What is the republican solution to ending mass shootings? Why don’t they ever offer solutions?

[Daryl Hunt]

The advantage of tne AR15 is highlighted in mass shootings.where the semi-automatic aspect with larger magazines & accuracy creates a higher death toll.

When reducing these death tolls, the banning on these assault type rifles makes sense.

It makes no sense. Changing a magazine on any gun does not take that long. Here is a video of how fast a magazine can be changed on a handgun; pay attention to the accuracy as well:

If they are equivalent to the AR-15 then why do you need them?

Because they are customizable, easy to shoot for all sizes of shooters especially women and the only reason you twits want the AR-15 so bad is that if you establish the precedent that the AR-15 rifle is dangerous because it is a semi automatic weapon....then you can come back and demand all other semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, as well as revolvers be banned because as we tell you, and you will state later.....they all operate the same way.

You left out the mos important. It's the one designed to do the most damage in the fastest time. And you left out that it was designed as a combat rifle. Then you left out that there are much better alternatives. You left out that it has the body count record for mass shooters. You left out that it's easy to conceal and transport it.

I don't advocate outright banning of the AR but I do advocate better controls on it through common sense firearms regulation.

The first requirement of common sense firearms regulation is common sense. Since none of the proposed "common sense" gun regulations would prevent another mass murder, they are far from common sense regulation.

No regulation has kept a single gun out of the hands of a gang banger or a potential mass murderer. Adding more regulations will not solve the firearm murder rate. Mainly, since those determined to do the murders don't give a tinker's damn about your regulations. The only people affected are honest, law abiding citizens.

Next, is this over fascination with numbers. One dead, no big deal, ten dead, big deal. Yet, ten dead is nothing more than one dead, ten times over. People die individually, and are mourned individually.

All common sense gun regs do is minimize the body count and make it harder for stupid people to kill so easily. There is quite a bit involved in those common sense regs but you will find each and every one of them an affront to your "Rights".

 

[2aguy]

Republicans see mass shootings as a form of population control, I guess.

That is a really stupid post......

Number killed in 2016.... 71, number killed in 2017....117

Number of people killed falling off ladders? 300.

Number of people killed in car accidents...38,000.

Conservatives and supporters of the 2nd Amendment know how to stop mass shootings and how to lower the gun crime rate....but because people like you are only interested in banning guns, not stopping gun crime, you won't listen to those solutions.

 

[2aguy]

It's too bad these gun debates are always two dimesional /black/white mentality

That's the biggest part of the problem

jmho

~S~

You will notice that I don't advocate the banning but the regulation. I think we both know there is a world of difference in those two terms. But the gun crazies operate that if you are not completely with them, you are completely against them. And they are looking for someone else to blame other than themselves. What they don't understand is, they may be right on certain parts but they come off as crackpot overall. And then things may go overboard on the Regulations. Usually, the new gun regs pretty well it right in most states. And they are all slowly coming towards the same Regulations. Then when they notice that there are enough of people like me and yes, the other side fringe, posting then here comes the temper tantrum and the threat of a revolution to "Protect their Rights".

No.... 2nd Amendment supporters know that the regulations you want do nothing to stop mass shooters, or criminals and all they do is set up the next step in the march to ban and confiscate guns.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Unless you show up with Mobile Artillery which kills more than any MG in existance. Unless you have the the logistics, unless you have an Air Force. Unless you have your own Navy.

As for 90 million, most people don't own an AR. Most of the ARs are owned by a very low percentage of the population. If you have one, there is a good chance you will have at least 2 or more. You seem to have left that out.

You really think that the US Military would fire on US citizens? You've never served if you do.

I took an oath. And it included foreign AND Domestic. If a group is trying to do a violent overthrow that is still covered in my oath. I took that oath 5 times and no one of any authority has ever told me to disregard it. So I still am held by it.

