Senate Democrats plan to hold the floor to protest inaction on gun legislation

[Slade3200]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

That’s a lame point

 

[iceberg]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

Which is why I always ask people that are for magazine limitations: Would you be happy if only 22 people got killed in a mass murder instead of 23?

It simply doesn't solve anything.

The "we saved one life" sounds good but again is emotional and difficult to prove.

I want changes that work. Not make people feel safe.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Is that what you think I’m talking about?! Ok Ray, think whatever you want.

Here is what you said:

For me I would support regulations on high capacity magazines and anything that enables either a rapid fire of bullets or extreme levels of destructive power.

Now when it comes to handguns, there are really only two types: semi-automatics and revolvers. So when you said you would support legislation against rapid fire bullets, were you talking about revolvers?

I’m talking about things like bump stocks. Hand guns and rifles should have less than a 10 round capacity IMO

Fine. We ban bump stocks but it changes nothing. Rubber bands will be used by people who want this effect.

How is that common sense or addressing issues when nothing changes except device used.

And while you "feel" no one needs it, emotions are not common sense. Please tell me how this change addresses the problem, not your emotions.

I never messed with bump stocks (and a majority of shooters never did either) but the mass murder that made them famous was also responsible for the killers guns jamming. They overheated because they were not manufactured for high speed shooting and over heated.

The bigger the mag the nastier it looks but it also becomes less effective much over 30 anyway. I had a 150 round drum n when full it was a bitch to pick up by itself.

And spray n pray is seldom effective. Hence 3 round bursts.

My 9mm has a 15 round magazine, and I'm pretty comfortable with it.

What people don't understand is that most people miss their targets repeatedly, and even more so when your heart is pounding and adrenaline flowing because you have somebody shooting at you. The longer the distance between the shooter and the target, the more likely misses.

A ten round magazine might be enough for one attacker depending on the situation, but not nearly large enough against multi attackers, especially those amped up on dope. It's also documented that just because you shoot somebody and it connects, doesn't mean you will disable them from further attack.

 

[Slade3200]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

how about this most recent shooting in Dayton. The guy had a 100 round mag and shot about 20 people in just over a minute. Thank god the cops got there and took him
Down so quickly

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

Which is why I always ask people that are for magazine limitations: Would you be happy if only 22 people got killed in a mass murder instead of 23?

It simply doesn't solve anything.

The "we saved one life" sounds good but again is emotional and difficult to prove.

I want changes that work. Not make people feel safe.

Saving one life is great provided it doesn't' cost us ten more lives lost in return.

 

[Markle]

I’ve makes good points and asks questions that progress the conversation. 2aguy comes in demagoguing with the fear tactic that we want to ban all guns. Some might want to ban all guns but many like myself don’t.

For me I would support regulations on high capacity magazines and anything that enables either a rapid fire of bullets or extreme levels of destructive power.

So you finally admit, you demand that all guns be banned.

ALL of these guns are semi-automatic. So Slade3200 finally says what all Progressives believe BAN ALL GUNS!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

how about this most recent shooting in Dayton. The guy had a 100 round mag and shot about 20 people in just over a minute. Thank god the cops got there and took him
Down so quickly

And he could have done the same with 20 round mags.

 

[Markle]

I’m talking about things like bump stocks. Hand guns and rifles should have less than a 10 round capacity IMO

Right, and we'll have criminals in droves lining up to turn in their high capacity magazines.

Got it!

 

[DamnDude]

So I’m guessing your against the regulations on machine guns then is that right? Do you think anybody should be able to walk into a 711 and buy an uzi with their slurpy no questions asked?.

Why is that lame? I’ve met several posters on this board that support such things and state that any kind of regulation on firearms is unconstitutional.

The hyperbole, Slade3200.
I do not believe anyone within the confines of our conversation have the belief anyone should be able to run down to the local 24/7/365 7-11 and be able to buy an uzi when they run in to get a Slurpee for their kid...
It cheapens the conversation. I know you're better than that.

 

[iceberg]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

how about this most recent shooting in Dayton. The guy had a 100 round mag and shot about 20 people in just over a minute. Thank god the cops got there and took him
Down so quickly

If he had 30 round mags he likely would have done more damage.pick up a full 100 round mag n put it in a gun and see how easy to shoot.

That said, I already said limiting at least is a factual point to consider. But 1 mass shooting in a fog of maybe isnt common sense to fix a problem. It's regulation for regulation.

In 30+ years in Corp life, the 2 most useless people are the oneswho shout SOMETHING MUST BE DONE and WE DID SOMETHING. if actions don't directly address problems they are just window dressing. When that fails invariably those who did it simply ratchet up regulation.

Top 5 cities of gun violence, how has tighter regulation worked?

Let's fix issues, not perception. To me THAT is common sense

 

[iceberg]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

how about this most recent shooting in Dayton. The guy had a 100 round mag and shot about 20 people in just over a minute. Thank god the cops got there and took him
Down so quickly

And he could have done the same with 20 round mags.

