[stanley]

"Personally - I have no problem with people owning firearms. I'd like universal background checks, I'd like mandatory federal licensing that requires that you take an actual test, I'd like mandatory classroom and target instruction. I'm absolutely pro-2A. "BUT"

The "BUT" part always cracks me up and makes me shake my head

[Joe V.]

Originally Posted by johnnascar

you are outgunned with a pistol when confronting an idiot with an assault rifle. like the cop that got killed

What is an assault rifle, your definition, please. Being black and scary?

[stanley]

Originally Posted by johnnascar

you are outgunned with a pistol when confronting an idiot with an assault rifle. like the cop that got killed

Given that argument.........fight fire with fire, I'm good with that.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by tvbound

It's proved to be great for business for the gun and ammo manufacturers though, to keep scaring the easily gullible people by constantly saying it.

ANd where most of the these guns and ammo made. Northeast aNd California. Funny how they want to control type of guns but ok with them making them i theatre state.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

If this potential shooter knew that 75% of the people in that supermarket, including managers and employees, were armed he probably wouldn't have thought about what he was about to do.

The same for the Boulder shooter.

There are of course, a few of these idiots that want to die and would still try a mass shooting knowing that they would be killed, but if more people were armed, the damage would be minimized.

So, that thesis would be........MORE guns in more hands equals less VIOLENCE and killing. I don't buy that. What I think would work is to require the manufactures to produce ONLY SINGLE-SHOT pistols, rifles, and shotguns. Police could slowly get semi-autos off the streets with normal Police work as weapons were used in crimes. They could buy back other semi-auto weapons from WILLING sellers or who would trade for single shots. After about 3 generations there would be very few semi-autos on the street or in Civilian hands.
All gun groups would have given some - for a safer America. Gun manufactures would lose their highest profit margin military-style rifles. Hunters would hunt better because they would have to place carefully that one shot - they would lose only the inefficient idea of "spraying" shots around Homeowners would lose SOME firepower and defense capacity for ONLY 3 generation. Target shooters and trap shooters would lose virtually nothing. Gun owners would not even need ANY background checks after 3 generations in my opinion. Less legislation over "baby steps" would be needed. This would be a simple and clean solution. Mass murders would drop to zero after 3 generations. And BONUS, the guns could be sold in 3rd world countries to make a profit for the Police and cost the taxpayer ZERO!

This is ridiculous and would NEVER work - you say? Not so say I.....use your google machine......
Australia did just about this VERY thing several years ago - they bought and melted down ALL their citizens semi-autos ( I think that they allowed bolt actions, not sure). They did it quickly, not in 3 generations. And since that buyback, there has been ZERO MASS MURDERS in Australia!!!!!!! Check that out sport fans!

[stanley]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

So, that thesis would be........MORE guns in more hands equals less VIOLENCE and killing. I don't buy that. What I think would work is to require the manufactures to produce ONLY SINGLE-SHOT pistols, rifles, and shotguns. Police could slowly get semi-autos off the streets with normal Police work as weapons were used in crimes. They could buy back other semi-auto weapons from WILLING sellers or who would trade for single shots. After about 3 generations there would be very few semi-autos on the street or in Civilian hands.
All gun groups would have given some - for a safer America. Gun manufactures would lose their highest profit margin military-style rifles. Hunters would hunt better because they would have to place carefully that one shot - they would lose only the inefficient idea of "spraying" shots around Homeowners would lose SOME firepower and defense capacity for ONLY 3 generation. Target shooters and trap shooters would lose virtually nothing. Gun owners would not even need ANY background checks after 3 generations in my opinion. Less legislation over "baby steps" would be needed. This would be a simple and clean solution. Mass murders would drop to zero after 3 generations. And BONUS, the guns could be sold in 3rd world countries to make a profit for the Police and cost the taxpayer ZERO!

You do have a sense of humor!

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

So, that thesis would be........MORE guns in more hands equals less VIOLENCE and killing. I don't buy that. What I think would work is to require the manufactures to produce ONLY SINGLE-SHOT pistols, rifles, and shotguns. Police could slowly get semi-autos off the streets with normal Police work as weapons were used in crimes. They could buy back other semi-auto weapons from WILLING sellers or who would trade for single shots. After about 3 generations there would be very few semi-autos on the street or in Civilian hands.
All gun groups would have given some - for a safer America. Gun manufactures would lose their highest profit margin military-style rifles. Hunters would hunt better because they would have to place carefully that one shot - they would lose only the inefficient idea of "spraying" shots around Homeowners would lose SOME firepower and defense capacity for ONLY 3 generation. Target shooters and trap shooters would lose virtually nothing. Gun owners would not even need ANY background checks after 3 generations in my opinion. Less legislation over "baby steps" would be needed. This would be a simple and clean solution. Mass murders would drop to zero after 3 generations. And BONUS, the guns could be sold in 3rd world countries to make a profit for the Police and cost the taxpayer ZERO!

