Atlanta Urgent Care shooting. May 3, 2023.

[Taltarzac725]

Live updates: Atlanta Midtown shooting news (https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/atlanta-midtown-shooting/index.html)

I recall writing a top lawyer in San Francisco at a law firm which had just had a shooting inside and he had written back to me that they did not have the resources to do anything about addressing the needs of survivors/victims of these kind of crimes. One of which had just happened at his law firm.

My concern in writing the lawyer was access to practical materials for survivors/victims of crimes in SF Bay Area law libraries and other kinds of libraries.

But I do think that law firm was a major driver towards a assault weapons ban that went into effect. 101 California Street shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_California_Street_shooting)

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_Enforcement_Act)

[manaboutown]

Live updates: Atlanta Midtown shooting news (https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/atlanta-midtown-shooting/index.html)

I recall writing a top lawyer in San Francisco at a law firm which had just had a shooting inside and he had written back to me that they did not have the resources to do anything about addressing the needs of survivors/victims of these kind of crimes. One of which had just happened at his law firm.

My concern in writing the lawyer was access to practical materials for survivors/victims of crimes in SF Bay Area law libraries and other kinds of libraries.

But I do think that law firm was a major driver towards a assault weapons ban that went into effect. 101 California Street shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_California_Street_shooting)

Criminals and psychos could care less about gun bans of any type and usually obtain their weapons through some form of illegal means. They are almost always the ones who pull triggers and murder people. All gun bans do is deprive law-abiding citizens of their right to protect themselves from vicious criminals. Having a gun of some kind for defense is essential these days in many areas of the country, both rural and urban, as murderous criminals are rarely incarcerated but released to commit more crimes including murdering folks,

[Taltarzac725]

Criminals and psychos could care less about gun bans of any type and usually obtain their weapons through some form of illegal means. They are almost always the ones who pull triggers and murder people. All gun bans do is deprive law-abiding citizens of their right to protect themselves from vicious criminals. Having a gun of some kind for defense is essential these days in many areas of the country, both rural and urban, as murderous criminals are rarely incarcerated but released to commit more crimes including murdering folks,

Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.

[njbchbum]

snipped
A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.

What is your opinion re how HIPAA impacts the release of medical info re red flag laws or the potential sale of guns/ammo to citizens -

Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule | HHS.gov (https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html)
Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12

"Individually identifiable health information" is information, including demographic data, that relates to:

the individual's past, present or future physical or mental health or condition,
the provision of health care to the individual, or
the past, present, or future payment for the provision of health care to the individual,

and that identifies the individual or for which there is a reasonable basis to believe it can be used to identify the individual.13 Individually identifiable health information includes many common identifiers (e.g., name, address, birth date, Social Security Number).

The Privacy Rule excludes from protected health information employment records that a covered entity maintains in its capacity as an employer and education and certain other records subject to, or defined in, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. §1232g.

[manaboutown]

Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.

Very funny about the land mines and all that!

I agree about watching for signs of mental illness. That could potentially have stopped several tragic multiple shootings such as in some schools and Las Vegas as well as some bombings such as those of the Unabomber, at the Boston Marathon and in Oklahoma City although it might be difficult to effectively implement except in a police state such as Cuba, China, Russia, Venezuela and the like.

I would definitely bring back and enforce the death penalty for first degree murder and multiple shootings.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Criminals and psychos could care less about gun bans of any type and usually obtain their weapons through some form of illegal means. They are almost always the ones who pull triggers and murder people. All gun bans do is deprive law-abiding citizens of their right to protect themselves from vicious criminals. Having a gun of some kind for defense is essential these days in many areas of the country, both rural and urban, as murderous criminals are rarely incarcerated but released to commit more crimes including murdering folks,

And yet - none of these law-abiding citizens with a generously-written right to carry a handgun openly, used their lawfully-carried gun to stop the shooter. In fact, the shooter is still running around free.

So much for having a gun for defense.

[Taltarzac725]

I would hope that it would be friends, family and the like contacting the police about their concerns about someone who is showing signs of wanting to injure him or herself and others. And using medical history to back it up. Of course, abuses would happen where someone with other motives would be turning to the police with their concerns about co-workers who beat them out of positions, jilted lovers getting revenge, neighbors with a beef of some kind, etc.

What is your opinion re how HIPAA impacts the release of medical info re red flag laws or the potential sale of guns/ammo to citizens -

Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule | HHS.gov (https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html)
Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12

"Individually identifiable health information" is information, including demographic data, that relates to:

the individual's past, present or future physical or mental health or condition,
the provision of health care to the individual, or
the past, present, or future payment for the provision of health care to the individual,

and that identifies the individual or for which there is a reasonable basis to believe it can be used to identify the individual.13 Individually identifiable health information includes many common identifiers (e.g., name, address, birth date, Social Security Number).

The Privacy Rule excludes from protected health information employment records that a covered entity maintains in its capacity as an employer and education and certain other records subject to, or defined in, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. §1232g.

[MrFlorida]

And yet - none of these law-abiding citizens with a generously-written right to carry a handgun openly, used their lawfully-carried gun to stop the shooter. In fact, the shooter is still running around free.

So much for having a gun for defense.

Most people with" generously -written "right to carry will only use it to protect their families and themselves. Sorry sweetie, that doesn't mean the general public. The way laws are now, the criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens.

[Number 10 GI]

And yet - none of these law-abiding citizens with a generously-written right to carry a handgun openly, used their lawfully-carried gun to stop the shooter. In fact, the shooter is still running around free.

So much for having a gun for defense.

It is a small percentage of the population that carry a personal protection firearm, so the possibility of someone at the scene having a weapon is small. Also, most doctor's offices, hospitals and clinics prohibit firearms on their premises. law abiding people obey the prohibition and do not carry in these locations, but the criminal element totally disregards it.

The state of Georgia does allow open carry of a weapon, but the individual must have a carry permit to do so.

[manaboutown]

And yet - none of these law-abiding citizens with a generously-written right to carry a handgun openly, used their lawfully-carried gun to stop the shooter. In fact, the shooter is still running around free.

So much for having a gun for defense.

Of course not, they are not vigilantes. They own guns to protect themselves, their families and at times others from vicious armed thugs who carjack, rob, burglarize and commit other crimes, some of which are unspeakable.

[njbchbum]

I would hope that it would be friends, family and the like contacting the police about their concerns about someone who is showing signs of wanting to injure him or herself and others. And using medical history to back it up. Of course, abuses would happen where someone with other motives would be turning to the police with their concerns about co-workers who beat them out of positions, jilted lovers getting revenge, neighbors with a beef of some kind, etc.

But would the HIPPA law re privacy prevent the release of a medical history?

[Taltarzac725]

But would the HIPPA law re privacy prevent the release of a medical history?

https://jacksonllp.com/red-flag-laws-erpo-and-hipaa/

I found this interesting.

[Cobullymom]

Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.
You hit the nail on the head, it's mental illness that is the driver of 90% of these horrible murders. Taking guns doesn't stop them, most are obtained illegally. Working with those with mental illness and people speaking up before something happens! People are complacent and do nothing, or when they do ask for help, it's ignored. We have a Godless society that is full of attention seeking mentally ill people. If no guns, they will find something, knives, vehicles, bombs, poison...People need to stop blaming inatimate objects and start blaming humans!!

[Susan1717]

So true!! Just like the man that used his vehicle as a weapon and ran over all those elderly people and children at the Wisconsin Christmas parade!! No gun involved but his car was his weapon. I’m from chicago where there are mass shootings every week. The majority of those guns are bought illegally off the street from gangs and brought in by cartel

[Lindsyburnsy]

Criminals and psychos could care less about gun bans of any type and usually obtain their weapons through some form of illegal means. They are almost always the ones who pull triggers and murder people. All gun bans do is deprive law-abiding citizens of their right to protect themselves from vicious criminals. Having a gun of some kind for defense is essential these days in many areas of the country, both rural and urban, as murderous criminals are rarely incarcerated but released to commit more crimes including murdering folks,
Unless you are an active duty soldier, you should be deprived from owning an AK rifle. Those weapons are for obliterating an enemy in war. Pretty sure we can live without them on our US streets. “Well regulated militia “ not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.

[MrFlorida]

Unless you are an active duty soldier, you should be deprived from owning an AK rifle. Those weapons are for obliterating an enemy in war. Pretty sure we can live without them on our US streets. “Well regulated militia “ not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.

There are laws and background checks in place, not everyone can just walk into a gun store and buy one.

[OhioBuckeye]

I agree guns don’t go off by themselves, besides even if they would banned guns of every type how are they going to keep gun murders from happening because criminals won’t hand over their guns willingly. Then criminals would be able to go into any home or bank & rob anything they want. Giving up guns is a Chinese solution, they said yrs. ago if the Chinese could take our guns & do away with our religion they could walk right in the U.S. & demand anything they want. They’ve already got a jump on it!

[Whitley]

Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.

Hi. I am not saying this in anyway to insult you. The weapon most often mentioned with an "assault rifle" gun ban is an armalite 15 AR15). It is in no way the most powerful weapon (I would not use one hunting boar). The reason most anti first amendment people cite this rifle is because it looks scary. Can you please let me know what you mean when you say a weapon meant for a battlefield. What constitutes an assault rifle for you? Maybe we can agree if we make clear the definitions.

[Whitley]

And yet - none of these law-abiding citizens with a generously-written right to carry a handgun openly, used their lawfully-carried gun to stop the shooter. In fact, the shooter is still running around free.

So much for having a gun for defense.

There are MANY instances where someone protected their own life and lives of others with a licensed weapon.

[Whitley]

People are complacent and do nothing, or when they do ask for help, it's ignored. We have a Godless society that is full of attention seeking mentally ill people.!!

You have been on tik tok I see.

[Whitley]

Unless you are an active duty soldier, you should be deprived from owning an AK rifle. Those weapons are for obliterating an enemy in war. Pretty sure we can live without them on our US streets. “Well regulated militia “ not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.

Would you describe the characteristics of (what you call) an AK rifle that makes them unsuitable for legal ownership?

[Blackbird45]

I do own a handgun, so I'm not against firearm ownership. But I am a true believer that everyone who owns a firearm should have training.

A system similar to getting a driver's license. Just as in the types of vehicles you drive, a car, motorcycle, truck. You do the same with firearms, hunting, handgun and assault weapon. The NRA can choose the calcification and do the training, once you pass on the type of firearms you qualify for you can purchase that type of firearm and the ammunition. while this is going on there could be a full background check.

Also there has to be training on how to safely to store your firearm. This business of leaving a firearm in your glove compartment in your car parked on the street overnight is a no, no. There has to be some common sense involved. Which means there has to be responsibility of being an owner. Which would mean if you were smart you would get some type of insurance to protect yourself.

I also believe that the industry should be able to come up with a home protective firearm that will stop an intruder that is easy to handle and will not take down you front door and the neighbor's dog. You don't have to kill an intruder; you just have to stop them in their tracks.

[Taltarzac725]

I do own a handgun, so I'm not against firearm ownership. But I am a true believer that everyone who owns a firearm should have training.

A system similar to getting a driver's license. Just as in the types of vehicles you drive, a car, motorcycle, truck. You do the same with firearms, hunting, handgun and assault weapon. The NRA can choose the calcification and do the training, once you pass on the type of firearms you qualify for you can purchase that type of firearm and the ammunition. while this is going on there could be a full background check.

Also there has to be training on how to safely to store your firearm. This business of leaving a firearm in your glove compartment in your car parked on the street overnight is a no, no. There has to be some common sense involved. Which means there has to be responsibility of being an owner. Which would mean if you were smart you would get some type of insurance to protect yourself.

I also believe that the industry should be able to come up with a home protective firearm that will stop an intruder that is easy to handle and will not take down you front door and the neighbor's dog. You don't have to kill an intruder; you just have to stop them in their tracks.

I recall a certain movie star slept or still sleeps with a shotgun under her bed. Probably loaded. That would probably stop most would be intruders except for a gang of them. I suppose you might need a AK rifle if you were being attacked by a platoon like in Ukraine. But this is not Ukraine.

And in practicality there is no way in the US to just confiscate AK rifle weapons now out there. But we could slow down the future flow of them to new would be mass killers.

[retiredguy123]

Unless you are an active duty soldier, you should be deprived from owning an AK rifle. Those weapons are for obliterating an enemy in war. Pretty sure we can live without them on our US streets. “Well regulated militia “ not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.
It is not accurate to compare a legal, semi-automatic weapon that can be purchased in most gun stores to a fully automatic weapon that soldiers use in war, and that are not sold in gun stores. That is an apples to oranges comparison. They are two entirely different weapons.

[Cybersprings]

I recall a certain movie star slept or still sleeps with a shotgun under her bed. Probably loaded. That would probably stop most would be intruders except for a gang of them. I suppose you might need a AK rifle if you were being attacked by a platoon like in Ukraine. But this is not Ukraine.

And in practicality there is no way in the US to just confiscate AK rifle weapons now out there. But we could slow down the future flow of them to new would be mass killers.

I think someone's ignorance may be showing. What is it about AK or AR rifles that are legal to own in the U.S. would allow you to take on a platoon anywhere? What is it about them that you think makes them so dangerous? I think you will find any answer you provide will embarass you (if you worry about looking very silly), but I am very interested in how someone who knows nothing about guns but wants to make the rules thinks.

[Taltarzac725]

I think someone's ignorance may be showing. What is it about AK or AR rifles that are legal to own in the U.S. would allow you to take on a platoon anywhere? What is it about them that you think makes them so dangerous? I think you will find any answer you provide will embarass you (if you worry about looking very silly), but I am very interested in how someone who knows nothing about guns but wants to make the rules thinks.


How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

Assault weapons are generally high-powered semiautomatic firearms where each round has up to four times the muzzle velocity of a handgun round. This means that each round from an assault weapon inflicts greater damage to the human body than a round from a typical handgun. Assault weapons are generally designed to fire rounds at a greater rate than other firearms, and when combined with high-capacity magazines, they enable a shooter to fire more rounds over a short period.

[cjrjck]

I do own a handgun, so I'm not against firearm ownership. But I am a true believer that everyone who owns a firearm should have training.

A system similar to getting a driver's license. Just as in the types of vehicles you drive, a car, motorcycle, truck. You do the same with firearms, hunting, handgun and assault weapon. The NRA can choose the calcification and do the training, once you pass on the type of firearms you qualify for you can purchase that type of firearm and the ammunition. while this is going on there could be a full background check.

Also there has to be training on how to safely to store your firearm. This business of leaving a firearm in your glove compartment in your car parked on the street overnight is a no, no. There has to be some common sense involved. Which means there has to be responsibility of being an owner. Which would mean if you were smart you would get some type of insurance to protect yourself.

I also believe that the industry should be able to come up with a home protective firearm that will stop an intruder that is easy to handle and will not take down you front door and the neighbor's dog. You don't have to kill an intruder; you just have to stop them in their tracks.

And because of the 1st Amendment, you have the right to proclaim your beliefs. And because of the 2nd Amendment, your well meaning ideas are just that, well meaning ideas. Can you imagine placing similar requirements on a person before they are allowed to express their views? You might say you can't equate the two (right to free speech and the right to bear arms) and I would say the Supreme Court has said no right shall be abridged. Placing such restrictions on gun ownership would do just that. Now, you do have a recourse. Use your poetic skills to stir up enough support to actually change the 2nd Amendment. It can be done.

[Taltarzac725]

And because of the 1st Amendment, you have the right to proclaim your beliefs. And because of the 2nd Amendment, your well meaning ideas are just that, well meaning ideas. Can you imagine placing similar requirements on a person before they are allowed to express their views? You might say you can't equate the two (right to free speech and the right to bear arms) and I would say the Supreme Court has said no right shall be abridged. Placing such restrictions on gun ownership would do just that. Now, you do have a recourse. Use your poetic skills to stir up enough support to actually change the 2nd Amendment. It can be done.

Check the history of the NRA. They were historically about gun control. How the NRA evolved from backing a 1934 ban on machine guns to blocking nearly all firearm restrictions today (https://theconversation.com/how-the-nra-evolved-from-backing-a-1934-ban-on-machine-guns-to-blocking-nearly-all-firearm-restrictions-today-183880)

[njbchbum]

https://jacksonllp.com/red-flag-laws-erpo-and-hipaa/

I found this interesting.

Yep - interesting - 'til I git to the Disclaimer! LOL

Now I'm gonna go look up HIPAA and gun permit applications! Thanks for your responses.

