Why does California want to ban rifles with detachable magazines and bullet buttons...anyone?

[OldLady]

Just wondering what the lack of a thought process was involved in this attack on the 2nd Amendment.....

What exactly is the reason for this new law? What will it allegedly do? What was the problem it is meant to solve?

And please...back this up with real statistics....

You know exactly why the law was proposed--it is to stop Joe Citizen from mowing down other citizens with military style weapons that can spew many bullets very fast, like the San Bernardino shooters used.

From The Gun Nut, Field and Stream "Why I Hate Detachable Magazines"
Petzal: Why I Hate Detachable Magazines
Say amen. There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
The guy above loves guns. But he calls detachable magazines what they are and what they are for. Your law abiding citizen does not need military style weapons and neither do the crooks who can also buy them.

From The Daily Caller, by NRA ILA contributor:
Anti-Gun Activist: Ban All Detachable-Magazine Semi-Automatics
Obviously, a ban on firearms that can use detachable magazines would prohibit the manufacture of all modern semi-automatic pistols and general-purpose semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. These firearms together account for a majority of new firearms sold in the United States. Of course, that is precisely why banning guns based upon their ability to use detachable magazines appeals to Sugarmann.

Bullet buttons are used in California to get around the law banning assault weapons.
Bullet button - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After certain rifles with detachable magazines and certain other features were classified as assault weapons under California State law, gun owners and manufacturers sought various ways to obtain certain styles of rifles similar to those determined to be assault weapons. One of the most common modifications is the use of a part known as a bullet button, which modifies a rifle so that the magazine is not removable without the use of a tool

You have spewn your numbers at me many times, 2AGuy, but I don't ever recall you answering my question, Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly? For self-defense, a hand gun or another type of rifle would work equally well. That's the only answer I want from you, not an argument about outlawing guns generally.

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

 

[Rustic]

Just wondering what the lack of a thought process was involved in this attack on the 2nd Amendment.....

What exactly is the reason for this new law? What will it allegedly do? What was the problem it is meant to solve?

And please...back this up with real statistics....

You know exactly why the law was proposed--it is to stop Joe Citizen from mowing down other citizens with military style weapons that can spew many bullets very fast, like the San Bernardino shooters used.

From The Gun Nut, Field and Stream "Why I Hate Detachable Magazines"
Petzal: Why I Hate Detachable Magazines
Say amen. There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
The guy above loves guns. But he calls detachable magazines what they are and what they are for. Your law abiding citizen does not need military style weapons and neither do the crooks who can also buy them.

From The Daily Caller, by NRA ILA contributor:
Anti-Gun Activist: Ban All Detachable-Magazine Semi-Automatics
Obviously, a ban on firearms that can use detachable magazines would prohibit the manufacture of all modern semi-automatic pistols and general-purpose semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. These firearms together account for a majority of new firearms sold in the United States. Of course, that is precisely why banning guns based upon their ability to use detachable magazines appeals to Sugarmann.

Bullet buttons are used in California to get around the law banning assault weapons.
Bullet button - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After certain rifles with detachable magazines and certain other features were classified as assault weapons under California State law, gun owners and manufacturers sought various ways to obtain certain styles of rifles similar to those determined to be assault weapons. One of the most common modifications is the use of a part known as a bullet button, which modifies a rifle so that the magazine is not removable without the use of a tool

You have spewn your numbers at me many times, 2AGuy, but I don't ever recall you answering my question, Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly? For self-defense, a hand gun or another type of rifle would work equally well. That's the only answer I want from you, not an argument about outlawing guns generally.

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

You still don't know the difference between a sporting rifle and a military grade rifle do you?
Please educate yourself before you go on making a fool out of yourself…

 

[Fenton Lum]

I'd like to learn more about his bit with them, where can I find out more?

You think the fully auto weapons ban was passed solely because Ronald Reagan didn't like the Black Panthers?

Just want to make sure that is why you are saying.

That's the only CA gun legislation passed under Reagan's tenure as gov?

Just want to make sure that is why you are saying.

We are obviously not talking about the same gun ban.

