77 replies to this topic

[The Average Joe]

When you've lost Sen Feinstein (one of the most vocal proponents for people, er gun control), you've lost the debate.

 

“I don’t know. I would have to take a good look at that,” Feinstein responded when asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” what regulations could have prevented the mass shooting at the Mandalay Resort and Casino that claimed the lives of 58 concert-goers. “I am not sure there is any set of laws that could have prevented it.”

 

 

And yet, I'm sure she will propose a bunch of meaningless laws...

[2 Aces]

The Left knows there are sufficient laws already on the books. They just use things like Vegas to attempt to take baby steps towards confiscation. The Left will never give up on their radical agenda, and most of them will never admit when they're wrong. It's a childishness that has permeated the Left for years. At least Feinstein occasionally shows some common sense.

[Who_Do_You_Trust]

It's always disappointing to hear the right say, "There are no solutions".  It's as if they're saying that a certain amount of death is an acceptable price for their arsenal in the basement.  

 

The original idea of the 2A was to stifle gov't tyranny.  Now that the country is wall-to-wall firearms, it imposes a new tyranny - people are afraid of going into public. Mass shooters are in places that they've never been before.  And yet, the 2A crowd says they need to be armed to protect themselves.  I would love to hear a reasonable conversation on how a 9mm in your pocket would have protected you in Las Vegas a week ago tonight.

 

I'm seriously considering the purchase of property in New Zealand, so when all the extreme factions decide it's time to start full blown warfare on America's streets, I'll have a place to go.  We're leaving for a trip to New Zealand on Wednesday.  It's a vacation, but I'm planning on a visit with a real estate agent too.

[2 Aces]

You want confiscation, but you are too cowardly to admit it, so you dance around it. I've been to New Zealand... it's not perfect either. If you move there, good riddance.

[Chris]

It's always disappointing to hear the right say, "There are no solutions".  It's as if they're saying that a certain amount of death is an acceptable price for their arsenal in the basement.  

 

The original idea of the 2A was to stifle gov't tyranny.  Now that the country is wall-to-wall firearms, it imposes a new tyranny - people are afraid of going into public. Mass shooters are in places that they've never been before.  And yet, the 2A crowd says they need to be armed to protect themselves.  I would love to hear a reasonable conversation on how a 9mm in your pocket would have protected you in Las Vegas a week ago tonight.

 

I'm seriously considering the purchase of property in New Zealand, so when all the extreme factions decide it's time to start full blown warfare on America's streets, I'll have a place to go.  We're leaving for a trip to New Zealand on Wednesday.  It's a vacation, but I'm planning on a visit with a real estate agent too.

And it's always disappointing to know the left is working towards total confiscation, period, no matter what they say.  Death by a thousand cuts.

 

Yes, the 2A was put in place to stand up against tyranny, government or otherwise.  The "militia" is not the Army, not the Navy, not the National Guard, it is the people, ordinary citizens.

 

And by the way, back in the day if you were in the Militia you were required to keep your weapon at home, in good order, powder and ball too, all at your own expense.  You were required occasionally to "muster" which meant you went to drill and train with others.

 

And you on the left really need to rethink all of your "gun free zones".  Mass shooters are in places that they were never before because there are "gun free" zones where they never were before. Gun free zones are "kill zones".  And nope, not everybody has to carry, just a few, trained, educated, practiced, and you don't need to know who they are.  You would not have been able to have your 9 mm in there, in the concert area.  And yes, to your point, hand gun out to 300 yards, not an option.  No existing laws would have prevented what happened in Las Vegas.  Bad guys are bad, this guy was really bad.  Bad guys don't don't follow laws.  