[Taltarzac725]

Forgotten words: ‘A well regulated Militia’ | The Hill (https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/3837733-forgotten-words-a-well-regulated-militia/)

I would bet that the Founding Fathers had read a lot of English history and did not want private armies around that would march on Parliament. That is not what the 2nd Amendment was about back then but was about a "well regulated militia".

And they probably know about Roman History-- Year of the Four Emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors#:~:text=The%20Year%20of% 20the%20Four,dynasty%2C%20to%20the%20Flavian%20dyn asty).

[Richpetty42]

I see it the same way, we make drugs illegal but criminals find a way to get them. So banning guns from everyone will only lead the criminals & psychopaths to get them illegally and the people in our country who are law abiding defenseless if they fall victim to a criminal who may be attacking them, breaking into their homes etc.
Now that most criminals face no consequences due to their crimes because of DAs and AGs who won’t prosecute them it may start looking like the wild west because the citizens won’t take crime in such a lax way when it comes to their doorstep, they will find a way to protect themselves and their property and not let the bad guys win a war on crime.
And guns are not the problem, if you put a gun on your table and walk away it will just sit there and nothing happens until you put it in your hands and pull the trigger, it’s the person holding it and their intentions on using it in a criminal act.. that’s the problem.
Criminals and psychos could care less about gun bans of any type and usually obtain their weapons through some form of illegal means. They are almost always the ones who pull triggers and murder people. All gun bans do is deprive law-abiding citizens of their right to protect themselves from vicious criminals. Having a gun of some kind for defense is essential these days in many areas of the country, both rural and urban, as murderous criminals are rarely incarcerated but released to commit more crimes including murdering folks,

[Taltarzac725]

Yep - interesting - 'til I git to the Disclaimer! LOL

Now I'm gonna go look up HIPAA and gun permit applications! Thanks for your responses.

They are lawyers. I remember as a law library reference worker I would just be allowed to take the person to an area of the library and kind of point at a work or works for whatever they were interested in at that time.

[Taltarzac725]

No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.

I see it the same way, we make drugs illegal but criminals find a way to get them. So banning guns from everyone will only lead the criminals & psychopaths to get them illegally and the people in our country who are law abiding defenseless if they fall victim to a criminal who may be attacking them, breaking into their homes etc.
Now that most criminals face no consequences due to their crimes because of DAs and AGs who won’t prosecute them it may start looking like the wild west because the citizens won’t take crime in such a lax way when it comes to their doorstep, they will find a way to protect themselves and their property and not let the bad guys win a war on crime.

[Cobullymom]

You have been on tik tok I see.

I have enough sense not to follow a Chinese trash app that steals your private information. Don't assume anything especially that I don't have enough intelligence or logic to speak for myself. But on the other hand you have just proven that you must follow tiktok trash..

[Kenswing]

How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

You do realize the site you linked is to a Bloomberg funded anti-gun group, right? Calling it news is quite the stretch.

[Blackbird45]

And because of the 1st Amendment, you have the right to proclaim your beliefs. And because of the 2nd Amendment, your well meaning ideas are just that, well meaning ideas. Can you imagine placing similar requirements on a person before they are allowed to express their views? You might say you can't equate the two (right to free speech and the right to bear arms) and I would say the Supreme Court has said no right shall be abridged. Placing such restrictions on gun ownership would do just that. Now, you do have a recourse. Use your poetic skills to stir up enough support to actually change the 2nd Amendment. It can be done.

The first amendment: are you not aware what been going on here in Fl. Banning certain books, what Disney can say and not say. I'm just saying there are many people out there who have firearms and don't have a clue how to handle them.

[mikeycereal]

How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown

Assault weapons are generally high-powered semiautomatic firearms where each round has up to four times the muzzle velocity of a handgun round. This means that each round from an assault weapon inflicts greater damage to the human body than a round from a typical handgun. Assault weapons are generally designed to fire rounds at a greater rate than other firearms, and when combined with high-capacity magazines, they enable a shooter to fire more rounds over a short period. (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

Thanks for providing this for those who "claim" ignorance. Nobody "needs" these types of weapons. And it's not because they "look scary." Unfortunately this is just a little friendly chat site where others like us can simply choose to argue the point back and forth and the info should be pounded into the lawmakers because they either don't seem to get it or choose to ignore it.

I'm all for tougher background checks. Maybe having family members come along to ok the purchase and verify that their son/sibling/husband isn't some stockpiling psycho with revenge as a motive. Yes it's come to that point where mommy and daddy need to sign off already. And yeah it's been like that where a few bad apples make it a hassle for everyone, I get it but that's where we've been.

[rpalumberi]

Criminals and psychos could care less about gun bans of any type and usually obtain their weapons through some form of illegal means. They are almost always the ones who pull triggers and murder people. All gun bans do is deprive law-abiding citizens of their right to protect themselves from vicious criminals. Having a gun of some kind for defense is essential these days in many areas of the country, both rural and urban, as murderous criminals are rarely incarcerated but released to commit more crimes including murdering folks,

agree 100%, not sure why so many otherwise level headed people don't see this - the left wants to defund the police while depriving law-abiding citizens of their 2nd amendment right to protect themselves - there's a reason why its the 2nd amendment, right behind #1 freedom of speech (also under attack under the guise of misinformation, Russian or otherwise) - thank you for speaking out

[Taltarzac725]

agree 100%, not sure why so many otherwise level headed people don't see this - the left wants to defund the police while depriving law-abiding citizens of their 2nd amendment right to protect themselves - there's a reason why its the 2nd amendment, right behind #1 freedom of speech (also under attack under the guise of misinformation, Russian or otherwise) - thank you for speaking out

The 2nd Amendment is about a well regulated militia and not the right of private citizens to have weapons designed for warfare.

[Whitley]

How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

In 2021, 447 homicides reported using a rifle vs 6,012 using a handgun. You want to outlaw certain rifles based on their muzzle velocity? Does a higher muzzle velocity make someone more dead? Rifles have higher muzzle velocities because (this really should not come as a shock) they are used to fire at targets further away. In addition, there are many rifles chambered with ammo that have greater muzzle velocity (i can not believe it has come to this. Ban requests based on muzzle velocity)than an AR15.

[Whitley]

How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

Everytown for Gun Safety is the news now? That is like me saying "How About You Watch The News" and link NRA videos. I'm kind of sure your heart is in the right place, but you may not be knowledgeable enough on the topic.

[Whitley]

The first amendment: are you not aware what been going on here in Fl. Banning certain books, what Disney can say and not say. I'm just saying there are many people out there who have firearms and don't have a clue how to handle them.

Banning books is just terrible. I remember how angry I was when I turned 12 and could not buy Playboy. Stop Book Banning.

[Number 10 GI]

How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

The four times as powerful as a hand gun round is true. True of ALL rifle rounds, not just those from the so-called assault weapons. The 5.56 round used in the AR15 is on the lower end of the spectrum when it comes to wound cavity creation. In many states the .223/5.56 is not legal to use on deer size game due to its relatively low power. The AK rifle round, 7.62 X 39 is comparable to the venerable old 30-30 lever action rifle which is not considered a "high power" round.
Your typical hunting calibers, 308 Winchester, 30-06 Springfield, etc., create devastating wounds. The .223/5.56 rounds in the hunting arena are considered varmint rounds for use on coyote, prairie dogs and other small varmints.

[Number 10 GI]

The first amendment: are you not aware what been going on here in Fl. Banning certain books, what Disney can say and not say. I'm just saying there are many people out there who have firearms and don't have a clue how to handle them.

There are no book bans in Florida. The law prohibits books containing certain information the responsible parents consider inappropriate for children from being in libraries meant for children. Do you think it is acceptable to allow Playboy or Hustler magazines to be in a library for kids? Is their absence from children's libraries not book banning?

[MrFlorida]

Since you like to quote the 2nd amendment of our constitution, perhaps you should read it completely . It also states that " The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" Keep meaning to possess. And bear meaning to carry. This was just up held by the Supreme Court.

[Number 10 GI]

No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.

You need to research the anti-gun organizations. They started out demanding the total prohibition of ownership of firearms by the citizenry. They only changed their message to banning certain "dangerous" firearms because a total ban didn't play well with most Americans. Their goal of total banning of firearms has not changed. A leopard can't change its spots.

[Number 10 GI]

Thanks for providing this for those who "claim" ignorance. Nobody "needs" these types of weapons. And it's not because they "look scary." Unfortunately this is just a little friendly chat site where others like us can simply choose to argue the point back and forth and the info should be pounded into the lawmakers because they either don't seem to get it or choose to ignore it.

I'm all for tougher background checks. Maybe having family members come along to ok the purchase and verify that their son/sibling/husband isn't some stockpiling psycho with revenge as a motive. Yes it's come to that point where mommy and daddy need to sign off already. And yeah it's been like that where a few bad apples make it a hassle for everyone, I get it but that's where we've been.

The same needs to be mandated when it comes to voting in an election. Someone needs to vouch for the capability of the voter to cast an informed vote. Do you think a senile or mentally ill individual has the capability to make an intelligent decision? There needs to be a tougher background check to affirm the person is legally allowed to vote and insure they are who they say they are.

[Number 10 GI]

Weapons of war is scare tactic invented to make a certain firearm sound more menacing than it really is. The English long bow was a devastating weapon on the ancient battlefield where their use often decided the outcome of the battle. Clubs, war hammers, swords, and knives have all been weapons of war. Every type of firearm ever made has been used at one time or another as a weapon of war.

[Taltarzac725]

Weapons of war is scare tactic invented to make a certain firearm sound more menacing than it really is. The English long bow was a devastating weapon on the ancient battlefield where their use often decided the outcome of the battle. Clubs, war hammers, swords, and knives have all been weapons of war. Every type of firearm ever made has been used at one time or another as a weapon of war.

We are talking about weapons used today in the Ukraine-Russian war not about Agincourt. These are assault weapons and many other kinds.


And I kind of doubt that anyone would allow scythes attached to golf cart wheels like the thousands of years they had battles between chariots to go around here in the Villages.

[Taltarzac725]

You need to research the anti-gun organizations. They started out demanding the total prohibition of ownership of firearms by the citizenry. They only changed their message to banning certain "dangerous" firearms because a total ban didn't play well with most Americans. Their goal of total banning of firearms has not changed. A leopard can't change its spots.

I kind of think that is a false flag so to speak. In the sense that maybe that was the case when they started but they saw how impractical that would be.

[Taltarzac725]

The same needs to be mandated when it comes to voting in an election. Someone needs to vouch for the capability of the voter to cast an informed vote. Do you think a senile or mentally ill individual has the capability to make an intelligent decision? There needs to be a tougher background check to affirm the person is legally allowed to vote and insure they are who they say they are.

We are a democracy. Idiots get to vote. There have been all kinds of abuses trying to keep people away from voting polls in US history. Usually people who were racially
and /or religiously different from those who controlled who could vote.

[Whitley]

We are talking about weapons used today in the Ukraine-Russian war not about Agincourt. These are assault weapons and many other kinds.


And I kind of doubt that anyone would allow scythes attached to golf cart wheels like the thousands of years they had battles between chariots to go around here in the Villages.

But we are not talking about weapons used in Ukraines war. Those weapons are Assault Weapons, they have the ability to fire single shot, burst of three shots, and full automatic. Hold the trigger and all thirty rounds go.

[manaboutown]

Unless you are an active duty soldier, you should be deprived from owning an AK rifle. Those weapons are for obliterating an enemy in war. Pretty sure we can live without them on our US streets. “Well regulated militia “ not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.

These statements are nothing but inane nonsense.

[Taltarzac725]

These statements are nothing but inane nonsense.

That is your opinion.

[Taltarzac725]

But we are not talking about weapons used in Ukraines war. Those weapons are Assault Weapons, they have the ability to fire single shot, burst of three shots, and full automatic. Hold the trigger and all thirty rounds go.

Look up the weapons used in the Ukraine-Russian war.

List of Russo-Ukrainian War military equipment - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russo-Ukrainian_War_military_equipment)

[jimjamuser]

Very funny about the land mines and all that!

I agree about watching for signs of mental illness. That could potentially have stopped several tragic multiple shootings such as in some schools and Las Vegas as well as some bombings such as those of the Unabomber, at the Boston Marathon and in Oklahoma City although it might be difficult to effectively implement except in a police state such as Cuba, China, Russia, Venezuela and the like.

I would definitely bring back and enforce the death penalty for first degree murder and multiple shootings.
Life in Prison for Fentanyl pushers and producers. The US loses 100 thousand citizens each year to Fentanyl. That is like the loss in a World WAR.

[Whitley]

Look up the weapons used in the Ukraine-Russian war.

List of Russo-Ukrainian War military equipment - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russo-Ukrainian_War_military_equipment)

OK, I looked them up. What is that supposed to accomplish? I really think you simply do not understand what you are speaking of. For instance, I did not see an AR15 there? So then you are OK with AR15's because they are not used in Ukraine? If we want to be picky, they are using guns in Ukraine from the early 1900's. The list shows that a bolt action rifle from 1891 is being used in the Russia-Ukraine war. Outlaw it? Are you suggesting all guns being used in Ukraine should be illegal? Even the ones that are over 100 years old? Based on what? Because they are used in Ukraine. It is a nonsensical point of view. You have advocated making guns illegal if 1) they are being used in ukraine and 2) their muzzle velocity if greater than a handgun. That just about covers every rifle after Black Powder.

[jimjamuser]

Of course not, they are not vigilantes. They own guns to protect themselves, their families and at times others from vicious armed thugs who carjack, rob, burglarize and commit other crimes, some of which are unspeakable.
There are so many mass violence incidents that it is hard to keep track of them. And I would predict that it is going to keep INCREASING. The one that scalded me was in Texas by a man (illegal) that had been DEPORTED 4 times. And he came back 4 times, obviously. If someone is deported it means that a country does NOT want him in that Country. For coming back from deportation a judge should give him 5 years in prison. So, for him to keep coming g back, that SHOULD take 20 years out of his life.
.......Personally, if I am going to be shot dead by some nutcase, I would MUCH prefer that I was shot by a REAL US CITIZEN nutcase, not an illegal. That would be TOO GREAT of an INSULT!!!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

Of course not, they are not vigilantes. They own guns to protect themselves, their families and at times others from vicious armed thugs who carjack, rob, burglarize and commit other crimes, some of which are unspeakable.
It seems to me that when bad guys have guns and good guys have guns, that the bad guys STILL have a BIG advantage over the good guys. Just like in basketball or football, the OFFENSE has the advantage over the defense because the offense (bad guys) control the situation........like when and where they are going to STRIKE. THE DEFENSE (good guys) is always REACTING to the offense. So, they're often a few steps behind.
......When a bad guy commits a crime, it is called an offense. Maybe a coincidence, but just like a football team's offense, the bad guys call the plays and know WHEN the ball is snapped.
.......That's why the bad guys have the EDGE. So, it does NOT matter if the good guys have lots of guns like in the US or FEWER guns like in England or Australia.

[Taltarzac725]

Many of these mass shooters and/or killers look to be mentally ill and are trying to get shot by law enforcement. So the death penalty would not be much of a deterrent as brought up by another poster.

I recall a deranged woman in Reno, Nevada running down people in her car. That made news for a long time. Sadly these events have become almost a daily occurrence. Priscilla Ford - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priscilla_Ford)

Victims identified in deadly car ramming near downtown Reno homeless shelter | KRNV (https://mynews4.com/news/local/victims-identified-in-deadly-crash-near-downtown-reno-homeless-shelter) And I had not even heard of this of man running down pedestrians last month in Reno, Nevada.

Turner was arrested on one count of open murder and two counts of attempted murder after telling police he drove into the pedestrians on purpose.

[jimjamuser]

So true!! Just like the man that used his vehicle as a weapon and ran over all those elderly people and children at the Wisconsin Christmas parade!! No gun involved but his car was his weapon. I’m from chicago where there are mass shootings every week. The majority of those guns are bought illegally off the street from gangs and brought in by cartel
It seems like the US is at WAR with ITSELf. It seems that we need NEW TOOLS against drugs, gangs, and cartels. I suggested patrolling DRONES overhead around The Villages..........and people FREAKED OUT........saying that something like that would be too "Big Brother" and would somehow hurt the independent individuality of the average Village resident. The problem is that the THREAT of drugs, gangs, and cartels is so MUCH of a greater PROBLEM that a few Village residents getting their feelings hurt. They are going to be PHYSICALLY hurt if the Villages does NOT hire enough POLICE to keep things here safe.
.......So, that is why new technology involving stationary cameras and cameras on DRONES are needed to keep the "BAD GUYS" at bay.

