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.
Statistically, ony 14 percent we're with assult style rifles. If people are angry enough and resourceful enough, it's still going to happen.
I think addressing the motivations behind the shootings would be more beneficial.
Sure...but why make it so EASY to take out dozens of people? Why is it so hard to define what weapons can be sold to/purchased by/owned by civilians? You can't specify anything above a certain caliber and/or magazines above a certain number and/or capable of firing more than so many shots a minute? There must be experts who can pin this down...if they want to.
"Shortly after 9:35 a.m., using his mother's Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle,
Lanza shot his way through a glass panel next to the locked front entrance doors of the school."
The NRA plan is a 200 some page detailed thesis. I have not signed on to subscribe to it yet, but I'm on the list for updates and have asked for a precis. What I heard from Dana Loesch last night it shows how to harden the campus and train people for the eventuality of an attack The Full plan may not be publically available.
And why exactly would that be? Do they really have something or is it total B.S.? It's THAT controversial? Then it'll never pass...pure hokum - and that's being generous.
This thread is for people who want to maturely and rationally consider how we might make our schools and other public venues safer from mass killers.
The only reason I want to have gun control at all is to create an easy-to-convict crime where others may be more difficult of proof. Also it may prevent a few spur of the moment murders by making it take a bit longer to acquire a gun.
Sure...but why make it so EASY to take out dozens of people? Why is it so hard to define what weapons can be sold to/purchased by/owned by civilians? You can't specify anything above a certain caliber and/or magazines above a certain number and/or capable of firing more than so many shots a minute? There must be experts who can pin this down...if they want to.
Of course they can. The far-right acts like this is some sort of rocket science and "impossible" to define. It's a joke. I can just imagine them arguing "how far above the speed limit should still be legal?," and since there's not a perfect answer in all cases, I guess speeding should be legal... Ugh!
Go out to a car lot and try to buy a big-rig / 18-wheeler. Oh, fancy that - you can't! Not without the appropriate license and paperwork. Do we have endless debates on what constitutes a "big truck?" Do we pretend that because cars can kill, anyone should be allowed to own and drive big-rig trucks, too? Do we have right-wingers screaming at us for using the incorrect "18-wheeler" term (since not all of them have 18-wheels) as they do with "assault weapons" and pretending that wins the debate? Of course not!
If nation can generally properly regulate the sale and ownership of commercial vehicles, it can do the same with guns - devices that are comparable lethal when in the wrong hands. But the reality is that there is no political will to do this.
You could get a bunch of gun experts and military people in a room together, look over what defines common guns, and set some clear limits on simple things, such as rate of fire, magazine capacity, range, etc. Then, ban the military or SWAT team level crap from private citizens. If you want to a tool to kill a room full of people, earn it - join the military and learn that a gun doesn't make you a hero, a patriot, or a big man. Until then, no - you're not qualified. We don't need man-children with Rambo fantasies owning such weapons.
But this will never happen in this nation. Instead, we'll just have years continue to pass with the far-right feigning concern over the bloodshed while wringing their hands and pretending "nothing can be done" - despite nearly every other civilized nation on the planet HAVING done something, and reaping the vastly lower gun crime as a result. But here? No. The bodies will keep piling up because hunting, playing sheriff, and "killing the gubermint for taking mah tax money!" is more important than the lives of others.
The USA ranks #102 in murder rate per capita, which suggest the media driven hysteria is a ploy to nudge the sheeple into surrendering liberty "for their own good."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Murder per capita
#1 El Salvador
#2 Honduras
#3 Venezuela
#9 South Africa
#15 Anguilla (UK)
#28 Puerto Rico
#35 Greenland (!)
# 43 Russia
# 64 Uruguay
#66 British Virgin Islands (UK)
# 95 Lithuania
#102 USA
#109 Ukraine
#112 Cuba
#131 India
#172 Canada
#178 France
#188 Israel (despite widespread arms)
PREDATORS AGREE : Disarmament saves lives - but not of the victims.
