Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Americas


Thanks Tree32Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 3rd, 2017, 10:53 AM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: In
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
An intelligent law which would ban all semi-automatic rifles and make it a felony with a mandatory 10 year no parole sentence for owning one would greatly decrease the casualty numbers, just for one.

LOL

Gun grabbing won't work. Semi-autos aren't a problem.

The Second Amendment presents gun grabbers with a real problem.
Kelvin is offline  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 11:00 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
An intelligent law which would ban all semi-automatic rifles and make it a felony with a mandatory 10 year no parole sentence for owning one would greatly decrease the casualty numbers, just for one.
They have a lot of "intelligent" laws regarding alcohol and drugs, yet DUIs claim as many lives as firearms. Let's see how many lives we can save by outlawing automobiles and alcoholic drinks.

You advocate gun bans here and you love to "ban" people that disagree with you. It comes to the point that gun grabbers have zero credibility.
Thanks from Sabcat

Last edited by discollector; October 3rd, 2017 at 11:07 AM.
discollector is offline  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 11:00 AM   #23
Mayor of Realville
 
webguy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,928
I haven't heard one gun law proposed that would have slowed this guy down. He had lots of money, no desire to live, and a clean record.

Describe a gun control law that would slow the Las Vegas shooker down if you can.
Thanks from Sabcat
webguy4 is offline  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 11:18 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nwolfe35 View Post
It was ONE PERSON with a SHIT LOAD OF GUNS AND AMMUNITION. Could one person with a knife kill 59 and wound over 500? Could one person with a pistol? Could one person with a car?

Furthermore could one person with any of those items have done it while barricaded in a hotel room at a distance of about 300 yards? You want a weapon to go hunting? Great. You want something for home defense? I'll back you 100%! You explain to the families of those killed why ONE MAN needs over 2 DOZEN rifles and THOUSANDS of rounds of ammunition.
Why does anyone "need" to be able to purchase 24 cans of beer at one time?

Why does anyone "need" a car that exceeds the speed limit?

Is it more palatable that 60 people are killed by DUI because it's done two or three people per accident as opposed to a killing spree where the damage is done all at once?
Thanks from guy39 and Sabcat
discollector is offline  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 11:22 AM   #25
Mayor of Realville
 
webguy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nwolfe35 View Post
It was ONE PERSON with a SHIT LOAD OF GUNS AND AMMUNITION. Could one person with a knife kill 59 and wound over 500? Could one person with a pistol? Could one person with a car?

Furthermore could one person with any of those items have done it while barricaded in a hotel room at a distance of about 300 yards? You want a weapon to go hunting? Great. You want something for home defense? I'll back you 100%! You explain to the families of those killed why ONE MAN needs over 2 DOZEN rifles and THOUSANDS of rounds of ammunition.
I dropped out of chemistry, and I could go to a couple of grocery stores and maybe a hardware store and easily make stuff that would hurt just as many people in a crowd.
Thanks from Sabcat
webguy4 is offline  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 11:25 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 6,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
An intelligent law which would ban all semi-automatic rifles and make it a felony with a mandatory 10 year no parole sentence for owning one would greatly decrease the casualty numbers, just for one.
I'm sorry I just have to wade in here. Prohibition didn't stop the flow of alcohol in this country. In some case it actually went up. All it did was make a small hand full of criminals very rich, including the Kennedy clan. It also brought a new level of violence to our cities not seen before. A bottle for scotch that sold for $3 was now $30 and people were willing to kill over territories, trade routes and production capabilities.

The war on drugs has been raging for 30 years now. On a good year we stop, at most, TWO percent of the drugs flowing into this country. With the war on drugs we have more people incarcerated than China or India who have 4 times out population. You can watch the news on almost any night and see violence directly related to the drug trade. And again all we've succeeded on doing is making a small number of increasingly violent cartels very very rich.

With an estimated 300 million guns already in the country, and more than 6000 miles of border between both Canada and Mexico and another 6000 miles of coast line there is simply no practical way to stop guns, or anything else for that fact from flowing into the country. All outlawing guns or even certain models, would do is make those already here much more valuable and entice traffickers to start bringing them in. Gun bans would be no more effective than prohibition was against alcohol or the current war on drugs. The fact remains the gun used, if indeed a full automatic was most likely ILLEGAL. He was breaking the law simply being in possession of it without an FFL .

This shooter is among the most troubling of all. By all outward appearances he was neither political or religious. He was retired at 64 which along with being an account, having a pilots license (not a cheap hobby) and playing $100 a hand poker, certainly indicated at least a middle class affluence. He should have had easy enough access to mental health care. Yet no one had any indication he was about to commit this horror.

