Perfect example for 2nd amendment rights.

[Slade3200]

Hopefully they can address this problem by improving assimilation, education, and community involvement

Assimilation, education and community involvement can have an affect but it will take years.

Yeah, I don’t think an immediate long term solution exists

So don't you feel not letting people come into the country illegally would be a solution?

yeah of course, why would anybody encourage people to break the law? I think it’s a false accusation that the left wants that

Wait a minute, aren't there 10's of thousands that are already here illegally, aren't there something like 800,000 on DACA, isn't there a caravan headed our way?

There are millions here... over a million DACA and a caravan headed here who shouldn’t be allowed in unless they go through the legal immigration or refuge process.

 

[Thinker101]

Assimilation, education and community involvement can have an affect but it will take years.

Yeah, I don’t think an immediate long term solution exists

So don't you feel not letting people come into the country illegally would be a solution?

yeah of course, why would anybody encourage people to break the law? I think it’s a false accusation that the left wants that

Wait a minute, aren't there 10's of thousands that are already here illegally, aren't there something like 800,000 on DACA, isn't there a caravan headed our way?

There are millions here... over a million DACA and a caravan headed here who shouldn’t be allowed in unless they go through the legal immigration or refuge process.

And what about the millions already here illegally?

 

[Slade3200]

Yeah, I don’t think an immediate long term solution exists

So don't you feel not letting people come into the country illegally would be a solution?

yeah of course, why would anybody encourage people to break the law? I think it’s a false accusation that the left wants that

Wait a minute, aren't there 10's of thousands that are already here illegally, aren't there something like 800,000 on DACA, isn't there a caravan headed our way?

There are millions here... over a million DACA and a caravan headed here who shouldn’t be allowed in unless they go through the legal immigration or refuge process.

And what about the millions already here illegally?

I think they should be held accountable

 

[Slade3200]

So don't you feel not letting people come into the country illegally would be a solution?

yeah of course, why would anybody encourage people to break the law? I think it’s a false accusation that the left wants that

Wait a minute, aren't there 10's of thousands that are already here illegally, aren't there something like 800,000 on DACA, isn't there a caravan headed our way?

There are millions here... over a million DACA and a caravan headed here who shouldn’t be allowed in unless they go through the legal immigration or refuge process.

And what about the millions already here illegally?

I think they should be held accountable

That doesn’t necessarily mean deportation though. Don’t think that is realistic at this point

 

[Thinker101]

yeah of course, why would anybody encourage people to break the law? I think it’s a false accusation that the left wants that

Wait a minute, aren't there 10's of thousands that are already here illegally, aren't there something like 800,000 on DACA, isn't there a caravan headed our way?

There are millions here... over a million DACA and a caravan headed here who shouldn’t be allowed in unless they go through the legal immigration or refuge process.

And what about the millions already here illegally?

I think they should be held accountable

That doesn’t necessarily mean deportation though. Don’t think that is realistic at this point

The number already here illegally is a tough one...although if it doesn't start, it will never end.

 

[Slade3200]

Wait a minute, aren't there 10's of thousands that are already here illegally, aren't there something like 800,000 on DACA, isn't there a caravan headed our way?

There are millions here... over a million DACA and a caravan headed here who shouldn’t be allowed in unless they go through the legal immigration or refuge process.

And what about the millions already here illegally?

I think they should be held accountable

That doesn’t necessarily mean deportation though. Don’t think that is realistic at this point

The number already here illegally is a tough one...although if it doesn't start, it will never end.

We need to fix the immigration system to better monitor everybody that enters this country. It shouldn’t be a 10 year process to immigrate here... as for those already here, there needs to be an option to gain legal status that doesn’t involve deportation. Create a domestic program to rebuild America and give qualifying illegals the option of entering the program and contribute, otherwise, bye bye. I should work like the Millitary, which could also be an option.

 

[Thinker101]

There are millions here... over a million DACA and a caravan headed here who shouldn’t be allowed in unless they go through the legal immigration or refuge process.

And what about the millions already here illegally?

I think they should be held accountable

That doesn’t necessarily mean deportation though. Don’t think that is realistic at this point

The number already here illegally is a tough one...although if it doesn't start, it will never end.

We need to fix the immigration system to better monitor everybody that enters this country. It shouldn’t be a 10 year process to immigrate here... as for those already here, there needs to be an option to gain legal status that doesn’t involve deportation. Create a domestic program to rebuild America and give qualifying illegals the option of entering the program and contribute, otherwise, bye bye. I should work like the Millitary, which could also be an option.

Although is we start deporting, the backlog in the courts would diminish greatly.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

In theory, I suppose. The time it takes to drop and reload is less that a second.