This is ridiculous and would NEVER work - you say? Not so say I.....use your google machine......
Australia did just about this VERY thing several years ago - they bought and melted down ALL their citizens semi-autos ( I think that they allowed bolt actions, not sure). They did it quickly, not in 3 generations. And since that buyback, there has been ZERO MASS MURDERS in Australia!!!!!!! Check that out sport fans!

Australia had almost ZERO MSASS MURDERS before their "so called" gun ban.

They knee jerked their way to the ban...

And now? There are more guns owned than before the "ban"...

[Northwoods]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Sadly, those are the things that gun owners are NOT using them for. They're using them to kill other American citizens. They're using them to rob banks. They're using them to hijack peoples' cars. They're using them to kidnap children. They're using them to shoot into crowds. They're using them to express their hatred of [insert whatever they hate here].

They're not using them to defend against a tyrannical government, and they're not using them against foreign invaders.

So basically, you feel everyone should carry weapons for reasons that have nothing to do with why they were allowed to have them in the first place.

Personally - I have no problem with people owning firearms. I'd like universal background checks, I'd like mandatory federal licensing that requires that you take an actual test, I'd like mandatory classroom and target instruction. I'm absolutely pro-2A. But I'm also absolutely pro-personal responsibility, which unfortunately too many gun-owners refuse to accept. And because the few ruin it for everyone else, I feel we need more CONTROL over who gets to carry legally, and who will be criminals simply by virtue of the fact that they possess one.

This way the illegal gun-owners who commit crimes with those illegally-owned guns, will have more severe consequences than those who owned their firearms legally.

OBB. I agree with you.

I agree with you about mandatory background checks, classroom and target instruction.
I believe guns should be treated like owning a car and having a Drivers license.
I don’t have an issue with banning assault weapons. I can’t imagine a reason for having one.
I believe there are many law-abiding people who own guns. They should be able to own guns.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

Originally Posted by DeanFL

.
.
Whenever there is a 'mass shooting' it's huge news for a few days, as the nut killing 10 in the Boulder, CO store over a week ago and the Atlanta nut killing 8 around Massage stores. Yes horrible and deserves wide coverage.

But, DAYS after (last week) in a PUBLIX supermarket in Atlanta THIS ocurred>

An Instacart shopper believed he heard someone loading guns in a bathroom stall.
Police arrested a man with 6 guns

(CNN)An Instacart shopper who entered an Atlanta supermarket bathroom this week told police he saw an AR-15 style rifle and heard what he believed was the sound of someone loading guns in a bathroom stall.

The witness rushed out of the bathroom and notified staff at the Publix Supermarket. When police arrived soon after, they arrested a suspect as he was exiting the bathroom -- with six loaded guns in his possession.
The suspect, identified as 22-year-old Rico Marley, now faces a slew of charges related to the incident, which came just days after 10 people were killed in a mass shooting at a supermarket in Boulder, Colorado.

According to the police incident report, Russell was entering the men's restroom when he "heard clicking sounds from the bathroom stall."
"It sounded to him like someone was loading firearms," an Atlanta officer wrote. "He also told me that he saw an AR-15 style rifle leaned against the wall."

After arresting Marley, police recovered six firearms: a DPMS AR-15-style rifle, a 12-gauge Maverick Arms Modell 88 shotgun, three semi-automatic 9 mm pistols and a .38-caliber revolver. All of the weapons were loaded and the rifle, shotgun and three 9 mm pistols all had a round in the chamber, according to the police report.
The suspect, who was wearing body armor when he was arrested, had the four handguns in his clothing while the rifle and shotgun were being carried inside a bag, the report says.

Att is a police photo of his loaded weapons. Imagine if that guy didn't hear the noise in the bathroom and alert police? yikes.
My reasoning for posting this is:

Why wasn't this HUGE nationwide news?
I happened upon this on a Yahoo news feed a couple days ago, googled and found this CNN article, and some others.
...only supposition I could arrive at was the 'suspect', that he didn't fit the 'Media's' model of the "typical" mass shooter to exploit.

An Instacart shopper believed he heard someone loading guns in a bathroom stall. Police arrested a man with 6 guns - CNN

3 days in a row I haven’t read many of the responses because I figure I already know the responses, like he was black, liberal press , blah , blah, blah the main reason it died down I suspect is because of the old newspaper saying If It Bleeds It Leads , nobody bleed , end of story.

[billethkid]

There is a significant consistency in discussions about recent shootings and that is the mis-understood and inappropriate categorization of weapons used as "ASSAULT RIFLES".

In the majority of cases they are not.

The following goes a long way to educate the meaning of AR....

