America's unique gun violence (Congress, illegal, weapons, deaths)

[JimRom]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

Nope, that wasn't the intention. The founders never intended ordinary citizens to have military grade weapons. They intended well regulated state militias to be able to use muskets and other weapons of the day to protect the individual states.

The Founders absolutely never imagined the power that guns would have in modern times, and they never would have approved of individual citizens collecting 50 semi and automatic weapons to gun down concerts.

That is not the original intention of the 2nd Amendment, and the current state of this country would absolutely be opposed by the Founders. You are wrong.

And lol at individual citizens having nuclear weapons. What a ridiculous notion. So instead of the idiot in Vegas murdering 59 people, he can destroy New York City and 22 million.

Logic not even once.

Your knowledge of the founding fathers' intentions is severely lacking. No excuse for that when the information is right out there on the internet for you to read.

From George Washington:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

"They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence..." If the intention of the 2nd Amendment is to be the citizens' keystone to liberty, it would be ridiculous to state that "arms" were to be limited to the weapons of the day. Firearms did not exist in a vacuum, the design was constantly changing and improving. Do you honestly believe that the people who wrote the 2nd Amendment didn't understand that fact?

From George Mason, co-author of the 2nd Amendment:

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

Hmm, seems pretty clear here. The term "militia" was intended by the writers of the 2nd Amendment to refer to the entirety of the American citizenry.

History (which many liberals tend to want to ignore) is quite clear on the fact that the founding fathers intended for the citizens to possess the same arms as an invading army or rogue government possessed. Nothing more, nothing less. It is also quite clear from reading history that debating the word "militia" as used in the 2nd Amendment is not necessary. The founding fathers made it quite clear, in their own words, that the term refers to the citizenry. Not some of the citizenry, not the government, the people. Considering that the entire Bill of Rights was intended to limit the powers of the government, it astounds me that anyone could possibly argue that arms were only meant to be born by a body that was subject to government supervision.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by tinytrump

A Ban on High Capacity Rifle Magazines (30 Rounds or more)
A Ban on All AR and Military Type Rifles

we don't live in the jungle or are at war- if you have a NEED to fire these-- go join the military/ security forces and help the soldiers out in the trenches.

Why do people continue to choose to be clueless when they say "military type" or military grade". That is like calling a Hummer Humvee H2 is a "military grade vehicle" just because the military uses something similar.

[AnywhereElse]

This discussion will go nowhere until those that wish to do harm to others can be stopped by having such weapons, and they cannot. Restrictions will just bring about a black market, weapons coming in by mule (illegal alien) just like illegal drugs do now. With the open borders and the lax enforcement of laws in general, we should all be armed and dangerous!

In our state, you don't even want to illegally enter a house as in many others, you can't "stand your ground" with a pea shooter: States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw We had a case a few years ago where someone broke into a home out in the county, well, no trial was needed.

It is dangerous. Every time they discuss bans or laws, more weapons are sold. You can make or enhance a ready made with instructions on the internet.

We have bigger problems like the open southern border and the lawlessness it promotes.

[PedroMartinez]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

Might want to take a look at countries like Australia that heavily restricted guns and haven't had a mass shooting in 21 years. Almost every other developed nation has heavy gun restriction, and their gun violence is astronomically lower than ours.

So yes, it works all over the world.

Why doesn't it work in Mexico?

[my54ford]

An observation...It appears to me that many of the posters crying loudly for gun control and changing the Constitution are the same poster crying the loudest against the Electoral College and for the changing that Amendment. Think about it.....

[tinytrump]

Originally Posted by Pilot1

Do you realize how few deaths in the U.S. are attributed to illegal use of either of these. How about we ban murder? Why do you want to take away my self defense of a home invasion with multiple assailants, and leave me, and my family unprotected? Don't you care about the children?

I own a weapon- 380 but my preference would be a bazooka- no need to get my glasses to see - can I have one??? no--
but apparently like little children men can't control themselves - and they are stupid egomaniacs who kill our children . point-- we make laws for all because one dum freakadoo breaks it

[Jimmy_wuz_here]

The conatitution doesn't care what you think OP and neither do I. The 2nd ammendment SHAL NOT BE INFRINGED! I am the NRA and you will never take my freedoms from me you traitor!

[Pilot1]

It is scary that so many support yet more restrictions on our Natural Right of self defense. Even some Fudd gun owners here. Scary, that you are so uninformed, and easily manipulated by our Media, and Democrats.

[Casper in Dallas]

Originally Posted by Heavenese

Come on folks, you got to be quite ridiculous to say you need an assault rifle or any military style weapon for protection. Now for me calling people this is probably going to turn a lot of people off who might be willing to listen, but I'm calling a spade a spade. If a robber came into your home in the middle of the night, a simple hand gun or hunting rifle should be more than enough to handle the job. You don't need a semi automatic to take a dude or dudette who probably don't have a weapon (a gun) themselves, out. It's crazy to think you need a highly powered rifle, just to stop one robber, or even more than one. Chances are extremely likely if you fire one shot, if the robber is still alive, they will flee. If you need a gun that fires rapidly just to ward off a robber, you are just a bad shot. You need to go back to the range.

The truth is if a robber did break into a gun owner's home, one who did own many guns including high powered rifles, the owner would pick a handgun from their cache or a similar easy to handle weapon to handle the situation. They wouldn't hop out of bed and reach for their AR-15, with the bump stock attached. If they did that, they are putting more than the robber's life at risk.

The media and people who argue for these military weapons slay me when they say they need it for protection. Yet the most foolish of idiotic claims as to why people need these weapons, is the original argument behind the second amendment. The right to bear arms for the militia, to fight in the event we have a tyrannical government. Come on folks, get real. That idea was formed back in the day, when the government had pretty much the same weapons a militia would have. In fact, the militias were among the strongest fighting forces during the revolutionary war. You won't be able to fight against a tyrannical American military today with your assault rifles. Again, get real. Assuming Trump went fool and had full control over every aspect of the military, he could do whatever the frick he wanted to do. Do you have B-52 bombers in your back yard to fight against Trump? Do you have laser guided drones you bought at a gun show? Do you have naval ships, jets, stealth aircrafts, and the latest technology we don't even know about to take down Trump's army? HECK NO YOU DON"T!!!!!!!!!!! Stop being so ridiculous, it's insulting to anyone with a grain of intelligence. If Trump wanted to take away our guns right now, he has the military to do it. (Fox News always talk about communist countries taking away people's guns. As if they did it democratically)

Ultimately what I'm saying is, there is no reason citizens should have military style weapons. You don't need them to protect yourselves against robbers. When you look at the mass shooters, they were all citizens with no criminal history. They got their guns legally, or if they were high schoolers, got their guns from their parents cache. It's a stupid argument to say bad guys (which is code speak for gang activity or drug cartels) get their hands on these guns, and that's why we need them. That's why you have the military geniuses. If gangs got that out of control in using illegal machine guns, the military arm will shut them down in a snap. In fact, if they wanted to, they could shut down all that potential activity right now. The military and the government arm are you protectors against that, not you Rambo! Also as I stated before, if you're worried about a tyrannical government, you stand no chance against that. So again, there's no good reason for citizens to have military weapons. Whether it's semi-automatic or automatic.

So don't buy one, see how simple that is.

[Ponderosa]

With 300 K firearms out there, no law is going to be effective other than a complete ban with exceptions for limited purposes like hunting. And then no semi autos - bolt actions, pumps, revolvers etc. Just the kind of guns we normally carried back when America was still great.