88 people killed in 16 mass shootings in USA..

[GoneBezerk]

Uh, the school shooter killed with handguns, he didn't show up like Rambo with a machine gun mowing down kids. He went room to room shooting them with handguns because nobody in the school had a handgun to shoot back at him.

So liberals that want to take away all guns to so-called make the world safer are full of shit. Criminals won't turn in their guns when obamination gets on his blowhard blowhorn and tells everyone to turn them in by midnight next Saturday.

Evil people will always get their hands on a weapon to rob a store or shoot up a school, so punishing Joe Schmoe for wanting to have gun in his house for his family's protection shows how fucked up liberals are.

Liberal scum here need to defend the number of people killed by criminals in 1-3 people killed incidents which blows away the "mass murder" stories that make headlines.

But of course, all those criminals will just turn in their guns when you tell them, eh dumbfucks???

Criminals will not turn in their guns, that's true. The rest of the rant is ridiculous. Liberals (small l) and other normal people don't see mass murder as a story, we see it as a horrific event with many causes - one of which is the weapon used.

The idiot fringe, of which GoneBezerk is a proud and uncivilized member, dismiss the murder of 20-first graders as the cost of freedom - I ask whose freedom? Something must be done to limit the ability of those few intent on doing evil from the ability to do so.

We paint with a broad brush whenever one of us chooses to fly today, it is past time to inconvenience the gun owner with the broad brush of gun control. It's time to take the nation back from the idiot fringe and from those who choose profit over innocent victims; who consider their deaths simply the cost (to others) of doing business.

 

[Nosmo King]

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

 

[OODA_Loop]

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

Stops criminals pretty effectively.

Practically every cop cruiser in the country has one.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Most people aren't a good shot when under pressure of death, so having some extra bullets to put in the person trying to kill them is smart.

That woman in GA that shot a piece of shit in her home hit him 5 out of 6 bullets....but he still was able to escape.

Maybe if she put a few more bullets in him with a gun using a gun clip, then he would be dead today, not still alive costing taxpayers money to keep him alive before he goes to jail for a short term.....to come after her again someday.

Criminals don't have a right to live when they enter someone's house without permission, so limiting a person's number of bullets they can own or put in a gun is supporting the criminal....like liberals usually do.

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

 

[JakeStarkey]

GB confuses (surprised, folks?) the effort to halt shootings like Newtown with taking guns out of houses.

No one credible is saying the 2d Amendment should be overturned. That will not happen.

 

[Nosmo King]

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

Stops criminals pretty effectively.

Practically every cop cruiser in the country has one.

So they are a weapon best suited for law enforcement. Fine. Why should a private citizen have one? What's the virtue of such weapons in the hands of private citizens?

 

[Nosmo King]

Most people aren't a good shot when under pressure of death, so having some extra bullets to put in the person trying to kill them is smart.

That woman in GA that shot a piece of shit in her home hit him 5 out of 6 bullets....but he still was able to escape.

Maybe if she put a few more bullets in him with a gun using a gun clip, then he would be dead today, not still alive costing taxpayers money to keep him alive before he goes to jail for a short term.....to come after her again someday.

Criminals don't have a right to live when they enter someone's house without permission, so limiting a person's number of bullets they can own or put in a gun is supporting the criminal....like liberals usually do.

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

Wouldn't a shot gun prove to be effective? If it's a matter of throwing more bullets around, should private citizens, who are admittedly poor marksmen, have the ability to shoot poorly with more bullets?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Uh, the school shooter killed with handguns, he didn't show up like Rambo with a machine gun mowing down kids. He went room to room shooting them with handguns because nobody in the school had a handgun to shoot back at him.

So liberals that want to take away all guns to so-called make the world safer are full of shit. Criminals won't turn in their guns when obamination gets on his blowhard blowhorn and tells everyone to turn them in by midnight next Saturday.

Evil people will always get their hands on a weapon to rob a store or shoot up a school, so punishing Joe Schmoe for wanting to have gun in his house for his family's protection shows how fucked up liberals are.

Liberal scum here need to defend the number of people killed by criminals in 1-3 people killed incidents which blows away the "mass murder" stories that make headlines.

But of course, all those criminals will just turn in their guns when you tell them, eh dumbfucks???

Criminals will not turn in their guns, that's true. The rest of the rant is ridiculous. Liberals (small l) and other normal people don't see mass murder as a story, we see it as a horrific event with many causes - one of which is the weapon used.

The idiot fringe, of which GoneBezerk is a proud and uncivilized member, dismiss the murder of 20-first graders as the cost of freedom - I ask whose freedom? Something must be done to limit the ability of those few intent on doing evil from the ability to do so.