[Cobullymom]

There are no book bans in Florida. The law prohibits books containing certain information the responsible parents consider inappropriate for children from being in libraries meant for children. Do you think it is acceptable to allow Playboy or Hustler magazines to be in a library for kids? Is their absence from children's libraries not book banning?

They love throwing out propaganda, book bans, don't say gay, assault rifles, clueless nonsense repeated over and over

[Taltarzac725]

They love throwing out propaganda, book bans, don't say gay, assault rifles, clueless nonsense repeated over and over

Banning books in libraries is ridiculous. The parents can control to a certain extent which books they read at home by not getting those books from a library. And once you tell a teen they cannot do something that usually ends in them doing just that. Especially when the arts are concerned. Elvis for instance and his music for another group of teens.

[TeresaE]

There are no books banned in Florida. You can go buy whatever you want and read it. There are books and learning materials that are not allowed in our public schools in Florida. See the difference?

[Cybersprings]

No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.

and that is LIE.

Joe Biden Says 9mm Bullet 'Blows The Lung Out of The Body' (https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-says-9mm-bullet-blows-lung-out-body-1711551)

[Cybersprings]

deleted

[MrFlorida]

No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.

I have a bridge to sell you....

[Whitley]

Banning books in libraries is ridiculous. The parents can control to a certain extent which books they read at home by not getting those books from a library. And once you tell a teen they cannot do something that usually ends in them doing just that. Especially when the arts are concerned. Elvis for instance and his music for another group of teens.

I agree, in a Public Library. I believe the books were pulled from the elementary school library.

[Wondering]

Live updates: Atlanta Midtown shooting news (https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/atlanta-midtown-shooting/index.html)

I recall writing a top lawyer in San Francisco at a law firm which had just had a shooting inside and he had written back to me that they did not have the resources to do anything about addressing the needs of survivors/victims of these kind of crimes. One of which had just happened at his law firm.

My concern in writing the lawyer was access to practical materials for survivors/victims of crimes in SF Bay Area law libraries and other kinds of libraries.

But I do think that law firm was a major driver towards a assault weapons ban that went into effect. 101 California Street shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_California_Street_shooting)

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_Enforcement_Act)
What society needs are more guns - not! Isn't it "great" that we live in Florida with open carry and doing away with concealed weapons permits. Is this really the State of freedom? Shouldn't we be free from gun violence! How about banning books and doing away with the teaching of true, factual history! Feels like going down a slippery slope, like Germany in the 1930's.

[NoMoSno]

What society needs are more guns - not! Isn't it "great" that we live in Florida with open carry and doing away with concealed weapons permits. Is this really the State of freedom? Shouldn't we be free from gun violence! How about banning books and doing away with the teaching of true, factual history! Feels like going down a slippery slope, like Germany in the 1930's.
There is no open carry in FL.

[Number 10 GI]

What society needs are more guns - not! Isn't it "great" that we live in Florida with open carry and doing away with concealed weapons permits. Is this really the State of freedom? Shouldn't we be free from gun violence! How about banning books and doing away with the teaching of true, factual history! Feels like going down a slippery slope, like Germany in the 1930's.

In the 1930's the NAZI government banned private ownership of firearms. Notice how well that worked out for the Jewish population.

[Whitley]

It seems like the US is at WAR with ITSELf. It seems that we need NEW TOOLS against drugs, gangs, and cartels. I suggested patrolling DRONES overhead around The Villages..........and people FREAKED OUT........saying that something like that would be too "Big Brother" and would somehow hurt the independent individuality of The

We already have entered the era of government surveillance. Walking down Manhattan streets you are one multiple cameras at any one time, some with facial recognition. There are sniffers inside corner posts checking for explosives or radioactive materials as you pass. I have an office on a small barrier island on the west coast of Fl.. At both ends there are license plate readers. If the driver has anything from a warrant to an unpaid ticket, it alerts the island police. Easy Pass: twenty years ago (turn of the century) a man was missing in NY. He left the office but never returned home to his wife in Bergen County NJ. Police were able to track him down using the easy pass; and not just at toll booths but through readers placed intermittently along roadways. As for being at war with itself, we are not being honest with ourselves. The countries most cited by the right and the left as safe, clean, caring for its population, are homogenous countries (Japan the Nordic Countries). Perhaps diversity as it is practiced in 2023 is not a strength.

[Taltarzac725]

There are no books banned in Florida. You can go buy whatever you want and read it. There are books and learning materials that are not allowed in our public schools in Florida. See the difference?

"Not allowed in public schools" usually means also in public school libraries. Which means a book ban.

[Taltarzac725]

and that is LIE.

Joe Biden Says 9mm Bullet 'Blows The Lung Out of The Body' (https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-says-9mm-bullet-blows-lung-out-body-1711551)

Actually read the article.

[Taltarzac725]

In the 1930's the NAZI government banned private ownership of firearms. Notice how well that worked out for the Jewish population.

How is anyone going to clear out all the guns in the US? Cannot be done in any way, shape or form!

Let's get real here. Weapons designed for battlefields are being used to attack parades, movie theater audiences, schools, churches, banks, work locations, and other places here in the United States. There should be fewer ways for these to be purchased. There have been more shootings per day in the US in 2023 as there are days so far.

[Number 10 GI]

How is anyone going to clear out all the guns in the US? Cannot be done in any way, shape or form!

Let's get real here. Weapons designed for battlefields are being used to attack parades, movie theater audiences, schools, churches, banks, work locations, and other places here in the United States. There should be fewer ways for these to be purchased. There have been more shootings per day in the US in 2023 as there are days so far.

I've said this many times before, we have a VIOLENCE problem in this country. Until we recognize that and address the problem nothing is going to change. If a person is intent on committing violent acts and a gun isn't available they will find another way to cause mayhem. Does a kitchen pressure cooker bomb filled with black powder taken from fireworks ring a bell? How about using a motor vehicle to mow down people on the street, does that ring a bell? How come there isn't a movement to control who can and can't purchase a pressure cooker or a motor vehicle? The tool isn't the problem, violent people are the problem.

[Haggar]

There are MANY instances where someone protected their own life and lives of others with a licensed weapon.

What is the basis for that statement? How many times has that happened? Many? - it happens occasionally I suppose but I can't really recall reading about it more than a few times in my lifetime.

I did read recently about the youth who was shot because he knocked on the wrong door.

We're thought about having a gun in the house. However don't really seeing us being the winner in a shoot-out.

[manaboutown]

What is the basis for that statement? How many times has that happened? Many? - it happens occasionally I suppose but I can't really recall reading about it more than a few times in my lifetime.

I did read recently about the youth who was shot because he knocked on the wrong door.

We're thought about having a gun in the house. However don't really seeing us being the winner in a shoot-out.

It happens all the time. About a week ago a tenant with brain damage for whom a local charity rents a unit at a self storage facility in Albuquerque, NM threatened the female site manager with a baseball bat and a knife. She immediately called 911 but he continued to threaten her. She finally pulled out a gun to defend herself and he took off. It took the city police 40 minutes to get there. He could/would have beat her to death and/or sliced her up and scrammed long before any cops arrived. Good thing she had the gun in her desk drawer!

[Cybersprings]

I compiled a list of lies spouted (intentionally or out of ignorance) by certain individuals in this short thread for anyone who is following:
1. AK rifles “are for obliterating an enemy in war.” (Only single-fire AK’s are legal to possess. No army would intentionally go to war with single-fire weapons if they had a choice. AK’s used in war are 3-shot burst and automatic capable.)
2. The 2nd amendment was intended to apply to people in a well-regulated militia, “not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.” And The 2nd Amendment is about a well regulated militia and not the right of private citizens to have weapons designed for warfare.
3. The NRA was “historically about gun control.” (deleted text copied from an article to avoid getting TOTV in trouble)
4. “The Founding Fathers had read a lot of English history and did not want private armies around that would march on Parliament.” The founding fathers had just fought a war against tyranny and wanted the people to have the power to prevent that from re-occurring. They also wanted to preclude a standing national army, so the people would be allowed to own weapons of war in order to fight when necessary. The thought of having to spell out the right of people to own weapons to protect themselves would have been ridiculous to them. They would be mortified that we actually have to fight for the right to protect ourselves today.
5. “No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.” Quite a few people are suggesting that, and many are suggesting banning all but 22s so that no one can accuse them of suggesting the banning of all guns.
6. Florida is banning books and dictating what Disney can and cannot say. Not one book has been banned. Certain books are not allowed in school libraries (just like many books and magazines have never been allowed in school libraries). Disney is allowed to say what they want and when they want. But if you are going to attack the state government and spout lies about it, then do not expect to keep the extra special treatment you have received for decades.
7. “Assault weapons are generally high-powered semiautomatic firearms where each round has up to four times the muzzle velocity of a handgun round. This means that each round from an assault weapon inflicts greater damage to the human body than a round from a typical handgun. Assault weapons are generally designed to fire rounds at a greater rate than other firearms, and when combined with high-capacity magazines, they enable a shooter to fire more rounds over a short period.”
a. (deleted text copied from an article to avoid getting TOTV in trouble)
b. (deleted text copied from an article to avoid getting TOTV in trouble)
c. A magazine takes a couple of seconds at most to change. So higher capacity magazines are not the problem.
8. “We are talking about weapons used today in the Ukraine-Russian war not about Agincourt. These are assault weapons and many other kinds.” The weapons generally used in Ukraine or any other war are not the same as AR and LEGAL AK rifles. Knives are used in war. Does that make knives weapons of war? Or only high-powered knives?
9. “We live in Florida with open carry” No explanation required.
10. “How about banning books and doing away with the teaching of true, factual history! Feels like going down a slippery slope, like Germany in the 1930's”. Again, no books banned and no doing away with teaching of true, factual history.
11. "Not allowed in public schools" usually means also in public school libraries. Which means a book ban. No. You do not get to redefine terms. Not allowed in public schools means not allowed (or we can allow banned) in public schools which includes the library. Book banning means you do not have the right to purchase or own the book, you know, kind of like what you are trying to do with guns. Objecting to playboy not being allowed in schools are you, because it reminds you of Nazi Germany????

[JMintzer]

And yet - none of these law-abiding citizens with a generously-written right to carry a handgun openly, used their lawfully-carried gun to stop the shooter. In fact, the shooter is still running around free.

So much for having a gun for defense.

What are you talking about?

Do you know for a fact that any of the victims in Atlanta were, themselves, carrying a weapon?

If not, your point is invalid. Well, actually it's invalid either way...

[Taltarzac725]

I compiled a list of lies spouted (intentionally or out of ignorance) by certain individuals in this short thread for anyone who is following:
1. AK rifles “are for obliterating an enemy in war.” (Only single-fire AK’s are legal to possess. No army would intentionally go to war with single-fire weapons if they had a choice. AK’s used in war are 3-shot burst and automatic capable.)
2. The 2nd amendment was intended to apply to people in a well-regulated militia, “not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.” And The 2nd Amendment is about a well regulated militia and not the right of private citizens to have weapons designed for warfare.
3. The NRA was “historically about gun control.” “William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate formed the National Rifle Association in 1871. The primary goal of the association would be to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis." Since then, the NRA has been the premier firearms education organization in the world. “ “A description of the background and development of the NRA notes NRA support for moderate measures of gun control in the 1950's and the 1960's; however, in the 1970's, the NRA began to notice that legislation which it had earlier supported had failed to curb crime or impair criminal access to firearms, while it was adversely affecting the firearms freedoms of the law-abiding citizen.”
4. “The Founding Fathers had read a lot of English history and did not want private armies around that would march on Parliament.” The founding fathers had just fought a war against tyranny and wanted the people to have the power to prevent that from re-occurring. They also wanted to preclude a standing national army, so the people would be allowed to own weapons of war in order to fight when necessary. The thought of having to spell out the right of people to own weapons to protect themselves would have been ridiculous to them. They would be mortified that we actually have to fight for the right to protect ourselves today.
5. “No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.” Quite a few people are suggesting that, and many are suggesting banning all but 22s so that no one can accuse them of suggesting the banning of all guns.
6. Florida is banning books and dictating what Disney can and cannot say. Not one book has been banned. Certain books are not allowed in school libraries (just like many books and magazines have never been allowed in school libraries). Disney is allowed to say what they want and when they want. But if you are going to attack the state government and spout lies about it, then do not expect to keep the extra special treatment you have received for decades.
7. “Assault weapons are generally high-powered semiautomatic firearms where each round has up to four times the muzzle velocity of a handgun round. This means that each round from an assault weapon inflicts greater damage to the human body than a round from a typical handgun. Assault weapons are generally designed to fire rounds at a greater rate than other firearms, and when combined with high-capacity magazines, they enable a shooter to fire more rounds over a short period.”
a. AR-15-style rifles are no more powerful than other hunting rifles of the same caliber and in most cases are chambered in calibers less powerful than common big-game hunting cartridges like the 30-06 Springfield and .300 Win. Mag. The standard AR-15 bullet carries kinetic energy of 1300 foot pounds; a typical hunting rifle bullet has between 2600 and 4000 foot pounds
b. Any rifle has a higher muzzle velocity than almost any handgun round. The longer the barrel the more time the expanding gases have to push against the bullet increasing its speed. The AR15 and AK do not have higher muzzle velocities than typical hunting rifles.
c. A magazine takes a couple of seconds at most to change. So higher capacity magazines are not the problem.
8. “We are talking about weapons used today in the Ukraine-Russian war not about Agincourt. These are assault weapons and many other kinds.” The weapons generally used in Ukraine or any other war are not the same as AR and LEGAL AK rifles. Knives are used in war. Does that make knives weapons of war? Or only high-powered knives?
9. “We live in Florida with open carry” No explanation required.
10. “How about banning books and doing away with the teaching of true, factual history! Feels like going down a slippery slope, like Germany in the 1930's”. Again, no books banned and no doing away with teaching of true, factual history.
11. "Not allowed in public schools" usually means also in public school libraries. Which means a book ban. No. You do not get to redefine terms. Not allowed in public schools means not allowed (or we can allow banned) in public schools which includes the library. Book banning means you do not have the right to purchase or own the book, you know, kind of like what you are trying to do with guns. Objecting to playboy not being allowed in schools are you, because it reminds you of Nazi Germany????

You make a lot of assertions with little evidence for them.

[JMintzer]

But would the HIPPA law re privacy prevent the release of a medical history?

And there lies the problem. We have contradictory laws.

Laws preventing the release of medical information (HIPAA, not HIPPA), and laws wanting that very information to be reported (Red Flag Laws)...

[JMintzer]

Unless you are an active duty soldier, you should be deprived from owning an AK rifle. Those weapons are for obliterating an enemy in war. Pretty sure we can live without them on our US streets. “Well regulated militia “ not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

The "well regulated militia" you speak of owned cannons and gunships. Plus, their rifles were the "weapons of war" at the time...

[JMintzer]

Hi. I am not saying this in anyway to insult you. The weapon most often mentioned with an "assault rifle" gun ban is an armalite 15 AR15). It is in no way the most powerful weapon (I would not use one hunting boar). The reason most anti first amendment people cite this rifle is because it looks scary. Can you please let me know what you mean when you say a weapon meant for a battlefield. What constitutes an assault rifle for you? Maybe we can agree if we make clear the definitions.

The problem is, they can't...

[JMintzer]

I do own a handgun, so I'm not against firearm ownership. But I am a true believer that everyone who owns a firearm should have training.

A system similar to getting a driver's license. Just as in the types of vehicles you drive, a car, motorcycle, truck. You do the same with firearms, hunting, handgun and assault weapon. The NRA can choose the calcification and do the training, once you pass on the type of firearms you qualify for you can purchase that type of firearm and the ammunition. while this is going on there could be a full background check.

Also there has to be training on how to safely to store your firearm. This business of leaving a firearm in your glove compartment in your car parked on the street overnight is a no, no. There has to be some common sense involved. Which means there has to be responsibility of being an owner. Which would mean if you were smart you would get some type of insurance to protect yourself.

I also believe that the industry should be able to come up with a home protective firearm that will stop an intruder that is easy to handle and will not take down you front door and the neighbor's dog. You don't have to kill an intruder; you just have to stop them in their tracks.

1: You cannot legislate "common sense"...

2: Driving a car is not a "constitutionally protected right". So, to compare that to firearm ownership is folly...

3: As to your last paragraph... Wut? Do you know anything about firearms?

[Cybersprings]

You make a lot of assertions with little evidence for them.

