[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45

A VW bug and a formula 1 are both cars, but both were designed for a different purpose. You will not see a VW bug at La Mann or a formula 1 are on city streets.
Yes, you can use assault firearms for hunting and for personal self-defense, but that is not what they were designed for. I’m not suggesting that assault weapons should be banned, but restrictions on who can own these weapons and where they could be carried might not be a bad idea.

Good thing no one uses an assault firearm for hunting... And I can't find a single instance where one was used in self defense, either...

Now AR-15s, otoh, are used to hunt quite often and have been in self defense many times...

Here's an ad for the AR-15 from the early 60's...

[Marine1974]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

As was pointed out to me in the last mass shooting, automatic weapons are not illegal, they are just harder to buy.

And your answer did not contribute. I expect the poster you replied to meant semi-automatic, since automatic weapons are not a big problem.

And then you can make it clear that any gun that you can repeatedly pull the trigger and fire is a semi-automatic, just to be pedantic.

The fact is single shot derringers are seldom used in mass shootings.

And gun control does work, as Gov. Newsome pointed out on Truth Social a little while back, the most unregulated states (Red states) also have the most per capita shooting deaths. Or conversely the most regulated states (Blue states) have the lowest per capita gun death rate.

Not in Illinois, a blue state , city of Chicago has the highest murder rate with a gun . Governor Newsome doesn’t know or doesn’t want to admit a blue state has the highest murder rate using a gun .
The bad guys have ruined it for the good guys , turn in your guns now .

[Vermilion Villager]

Originally Posted by Taurus510

We’ll, you claim to be an ex-hunter, then follow that up with an ignorant statement about “automatic” weapons. There are already many restrictions on automatic weapons. If you wish to own one, you have to go through an EXTENSIVE background check, the local sheriff has to personally vouch for you, then you will pay thousands just for the license to own an automatic weapon. Are you claiming that you hunted with automatic weapons?

He also said "and long range rifles"

[jammaiora]

Originally Posted by charlie1

I used to be a hunter and really would not want anyone to stop me from having my hunting guns. I could even see the potential reason for personal handguns for self defense. BUT I do feel that there needs to be much more control on automatic guns and long range rifles. Why can't our politician see that there are different guns for different purposes and band, or at least strongly control, any weapon that could be used for mass murders! Gun violence has gotten OUT OF CONTROL!

It's not all politicians, only the Republicans, who are supported by the gun lobbyists and gun manufacturers. It's all about money and greed. The US has more guns than population and more gun violence than the rest of the world.

[Randyj66]

I just don't understand why so many people are confused! If you are killed by a motor vehicle we don't try to ban motor vehicles, we look at the person operating it. Hence a gun is nothing without a operator! If you put your feelings aside there has only been one common denominator in all of the shootings, and that is related to the mental health of the gun owner. Guns do not function without a operator. We desperately need to change the way we need to address mental health. Again so many people have remained silent when they have witnessed someone with a severe mental health problem. Why, because we have become a nation of Karen's that are only willing to gossip about problems but do absolutely nothing to fix the problem because they are too lazy to get involved! Open your eyes,watch your surroundings and see something and do something! All of these situations have started at home because of a total breakdown of family structure. The problems then head to school where nothing is done to fix the home or school situation. Upon no effective mental health intervention the individual starts into a dark spiral.Fix the family equation, fix reporting of mental health problems, ban computer games that desensitize children by rewarding them by killing ! Children have become de sensitized by such games.Some can differentiate from fantasy and reality and others can't that's the issue. Please think about my thoughts and please try and help the situation. Because these are not normal thinking individuals I'm worried that if we remove there guns as weapons what are they going to use to commit these horrible crimes with next??? In closing I say Mental Health!!!!

[ringmic88]

The first step in solving a problem is to identify the problem. Is the gun really the problem or is it a symptom of the problem. This issue has turned into a political cudgel to sway people to vote for thier political party.

If our government could work together to properly identify the problem and come up with a meaningful way to combat it that is not based on politics we may get somewhere. More gun laws is not the answer ..... it's a political tool.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by Mushkie

This is their plan- ramp up violence to scare people into begging the government to take away their freedom, take away their guns.
The Evil aspects (Dems and RINO’s) in our Government are doing everything they can to destabilize marriage and families (welfare laws=fatherless, dependent on government handouts=plantation life; radical LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ indoctrination), de-humanize human life (pushing the agenda abortion is not only “good” for the woman to advance her career or ensure her freedom, but actually better for the baby to prevent them from being born into a life of poverty) and “to save the planet we need to kill humans”; devalue and poo poo the ideals of believing in God and religion, self reliance, resilience, hard work and sacrificing “now” to make it better in the future generations. All these an more have been the incubator for mass murderers and other evil acts.
You are being conditioned to believe that giving away your freedom in exchange for the false sense of security and safety is a good trade.
You gotta ask yourself- if guns are the problem, why no mass shootings at a gun store or shooting range??? Because these evil people look for soft targets- schools, shopping malls, hospitals and medical facilities, large public events.

