CNBC: Democrats quickly call for tighter gun laws after Las Vegas shooting massacre

[2aguy]

You are comparing cars? Cars are driven by millons and millions of people each day. They are an important part of most everyones lives. Most peoples day wouldn't be effected if guns disappeared tomorrow.

You don't think so? Then do this: Get a huge sign made that says WE HAVE NO FIREARMS IN THIS HOUSE, hang that sign on your front porch, and get back to us in a month or so and let us know how it worked out for ya......if you're still alive.

The reason people like you are protected by guns even if you don't own one is because our laws say you can use one for protection if you need it. Any potential attacker has no guarantee that you are not armed; in fact, statistically, they have to assume you are.

Give them a guarantee that you are not armed, and see what happens.

Yes really slowing crime a lot:
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Yes, the second straight year after the Ferguson effect. Why not expand a bit to see the real statistics?

View attachment 152479

Crime dropped with the Bill Clinton crime bill and gun control. Now as concealed carry has ramped up, crime is up.

Ah so what caused the ferguson effect? Cops shooting lots of people. That is a unique problem to the US also. Why do our police shoot so many people? Because we have so many guns. Every week a cop is shot and killed. So the ferguson effect is from too many guns.

No....you have no clue what you are talking about....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.
Hard Data, Hollow Protests

The reason for the current increase is what I have called the Ferguson Effect.

Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened.

Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by. Such stops are discretionary; cops don’t have to make them. And when political elites demonize the police for just such proactive policing, we shouldn’t be surprised when cops get the message and do less of it.

Seventy-two percent of the nation’s officers say that they and their colleagues are now less willing to stop and question suspicious persons, according to a Pew Research poll released in January. The reason is the persistent anti-cop climate.

Four studies came out in 2016 alone rebutting the charge that police shootings are racially biased. If there is a bias in police shootings, it works in favor of blacks and against whites. That truth has not stopped the ongoing demonization of the police—including, now, by many of the country’s ignorant professional athletes. The toll will be felt, as always, in the inner city, by the thousands of law-abiding people there who desperately want more police protection.

 

[Rustic]

Fool, that does not make it military grade you silly fucker…

Hey dummy. It doesnt have to be military grade to be full auto.

True, that means its still just a sporting rifle, and no where near as reliable as military grade. Dip shit

Doesn't need to be... it's spraying .223 rounds at high velocity, with probably each going through more than one person. And clearly he wasn't reliant on

Unless specially licensed, machine guns are illegal, ya thick head!

Gee. It must take extensive engineering to modify a semi-automatic firing system to a fully automatic firing system.

Can you do it? I doubt it.

It is also against the law to do that. That would be the same kind of law you would propose to outlaw guns.

Why break just one gun control law when you can break them all?

That means people will still die!

Do you have any idea how many gun laws the San Bernadino shooters broke? I guess we should expect criminals to obey all the laws regarding guns while they are randomly killing people.

Criminals don't follow laws, eh? That's far out, man.


So, a little quiz: if we just repealed the laws banning/controlling automatic weapons, would the result be:

a) more automatic weapons
b) same number
c) fewer

And, if you make it past that grueling question and got the correct answer, would the result then be:

a) more mass shootings and/or more dead people in each mass shooting
b) no change
c) fewer deaths and/or mass shootings, because we'll all be safer at this point, given the proliferation of automatic weapons

Taaaaaake your time...

Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person. It is designed to wound more then kill. One wounded soldier takes 2 or more others out of the battle.

Your bogus questions will be ignored because they are infested with stupidity.

"Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person."

From a high velocity rifle? No? Okay, you got me there. I'm sure you would know. I don't own rifles. Therefore, i know noting about anything. In your reasonable estimate.


And you ignored my questions because you are a sissy.

you need to ignore what progressive say about the firearms because it's all a lie...

 

[Brain357]

You are comparing cars? Cars are driven by millons and millions of people each day. They are an important part of most everyones lives. Most peoples day wouldn't be effected if guns disappeared tomorrow.