"As governor of California, Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford Act, which prohibited the carrying of firearms on your person, in your vehicle, and in any public place or on the street, and he also signed off on a 15-day waiting period for firearm purchases. After leaving the presidency, he supported the passage of the Brady bill that established by federal law a nationwide, uniform standard of a 7-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns to enable background checks on prospective buyers. He urged then President Bush to drop his opposition to the bill."

Another overlooked legacy of Reagan: Gun control

Yeah I was thinking of the Brady Bill.

Ah yeah, that wa a big one, What I was talking about/referring to was when he was still gov of CA.

 

[2aguy]

Just wondering what the lack of a thought process was involved in this attack on the 2nd Amendment.....

What exactly is the reason for this new law? What will it allegedly do? What was the problem it is meant to solve?

And please...back this up with real statistics....

You know exactly why the law was proposed--it is to stop Joe Citizen from mowing down other citizens with military style weapons that can spew many bullets very fast, like the San Bernardino shooters used.

From The Gun Nut, Field and Stream "Why I Hate Detachable Magazines"
Petzal: Why I Hate Detachable Magazines
Say amen. There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
The guy above loves guns. But he calls detachable magazines what they are and what they are for. Your law abiding citizen does not need military style weapons and neither do the crooks who can also buy them.

From The Daily Caller, by NRA ILA contributor:
Anti-Gun Activist: Ban All Detachable-Magazine Semi-Automatics
Obviously, a ban on firearms that can use detachable magazines would prohibit the manufacture of all modern semi-automatic pistols and general-purpose semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. These firearms together account for a majority of new firearms sold in the United States. Of course, that is precisely why banning guns based upon their ability to use detachable magazines appeals to Sugarmann.

Bullet buttons are used in California to get around the law banning assault weapons.
Bullet button - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After certain rifles with detachable magazines and certain other features were classified as assault weapons under California State law, gun owners and manufacturers sought various ways to obtain certain styles of rifles similar to those determined to be assault weapons. One of the most common modifications is the use of a part known as a bullet button, which modifies a rifle so that the magazine is not removable without the use of a tool

You have spewn your numbers at me many times, 2AGuy, but I don't ever recall you answering my question, Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly? For self-defense, a hand gun or another type of rifle would work equally well. That's the only answer I want from you, not an argument about outlawing guns generally.

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers.......that you guys can't see it is just sad............when people are unarmed, when their government goes bad, they become victims filling mass graves........when the people are armed........it can't happen without those trying to do it paying a heavy price........

 

[Fenton Lum]

You know exactly why the law was proposed--it is to stop Joe Citizen from mowing down other citizens with military style weapons that can spew many bullets very fast, like the San Bernardino shooters used.

From The Gun Nut, Field and Stream "Why I Hate Detachable Magazines"
Petzal: Why I Hate Detachable Magazines
Say amen. There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
The guy above loves guns. But he calls detachable magazines what they are and what they are for. Your law abiding citizen does not need military style weapons and neither do the crooks who can also buy them.

From The Daily Caller, by NRA ILA contributor:
Anti-Gun Activist: Ban All Detachable-Magazine Semi-Automatics
Obviously, a ban on firearms that can use detachable magazines would prohibit the manufacture of all modern semi-automatic pistols and general-purpose semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. These firearms together account for a majority of new firearms sold in the United States. Of course, that is precisely why banning guns based upon their ability to use detachable magazines appeals to Sugarmann.

Bullet buttons are used in California to get around the law banning assault weapons.
Bullet button - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After certain rifles with detachable magazines and certain other features were classified as assault weapons under California State law, gun owners and manufacturers sought various ways to obtain certain styles of rifles similar to those determined to be assault weapons. One of the most common modifications is the use of a part known as a bullet button, which modifies a rifle so that the magazine is not removable without the use of a tool

You have spewn your numbers at me many times, 2AGuy, but I don't ever recall you answering my question, Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly? For self-defense, a hand gun or another type of rifle would work equally well. That's the only answer I want from you, not an argument about outlawing guns generally.

So 2 incidents a year isn't an issue for you, got it. How many would be?


And is this a problem?

there are over 3,750,000 million AR-15 rifles alone in the country, this does not add in the Ruger Mini-14s, AKs and all the other rifles with a detachable magazine.......how many are used in a crime each year...

between 2 - 4?

