Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If states decide they want to disarm thier own citizens with over-reaching gun control bills, then the follow amendment should be proposed in each case:
1. Police officers shall follow all the requirements of the gun control bill, with the exception of when on duty. In this case they must return the "illegal" weapon to an armory for storage every day.
2. Any carry home piece they are allowed must follow ALL regulations that anyone else in the state must follow, from banned weapons, to magazine limits, to trigger lock requirements and storage requirements.
3. Police must follow the same regulations for off duty concealed carry. They should not be given exceptions in places where one has to show cause for having one.
4. All government officals that are not police officers have to follow the same rules as everyone else, no exceptions. This includes any private security they might use.
5. Security guards for the well off should follow the same laws as everyone else, no exceptions.
Who is talking about disarming anyone?
[
A gun law, "Hey, you can't own more than one gun, you have to have a background check, and, oh, yeah, you can't have a military grade weapon" definitely would have prevented Newtown.
Lanza could have done newtown with a revolver, and he only did use one gun anyway.
You can't say "definitely" and you know it, you hack.
If he had a revolver, he would have gotten off exactly six shots, instead of the 154 he was able to shoot.
Given his shot-to-kill ratio was 5.9 rounds for every person he killed, he might not have been able to inflict even one fatality at that rate.
Too easy to get around: all the police chief would need to do is declare that cops are ALWAYS "on duty"and MUST carry their service weapon.
That would cost them a pretty penny, to pay them 24/7. They could try to salary them but I doubt the police unions would like it.
Please realize that I dont want gun control like the NY/Colorado/Conn Crap to pass. If it does however, I dont want to create a new class of "knights" the armed upper class that gets rights the rest of us do not have, and gets to lord over us like we are some medival serfs.
Most cops I know keep their service weapons handy.
Okay, let's get real here. The two reasons why you gun whacks give for wanting guns are pretty silly.
The first is you need to protect yourself from hoardes of criminals- but...
- A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.
- The FBI only recorded 201 justified homicides with a gun out of 10,000 recorded that year.
- 80% of murder victims know their killers.
Guns in the home do not make you safer.
The other logic you give is that you are sooooo paranoid the government is going to kill you. Again, the government will always have bigger guns, better guns, and be better with them. And frankly, if it comes to a shootout between a gun nut and a cop, the sympathy is always going to be with the cop.
He did not have a military grade weapon. He had a military looking Bushmaster of .223 caliber.If he had a revolver, he would have gotten off exactly six shots, instead of the 154 he was able to shoot.
Given his shot-to-kill ratio was 5.9 rounds for every person he killed, he might not have been able to inflict even one fatality at that rate.
not necessarily so
those with limited shots
tend to insure they make the mark more often
I just don't know how to respond to this sort of insanity. You do realize we are talking about a crazy person here, right? one who went out with the intent to shoot kids. Somehow, "shot conservation" wasn't up on his mind.
Point is, he had a military grade weapon and was able to shoot 154 shots in 5 minutes. No civilian should have that kind of firepower and definitely NOT a crazy one.
[
I am armed, trained and screened, (by the FBI in order to hold a CCW permit) but you want to take away what may be my preferred weapon and capacity choice because you piss your britches every time you see a scary black gun. In effect, you want criminals who could not pass the screening I have to be better armed than I am. You want all guns registered with a federal database. You will shout that you don't want to confiscate my "legal" weapons, but refuse to acknowledge that the government knowing what weapons I own is a precursor to confiscation.
[
Kellerman HAS BEEN DEBUNKED. The fact that you rely on it, shows your unwillingness to have meaningful debate.
[]
He did not have a military grade weapon. He had a military looking Bushmaster of .223 caliber.not necessarily so
those with limited shots
tend to insure they make the mark more often
I just don't know how to respond to this sort of insanity. You do realize we are talking about a crazy person here, right? one who went out with the intent to shoot kids. Somehow, "shot conservation" wasn't up on his mind.
Point is, he had a military grade weapon and was able to shoot 154 shots in 5 minutes. No civilian should have that kind of firepower and definitely NOT a crazy one.
[
you are assuming that every military person and Cop would side with the government.....
[
Do you have any idea how many rounds can be fired from a revolver in the 10 minutes it took for police to enter the building? He was unopposed. One armed and trained adult in the building could have made the Newtown death toll 1 instead of 26. Even someone as inept as you, could have taken him out as he shot his way through the entrance, especially if he was a Mormon.
If states decide they want to disarm thier own citizens with over-reaching gun control bills, then the follow amendment should be proposed in each case:
1. Police officers shall follow all the requirements of the gun control bill, with the exception of when on duty. In this case they must return the "illegal" weapon to an armory for storage every day.
2. Any carry home piece they are allowed must follow ALL regulations that anyone else in the state must follow, from banned weapons, to magazine limits, to trigger lock requirements and storage requirements.
3. Police must follow the same regulations for off duty concealed carry. They should not be given exceptions in places where one has to show cause for having one.
4. All government officals that are not police officers have to follow the same rules as everyone else, no exceptions. This includes any private security they might use.
5. Security guards for the well off should follow the same laws as everyone else, no exceptions.
Who is talking about disarming anyone?
When you tell someone they can no longer own an AR-15 and they already own one, that is disarming people. When you outlaw a magazine that holds thirty rounds when people already own them that is disarming people... Do we need to write it in crayon with little pictures for you?
He did not have a military grade weapon. He had a military looking Bushmaster of .223 caliber.I just don't know how to respond to this sort of insanity. You do realize we are talking about a crazy person here, right? one who went out with the intent to shoot kids. Somehow, "shot conservation" wasn't up on his mind.