The ONLY overthrow going on here is being perpetrated by the American Left. IF you served you were an "in the rear with the gear" guy. Our military will NOT fire on people who are doing nothing more than defending their rights.

We will if you are trying to overthrow the Constitutionally elected government like many seem to suggest. Your are fighting for your rights except the laws say you are just a domestic terrorist and that is covered in my Oath to serve. So yes, the Military will fire on you if you grab your gun of go for that overthrow since you are NOT a citizen anymore. When the first shot you fired, you negated your citizenship.

(smile) The Feds come for American's guns and we refuse OUR military will NOT fire on us.

Except, the Fed will never come for your guns. That would be against the Constitution. But the State might. But as long as you are abiding by the law, even the state can't do that. Certain firearms are protected in your homes. Those outside that are not and it becomes a privilege to own them. But it's already been upheld in Federal Court that certain firearms are protected.

Now, if you start stockpiling illegal weapons (since there is really no bans but regulated guns) then you are now breaking the law. You are no longer a law abiding citizen. That bunch busted in New Mexico not long ago learned the hard way. They conspired to overthrow the government and were training people to do just that. Their people were arrested and sent to prison for a very long time and all their weapons were confiscated. They stepped over the line and were labeled Domestic Terrorist. You need to append your blanket statement to read "Our Military will not fire on Law Abiding Citizens".

 

[Daryl Hunt]

We can't defend ourselves against our own government with these pea shooters.

We need machine guns right now.

.

So you get your machine guns and go for it. As you stand on your little hill and look out across the landscape at the Federal US Military, It reminds me of a Movie Quote, "I think we need a bigger boat".

so, give us our machine guns.

Plan on that revolution and we will. One piece at a time starting with the Projectiles.

 

[12icer]

There is no “common sense” type of gun control. The solution is common sense person control, by removing the liberal social structure that has been forced on our country. Remove the idea of entitlement, remove the basis for perceived injustice and you remove the persons reasoning behind mass shootings. Our schools have breeding grounds for this type of person. The ruling class narrative pushed by them is anti constitution, anti individual, and anti American.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's too bad these gun debates are always two dimesional /black/white mentality

That's the biggest part of the problem

jmho

~S~

You will notice that I don't advocate the banning but the regulation. I think we both know there is a world of difference in those two terms. But the gun crazies operate that if you are not completely with them, you are completely against them. And they are looking for someone else to blame other than themselves. What they don't understand is, they may be right on certain parts but they come off as crackpot overall. And then things may go overboard on the Regulations. Usually, the new gun regs pretty well it right in most states. And they are all slowly coming towards the same Regulations. Then when they notice that there are enough of people like me and yes, the other side fringe, posting then here comes the temper tantrum and the threat of a revolution to "Protect their Rights".

No.... 2nd Amendment supporters know that the regulations you want do nothing to stop mass shooters, or criminals and all they do is set up the next step in the march to ban and confiscate guns.

You are a lost cause. The ONLY thing the 2nd amendment does is limit the Feds. And our common sense laws here have proven you wrong. We have the highest number of mass shootings here than any other state. But it stopped cold when we went to common sense regulations and social changes. Not Socialist changes as your reading what you want to read, but real social changes. It's much harder now for the shooter to get his weapons into place to use them. And a few other tidbits. It works. But your bunch and the NRA fought tooth and nail and spent millions to try and block all this while spewing your "Fixes" or not offering any viable "Fixes" in the process. You failed, we won and we are safer now than we were 20 years ago.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

There is no “common sense” type of gun control. The solution is common sense person control, by removing the liberal social structure that has been forced on our country. Remove the idea of entitlement, remove the basis for perceived injustice and you remove the persons reasoning behind mass shootings. Our schools have breeding grounds for this type of person. The ruling class narrative pushed by them is anti constitution, anti individual, and anti American.

So just blame it on someone else rather than accepting any responsibility of your own. My,My, that really works.