[UncleVinnys]

 

 

Table 1: The 20th Century Collectivist Death Toll

 

Collectivist Regime, Religion, Millions Murdered, Period

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics [USSR] Atheist 61.911 Millions Murdered, 1917-1987
Chinese Communists [PRC] Atheist 35.236 Millions Murdered, 1949-1987
German (National) Socialists [Nazis] Pagan 20.946 Millions Murdered, 1933-1945
China (Mao Soviets) Atheist 3.466 Millions Murdered, 1923-1949
Cambodian Communists Atheist 2.035 Millions Murdered, 1975-1979
Vietnamese Communists Atheist 1.670 Millions Murdered,1945-1987

Polish Communists Atheist 1.585 Millions Murdered,1945-1948

Yugoslavian Socialists Atheist 1.072 Millions Murdered,1944-1987

North Korean Communists Atheist 1.663 Millions Murdered, 1948-1987

 

Grand Total 129.6 Millions Murdered.....!

Whole argument is bogus!    

Those were totalitarian regimes.

We are talking about America.
An America BTW which is headed by the most pro-gun P-P-President* we've had since Reagan.
So - are you saying you need the guns just in case the US government turns on you somehow.?

Ridiculous on the surface!

 

Like I said: Crybabies filled with fear. "Bogey man might get me!"

No, these folks think the density of lead will somehow save them from the

fears that are all in their head. Believe me; salvation does not come from

shooting your brothers. 
 

* (Pardon the stutter) but I hear there are reports confirming the Steele

  "golden showers" report on Turnip.
 

[2 Aces]

You still haven't answered our question: What law would have stopped the Las Vegas murders?? Take your time, UncleBernie... we'll wait..

[UncleVinnys]

Easy!
Like a car license.
You have to pass a test.

You have to be re-certified every few years.

No license without insurance.

Limits on ammo sales.

Limits on magazine size.

Limits on automatic weapons.
No guns for folks with violent crimes in the past, including domestic violence.

Substantial background checks.
Mental health screening.

[The Average Joe]

Ummm, you realize most of those are already in place right? 

 

You already have to pass a test to be handgun certified before you can purchase one.  No reason to have to re-certify unless it's like the DMV where if you have no issues it automatically renews.

 

BS on the insurance. That will stop ZERO crime.

 

Limits on ammo sales are also silly. I can stock up if I don't practice and who is to say how much is too much. I have known people that go through 500 rounds on a day trip.

 

Magazine size limit is silly, but you already won that debate so pointless at this time. I can swap out a mag in around a second and a half so what are you really saving?

 

There are already extreme limits on automatic weapons. Figure on having DOJ crawl up your behind for about 6 months and then paying 15-20k for the weapon. 

 

There are already substantial background checks. No violent felons are getting legal weapons And, more applicable to many here, in most states, you cannot buy a legal gun if you have a medical marijuana card. CA has mental health prohibitions already.

 

Now if you want to have a serious discussion, educate yourself first.  How about we prohibit known gang members from owning a gun? Automatic 5 years for possession. I would even go along with requiring a safety class for gun purchasers.  You still won't stop crazy or those dedicated to evil with ANY laws.

 

And Who Do, good luck immigrating to NZ. I looked into it once and they are VERY restrictive about immigrants.

[Who_Do_You_Trust]

Ummm, you realize most of those are already in place right? 

 

You already have to pass a test to be handgun certified before you can purchase one.  No reason to have to re-certify unless it's like the DMV where if you have no issues it automatically renews.

 

BS on the insurance. That will stop ZERO crime.

 

Limits on ammo sales are also silly. I can stock up if I don't practice and who is to say how much is too much. I have known people that go through 500 rounds on a day trip.

 

Magazine size limit is silly, but you already won that debate so pointless at this time. I can swap out a mag in around a second and a half so what are you really saving?

 

There are already extreme limits on automatic weapons. Figure on having DOJ crawl up your behind for about 6 months and then paying 15-20k for the weapon. 

 

There are already substantial background checks. No violent felons are getting legal weapons And, more applicable to many here, in most states, you cannot buy a legal gun if you have a medical marijuana card. CA has mental health prohibitions already.

 

Now if you want to have a serious discussion, educate yourself first.  How about we prohibit known gang members from owning a gun? Automatic 5 years for possession. I would even go along with requiring a safety class for gun purchasers.  You still won't stop crazy or those dedicated to evil with ANY laws.

 

And Who Do, good luck immigrating to NZ. I looked into it once and they are VERY restrictive about immigrants.