Mass shooters and shootings have dramatically increased since “sounds good, virtue signaling title” policies have been enacted and “progressive” agenda:

- “gun free zone” laws (as evil would follow such an idiotic law),

- shooters almost exclusively Democrats- I am not kidding- and/or had contact with Leftist organizations.

-defund the police, disregard and disrespect for law and order,

- glamorize the destruction of “God fearing, good old fashioned” values, family and marriage.

Evil and evil acts will always exist in a free society. Utopia isn’t possible and every attempt to create Utopia is makes life a tyrannical hell.

Freedom, by definition is dangerous, risky, uncertain but life without Freedom is a life not worth living.

Guns aren’t the problem- mass murderers can use a car, a bomb, a plane, a vaccine.

Historically, any government that confiscated guns from their citizens “for their safety” quickly preceded to slaughter hundreds of millions of their citizens they labeled “a danger to society”- them - Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin.

And the argument “oh, but that wouldn’t happen here in the United States” won’t work either- cuz it already did- the largest mass murder in America happen in Dec 29, 1890 and done by THE GOVERNMENT. Federal agents and the 7th cavalry went to Wounded Knee creek to confiscate the guns of the Sioux Indians. Once the majority of Sioux had surrendered their guns, the cavalry opened fire, killing all of the 297 Indians- 200 of the 297 were unarmed women and children.

“Any society that willingly gives away a little freedom to gain a little security, deserves neither and loses both” - Ben Franklin.



STAY FREE

Agreed. On just about every point.

The proof of the accuracy of the quoted post isn't hard to find. It exists in the past of most of us. Back in the day (1960's) guns were everywhere in the area where I lived. We even brought guns to school: gun safety and training classes were held on a regula basis, so bringing a gun to school was commonplace. We had to store 'em in the Principal's office until it was time to use them but the ammo we just carried loose in our pockets. Dad collected guns (had over 50 when he died), and my siblings and I were all taught at a very early age how to use and care for guns, but most of all how to RESPECT guns.

Along with that, we were taught at home from toddlerhood to RESPECT one another as well. I, as well as the great majority of the people of the time, came from two-married-parent households with strong role models for both genders. We learned strong positive values from an early age, both because of the parental role-models we had and because we knew that if we transgressed significantly we'd have a warm behind. Once in school, Mom and Dad had one cardinal rule: "Don't get in trouble at school and then come home and tell us about it, because you'll be in twice as much trouble at home". And they meant it.

Contrast that to today. The lack of effective parenting has led to a significant lack of values, mainly on the part of the young but certainly not limited to them. Penalties under the law, even when applied, usually end up being so watered-down because of plea-bargaining that it hardly serves as any kind of deterrent. At home when I was a youngster, we never locked anything. Today, I lock everything, even in relatively crime-free TV. And my wife and I both have handguns in our nightstands.

It is a different world than the one many of us grew up in. And we seem intent on following a path that is guaranteed to make it even worse.

[Ptmckiou]

Originally Posted by billethkid

The capability of the gun IS NOT and HAS NOT been the problem!

Actually not true. Let’s take that statement to its extreme, to make my point. If you have two guys armed in a gymnasium full of children, and one has an AR-15, and the other has a 6-shooter, who is going to kill more humans in 60 seconds? Who is going to have to pause often to reload, to give police the opportunity to shoot him? Who’s victims will likely live (even though they were shot) because the holes are addressable by doctors, whereas they other guys bullets explode inside the body creating massive trauma to many organs, including ripping off limbs and decapitating victims?

The CAPABILITY of the gun IS THE ISSUE!!!!

[Joe C.]

It is my God given right to defend myself. It is reaffirmed in the 2nd Amendment. But the 2nd Amendment is also there to protect us from a tyrannical government. And only a tyrannical government would disarm it's citizens.

There should be strict enforcement of gun laws, and the consequence of violating them should be severe punishment, and IMHO, in many cases the death penalty applied. But then the leftists would say that certain minorities would be impacted, and that's not fair. Others would say that it's too cruel and unusual punishment.