You don't think so? Then do this: Get a huge sign made that says WE HAVE NO FIREARMS IN THIS HOUSE, hang that sign on your front porch, and get back to us in a month or so and let us know how it worked out for ya......if you're still alive.

The reason people like you are protected by guns even if you don't own one is because our laws say you can use one for protection if you need it. Any potential attacker has no guarantee that you are not armed; in fact, statistically, they have to assume you are.

Give them a guarantee that you are not armed, and see what happens.

Yes really slowing crime a lot:
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Yes, the second straight year after the Ferguson effect. Why not expand a bit to see the real statistics?

View attachment 152479

Crime dropped with the Bill Clinton crime bill and gun control. Now as concealed carry has ramped up, crime is up.

Ah so what caused the ferguson effect? Cops shooting lots of people. That is a unique problem to the US also. Why do our police shoot so many people? Because we have so many guns. Every week a cop is shot and killed. So the ferguson effect is from too many guns.

No....you have no clue what you are talking about....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.
Hard Data, Hollow Protests

The reason for the current increase is what I have called the Ferguson Effect.

Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened.

Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by. Such stops are discretionary; cops don’t have to make them. And when political elites demonize the police for just such proactive policing, we shouldn’t be surprised when cops get the message and do less of it.

Seventy-two percent of the nation’s officers say that they and their colleagues are now less willing to stop and question suspicious persons, according to a Pew Research poll released in January. The reason is the persistent anti-cop climate.

Four studies came out in 2016 alone rebutting the charge that police shootings are racially biased. If there is a bias in police shootings, it works in favor of blacks and against whites. That truth has not stopped the ongoing demonization of the police—including, now, by many of the country’s ignorant professional athletes. The toll will be felt, as always, in the inner city, by the thousands of law-abiding people there who desperately want more police protection.

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hey dummy. It doesnt have to be military grade to be full auto.

True, that means its still just a sporting rifle, and no where near as reliable as military grade. Dip shit

Doesn't need to be... it's spraying .223 rounds at high velocity, with probably each going through more than one person. And clearly he wasn't reliant on

Gee. It must take extensive engineering to modify a semi-automatic firing system to a fully automatic firing system.

Can you do it? I doubt it.

It is also against the law to do that. That would be the same kind of law you would propose to outlaw guns.

Why break just one gun control law when you can break them all?

That means people will still die!

Do you have any idea how many gun laws the San Bernadino shooters broke? I guess we should expect criminals to obey all the laws regarding guns while they are randomly killing people.

Criminals don't follow laws, eh? That's far out, man.


So, a little quiz: if we just repealed the laws banning/controlling automatic weapons, would the result be:

a) more automatic weapons
b) same number
c) fewer

And, if you make it past that grueling question and got the correct answer, would the result then be:

a) more mass shootings and/or more dead people in each mass shooting
b) no change
c) fewer deaths and/or mass shootings, because we'll all be safer at this point, given the proliferation of automatic weapons

Taaaaaake your time...

Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person. It is designed to wound more then kill. One wounded soldier takes 2 or more others out of the battle.

Your bogus questions will be ignored because they are infested with stupidity.

"Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person."

From a high velocity rifle? No? Okay, you got me there. I'm sure you would know. I don't own rifles. Therefore, i know noting about anything. In your reasonable estimate.


And you ignored my questions because you are a sissy.

you need to ignore what progressive say about the firearms because it's all a lie...

I own my own guns... and i ignore nobody.... if I agreed with these gun freaks, I would be delusional...

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Buy stock in Gun Manufacturers. You're about to make a killing with this new round of gun confiscation talks by the commie left.


They never learn.

 

[Brain357]

You are comparing cars? Cars are driven by millons and millions of people each day. They are an important part of most everyones lives. Most peoples day wouldn't be effected if guns disappeared tomorrow.

You don't think so? Then do this: Get a huge sign made that says WE HAVE NO FIREARMS IN THIS HOUSE, hang that sign on your front porch, and get back to us in a month or so and let us know how it worked out for ya......if you're still alive.

The reason people like you are protected by guns even if you don't own one is because our laws say you can use one for protection if you need it. Any potential attacker has no guarantee that you are not armed; in fact, statistically, they have to assume you are.

