[Byte1]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Your observation is profoundly flawed.

I don't like guns. I'm also pro 2A. People should maintain the right to have firearms to form well-regulated militias.

I don't believe in what you consider to be "god." But if your deity makes you happy, go for it. Believe what you like.

I believe that if a law can't be enforced, it needs to a) change to make it enforceable or b) cease to be a law.

I believe if booze can't be eliminated, then make sure that people who abuse it are not causing harm to anyone else. Have laws regarding drinking and driving, for example.

I believe if cannabis can't be eliminated, then make sure that people who abuse it are not causing harm to anyone else. Keep smoking and vaping out of public buildings/restaurants or other enclosed public-accessible spaces, and impose the same "driving under the influence" laws that exist for any other substance that can affect someone's judgment, hand-eye coordination, reaction time.

I also believe that if abortions can't be stopped, then make sure they are legal and safe.

Like I stipulated in my post; it is MY OPINION. Just like your post is not fact, just your opinion. Like I said, if you can't control it, many folks believe it should be legalized and taxed. It's simply a matter of rationalization by some that want to be right, can't so they believe that their compromise is winning a debate. Of course, this is just my opinion, based on my observation.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

And since you feel compelled to make this post political, why is mass shootings have increased under every administration over the past 50 years? On that's right, it doesn't matter.

Perhaps because our population has increased in size, therefore crime has also increased? Just a suggestion, and I am sure it will result in an argument rather than as part of the discussion. Also of consideration is that enforcement and penalties for committing a crime are lax.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Which caused MORE damage...

That is why a .22 was the gun of choice for "Mafia Hits" back in the day...

One to the melon just rattles around in there...

Another reason the "hit man" preferred the .22 was because it was easily silenced. In the "olden" days a silenced .22 revolver was the rage of all genuine hit men.

[Wyseguy]

"No, it's not. There is nothing in any law of any state or in the Constitution guaranteeing you the right to THAT specific firearm."

The above sounds like something one of the people on the View would say.

[Wyseguy]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I don't have to. I'm not the one making the claim that you have the right to a specific type of weapon.

If you want to claim that you have a right to THAT weapon, then show me where it says you do. The Constitution does not state that you have the right to bear ANY firearms. It only states that you have the right to bear arms. The law allows for further clarification, should the legislature choose to do so. That's why 2A is an amendment. The Constitution consists of a pre-amble, seven actual articles, and 27 amendments. The amendments are add-ons. They were not part of the original Constitution and can be removed, or further amended, or appended, or edited.

The law states what IS NOT permitted, not what is. Similar to Freedom of Speech. All speech is permitted with very few, very specific exceptions.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Byte1

Another reason the "hit man" preferred the .22 was because it was easily silenced. In the "olden" days a silenced .22 revolver was the rage of all genuine hit men.

How do you "silence" a revolver???

The gas escapes out the cylinder, thus creating the "bang"...

Silencers (actually called suppressors), really only work on semi-auto weapons, or bolt action rifles...

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

How do you "silence" a revolver???

The gas escapes out the cylinder, thus creating the "bang"...

Silencers (actually called suppressors), really only work on semi-auto weapons, or bolt action rifles...

For most revolvers, that is true. However there are some revolvers (such as the Nagant "Gas Seal" revolver) that can be suppressed. In fact that particular revolver (suppressed) was the favorite weapon of the KGB in carrying out their assassinations.

...OR, you could take the Vito Corleone route (Godfather II), just wrap the entire revolver on a towel. 'Course, after your victim is offed, you have the problem of a flaming towel...

[Wyseguy]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

How do you "silence" a revolver???

The gas escapes out the cylinder, thus creating the "bang"...

Silencers (actually called suppressors), really only work on semi-auto weapons, or bolt action rifles...

I had the same question; thinking that perhaps the poster was saying the silence of a 22 vs 380cal or 9mm. A pillow over a 22 muffles the sound as well?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

The law states what IS NOT permitted, not what is. Similar to Freedom of Speech. All speech is permitted with very few, very specific exceptions.

The few exceptions to freedom of speech are not listed in the Constitution or the Amendments. And yet - there they are. Exceptions.

The same can be made true for exceptions to "right to bear arms."

[Babubhat]

A thread that need to become extinct. Only the SC decides

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

For most revolvers, that is true. However there are some revolvers (such as the Nagant "Gas Seal" revolver) that can be suppressed. In fact that particular revolver (suppressed) was the favorite weapon of the KGB in carrying out their assassinations.

...OR, you could take the Vito Corleone route (Godfather II), just wrap the entire revolver on a towel. 'Course, after your victim is offed, you have the problem of a flaming towel...

The Nagant is just a tad larger caliber than a .22, no?

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

The few exceptions to freedom of speech are not listed in the Constitution or the Amendments. And yet - there they are. Exceptions.

The same can be made true for exceptions to "right to bear arms."

And there have been many of them, limiting the right to bear arms, over the years... Not "very few"...

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

How do you "silence" a revolver???

The gas escapes out the cylinder, thus creating the "bang"...

Silencers (actually called suppressors), really only work on semi-auto weapons, or bolt action rifles...

My bad. Actually, the 22cal PISTOL was a semi-automatic that was the popular one in the old days for silencing. Don't know why I said revolver, other than as a replacement for the term "pistol." Today, you can get a permit for a silencer and they have come a long way in technology.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Byte1

My bad. Actually, the 22cal PISTOL was a semi-automatic that was the popular one in the old days for silencing. Don't know why I said revolver, other than as a replacement for the term "pistol." Today, you can get a permit for a silencer and they have come a long way in technology.

"Suppressor"...

[Sarah_W]

Just to recap. There are millions of AR styled rifles in the US and unlike today's talking points it is NOT the weapon of choice for mass shooters. The national conversation is always to discuss how to restrict firearms from law abiding citizens and NEVER discuss the people. The people being; the shooter, the responders and those who don't respond. We don't have a lot of information yet on the Highland Park shooter so let's talk about Uvalde, TX mass shooter.

At Robb Elementary, Salvadore Ramos, 18, entered the school through an unlocked door with an AR style rifle and slaughtered children. Police entered the building through the same door within 3 minutes. The appalling fact the follows is that for an hour and 17 minutes the Police did nothing. In other words, Ramos was allowed to continue his mass shooting for 64 minutes with no interruption by armed Police officers. If you care and watch either of the videos below you may be appalled to see officers checking their cell phone and getting some hand sanitizer from a wall dispenser and the moment they hear a gun shot they run to safety while children are slaughtered. All the while, the officers outside the building did everything they could, including force, to keep parents from entering the building to save their children.

In my opinion, although the Supreme Court ruled years ago that the Police do NOT have a duty to protect us, there is absolutely no room for cowardice in Law Enforcement.

Edited video

Exclusive video from inside Uvalde school shows officers' delayed response to mass shooting

Full video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyPTePoiI3M