Do you really think a few new laws would have stopped this man ??
Thanks from Sabcat
BubbaJones is online now  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 11:54 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 17,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nwolfe35 View Post
It was ONE PERSON with a SHIT LOAD OF GUNS AND AMMUNITION. Could one person with a knife kill 59 and wound over 500? Could one person with a pistol? Could one person with a car?

Furthermore could one person with any of those items have done it while barricaded in a hotel room at a distance of about 300 yards? You want a weapon to go hunting? Great. You want something for home defense? I'll back you 100%! You explain to the families of those killed why ONE MAN needs over 2 DOZEN rifles and THOUSANDS of rounds of ammunition.
So the answer to that is what? Whether a crazy person buys them legally or obtains them illegally, what is your suggested recourse? I have several different guns. Each one for a specific purpose. Am I to limited to the amount of weapons I can accumulate? Am I to be told that I can only buy a certain amount of ammo for those guns because some crazy person went off the deep end? I will legally keep my guns and ammo and no one is going to tell me I don't have that right because of ONE CRAZY PERSONS!!
caconservative is online now  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 12:38 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Katmandu
Posts: 4,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
An intelligent law which would ban all semi-automatic rifles and make it a felony with a mandatory 10 year no parole sentence for owning one would greatly decrease the casualty numbers, just for one.
What about semi-automatic shotguns?

Semi-auto handguns?
Libertine is offline  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 01:04 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 420
If you give up your weapons, will antifa give up theirs?

Will the drug dealers and desperate drug users not feel even more emboldened to attack people they know cannot defend themselves?

Who will serve as the bulwark against tyranny if America disarms?

If firearms are outlawed, millions will not comply. America already has the most prisons in the entire world. At what point does the prison population become financially unbearable for the taxpayer?

Right now with ISIS claiming responsibility for having radicalized this guy, a big mistake would be to think they don't have that capability. It's either that or he was on SSRIs. Maybe it's time to start thinking about real ways of dealing with political jihadists and those who are addicted to "legal drugs" ... the ones whose known side effects are thoughts of suicide and homicide.
Thanks from Sabcat
discollector is offline  
Old October 3rd, 2017, 01:21 PM   #30
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 26,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaJones View Post
I'm sorry I just have to wade in here. Prohibition didn't stop the flow of alcohol in this country. In some case it actually went up. All it did was make a small hand full of criminals very rich, including the Kennedy clan. It also brought a new level of violence to our cities not seen before. A bottle for scotch that sold for $3 was now $30 and people were willing to kill over territories, trade routes and production capabilities.

The war on drugs has been raging for 30 years now. On a good year we stop, at most, TWO percent of the drugs flowing into this country. With the war on drugs we have more people incarcerated than China or India who have 4 times out population. You can watch the news on almost any night and see violence directly related to the drug trade. And again all we've succeeded on doing is making a small number of increasingly violent cartels very very rich.

With an estimated 300 million guns already in the country, and more than 6000 miles of border between both Canada and Mexico and another 6000 miles of coast line there is simply no practical way to stop guns, or anything else for that fact from flowing into the country. All outlawing guns or even certain models, would do is make those already here much more valuable and entice traffickers to start bringing them in. Gun bans would be no more effective than prohibition was against alcohol or the current war on drugs. The fact remains the gun used, if indeed a full automatic was most likely ILLEGAL. He was breaking the law simply being in possession of it without an FFL .

This shooter is among the most troubling of all. By all outward appearances he was neither political or religious. He was retired at 64 which along with being an account, having a pilots license (not a cheap hobby) and playing $100 a hand poker, certainly indicated at least a middle class affluence. He should have had easy enough access to mental health care. Yet no one had any indication he was about to commit this horror.

Do you really think a few new laws would have stopped this man ??
Then explain to me why the US is such an outlier in all stats regarding gun deaths and injuries compared to countries that have significant restrictions on weapon types and ownership.
RNG is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Americas

Tags
argument, bastards, set, terms



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Progressives and redefining terms Sabcat Political Talk 62 March 8th, 2016 07:49 AM
His Terms Are Always Hostile Ones Truth Detector Current Events 37 January 24th, 2013 11:51 AM
Petition for limiting Congressional terms.. Kate Current Events 5 January 24th, 2013 05:32 AM
Gay Marriage Is A Contradiction Of Terms Little man Gay and Lesbian Rights 3 May 28th, 2011 05:22 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.