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.
The half measures that gun control advocates continually push are entirely useless. I'm talking about things like 'assault weapon' bans, waiting periods, etc. The only honest, informed debate would be about whether we should have full, Japanese-style prohibition.
The so-called 'assault weapon' ban was the dumbest of them all. The 1994 law as written was quite convoluted. If you dig into the actual details you can't help but realize that it was dumb, dumb, dumb. Even the Washington Post admitted after it passed that it was just 'symbolic.'
What about a ban on high capacity magazines, or "clips" as they are often incorrectly called? Surely that is a "common sense" restriction? No. Consider that the guy in Aurora, CO had a super-duper 100 round drum magazine (a "100 round ammunition barrel," as NBC News idiotically called it). But it jammed on him, as drums are very prone to do. With a vest full of 10-round mags, which tend to be rock-solid reliable, perhaps more would have been killed.
The CDC conducted a sweeping review of US gun laws in 2009, and concluded that it could find no evidence that any of the half measures were effective. I could have saved their team of PhDs in white jackets a lot of time, and the CDC a lot of money, had they just asked me. No Proof Gun Laws Reduce Violence - CBS News
So gun-control advocates, please stop. If you want to have a debate about full prohibition, fine. That could actually be a debate worth having. But with the half-measure proposals, you just a) make yourselves look dumb, and b)waste your time.
This debate was already had in the Supreme Court... They upheld the 2nd ammendment, and have repeatedly...
Then the debate should be over whether to amend the 2nd amendment. Instead we get from anti-gun people these continual proposals for "assault weapon" bans, waiting periods, etc. Things that even the CDC, which traditionally has been anti-gun, admits do not make a difference.
Where are all the posters that I see in other threads defending these 'common sense' laws such as 'assault weapon' bans? Kind of a loud quiet. Don't you guys have any counter-arguments to what I said?
There are gun control laws all over but they are totally useless, when you have 300+Million guns in the country and an internet where you can order any weapon you want give up the idea of gun laws they total waste of time and dont impede some one who wants to commit a gun crime.
Shooting sprees that i can remember over the last 50yrs took place whether gun laws were in place or not.
Asking people to give up their guns or the freedom to have a gun is akin to asking people to give up their cars.Not going to happen as its just too engrained in the makeup of the society.
I'd be all for a law that could be passed that could have prevented this and similar types of killing sprees but i cant think of a single law that would have prevented this massacre or others like it, its like passing a law to prevent car accidents,nothing will work when you have that many guns so readily available.
There is no debate, really. The reason is that there are no Second Amendment rights. The Second Amendment does not grant any rights. The right to own a gun - like all rights - exists only by law.
“One cannot legislate the maniacs off the street... these maniacs can only be shut down by an armed citizenry. Indeed bad things can happen in nations where the citizenry is armed, but not as bad as those which seem to be threatening our disarmed citizenry in this country at this time.”
"All the people constitute the militia — according to the Founding Fathers. Therefore every able-bodied man has a duty under the Constitution to become part of the "well-regulated" militia, specifically to understand and perform well with the individual weapon currently issued to the regular establishment. . . . Thus one who has not qualified himself with the M-16 may not be considered to be a responsible citizen."
"Weapons compound man's power to achieve; they amplify the capabilities of both the good man and the bad, and to exactly the same degree, having no will of their own. Thus we must regard them as servants, not masters - and good servants to good men. Without them, man is diminished, and his opportunities to fulfill his destiny are lessened. An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it."
— Col. Jeff Cooper
Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen. Jeff Cooper
The debate is nonsense. It's trumped-up election propaganda.
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.
