Biden on Gun Control

[Auld Phart]

First thing Biden will do is take the guns

Then.....

Tear down the wall
Repeal Trumps tax cuts
Save the planet
Stack the Supreme Court
Drain the Swamp!

Before or after he fills his drool cup?

 

[progressive hunter]

"Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts"



That's sure to win him the votes of thousands of gun owners.

Right?

Most Americans favor stricter gun control.

Moron.....you don't inform the people about the issue, and they simply respond to the sound of the question.

They don't know we already have background checks.

They don't know that the democrat party is the main reason we have gun crime in democrat party controlled cities.

They don't know that gun free zones allow mass shooters to kill more people.

They don't know that magazine size has nothing to do with how many people are killed in mass public shootings...

If you actually asked accurate questions, they wouldn't support you....

Do you not remember that report a month ago, it say large mag over 10 rounds are the cause of mass shootings.

Here I'll remind of the study:
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Bans on large-capacity magazines were also associated with fewer fatal mass shootings and fatalities

fake news,,,

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Supreme court? I think it was appeals court.

However, they upheld the ban on automatic weapons, that are considered assault weapons.

Semi-automatics are not assault weapons, therefore they're not included in the ban.

Leftist solution? Change the definition and call every weapon an "assault weapon" and banning will be constitutional.

We were discussing whether it is constitutionally acceptable to regulate guns at all, since the constitution doesn't differentiate between types of arms in any way. "Shall not be infringed" means the same thing for a bb gun as it does for a fully auto 50 cal rifle. If the constitution allows regulation of one type, it allows regulation of all types. Try to keep up.

Only, the Constitution doesn't mention regulating arms. If you look what the intent of 2nd Amendment is, than people should have right to all arms that state has, in order to to protect themselves from the tyrannic state.

The constitution doesn't directly mention most things that it has authority over. You need to get a 7th grade civics book to figure out how all that works.

It's English. Have a problem?

Sorry if the real world doesn't align with how you think it should be. You should take your tinfoil hat and a sign and go stand on a street corner somewhere.That's where nut bags like you that claim the supreme court doesn't have the right to determine constitutionality of our laws are usually seen.

I have not claimed that. You claim to be educated?

 

[Penelope]

"Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts"



That's sure to win him the votes of thousands of gun owners.

Right?

Most Americans favor stricter gun control.

Moron.....you don't inform the people about the issue, and they simply respond to the sound of the question.

They don't know we already have background checks.

They don't know that the democrat party is the main reason we have gun crime in democrat party controlled cities.

They don't know that gun free zones allow mass shooters to kill more people.

They don't know that magazine size has nothing to do with how many people are killed in mass public shootings...

If you actually asked accurate questions, they wouldn't support you....

Do you not remember that report a month ago, it say large mag over 10 rounds are the cause of mass shootings.

Here I'll remind of the study:
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Bans on large-capacity magazines were also associated with fewer fatal mass shootings and fatalities

fake news,,,

The only think fake about the study is Breibart's spin on it.

 

[progressive hunter]

"Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts"



That's sure to win him the votes of thousands of gun owners.

Right?

Most Americans favor stricter gun control.

Moron.....you don't inform the people about the issue, and they simply respond to the sound of the question.

They don't know we already have background checks.

They don't know that the democrat party is the main reason we have gun crime in democrat party controlled cities.

They don't know that gun free zones allow mass shooters to kill more people.

They don't know that magazine size has nothing to do with how many people are killed in mass public shootings...

If you actually asked accurate questions, they wouldn't support you....

Do you not remember that report a month ago, it say large mag over 10 rounds are the cause of mass shootings.

Here I'll remind of the study:
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Bans on large-capacity magazines were also associated with fewer fatal mass shootings and fatalities

fake news,,,

The only think fake about the study is Breibart's spin on it.

whats a breibart???

 

[Ame®icano]

Like what, give few examples, it shouldn't be a problem since you're fresh from 7th grade.

Really? The constitution is consulted to determine governing rules for everything from gay marriage rights to cell phone frequencies.

Point to the Constitution where gay "marriage", or any marriage is responsibility of Federal government.

The constitution doesn't directly address gay marriage, like it doesn't directly address most of the things it has authority over. The supreme court makes the determination if the wording encompasses and allows all those things. You didn't already know that?
Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Is A Constitutional Right

It does, however, state explicitly, the Right to Keep and Bear arms shall not be infringed......