Likely more accurate with more deaths. My own speculation, yes. But experience in shooting ARs while limited shows this to be true. Glitz over function seldom does well on an AR.

 

[Slade3200]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

Which is why I always ask people that are for magazine limitations: Would you be happy if only 22 people got killed in a mass murder instead of 23?

It simply doesn't solve anything.

The "we saved one life" sounds good but again is emotional and difficult to prove.

I want changes that work. Not make people feel safe.

Tell ya what. Get two paintball squads and arm one squad with rapid fire weapons and the other with less powerful weapons and less ammo capacity and then have both squads go shoot up a crowd and see who gets more hits. Do you really have a question about the outcome

 

[Slade3200]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

how about this most recent shooting in Dayton. The guy had a 100 round mag and shot about 20 people in just over a minute. Thank god the cops got there and took him
Down so quickly

And he could have done the same with 20 round mags.

I don’t believe you

 

[iceberg]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

Which is why I always ask people that are for magazine limitations: Would you be happy if only 22 people got killed in a mass murder instead of 23?

It simply doesn't solve anything.

The "we saved one life" sounds good but again is emotional and difficult to prove.

I want changes that work. Not make people feel safe.

Tell ya what. Get two paintball squads and arm one squad with rapid fire weapons and the other with less powerful weapons and less ammo capacity and then have both squads go shoot up a crowd and see who gets more hits. Do you really have a question about the outcome

So we are drifting off to who knows where and throwing up make believe to support "common sense".

Maybe we should quit for the night.

 

[Slade3200]

I’m talking about things like bump stocks. Hand guns and rifles should have less than a 10 round capacity IMO

Right, and we'll have criminals in droves lining up to turn in their high capacity magazines.

Got it!

If they are found with one they get a harsher punishment. That’s a positive

 

[iceberg]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

how about this most recent shooting in Dayton. The guy had a 100 round mag and shot about 20 people in just over a minute. Thank god the cops got there and took him
Down so quickly

And he could have done the same with 20 round mags.

I don’t believe you

Your choice but do you have experience in this or just don't want to believe it?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

That’s a lame point

How is it lame when I just provided video evidence that changing a magazine is as easy as flipping a coin? This video is proof positive limited magazine size will not solve anything.

 

[iceberg]

I’m talking about things like bump stocks. Hand guns and rifles should have less than a 10 round capacity IMO

Right, and we'll have criminals in droves lining up to turn in their high capacity magazines.

Got it!

If they are found with one they get a harsher punishment. That’s a positive

So now I must turn mine in or I'm a criminal? The regulation and control for unproven results isn't going to go well.

It CERTAINLY is not common sense.

 

[Slade3200]

So I’m guessing your against the regulations on machine guns then is that right? Do you think anybody should be able to walk into a 711 and buy an uzi with their slurpy no questions asked?.

Why is that lame? I’ve met several posters on this board that support such things and state that any kind of regulation on firearms is unconstitutional.

The hyperbole, Slade3200.
I do not believe anyone within the confines of our conversation have the belief anyone should be able to run down to the local 24/7/365 7-11 and be able to buy an uzi when they run in to get a Slurpee for their kid...
It cheapens the conversation. I know you're better than that.

The last conversation I had about this 3 posters in the thread all said that. They also said it should be fine for anybody to walk through a school with a gun. It blows my mind.

I use the 711 question to see if I’m talking to rational people who can admit that some
Regulation is needed or if I’m talking to a wingnut

 

[Slade3200]

Rubber bands? How about bump stocks? I thought that was a fair thing to ban. And yes, I don’t think we need a 30 round capacity in any weapon. The best opportunity to take down a shooter is when they reload.

Is that what you think? Tell that to this guy.

The argument is "slow them down" OF WHICH it doesn't enough to make a difference. Cite ANY mass shooting where large capacity mags caused more deaths. Usually they jam and weight makes carrying and aiming harder.

how about this most recent shooting in Dayton. The guy had a 100 round mag and shot about 20 people in just over a minute. Thank god the cops got there and took him
Down so quickly

If he had 30 round mags he likely would have done more damage.pick up a full 100 round mag n put it in a gun and see how easy to shoot.

That said, I already said limiting at least is a factual point to consider. But 1 mass shooting in a fog of maybe isnt common sense to fix a problem. It's regulation for regulation.

In 30+ years in Corp life, the 2 most useless people are the oneswho shout SOMETHING MUST BE DONE and WE DID SOMETHING. if actions don't directly address problems they are just window dressing. When that fails invariably those who did it simply ratchet up regulation.

Top 5 cities of gun violence, how has tighter regulation worked?

Let's fix issues, not perception. To me THAT is common sense

What about a 10 round mag? What do you think would have happened then?