Give them a guarantee that you are not armed, and see what happens.

Yes really slowing crime a lot:
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Yes, the second straight year after the Ferguson effect. Why not expand a bit to see the real statistics?

View attachment 152479

Crime dropped with the Bill Clinton crime bill and gun control. Now as concealed carry has ramped up, crime is up.

Ah so what caused the ferguson effect? Cops shooting lots of people. That is a unique problem to the US also. Why do our police shoot so many people? Because we have so many guns. Every week a cop is shot and killed. So the ferguson effect is from too many guns.

No....you have no clue what you are talking about....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.
Hard Data, Hollow Protests

The reason for the current increase is what I have called the Ferguson Effect.

Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened.

Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by. Such stops are discretionary; cops don’t have to make them. And when political elites demonize the police for just such proactive policing, we shouldn’t be surprised when cops get the message and do less of it.

Seventy-two percent of the nation’s officers say that they and their colleagues are now less willing to stop and question suspicious persons, according to a Pew Research poll released in January. The reason is the persistent anti-cop climate.

Four studies came out in 2016 alone rebutting the charge that police shootings are racially biased. If there is a bias in police shootings, it works in favor of blacks and against whites. That truth has not stopped the ongoing demonization of the police—including, now, by many of the country’s ignorant professional athletes. The toll will be felt, as always, in the inner city, by the thousands of law-abiding people there who desperately want more police protection.

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

True, that means its still just a sporting rifle, and no where near as reliable as military grade. Dip shit

Doesn't need to be... it's spraying .223 rounds at high velocity, with probably each going through more than one person. And clearly he wasn't reliant on

Can you do it? I doubt it.

It is also against the law to do that. That would be the same kind of law you would propose to outlaw guns.

Why break just one gun control law when you can break them all?

That means people will still die!

Do you have any idea how many gun laws the San Bernadino shooters broke? I guess we should expect criminals to obey all the laws regarding guns while they are randomly killing people.

Criminals don't follow laws, eh? That's far out, man.


So, a little quiz: if we just repealed the laws banning/controlling automatic weapons, would the result be:

a) more automatic weapons
b) same number
c) fewer

And, if you make it past that grueling question and got the correct answer, would the result then be:

a) more mass shootings and/or more dead people in each mass shooting
b) no change
c) fewer deaths and/or mass shootings, because we'll all be safer at this point, given the proliferation of automatic weapons

Taaaaaake your time...

Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person. It is designed to wound more then kill. One wounded soldier takes 2 or more others out of the battle.

Your bogus questions will be ignored because they are infested with stupidity.

"Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person."

From a high velocity rifle? No? Okay, you got me there. I'm sure you would know. I don't own rifles. Therefore, i know noting about anything. In your reasonable estimate.


And you ignored my questions because you are a sissy.

I ignored your question because they are stupid, just like their author.

There is a lot you know nothing about, so why not just shut up and keep that little secret to yourself?

No, you ignored them, because you are a sissy. You , despite your bluster, actually agree with some degree of gun control. And you know why we need it and what its positive effects are. But you'd rather throw your little hissy than admit it.

What are the positive effects? Apparently the guns used in last night's shooting were illegal.

Did the law prevent that from happening?

Unlike most people, I am around automatic weapons on a regular basis because of my work with the military. There are good points and bad points to the use of each, which is why the M-4 does not have the full auto capability of its predecessor the M-16.

Last night the shooter was employing automatic weapons by what is called "spray and pray", that being spray down an area with bullets and pray you hit something. Aiming an automatic weapon other than just in the general direction of your target is almost completely useless. Why do you think snipers prefer bolt action or semi-automatic rifles? Accuracy!

At best, only a small percentage of those shot last night were actually targeted. He was likely firing blindly in the direction of the crowd and that was all.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Doesn't need to be... it's spraying .223 rounds at high velocity, with probably each going through more than one person. And clearly he wasn't reliant on
Criminals don't follow laws, eh? That's far out, man.