Just like every post you have made. Like you have posted, look it up. Please indicate 1 thing that I said that was incorrect, and I will gladly provide the proof/reference. I pointed out many things that you said that were incorrect.

[manaboutown]

I compiled a list of lies spouted (intentionally or out of ignorance) by certain individuals in this short thread for anyone who is following:
1. AK rifles “are for obliterating an enemy in war.” (Only single-fire AK’s are legal to possess. No army would intentionally go to war with single-fire weapons if they had a choice. AK’s used in war are 3-shot burst and automatic capable.)
2. The 2nd amendment was intended to apply to people in a well-regulated militia, “not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.” And The 2nd Amendment is about a well regulated militia and not the right of private citizens to have weapons designed for warfare.
3. The NRA was “historically about gun control.” “William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate formed the National Rifle Association in 1871. The primary goal of the association would be to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis." Since then, the NRA has been the premier firearms education organization in the world. “ “A description of the background and development of the NRA notes NRA support for moderate measures of gun control in the 1950's and the 1960's; however, in the 1970's, the NRA began to notice that legislation which it had earlier supported had failed to curb crime or impair criminal access to firearms, while it was adversely affecting the firearms freedoms of the law-abiding citizen.”
4. “The Founding Fathers had read a lot of English history and did not want private armies around that would march on Parliament.” The founding fathers had just fought a war against tyranny and wanted the people to have the power to prevent that from re-occurring. They also wanted to preclude a standing national army, so the people would be allowed to own weapons of war in order to fight when necessary. The thought of having to spell out the right of people to own weapons to protect themselves would have been ridiculous to them. They would be mortified that we actually have to fight for the right to protect ourselves today.
5. “No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.” Quite a few people are suggesting that, and many are suggesting banning all but 22s so that no one can accuse them of suggesting the banning of all guns.
6. Florida is banning books and dictating what Disney can and cannot say. Not one book has been banned. Certain books are not allowed in school libraries (just like many books and magazines have never been allowed in school libraries). Disney is allowed to say what they want and when they want. But if you are going to attack the state government and spout lies about it, then do not expect to keep the extra special treatment you have received for decades.
7. “Assault weapons are generally high-powered semiautomatic firearms where each round has up to four times the muzzle velocity of a handgun round. This means that each round from an assault weapon inflicts greater damage to the human body than a round from a typical handgun. Assault weapons are generally designed to fire rounds at a greater rate than other firearms, and when combined with high-capacity magazines, they enable a shooter to fire more rounds over a short period.”
a. AR-15-style rifles are no more powerful than other hunting rifles of the same caliber and in most cases are chambered in calibers less powerful than common big-game hunting cartridges like the 30-06 Springfield and .300 Win. Mag. The standard AR-15 bullet carries kinetic energy of 1300 foot pounds; a typical hunting rifle bullet has between 2600 and 4000 foot pounds
b. Any rifle has a higher muzzle velocity than almost any handgun round. The longer the barrel the more time the expanding gases have to push against the bullet increasing its speed. The AR15 and AK do not have higher muzzle velocities than typical hunting rifles.
c. A magazine takes a couple of seconds at most to change. So higher capacity magazines are not the problem.
8. “We are talking about weapons used today in the Ukraine-Russian war not about Agincourt. These are assault weapons and many other kinds.” The weapons generally used in Ukraine or any other war are not the same as AR and LEGAL AK rifles. Knives are used in war. Does that make knives weapons of war? Or only high-powered knives?
9. “We live in Florida with open carry” No explanation required.
10. “How about banning books and doing away with the teaching of true, factual history! Feels like going down a slippery slope, like Germany in the 1930's”. Again, no books banned and no doing away with teaching of true, factual history.
11. "Not allowed in public schools" usually means also in public school libraries. Which means a book ban. No. You do not get to redefine terms. Not allowed in public schools means not allowed (or we can allow banned) in public schools which includes the library. Book banning means you do not have the right to purchase or own the book, you know, kind of like what you are trying to do with guns. Objecting to playboy not being allowed in schools are you, because it reminds you of Nazi Germany????

Thank you for a listing the true actual facts!

[JMintzer]

It is not accurate to compare a legal, semi-automatic weapon that can be purchased in most gun stores to a fully automatic weapon that soldiers use in war, and that are not sold in gun stores. That is an apples to oranges comparison. They are two entirely different weapons.

Why are you bringing facts into this emotional argument?

[JMintzer]

How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

Everytown? Yeah, there's no bias there...

[Johnsocat]

And yet - none of these law-abiding citizens with a generously-written right to carry a handgun openly, used their lawfully-carried gun to stop the shooter. In fact, the shooter is still running around free.

So much for having a gun for defense.

Personal carry citizens typically carry to protect themselves and their families.
It's a shame that none of the victims here had the foresight to protect themselves by carrying a gun.
I suspect that may have been their last regret.

[JMintzer]

Forgotten words: ‘A well regulated Militia’ | The Hill (https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/3837733-forgotten-words-a-well-regulated-militia/)

I would bet that the Founding Fathers had read a lot of English history and did not want private armies around that would march on Parliament. That is not what the 2nd Amendment was about back then but was about a "well regulated militia".

And they probably know about Roman History-- Year of the Four Emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors#:~:text=The%20Year%20of% 20the%20Four,dynasty%2C%20to%20the%20Flavian%20dyn asty).

They had just came out of a bloody war against a tyrannical government and they wanted to make sure that would not have to happen again...

So, yeah, that's exactly what they wanted...

[JMintzer]

No one is suggesting banning of all guns. That is a straw man argument.

No, just guns that "look scary"...

[JMintzer]

The first amendment: are you not aware what been going on here in Fl. Banning certain books, what Disney can say and not say. I'm just saying there are many people out there who have firearms and don't have a clue how to handle them.

Wrong and wrong...

They are simply making sure that the books are "age appropriate". Nothing is "banned"...

And pray tell, what has Disney been banned from saying?

[JMintzer]

Thanks for providing this for those who "claim" ignorance. Nobody "needs" these types of weapons. And it's not because they "look scary." Unfortunately this is just a little friendly chat site where others like us can simply choose to argue the point back and forth and the info should be pounded into the lawmakers because they either don't seem to get it or choose to ignore it.

I'm all for tougher background checks. Maybe having family members come along to ok the purchase and verify that their son/sibling/husband isn't some stockpiling psycho with revenge as a motive. Yes it's come to that point where mommy and daddy need to sign off already. And yeah it's been like that where a few bad apples make it a hassle for everyone, I get it but that's where we've been.

I notice you left out "trans daughter"...

At what age do "mommy and daddy" no longer have to sign off on a gun purchase?

[JMintzer]

The 2nd Amendment is about a well regulated militia and not the right of private citizens to have weapons designed for warfare.

Wrong again. The "well regulated militia" at the time WAS "The People"...

You know, the private citizens...

[JMintzer]

Banning books is just terrible. I remember how angry I was when I turned 12 and could not buy Playboy. Stop Book Banning.

Yeah, we had to steal them from Dad's sock drawer...

[JMintzer]

We are talking about weapons used today in the Ukraine-Russian war not about Agincourt. These are assault weapons and many other kinds.


Nope. No soldier carries an AR-15 into battle. The AK's that civilians own are not carried into battle, either...

Please educate yourself...

[JMintzer]

Look up the weapons used in the Ukraine-Russian war.

List of Russo-Ukrainian War military equipment - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russo-Ukrainian_War_military_equipment)

Yeah, I don't see an AR-15 on the list. And the AK-47 on the list is the "fully automatic" version that is not the semi-auto that the "average joe" is buying in this country...

Once again, you're comparing apples and kumquats...

[Cybersprings]

Actually read the article.

No. Don't actually read the article which does not address what the president said. Listen to what Biden said for yourself....
"A 9 mm bullet blows the lungs out of the body. So, the idea these high-caliber weapons, there simply is no rationale basis for it, in terms of self-protection, hunting..."

He was suggesting banning 9mm handguns. Try going for the truth, not with how people such as Newsweek try to spin the truth. There were lots of articles on that quote and him suggesting to ban handguns (other than 22), but I wanted to post the left leaning site with the actual video of him saying it, so that you would hopefully listen to his words. It appears my attempt at getting you to acknowledge the truth have failed again.

[Taltarzac725]

Florida at Center of Debate as School Book Bans Surge Nationally - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/22/books/book-ban-florida.html)

Just Google and you can find a great deal of materials backed me up. I do know something about book bans as I have a MA in Librarianship and have worked in a number of different libraries of all kinds-- academic, law, and public ones.

[Taltarzac725]

What Does the 2nd Amendment Say? — Civics 101: A Podcast (https://www.civics101podcast.org/civics-101-episodes/2ndamendment?gad=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMItbXwkcje_gIVYRtlCh3UgQeaEAAYASAA EgJ7svD_BwE)

I found this very interesting.

Alexandra Filindra: In the Civil War, the militia showed how badly trained there were. There were constantly brawling, and they weren't working with each other from different states because they didn't have any contact. They had no organizational training, [00:12:30] and they were drunk.

Nick Capodice: And a group of officers from the New York State militia who saw how terribly the militia had performed in the Civil War, devoted themselves to the task of training them, specifically training them how to shoot better records from the union estimated that its troops fired about 1000 rifle shots for each Confederate soldier hit.

Hannah McCarthy: So they weren't just ineffective. They were also, I would assume, costing a lot of money.

[Taltarzac725]

Why We Can't Ignore the "Militia" Clause of the Second Amendment | Mises Wire (https://mises.org/wire/why-we-cant-ignore-militia-clause-second-amendment?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI753Mw8ne_gIVmgOzAB0bNA kKEAAYAiAAEgIHHPD_BwE)

Also very interesting.

Fearful that a large federal military could be used to destroy the freedoms of the states themselves, Anti-Federalists and other Americans fearful of centralized power in the US government designed the Second Amendment accordingly. It was designed to guarantee that the states would be free to raise and train their own militias as a defense against federal power, and as a means of keeping a defensive military force available to Americans while remaining outside the direct control of the federal government.

This is about having a well trained well equipped state militia. Which we do in the states. They are called National Guards for various states.

NV Nat'l Guard Home (https://nvng.nv.gov/)

Air National Guard - U.S. Air Force (https://www.airforce.com/ways-to-serve/air-national-guard?&&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIh4eBoMve_gIV1RRlCh0wwAijEAAYASAA EgLVLfD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds)

[Cybersprings]

Florida at Center of Debate as School Book Bans Surge Nationally - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/22/books/book-ban-florida.html)

Just Google and you can find a great deal of materials backed me up. I do know something about book bans as I have a MA in Librarianship and have worked in a number of different libraries of all kinds-- academic, law, and public ones.

I couldn't read the NYT article without paying, and that definitely wasn't going to happen.

I guess our disagreement is based on different definition of terms, exacerbated by people who compare books being banned in schools with Nazi Germany.

Books banned by Nazi Germany were burned and not allowed to be owned. Books banned in Florida (NOT BY STATE OF FLORIDA, but by local school districts) are banned only from public schools while parents and others are allowed to own them and provide them to their children if they so desire. Major difference.

There are many cases that uphold that banning books in schools violates the first amendment. The only Supreme Court case I could find was a 4-4 split. So, that cannot be considered settled law.

But, I would like you to go on record as supporting Playboy, Penthouse, and Guns and Ammo, or the Shades of Gray series in Public schools because the children have a first amendment right to them. If you do support that, we know where you stand. If you don't support that, we know that you are a hypcrite.

[Whitley]

"Not allowed in public schools" usually means also in public school libraries. Which means a book ban.

So you believe ALL books should be allowed in public elementary schools? I want to be sure I understand.

[Taltarzac725]

I couldn't read the NYT article without paying, and that definitely wasn't going to happen.

I guess our disagreement is based on different definition of terms, exacerbated by people who compare books being banned in schools with Nazi Germany.

Books banned by Nazi Germany were burned and not allowed to be owned. Books banned in Florida (NOT BY STATE OF FLORIDA, but by local school districts) are banned only from public schools while parents and others are allowed to own them and provide them to their children if they so desire. Major difference.

There are many cases that uphold that banning books in schools violates the first amendment. The only Supreme Court case I could find was a 4-4 split. So, that cannot be considered settled law.

But, I would like you to go on record as supporting Playboy, Penthouse, and Guns and Ammo, or the Shades of Gray series in Public schools because the children have a first amendment right to them. If you do support that, we know where you stand. If you don't support that, we know that you are a hypcrite.

What does Nazi Germany have to do with the US in 2023? That was a totalitarian state under the control of a madman-- Adolf Hitler.

[Whitley]

What society needs are more guns - not! Isn't it "great" that we live in Florida with open carry and doing away with concealed weapons permits. Is this really the State of freedom? Shouldn't we be free from gun violence! How about banning books and doing away with the teaching of true, factual history! Feels like going down a slippery slope, like Germany in the 1930's.

And who would decide "True Factual History"? Exactly what true factual history is being hidden?

[Taltarzac725]

The needs of the community are part of library collection development. Those are usually the job of someone with a lot of experience assessing how well certain materials are for that library.


School librarians would also take that approach. What is good for the community as far as books included. They should not be involved in schemes to get voters for so and do by making them players in a shell game.

[Whitley]

What is the basis for that statement? How many times has that happened? Many? - it happens occasionally I suppose but I can't really recall reading about it more than a few times in my lifetime.

I did read recently about the youth who was shot because he knocked on the wrong door.

We're thought about having a gun in the house. However don't really seeing us being the winner in a shoot-out.

The best estimates are that guns are used to deter or thwart crime between 500,000 and 2.8 million times per year, but the more likely answer is probably somewhere in the middle. A 2021 survey2 estimated that guns are used 1.67 million times per year in self defense in the United States.

Now if you decide not to have a gun in your home to defend your loved ones and self, that is fine. Your choice. I would propose your chances of defending yourselves from a violent home invasion are better with a gun then without, but no one should tell you what is right for you. That would be wrong.

[Cybersprings]

Why We Can't Ignore the "Militia" Clause of the Second Amendment | Mises Wire (https://mises.org/wire/why-we-cant-ignore-militia-clause-second-amendment?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI753Mw8ne_gIVmgOzAB0bNA kKEAAYAiAAEgIHHPD_BwE)

Also very interesting.

This is about having a well trained well equipped state militia. Which we do in the states. They are called National Guards for various states.



"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

You are not allowed to re-write this just because you want to. It does not say the right of states to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

It did not enumerate the right for states but for the people. It was trying to prevent a standing national army and to protect the rights of the states from tyrannical national government. And to do this it enumerated the right for the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. It was not talking about personal protection (from home invaders and such) and hunting as that was assumed to be so given that it did not even need to be mentioned.

Just like the 1st amendment did not specify free speech using the internet, the second amendment did not specify which arms were considered acceptable.

[Cybersprings]

The needs of the community are part of library collection development. Those are usually the job of someone with a lot of experience assessing how well certain materials are for that library.


School librarians would also take that approach. What is good for the community as far as books included. They should not be involved in schemes to get voters for so and do by making them players in a shell game.

So a school librarian should make the decision for what should be included in the library..... Based on what? the individual beliefs of that person overrides the beliefs of the community? If the librarian selects one book and not another, that is just as surely book banning as if the community made the decision. Surely this was not intended to be a serious comment. If

[Cybersprings]

What does Nazi Germany have to do with the US in 2023? That was a totalitarian state under the control of a madman-- Adolf Hitler.

Exactly my point. But, that is the comparison made in this thread by multiple people. Glad we can agree on one point...it is absolutely rediculous to compare what is happening in FL to Nazi Germany.

[Taltarzac725]

Exactly my point. But, that is the comparison made in this thread by multiple people. Glad we can agree on one point...it is absolutely rediculous to compare what is happening in FL to Nazi Germany.

What I happening in Florida is just Woke shenanigans mainly by a man in political office.

[Taltarzac725]

So a school librarian should make the decision for what should be included in the library..... Based on what? the individual beliefs of that person overrides the beliefs of the community? If the librarian selects one book and not another, that is just as surely book banning as if the community made the decision. Surely this was not intended to be a serious comment. If

It is not a personal decision but a professional one based on what other librarians in other school libraries are doing for their communities. They usually will keep such books in their libraries. I mean the ones some parents do not want their kids having access to but it is not up to a small group of parents but is based on long term professional practices.

[Cybersprings]

What I happening in Florida is just Woke shenanigans mainly by a man in political office.