 

Joe - the problem is that laws are not applied evenly across the country.  I would bet that most guns used in Chicago crime are acquired in other states.  I read once that a very large % of guns used in Calif crimes are acquired outside the state, mostly Nevada gun shows.

 

Here are some interesting numbers to ponder (gleaned from PEW research reports):

 

-  Of 134 mass shootings in the USA since 1966, all but three were committed by males.

 

-  Nearly 50% of the world's civilian owned guns are in the hand of Americans.

 

-  Gun ownership in the USA is concentrated to a group of "super-owners" who make up 3% of the population, each one owning an average of 17 guns.

 

-  More women are buying guns, but truly for self defense.  The vast majority own only one firearm.

 

-  95% of conservative gun owners agree that " the right to own guns is essential to their own sense of freedom".

 

-  Gun hoarders (those who own at least five guns) say being a gun owner is "very important" to their personal identity.  (The implications of this are mind-bending)  

 

Please derive your own conclusions.

[2 Aces]

Easy!
Like a car license.
You have to pass a test.

You have to be re-certified every few years.

No license without insurance.

Limits on ammo sales.

Limits on magazine size.

Limits on automatic weapons.
No guns for folks with violent crimes in the past, including domestic violence.

Substantial background checks.
Mental health screening.

 

Oh, so these things would have stopped the Las Vegas shooter? Man, you're a NutBird, aren't you? Like Joe said, you need to educate yourself first before you debate us. You just sound woefully ignorant... almost child-like. But hey, you embody the modern-day radical Leftist, antifa-loving Democrat Party. Clueless from Day 1.... Now, go get educated !!

[Chris]

 

Joe - the problem is that laws are not applied evenly across the country.  I would bet that most guns used in Chicago crime are acquired in other states.  I read once that a very large % of guns used in Calif crimes are acquired outside the state, mostly Nevada gun shows.

 

Here are some interesting numbers to ponder (gleaned from PEW research reports):

 

-  Of 134 mass shootings in the USA since 1966, all but three were committed by males.

 

-  Nearly 50% of the world's civilian owned guns are in the hand of Americans.

 

-  Gun ownership in the USA is concentrated to a group of "super-owners" who make up 3% of the population, each one owning an average of 17 guns.

 

-  More women are buying guns, but truly for self defense.  The vast majority own only one firearm.

 

-  95% of conservative gun owners agree that " the right to own guns is essential to their own sense of freedom".

 

-  Gun hoarders (those who own at least five guns) say being a gun owner is "very important" to their personal identity.  (The implications of this are mind-bending)  

 

Please derive your own conclusions.

Well, I guess I am a "three percenter" in more ways than one...!   Super....!

 

And laws not applied evenly across the country is not a problem, it is called "states rights".

 

And terms like "super owners" and "gun hoarders" are terms invented by the loony left who do not understand the first thing about owning firearms, collecting them, using them, and storing them.  Many guns owned by Americans are family heirlooms passed down from generation to generation and have a significant sentimental value to the owners.  Many of the arms have been used in hunting, passed down from father to son, son to grandson or granddaughter.  One of my most prized rifles is a well used Marlin .22 rifle that my father had.  I taught my sons and my daughter to shoot with that rifle, how to be safe with that rifle, how to hit a small target at 50 yards with that rifle.  It is worth probably no more than $50 in a gun store but to me it is priceless.   To you and others on the left you see it as an "evil" tool of man, to be confiscated, not to be given as a gift from father to son without government paperwork, paying a tax, a fee, and waiting 10 days to give it to them all while the rifle is locked up in a gun store for those 10 days.  My God...!  That rifle has been in my family since the 1940's and you guys make it a hassle to give it to a son or daughter when the time comes, and you lock it up for ten days and cost me money, and you register it, the serial number in a data base.   Do you see why we don't trust the left and their loony "common sense" gun laws....?  Chris

[The Average Joe]

Yeah, I know a guy that has over 40 guns. Some so old they would have to have some serious gunsmithing to fire. They were his grandfathers, who passed them on to his father (who was an avid hunter), who then passed them on to my friend (who is also an avid hunter.)  He only regularly uses his favorite shotguns and one rifle for hunting, but we have a great time shooting a variety of them for fun. He also has several kids who will receive those guns when the time comes.  He is a very responsible owner, and the guns are far more valuable to him as pieces of his families history than any type of "hoarding". 