 

[2aguy]

It's too bad these gun debates are always two dimesional /black/white mentality

That's the biggest part of the problem

jmho

~S~

You will notice that I don't advocate the banning but the regulation. I think we both know there is a world of difference in those two terms. But the gun crazies operate that if you are not completely with them, you are completely against them. And they are looking for someone else to blame other than themselves. What they don't understand is, they may be right on certain parts but they come off as crackpot overall. And then things may go overboard on the Regulations. Usually, the new gun regs pretty well it right in most states. And they are all slowly coming towards the same Regulations. Then when they notice that there are enough of people like me and yes, the other side fringe, posting then here comes the temper tantrum and the threat of a revolution to "Protect their Rights".

No.... 2nd Amendment supporters know that the regulations you want do nothing to stop mass shooters, or criminals and all they do is set up the next step in the march to ban and confiscate guns.

You are a lost cause. The ONLY thing the 2nd amendment does is limit the Feds. And our common sense laws here have proven you wrong. We have the highest number of mass shootings here than any other state. But it stopped cold when we went to common sense regulations and social changes. Not Socialist changes as your reading what you want to read, but real social changes. It's much harder now for the shooter to get his weapons into place to use them. And a few other tidbits. It works. But your bunch and the NRA fought tooth and nail and spent millions to try and block all this while spewing your "Fixes" or not offering any viable "Fixes" in the process. You failed, we won and we are safer now than we were 20 years ago.

You just say things and think people will believe them....nothing you post is true or accurate.

 

[2aguy]

It's too bad these gun debates are always two dimesional /black/white mentality

That's the biggest part of the problem

jmho

~S~

You will notice that I don't advocate the banning but the regulation. I think we both know there is a world of difference in those two terms. But the gun crazies operate that if you are not completely with them, you are completely against them. And they are looking for someone else to blame other than themselves. What they don't understand is, they may be right on certain parts but they come off as crackpot overall. And then things may go overboard on the Regulations. Usually, the new gun regs pretty well it right in most states. And they are all slowly coming towards the same Regulations. Then when they notice that there are enough of people like me and yes, the other side fringe, posting then here comes the temper tantrum and the threat of a revolution to "Protect their Rights".

No.... 2nd Amendment supporters know that the regulations you want do nothing to stop mass shooters, or criminals and all they do is set up the next step in the march to ban and confiscate guns.

You are a lost cause. The ONLY thing the 2nd amendment does is limit the Feds. And our common sense laws here have proven you wrong. We have the highest number of mass shootings here than any other state. But it stopped cold when we went to common sense regulations and social changes. Not Socialist changes as your reading what you want to read, but real social changes. It's much harder now for the shooter to get his weapons into place to use them. And a few other tidbits. It works. But your bunch and the NRA fought tooth and nail and spent millions to try and block all this while spewing your "Fixes" or not offering any viable "Fixes" in the process. You failed, we won and we are safer now than we were 20 years ago.

Wrong, The 2nd Amendment doesn't grant a Right, it doesn't only limit the power of the Federal government ......the Right belongs to us in the state as well....Mcdonald v City of Chicago explained that to people like you...

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), is a landmark[1] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that found that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms," as protected under the Second Amendment, is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment against the states.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's too bad these gun debates are always two dimesional /black/white mentality

That's the biggest part of the problem

jmho

~S~

You will notice that I don't advocate the banning but the regulation. I think we both know there is a world of difference in those two terms. But the gun crazies operate that if you are not completely with them, you are completely against them. And they are looking for someone else to blame other than themselves. What they don't understand is, they may be right on certain parts but they come off as crackpot overall. And then things may go overboard on the Regulations. Usually, the new gun regs pretty well it right in most states. And they are all slowly coming towards the same Regulations. Then when they notice that there are enough of people like me and yes, the other side fringe, posting then here comes the temper tantrum and the threat of a revolution to "Protect their Rights".