This is hilarious. Some posters using terms when they apparently don't even know what they mean. And so unspecific as to not even make a real point. I'll just have to let this one clearly reflect upon the poster.

[Whitley]

Florida at Center of Debate as School Book Bans Surge Nationally - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/22/books/book-ban-florida.html)

Just Google and you can find a great deal of materials backed me up. I do know something about book bans as I have a MA in Librarianship and have worked in a number of different libraries of all kinds-- academic, law, and public ones.

Do you honestly not recognize the difference between certain books not being in an elementary school library and a book ban like nazi germany (your comparison)? I am beginning to think a certain group are not interested in facts.

[Taltarzac725]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

You are not allowed to re-write this just because you want to. It does not say the right of states to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

It did not enumerate the right for states but for the people. It was trying to prevent a standing national army and to protect the rights of the states from tyrannical national government. And to do this it enumerated the right for the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. It was not talking about personal protection (from home invaders and such) and hunting as that was assumed to be so given that it did not even need to be mentioned.

Just like the 1st amendment did not specify free speech using the internet, the second amendment did not specify which arms were considered acceptable.

You did not even bother reading the discussion which is about what the Founding Fathers meant by the 2nd Amendment which was not about individual rights but about a well regulated militia.

[JMintzer]

Banning books in libraries is ridiculous. The parents can control to a certain extent which books they read at home by not getting those books from a library. And once you tell a teen they cannot do something that usually ends in them doing just that. Especially when the arts are concerned. Elvis for instance and his music for another group of teens.

Those "banned" books are not "banned" for teens. Only for young children...

[Whitley]

The needs of the community are part of library collection development. Those are usually the job of someone with a lot of experience assessing how well certain materials are for that library.


School librarians would also take that approach. What is good for the community as far as books included. They should not be involved in schemes to get voters for so and do by making them players in a shell game.

If you do not understand this I fear there is no room for meaningful discussion. Do you not understand that the needs or interests of a community differ from the needs of a grade school?

[Cybersprings]

It is not a personal decision but a professional one based on what other librarians in other school libraries are doing for their communities. They usually will keep such books in their libraries. I mean the ones some parents do not want their kids having access to but it is not up to a small group of parents but is based on long term professional practices.

So librarians will totally keep their personal opinion out of the decision and rely on what other librarians ared deciding. So, ALL books are purchased for the library. Because, to not do so would be banning and we can't have that.


And are you saying that long term professional practice of librarians is what we should rely on?

The Heroes of Desegregating in Public Libraries - Granville County Library System (https://granville.lib.nc.us/2019/02/the-heroes-of-desegregating-in-public-libraries/#:~:text=Also%2C%20the%20Civil%20Rights%20Act,A%20 History%20of%20Public%20Libraries)).

The bravery these protesters exhibited during such an important time in our nation’s history influenced three of the Supreme Court’s decisions that helped dismantle segregation in public libraries: Brown vs. Board of Education, which overran the “separate but equal” ruling in segregated schools with broader implications. Also, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discrimination in public facilities, including public libraries. Finally, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 gave African Americans power in their local governments and thus in their local public libraries (A History of Public Libraries).

It was the "professional" librarians using "long term professional practice" to keep the public libraries segregated until the supreme court outlawed it. Sorry if I don't consider them as a group so much better to decide for the community than the community itself.

[JMintzer]

"Not allowed in public schools" usually means also in public school libraries. Which means a book ban.

https://media.tenor.com/q9crr_x6HLYAAAAC/princess-bride-you-keep-using-that-word.gif

[JMintzer]

Actually read the article.

The article says exactly that...

[JMintzer]

How is anyone going to clear out all the guns in the US? Cannot be done in any way, shape or form!

Let's get real here. Weapons designed for battlefields are being used to attack parades, movie theater audiences, schools, churches, banks, work locations, and other places here in the United States. There should be fewer ways for these to be purchased. There have been more shootings per day in the US in 2023 as there are days so far.

Repeating false information again and again does not magically make it correct...

[Cybersprings]

You did not even bother reading the discussion which is about what the Founding Fathers meant by the 2nd Amendment which was not about individual rights but about a well regulated militia.

I did read the discussion. And I do not agree that you have posted the ultimate authority on this discussion.

The Founding Fathers felt that citizens should be able to protect themselves against the government and any other threat to their wellbeing or personal freedom. The Second Amendment granted citizens that right — giving them the ability to defend themselves and their property.

What Is The Second Amendment And How Is It Defined
NRA-ILA | What Is The Second Amendment And How Is It Defined (https://www.nraila.org/what-is-the-second-amendment-and-how-is-it-defined/#:~:text=The%20Founding%20Fathers%20felt%20that,de fend%20themselves%20and%20their%20property).

[JMintzer]

You make a lot of assertions with little evidence for them.

Pot, meet kettle...

[Cybersprings]

What Does the 2nd Amendment Say? — Civics 101: A Podcast (https://www.civics101podcast.org/civics-101-episodes/2ndamendment?gad=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMItbXwkcje_gIVYRtlCh3UgQeaEAAYASAA EgJ7svD_BwE)

I found this very interesting.

Well I found this even more interesting....and credible

The James Madison Research Library and Information Center (https://www.madisonbrigade.com/library_bor.htm#HISTORY)

[Taltarzac725]

The rigours of frontier life would have required pretty much anyone there to be well armed which I assume the Founding Fathers would have known.

They were addressing militia pretty much in the 2nd Amendment and not people carrying arms as that would have been a given in many situations.

[Taltarzac725]

Second Amendment - Harvard Law Review (https://harvardlawreview.org/topics/second-amendment/)

Worth a look if you are interested in how legal scholars are looking at the 2nd Amendment in 2023 and just prior to 2023.

How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment | Brennan Center for Justice (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-nra-rewrote-second-amendment)

Corpus Linguistics and the Second Amendment - Harvard Law Review (https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2018/08/corpus-linguistics-and-the-second-amendment/)

Comprehensive Bibliography Of The Second Amendment in Law Reviews, by
David B. Kopel (https://davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/comprehensive-bibliography-of-the-second-amendment-in-law-reviews.htm)

[Cybersprings]

Second Amendment - Harvard Law Review (https://harvardlawreview.org/topics/second-amendment/)

Worth a look if you are interested in how legal scholars are looking at the 2nd Amendment in 2023 and just prior to 2023.

How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment | Brennan Center for Justice (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-nra-rewrote-second-amendment)

Corpus Linguistics and the Second Amendment - Harvard Law Review (https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2018/08/corpus-linguistics-and-the-second-amendment/)

Comprehensive Bibliography Of The Second Amendment in Law Reviews, by
David B. Kopel (https://davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/comprehensive-bibliography-of-the-second-amendment-in-law-reviews.htm)

Pardon me if I take the words of the founding fathers more seriously than that of current "scholars" in determining their intent. Here is but a small sampling.


"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Stephens Smith, son-in-law of John Adams, December 20, 1787

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
- Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833

[Taltarzac725]

Pardon me if I take the words of the founding fathers more seriously than that of current "scholars" in determining their intent. Here is but a small sampling.


"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Stephens Smith, son-in-law of John Adams, December 20, 1787

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
- Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833

It is the Supreme Court and lower courts that determine in 2023 what the Founding Fathers meant in the 2nd Amendment.

[manaboutown]

The rigours of frontier life would have required pretty much anyone there to be well armed which I assume the Founding Fathers would have known.

They were addressing militia pretty much in the 2nd Amendment and not people carrying arms as that would have been a given in many situations.

The Founding Fathers had a revolution to win and a government to establish. The exploits of Davey Crockett, King of the Wild Frontier, and other frontiersmen came later. The Founding Fathers and other colonists needed to be armed as individuals for their own protection as they and their families at times unfortunately had needed to engage in armed conflict not only with indigenous people but their own criminal element. The Founding Fathers therefore recognized individual citizens of the new country they were establishing needed the right to bear arms, thus the second amendment in 1791. Founding Fathers of the United States - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States)

[Cybersprings]

It is the Supreme Court and lower courts that determine in 2023 what the Founding Fathers meant in the 2nd Amendment.


Attempting to have an intellectual discussion with some people is so challenging.

You post the links to 4 different articles on what supposed scholars believe the founding fathers meant. Not one was to a court decision.

I post the text of what the founding fathers actually said, and say I take the word of them, over what supposed scholars say they meant. You have nothing to refute their words, so you reply that it is the courts that will decide what they meant.

Then why did you post worthless links to commentaries other than the courts?

And I don't disagree that the courts will decide, but that does not mean they will be correct. We just have to accept their decisions, correct or not. At least until we get the opportunity to correct any errors they made, e.g Plessy vs Ferguson and Roe V. Wade.

[Bwanajim]

Exactly!!

[Bwanajim]

Could you please define exactly what a “assault weapon” is and how it’s different than other firearms??

[manaboutown]

It is the Supreme Court and lower courts that determine in 2023 what the Founding Fathers meant in the 2nd Amendment.

The same courts mandating the catch and release of criminals so they can go on and commit more crimes? That terrifies me!

[Taltarzac725]

Attempting to have an intellectual discussion with some people is so challenging.

You post the links to 4 different articles on what supposed scholars believe the founding fathers meant. Not one was to a court decision.

I post the text of what the founding fathers actually said, and say I take the word of them, over what supposed scholars say they meant. You have nothing to refute their words, so you reply that it is the courts that will decide what they meant.

Then why did you post worthless links to commentaries other than the courts?

And I don't disagree that the courts will decide, but that does not mean they will be correct. We just have to accept their decisions, correct or not. At least until we get the opportunity to correct any errors they made, e.g Plessy vs Ferguson and Roe V. Wade.

And your quotes look like something pointed out by the NRA recently.

[Bwanajim]

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.



QUOTE=Taltarzac725;2214001]Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.[/QUOTE]

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.

[Bwanajim]

Please tell me how old AK 47 or as you call it “a weapon of war” is different than any other legally own firearm? How does it function differently? I await your reply.

[Bwanajim]

These “assault rifles” cannot fire rounds, any faster than any other hunting rifle! They are semi automatic, which means one pull of the trigger is one bullet. They are not fully automatic machine guns! And in fact, my Weatherby hunting rifle has a bullet that’s four times as large. It does a lot more damage . I’m tired of the ignorance on this matter because people don’t educate themselves, they only go by what the MSM tells them. ������������

[Number 10 GI]

What is the basis for that statement? How many times has that happened? Many? - it happens occasionally I suppose but I can't really recall reading about it more than a few times in my lifetime.

I did read recently about the youth who was shot because he knocked on the wrong door.

We're thought about having a gun in the house. However don't really seeing us being the winner in a shoot-out.

It is estimated by a number of different sources that legally armed citizens stop an aggressive assault/robbery nearly 2 million times a year. Many times, just brandishing their weapon stopped the attack before it started. Take your time on you tube and you can watch hours of videos from television stations across the U.S. reporting on armed citizens that saved themselves or another person. I sat one night and watched them for nearly 2 hours before I got tired and quit. Naturally you aren't going to see this on the national news networks because it refutes their anti-gun narrative. However, they never hesitate to incessantly broadcast and re-broadcast instances where a bad guy kills someone.

[Number 10 GI]

Attempting to have an intellectual discussion with some people is so challenging.

You post the links to 4 different articles on what supposed scholars believe the founding fathers meant. Not one was to a court decision.

I post the text of what the founding fathers actually said, and say I take the word of them, over what supposed scholars say they meant. You have nothing to refute their words, so you reply that it is the courts that will decide what they meant.

Then why did you post worthless links to commentaries other than the courts?

And I don't disagree that the courts will decide, but that does not mean they will be correct. We just have to accept their decisions, correct or not. At least until we get the opportunity to correct any errors they made, e.g Plessy vs Ferguson and Roe V. Wade.

The quotes you listed are in very plain and simple terms that even a 10 year old can understand. There is nothing in what they said that can be construed any differently than as written.

[jimjamuser]

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.



QUOTE=Taltarzac725;2214001]Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.[/QUOTE]
An assault rifle is relatively light with a short barrel and a semi-automatic action with the capability to go full automatic. A key point is the cartridge used in the weapon. The cartridge must have a high velocity to cause bad wounds and ALSO to have a flat trajectory out to about 300 yds so it is easy for the soldier to use without changing sights or consulting a trajectory table. Also, the cartridge MUST have low recoil because most soldiers have problems with recoil and may flinch or jerk the trigger. So, high velocity and low recoil demand a 22 caliber cartridge and the .223 fits that bill. Also, the small caliber allows MORE ammo to be carried.

[jimjamuser]

Please tell me how old AK 47 or as you call it “a weapon of war” is different than any other legally own firearm? How does it function differently? I await your reply.
The main attribute of the AK 47 was it was easy to produce and manufacturing tolerances did NOT have to be exact. Because of this, it could be THROWN into a mud puddle and other abuse and it would come up FIRING.

[Taltarzac725]

What I happening in Florida is just Woke shenanigans mainly by a man in political office.

I think people who read this know whom I am talking about here. I am trying to keep this from getting too political. WOKE is a new dog whistle and would fit right in with the novel 1984.

[jimjamuser]

Exactly my point. But, that is the comparison made in this thread by multiple people. Glad we can agree on one point...it is absolutely rediculous to compare what is happening in FL to Nazi Germany.
Lots of similarities - Hitler attacked his foil, the Jewish people. In Florida they attack Mickey Mouse. And school teachers and school children. Notice.........just some available group that is relatively weak.

[jimjamuser]

Exactly my point. But, that is the comparison made in this thread by multiple people. Glad we can agree on one point...it is absolutely rediculous to compare what is happening in FL to Nazi Germany.
NOT so ridiculous!

[jimjamuser]

I couldn't read the NYT article without paying, and that definitely wasn't going to happen.

I guess our disagreement is based on different definition of terms, exacerbated by people who compare books being banned in schools with Nazi Germany.

Books banned by Nazi Germany were burned and not allowed to be owned. Books banned in Florida (NOT BY STATE OF FLORIDA, but by local school districts) are banned only from public schools while parents and others are allowed to own them and provide them to their children if they so desire. Major difference.

There are many cases that uphold that banning books in schools violates the first amendment. The only Supreme Court case I could find was a 4-4 split. So, that cannot be considered settled law.

But, I would like you to go on record as supporting Playboy, Penthouse, and Guns and Ammo, or the Shades of Gray series in Public schools because the children have a first amendment right to them. If you do support that, we know where you stand. If you don't support that, we know that you are a hypcrite.
Book baning like any BAD policy can start out small and then expand into burning like in Fascist Germany.

[TeresaE]

Live updates: Atlanta Midtown shooting news (https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/atlanta-midtown-shooting/index.html)

I recall writing a top lawyer in San Francisco at a law firm which had just had a shooting inside and he had written back to me that they did not have the resources to do anything about addressing the needs of survivors/victims of these kind of crimes. One of which had just happened at his law firm.

My concern in writing the lawyer was access to practical materials for survivors/victims of crimes in SF Bay Area law libraries and other kinds of libraries.

But I do think that law firm was a major driver towards a assault weapons ban that went into effect. 101 California Street shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_California_Street_shooting)

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_Enforcement_Act)

I remember this shooting. It was a personal beef between the shooter and the law firm. SFPD SWAT was on the scene immediately because they were doing training exercises nearby. There was so much confusion from the 911 calls that the SWAT team thought there were multiple shooters not just one guy. But no matter how fast the cops respond they will never be there in time to stop these nuts. Only another gun will. That’s a sad fact. The gun restrictions enacted post event are meaningless. Until we find a way to end jealousy, greed, anger and rage we will have violence. As a species we must own that.

[Taltarzac725]

I remember this shooting. It was a personal beef between the shooter and the law firm. SFPD SWAT was on the scene immediately because they were doing training exercises nearby. There was so much confusion from the 911 calls that the SWAT team thought there were multiple shooters not just one guy. But no matter how fast the cops respond they will never be there in time to stop these nuts. Only another gun will. That’s a sad fact. The gun restrictions enacted post event are meaningless. Until we find a way to end jealousy, greed, anger and rage we will have violence. As a species we must own that.