Cars accidentally kill 35,000 people a year...just for some perspective....

How is this a real problem again, considering how many Americans have these weapons for self defense, sport, hunting and collecting and never use them for crime....

Please......tell me why they are a problem.

I just did. As a gun lover pointed out, There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly?

Where did you get 2 - 4? If so, please enlighten us about those incidents and how many people were injured and killed during the crimes. The Aurora shooter, the San Bernardino shooters and others have used those military style weapons to kill large numbers of people as quickly as possible. Exactly what they were designed for. You are right, though, that my focus on rifles was a bit off base. Apparently handguns are the biggest problem, at least in Chicago: Graphic: The Most Popular Crime Guns in Chicago, Ranked

So once again, I've argued my way out of a moderate position. The guns in Chicago, according to the cops, are being purchased in neighboring states with loopholes in their gun control laws. The Gun control laws you oppose. I don't see how you can argue for law and order when you reflexively oppose the laws that would help keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

I have listed mass shooting tracker from Mother Jones several times....they list the weapon in the description of the event.....

The year of Sandy Hook and Aurora, 2 were used......Sand Bernadino......the muslim terrorists each used one AR-15....

So....that is about 2 each year....now you tell me why that means that the other 3,749,998 million guns in private hands need to be confiscated.....

And in each mass shooting you mentioned, a lever action rifle or pump action shotgun could have done the same killing.....

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....chicago criminals kill more than in many other cities...why is it that New York and L.A. have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? Both places have just as strict gun control as Chicago....and in both places they live next to states with normal gun laws....like Arizona, and Vermont.......

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please....explain how any of your gun control laws actually keep guns out of the hands of criminals....you haven't shown one law you support that does that.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

And another point....what about the cities in Arizona, and Texas....and other places...that have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? From what you just posted...their criminals don't even have to leave the state to get guns...yet their gun murder rates are lower than Chicago........how does that support your post?

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....

It would be helpful if you had some data to present or study to cite?

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please see the above, your pronouncements alone are rather thin.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

We'd love to see your research, thanks in advance.

If anyone has these types of guns for alleged self defense and your argument is these weapons are very rarely used for ill intent, then the whole thing's rather silly. Furthermore, the concept that you're going to fend off the overreach of an intrusive govt with your guns is fantasy. You got distracted and sat on your arse while corporate power and concentrated wealth took over your democracy, your economic and political systems, militarized police departments to snatch you up if you ever begin to resist, and privatized your prison system so that the pwoer structure can squeeze $40-50K out of your carcass in a post industrial society.

But praise Jesus, you still got your gun. Sheesh pard.

Wow....you better hurry up....we are about to leave Iraq and Afghanistan and they need to know that just using rifles and improvised explosive devices is never going to drive off either the Soviet army or the United States Army....you better hurry because we are pulling out............

Do you guys ever study history....or reality?

Talking about america, focus.

 

[OldLady]

You know exactly why the law was proposed--it is to stop Joe Citizen from mowing down other citizens with military style weapons that can spew many bullets very fast, like the San Bernardino shooters used.

From The Gun Nut, Field and Stream "Why I Hate Detachable Magazines"
Petzal: Why I Hate Detachable Magazines
Say amen. There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
The guy above loves guns. But he calls detachable magazines what they are and what they are for. Your law abiding citizen does not need military style weapons and neither do the crooks who can also buy them.

From The Daily Caller, by NRA ILA contributor:
Anti-Gun Activist: Ban All Detachable-Magazine Semi-Automatics
Obviously, a ban on firearms that can use detachable magazines would prohibit the manufacture of all modern semi-automatic pistols and general-purpose semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. These firearms together account for a majority of new firearms sold in the United States. Of course, that is precisely why banning guns based upon their ability to use detachable magazines appeals to Sugarmann.

