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.
Now that progressive gun-haters have realized that the AR is not a machine gun and functionally no different than a semi-auto Remington hunting rifle they've expanded their rhetoric to include banning all semi-auto weapons. At coffee this morning some lady suggested that the musket would be fine for hunting.
At least now they are being honest about their true intentions, so give them that.
The problem is we are being distracted by the easy job of regulating things instead of figuring out how to identify and control these crazy people and preventing them from committing these atrocities. Guns do not kill people without a human pulling the trigger. Crazy people do not need machine guns to kill people. Automobiles filled with explosives work just fine.
Our own government has made the people soft easy targets, by making the gun the bad guy and pushing that no one should own one and definitely not carry one..
Our own government has made the people soft easy targets, by making the gun the bad guy and pushing that no one should own one and definitely not carry one..
That's not what the Ds are pushing. Rs election campaigns are funded by NRA. GOP has no interest in reducing the mass part of mass killings and alienating their Sugar Daddy..
That's not what the Ds are pushing. Rs election campaigns are funded by NRA. GOP has no interest in reducing the mass part of mass killings and alienating their Sugar Daddy..
Those who rag on the NRA continuously, are you aware of exactly what the NRA really IS?
It is an Association made up of about 4.5 MILLION members! It has been estimated that less than half of the gun owners in the United States belong to the NRA. Many belong to the GOA (Gun Owners of America), and many don't belong to any national organization. Yet, they write to their congresspersons on a regular basis. Intelligent congresspersons LISTEN to what their constituents say!
Yes, the so called "gun lobby" IS huge! In fact, I am one of those lobbyists! An independent, to be sure, but I am a gun rights lobbyist, and proud of it.
Of course, I write to my representatives about other issues, as well.
Do you?
Between this thread and another that include more comments than I have time or inclination to retort, I will simply point out that it seems almost impossible for me to keep the focus where I think it needs to be, or yes, any further exchange is more pointless than usual...
1) I am not the one to decide any of what might be included and/or decided upon when it comes to gun control. The opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone, nothing more and nothing less. I am simply asking the questions I do for the sake of considering what gun control is possible or reasonable. If the argument is that the 2A, for example, prohibits such consideration and/or definition as to which weapons will be banned or not, then obviously there is no further argument.
2) If the argument is that bad guys will get the banned guns anyway, then again no further argument, as I have noted more than a few times before despite what seems a general inability to note or comprehend accordingly.
3) IF, however, anyone should consider gun control measures or possibilities in light of what politicians are forced to do in response to public outrage over the likes of mass murder acts of terrorism with a gun, and/or the exceptional level of gun violence in America, then I have simply tried to define the goal and ban as follows:
Ban/Goal: restrict the sale of weapons that have a "kill rate" beyond a certain level. Obviously this level is highly subjective, but at least a number that can be negotiated in light of the same figuring that went into the ban of these sorts of "assault" weapons already. Agreed, "assault" is too vague or confusing a term. Instead, define and/or ban according to a specific "kill rate" and/or capability -- that might bring general or majority consensus such that the public is assuaged and gun enthusiasts are still able to hunt, sport and/or protect themselves from reasonable threat.
Again (and again), yes bad guys will get these guns anyway and yes, there is no real way to prevent such acts of terrorism, but IF there is the possibility of preventing even one more act of terrorism by way of such a ban and/or IF the idea is just as much to satisfy the effort to exhaust every reasonable effort, then THIS is what I'm suggesting is the most reasonable manner if not the only manner in which to get there.
Between this thread and another that include more comments than I have time or inclination to retort, I will simply point out that it seems almost impossible for me to keep the focus where I think it needs to be, or yes, any further exchange is more pointless than usual...
1) I am not the one to decide any of what might be included and/or decided upon when it comes to gun control. The opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone, nothing more and nothing less. I am simply asking the questions I do for the sake of considering what gun control is possible or reasonable. If the argument is that the 2A, for example, prohibits such consideration and/or definition as to which weapons will be banned or not, then obviously there is no further argument.
2) If the argument is that bad guys will get the banned guns anyway, then again no further argument, as I have noted more than a few times before despite what seems a general inability to note or comprehend accordingly.
3) IF, however, anyone should consider gun control measures or possibilities in light of what politicians are forced to do in response to public outrage over the likes of mass murder acts of terrorism with a gun, and/or the exceptional level of gun violence in America, then I have simply tried to define the goal and ban as follows:
Ban/Goal: restrict the sale of weapons that have a "kill rate" beyond a certain level. Obviously this level is highly subjective, but at least a number that can be negotiated in light of the same figuring that went into the ban of these sorts of "assault" weapons already. Agreed, "assault" is too vague or confusing a term. Instead, define and/or ban according to a specific "kill rate" and/or capability -- that might bring general or majority consensus such that the public is assuaged and gun enthusiasts are still able to hunt, sport and/or protect themselves from reasonable threat.
Again (and again), yes bad guys will get these guns anyway and yes, there is no real way to prevent such acts of terrorism, but IF there is the possibility of preventing even one more act of terrorism by way of such a ban and/or IF the idea is just as much to satisfy the effort to exhaust every reasonable effort, then THIS is what I'm suggesting is the most reasonable manner if not the only manner in which to get there.
What's your goal? Save lives or just ban guns? They are not the same, mind you.
That's not what the Ds are pushing. Rs election campaigns are funded by NRA. GOP has no interest in reducing the mass part of mass killings and alienating their Sugar Daddy..
I can't stand people like you who are just being completely dishonest.
Do you even know what NRA is and how it functions?
The only people who absolutely zero interest in reducing mass killing or saving lives is the liberals. They don't care! THEY DON'T CARE!
If they did, they would advocate to lock up anybody whom they can't trust.
That's not what the Ds are pushing. Rs election campaigns are funded by NRA. GOP has no interest in reducing the mass part of mass killings and alienating their Sugar Daddy..
The push to arm the public, is the only thing that will deter mass killings. The DNC has no interest in reducing the mass part of mass killing, only removing arms from the people so government is the only protection.
Because some do not wish to defend themselves from bullies, do not deny others less cowardly, to do the same.
it can kill alot of innocent people and thats the american way!!!!
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.