Wouldn't a more realistic option be to shoot back at him, rather than try to take him down bare-handed?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I can't stop 11000 murders but If I can stop one (mine or my wife's) that's good enough reason to have a gun

What if you can stop 1 murder by limiting the firepower or magazine capacity of a gun in a school shooters hands. Say 16 deaths instead of 17 cause he had less bullets or had to reload... would that be worth it?

No.

Because all he would have to do is bring more than one gun or more than one magazine

If he brought the same amount of guns and the same amount of magazines but they had less capacity and firepower then there would be less damage. Common sense man

If ifs and buts were candy and nut, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Anyone hell bent on murder will bring whatever he thinks he needs to get the job done so instead of one rifle and 5 30 round mags he'll bring 15 10 round mags if he has it in his twisted mind that he needs 150 rounds

Or he'll bring 2 rifles or any combination of rifles and handguns etc

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

The time to reload is minuscule.

 

[Slade3200]

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

In theory, I suppose. The time it takes to drop and reload is less that a second.

Wouldn't a more realistic option be to shoot back at him, rather than try to take him down bare-handed?

Sure, if a cop or security guard or permitted armed citizen is around

 

[Slade3200]

What if you can stop 1 murder by limiting the firepower or magazine capacity of a gun in a school shooters hands. Say 16 deaths instead of 17 cause he had less bullets or had to reload... would that be worth it?

No.

Because all he would have to do is bring more than one gun or more than one magazine

If he brought the same amount of guns and the same amount of magazines but they had less capacity and firepower then there would be less damage. Common sense man

If ifs and buts were candy and nut, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Anyone hell bent on murder will bring whatever he thinks he needs to get the job done so instead of one rifle and 5 30 round mags he'll bring 15 10 round mags if he has it in his twisted mind that he needs 150 rounds

Or he'll bring 2 rifles or any combination of rifles and handguns etc

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

The time to reload is minuscule.

Well that depends on the gun and where you are storing your bullets

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

To the contrary, my plan is to make deliberate murder, or manslaughter of an innocent while attempting to commit murder a capital crime requiring the death sentence. That sentence to be carried out in public within one year of the conviction. Hang the perpetrator in his own neighborhood.

Mass murderers who die on the scene, should be publicly dumped into a garbage truck and hauled off to a landfill. His/her relatives could retrieve the body there, if they desire to do so. If the mass murderer survives, he should be put in chains and dragged off to jail through the streets where he can feel the wrath of an enraged community. Mass shootings would become rare.

They used to do all that stuff 100s of years ago. How did it work out?

There never was a repeat offender.....

Why don’t those systems exist anymore?

Because bleeding heart liberals stopped executing the murderers and rapists(like Ted Kennedy and Charles Manson) and set free, the child molesters, because it was inhumane to keep mentally ill people locked up..

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes? And why wouldn’t the old system go back to using the “effective” tactics once the changes proved to be ineffective?

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes?

Because idiots like you and the Obamaphone lady were more interested in FREE stuff than keeping criminals out of society.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I can't stop 11000 murders but If I can stop one (mine or my wife's) that's good enough reason to have a gun

What if you can stop 1 murder by limiting the firepower or magazine capacity of a gun in a school shooters hands. Say 16 deaths instead of 17 cause he had less bullets or had to reload... would that be worth it?

No.

Because all he would have to do is bring more than one gun or more than one magazine

If he brought the same amount of guns and the same amount of magazines but they had less capacity and firepower then there would be less damage. Common sense man

If ifs and buts were candy and nut, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Anyone hell bent on murder will bring whatever he thinks he needs to get the job done so instead of one rifle and 5 30 round mags he'll bring 15 10 round mags if he has it in his twisted mind that he needs 150 rounds

Or he'll bring 2 rifles or any combination of rifles and handguns etc

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

And you're the expert on how people hell bent on murder think?

FYI Cruz only had 10 round magazines
What stopped him was a jammed gun because it was a piece of shit and he didn't know how to operate it very well

 

[Slade3200]

They used to do all that stuff 100s of years ago. How did it work out?

There never was a repeat offender.....

Why don’t those systems exist anymore?

Because bleeding heart liberals stopped executing the murderers and rapists(like Ted Kennedy and Charles Manson) and set free, the child molesters, because it was inhumane to keep mentally ill people locked up..

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes? And why wouldn’t the old system go back to using the “effective” tactics once the changes proved to be ineffective?

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes?

Because idiots like you and the Obamaphone lady were more interested in FREE stuff than keeping criminals out of society.