We paint with a broad brush whenever one of us chooses to fly today, it is past time to inconvenience the gun owner with the broad brush of gun control. It's time to take the nation back from the idiot fringe and from those who choose profit over innocent victims; who consider their deaths simply the cost (to others) of doing business.

The BIG LIE: " so punishing Joe Schmoe for wanting to have gun in his house for his family's protection shows how fucked up liberals are."

This is the lie told over and over ad nausea and shows how dishonest the debate on gun control has become. Rational people, and this is not directed to GoneBezerk, understand that the Second Amendment is not sacrosanct and efforts to reduce gun violence can be done without punishing the Joe Schmoes of the nation.

 

[Nosmo King]

Hunting to this area of the country is what skiing is to Vail. Politicians know this and every election cycle brings another round of threatening ads from the NRA and other lackeys of the gun makers. They tell us every four years of how the Democrats want to take away our guns. Just as the sun rises in the East and just as the Winter Olympics are less fun than the Summer Olympics, we get the same threats, the same lies, the same dose of political pablum.

We're smarter than that, ion spite of what the ads say. And we're smart enough to recognize that "mass shootings" are wrought from high capacity magazines.

A classroom of first graders riddled with as many as seven shots apiece certainly deserves an honest debate. a debate unfettered by distractions as presented in the OP. A debate free of lies like "liberals that want to take away all guns to so-called (sic) make the world safer".

 

[OODA_Loop]

Wouldn't a shot gun prove to be effective? If it's a matter of throwing more bullets around, should private citizens, who are admittedly poor marksmen, have the ability to shoot poorly with more bullets?

No. Most LE agencies have replaced the shotgun with the 5.56 carbine (predominantely AR15 platform). Less recoil, better sights and way more accurate.

5.56 has pretty effective single shot stopping power.

 

[OODA_Loop]

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

Stops criminals pretty effectively.

Practically every cop cruiser in the country has one.

So they are a weapon best suited for law enforcement. Fine. Why should a private citizen have one? What's the virtue of such weapons in the hands of private citizens?

I can stop criminals equally as effectively.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Uh liberal scum like you, the gov of NY, said he is looking into banning guns in NY against the second amendment.

You are full of shit to claim the end state for liberals isn't taking away the guns they can get their hands on....which is the law-abiding citizens too scared to hide a gun in their home against some law.

Criminals don't give a shit about your laws or you....they will still shoot you even it is "illegal," idiot.

Uh, the school shooter killed with handguns, he didn't show up like Rambo with a machine gun mowing down kids. He went room to room shooting them with handguns because nobody in the school had a handgun to shoot back at him.

So liberals that want to take away all guns to so-called make the world safer are full of shit. Criminals won't turn in their guns when obamination gets on his blowhard blowhorn and tells everyone to turn them in by midnight next Saturday.

Evil people will always get their hands on a weapon to rob a store or shoot up a school, so punishing Joe Schmoe for wanting to have gun in his house for his family's protection shows how fucked up liberals are.

Criminals will not turn in their guns, that's true. The rest of the rant is ridiculous. Liberals (small l) and other normal people don't see mass murder as a story, we see it as a horrific event with many causes - one of which is the weapon used.

The idiot fringe, of which GoneBezerk is a proud and uncivilized member, dismiss the murder of 20-first graders as the cost of freedom - I ask whose freedom? Something must be done to limit the ability of those few intent on doing evil from the ability to do so.

We paint with a broad brush whenever one of us chooses to fly today, it is past time to inconvenience the gun owner with the broad brush of gun control. It's time to take the nation back from the idiot fringe and from those who choose profit over innocent victims; who consider their deaths simply the cost (to others) of doing business.

The BIG LIE: " so punishing Joe Schmoe for wanting to have gun in his house for his family's protection shows how fucked up liberals are."

This is the lie told over and over ad nausea and shows how dishonest the debate on gun control has become. Rational people, and this is not directed to GoneBezerk, understand that the Second Amendment is not sacrosanct and efforts to reduce gun violence can be done without punishing the Joe Schmoes of the nation.

 

[Nosmo King]

Wouldn't a shot gun prove to be effective? If it's a matter of throwing more bullets around, should private citizens, who are admittedly poor marksmen, have the ability to shoot poorly with more bullets?

No. Most LE agencies have replaced the shotgun with the 5.56 carbine (predominantely AR15 platform). Less recoil, better sights and way more accurate.

5.56 has pretty effective single shot stopping power.

But again, the weapon is better suited for use by law enforcement or in a military setting, not on the streets.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

One of its uses is to hunt hogs which provides food for local communities.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Swinging a shotgun around a house isn't optimal like a handgun or "assault weapon" with a shorter length than a shotgun.

A criminal can see your shotgun sticking out from the corner, but he can't see your handgun behind the corner prior to coming around to shoot him.