Modern Sporting Rifle: Introduction • NSSF

(Some will fault the article source....if one doesn't like this one just google "what is an assault rifle"....they all state the same)

It is recognized that becoming aware of the real description it will not be acknowledged by the anti gun agenda, jargon, rhetoric and special interest urban legends.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Northwoods

OBB. I agree with you.

I agree with you about mandatory background checks, classroom and target instruction.
I believe guns should be treated like owning a car and having a Drivers license.
I don’t have an issue with banning assault weapons. I can’t imagine a reason for having one.
I believe there are many law-abiding people who own guns. They should be able to own guns.

Just not the guns you don't like...

Oh, and please tell me, what other Constitutionally Protected Right requirers classroom and target instruction and licensing?

Hell, there are waaaay to many that believe that simply showing an ID to vote is an infringement...

But sure, add more hoops to jump thru to own a gun, when we already have thousands of laws on the books that aren't enforced...

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Just not the guns you don't like...

Oh, and please tell me, what other Constitutionally Protected Right requirers classroom and target instruction and licensing?

Hell, there are waaaay to many that believe that simply showing an ID to vote is an infringement...

But sure, add more hoops to jump thru to own a gun, when we already have thousands of laws on the books that aren't enforced...

No other constitutionally protected right involves targets. Not sure where you thought you were going with that one.

There are, however, rules and regs for all other constitutionally protected rights. Each right comes with it certain responsibilities. Like, freedom of religion for example:

You have the right to practice your religion. HOWEVER: if practicing your religion requires that you stop in the middle of the highway because it's noon, getting out of your car, laying a prayer mat down, and praying on your knees facing Mecca for 5 minutes every day, then no - you don't have that right.

Back to weapons: it is illegal to possess a grenade or a bomb. Those are weapons, and it's been illegal to posses them since 1938. I don't hear anyone hollering about those, why the fuss about semi-automatic weapons? Buy a rifle or pistol if that's what you'd like to do. Nothing wrong with it. Just make sure it's registered, and make sure you know how to use it, how NOT to use it, when to use it, when NOT to use it. Make sure that if you plan on using it on a person, you don't miss.

It's not much to ask, really.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

No other constitutionally protected right involves targets. Not sure where you thought you were going with that one.

There are, however, rules and regs for all other constitutionally protected rights. Each right comes with it certain responsibilities. Like, freedom of religion for example:

You have the right to practice your religion. HOWEVER: if practicing your religion requires that you stop in the middle of the highway because it's noon, getting out of your car, laying a prayer mat down, and praying on your knees facing Mecca for 5 minutes every day, then no - you don't have that right.

Nice red herring...

Back to weapons: it is illegal to possess a grenade or a bomb. Those are weapons, and it's been illegal to posses them since 1938.

No, you most certainly can own a grenade. Just get the proper tax stamp...

As for a bomb... Define what kind of bomb...

But we're not talking about those. You just threw that in to muddy up the conversation...

I don't hear anyone hollering about those, why the fuss about semi-automatic weapons? Buy a rifle or pistol if that's what you'd like to do. Nothing wrong with it. Just make sure it's registered, and make sure you know how to use it, how NOT to use it, when to use it, when NOT to use it. Make sure that if you plan on using it on a person, you don't miss.

It's not much to ask, really.

Yes, why the fuss about "semi-automatic" weapons?

You do realize that the vast majority of pistols and rifles sold are "semi-automatic" weapons, don't you? Or are you talking about something of which you have no knowledge?

And why should I be required to register anything? Registration leads to confiscation. It's happened over and over again...

Make sure I know how to use it? Not really that hard... When to use it? Again, not really that hard...

Don't miss? Did you know that the "trained law enforcement officers", you know, the ones people love to say should be the only ones who have guns? Those guys... They only hit their target 30% of the time... Adrenaline is a bitch...

[Lindsyburnsy]

More guns is nonsense. I do not want to be in a store, restaurant or anywhere else for that matter where there's a nut job who thinks he has to hitch a long gun to his backside and yet, it's inconvenient for this same guy to wear a mask? Please.

[Northwoods]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Just not the guns you don't like...

Oh, and please tell me, what other Constitutionally Protected Right requirers classroom and target instruction and licensing?

Hell, there are waaaay to many that believe that simply showing an ID to vote is an infringement...

But sure, add more hoops to jump thru to own a gun, when we already have thousands of laws on the books that aren't enforced...

As of 1986, ownership of fully automatic firearms and parts that fire bullets without stopping once the trigger is depressed is banned. Legal machine guns must be manufactured before 1986.
I believe that people have the right to own a gun for both protection and sport. I just struggle with all the deaths that have occurred by someone using a rapid fire weapon. It’s just how I feel.
Oh - and I 100% believe that you should have to show an ID to vote!!!!