Ok, keep telling yourself that

 

[Slade3200]

What if you can stop 1 murder by limiting the firepower or magazine capacity of a gun in a school shooters hands. Say 16 deaths instead of 17 cause he had less bullets or had to reload... would that be worth it?

No.

Because all he would have to do is bring more than one gun or more than one magazine

If he brought the same amount of guns and the same amount of magazines but they had less capacity and firepower then there would be less damage. Common sense man

If ifs and buts were candy and nut, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Anyone hell bent on murder will bring whatever he thinks he needs to get the job done so instead of one rifle and 5 30 round mags he'll bring 15 10 round mags if he has it in his twisted mind that he needs 150 rounds

Or he'll bring 2 rifles or any combination of rifles and handguns etc

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

And you're the expert on how people hell bent on murder think?

FYI Cruz only had 10 round magazines
What stopped him was a jammed gun because it was a piece of shit and he didn't know how to operate it very well

That’s a great example. How many do you think would be dead if he had 30 round magazines?

 

[Skull Pilot]

No.

Because all he would have to do is bring more than one gun or more than one magazine

If he brought the same amount of guns and the same amount of magazines but they had less capacity and firepower then there would be less damage. Common sense man

If ifs and buts were candy and nut, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Anyone hell bent on murder will bring whatever he thinks he needs to get the job done so instead of one rifle and 5 30 round mags he'll bring 15 10 round mags if he has it in his twisted mind that he needs 150 rounds

Or he'll bring 2 rifles or any combination of rifles and handguns etc

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

And you're the expert on how people hell bent on murder think?

FYI Cruz only had 10 round magazines
What stopped him was a jammed gun because it was a piece of shit and he didn't know how to operate it very well

That’s a great example. How many do you think would be dead if he had 30 round magazines?

No more since it takes about a second and a half to drop and swap a magazine.

Did you see this yet

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

There never was a repeat offender.....

Why don’t those systems exist anymore?

Because bleeding heart liberals stopped executing the murderers and rapists(like Ted Kennedy and Charles Manson) and set free, the child molesters, because it was inhumane to keep mentally ill people locked up..

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes? And why wouldn’t the old system go back to using the “effective” tactics once the changes proved to be ineffective?

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes?

Because idiots like you and the Obamaphone lady were more interested in FREE stuff than keeping criminals out of society.

Ok, keep telling yourself that

I know all about it, it is you that cant seem to pull your head out of your dumb ass.

 

[Slade3200]

If he brought the same amount of guns and the same amount of magazines but they had less capacity and firepower then there would be less damage. Common sense man

If ifs and buts were candy and nut, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Anyone hell bent on murder will bring whatever he thinks he needs to get the job done so instead of one rifle and 5 30 round mags he'll bring 15 10 round mags if he has it in his twisted mind that he needs 150 rounds

Or he'll bring 2 rifles or any combination of rifles and handguns etc

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

And you're the expert on how people hell bent on murder think?

FYI Cruz only had 10 round magazines
What stopped him was a jammed gun because it was a piece of shit and he didn't know how to operate it very well

That’s a great example. How many do you think would be dead if he had 30 round magazines?

No more since it takes about a second and a half to drop and swap a magazine.

Did you see this yet

Are you really not getting it or are you just trying to be difficult?

He brought a gun with some magazines. If his magazines would have held 30 rounds instead of 10 there would have been more shots and more dead. You said yourself he had a shitty gun that locked up that cut him short and prevented more from dying. Same concept

 

[Slade3200]

Why don’t those systems exist anymore?

Because bleeding heart liberals stopped executing the murderers and rapists(like Ted Kennedy and Charles Manson) and set free, the child molesters, because it was inhumane to keep mentally ill people locked up..

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes? And why wouldn’t the old system go back to using the “effective” tactics once the changes proved to be ineffective?

How did these bleeding heart liberals with, as you describe, ineffective and counterproductive views, gain so much power to be able to institute these kind of changes?

Because idiots like you and the Obamaphone lady were more interested in FREE stuff than keeping criminals out of society.

Ok, keep telling yourself that

I know all about it, it is you that cant seem to pull your head out of your dumb ass.

Haha, look at you fucking puppets posting the same crap back to back. That’s funny

 

[Pop23]

Sure if he wants 150 rounds but who thinks like that? I don’t think many. Most people get a gun and then some extra magazines that they may or may not take with them.

And wouldn’t you rather a nutball need to carry 15 magazines and reload 15 times as opposed to 5? Each reload is time to run or disarm the guy.

In theory, I suppose. The time it takes to drop and reload is less that a second.

Wouldn't a more realistic option be to shoot back at him, rather than try to take him down bare-handed?

But seriously, with today's technology, a high capacity magazine would be easy to 3D print.