No.... 2nd Amendment supporters know that the regulations you want do nothing to stop mass shooters, or criminals and all they do is set up the next step in the march to ban and confiscate guns.

You are a lost cause. The ONLY thing the 2nd amendment does is limit the Feds. And our common sense laws here have proven you wrong. We have the highest number of mass shootings here than any other state. But it stopped cold when we went to common sense regulations and social changes. Not Socialist changes as your reading what you want to read, but real social changes. It's much harder now for the shooter to get his weapons into place to use them. And a few other tidbits. It works. But your bunch and the NRA fought tooth and nail and spent millions to try and block all this while spewing your "Fixes" or not offering any viable "Fixes" in the process. You failed, we won and we are safer now than we were 20 years ago.

You just say things and think people will believe them....nothing you post is true or accurate.

When I say something, I probably have already posted links in the past. You get your ass handed to you, then you wait an amount of time and then start the same BS all over again hoping that we have all forgotten and you can sneak your BS through. And your buddies start gang posting to bury any other peoples opinions. You are not the majority, you are just LOUD.

 

[Skull Pilot]

hey didn't you just say the 5.56 was a round designed to wound not kill?

make up your mind

and you know as well as I do that an AR fires no faster than any other semiautomatic rifle

Let's take a look at the Vegas shooting. Over 500 people were wounded versus 57 confirmed dead. It does a lot of both wound and kill and it does it very fast and efficient. It's design, for the day, was dead on for combat.

it is no faster than any other semiautomatic rifle and here you are saying you don't want to ban all semiautomatics while calling to get rid of just one type because it's "too deadly"

I don't want to ban any of them. But I do want some checks and balances. When one weapon is as efficient in killing and wounding as the AR then it's worth seriously looking at.

The fact is, if you are going to go balls out for 10 minutes, the AR IS much faster than the sporting semi autos. If you are talking about one 30 round mag then no it's not. But bring lots of mags and the AR is now being used for what it was originally designed for and it's better at it than all the others.

That is utter horseshit

to paraphrase you

if it sounds like a gun ban it is a gun ban.

You do not want anyone to have a .223 semiautomatic

The 223 isn't the problem. It's a substandard round for hunting. Many times, it doesn't do the kill in one shot. One Shot, One Kill. When you can get one shot one kill then that's a good round no matter what it's fired from. If it has a higher degree of wounding then it's a substandard round. And since the 556 Nato (which is a more powerful round if you have the right chambered barrel) is designed to borderline kill then as a hunting rifle even that is substandard. But if you can throw out more lead than any other of the sporting rifles then that's not a sporting rifle anymore. It's using it as it was intended for and that is the shoot lots and lots of people fast and continuous. And that is exactly what the AR can do and does do for both the Military and the Sillyvillians.

It's a perfectly fine round for small game like coons, skunks groundhogs etc. Quite a few people use them on feral pigs as well.

and the AR does not and will not fire faster than any other semiautomatic.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's too bad these gun debates are always two dimesional /black/white mentality

That's the biggest part of the problem

jmho

~S~

You will notice that I don't advocate the banning but the regulation. I think we both know there is a world of difference in those two terms. But the gun crazies operate that if you are not completely with them, you are completely against them. And they are looking for someone else to blame other than themselves. What they don't understand is, they may be right on certain parts but they come off as crackpot overall. And then things may go overboard on the Regulations. Usually, the new gun regs pretty well it right in most states. And they are all slowly coming towards the same Regulations. Then when they notice that there are enough of people like me and yes, the other side fringe, posting then here comes the temper tantrum and the threat of a revolution to "Protect their Rights".

No.... 2nd Amendment supporters know that the regulations you want do nothing to stop mass shooters, or criminals and all they do is set up the next step in the march to ban and confiscate guns.