Except that the kind of guns used often will allow the perpetrator to murder far more people. Thinking of the scenes from Saving Private Ryan and the weapons used during that landing. Those kind of weapons used in battles should be restricted to the military as much as possible. Something like them was pointed at a crowd in Las Vegas at a country-western concert by a man who collected weapons if memory serves. Stephen Paddock - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Paddock) AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle) ArmaLite AR-10 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-10)

[manaboutown]

Except that the kind of guns used often will allow the perpetrator to murder far more people. Thinking of the scenes from Saving Private Ryan and the weapons used during that landing. Those kind of weapons used in battles should be restricted to the military as much as possible. Something like them was pointed at a crowd in Las Vegas at a country-western concert by a man who collected weapons if memory serves. Stephen Paddock - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Paddock) AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle) ArmaLite AR-10 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-10)

The Las Vegas shooter used a bump stock. I don't think they were used during Saving Private Ryan times by the military as they had actual automatic weapons. Movie scenes are not real, but fantasy, just like some of the allegations in your arguments.

[Taltarzac725]

The Las Vegas shooter used a bump stock. I don't think they were used during Saving Private Ryan times by the military as they had actual automatic weapons. Movie scenes are not real, but fantasy, just like some of the allegations in your arguments.

My late father of my sister-in-law landed in Normandy a few weeks after that battle and he found Saving Private Ryan very realistic. He met people who had been there on D-Day.

And you people are sure bringing up the personal attacks a lot. I never said that the Nazis had bump stocks. They had MG 42 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_42) which is an very fast firing machine gun.

[jimjamuser]

It seems like the US is at WAR with ITSELf. It seems that we need NEW TOOLS against drugs, gangs, and cartels. I suggested patrolling DRONES overhead around The Villages..........and people FREAKED OUT........saying that something like that would be too "Big Brother" and would somehow hurt the independent individuality of the average Village resident. The problem is that the THREAT of drugs, gangs, and cartels is so MUCH of a greater PROBLEM that a few Village residents getting their feelings hurt. They are going to be PHYSICALLY hurt if the Villages does NOT hire enough POLICE to keep things here safe.
.......So, that is why new technology involving stationary cameras and cameras on DRONES are needed to keep the "BAD GUYS" at bay.
The US IS at war with itself right now. Fentanyl made in China is coming in, probably, through Mexico and killing about 100,000 US citizens per year. Notice that about 4 years ago we would hear of one mass murder event per month - today it is almost one mass murder in the US per day - and, believe it or NOT, it will continue to get worse until it touches even TV Land.
......Of course, one major problem is the massive number of guns in the US. For those who, mistakenly want to discount this factor just look at a chart of murders BY COUNTRY. The US is, by far the leader, #1. It is probably too late to change that fact, the NRA has bought up all the US leaders in Washington. But, the CHAOS and disunity within the US are also to blame. Today the unification of America is directly opposite to what it was during and after WW2.
.........Today's Washington leaders are NOT working for America, they are working for their particular Party and forget America!

[jimjamuser]

These “assault rifles” cannot fire rounds, any faster than any other hunting rifle! They are semi automatic, which means one pull of the trigger is one bullet. They are not fully automatic machine guns! And in fact, my Weatherby hunting rifle has a bullet that’s four times as large. It does a lot more damage . I’m tired of the ignorance on this matter because people don’t educate themselves, they only go by what the MSM tells them. ������������
People are about as hard to kill with a bullet as a groundhog or a fox, which is to say they are easy to kill - as animals go, humans are very weak. Smart, but weak. Now a 300 magnum is designed to kill moose and grizzly bears, not humans because it would be OVERKILL.
.......The 223 cartridge in a semi-auto short rifle is the perfect weapon to kill masses of humans. The main reason is that because of the LOW RECOIL the 223 cartridge can be used efficiently by criminals and crazy people that need NOT go to a range and practice shooting accuracy. It is SIMPLY easy to SHOOT. If a deranged person wants to shoot/kill about 4 people, they can accomplish that with a handgun. But, for the more ambitious crazies, they need a semi-auto short barrel 223 to attempt to kill between 5 to 10.
........The 223 in a AR-15 short rifle style has become the most popular man-killing weapon in the US. People are NOT buying them to HUNT groundhogs and foxes. HINT.......you might think that a SMART government would be able to take the popular MAN-KILLERS off of the MARKET. But, I guess that little gem of knowledge is beyond the good old USA.

[JMintzer]

Could you please define exactly what a “assault weapon” is and how it’s different than other firearms??

They can't and that is the crux of the problem...

[JMintzer]

And your quotes look like something pointed out by the NRA recently.

Are you denying that they are actual quotes from the Founding Fathers?

Or are they simply quotes you don't like?

[JMintzer]

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.
An assault rifle is relatively light with a short barrel and a semi-automatic action with the capability to go full automatic. A key point is the cartridge used in the weapon. The cartridge must have a high velocity to cause bad wounds and ALSO to have a flat trajectory out to about 300 yds so it is easy for the soldier to use without changing sights or consulting a trajectory table. Also, the cartridge MUST have low recoil because most soldiers have problems with recoil and may flinch or jerk the trigger. So, high velocity and low recoil demand a 22 caliber cartridge and the .223 fits that bill. Also, the small caliber allows MORE ammo to be carried.[/QUOTE]

The only part of your statement that was correct was the first sentence... (except for the "short barrel" part)

Everything after that was garbage...

[JMintzer]

An assault rifle is relatively light with a short barrel and a semi-automatic action with the capability to go full automatic. A key point is the cartridge used in the weapon. The cartridge must have a high velocity to cause bad wounds and ALSO to have a flat trajectory out to about 300 yds so it is easy for the soldier to use without changing sights or consulting a trajectory table. Also, the cartridge MUST have low recoil because most soldiers have problems with recoil and may flinch or jerk the trigger. So, high velocity and low recoil demand a 22 caliber cartridge and the .223 fits that bill. Also, the small caliber allows MORE ammo to be carried.

The only part of your statement that was correct was the first sentence... (except for the "short barrel" part)

Everything after that was garbage...

[JMintzer]

The main attribute of the AK 47 was it was easy to produce and manufacturing tolerances did NOT have to be exact. Because of this, it could be THROWN into a mud puddle and other abuse and it would come up FIRING.

Which has nothing to do with the civilian version being an assault weapon...

Just more "word salad"...

[JMintzer]

Lots of similarities - Hitler attacked his foil, the Jewish people. In Florida they attack Mickey Mouse. And school teachers and school children. Notice.........just some available group that is relatively weak.

Disgusting comparison...

[JMintzer]

Book baning like any BAD policy can start out small and then expand into burning like in Fascist Germany.

Good thing no one is banning books...

[JMintzer]

Except that the kind of guns used often will allow the perpetrator to murder far more people. Thinking of the scenes from Saving Private Ryan and the weapons used during that landing. Those kind of weapons used in battles should be restricted to the military as much as possible. Something like them was pointed at a crowd in Las Vegas at a country-western concert by a man who collected weapons if memory serves. Stephen Paddock - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Paddock) AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle) ArmaLite AR-10 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-10)

Those were MACHINE GUNS!!!

NO ONE is talking about MACHINE GUNS!!!

And the Vegas shooter did not use "something like them"...

This is why it is pointless to have a conversation with people who refuse to educate themselves, and those who completely ignore the facts of the discussion, even when given those facts time and time again...

[JMintzer]

My late father of my sister-in-law landed in Normandy a few weeks after that battle and he found Saving Private Ryan very realistic. He met people who had been there on D-Day.

And you people are sure bringing up the personal attacks a lot. I never said that the Nazis had bump stocks. They had MG 42 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_42) which is an very fast firing machine gun.

And NO ONE is suggesting that every Tom, Dick & Harry have one of those!

[JMintzer]

The US IS at war with itself right now. Fentanyl made in China is coming in, probably, through Mexico and killing about 100,000 US citizens per year. Notice that about 4 years ago we would hear of one mass murder event per month - today it is almost one mass murder in the US per day - and, believe it or NOT, it will continue to get worse until it touches even TV Land.
......Of course, one major problem is the massive number of guns in the US. For those who, mistakenly want to discount this factor just look at a chart of murders BY COUNTRY. The US is, by far the leader, #1. It is probably too late to change that fact, the NRA has bought up all the US leaders in Washington. But, the CHAOS and disunity within the US are also to blame. Today the unification of America is directly opposite to what it was during and after WW2.
.........Today's Washington leaders are NOT working for America, they are working for their particular Party and forget America!

Complete nonsense...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/20201023_UNODC_Intentional_homicides_by_country_-_highest_rates_and_most_populous_countries.png

[JMintzer]

People are about as hard to kill with a bullet as a groundhog or a fox, which is to say they are easy to kill - as animals go, humans are very weak. Smart, but weak. Now a 300 magnum is designed to kill moose and grizzly bears, not humans because it would be OVERKILL.
.......The 223 cartridge in a semi-auto short rifle is the perfect weapon to kill masses of humans. The main reason is that because of the LOW RECOIL the 223 cartridge can be used efficiently by criminals and crazy people that need NOT go to a range and practice shooting accuracy. It is SIMPLY easy to SHOOT. If a deranged person wants to shoot/kill about 4 people, they can accomplish that with a handgun. But, for the more ambitious crazies, they need a semi-auto short barrel 223 to attempt to kill between 5 to 10.
........The 223 in a AR-15 short rifle style has become the most popular man-killing weapon in the US. People are NOT buying them to HUNT groundhogs and foxes. HINT.......you might think that a SMART government would be able to take the popular MAN-KILLERS off of the MARKET. But, I guess that little gem of knowledge is beyond the good old USA.

Wrong again...

The .223/5.56 cartridge was chosen due to it's light weight (you could carry more) and that they tend to WOUND, not KILL. Hence, it would take more people out of the fight. Those wounded and those tending to the wounded...

Many of the troops complain that it is not deadly enough of a round...

[Taltarzac725]

I enjoy your input.

Gun experts: Las Vegas shooter used '''fully''' automatic weapon - ABC7 New York (https://abc7ny.com/las-vegas-shooting-mass-massacre/2479938/)

Please keep posting and learn to use the Ignore List function. There are some people and posts really not worth reading.

People are about as hard to kill with a bullet as a groundhog or a fox, which is to say they are easy to kill - as animals go, humans are very weak. Smart, but weak. Now a 300 magnum is designed to kill moose and grizzly bears, not humans because it would be OVERKILL.
.......The 223 cartridge in a semi-auto short rifle is the perfect weapon to kill masses of humans. The main reason is that because of the LOW RECOIL the 223 cartridge can be used efficiently by criminals and crazy people that need NOT go to a range and practice shooting accuracy. It is SIMPLY easy to SHOOT. If a deranged person wants to shoot/kill about 4 people, they can accomplish that with a handgun. But, for the more ambitious crazies, they need a semi-auto short barrel 223 to attempt to kill between 5 to 10.
........The 223 in a AR-15 short rifle style has become the most popular man-killing weapon in the US. People are NOT buying them to HUNT groundhogs and foxes. HINT.......you might think that a SMART government would be able to take the popular MAN-KILLERS off of the MARKET. But, I guess that little gem of knowledge is beyond the good old USA.

[Larchap49]

Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.

You sir are a dreamer. How did outlawing prostitution work? How did outlawing drugs work? How did Prohibition work 100 years ago. Criminals are criminals and pay no attention to laws or bans. They will do what they do with impunity knowing no law abiding citizen is armed to prevent it. Not to mention gov------nt. There are loopholes that could be closed and monitoring of the unwell mentally ill, but a ban deprived the wrong people and removes too many deterrents.

[Taltarzac725]

You sir are a dreamer. How did outlawing prostitution work? How did outlawing drugs work? How did Prohibition work 100 years ago. Criminals are criminals and pay no attention to laws or bans. They will do what they do with impunity knowing no law abiding is armed to prevent it. Not to mention gov------nt. There are loopholes that could be closed and monitoring of the unwell mentally ill, but a ban deprived the wrong people and removes too many deterrents.

I never wrote anything like you are implying.

I AM suggesting they do something about stopping the selling of weapons which were designed at their inception for use in warfare. There is no getting the hornets back in the nest after you have destroyed it.

Attention Required! | Cloudflare (https://www.bradyunited.org/act/ban-weapons-war)

[Larchap49]

Unless you are an active duty soldier, you should be deprived from owning an AK rifle. Those weapons are for obliterating an enemy in war. Pretty sure we can live without them on our US streets. “Well regulated militia “ not free for all of all weapons by anybody who wants one.

Do you even know what an AK Rifle is? These type of weapons sold to the law abiding public are not fully automatic weapons as are the military versions. They are no more or less capable to obliterate than a ordinary semiautomatic hunting rifle. Maybe know the facts about what you are talking about before taking to the key board

[Taltarzac725]

Do you even know what an AK Rifle is? These type of weapons sold to the law abiding public are not fully automatic weapons as are the military versions. They are no more or less capable to obliterate than a ordinary semiautomatic hunting rifle. Maybe know the facts about what you are talking about before taking to the key board

Really? Tell that to parents of the kids killed at Parkland. They did see the photos of the damage this weapon caused. Parkland high school shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_high_school_shooting)

AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle)

Smith & Wesson M&P15 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_M%26P15)

[Larchap49]

How about watching the news. Prohibit Assault Weapons | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/assault-weapons/)

What you describe as an assault weapon are not all that high powered. Big game hunting rifles are high powered. They are only capable of being fired as fast as a person can pull the trigger. They are not fully automatic weapons like the military versions. Many types of hand gun ammunition will do much greater damage than an assault weapon round. The only correct thing in your post is they do have larger magazines than most other rifle type guns but many handguns are capable of larger capacities. When you post use the facts not your imagination, know your subject and you will appear less silly.

[Taltarzac725]

What you describe as an assault weapon are not all that high powered. Big game hunting rifles are high powered. They are only capable of being fired as fast as a person can pull the trigger. They are not fully automatic weapons like the military versions. Many types of hand gun ammunition will do much greater damage than an assault weapon round. The only correct thing in your post is they do have larger magazines than most other rifle type guns but many handguns are capable of larger capacities. When you post use the facts not your imagination, know your subject and you will appear less silly.

It is the number of rounds coming out of the barrel. Again. Tell what you are selling to the parents of the Parkland kids.

Many kids in this country and terrified just to go to school every week day as are their parents. School shootings: How parents can cope with anxiety after a traumatic event | BabyCenter (https://www.babycenter.com/child/parenting-strategies/school-shootings-parental-anxiety_40009570)

School shootings are a routine and horrifying part of life in America – and they're taking a heavy toll on parents. Firearms are now the leading cause of death for children and teens, so it's normal if you're struggling with anxiety and fear about sending your child to school after a mass shooting or another traumatic event. But there are things you can do: Learn about your school's precautionary measures, focus on positive school experiences, and channel your concern into action.

That is because of the worship of guns in this country and the idiotic idea that collecting them will serve as some kind of check on government. They are much better trained and armed than any armchair wanna be warriors.

[Larchap49]

You make a lot of assertions with little evidence for them.

No I think he was pretty much on the money

[Taltarzac725]

No I think he was pretty much on the money

Hardly.

[Number 10 GI]

Lots of similarities - Hitler attacked his foil, the Jewish people. In Florida they attack Mickey Mouse. And school teachers and school children. Notice.........just some available group that is relatively weak.

Why do you and many others try to diminish the evil brutality of the Nazi government? It was the most brutal, inhuman and evil event in world history. To compare it to the trivial political spats today is an insult to those who died in the Holocaust. Do some reading of those events by the survivors, watch the many documentaries about this terrible time in history. Spend the money and travel to Europe and see first hand the few remaining death camps.

[Larchap49]

Really? Tell that to parents of the kids killed at Parkland. They did see the photos of the damage this weapon caused. Parkland high school shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_high_school_shooting)

AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle)

Smith & Wesson M&P15 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_M%26P15)

Doesn't change the fact that they don't do any more or less damage than any other semi automatic weapon. Actually less than a bigger caliber rifle, or a handgun using some form of hollow point bullet meant to inflict maximum damage. So pointing your finger at what you call an assault weapon based on others opinions and not on facts is irresponsible.

[Taltarzac725]

Doesn't change the fact that they don't do any more or less damage than any other semi automatic weapon. Actually less than a bigger caliber rifle, or a handgun using some form of hollow point bullet meant to inflict maximum damage. So pointing your finger at what you call an assault weapon based on others opinions and not on facts is irresponsible.

Ridiculous response. The facts in what weapons were used in the shootings of 2023 show different.

[Larchap49]

Really? Tell that to parents of the kids killed at Parkland. They did see the photos of the damage this weapon caused. Parkland high school shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_high_school_shooting)

AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle)

Smith & Wesson M&P15 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_M%26P15)

I am not diminishing the horrors of mass shootings only the non factual postings about what is and is not an assault rifle. The versions sold to the public are not the military versions, and no more dangerous than other firearms. A deranged person will simply find another avenue for his sick activity.
.