Bullet buttons are used in California to get around the law banning assault weapons.
Bullet button - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After certain rifles with detachable magazines and certain other features were classified as assault weapons under California State law, gun owners and manufacturers sought various ways to obtain certain styles of rifles similar to those determined to be assault weapons. One of the most common modifications is the use of a part known as a bullet button, which modifies a rifle so that the magazine is not removable without the use of a tool

You have spewn your numbers at me many times, 2AGuy, but I don't ever recall you answering my question, Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly? For self-defense, a hand gun or another type of rifle would work equally well. That's the only answer I want from you, not an argument about outlawing guns generally.

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers.......that you guys can't see it is just sad............when people are unarmed, when their government goes bad, they become victims filling mass graves........when the people are armed........it can't happen without those trying to do it paying a heavy price........

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers....
I disagree. And to me, what is sad is that you can't see it. The completely unnecessary killing will continue, and you don't care. You dream of doing more of it, actually. Dream of killing government soldiers, mexican gang members, black rioters. It's underlying everything you argue for. Sad.

 

[Rustic]

The Brady Bill saved no lives, it just eroded freedoms...

 

[OldLady]

You know exactly why the law was proposed--it is to stop Joe Citizen from mowing down other citizens with military style weapons that can spew many bullets very fast, like the San Bernardino shooters used.

From The Gun Nut, Field and Stream "Why I Hate Detachable Magazines"
Petzal: Why I Hate Detachable Magazines
Say amen. There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
The guy above loves guns. But he calls detachable magazines what they are and what they are for. Your law abiding citizen does not need military style weapons and neither do the crooks who can also buy them.

From The Daily Caller, by NRA ILA contributor:
Anti-Gun Activist: Ban All Detachable-Magazine Semi-Automatics
Obviously, a ban on firearms that can use detachable magazines would prohibit the manufacture of all modern semi-automatic pistols and general-purpose semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. These firearms together account for a majority of new firearms sold in the United States. Of course, that is precisely why banning guns based upon their ability to use detachable magazines appeals to Sugarmann.

Bullet buttons are used in California to get around the law banning assault weapons.
Bullet button - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After certain rifles with detachable magazines and certain other features were classified as assault weapons under California State law, gun owners and manufacturers sought various ways to obtain certain styles of rifles similar to those determined to be assault weapons. One of the most common modifications is the use of a part known as a bullet button, which modifies a rifle so that the magazine is not removable without the use of a tool

You have spewn your numbers at me many times, 2AGuy, but I don't ever recall you answering my question, Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly? For self-defense, a hand gun or another type of rifle would work equally well. That's the only answer I want from you, not an argument about outlawing guns generally.

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

You still don't know the difference between a sporting rifle and a military grade rifle do you?
Please educate yourself before you go on making a fool out of yourself…

You should change your avi. It's obnoxious.

 

[Rustic]

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

You still don't know the difference between a sporting rifle and a military grade rifle do you?
Please educate yourself before you go on making a fool out of yourself…

You should change your avi. It's obnoxious.

The truth hurts... Huh?

 

[Fenton Lum]

You know exactly why the law was proposed--it is to stop Joe Citizen from mowing down other citizens with military style weapons that can spew many bullets very fast, like the San Bernardino shooters used.

From The Gun Nut, Field and Stream "Why I Hate Detachable Magazines"
Petzal: Why I Hate Detachable Magazines
Say amen. There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
The guy above loves guns. But he calls detachable magazines what they are and what they are for. Your law abiding citizen does not need military style weapons and neither do the crooks who can also buy them.

From The Daily Caller, by NRA ILA contributor:
Anti-Gun Activist: Ban All Detachable-Magazine Semi-Automatics
Obviously, a ban on firearms that can use detachable magazines would prohibit the manufacture of all modern semi-automatic pistols and general-purpose semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. These firearms together account for a majority of new firearms sold in the United States. Of course, that is precisely why banning guns based upon their ability to use detachable magazines appeals to Sugarmann.

Bullet buttons are used in California to get around the law banning assault weapons.
Bullet button - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After certain rifles with detachable magazines and certain other features were classified as assault weapons under California State law, gun owners and manufacturers sought various ways to obtain certain styles of rifles similar to those determined to be assault weapons. One of the most common modifications is the use of a part known as a bullet button, which modifies a rifle so that the magazine is not removable without the use of a tool

You have spewn your numbers at me many times, 2AGuy, but I don't ever recall you answering my question, Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly? For self-defense, a hand gun or another type of rifle would work equally well. That's the only answer I want from you, not an argument about outlawing guns generally.

