows what they would do in that situation unless they were in it. And I highly doubt that most gun toting average Joes would have been able to stop the shooter in this case.
FACT: maybe the gunman would have been stopped, or maybe not, if there were armed moviegoers.
FACT: 100% guarantee that he could NOT be stopped if there were no armed moviegoers.
The news didn't say he went to someone to get it, they said they were mailed to his house.
Now, that might be an individual sale, which is perfectly legal. I'm against even that, I think individual to individual sale should be regulated and forced to be done before a third party
Ammo can be delivered to your doorstep by buying it through the mail or online, firearms bought that way must be sent to a FFL first unless it is a antique.
Speaking of antiques, I would be hard pressed to find ammo for some of mine if it were not for buying through the internet. I have some odd ball calibers and a ban of internet sales on ammo would be a serious blow to me and would do nothing to stop crime.
This is why I say thought besides emotion has to be put into things after a tragedy. I think 9/11 and the aftemath we passed in laws and got involved in proves that as a example.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