[Taltarzac725]

I am not diminishing the horrors of mass shootings only the non factual postings about what is and is not an assault rifle. The versions sold to the public are not the military versions, and no more dangerous than other firearms. A deranged person will simply find another avenue for his sick activity.
.

What does that have to do with anything? And deranged people can now just pick up an assault rifle. Other kinds of weapons that can cause mass casualties are hard to get, use, and transport. Assault rifles are not.

[Number 10 GI]

I think one of the reasons the AR15 is used so often is because the media and anti-gun zealots have portrayed it as the ultimate, most death dealing weapon in the history of firearms. In the close quarters of school rooms, a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with 00 Buck Shot will wreak far more destruction. Do you remember this mass shooting?

The Washington Navy Yard shooting occurred on September 16, 2013, when 34-year-old Aaron Alexis fatally shot 12 people and injured three others in a mass shooting at the headquarters of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) inside the Washington Navy Yard in southeast Washington, D.C. The attack took place in the Navy Yard's Building 197; it began around 8:16 a.m. EDT and ended when police killed Alexis around 9:25 a.m. It is the deadliest mass shooting in Washington, D.C. history, as well as the second deadliest mass murder on a U.S. military base, behind the 2009 Fort Hood shooting.

You can read the whole story here: Washington Navy Yard shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Navy_Yard_shooting)

The murderer used a 12 gauge shotgun.

Yes, the AR15 is an efficient killing implement, but so are all other centerfire cartridge rifles. Yes, the AR15 is a weapon of war, but nearly every rifle ever made has been used as a weapon of war.
I'm going to keep harping on the fact that we have a violence problem in this country. Why is this not the primary topic of concern in this country? Too many people don't want to talk about it because it will require complicated, expensive and possibly controversial actions to fix the problem. It's much easier to blame an inanimate object for the weak minded to embrace as the cure-all, taking the pressure off gutless politicians.

[Taltarzac725]

Terms to Know About Guns When Discussing Mass Shootings (https://www.businessinsider.com/terms-to-know-about-guns-when-discussing-mass-shootings-2019-8)

Worth a look.

[Taltarzac725]

I think one of the reasons the AR15 is used so often is because the media and anti-gun zealots have portrayed it as the ultimate, most death dealing weapon in the history of firearms. In the close quarters of school rooms, a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with 00 Buck Shot will wreak far more destruction. Do you remember this mass shooting?

The Washington Navy Yard shooting occurred on September 16, 2013, when 34-year-old Aaron Alexis fatally shot 12 people and injured three others in a mass shooting at the headquarters of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) inside the Washington Navy Yard in southeast Washington, D.C. The attack took place in the Navy Yard's Building 197; it began around 8:16 a.m. EDT and ended when police killed Alexis around 9:25 a.m. It is the deadliest mass shooting in Washington, D.C. history, as well as the second deadliest mass murder on a U.S. military base, behind the 2009 Fort Hood shooting.

You can read the whole story here: Washington Navy Yard shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Navy_Yard_shooting)

The murderer used a 12 gauge shotgun.

Yes, the AR15 is an efficient killing implement, but so are all other centerfire cartridge rifles. Yes, the AR15 is a weapon of war, but nearly every rifle ever made has been used as a weapon of war.
I'm going to keep harping on the fact that we have a violence problem in this country. Why is this not the primary topic of concern in this country? Too many people don't want to talk about it because it will require complicated, expensive and possibly controversial actions to fix the problem. It's much easier to blame an inanimate object for the weak minded to embrace as the cure-all, taking the pressure off gutless politicians.

Shotguns make excellent home defense weapons.

We are not blaming guns. We ARE blaming those that sell , market and glamorize weapons primarily designed for use on battlefields.

[Number 10 GI]

What does that have to do with anything? And deranged people can now just pick up an assault rifle. Other kinds of weapons that can cause mass casualties are hard to get, use, and transport. Assault rifles are not.

You probably won't read the article I just posted about the Washington Navy Yard mass shooting. The article cited stated that the killer cut down the barrel and stock of a shot gun, disassembled it and stuck it in a shoulder bag. He then went into a bathroom in the navy yard, assembled it and murdered 12 people. Easy to get, use, and transport, wasn't that what you said?
What other kinds of weapons that can cause mass casualties are hard to get? 12 gauge shotguns are available in nearly all gun shops and are no harder to obtain than a rifle. The murderer in the medical clinic incident being discussed used a "blow out both lungs" 9mm semiauto pistol, not a so-called assault rifle.

[Number 10 GI]

Shotguns make excellent home defense weapons.

We are not blaming guns. We ARE blaming those that sell , market and glamorize weapons primarily designed for use on battlefields.

Do you not know that shotguns were used extensively in WWI, WWII and in Viet Nam? In WW I shotguns were used as trench clearing weapons, not only in 12 gauge, but 10 gauge which is much more powerful than a 12 gauge. They were devastating in trench clearing. They were so effective that the Germans lodged a protest against the use of shotguns as they were against the law of warfare.

[Larchap49]

What does that have to do with anything? And deranged people can now just pick up an assault rifle. Other kinds of weapons that can cause mass casualties are hard to get, use, and transport. Assault rifles are not.

Say What? Do you think AR-15s or AK-47s are easier to get than hand guns, hunting rifles, shot guns etc. Do you really think they are easier to hide than a hand gun or sawed off high capacity shot gun. Unless you are referring to hand grenades you are off base.

[Larchap49]

I think one of the reasons the AR15 is used so often is because the media and anti-gun zealots have portrayed it as the ultimate, most death dealing weapon in the history of firearms. In the close quarters of school rooms, a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with 00 Buck Shot will wreak far more destruction. Do you remember this mass shooting?

The Washington Navy Yard shooting occurred on September 16, 2013, when 34-year-old Aaron Alexis fatally shot 12 people and injured three others in a mass shooting at the headquarters of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) inside the Washington Navy Yard in southeast Washington, D.C. The attack took place in the Navy Yard's Building 197; it began around 8:16 a.m. EDT and ended when police killed Alexis around 9:25 a.m. It is the deadliest mass shooting in Washington, D.C. history, as well as the second deadliest mass murder on a U.S. military base, behind the 2009 Fort Hood shooting.

You can read the whole story here: Washington Navy Yard shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Navy_Yard_shooting)

The murderer used a 12 gauge shotgun.

Yes, the AR15 is an efficient killing implement, but so are all other centerfire cartridge rifles. Yes, the AR15 is a weapon of war, but nearly every rifle ever made has been used as a weapon of war.
I'm going to keep harping on the fact that we have a violence problem in this country. Why is this not the primary topic of concern in this country? Too many people don't want to talk about it because it will require complicated, expensive and possibly controversial actions to fix the problem. It's much easier to blame an inanimate object for the weak minded to embrace as the cure-all, taking the pressure off gutless politicians.

Thank you, well stated.

[jimjamuser]

You sir are a dreamer. How did outlawing prostitution work? How did outlawing drugs work? How did Prohibition work 100 years ago. Criminals are criminals and pay no attention to laws or bans. They will do what they do with impunity knowing no law abiding citizen is armed to prevent it. Not to mention gov------nt. There are loopholes that could be closed and monitoring of the unwell mentally ill, but a ban deprived the wrong people and removes too many deterrents.
Australia banned certain guns and gun violence went DOWN there. The main difference between the US and Australia is that Australia does NOT have the NRA. So, that tells me that SOMETHING could be done about US gun murders .....but that it is MORE IMPORTANT to have the US NRA protect the profits of the GUN MANUFACTURERS.
...........Murders and mass murders are INCREASING each year. The US is the country with the most GUNS in the hands of civilians - so, why haven't the murders DECREASED. Hint.......they are not going to DECREASE, JUST THE OPPOSITE. More gun sales ADD to the PROBLEM, they have NOT decreased the problem.

[jimjamuser]

Say What? Do you think AR-15s or AK-47s are easier to get than hand guns, hunting rifles, shot guns etc. Do you really think they are easier to hide than a hand gun or sawed off high capacity shot gun. Unless you are referring to hand grenades you are off base.
That is VERY TRUE about a shotgun being a better defensive weapon for a homeowner than a AR-15 style weapon, which is designed to kill or wound up to 10 or more victims. Recoil (or lack of it) is the main advantage of an AR-15-style rifle. AR-15-style rifles are EASY to use because the normal cartridge is the 223, which has low RECOIL. Shotguns and deer rifles NORMALLY have MORE recoil than a 223. The 223 has low recoil and high velocity so it has almost ZERO back-kick (recoil) and still delivers high energy downrange - up to about 300 yards.
.........Pistols have the problem that the short distance between the back sight and the front sight makes it difficult to hit anything except at close range - and takes more practice than a short-barreled 223. Also, the pistol cartridges hit with WAY less knockdown power.
..........So, basically, the short-barreled rifle in 223 caliber is the weapon of choice for KILLING people. The NRA would block any attempt to ban any particular weapon, but AK-47 were banned years ago. An AR-15 in 223 would be an ideal weapon to ban because it's main use is to KILL HUMANS.

[Kenswing]

That is VERY TRUE about a shotgun being a better defensive weapon for a homeowner than a AR-15 style weapon, which is designed to kill or wound up to 10 or more victims. Recoil (or lack of it) is the main advantage of an AR-15-style rifle. AR-15-style rifles are EASY to use because the normal cartridge is the 223, which has low RECOIL. Shotguns and deer rifles NORMALLY have MORE recoil than a 223. The 223 has low recoil and high velocity so it has almost ZERO back-kick (recoil) and still delivers high energy downrange - up to about 300 yards.
.........Pistols have the problem that the short distance between the back sight and the front sight makes it difficult to hit anything except at close range - and takes more practice than a short-barreled 223. Also, the pistol cartridges hit with WAY less knockdown power.
..........So, basically, the short-barreled rifle in 223 caliber is the weapon of choice for KILLING people. The NRA would block any attempt to ban any particular weapon, but AK-47 were banned years ago. An AR-15 in 223 would be an ideal weapon to ban because its main use is to KILL HUMANS. You’re one funny guy. A .223 has more stopping power than a pistol round? My 1911 in .45ACP will knock you down a lot better than a.223 coming from a rifle or pistol. It’s posts like this that make people ignore you. You have no credibility. You just spew stuff that you wish was true just so you can troll your agenda.

[Taltarzac725]

You’re one funny guy. A .223 has more stopping power than a pistol round? My 1911 in .45ACP will knock you down a lot better than a.223 coming from a rifle or pistol. It’s posts like this that make people ignore you. You have no credibility. You just spew stuff that you wish was true just so you can troll your agenda.

It seems to matter how you define "powerful".

.223 vs .45 ACP? - The Firing Line Forums (https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=507998)

Which is more powerful: 9mm or .223? - Quora (https://www.quora.com/Which-is-more-powerful-9mm-or-223#:~:text=223%20is%20much%20more%20powerful,is%2 0about%201100%20ft%20lbs).

Disclosure though-- I have not fired a gun of any kind since can, bottle and derelict car and truck shooting at a dump near Reno, Nevada in 1982 with my grandfather.

[NoMoSno]

but AK-47 were banned years ago.
The AK-47 is not banned.
AK47 For SALE - AtlanticFirearms.com (https://atlanticfirearms.com/ak47-for-sale)

[Taltarzac725]

Another shooting. This time in a mall in Texas.

Live updates: Shooting at outlet mall in Allen, Texas, leaves at least 9 hospitalized (https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/allen-texas-mall-shooting-05-06-23/index.html)

[Bay Kid]

My gun is not dangerous. Crazy people are dangerous.

[JMintzer]

I enjoy your input.

Gun experts: Las Vegas shooter used '''fully''' automatic weapon - ABC7 New York (https://abc7ny.com/las-vegas-shooting-mass-massacre/2479938/)

Please keep posting and learn to use the Ignore List function. There are some people and posts really not worth reading.

Did you bother to read the article you posted?

It said "he could also have used a bump stock"...

You cannot make a determination from sound alone. You MUST examine the weapon to see if it was modified or not...

That article has ZERO info on that...

P.S. The post you responded to was chock full of nonsense...

[JMintzer]

Really? Tell that to parents of the kids killed at Parkland. They did see the photos of the damage this weapon caused. Parkland high school shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_high_school_shooting)

AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle)

Smith & Wesson M&P15 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_M%26P15)

Cho killed 30 ADULTS at VA Tech with two handguns. A 9mm and a .22...

But sure, play the emotional card...

[JMintzer]

It is the number of rounds coming out of the barrel. Again. Tell what you are selling to the parents of the Parkland kids.

The Parkland shooter had a bag filled with 10 round magazines. He changed them out quickly... That is less rounds per magazine than many handguns...

Many kids in this country and terrified just to go to school every week day as are their parents. School shootings: How parents can cope with anxiety after a traumatic event | BabyCenter (https://www.babycenter.com/child/parenting-strategies/school-shootings-parental-anxiety_40009570)



That is because of the worship of guns in this country and the idiotic idea that collecting them will serve as some kind of check on government. They are much better trained and armed than any armchair wanna be warriors.

More emotional nonsense...

[JMintzer]

Why do you and many others try to diminish the evil brutality of the Nazi government? It was the most brutal, inhuman and evil event in world history. To compare it to the trivial political spats today is an insult to those who died in the Holocaust. Do some reading of those events by the survivors, watch the many documentaries about this terrible time in history. Spend the money and travel to Europe and see first hand the few remaining death camps.

Because they have no other argument to make...

[JMintzer]

Ridiculous response. The facts in what weapons were used in the shootings of 2023 show different.

Many more "mass shootings" are done using handguns, every single year...

[JMintzer]

What does that have to do with anything? And deranged people can now just pick up an assault rifle. Other kinds of weapons that can cause mass casualties are hard to get, use, and transport. Assault rifles are not.

More factually incorrect nonsense...

[JMintzer]

Terms to Know About Guns When Discussing Mass Shootings (https://www.businessinsider.com/terms-to-know-about-guns-when-discussing-mass-shootings-2019-8)

Worth a look.

You should pay attention to much of the article...

[JMintzer]

Australia banned certain guns and gun violence went DOWN there. The main difference between the US and Australia is that Australia does NOT have the NRA. So, that tells me that SOMETHING could be done about US gun murders .....but that it is MORE IMPORTANT to have the US NRA protect the profits of the GUN MANUFACTURERS.
...........Murders and mass murders are INCREASING each year. The US is the country with the most GUNS in the hands of civilians - so, why haven't the murders DECREASED. Hint.......they are not going to DECREASE, JUST THE OPPOSITE. More gun sales ADD to the PROBLEM, they have NOT decreased the problem.

Australian's now own More guns than before the ban and gun violence is still lower there...

It's their culture, not the guns...

[JMintzer]

That is VERY TRUE about a shotgun being a better defensive weapon for a homeowner than a AR-15 style weapon, which is designed to kill or wound up to 10 or more victims. Recoil (or lack of it) is the main advantage of an AR-15-style rifle. AR-15-style rifles are EASY to use because the normal cartridge is the 223, which has low RECOIL. Shotguns and deer rifles NORMALLY have MORE recoil than a 223. The 223 has low recoil and high velocity so it has almost ZERO back-kick (recoil) and still delivers high energy downrange - up to about 300 yards.
.........Pistols have the problem that the short distance between the back sight and the front sight makes it difficult to hit anything except at close range - and takes more practice than a short-barreled 223. Also, the pistol cartridges hit with WAY less knockdown power.
..........So, basically, the short-barreled rifle in 223 caliber is the weapon of choice for KILLING people. The NRA would block any attempt to ban any particular weapon, but AK-47 were banned years ago. An AR-15 in 223 would be an ideal weapon to ban because it's main use is to KILL HUMANS.

This was incorrect the first time you posted it. Repeating it does not make it any more correct...

[Taltarzac725]

Dr. Sanjay Gupta: The damage to the human body caused by firearms | CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/08/health/gun-violence-human-body-damage-gupta/index.html)

I know the grandparents of a 14 year old girl murdered in the Parkland shooting. Know them quite well in fact. Parkland high school shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_high_school_shooting)

The damage done by these rounds from AR-15 type weapons is very extensive. AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle)

Many trauma physicians have written about treating these kind of wounds.