I ask again, is severe regulation of fully auto weapons infringment? The constitution doesn't differentiate between types of arms in the 2nd. If one can be regulated, they all can be regulated.

Let me ask you... Can your "free speech" right be regulated?

 

[Ame®icano]

Yet current regulation of fully automatic weapons is still perfectly constitutional. What part of the constitution makes fully auto weapons OK to regulate, but not any other type?

Does term "self defense" ring a bell?

You don't need assault weapons for self defense. Machine gun, or fully automatic rifle are assault weapons. Semi-automatic AR-15, regardless of how "scary" looking is, is not an assault weapon.

 

[Ame®icano]

We were discussing whether it is constitutionally acceptable to regulate guns at all, since the constitution doesn't differentiate between types of arms in any way. "Shall not be infringed" means the same thing for a bb gun as it does for a fully auto 50 cal rifle. If the constitution allows regulation of one type, it allows regulation of all types. Try to keep up.

Only, the Constitution doesn't mention regulating arms. If you look what the intent of 2nd Amendment is, than people should have right to all arms that state has, in order to to protect themselves from the tyrannic state.

The constitution doesn't directly mention most things that it has authority over. You need to get a 7th grade civics book to figure out how all that works.

It's English. Have a problem?

Sorry if the real world doesn't align with how you think it should be. You should take your tinfoil hat and a sign and go stand on a street corner somewhere.That's where nut bags like you that claim the supreme court doesn't have the right to determine constitutionality of our laws are usually seen.

I have not claimed that. You claim to be educated?

She is, by CNN and Comedy Central.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts
"Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts"
That's sure to win him the votes of thousands of gun owners.
Right?

Does this mean Bobby will show up at my door in SWAT gear?

 

[M14 Shooter]

They should ban any and all magazines that carry more than 10 shells, and enforce it to make sure you only allowed 1 to buy every 15 years , if you lose it to bad.

You cannot demonstrate the necessity for, or efficacy of, these restrictions.

 

[M14 Shooter]

[
The Heller decision affirmed the government`s (we the people) right to regulate guns.
The Second Amendment allows for more gun control than you think

The government does not have rights, it has powers.
the fact certain regulations are constitutionally acceptable does not mean ALL regulations are constitutionally acceptable.
So.. what's you point?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you not remember that report a month ago, it say large mag over 10 rounds are the cause of mass shootings.

^^^^^
This is a lie.

 

[progressive hunter]

Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts
"Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts"
That's sure to win him the votes of thousands of gun owners.
Right?

Does this mean Bobby will show up at my door in SWAT gear?

commie gun grabbers never do the grabbing themselves,,,

 

[2aguy]

Moron.....you don't inform the people about the issue, and they simply respond to the sound of the question.

They don't know we already have background checks.

They don't know that the democrat party is the main reason we have gun crime in democrat party controlled cities.

They don't know that gun free zones allow mass shooters to kill more people.

Actually, most Americans don't know how lax our gun laws are, or they'd be for making them even tighter.

You see, the real problem, every time a Second Amendment Hero shoots up a school or a theater or a concert...

View attachment 310220
(Pictured - Second Amendment Heroes)

... people ask, "how the hell did that person get a gun?!". The problem is, by the time the answer comes on, we've moved on to the next tragedy.

Moron....ask the uninformed American how many gun laws we already have and they won't have a clue.....ask them any basic question and they don't have a clue.

 

[2aguy]

"Joe Biden promises to put Beto O'Rourke in charge of gun control efforts"



That's sure to win him the votes of thousands of gun owners.

Right?

Most Americans favor stricter gun control.

Moron.....you don't inform the people about the issue, and they simply respond to the sound of the question.

They don't know we already have background checks.

They don't know that the democrat party is the main reason we have gun crime in democrat party controlled cities.

They don't know that gun free zones allow mass shooters to kill more people.

They don't know that magazine size has nothing to do with how many people are killed in mass public shootings...

If you actually asked accurate questions, they wouldn't support you....

Do you not remember that report a month ago, it say large mag over 10 rounds are the cause of mass shootings.

