Thoughts and Prayers

[JazzGal]

The 18 school shootings is an inaccurate or misleading statement for a variety of reasons. I'll leave it to all of you to look it up, not hard. Still doesn't diminish the tragedy involved here. This is wrong.

I agree with you here. I am annoyed by people trying to bolster their argument with misleading data. These range from shootings near schools, kids who bring a gun to school which accidentally goes off, and people intent on killing people. Yet the 18 school shootings stat is meant to lead people to believe there have been 18 mass shootings in the past six weeks.

 

[Rubashov]

Zero school shootings here, wonder why? In fact the last one I can remember was a barman being shot at my universities student bar in 1999, but you know guns don't kill people.

 

[Douchebag K]

How freaking hard is it for a society to decide that at the least they don’t need automatic and semi automatic weapons ???

 

[One Brow]

Small correction: I said deterrent when I meant defense. Guns are used for self defense much more often than you would think. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/91da/afbf92d021f06426764e800a4e639a1c1116.pdf I don't think 10 rounds is sufficient to defend against anything more than 2 people. If 3 men were to break into my house then I'd want the full 16 in my clips.

Because after you fire off 5 shots, the other two guys will be charging at you? Do you see why this seems irrational to me?

Or, as gun advocates would add, you'd find another method.

Soooo many places where they don't find another method.

 

[Getting Traded]

Is there some reason we can't do both, outside of your unwillingness?

I think a person's life takes precedence over being harassed. The MeToo movement is much about a breakdown in communication between men and women -- this is not to say that men in power don't abuse and sexually harass women. But do you know any guy who doesn't talk differently about sex with their buddies than they do, even with their wives? And if they talked that way in front of a woman who isn't their wife or significant other, they would be charged with sexual harassment.

 

[freakazoid]

I don't believe it would accomplish very much at all as far as criminal gun acts are concerned. By far most gun murders are committed with handguns and only a few shots are fired. That's the biggest gun issue there is and almost none of the "sensible regulations" address it at all.

I believe that individuals have a right to defend themselves. There are situations where magazine capacity could be advantageous. If you look at the riots in LA after the Rodney King verdict, I believe it would be advantageous in holding off a mob.

I'm a gun owner, and I kind of find this argument to be ridiculous. Has there ever been a single incident where high capacity magazines have saved lives in this country? When you measure the damage bad guys are able to do compered to the supposed good that high capacity mags might one day do in some unlikely scenario, I don't see how any reasonable person could make this argument.

And I happen to own a couple of 22 round clips for my glock. I appreciate the fact I was able to buy them and I probably won't be handing them in, but if it's a choice between me not being able to buy them anymore and keeping this kind of fire power out of the hands of mentally deranged and pissed off individuals full of hate, the decision is really easy. Gun enthusiasts lived through Bill Clinton's ban on assault rifles and we'll live through the next round of gun control, whenever that happens to come.

There really isn't any reasonable argument that people need high capacity mags to protect themselves. If you're really going to try and make that argument, you have to get into scenarios where society collapses for some reason and we end up with martial law or something like that. Even then, if you're getting into massive firefights with that many rounds flying around, it's only a matter of time before we're all dead anyway.

 

[♪alt13]

We know who is killing people. The vast majority of shooters are young men. So how's about raising the age at which you can buy or carry a gun, any gun? I don't have the numbers but it seems like 9 out of 10 times the shooter is under 25.

 

[Gameface]

I've mentioned it here before, but I kind of like the idea of going to a militia system. Individuals could privately own hunting rifles (no semi-automatics) and a revolver. One of each per individual. To own anything more than that you must belong to a militia. The militia would have its own membership criteria, training, certification, etc.. The militia would have to maintain an armory and keep records of all weapons going in and out of the armory. Militia members can only have a limited number of guns checked out to keep at home for self defense. Guns can be checked out for outings and target practice. If a member of a militia commits a gun related crime the militia could have its certification revoked and it could be closed down.

Just a rough idea, but I think a militia system could address a number of issues with an armed citizenry.

 

[fishonjazz]

I've mentioned it here before, but I kind of like the idea of going to a militia system. Individuals could privately own hunting rifles (no semi-automatics) and a revolver. One of each per individual. To own anything more than that you must belong to a militia. The militia would have its own membership criteria, training, certification, etc.. The militia would have to maintain an armory and keep records of all weapons going in and out of the armory. Militia members can only have a limited number of guns checked out to keep at home for self defense. Guns can be checked out for outings and target practice. If a member of a militia commits a gun related crime the militia could have its certification revoked and it could be closed down.