Point is, he had a military grade weapon and was able to shoot 154 shots in 5 minutes. No civilian should have that kind of firepower and definitely NOT a crazy one.
Which had the capability to fire at Semi-Automatic mode and takes the same 5.56 round that the M16 series has.
[
you are assuming that every military person and Cop would side with the government.....
Yes, actually, I would... based on teh fact that they always do.
[
I am armed, trained and screened, (by the FBI in order to hold a CCW permit) but you want to take away what may be my preferred weapon and capacity choice because you piss your britches every time you see a scary black gun. In effect, you want criminals who could not pass the screening I have to be better armed than I am. You want all guns registered with a federal database. You will shout that you don't want to confiscate my "legal" weapons, but refuse to acknowledge that the government knowing what weapons I own is a precursor to confiscation.
Guy, criminals aren't the problem I'm worried about. Most gun deaths are sucides and domestic arguments. We clean those off the books, THEN we can worry about the crooks.
Good guys with guns almost never kill bad guys with guns. The FBI found only 201 cases of justifiable homicide in 2011 when there were 32,000 gun deaths that year.
[
Kellerman HAS BEEN DEBUNKED. The fact that you rely on it, shows your unwillingness to have meaningful debate.
[]
No, it hasn't. What you guys want to do is exclude certain data to make your point, but frankly, I think Kellerman was probably conservative.
If you have 32K gun deaths in a year, and only 201 of those were cases where someone was ruled to have justifiably shot in his own defense, you have 159 other cases where the gun WAS the problem for every one where it was.
[
you are assuming that every military person and Cop would side with the government.....
Yes, actually, I would... based on teh fact that they always do.
Joeb131--
I am not going to take the time to go back and directly quote every one of your posts.. but here are my responses to many of your statements.
1 - Cops are not all that well trained with the use of firearms. Most spend less time at a firing range than the average private gun owner. I fire at least a couple of hundred rounds each month. Most cops don't do that a year. The only real exception are those who are S.W.A.T. or other special team members.
2 - Most of the characteristics that ill-fated Di Fi anti-gun bill would have banned have nothing to do with how a gun actually operates. Purely cosmetic.
3 - Kellerman is a liar and admitted it.
4 - I would suggest that you go to YouTube and view the videos of the quick shot artists from around the world. They take western style six shooters and shoot faster and more accurately than most people can with a semi-automatic. It is the person not the weapon.
5 - While no right is absolute, on that statement we agree, every right enumerated in the Constitution is traditionally given the widest reading possible, not the narrowest.
6 - If "Saving Lives" is your main concern, then why do you support Abortion on demand? Planned Parenthood proudly killed 1 million children over the past three years. And they get Government financing to do it.
7 - Your "FBI" chart does not, because it is not tracked, show the number of times the display of superior firepower prevented a crime.
8 - You say I have "no compelling reason" to be armed at all times. Please tell me just how I am supposed to know when I am to be mugged the next time? The last time I was accosted by a criminal, I was sitting in my car at a redlight on a major highway on my way to work. The police still haven't caught him.
If states decide they want to disarm thier own citizens with over-reaching gun control bills, then the follow amendment should be proposed in each case:
1. Police officers shall follow all the requirements of the gun control bill, with the exception of when on duty. In this case they must return the "illegal" weapon to an armory for storage every day.
2. Any carry home piece they are allowed must follow ALL regulations that anyone else in the state must follow, from banned weapons, to magazine limits, to trigger lock requirements and storage requirements.
3. Police must follow the same regulations for off duty concealed carry. They should not be given exceptions in places where one has to show cause for having one.
4. All government officals that are not police officers have to follow the same rules as everyone else, no exceptions. This includes any private security they might use.
5. Security guards for the well off should follow the same laws as everyone else, no exceptions.
1- Frankly, the way you gun fetishist talk about your guns, I really think it's a lot of penis compensation going on here. No answer, simply an insult. Not really surpised, you know I am right.
2- Then argue against those things, and propose a gun bill that makes sense, and doesn't put high-grade weaponry into the hands of a Lanza. We have the laws in place. Laws don't prevent crime, they punish those who break the laws.
3- Kellerman was right on the money. I know you guys hate that, but I've known a lot of people who had family members die from a gun they bought for protection. Never knew one who killed a bad guy. That's why he admitted his numbers were wrong...
4- Adam Lanza was not a quick shot artist, but the weapons his Crazy Mom bought gave him the capability to match them. Strawman arguement. He killed his mother who legally owned those weapons. Then he stole those guns.
5- Every right in the constitution SHOULD be given the most LOGICAL reading. Free Speech is curtailed by the sensible position you don't yell Fire (or "Shooter") in a crowded theatre. Freedom of religion does not mean you can smoke Peyote or molest kids. And, yes, "Shall not be infringed" should mean, we need to know what kind of weapons people have and prevent them from having weapons they don't need. "Well REgulated" It's in there. Let me know when you are appointed to the SCotUS. Until then, we will use the standard that has been used for over 200 years.
6- Fetuses aren't babies. And just as many abortions happened before they were legalized as after. Interestingly enough people are in jail for killing unborn children. If you were interested in saving lives, you wouldn't be supporting abortion or making arguments supporting it.
7- It's a bullshit number. Frankly, displaying a gun would probably aggrevate a situation... Wrong. Too many cases where the simple display of a firearm has sent criminals running.
8- The fact you are still alive tells me you didn't need a gun in that situation. Try answering the question. When will I be mugged next so that I make sure that I only carry my weapon that day.
