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.
It doesn't really matter whether you're against that or not. The Supreme Court already ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects weapons that are in "common use". The type of weapons that Paddock used are indeed in "common use". Why is that so difficult for you and others to understand?
They specifically mentioned in "common use" to negate the argument that the 2nd Amendment only applies to weapons that were available at the time the Constitution was written. As many people would have you believe.
In all probability bump stocks or any other device that can be attached to a semi automatic firearm to simulate full automatic fire will be made illegal to manufacture and own. But the actual firearm will not. Just as it is already illegal to convert a semi automatic firearm to full automatic fire by physically altering the actual firearm or it's internal parts.
If you're one who thinks it should be up to you who should decide which weapons that are in "common use" that people should be allowed to own. Then you are not one who "feels strongly about our right to own a gun for the reasons typical law-abiding gun owners own guns". Who are you trying to kid?
I'm always amazed and a little baffled by people who go on about what "should be up to me."
Obviously these laws, what gun control measures are adopted, deemed constitutional and all the rest is not up to me, or you. What nonsense is this too?
We here are expressing opinion about what we think should be done about preventing terrorism; when, where, how and why.
What about that is so hard for you to understand?
The weapons Paddock used are in "common use" by American citizens you say?
I've got to look into that claim, but I was not aware of that. I'm not sure that's true either, but maybe we have different definitions of "common use?"
Use of shotguns and handguns is more what I would call common, but I don't have the numbers handy...
Their arguments are bordering on the absurd. Unfortunately these are the types of people we have to contend with. The next thing they will be arguing is that it applies to the "arms" that we are born with. That's how ridiculous this is becoming. We're not dealing with rational people here. Just emotional mass hysteria.
You can claim ridiculous and be even more ridiculous as no doubt is your goal here, but arguing for the legality of the vast majority of weapons out there versus other weapons like Paddock used to kill nearly 60 people and injure 500 in just minutes is hardly ridiculous to most reasonable people. Ridiculous as a heart attack maybe...
The weapons Paddock used are in "common use" by American citizens you say?
Around 20% of all sales of firearms in the US since 2004 have been AR-15 pattern rifles (BATFE estimate). That kind of makes it common use don't you think.
I'm always amazed and a little baffled by people who go on about what "should be up to me."
Obviously these laws, what gun control measures are adopted, deemed constitutional and all the rest is not up to me, or you. What nonsense is this too?
We here are expressing opinion about what we think should be done about preventing terrorism; when, where, how and why.
What about that is so hard for you to understand?
The weapons Paddock used are in "common use" by American citizens you say?
I've got to look into that claim, but I was not aware of that. I'm not sure that's true either, but maybe we have different definitions of "common use?"
Use of shotguns and handguns is more what I would call common, but I don't have the numbers handy...
Small caliber semi auto rifles ? Absolutely they are in common use. Small game hunters use them. Competition shooters use them (3 gun). Yeah, semi auto sporting rifles are quite common.
I'm always amazed and a little baffled by people who go on about what "should be up to me."
Obviously these laws, what gun control measures are adopted, deemed constitutional and all the rest is not up to me, or you. What nonsense is this too?
We here are expressing opinion about what we think should be done about preventing terrorism; when, where, how and why.
What about that is so hard for you to understand?
The weapons Paddock used are in "common use" by American citizens you say?
I've got to look into that claim, but I was not aware of that. I'm not sure that's true either, but maybe we have different definitions of "common use?"
Use of shotguns and handguns is more what I would call common, but I don't have the numbers handy...
Thousands of AR 15s have been sold and are in daily use for hunting, etc. I don't have one or want one, but I see them at the range every weekend and have for several years. If I was still a hunter, I might want one, although my 22 semi-auto sig sauer will do most of the same things,
Around 20% of all sales of firearms in the US since 2004 have been AR-15 pattern rifles (BATFE estimate). That kind of makes it common use don't you think.
Go look it up on Google, AR-15 Sales.
Just did, and you're right. I knew they were out there, but I didn't realize how many or how popular...
Also not used in Paddock-like acts of terrorism?
"Aurora, Sandy Hook, San Bernardino and now Orlando"
- in each of these places, an assailant wielding an AR-15 rifle has claimed the lives of school children, moviegoers, people celebrating Christmas or a night out.
For a decade, it was effectively illegal to purchase a new AR-15 under statutes of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB). Following the 1989 death of five children and injuries to more than 30 people including a teacher in Stockton, California at the hands of a man wielding an AK-47 semi-automatic rifle, the US government sought to prevent the kind of mass shootings that the accuracy and speed of guns like the AR-15 and AK-47 can facilitate.
Just did, and you're right. I knew they were out there, but I didn't realize how many or how popular...
Also not used in Paddock-like acts of terrorism?
"Aurora, Sandy Hook, San Bernardino and now Orlando"
- in each of these places, an assailant wielding an AR-15 rifle has claimed the lives of school children, moviegoers, people celebrating Christmas or a night out.