So, a little quiz: if we just repealed the laws banning/controlling automatic weapons, would the result be:

a) more automatic weapons
b) same number
c) fewer

And, if you make it past that grueling question and got the correct answer, would the result then be:

a) more mass shootings and/or more dead people in each mass shooting
b) no change
c) fewer deaths and/or mass shootings, because we'll all be safer at this point, given the proliferation of automatic weapons

Taaaaaake your time...

Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person. It is designed to wound more then kill. One wounded soldier takes 2 or more others out of the battle.

Your bogus questions will be ignored because they are infested with stupidity.

"Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person."

From a high velocity rifle? No? Okay, you got me there. I'm sure you would know. I don't own rifles. Therefore, i know noting about anything. In your reasonable estimate.


And you ignored my questions because you are a sissy.

I ignored your question because they are stupid, just like their author.

There is a lot you know nothing about, so why not just shut up and keep that little secret to yourself?

No, you ignored them, because you are a sissy. You , despite your bluster, actually agree with some degree of gun control. And you know why we need it and what its positive effects are. But you'd rather throw your little hissy than admit it.

What are the positive effects? Apparently the guns used in last night's shooting were illegal.

Did the law prevent that from happening?

Unlike most people, I am around automatic weapons on a regular basis because of my work with the military. There are good points and bad points to the use of each, which is why the M-4 does not have the full auto capability of its predecessor the M-16.

Last night the shooter was employing automatic weapons by what is called "spray and pray", that being spray down an area with bullets and pray you hit something. Aiming an automatic weapon other than just in the general direction of your target is almost completely useless. Why do you think snipers prefer bolt action or semi-automatic rifles? Accuracy!

At best, only a small percentage of those shot last night were actually targeted. He was likely firing blindly in the direction of the crowd and that was all.

"What are the positive effects?"

Well, let's go back to square one, then:

So, a little quiz: if we just repealed the laws banning/controlling automatic weapons, would the result be:

a) more automatic weapons
b) same number
c) fewer

And, if you make it past that grueling question and got the correct answer, would the result then be:

a) more mass shootings and/or more dead people in each mass shooting
b) no change
c) fewer deaths and/or mass shootings, because we'll all be safer at this point, given the proliferation of automatic weapons

Taaaaaake your time...

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person. It is designed to wound more then kill. One wounded soldier takes 2 or more others out of the battle.

Your bogus questions will be ignored because they are infested with stupidity.

"Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person."

From a high velocity rifle? No? Okay, you got me there. I'm sure you would know. I don't own rifles. Therefore, i know noting about anything. In your reasonable estimate.


And you ignored my questions because you are a sissy.

I ignored your question because they are stupid, just like their author.

There is a lot you know nothing about, so why not just shut up and keep that little secret to yourself?

No, you ignored them, because you are a sissy. You , despite your bluster, actually agree with some degree of gun control. And you know why we need it and what its positive effects are. But you'd rather throw your little hissy than admit it.

What are the positive effects? Apparently the guns used in last night's shooting were illegal.

Did the law prevent that from happening?

Unlike most people, I am around automatic weapons on a regular basis because of my work with the military. There are good points and bad points to the use of each, which is why the M-4 does not have the full auto capability of its predecessor the M-16.

Last night the shooter was employing automatic weapons by what is called "spray and pray", that being spray down an area with bullets and pray you hit something. Aiming an automatic weapon other than just in the general direction of your target is almost completely useless. Why do you think snipers prefer bolt action or semi-automatic rifles? Accuracy!

At best, only a small percentage of those shot last night were actually targeted. He was likely firing blindly in the direction of the crowd and that was all.

"What are the positive effects?"

Well, let's go back to square one, then:

So, a little quiz: if we just repealed the laws banning/controlling automatic weapons, would the result be:

a) more automatic weapons
b) same number
c) fewer

And, if you make it past that grueling question and got the correct answer, would the result then be:

a) more mass shootings and/or more dead people in each mass shooting
b) no change
c) fewer deaths and/or mass shootings, because we'll all be safer at this point, given the proliferation of automatic weapons

Taaaaaake your time...

Why should I answer your questions when you can't even get the simplest concept correct?