Let's take the emotion out of the argument, express only the facts, and apply logic to eliminate the problem.

[Ptmckiou]

Originally Posted by srswans

We need a refresher on the Second Amendment. It’s main purpose, IIRC, was to keep the government in check. From this perspective, it is not a mystery why the left wants to get rid of guns. That’s the last thing we need.

The main purpose of the 2nd amendment is to have a ready armed “militia” if needed, instead of having to employ a federal army. You had to register to be in the militia, and what arms you had were monitored and the gov could take them away if you were taken of the register. Under no circumstances, is the citizens of the USA (armed as they may) going to win a fight with the US military. Never going to happen. They don’t have the resources or expertise of advance artillery that the military has. Therefore, it’s a moot point to keep saying the 2nd amendment is to keep the government in check.. Haaaaa dream on about that thought…

[Joe C.]

Originally Posted by Ptmckiou

Actually not true. Let’s take that statement to its extreme, to make my point. If you have two guys armed in a gymnasium full of children, and one has an AR-15, and the other has a 6-shooter, who is going to kill more humans in 60 seconds? Who is going to have to pause often to reload, to give police the opportunity to shoot him? Who’s victims will likely live (even though they were shot) because the holes are addressable by doctors, whereas they other guys bullets explode inside the body creating massive trauma to many organs, including ripping off limbs and decapitating victims?

The CAPABILITY of the gun IS THE ISSUE!!!!

Bullets that EXPLODE? Or bullets that expand. I've never seen a gun that would DECAPITATE a person. I think you've watched too many movies.

[donassaid]

I expect the good people of Ukraine would prefer to have AR 15's right now as well as those in Venezuela.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by Randyj66

I just don't understand why so many people are confused! If you are killed by a motor vehicle we don't try to ban motor vehicles, we look at the person operating it. Hence a gun is nothing without a operator! If you put your feelings aside there has only been one common denominator in all of the shootings, and that is related to the mental health of the gun owner. Guns do not function without a operator. We desperately need to change the way we need to address mental health. Again so many people have remained silent when they have witnessed someone with a severe mental health problem. Why, because we have become a nation of Karen's that are only willing to gossip about problems but do absolutely nothing to fix the problem because they are too lazy to get involved! Open your eyes,watch your surroundings and see something and do something! All of these situations have started at home because of a total breakdown of family structure. The problems then head to school where nothing is done to fix the home or school situation. Upon no effective mental health intervention the individual starts into a dark spiral.Fix the family equation, fix reporting of mental health problems, ban computer games that desensitize children by rewarding them by killing ! Children have become de sensitized by such games.Some can differentiate from fantasy and reality and others can't that's the issue. Please think about my thoughts and please try and help the situation. Because these are not normal thinking individuals I'm worried that if we remove there guns as weapons what are they going to use to commit these horrible crimes with next??? In closing I say Mental Health!!!!

People don't typically (328 out of 328) decide, I wanna kill a bunch of people and go get in their car and drive down the street murdering people. It is not efficient.

Instead they say, "I think I want to kill a bunch of people" and they go get an AR-15. (MOST mass shooting that is the weapon of choice) What is the difference? One is large and can get most places where people congregate, guns are designed to kill (some people like to kill watermelons with them) and do it quickly and efficiently and they are easy to get into locations where lots of people are in close quarters.

Yes, the question of WHY that people decided to kill a bunch of people is a better question than what they used. But, in order to figure out why we have to gather information and study it and come to conclusions. We were going to do that, then a party got into office and make it illegal to study gun related deaths - care to guess which party?

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by Joe C.

It is my God given right to defend myself. It is reaffirmed in the 2nd Amendment. But the 2nd Amendment is also there to protect us from a tyrannical government. And only a tyrannical government would disarm it's citizens.

There should be strict enforcement of gun laws, and the consequence of violating them should be severe punishment, and IMHO, in many cases the death penalty applied. But then the leftists would say that certain minorities would be impacted, and that's not fair. Others would say that it's too cruel and unusual punishment.

Let's take the emotion out of the argument, express only the facts, and apply logic to eliminate the problem.

I will agree to take emotion out, if you agree to take god out. Our government/country is secular, and I believe all "rights" are government given.

[Joe C.]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

I will agree to take emotion out, if you agree to take god out. Our government/country is secular, and I believe all "rights" are government given.

We are endowed by our Creator, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Or so the document says. And I believe that our Creator, is God.