You are a lost cause. The ONLY thing the 2nd amendment does is limit the Feds. And our common sense laws here have proven you wrong. We have the highest number of mass shootings here than any other state. But it stopped cold when we went to common sense regulations and social changes. Not Socialist changes as your reading what you want to read, but real social changes. It's much harder now for the shooter to get his weapons into place to use them. And a few other tidbits. It works. But your bunch and the NRA fought tooth and nail and spent millions to try and block all this while spewing your "Fixes" or not offering any viable "Fixes" in the process. You failed, we won and we are safer now than we were 20 years ago.

Wrong, The 2nd Amendment doesn't grant a Right, it doesn't only limit the power of the Federal government ......the Right belongs to us in the state as well....Mcdonald v City of Chicago explained that to people like you...

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), is a landmark[1] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that found that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms," as protected under the Second Amendment, is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment against the states.

There you go again. McDonald, like Heller was taken up because the State tried to ban handguns in the home. Handguns, conventional hunting rifles and shotguns (except for shortened barrels) are a right to have in hour home. All other weapons are privileges, not rights. The ones that are deemed privileges are done that way for the sake of Public Safety. But it does NOT stop the state from requiring you to have to register the firearm or for you to have to possess a license to own it. The State just has to make it where you CAN own the lesser firearms. And they can come and take you guns if you don't follow their regulations. As long as it's done with Due Process that is. You are just throwing another temper tantrum.

 

[2aguy]

It's too bad these gun debates are always two dimesional /black/white mentality

That's the biggest part of the problem

jmho

~S~

You will notice that I don't advocate the banning but the regulation. I think we both know there is a world of difference in those two terms. But the gun crazies operate that if you are not completely with them, you are completely against them. And they are looking for someone else to blame other than themselves. What they don't understand is, they may be right on certain parts but they come off as crackpot overall. And then things may go overboard on the Regulations. Usually, the new gun regs pretty well it right in most states. And they are all slowly coming towards the same Regulations. Then when they notice that there are enough of people like me and yes, the other side fringe, posting then here comes the temper tantrum and the threat of a revolution to "Protect their Rights".

No.... 2nd Amendment supporters know that the regulations you want do nothing to stop mass shooters, or criminals and all they do is set up the next step in the march to ban and confiscate guns.

You are a lost cause. The ONLY thing the 2nd amendment does is limit the Feds. And our common sense laws here have proven you wrong. We have the highest number of mass shootings here than any other state. But it stopped cold when we went to common sense regulations and social changes. Not Socialist changes as your reading what you want to read, but real social changes. It's much harder now for the shooter to get his weapons into place to use them. And a few other tidbits. It works. But your bunch and the NRA fought tooth and nail and spent millions to try and block all this while spewing your "Fixes" or not offering any viable "Fixes" in the process. You failed, we won and we are safer now than we were 20 years ago.

Wrong, The 2nd Amendment doesn't grant a Right, it doesn't only limit the power of the Federal government ......the Right belongs to us in the state as well....Mcdonald v City of Chicago explained that to people like you...

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), is a landmark[1] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that found that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms," as protected under the Second Amendment, is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment against the states.

There you go again. McDonald, like Heller was taken up because the State tried to ban handguns in the home. Handguns, conventional hunting rifles and shotguns (except for shortened barrels) are a right to have in hour home. All other weapons are privileges, not rights. The ones that are deemed privileges are done that way for the sake of Public Safety. But it does NOT stop the state from requiring you to have to register the firearm or for you to have to possess a license to own it. The State just has to make it where you CAN own the lesser firearms. And they can come and take you guns if you don't follow their regulations. As long as it's done with Due Process that is. You are just throwing another temper tantrum.

Wrong.....again.

Heller stated that all guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment, especially the ones that are in common use...like the AR-15, the most popular rifle in the country and Scalia specifically named it as protected in his dissent on Friedman v. Highland park....

And specifically they state you don't read any Right by allowing the government to say, okay, you are allowed the absolute minimum, so we have honored the Right...doesn't work that way, doofus.