I am not playing your stupid hypothetical games.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You don't think so? Then do this: Get a huge sign made that says WE HAVE NO FIREARMS IN THIS HOUSE, hang that sign on your front porch, and get back to us in a month or so and let us know how it worked out for ya......if you're still alive.

The reason people like you are protected by guns even if you don't own one is because our laws say you can use one for protection if you need it. Any potential attacker has no guarantee that you are not armed; in fact, statistically, they have to assume you are.

Give them a guarantee that you are not armed, and see what happens.

Yes really slowing crime a lot:
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Yes, the second straight year after the Ferguson effect. Why not expand a bit to see the real statistics?

View attachment 152479

Crime dropped with the Bill Clinton crime bill and gun control. Now as concealed carry has ramped up, crime is up.

Ah so what caused the ferguson effect? Cops shooting lots of people. That is a unique problem to the US also. Why do our police shoot so many people? Because we have so many guns. Every week a cop is shot and killed. So the ferguson effect is from too many guns.

No....you have no clue what you are talking about....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.
Hard Data, Hollow Protests

The reason for the current increase is what I have called the Ferguson Effect.

Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened.

Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by. Such stops are discretionary; cops don’t have to make them. And when political elites demonize the police for just such proactive policing, we shouldn’t be surprised when cops get the message and do less of it.

Seventy-two percent of the nation’s officers say that they and their colleagues are now less willing to stop and question suspicious persons, according to a Pew Research poll released in January. The reason is the persistent anti-cop climate.

Four studies came out in 2016 alone rebutting the charge that police shootings are racially biased. If there is a bias in police shootings, it works in favor of blacks and against whites. That truth has not stopped the ongoing demonization of the police—including, now, by many of the country’s ignorant professional athletes. The toll will be felt, as always, in the inner city, by the thousands of law-abiding people there who desperately want more police protection.

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"Your ignorance is showing. A .223 round will not pass through a person."

From a high velocity rifle? No? Okay, you got me there. I'm sure you would know. I don't own rifles. Therefore, i know noting about anything. In your reasonable estimate.


And you ignored my questions because you are a sissy.

I ignored your question because they are stupid, just like their author.

There is a lot you know nothing about, so why not just shut up and keep that little secret to yourself?

No, you ignored them, because you are a sissy. You , despite your bluster, actually agree with some degree of gun control. And you know why we need it and what its positive effects are. But you'd rather throw your little hissy than admit it.

What are the positive effects? Apparently the guns used in last night's shooting were illegal.

Did the law prevent that from happening?

Unlike most people, I am around automatic weapons on a regular basis because of my work with the military. There are good points and bad points to the use of each, which is why the M-4 does not have the full auto capability of its predecessor the M-16.

Last night the shooter was employing automatic weapons by what is called "spray and pray", that being spray down an area with bullets and pray you hit something. Aiming an automatic weapon other than just in the general direction of your target is almost completely useless. Why do you think snipers prefer bolt action or semi-automatic rifles? Accuracy!

At best, only a small percentage of those shot last night were actually targeted. He was likely firing blindly in the direction of the crowd and that was all.

"What are the positive effects?"

Well, let's go back to square one, then:

So, a little quiz: if we just repealed the laws banning/controlling automatic weapons, would the result be:

a) more automatic weapons
b) same number
c) fewer

And, if you make it past that grueling question and got the correct answer, would the result then be:

a) more mass shootings and/or more dead people in each mass shooting
b) no change
c) fewer deaths and/or mass shootings, because we'll all be safer at this point, given the proliferation of automatic weapons

Taaaaaake your time...

Why should I answer your questions when you can't even get the simplest concept correct?

I am not playing your stupid hypothetical games.

Gotcha. You won't answer, because you don't feel like it. So, there. Neener neener. Okay.

And "the game" is not hypothetical, it is actually historical. As in, this quiz and the resulting debate already happened. Wanna guess how it turned out? No fair, you're from the future.

 

[MikeK]

Let's see if they only "look" like assault weapons or are easily modified to become assault weapons

The monster was firing at 600 rounds per minute. Awfully fast for a semiautomatic

"Easily modified?" Only for an expert machinist with gunsmithing experience working with precision drawings and precise receiver measurements.