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers.......that you guys can't see it is just sad............when people are unarmed, when their government goes bad, they become victims filling mass graves........when the people are armed........it can't happen without those trying to do it paying a heavy price........

Your govt's already gone bad and you've myopically missed it while fighting windmills. Much of it came while your ilk begged your govt to steer you toward a militarized police surveillance state to keep you "safe" from "terrorists" in the wake of 9/11.

Your little gun doesn't give your govt a nanosecond's worth of pause. They have drones and can know your every move if they choose to, you'd never see anything coming, just like you couldn't see the economic system being used to sodomize the masses into anxious submission.

Eisenhower warned us of all this, back when "conservatives" were, well, conservative.

 

[2aguy]

So 2 incidents a year isn't an issue for you, got it. How many would be?


And is this a problem?

there are over 3,750,000 million AR-15 rifles alone in the country, this does not add in the Ruger Mini-14s, AKs and all the other rifles with a detachable magazine.......how many are used in a crime each year...

between 2 - 4?

Cars accidentally kill 35,000 people a year...just for some perspective....

How is this a real problem again, considering how many Americans have these weapons for self defense, sport, hunting and collecting and never use them for crime....

Please......tell me why they are a problem.

I just did. As a gun lover pointed out, There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly?

Where did you get 2 - 4? If so, please enlighten us about those incidents and how many people were injured and killed during the crimes. The Aurora shooter, the San Bernardino shooters and others have used those military style weapons to kill large numbers of people as quickly as possible. Exactly what they were designed for. You are right, though, that my focus on rifles was a bit off base. Apparently handguns are the biggest problem, at least in Chicago: Graphic: The Most Popular Crime Guns in Chicago, Ranked

So once again, I've argued my way out of a moderate position. The guns in Chicago, according to the cops, are being purchased in neighboring states with loopholes in their gun control laws. The Gun control laws you oppose. I don't see how you can argue for law and order when you reflexively oppose the laws that would help keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

I have listed mass shooting tracker from Mother Jones several times....they list the weapon in the description of the event.....

The year of Sandy Hook and Aurora, 2 were used......Sand Bernadino......the muslim terrorists each used one AR-15....

So....that is about 2 each year....now you tell me why that means that the other 3,749,998 million guns in private hands need to be confiscated.....

And in each mass shooting you mentioned, a lever action rifle or pump action shotgun could have done the same killing.....

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....chicago criminals kill more than in many other cities...why is it that New York and L.A. have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? Both places have just as strict gun control as Chicago....and in both places they live next to states with normal gun laws....like Arizona, and Vermont.......

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please....explain how any of your gun control laws actually keep guns out of the hands of criminals....you haven't shown one law you support that does that.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

And another point....what about the cities in Arizona, and Texas....and other places...that have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? From what you just posted...their criminals don't even have to leave the state to get guns...yet their gun murder rates are lower than Chicago........how does that support your post?

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....

It would be helpful if you had some data to present or study to cite?

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please see the above, your pronouncements alone are rather thin.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

We'd love to see your research, thanks in advance.

If anyone has these types of guns for alleged self defense and your argument is these weapons are very rarely used for ill intent, then the whole thing's rather silly. Furthermore, the concept that you're going to fend off the overreach of an intrusive govt with your guns is fantasy. You got distracted and sat on your arse while corporate power and concentrated wealth took over your democracy, your economic and political systems, militarized police departments to snatch you up if you ever begin to resist, and privatized your prison system so that the pwoer structure can squeeze $40-50K out of your carcass in a post industrial society.

But praise Jesus, you still got your gun. Sheesh pard.

Wow....you better hurry up....we are about to leave Iraq and Afghanistan and they need to know that just using rifles and improvised explosive devices is never going to drive off either the Soviet army or the United States Army....you better hurry because we are pulling out............

Do you guys ever study history....or reality?

Talking about america, focus.

It is you who needs to engage their brain.....armed Americans with an understanding of our culture and technology are supposed to be unable to resist a violent attack by our own government...while backwards ass barbarians with only rifles and improvised explosives drove us out of 2 countries....

