[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

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]

Originally Posted by Whitley

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]

Originally Posted by Haggar

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]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

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]

Originally Posted by 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.” “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]

Originally Posted by njbchbum

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]

Originally Posted by Lindsyburnsy

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.

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

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Whitley

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

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]

Originally Posted by 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.” “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]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

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]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

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

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

[Johnsocat]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

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.