 

[Political Junky]

Automatics are legal in Nevada if purchased before 1986.

 

[theHawk]

Still waiting to hear what law the Dems want to pass that will magically prevent this type of attack again.



At this point there seems to be no clear motive, but there are reports he was a heavy gambler. I have a strong suspicion that his woman had to know something about his mental state.

 

[Nosmo King]

In the light of the events in Las Cegas, no one is doing a "happy dance", especially gun control advocates. We do not traffic in schadenfreude. That despicable trait is the province of those who refuse to recognize the havoc automatic weapons bring to our streets.

What's the purpose of a machine gun? It is not designed for sporting purposes. It is designed exclusively to kill as many humans as quickly as possible. No one can justify their ownership among civilians. Such weapons belong in the hands of a well regulated militia, not on American streets.

Unless specially licensed, machine guns are illegal, ya thick head!

Gee. It must take extensive engineering to modify a semi-automatic firing system to a fully automatic firing system.

Can you do it? I doubt it.

It is also against the law to do that. That would be the same kind of law you would propose to outlaw guns.

Why break just one gun control law when you can break them all?

That means people will still die!

Do you have any idea how many gun laws the San Bernadino shooters broke? I guess we should expect criminals to obey all the laws regarding guns while they are randomly killing people.

Here's my solution. Citizens retain all the bolt action rifles, revolvers and pump shot guns they want.

Any and all guns fitted with a semi-automatic firing system, can be loaded by means of a high capacity magazine should be illegal to own, buy, sell, manufacture, import or distribute.

Guns for sport and self defense remain legal. Guns for warfare are banned. Anyone retaining a banned weapon may keep it if it I should rendered unfireable and kept as a collector's item.

Your proposal would take away all but one firearm I own and that one was made in the 1920s.

Go ahead and try to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Just right ahead and try. See what happens.

The epic failure will be a monument to the idiocy of the gun-grabbers. BTW, which model of gun-grabber are you? Nazi or Communist?

I'm not repealing the second amendment. I'm abiding by it. My proposal puts military weapons where they belong, in the hands of well regulated militiamen. Sporting arms are still in the hands of the citizens.

What model of 'gun-grabber' am I? Neither Nazi nor Communist. I'm a pragmatist.

 

[MikeK]

Automatics are legal in Nevada if purchased before 1986.

How does Nevada state law supersede the federal law? Or is it something like the pot laws in states where it's legal?

 

[Brain357]

Still waiting to hear what law the Dems want to pass that will magically prevent this type of attack again.



At this point there seems to be no clear motive, but there are reports he was a heavy gambler. I have a strong suspicion that his woman had to know something about his mental state.

The same laws other countries use? Maybe you haven't noticed, but we are the only ones that regularly have mass shootings.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Automatics are legal in Nevada if purchased before 1986.

How does Nevada state law supersede the federal law? Or is it something like the pot laws in states where it's legal?

"How does Nevada state law supersede the federal law? "

It doesn't. That's actually the federal law.

 

[theHawk]

Still waiting to hear what law the Dems want to pass that will magically prevent this type of attack again.



At this point there seems to be no clear motive, but there are reports he was a heavy gambler. I have a strong suspicion that his woman had to know something about his mental state.

The same laws other countries use? Maybe you haven't noticed, but we are the only ones that regularly have mass shootings.

We are not the only ones that have mass shootings on a regular basis, moron.

 

[MikeK]

Your rationalization falls flat. How do you conclude he lived an isolated life? Lacking more than ten guns in a 32nd floor hotel room, how could he have killed so many so quickly from such safety? A truck bomb as the hyper Conservative McVeigh did? Perhaps. But unlikely given modern security methods. He used a machine gun, a modified semi-automatic firing system and high capacity ammunition clips. Somebody must step up and say enough! There is no use for such weapons other than to kill as many people as quickly as possible. A weapon that belongs in the hands of a well regulated militia, not on the streets of America.

Are you saying such guns should be illegal -- like drugs, you mean?

Okay. That's a really good idea. Should work. Let's do that.