For a decade, it was effectively illegal to purchase a new AR-15 under statutes of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB). Following the 1989 death of five children and injuries to more than 30 people including a teacher in Stockton, California at the hands of a man wielding an AK-47 semi-automatic rifle, the US government sought to prevent the kind of mass shootings that the accuracy and speed of guns like the AR-15 and AK-47 can facilitate.
It was illegal to purchase an actual AR 15, but you could purchase a rifle that functioned exactly the same but did not have the "black" features. The "black" features affected the look but did not alter the function at all. The law also did not affect the sale of many other semi-auto rifles with the same capacity and with more powerful ammo. The traditional AR 15 is not a very powerful rifle with the 223 ammo.
I'm always amazed and a little baffled by people who go on about what "should be up to me."
Obviously these laws, what gun control measures are adopted, deemed constitutional and all the rest is not up to me, or you. What nonsense is this too?
We here are expressing opinion about what we think should be done about preventing terrorism; when, where, how and why.
What about that is so hard for you to understand?
The weapons Paddock used are in "common use" by American citizens? I've got to look into that claim, but I was not aware about that, and I'm not sure that's true...
To look into that claim is to go to a shooting range, or hog hunting.
There are states that it is permissible to take game without a bag limit. That's where the whole "sportsman" ideology comes from. Bag limits, and round limits. To prevent an extinction of a species through hunting. In upstate NY where I lived shortly after the town I resided in revised the days you could hunt, the deer population exploded and they became a legitimate nuisance. Property and crop damage. Property being them scrounging for food eating anything and everything due to over population, to collisions with vehicles. With a 308 chambered AR platform and 20 round magazine, coupled with a suppressor, one could take multiple deer without wounding or maiming them.
This is where I have a problem with the NRAs members being elitists claiming they are pro 2A. They're elitists who would only draw the line at engraved double barrels, 6 shooters and bolt actions, same with pro 2A politicians. There was one here in florida, I can't remember his name, but his ad photo showed him holding a 2k dollar engraved double barrel Benelli with a bolt action rifle on his back via sling, and a revolver on his hip. I can't take guys like him seriously.
You show me a politician holding a Bravo Company or Spikes with an Eotech or aim point, with a Glock on 1 hip and a 1911 on the other claiming to be pro 2a they have my vote.
ARs are common use. Of all the ranges I've been to indoor or outdoor, even when I lived in NY it was an AR or AK platform semi auto, followed by M1 action semi auto, followed by bolt actions and in the rear of the pack, lever actions.
Pistols. The 2 common platforms of pistols are semi auto polymer frames and 1911s. Grandpa's revolver isn't as common, unless it's chambered in 500 or 454 cassul. The big magnum offerings are the only common revolvers I see in use.
Look at the age range and gender of who fires ARs. You come down to the ranges I attend, you'll see kids as young as 10 11 12 shooting AR platforms. You'll see young men and women shooting AR platform rifles. Come with me and you'll see my 70 year old mother shoot AR platform rifles. She doesn't need to buy one, I have multiple for her to choose from, in multiple calibers and configurations.
ARs are the most popular and common rifles to be found hog hunting and target shooting. And very popular with young men and women.
Heck, I built a pink one for my sister. Barrel, gas block, upper, lower, buffer tube, all cerakoted to match the pink furniture I had acquired for it.
It is a common use rifle.
There is in my mind no doubt that the Founding Fathers wanted a citizenry armed to the degree that they could overthrow any regime they found oppressive.
That view however is not acceptable in today's environment. So even NRA and other quite conservative groups will not support it. And the mildly conservative USSC ran away and ducked. I call it "The Grand Conspiracy". The agreement by most sides of the situation that the 2nd does not mean what it meant.
The rub is that it meant virtually any neighborhood group could put together a company or battalion and drive out the government operatives. The Founding Revolutionaries would have liked that. But the powers that be today could not stand it.
If interpreted as designed we would have an instant rebellion as the low socioeconomic areas armed up and asserted their rights. And the Compton Battalion drives off LAPD.
In the end it would likely have been the end of the 2nd.
Truth seeker and speaker it seems to me...
Some gun enthusiasts cling to this notion about what the founding fathers had in mind without really having a clue just how different their thoughts and considerations where then in the context of their environment during that time versus ours today. Then, they stroke each other a little more with comments about how any such mentality considering the likes is beneath them. Nice to read something a little more in the realm of reasonable and true.
That said, I must admit it hardly matters what was then versus now, because now we have over 3 million AR-15s in the hands of lots of Americans that makes it awfully difficult to do anything about. That's a whole lot of AR-15s added to the over 300 million other guns also out there.
I'm not sure at what point futility becomes the basis for simply accepting the need or want of American citizens to own/use weapons like Paddock used, but I'd like to think we can do better. The opioid epidemic is another problem that seems somewhat futile to combat, yet...
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.