Just a rough idea, but I think a militia system could address a number of issues with an armed citizenry.

Interesting idea

 

[♪alt13]

I've mentioned it here before, but I kind of like the idea of going to a militia system. Individuals could privately own hunting rifles (no semi-automatics) and a revolver. One of each per individual. To own anything more than that you must belong to a militia. The militia would have its own membership criteria, training, certification, etc.. The militia would have to maintain an armory and keep records of all weapons going in and out of the armory. Militia members can only have a limited number of guns checked out to keep at home for self defense. Guns can be checked out for outings and target practice. If a member of a militia commits a gun related crime the militia could have its certification revoked and it could be closed down.

Just a rough idea, but I think a militia system could address a number of issues with an armed citizenry.

I'm not certain but I'm pretty sure that that couldn't be accomplished without a constitutional amendment. IIRC SCOTUS ruled on this and affirmed the 2nd amendment as a right of the individual. Like a said I'm not certain but it sounds familiar.

 

[MVP]

I've mentioned it here before, but I kind of like the idea of going to a militia system. Individuals could privately own hunting rifles (no semi-automatics) and a revolver. One of each per individual. To own anything more than that you must belong to a militia. The militia would have its own membership criteria, training, certification, etc.. The militia would have to maintain an armory and keep records of all weapons going in and out of the armory. Militia members can only have a limited number of guns checked out to keep at home for self defense. Guns can be checked out for outings and target practice. If a member of a militia commits a gun related crime the militia could have its certification revoked and it could be closed down.

Just a rough idea, but I think a militia system could address a number of issues with an armed citizenry.

So you are suggesting more people with more guns? I am confused.

 

[♪alt13]

So you are suggesting more people with more guns? I am confused.

How did you get that from what he wrote? He proposed stricter control of all weapons and especially strict controls of weapons with higher capacity and rifles with semi-automatic function. He proposed limiting personal ownership of handguns to revolvers and rifles to hunting rifles(I presume he means bolt/lever/pump/muzzle load).

 

[Deleted member 5000]

Listen to the Gazelle vs Leopard analogy

 

[Getting Traded]

It all boils down to having strict rules and controls over who can own a gun -- simple as that. But the gun lobby (NRA) is opposed because that will cut into the profits of the gun manufacturers. And they pay off the corrupt politicians to do nothing. So, when it comes down to it, the dishonest, unethical politicians are as much to blame as anyone because they allow this permissive policy towards gun ownership to continue. Really, for politicians not to draw up legislation for gun control is not only unethical but criminal. Some politician should propose legislation in mockery to make it a crime to oppose gun control.

 

[MVP]

Listen to the Gazelle vs Leopard analogy

This guy is completely insane. No wonder nothing is going to change - Americans obsession and love for guns is incurable mental disorder.

 

[Deleted member 5000]

I'm curious MVP if someone broke into to your home, say you even have a family, what is your suggestions to do in this situation?

Put on a pot of coffee while you ask them kindly to wait for you for the police to come rescue you?

 

[MVP]

I'm curious MVP if someone broke into to your home, say you even have a family, what is your suggestions to do in this situation?
Put on a pot of coffee while you ask them kindly to wait for you for the police to come rescue you?

Not saying it will never happen ( it would be very unusual here where I live), but if it will - people usually break in for money or for other material things - not to kill home owners. I would just give the robber whatever they want.
Reading numerous stories from USA ( like where father shot son because he got it confused with robber) just re-affirms my position that no gun will be ever needed in my house.

 

[MVP]

Listen to the Gazelle vs Leopard analogy

So all these mass shooters killed all those people because they were starving and had an instinct to eat them? The stupidest analogy one would come up with. Just beyond stupendous.

 

[The Thriller]

How freaking hard is it for a society to decide that at the least they don’t need automatic and semi automatic weapons ???

Very hard, when the NRA pumps millions of dollars annually into republican candidates’ campaigns. The gop has this game figured out. Take tons of money from the NRA, the Kochs, and the Mercers. Then award them with tax cuts, anti-environmental policies, and deregulation of guns.

If you look at Florida’s top political leaders, they are all beholden to the NRA. Gov Rick Scott and Sen Lil Marco are the top recipients of dirty NRA money. And we wonder why in Florida they have stand your ground laws and deregulated gun policies?

The DNC needs to emphasize this more in their platform and not be afraid of the NRA. Vote for democrats who will enact gun regulation.

 

[Deleted member 5000]

Well man, we won't infringe on your right to maintain that contingency plan. No argument to be had.