Here I'll remind of the study:
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Bans on large-capacity magazines were also associated with fewer fatal mass shootings and fatalities

And that was a crap report....considering that magazines were not a factor in any of the 10 mass public shootings in 2019.......

This is an actual look at mass public shootings and the magazines used........

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

I.

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

 

[BULLDOG]

Really? The constitution is consulted to determine governing rules for everything from gay marriage rights to cell phone frequencies.

Point to the Constitution where gay "marriage", or any marriage is responsibility of Federal government.

The constitution doesn't directly address gay marriage, like it doesn't directly address most of the things it has authority over. The supreme court makes the determination if the wording encompasses and allows all those things. You didn't already know that?
Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Is A Constitutional Right

It does, however, state explicitly, the Right to Keep and Bear arms shall not be infringed......

I ask again, is severe regulation of fully auto weapons infringment? The constitution doesn't differentiate between types of arms in the 2nd. If one can be regulated, they all can be regulated.

you have yet to show where it allows for any regulation,,,

Why do you think I should have to show you that? Regulation does exist. You can ignore that fact only with great effort. I can only assume that constitutional scholars with much more education than random anonymous posters on some message board, such as you and I, have determined that the constitution does allow for it. If you disagree, then you are either nuts or very retarded.

 

[progressive hunter]

Point to the Constitution where gay "marriage", or any marriage is responsibility of Federal government.

The constitution doesn't directly address gay marriage, like it doesn't directly address most of the things it has authority over. The supreme court makes the determination if the wording encompasses and allows all those things. You didn't already know that?
Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Is A Constitutional Right

It does, however, state explicitly, the Right to Keep and Bear arms shall not be infringed......

I ask again, is severe regulation of fully auto weapons infringment? The constitution doesn't differentiate between types of arms in the 2nd. If one can be regulated, they all can be regulated.

you have yet to show where it allows for any regulation,,,

Why do you think I should have to show you that? Regulation does exist. You can ignore that fact only with great effort. I can only assume that constitutional scholars with much more education than random anonymous posters on some message board, such as you and I, have determined that the constitution does allow for it. If you disagree, then you are either nuts or very retarded.

I dont need a higher education to read simple english,,,

and dont forget you are also an anonymous poster on some message board,,
thing is I have facts in the constitution to back up what I say and all you have is your opinion,,,

and before you come back with your constitutional scholars BS just remember they also said slavery was legal until it wasnt,,,

 

[BULLDOG]

Really? The constitution is consulted to determine governing rules for everything from gay marriage rights to cell phone frequencies.

Point to the Constitution where gay "marriage", or any marriage is responsibility of Federal government.

The constitution doesn't directly address gay marriage, like it doesn't directly address most of the things it has authority over. The supreme court makes the determination if the wording encompasses and allows all those things. You didn't already know that?
Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Is A Constitutional Right

It does, however, state explicitly, the Right to Keep and Bear arms shall not be infringed......

I ask again, is severe regulation of fully auto weapons infringment? The constitution doesn't differentiate between types of arms in the 2nd. If one can be regulated, they all can be regulated.

Let me ask you... Can your "free speech" right be regulated?

Yes. The most common example of regulation of free speech is you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre.

 

[progressive hunter]

Point to the Constitution where gay "marriage", or any marriage is responsibility of Federal government.

The constitution doesn't directly address gay marriage, like it doesn't directly address most of the things it has authority over. The supreme court makes the determination if the wording encompasses and allows all those things. You didn't already know that?
Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Marriage Is A Constitutional Right

It does, however, state explicitly, the Right to Keep and Bear arms shall not be infringed......

I ask again, is severe regulation of fully auto weapons infringment? The constitution doesn't differentiate between types of arms in the 2nd. If one can be regulated, they all can be regulated.

Let me ask you... Can your "free speech" right be regulated?

Yes. The most common example of regulation of free speech is you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre.

but you can yell fire in a crowded theater you dumb ****,,,

 

[BULLDOG]

Yet current regulation of fully automatic weapons is still perfectly constitutional. What part of the constitution makes fully auto weapons OK to regulate, but not any other type?

Does term "self defense" ring a bell?

You don't need assault weapons for self defense. Machine gun, or fully automatic rifle are assault weapons. Semi-automatic AR-15, regardless of how "scary" looking is, is not an assault weapon.

But they are still subject to being regulated..