Please......try to think harder....and use more brain cells....

 

[Fenton Lum]

Just wondering what the lack of a thought process was involved in this attack on the 2nd Amendment.....

What exactly is the reason for this new law? What will it allegedly do? What was the problem it is meant to solve?

And please...back this up with real statistics....

To look like they're doing something when they're not really doing anything is my guess. Window dressing.

Then there's nothing to be soiling oneself over.

Not much to worry about, no...but because these politicians in CA think gun control is a winner for them. Nothing wrong with opposing this stupidity and remaining vigilant.

You should go back a revisit how Reagan got all about gun control as gov of CA when the Black Panthers decided they could open carry too.

He was being racist...

No one in the gun fetish crowd wants armed militants out in public. which tells me, it ain't really about the gun, it;s about something else. Robert F Williams also encoutered the same virus in the early 60's in N Carolina.

 

[2aguy]

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers.......that you guys can't see it is just sad............when people are unarmed, when their government goes bad, they become victims filling mass graves........when the people are armed........it can't happen without those trying to do it paying a heavy price........

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers....
I disagree. And to me, what is sad is that you can't see it. The completely unnecessary killing will continue, and you don't care. You dream of doing more of it, actually. Dream of killing government soldiers, mexican gang members, black rioters. It's underlying everything you argue for. Sad.

The killing is committed by people who cannot legally own guns right now. How is the killing going to stop if you disarm normal, law abiding people? They can't even keep guns out of Britain, France, Australia or Japan....yet you think the criminals who commit murder....90% of murderers have at least one or more felony convictions....are going to simply say....oh, guns are illegal, I guess I can't use them anymore......

It is your lack of thinking that is sad.........normal people with guns are not shooting other people.....

90% of gun murder is committed by individuals with felonies for crimes....and 70-80% of their victims are also felons.......

And you think that normal people are the problem.....

 

[Rustic]

You don't know the first thing about any firearms, your so-called "military style was assault weapon" It's just the sporting rifle... dumbass

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers.......that you guys can't see it is just sad............when people are unarmed, when their government goes bad, they become victims filling mass graves........when the people are armed........it can't happen without those trying to do it paying a heavy price........

Your govt's already gone bad and you've myopically missed it while fighting windmills. Much of it came while your ilk begged your govt to steer you toward a militarized police surveillance state to keep you "safe" from "terrorists" in the wake of 9/11.

Your little gun doesn't give your govt a nanosecond's worth of pause. They have drones and can know your every move if they choose to, you'd never see anything coming, just like you couldn't see the economic system being used to sodomize the masses into anxious submission.

Eisenhower warned us of all this, back when "conservatives" were, well, conservative.

There has never been a conservative president in the last hundred plus years of this country… Dumbass
Calvin Coolidge was the closest we have to it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Just wondering what the lack of a thought process was involved in this attack on the 2nd Amendment.....

What exactly is the reason for this new law? What will it allegedly do? What was the problem it is meant to solve?

And please...back this up with real statistics....

Wrong.

Such measures have been upheld as Constitutional on appeal, and the Maryland law is pending further review.

Until such time as the Supreme Court rules otherwise, the proposed California measure does not ‘violate’ the Second Amendment, rendering the notion that the law is an ‘attack’ on the Second Amendment a lie.

 

[Fenton Lum]

I just did. As a gun lover pointed out, There’s only one rational reason to design a rifle with a detachable magazine, and that is for military use, where you have to stuff as many rounds in the gun as quickly as you can.
Why do those nice, law abiding gun owners in America need military-style assault weapons designed solely to kill more people more quickly?

Where did you get 2 - 4? If so, please enlighten us about those incidents and how many people were injured and killed during the crimes. The Aurora shooter, the San Bernardino shooters and others have used those military style weapons to kill large numbers of people as quickly as possible. Exactly what they were designed for. You are right, though, that my focus on rifles was a bit off base. Apparently handguns are the biggest problem, at least in Chicago: Graphic: The Most Popular Crime Guns in Chicago, Ranked

So once again, I've argued my way out of a moderate position. The guns in Chicago, according to the cops, are being purchased in neighboring states with loopholes in their gun control laws. The Gun control laws you oppose. I don't see how you can argue for law and order when you reflexively oppose the laws that would help keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

I have listed mass shooting tracker from Mother Jones several times....they list the weapon in the description of the event.....