Of course they can. The far-right acts like this is some sort of rocket science and "impossible" to define. It's a joke. I can just imagine them arguing "how far above the speed limit should still be legal?," and since there's not a perfect answer in all cases, I guess speeding should be legal... Ugh!
Go out to a car lot and try to buy a big-rig / 18-wheeler. Oh, fancy that - you can't! Not without the appropriate license and paperwork. Do we have endless debates on what constitutes a "big truck?" Do we pretend that because cars can kill, anyone should be allowed to own and drive big-rig trucks, too? Do we have right-wingers screaming at us for using the incorrect "18-wheeler" term (since not all of them have 18-wheels) as they do with "assault weapons" and pretending that wins the debate? Of course not!
If nation can generally properly regulate the sale and ownership of commercial vehicles, it can do the same with guns - devices that are comparable lethal when in the wrong hands. But the reality is that there is no political will to do this.
You could get a bunch of gun experts and military people in a room together, look over what defines common guns, and set some clear limits on simple things, such as rate of fire, magazine capacity, range, etc. Then, ban the military or SWAT team level crap from private citizens. If you want to a tool to kill a room full of people, earn it - join the military and learn that a gun doesn't make you a hero, a patriot, or a big man. Until then, no - you're not qualified. We don't need man-children with Rambo fantasies owning such weapons.
But this will never happen in this nation. Instead, we'll just have years continue to pass with the far-right feigning concern over the bloodshed while wringing their hands and pretending "nothing can be done" - despite nearly every other civilized nation on the planet HAVING done something, and reaping the vastly lower gun crime as a result. But here? No. The bodies will keep piling up because hunting, playing sheriff, and "killing the gubermint for taking mah tax money!" is more important than the lives of others.
Cant rep you again, but I like those comparisons. And I agree with what you said about regulating the types of firearms based on their rate of fire, magazine capacity, etc.
Of course they can. The far-right acts like this is some sort of rocket science and "impossible" to define. It's a joke.<>
Nah, it is just semantics about calling all "big black ugly rifles with semi-automatic fire and magazines" AR-15s and/or Assault Weapons. Gunnies are like most technical people and like precision in terminology. They get bothered when people use either term when the weapon involved is not either one.
It's like if you as a car guy heard someone call a stylish four door British AWD luxury vehicle a "jeep" when it is actually a Range Rover Velar.
Especially if people want to ban "jeeps."
I do think the best for all of the discussions we on either side of a discussion allow the default to be AR-15 because "assault" has a meaning in and of itself: as·sault əˈsôlt/ verb
1. make a physical attack on.
"he pleaded guilty to assaulting a police officer"
noun
1. a physical attack.
"his imprisonment was for an assault on the film director"
When we get down to the law of 1994, this got so difficult they had to make a list of over 200 specific rifles.
2000 functionally identical rifles were exempt. Defining what is forbidden is difficult. We will have to start over again to define what is an assault weapon today. "LAW is hard!" and "Time Marches On"
To have effective gun control the 2nd amendment needs to be repealed. Plain and simple. You can't have effective gun control while guaranteeing the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
The fact of the matter is that you're not going to have the government's permission to revolt against it anyway, and anybody that takes up arms against the government is going to be targeted as a terrorist/criminal that has no right to a firearm. We already take the privilege to guns from felons.
Of course they can. The far-right acts like this is some sort of rocket science<>
Actually with no relationship to the discussion about who gets one, the design and fabrication of guns was rocket science in the Fourteenth Century. Most of what we know about metallurgy and machining came from developments in search of better guns. Today the guns available to the public would be magical to them.
All of the mechanical systems we depend on in our daily lives have evolved from that weapons technology. That is part of why guns fascinate some people. "That, and Watches."
To have effective gun control the 2nd amendment needs to be repealed. Plain and simple. You can't have effective gun control while guaranteeing the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
The fact of the matter is that you're not going to have the government's permission to revolt against it anyway, and anybody that takes up arms against the government is going to be targeted as a terrorist/criminal that has no right to a firearm. We already take the privilege to guns from felons.
Congress can't repeal a part of the constitution.
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.