Here...Scalia, clarifying, for people like you what Heller protects...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense. Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629.

And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It makes no sense. Changing a magazine on any gun does not take that long. Here is a video of how fast a magazine can be changed on a handgun; pay attention to the accuracy as well:

If they are equivalent to the AR-15 then why do you need them?

Because they are customizable, easy to shoot for all sizes of shooters especially women and the only reason you twits want the AR-15 so bad is that if you establish the precedent that the AR-15 rifle is dangerous because it is a semi automatic weapon....then you can come back and demand all other semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, as well as revolvers be banned because as we tell you, and you will state later.....they all operate the same way.

You left out the mos important. It's the one designed to do the most damage in the fastest time. And you left out that it was designed as a combat rifle. Then you left out that there are much better alternatives. You left out that it has the body count record for mass shooters. You left out that it's easy to conceal and transport it.

I don't advocate outright banning of the AR but I do advocate better controls on it through common sense firearms regulation.

The first requirement of common sense firearms regulation is common sense. Since none of the proposed "common sense" gun regulations would prevent another mass murder, they are far from common sense regulation.

No regulation has kept a single gun out of the hands of a gang banger or a potential mass murderer. Adding more regulations will not solve the firearm murder rate. Mainly, since those determined to do the murders don't give a tinker's damn about your regulations. The only people affected are honest, law abiding citizens.

Next, is this over fascination with numbers. One dead, no big deal, ten dead, big deal. Yet, ten dead is nothing more than one dead, ten times over. People die individually, and are mourned individually.

All common sense gun regs do is minimize the body count and make it harder for stupid people to kill so easily. There is quite a bit involved in those common sense regs but you will find each and every one of them an affront to your "Rights".

and nothing you propose will do that

Get rid of a rifle and a different rifle will be used
Get rid of that rifle and a different rifle will be used
A mass shooter will just walk in to a school with a couple handguns and a shitload of magazines or a bullpup shotgun with an 18 shot capacity etc etc etc

The only thing that's going to stop anyone from shooting up a place is to not let them in in the first place

 

[Skull Pilot]

There is no “common sense” type of gun control. The solution is common sense person control, by removing the liberal social structure that has been forced on our country. Remove the idea of entitlement, remove the basis for perceived injustice and you remove the persons reasoning behind mass shootings. Our schools have breeding grounds for this type of person. The ruling class narrative pushed by them is anti constitution, anti individual, and anti American.

So just blame it on someone else rather than accepting any responsibility of your own. My,My, that really works.

I have absolutely ZERO responsibility for any gun crime ever committed

 

[2aguy]

If they are equivalent to the AR-15 then why do you need them?

Because they are customizable, easy to shoot for all sizes of shooters especially women and the only reason you twits want the AR-15 so bad is that if you establish the precedent that the AR-15 rifle is dangerous because it is a semi automatic weapon....then you can come back and demand all other semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, as well as revolvers be banned because as we tell you, and you will state later.....they all operate the same way.

You left out the mos important. It's the one designed to do the most damage in the fastest time. And you left out that it was designed as a combat rifle. Then you left out that there are much better alternatives. You left out that it has the body count record for mass shooters. You left out that it's easy to conceal and transport it.

I don't advocate outright banning of the AR but I do advocate better controls on it through common sense firearms regulation.

The first requirement of common sense firearms regulation is common sense. Since none of the proposed "common sense" gun regulations would prevent another mass murder, they are far from common sense regulation.

No regulation has kept a single gun out of the hands of a gang banger or a potential mass murderer. Adding more regulations will not solve the firearm murder rate. Mainly, since those determined to do the murders don't give a tinker's damn about your regulations. The only people affected are honest, law abiding citizens.

Next, is this over fascination with numbers. One dead, no big deal, ten dead, big deal. Yet, ten dead is nothing more than one dead, ten times over. People die individually, and are mourned individually.