I wish I had my dad's old guns, but they were destroyed by fire. I was given a single shot .22 rifle for my 12th birthday with a letter from my dad talking about responsibility and becoming a man. I, in turn, gave the same rifle to my son in his teens, with a letter from me AND the letter from my dad. perhaps, one day, that will get passed on as well.  Like Chris' story, the rifle is not worth much (or like my friend's inoperable heirlooms), but the sentimental value is high.

That is one thing I think gun limiters forget. A well maintained weapon will last for more than a lifetime. My son's .22 has some very minor case burn on the end of the barrel, and a bit of cosmetic wear on the bolt, but is otherwise in nearly the same condition as when I got it over 40 years ago.

As for "hoarders" owning 5 guns. Hmmm. I could easily see owning 5 guns. Different tools for different uses. A carry weapon, a shotgun for home defense, a hunting rifle, a target rifle, a target pistol, a historical pistol/replica (would love to get an 1875 Rem. Outlaw with 7.5 inch barrel and .45 colt just for fun)., etc.  Very easy to go over 5 if you hunt.  Guess I just wonder who sets the limit and for what reasons. Could I set the limit on how many HP your car could have? How about a limit on how much salt you could ingest? Or sugar?

 

But I digress, the issue is that everyone wants "something" done, but none of the proposed solutions would have stopped any of the incidents.

[Who_Do_You_Trust]

Yeah, I know a guy that has over 40 guns. Some so old they would have to have some serious gunsmithing to fire. They were his grandfathers, who passed them on to his father (who was an avid hunter), who then passed them on to my friend (who is also an avid hunter.)  He only regularly uses his favorite shotguns and one rifle for hunting, but we have a great time shooting a variety of them for fun. He also has several kids who will receive those guns when the time comes.  He is a very responsible owner, and the guns are far more valuable to him as pieces of his families history than any type of "hoarding". 

I wish I had my dad's old guns, but they were destroyed by fire. I was given a single shot .22 rifle for my 12th birthday with a letter from my dad talking about responsibility and becoming a man. I, in turn, gave the same rifle to my son in his teens, with a letter from me AND the letter from my dad. perhaps, one day, that will get passed on as well.  Like Chris' story, the rifle is not worth much (or like my friend's inoperable heirlooms), but the sentimental value is high.

That is one thing I think gun limiters forget. A well maintained weapon will last for more than a lifetime. My son's .22 has some very minor case burn on the end of the barrel, and a bit of cosmetic wear on the bolt, but is otherwise in nearly the same condition as when I got it over 40 years ago.

As for "hoarders" owning 5 guns. Hmmm. I could easily see owning 5 guns. Different tools for different uses. A carry weapon, a shotgun for home defense, a hunting rifle, a target rifle, a target pistol, a historical pistol/replica (would love to get an 1875 Rem. Outlaw with 7.5 inch barrel and .45 colt just for fun)., etc.  Very easy to go over 5 if you hunt.  Guess I just wonder who sets the limit and for what reasons. Could I set the limit on how many HP your car could have? How about a limit on how much salt you could ingest? Or sugar?

 

But I digress, the issue is that everyone wants "something" done, but none of the proposed solutions would have stopped any of the incidents.

 

Australia came up with a solution that seems to have worked.  Guess we're not as smart as they are.  Or just maybe - males in Australia have enough confidence in their masculinity that they don't need to project it onto a chunk of metal.

 

The statement above - Gun hoarders (those who own at least five guns) say being a gun owner is "very important" to their personal identity. -  says a great deal about the state of the American males' psyche.  

[2 Aces]

Are you having *gender identification issues*?? Sounds like it. Just because YOU may be confused doesn't mean WE are. Oh, and typical of Commie Libs like yourself to decide what should be "very important" to people. Go away and mind your own business. Your anti-America, anti-Constitution act has worn old.