The year of Sandy Hook and Aurora, 2 were used......Sand Bernadino......the muslim terrorists each used one AR-15....

So....that is about 2 each year....now you tell me why that means that the other 3,749,998 million guns in private hands need to be confiscated.....

And in each mass shooting you mentioned, a lever action rifle or pump action shotgun could have done the same killing.....

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....chicago criminals kill more than in many other cities...why is it that New York and L.A. have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? Both places have just as strict gun control as Chicago....and in both places they live next to states with normal gun laws....like Arizona, and Vermont.......

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please....explain how any of your gun control laws actually keep guns out of the hands of criminals....you haven't shown one law you support that does that.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

And another point....what about the cities in Arizona, and Texas....and other places...that have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? From what you just posted...their criminals don't even have to leave the state to get guns...yet their gun murder rates are lower than Chicago........how does that support your post?

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....

It would be helpful if you had some data to present or study to cite?

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please see the above, your pronouncements alone are rather thin.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

We'd love to see your research, thanks in advance.

If anyone has these types of guns for alleged self defense and your argument is these weapons are very rarely used for ill intent, then the whole thing's rather silly. Furthermore, the concept that you're going to fend off the overreach of an intrusive govt with your guns is fantasy. You got distracted and sat on your arse while corporate power and concentrated wealth took over your democracy, your economic and political systems, militarized police departments to snatch you up if you ever begin to resist, and privatized your prison system so that the pwoer structure can squeeze $40-50K out of your carcass in a post industrial society.

But praise Jesus, you still got your gun. Sheesh pard.

Wow....you better hurry up....we are about to leave Iraq and Afghanistan and they need to know that just using rifles and improvised explosive devices is never going to drive off either the Soviet army or the United States Army....you better hurry because we are pulling out............

Do you guys ever study history....or reality?

Talking about america, focus.

It is you who needs to engage their brain.....armed Americans with an understanding of our culture and technology are supposed to be unable to resist a violent attack by our own government...while backwards ass barbarians with only rifles and improvised explosives drove us out of 2 countries....

Please......try to think harder....and use more brain cells....

Well someone needs to re-evaluate our empire then don't we. We keep going in a "liberators" only to become despised occupiers, over and over again. Nah, couldn't be an issue there to think about. But you are correct about one thing. When empires begin to crumble, they will redirect the forces from the occupation of other lands on the fringe of empire, toward crushing dissent at home. But you'l be sitting on your couch watching it happen and bitching about "liberals" n shit. You won't do anything but post lunatic fringe bs.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Actually, I looked up these "sporting rifles" and how many bullets they can fire in a minute without reloading. If you and your friends need that kind of firepower to get your deer, you're the dumbasses.

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers.......that you guys can't see it is just sad............when people are unarmed, when their government goes bad, they become victims filling mass graves........when the people are armed........it can't happen without those trying to do it paying a heavy price........

Your govt's already gone bad and you've myopically missed it while fighting windmills. Much of it came while your ilk begged your govt to steer you toward a militarized police surveillance state to keep you "safe" from "terrorists" in the wake of 9/11.

Your little gun doesn't give your govt a nanosecond's worth of pause. They have drones and can know your every move if they choose to, you'd never see anything coming, just like you couldn't see the economic system being used to sodomize the masses into anxious submission.

Eisenhower warned us of all this, back when "conservatives" were, well, conservative.

There has never been a conservative president in the last hundred plus years of this country… Dumbass
Calvin Coolidge was the closest we have to it.

Which is to say that for a very long time, most of your fellow citizens disagree with your views. Interesting.

 

[Rustic]

I have listed mass shooting tracker from Mother Jones several times....they list the weapon in the description of the event.....

The year of Sandy Hook and Aurora, 2 were used......Sand Bernadino......the muslim terrorists each used one AR-15....

So....that is about 2 each year....now you tell me why that means that the other 3,749,998 million guns in private hands need to be confiscated.....