Why do semi-automatic rifles cause so much damage? - ABC7 Los Angeles (https://abc7.com/why-ar15-semi-automatic-weapons-dangerous/13051721/)

[JMintzer]

Dr. Sanjay Gupta: The damage to the human body caused by firearms | CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/08/health/gun-violence-human-body-damage-gupta/index.html)

I know the grandparents of a 14 year old girl murdered in the Parkland shooting. Know them quite well in fact. Parkland high school shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_high_school_shooting)

The damage done by these rounds from AR-15 type weapons is very extensive. AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle)

Many trauma physicians have written about treating these kind of wounds.

Why do semi-automatic rifles cause so much damage? - ABC7 Los Angeles (https://abc7.com/why-ar15-semi-automatic-weapons-dangerous/13051721/)

So much misleading info in those articles...

First, the watermelon test... You have no idea what calibre round they used with the handgun. If it was a sub-sonic .22, yes, it would most likely leave a small entrance/exit wlound.

If it was a 9mm or .45 defensive round that expands on impact? It would cause much more damage...

When they talk about rifles, they use a lot of "MAYS" and "COULDS"...

When they talk about children, they only mention that "rifles cause more damage in children", due to the smaller organs, less fat, etc. What they leave out is than handgunst will also have the same effect on children, for the same reasons...

[Cybersprings]

The main difference between the US and Australia is that Australia does NOT have the NRA.

This is A PERFECT EXAMPLE why it makes no sense to even attempt intellectual discussions with certain people.

You assert the main difference between the U.S. and Australia is that Australia does not have the NRA.

The country’s land territory is the sixth-largest in the world at 7.692 square kilometres. When measuring the population against its land area, Australia has one of the lowest densities in the world.
Compared with the population density of other countries such as that of the United States, which is 35.71 persons per square kilometre, Australia has only 3 persons/km2. It also has a lower density than Canada’s 4 persons /km2, New Zealand’s 18 persons/ km2, and the United Kingdom’s 275 persons/ km2.

Thomas Stucky and John Ottensmann show that rates of murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault are generally higher in areas with high-density residential developments and commercial property, and generally lower in areas characterized by industry, parks and schools.

The U.S. Continental land border with other countries (you know like where guns could be smuggled in) is approximately 6000 miles.
The Australian land border with other countries is .......0

Quite a few other differences between the 2 countries. But I think you should stick with the NRA being the main difference.
It's like a warning sign on your forehead that allows other's to stay clear as there may be some cognitive abilities missing or degraded.

[JMintzer]

This is A PERFECT EXAMPLE why it makes no sense to even attempt intellectual discussions with certain people.

You assert the main difference between the U.S. and Australia is that Australia does not have the NRA.

The country’s land territory is the sixth-largest in the world at 7.692 square kilometres. When measuring the population against its land area, Australia has one of the lowest densities in the world.
Compared with the population density of other countries such as that of the United States, which is 35.71 persons per square kilometre, Australia has only 3 persons/km2. It also has a lower density than Canada’s 4 persons /km2, New Zealand’s 18 persons/ km2, and the United Kingdom’s 275 persons/ km2.

Thomas Stucky and John Ottensmann show that rates of murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault are generally higher in areas with high-density residential developments and commercial property, and generally lower in areas characterized by industry, parks and schools.

The U.S. Continental land border with other countries (you know like where guns could be smuggled in) is approximately 6000 miles.
The Australian land border with other countries is .......0

Quite a few other differences between the 2 countries. But I think you should stick with the NRA being the main difference.
It's like a warning sign on your forehead that allows other's to stay clear as there may be some cognitive abilities missing or degraded.

There you go again... Confusing him with facts...

[Taltarzac725]

This is A PERFECT EXAMPLE why it makes no sense to even attempt intellectual discussions with certain people.

You assert the main difference between the U.S. and Australia is that Australia does not have the NRA.

The country’s land territory is the sixth-largest in the world at 7.692 square kilometres. When measuring the population against its land area, Australia has one of the lowest densities in the world.
Compared with the population density of other countries such as that of the United States, which is 35.71 persons per square kilometre, Australia has only 3 persons/km2. It also has a lower density than Canada’s 4 persons /km2, New Zealand’s 18 persons/ km2, and the United Kingdom’s 275 persons/ km2.

Thomas Stucky and John Ottensmann show that rates of murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault are generally higher in areas with high-density residential developments and commercial property, and generally lower in areas characterized by industry, parks and schools.

The U.S. Continental land border with other countries (you know like where guns could be smuggled in) is approximately 6000 miles.
The Australian land border with other countries is .......0

Quite a few other differences between the 2 countries. But I think you should stick with the NRA being the main difference.
It's like a warning sign on your forehead that allows other's to stay clear as there may be some cognitive abilities missing or degraded.

Nicely put!

[jimjamuser]

It seems to matter how you define "powerful".

.223 vs .45 ACP? - The Firing Line Forums (https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=507998)

Which is more powerful: 9mm or .223? - Quora (https://www.quora.com/Which-is-more-powerful-9mm-or-223#:~:text=223%20is%20much%20more%20powerful,is%2 0about%201100%20ft%20lbs).

Disclosure though-- I have not fired a gun of any kind since can, bottle and derelict car and truck shooting at a dump near Reno, Nevada in 1982 with my grandfather.
That is just oppositeville-talk. A .45 pistol bullet will bounce off most bullet-proof vests. But, a high-velocity RIFLE round like a .223 will blow holes in the same vests. Take a vest out to a rifle range and prove that. In fact the US Army found that 9mm (higher velocity cartridges) were superior to the .45 ACP as far as penetration and wounding power goes. In general, any high-velocity rifle cartridge has better knock-down power than ANY normal pistol cartridge.
.........To prove that.......I think that any gun enthusiast that was attacked by a brown bear in Alaska would rather have in their hands the old 30-30 rifle rather than a 44-magnum six-gun!

[jimjamuser]

The AK-47 is not banned.
AK47 For SALE - AtlanticFirearms.com (https://atlanticfirearms.com/ak47-for-sale)
I said "WERE" banned. And that's true they were banned years ago. They are NOT banned TODAY - ALMOST nothing is banned today. That is why so many children are being blown apart today. That is NOT on my conscience. I would allow zero guns that are NOT single-shot to be sold today. So, my conscience is clear. I wonder how some gun enthusiasts can sleep at night.

[Cybersprings]

I said "WERE" banned. And that's true they were banned years ago. They are NOT banned TODAY - ALMOST nothing is banned today. That is why so many children are being blown apart today. That is NOT on my conscience. I would allow zero guns that are NOT single-shot to be sold today. So, my conscience is clear. I wonder how some gun enthusiasts can sleep at night.

Please list 1 gun that is not single trigger pull, single-shot that is legal in the U.S. today that was banned in the past. I'll wait.......

[JMintzer]

That is just oppositeville-talk. A .45 pistol bullet will bounce off most bullet-proof vests. But, a high-velocity RIFLE round like a .223 will blow holes in the same vests. Take a vest out to a rifle range and prove that. In fact the US Army found that 9mm (higher velocity cartridges) were superior to the .45 ACP as far as penetration and wounding power goes. In general, any high-velocity rifle cartridge has better knock-down power than ANY normal pistol cartridge.
.........To prove that.......I think that any gun enthusiast that was attacked by a brown bear in Alaska would rather have in their hands the old 30-30 rifle rather than a 44-magnum six-gun!

All of which has nothing to do with the subject at hand... As usual...

[JMintzer]

I said "WERE" banned. And that's true they were banned years ago. They are NOT banned TODAY - ALMOST nothing is banned today. That is why so many children are being blown apart today. That is NOT on my conscience. I would allow zero guns that are NOT single-shot to be sold today. So, my conscience is clear. I wonder how some gun enthusiasts can sleep at night.

Thank god you're the one making the rules...

And my conscience is clear, as well... My guns have never hurt anyone... They must be defective...

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

If guns aren't the problem, and people are the problem, then why are some states making it easier to put guns in the hands of problem people?

I'm not in favor of weapons bans. I'm respectful of 2A, even though I don't have a gun and won't allow one in my house. But I can't for the life of me figure out why some states bend over backward to make it easier to possess them. It's already easy to possess them - even if you're a mass murderer. It's like leading a fox into a henhouse.

[Taltarzac725]

If guns aren't the problem, and people are the problem, then why are some states making it easier to put guns in the hands of problem people?

I'm not in favor of weapons bans. I'm respectful of 2A, even though I don't have a gun and won't allow one in my house. But I can't for the life of me figure out why some states bend over backward to make it easier to possess them. It's already easy to possess them - even if you're a mass murderer. It's like leading a fox into a henhouse.

Gun ownership - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_ownership)

Looks like there are almost 400,000,000 guns in the US. More than the population.

Not sure how we could stop some sales to the wrong people but we could slow them down a bit and start looking into ways of making sure the wrong people do not get their hands on them. It would take a national concerted effort though to actual make this happen.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Gun ownership - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_ownership)

Looks like there are almost 400,000,000 guns in the US. More than the population.

Not sure how we could stop some sales to the wrong people but we could slow them down a bit and start looking into ways of making sure the wrong people do not get their hands on them. It would take a national concerted effort though to actual make this happen.

The wrong people will get their hands on them. But we can make it cost them more to do so, AND have more severe consequences when they get caught.

1. National - not statewide - database and mandatory background check through it.
2. Mandatory federal - licensing to legally own firearms, which would require classroom instruction, passing a written test, and proof of competency at a federally-approved shooting range.
3. Mandatory federal - registration of legally-owned firearms.
4. Mandatory minimum insurance requirements - so if you shoot someone and it's determined to be either your fault, or no-fault, YOUR insurance covers at least some of the damages. (so if you shot someone who tried to shoot you first - your insurance policy would not have to cover their injuries/death)

So sure - anyone can get around all those laws. But if they're caught breaking them, they can have severe penalties imposed on them.

It won't stop the bad guys from having guns. But it'll make it cost them more, and come with more risk.

[JMintzer]

If guns aren't the problem, and people are the problem, then why are some states making it easier to put guns in the hands of problem people?

I'm not in favor of weapons bans. I'm respectful of 2A, even though I don't have a gun and won't allow one in my house. But I can't for the life of me figure out why some states bend over backward to make it easier to possess them. It's already easy to possess them - even if you're a mass murderer. It's like leading a fox into a henhouse.

What states are "making it easier to put guns in the hands of problem people"?

What states are "making it easier to possess them"?

What specific laws have been passed?

[JMintzer]

The wrong people will get their hands on them. But we can make it cost them more to do so, AND have more severe consequences when they get caught.

1. National - not statewide - database and mandatory background check through it.
2. Mandatory federal - licensing to legally own firearms, which would require classroom instruction, passing a written test, and proof of competency at a federally-approved shooting range.
3. Mandatory federal - registration of legally-owned firearms.
4. Mandatory minimum insurance requirements - so if you shoot someone and it's determined to be either your fault, or no-fault, YOUR insurance covers at least some of the damages. (so if you shot someone who tried to shoot you first - your insurance policy would not have to cover their injuries/death)

So sure - anyone can get around all those laws. But if they're caught breaking them, they can have severe penalties imposed on them.

It won't stop the bad guys from having guns. But it'll make it cost them more, and come with more risk.

So, you want a "Poll Tax" for gun ownership?

You want to make it more expensive to own a gun? What about people with limited means? If they cannot afford all of the extra costs, they're screwed?

Registration leads to confiscation... EVERY SINGLE TIME...

But, I'll agree with stiffer penalties if you're caught carrying or possessing illegally.

Problem is, the progressive DAs continue to drop said gun charges in order to get an easy conviction (to keep their conviction rate up). That is one of the reason there are so many people in jail for "non-violent drug offenses"...

They were caught carrying an illegal gun, those charges were dropped if they plead guilty to the drug charges. The DA gets an easy conviction (no lengthy trial), and the perp is out of jail after a few months...

[Cybersprings]

But I can't for the life of me figure out why some states bend over backward to make it easier to possess them. It's already easy to possess them - even if you're a mass murderer. It's like leading a fox into a henhouse.

Can you please explain what you mean. Where is it legal for a mass murderer to possess a firearm?

And as far a the new Florida law:

(deleted text copied from an article to avoid getting TOTV in trouble)

So, I am little bit confused on your concern. thanks

[Cybersprings]

1. National - not statewide - database and mandatory background check through it.
2. Mandatory federal - licensing to legally own firearms, which would require classroom instruction, passing a written test, and proof of competency at a federally-approved shooting range.
3. Mandatory federal - registration of legally-owned firearms.


What could possibly go wrong with these suggestions? It's not like the Federal justice system could be weaponized against people that don't hold the "correct" beliefs. Oh, wait.....

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Can you please explain what you mean. Where is it legal for a mass murderer to possess a firearm?

And as far a the new Florida law:

Only people who meet existing criteria requirements for a concealed carry permit can carry a gun in public, according to the legislation. That includes things like being a citizen, being over 21, not having a disqualifying felony charge and not having certain misdemeanor domestic violence charges or an injunction.

The bill does not alter who can and cannot purchase a firearm. Existing state and federal laws, including requirements for background checks for gun purchases, still apply.

So, I am little bit confused on your concern. thanks

Set the scene:

Permitless open carry = if you're carrying openly, and not doing anything suspicious at the moment, then no one can question you about it. No one can confront you about it. And - most people wouldn't dare confront you about it.

This means - someone who is about to commit murder will walk among you all, in plain sight, and no one will know until someone is already dead.

New scene:

Open carry NOT permitted = if you're carrying openly, you're breaking the law. The only people who are going to do that, are criminals. They'll stick out like a sore thumb. Very easy to tell which one in the crowd is about to shoot someone, because - they're the ONLY ones carrying those weapons out in the open.

Previous scene: You don't know who is the target, and who is the shooter.
New scene: the shooter is the one with the gun. It's a no-brainer.


That's just ONE example. If you want to know which states have which laws you can check, just like I did. You can even get a nice neat run-down by state on wikipedia, and on various other websites. You can check the NRA (anti-restriction) website, Giffords (anti-gun) website, the ATF (the actual law) website, if you don't like wikipedia.

[Cybersprings]

Set the scene:

Permitless open carry = if you're carrying openly, and not doing anything suspicious at the moment, then no one can question you about it. No one can confront you about it. And - most people wouldn't dare confront you about it.

This means - someone who is about to commit murder will walk among you all, in plain sight, and no one will know until someone is already dead.

New scene:

Open carry NOT permitted = if you're carrying openly, you're breaking the law. The only people who are going to do that, are criminals. They'll stick out like a sore thumb. Very easy to tell which one in the crowd is about to shoot someone, because - they're the ONLY ones carrying those weapons out in the open.

Previous scene: You don't know who is the target, and who is the shooter.
New scene: the shooter is the one with the gun. It's a no-brainer.


That's just ONE example. If you want to know which states have which laws you can check, just like I did. You can even get a nice neat run-down by state on wikipedia, and on various other websites. You can check the NRA (anti-restriction) website, Giffords (anti-gun) website, the ATF (the actual law) website, if you don't like wikipedia.

I don't even know what to say. Are your scene's meant to be serious?

All states allow person to have rifles, shotguns and other similar weapons which are not concealed weapons and to move about with those weapons freely as long as they are not loaded while carried in some locales. In some states, the “long guns” may even be loaded while transported.

This has always been the case and is not a new phenomenon.

So, in your scene, the murderer who is open carrying (this term only applies to weapons that can be concealed, so we are talking handguns) and be seen by all. The person can be watched and avoided.
Replay the scene where the person is carrying concealed, and now no one can see the weapon, no one can keep an eye on the guy or avoid him until he chooses to kill people.

So, maybe I missed something really nuanced in what you were trying to say, because otherwise it makes absolutely no sense at all.

[Cybersprings]

We have 15 pages of back and forth and zero progress in the discussion (shocker, I know).

Can we all agree that:
1. There are approximately 400 million guns in the U.S. a lot of which are the scary kind.
2. We have a completely open border that is unable to stop millions of illegal immigrants and literally tons of illegal drugs as well as many many weapons, lots of which are illegal (automatic weapons).
3. People (criminal) who are going to commit (mass) murder are not deterred by breaking numerous laws and taking the lives of innocents (often kids). Therefore, they will not follow gun laws and will get a weapon in some illegal fashion as necessary.
4. Therefore, the mission is to somehow predict which previously law abiding citizen has somehow snapped and prevent them from possessing or using a gun, explosive, SUV, etc., or at the very least minimize the damage they are able to inflict, while not preventing law abiding citizens from possessing weapons for self-protection, sport, or whatever other legal purpose as protected by common sense and the U.S. Constitution.

If we focussed on that real mission, then, and only then, can we make any progress.

[JD Tremor]

98312