All common sense gun regs do is minimize the body count and make it harder for stupid people to kill so easily. There is quite a bit involved in those common sense regs but you will find each and every one of them an affront to your "Rights".

and nothing you propose will do that

Get rid of a rifle and a different rifle will be used
Get rid of that rifle and a different rifle will be used
A mass shooter will just walk in to a school with a couple handguns and a shitload of magazines or a bullpup shotgun with an 18 shot capacity etc etc etc

The only thing that's going to stop anyone from shooting up a place is to not let them in in the first place

And they will select their targets differently....the Sandy Hook shooter wanted a huge body count because he saw the attack like a video game...so he went to the school that didn't have a police resource officer and he targeted the Kindergarten...the most helpless of victims in a gun free zone.

 

[Doc1]

There is no “common sense” type of gun control. The solution is common sense person control, by removing the liberal social structure that has been forced on our country. Remove the idea of entitlement, remove the basis for perceived injustice and you remove the persons reasoning behind mass shootings. Our schools have breeding grounds for this type of person. The ruling class narrative pushed by them is anti constitution, anti individual, and anti American.

So just blame it on someone else rather than accepting any responsibility of your own. My,My, that really works.

The responsibility for any shooting is solely the shooters.
Grow the fuck up.

 

[cutter]

Those laws are all weakened by other states with weak laws, and we have many

So what you're saying is that the laws don't work, and people will go wherever they need to go to get what they want...Thanks for making my point for me.

Yes we need strong federal laws. Countries with strong gun control don’t have this problem for obvious reasons.

I see your point. China, Cuba, No. Korea all have less gun violence that wehave. I’ll take the violence, you can have the great gun free countries.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Because they are customizable, easy to shoot for all sizes of shooters especially women and the only reason you twits want the AR-15 so bad is that if you establish the precedent that the AR-15 rifle is dangerous because it is a semi automatic weapon....then you can come back and demand all other semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, as well as revolvers be banned because as we tell you, and you will state later.....they all operate the same way.

You left out the mos important. It's the one designed to do the most damage in the fastest time. And you left out that it was designed as a combat rifle. Then you left out that there are much better alternatives. You left out that it has the body count record for mass shooters. You left out that it's easy to conceal and transport it.

I don't advocate outright banning of the AR but I do advocate better controls on it through common sense firearms regulation.

The first requirement of common sense firearms regulation is common sense. Since none of the proposed "common sense" gun regulations would prevent another mass murder, they are far from common sense regulation.

No regulation has kept a single gun out of the hands of a gang banger or a potential mass murderer. Adding more regulations will not solve the firearm murder rate. Mainly, since those determined to do the murders don't give a tinker's damn about your regulations. The only people affected are honest, law abiding citizens.

Next, is this over fascination with numbers. One dead, no big deal, ten dead, big deal. Yet, ten dead is nothing more than one dead, ten times over. People die individually, and are mourned individually.

All common sense gun regs do is minimize the body count and make it harder for stupid people to kill so easily. There is quite a bit involved in those common sense regs but you will find each and every one of them an affront to your "Rights".

and nothing you propose will do that

Get rid of a rifle and a different rifle will be used
Get rid of that rifle and a different rifle will be used
A mass shooter will just walk in to a school with a couple handguns and a shitload of magazines or a bullpup shotgun with an 18 shot capacity etc etc etc

The only thing that's going to stop anyone from shooting up a place is to not let them in in the first place

And they will select their targets differently....the Sandy Hook shooter wanted a huge body count because he saw the attack like a video game...so he went to the school that didn't have a police resource officer and he targeted the Kindergarten...the most helpless of victims in a gun free zone.

comparing any mass shooting to combat is beyond ridiculous as most mass shooters choose their targets when they are in places no one can shoot back so it's more like target practice

The guy in CA used a .45 and shot people more than once in many instances because he had a different agenda. He certainly could have killed more people if has was of a mind to