And in each mass shooting you mentioned, a lever action rifle or pump action shotgun could have done the same killing.....

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....chicago criminals kill more than in many other cities...why is it that New York and L.A. have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? Both places have just as strict gun control as Chicago....and in both places they live next to states with normal gun laws....like Arizona, and Vermont.......

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please....explain how any of your gun control laws actually keep guns out of the hands of criminals....you haven't shown one law you support that does that.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

And another point....what about the cities in Arizona, and Texas....and other places...that have lower gun murder rates than Chicago? From what you just posted...their criminals don't even have to leave the state to get guns...yet their gun murder rates are lower than Chicago........how does that support your post?

And Chicago is lying.....guns from other states are not the issue.....

It would be helpful if you had some data to present or study to cite?

So the idea that chicago is more violent because of Indiana is crap........

Please see the above, your pronouncements alone are rather thin.

You need to do more research, faster....that lie about Chicago guns is very old.......and think about New York and L.A........do they live next to states that sell guns.....

We'd love to see your research, thanks in advance.

If anyone has these types of guns for alleged self defense and your argument is these weapons are very rarely used for ill intent, then the whole thing's rather silly. Furthermore, the concept that you're going to fend off the overreach of an intrusive govt with your guns is fantasy. You got distracted and sat on your arse while corporate power and concentrated wealth took over your democracy, your economic and political systems, militarized police departments to snatch you up if you ever begin to resist, and privatized your prison system so that the pwoer structure can squeeze $40-50K out of your carcass in a post industrial society.

But praise Jesus, you still got your gun. Sheesh pard.

Wow....you better hurry up....we are about to leave Iraq and Afghanistan and they need to know that just using rifles and improvised explosive devices is never going to drive off either the Soviet army or the United States Army....you better hurry because we are pulling out............

Do you guys ever study history....or reality?

Talking about america, focus.

It is you who needs to engage their brain.....armed Americans with an understanding of our culture and technology are supposed to be unable to resist a violent attack by our own government...while backwards ass barbarians with only rifles and improvised explosives drove us out of 2 countries....

Please......try to think harder....and use more brain cells....

Well someone needs to re-evaluate our empire then don't we. We keep going in a "liberators" only to become despised occupiers, over and over again. Nah, couldn't be an issue there to think about. But you are correct about one thing. When empires begin to crumble, they will redirect the forces from the occupation of other lands on the fringe of empire, toward crushing dissent at home. But you'l be sitting on your couch watching it happen and bitching about "liberals" n shit. You won't do anything but post lunatic fringe bs.

More laws will do nothing and save nobody, but the control freaks will continue trying… LOL

 

[Rustic]

Don't need that for deer...need it for humans who may attack us.....that was the whole point to the 2nd Amendment....

So.....did you read up on the Autodefensas in Mexico yet? You know....to learn about real world gun needs?

Okay. So we all, everyone in this country, needs to be armed like a SWAT team because of people in Mexico?

Everyone in this country has a Right to have the same weapons that law enforcement and the military have for their cops and soldiers.......that you guys can't see it is just sad............when people are unarmed, when their government goes bad, they become victims filling mass graves........when the people are armed........it can't happen without those trying to do it paying a heavy price........

Your govt's already gone bad and you've myopically missed it while fighting windmills. Much of it came while your ilk begged your govt to steer you toward a militarized police surveillance state to keep you "safe" from "terrorists" in the wake of 9/11.

Your little gun doesn't give your govt a nanosecond's worth of pause. They have drones and can know your every move if they choose to, you'd never see anything coming, just like you couldn't see the economic system being used to sodomize the masses into anxious submission.

Eisenhower warned us of all this, back when "conservatives" were, well, conservative.

There has never been a conservative president in the last hundred plus years of this country… Dumbass
Calvin Coolidge was the closest we have to it.

Which is to say that for a very long time, most of your fellow citizens disagree with your views. Interesting.

There's no such thing as a conservative career politician, like oil and water…

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There has never been a conservative president in the last hundred plus years of this country… Dumbass
Calvin Coolidge was the closest we have to it.

So what exactly is your definition of conservatism?