That woman in GA would be up shit creek going into her crawl space with a shotgun....

Most people aren't a good shot when under pressure of death, so having some extra bullets to put in the person trying to kill them is smart.

That woman in GA that shot a piece of shit in her home hit him 5 out of 6 bullets....but he still was able to escape.

Maybe if she put a few more bullets in him with a gun using a gun clip, then he would be dead today, not still alive costing taxpayers money to keep him alive before he goes to jail for a short term.....to come after her again someday.

Criminals don't have a right to live when they enter someone's house without permission, so limiting a person's number of bullets they can own or put in a gun is supporting the criminal....like liberals usually do.

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

Wouldn't a shot gun prove to be effective? If it's a matter of throwing more bullets around, should private citizens, who are admittedly poor marksmen, have the ability to shoot poorly with more bullets?

 

[Nosmo King]

What is the virtue of a semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? What indispensible good does it provide society?

One of its uses is to hunt hogs which provides food for local communities.

Were there no hogs felled before the advent of the semi-automatic weapon fitted with a high capacity magazine? And does that virtue outweigh the carnage wrought by such weapons? Is hog hunting the indispensable good that means we must suffer the agony of class rooms turned into battle zones?

 

[Ernie S.]

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 32,885 people died in traffic crashes in 2010 in the United States (latest figures available),
including an estimated 10,228 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31% of all traffic deaths last year.

Since NHTSA began recording alcohol-related statistics in 1982, drunk driving fatalities have decreased 52% from 21,113 in 1982.
Since the inception of The Century Council and our national efforts to fight drunk driving, drunk driving fatalities have declined 35% from 15,827 in 1991. (Source: NHTSA/FARS, 2011)

Sixteen US Mass Shootings Happened in 2012, Leaving at Least 88 Dead | The Nation

A drunk driver in 2010 killed 115 people for every one person killed in a mass killing in 2012.

Where is the media on Banning alcohol which causes drunken behavior which causes driving accidents which causes killings?

Shouldn't every drunk driver that kills someone be executed???

It's time to regulate vehicle fuel capacity. No one NEEDS a 30 gallon gas tank.

 

[Nosmo King]

Swinging a shotgun around a house isn't optimal like a handgun or "assault weapon" with a shorter length than a shotgun.

A criminal can see your shotgun sticking out from the corner, but he can't see your handgun behind the corner prior to coming around to shoot him.

That woman in GA would be up shit creek going into her crawl space with a shotgun....

Most people aren't a good shot when under pressure of death, so having some extra bullets to put in the person trying to kill them is smart.

That woman in GA that shot a piece of shit in her home hit him 5 out of 6 bullets....but he still was able to escape.

Maybe if she put a few more bullets in him with a gun using a gun clip, then he would be dead today, not still alive costing taxpayers money to keep him alive before he goes to jail for a short term.....to come after her again someday.

Criminals don't have a right to live when they enter someone's house without permission, so limiting a person's number of bullets they can own or put in a gun is supporting the criminal....like liberals usually do.

Wouldn't a shot gun prove to be effective? If it's a matter of throwing more bullets around, should private citizens, who are admittedly poor marksmen, have the ability to shoot poorly with more bullets?

I own a shotgun for home defense. Thankfully I have never had to use it. But my plan in the event of an intruder is to call out that I have a shot gun, a telephone and I know how to use both. The sound of racking a round into the chamber should act as quite the deterrent. Moving about my house with a shotgun in hand is not a clumsy act. And I hold sufficient fire power to stop any intruder.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Wouldn't a shot gun prove to be effective? If it's a matter of throwing more bullets around, should private citizens, who are admittedly poor marksmen, have the ability to shoot poorly with more bullets?

No. Most LE agencies have replaced the shotgun with the 5.56 carbine (predominantly AR15 platform). Less recoil, better sights and way more accurate.

5.56 has pretty effective single shot stopping power.

But again, the weapon is better suited for use by law enforcement or in a military setting, not on the streets.

Not according to the Supreme Court which says the test is weapons in "common use"

There are estimated 4 million AR15s in the country, including practically every police car.
I bought mine at Walmart. Pretty common use.

 

[Nosmo King]

No. Most LE agencies have replaced the shotgun with the 5.56 carbine (predominantly AR15 platform). Less recoil, better sights and way more accurate.

5.56 has pretty effective single shot stopping power.

But again, the weapon is better suited for use by law enforcement or in a military setting, not on the streets.

Not according to the Supreme Court which says the test is weapons in "common use"

There are estimated 4 million AR15s in the country, including practically every police car.
I bought mine at Walmart. Pretty common use.

But the virtues you listed were all concerned with law enforcement. Does that justify an arms race on the streets of America?