C
Cavman
Guest
Ok let’s ban GUN FREE ZONES we see how they do a lot of good.
Opponents Protest in Face of NRA Silence on Sandy Hook Shooting
- Status
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Does a criminal care about a background check, especially those with access to falsify documents to avoid detection?
He was underage, and that denied him the right to purchase. If he provided no false identification, no laws were broken. He was simply rejected.
300 million guns, 500 million people, approximates of course. Ignore controlling the guns and let’s identify mental illnesses. Logistics alone are against us, especially with people who have some type of mental illness that is not detectable until they show some signs of mental instability.
Let’s assume mental stability is the way to go, are current gun owners open to being evaluated? If so, who bears the costs? Even then, some mental illnesses are undetectable until signs are shown. In some of these cases, shooting rampages are the first signs noticed.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
That really doesn’t address the point you raised, and the points in my response. It also appears to be biased towards one view.
We can either find real recommendations, with open minds, or lawmakers will impose what they feel is real.
E
exnihilo
Guest
Actually I’m in the militia. According to my state’s laws every able bodied men over 17 is in the militia. Obviously I need a weapon suitable for a militia. The Swiss have similar conditions and laws.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I think our country has solved any militia problems. Even in comparing the number of militia when the language of the 2nd amendment was written, we have about as many nuclear weapons alone. Then we can count conventional weaponry in our disposal.
We have a right to bear arms, that’s a given. But is it for the purposes identified in the 2nd amendment?
I’ve made several suggestions referencing control, and not bans. They are overlooked, and not discussed by gun rights advocates for some reason. That kind of close ended discussion can only bring about an imposition of laws, as opposed to a reasoned group of laws, in my opinion.
S
SamH
Guest
Agreed. Criminals don’t obey the law. Do you think passing more laws they won’t obey is the solution?
If he attempted to purchase a weapon he broke the law. It doesn’t matter how poor of attempt he made. I see people denied all the time on the background check - none of them fear criminal prosecution because the Justice Department doesn’t enforce the law.
Just like when an illegal alien gives me false documentation and the E-Verify program identifies them. They attempted to illegally gain employment and have been identified right down to their address but the government does nothing. He person goes to the next employer hoping they don’t do background checks.
S
SamH
Guest
You don’t know how the draft works do you?
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Actually the draft ended, at the same time I enlisted. And even without an active draft, one could be instituted in a national emergency. Those drafted would be issued arms, as per the 2 second amendment.
S
SamH
Guest
You are actually part of the federal militia too. Through the “selective service” you can be called out on a selective basis to serve your country. They just don’t call the militia out enmass any more - for now.
S
SamH
Guest
Wouldn’t it be better if the person knew how to use arms before be activated? It aids in training - exactly as the 2nd Amendment suggests.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
All through man’s history, people have avoided persecution. The Justice Department does enforce laws, as do multiple other agencies. If you’re suggesting we place enforcement in the hands of the people, this discussion is about some of those people who have turned on their fellow citizens.
No matter what documentation any specific law requires, it can be, and often is, circumvented; and that doesn’t matter what partisans are in power. Now, we’re back to checking mental illnesses, which many are undetectable until someone shows signs of mental illness. This kid showed his signs at Sandy Hook Elementary school.
B
Blacksword
Guest
The second question is silly, obviously the Constitution does not. For the first question: have a look en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushmaster_M4_Type_Carbine
I’d say the fact that it is a semi-automatic gun even in the non-automatic versions, capable of firing off huge amounts of rounds in a super short amount of time, and has been used in numerous military conflicts and by tons of countries’ militaries, makes it a “military-grade assault rifle”. It’s based on an AR-15! There is no reason a civilian needs something like this, and if the crazy who murdred those kinds had been armed with a handgun or simple hunting rifle we’d have 4 or 5 dead children at most instead of 20, plain and simple. Killing capacity MATTERS when we’re talking about a deranged person with a firearm. How many successive shots can you squeeze off before you have to reload? How quickly can you fire those shots? How long does it take to reload? The answer to these questions in the case of weapons like this is, respectively: inexcusably too many for a civilian non-law enforcement officer to have access to, way too quickly, super quick in fact, and, lastly, a few seconds to reload: just remove one clip and stick in the new one.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Then you’re offering a solution; e.g. training. Once training is complete, we need a certification that shows training has been complete. We can grow more control from that point.
S
SamH
Guest
DPMS AR15s are not military grade.
I believe only Colt and select Bushmaster AR15s are considered military grade.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Minor changes to an AR15 can result in a M16, for all practical purposes.
B
Blacksword
Guest
Very true. But the real danger posed by such weapons to the large majority of us as citizens in public is not from hardened criminals obtaining these weapons and massacring people in the street, it’s from mentally deranged sick persons obtaining these weapons and massacring us in the street (or mall, movie theater, school, gym, or church)! Look at each of these incidents we’ve seen over the last 12 years or so: ALL of them would not have occurred at all or been greatly lessened in severity had these kinds of firearms not been available for easy sale to the public. Let me know when the Mafia starts suddenly randomly butchering school children for no reason.
E
exnihilo
Guest
On older models. Newer models have been redesigned. Accuracy goes down considerably with full auto and even rapidly firing a semi automatic. Rate of fire is really irrelevant when no one can stop the shooter because they themselves are unarmed. The guy could have used a pump shotgun and been just as deadly taking minimal time to reload.
B
Blacksword
Guest
This seems if anything to be an argument for MORE stringent standards on what is considered an assault weapon, not less standards on all guns…evil people can do evil things, Tim McVeigh was evil and meticulous, I’d still take, if required, one OK bombing rather than a dozen Columbine-like shootings…wouldn’t you?
E
exnihilo
Guest
It is not because the very people you would still allow to have weapons, government personnel, kill far more people with those weapons than do private citizens. In fact the federal government killed more children at Waco than this incident using their tanks and the simple element fire.
S
SamH
Guest
Agreed. If you have access to a machine shop, but then you can build your own even better weapon.
- Status