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.
Is there a line, and maybe this is it with the CT shooting where people will say, OK you can own a gun but we don't need semi auto box fed guns that can shoot 200 rds a min, and 100 round drums. If we have to live with guns, you are going to have to rack a round each time you shoot to slow yourself down, or reload a revolver between 6 rounds. Is that something that could at some point come down the pike?
That would be my approach (guns that can't shoot fast and require frequent somewhat complicated reloading). I also think that modern technology could help and maybe be applied to allow some types of semi/full auto weapons under certain circumstances. For instance, a gun that will only fire when used by its registered owner. Or a gun that requires a signal from a source like a transmitter at a gun range before it can be operated at full capability. How about guns like cell phones that can be rendered useless if lost or stolen. Guns like these would fire up a whole new industry.
Of course, ways around all this would be found by criminals. But "casual" killings, mass shootings, and the like would be substantially reduced or eliminated.
It's crap like this that creates these fantasies in liberal minds. How many ar owners have 100 round magazines? And how many ar's shoot 200 rounds per minute? It's well less than half of that.
What happened last week was beyond tragic, but when the left starts acting on things they have no idea about, just because they're scared, it'll lead to more tragedy.
If I'm being attacked and have to rack a round before each shot, my chances for survival have gone way down. Especially if I'm up against some nut like last week.
The nuts will ALWAYS have access to crazy. ALWAYS.
I'd like to see a statistic on how many licensed CHL holders commit crimes.
That would be my approach (guns that can't shoot fast and require frequent somewhat complicated reloading). I also think that modern technology could help and maybe be applied to allow some types of semi/full auto weapons under certain circumstances. For instance, a gun that will only fire when used by its registered owner. Or a gun that requires a signal from a source like a transmitter at a gun range before it can be operated at full capability. How about guns like cell phones that can be rendered useless if lost or stolen. Guns like these would fire up a whole new industry.
Of course, ways around all this would be found by criminals. But "casual" killings, mass shootings, and the like would be substantially reduced or eliminated.
No, they wouldn't. For proof, look to the 1994 "assault weapon" ban. It didn't slow down shooting one bit, because it was a feel-good law, just like what you are proposing. The so-called "assault weapons" are used in a slim minority of shooting, and banning them or regulating them more heavily isn't going to make a dent in violent crime. We need to look at the societal problems that lead to these crimes, not the tools that are used to commit them.
That would be my approach (guns that can't shoot fast and require frequent somewhat complicated reloading). I also think that modern technology could help and maybe be applied to allow some types of semi/full auto weapons under certain circumstances. For instance, a gun that will only fire when used by its registered owner. Or a gun that requires a signal from a source like a transmitter at a gun range before it can be operated at full capability. How about guns like cell phones that can be rendered useless if lost or stolen. Guns like these would fire up a whole new industry.
Of course, ways around all this would be found by criminals. But "casual" killings, mass shootings, and the like would be substantially reduced or eliminated.
You're so called "casual killings" usually involve one shot by some thug. No racking. No reloading. This would serve no purpose except to further protect those that mean you harm.
We live in a world with evil. Those of us that aren't evil vastly outnumber those that are. By allowing the good people to carry, you're going to greatly reduce the ability of evil to prosper.
Is there a line, and maybe this is it with the CT shooting where people will say, OK you can own a gun but we don't need semi auto box fed guns that can shoot 200 rds a min, and 100 round drums. If we have to live with guns, you are going to have to rack a round each time you shoot to slow yourself down, or reload a revolver between 6 rounds. Is that something that could at some point come down the pike?
You do not get to decide what kind of firearm I need or do not need. Do you tell mechanics which type of tool they can use and which kind of tool they cannot use? Everyone has different needs, and that requires different tools.
there is a PROBLEM with TRYING to BAN any type of gun
1. the bushmaster .223 is NOT an assault weapon....by defination an assault weapon is a FULLY-AUTOMATIC weapon
2. most of the ILLEGAL UZI's (yes an assault weapon) cant and havenet been able to be bought in the USA for decades...yet it and the mac10 are the commonly used weapon of the thug gangs and drug cartell
banning guns only hurts the law abiding citizen
I live in NY, one of the toughest states on guns...it is EASIER (and mostly cheaper) for me to buy an ILLEGAL weapon out of somebodies trunk of their car, than it is for me to purchace one legally.
Does anyone have the stats one which guns are involved in most shooting deaths?
Based on my (anecdotal) evidence working at different trauma centers, it's almost always a handgun. I don't consider 7 bullets in a clip to be 'high capacity.'
No, they wouldn't. For proof, look to the 1994 "assault weapon" ban. It didn't slow down shooting one bit, because it was a feel-good law, just like what you are proposing. The so-called "assault weapons" are used in a slim minority of shooting, and banning them or regulating them more heavily isn't going to make a dent in violent crime. We need to look at the societal problems that lead to these crimes, not the tools that are used to commit them.
You are forgetting that these anti-gun fascists have been altering the definition of "assault weapon" to include any type of weapon.
For example, California has determined that my Winchester Model 1912 pump shotgun is an "assault weapon" because the trigger only needs to be squeezed once and held to fire multiple rounds. The English made Henry level-action rifle, that has been imported into the US since 1865, was banned by the BATFE in February 1996 because it was redefined as an "assault weapon" because it was capable of holding 12 rounds in its tube magazine instead of the maximum allowed 10 rounds under the Assault Weapon Ban Act of 1994.
You and I know that the Assault Weapon Ban Act of 1994 was purely cosmetic and did not change anything with regard to gun crimes, but it did allow these anti-gun wannabe fascists to ban firearms.
You do not get to decide what kind of firearm I need or do not need. Do you tell mechanics which type of tool they can use and which kind of tool they cannot use? Everyone has different needs, and that requires different tools.
I don't tell you what you can and can't own, the Government can and does. They tell you if you want to own a full auto, you have to go through the full back ground check, finger print ect. Pay 200 stamp fee and get the gun tattooed to your ass. This is the reason that few if any full legal autos have been involved in a crime. You cant take these weapons to wal mart and sell in some FTF deal with no ID. You have to find a buyer, have them submit to the back ground check and pay 200 for a stamp and go through a class 3 dealer to do the transfer. Thats another 100 bucks. It works and it is telling you what and how you take ownership. So suck it up cowboy.
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.
