CNBC: Democrats quickly call for tighter gun laws after Las Vegas shooting massacre

[jc456]

Source: CNBC.COM
Article: Democrat on Las Vegas shooting massacre: 'Time for Congress to get off its a-- and do something'

"Following the shooting, some top Democrats — often proponents of tighter restrictions on guns — urged the Republican-controlled Congress to take action to prevent similar mass shootings.


"This must stop. It is positively infuriating that my colleagues in Congress are so afraid of the gun industry that they pretend there aren't public policy responses to this epidemic," said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., in a statement. "There are, and the thoughts and prayers of politicians are cruelly hollow if they are paired with continued legislative indifference. It's time for Congress to get off its a-- and do something."

Well it certainly didn't take long for the buzzards-D to form up and start picking the corpses clean of any politically advantageous morsels they could get their bloody beaks on.

One wonders why the Democrats didn't pass any of this gun control legislation back when they had a lock on Congress in 2009, guess there wasn't any political advantage in it for 'em then.

The gun lobby pretty much clobbered them after Sandy Hook. It's about money and one issue voters. Someday perhaps Americans will support legislation limiting the number of weapons owned and their storage. I don't see that as a total fix for the problem of mass shootings. Apparantly its' ok to ban Muslims for coming here, but not ok to make gun sellers very wary about selling an individual a whole truck load of rifles.

I'm not sure why you single out people who jump on the gun legislation issue, when you know damn well the AltR would be ejaculating if this guy had been a Muslim. Just look at the fake threads yesterday.

We need guns to protect ourselves from THE RACIST VIOLENT DEMOCRAT PARTY. Look how many GOP Congressmen, Trump Supporters, Country Music Fans they have tried to kill. They even killed Seth Rich, and threatened to assassinate the president.

Yeah they're coming for you chump. LOL

I believe that.

 

[hunarcy]

The right, if you read the Amendment is not reserved to the militia. It is the right of THE PEOPLE that is preserved.

That would make sense if it was a completely separate sentence. The problem with your logic is that the comma makes it contingent on the first part of the sentence.

And the problem with your interpretation is that you are giving the dependent clause the same weight as the independent clause. But, the fact remains that the people who wrote the 2nd Amendment had already used the word "militia", so obviously they could spell it. They CHOSE the word "People" because the right was not limited to the Militia.

No they chose the word "people" because they had no standing military reserve like they do now. The needed ordinary civilians to be their reserves.

That's what YOU believe, but the fact is that they said "the People" not the militia.

They said "the people" in order to populate a well regulated militia. I thought they taught reading comprehension where you are from?

Your slap was weak and ineffective. Even you admit they said "the People" which means it's an individual right, not dependent on being part of a militia. Good day.

 

[hunarcy]

The right, if you read the Amendment is not reserved to the militia. It is the right of THE PEOPLE that is preserved.

That would make sense if it was a completely separate sentence. The problem with your logic is that the comma makes it contingent on the first part of the sentence.

And the problem with your interpretation is that you are giving the dependent clause the same weight as the independent clause. But, the fact remains that the people who wrote the 2nd Amendment had already used the word "militia", so obviously they could spell it. They CHOSE the word "People" because the right was not limited to the Militia.

Militias relied on an armed population for their members. Militias were not armed, soldiers brought their own weapons

They wanted them well regulated so that they were trained, had an organizational structure and they knew who needed to be contacted

Yes, so the PEOPLE kept their arms and joined the militia as they chose. Same as now.

You dont keep your arms now. They issue you one.

Nope. I exercise my individual right and own my firearm.

 

[paperview]

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump

President Obama spoke for me and every American in his remarks in #Newtown Connecticut.

3:21 PM - 17 Dec 2012

 

[MikeK]

Well, that's true. Of course, Sandy Hook and Aurora and Tuscon and the Pulse Night Club and Las Vegas hadn't happened yet. So I guess they didn't have their crystal balls.

But now that those things have happened, how do we sensibly address them.

They all have one root cause- Mentally unstable people having access to military grade, semi-automatic weapons.

1) What makes a semi-auto weapon "military grade?"

2) If a ban were imposed on the type of weapons you are referring to, do you truly believe the ban could function more effectively than does the ban on recreational narcotics?

3) If your neighborhood is invaded by aggressive rioters who are armed with "military grade" weaponry, unless you believe that couldn't happen, wouldn't you like to have a defensive "military grade" weapon in a closet? Or do you not believe in the fundamental motivation and purpose for the Second Amendment? Or are you one of those Americans who are conditioned to depend on others to protect you?

 

[MikeK]

[QUOTE="Asclepias, post: 18276183, member: 44774]"Any gun can pretty much be turned into an auto.[/quote]
Not true.

No way that they are going to ban all guns.

Quite true. The drug war is manifest evidence that government bans cannot work in a democracy.

 

[jon_berzerk]

--LOL

since when did the government start handing out firearms

a trumpgun

similiar to the obamaphone

--LOL

Since people joined the military or the reserves. Long before Drumpf was around.

hey dummy that is not the militia

Hey dummy thats what the Militia Act says.

Militia (United States) - Wikipedia

Today, as defined by the Militia Act of 1903, the term "militia" is primarily used to describe two groups within the United States:

• Organized militia – consisting of State militia forces; notably, the National Guard and Naval Militia.[9] (Note: the National Guard is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States.)
• Unorganized militia – composing the Reserve Militia: every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age, not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.[10]

state national guard dummy the federal reserve is not the militia

perpich vs dod

I didnt say the federal reserve was the militia dummy. How did you get so confused? I guess now youre going to claim National guard doesnt issue you a weapon?

which guard fuck head

 

[Skull Pilot]

Well, that's true. Of course, Sandy Hook and Aurora and Tuscon and the Pulse Night Club and Las Vegas hadn't happened yet. So I guess they didn't have their crystal balls.

But now that those things have happened, how do we sensibly address them.

They all have one root cause- Mentally unstable people having access to military grade, semi-automatic weapons.

1) What makes a semi-auto weapon "military grade?"

2) If a ban were imposed on the type of weapons you are referring to, do you truly believe the ban could function more effectively than does the ban on recreational narcotics?

3) If your neighborhood is invaded by aggressive rioters who are armed with "military grade" weaponry, unless you believe that couldn't happen, wouldn't you like to have a defensive "military grade" weapon in a closet? Or do you not believe in the fundamental motivation and purpose for the Second Amendment? Or are you one of those Americans who are conditioned to depend on others to protect you?

FYI That quote is wrongly attributed to me.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The thing is, it's kind of their job to know they are selling a deadly object to a nut.

It is? I've yet to know of a gun store that requires you to see the gun store psychiatrist before selling you a weapon.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

We should ban penises, to stop rape.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

33,635 were killed by guns, what percentage of those were killed by illegal guns? Without looking over 50%. Then consider how many were killed because they had it coming.

The you have to consider that suicides are part of that "killed by guns" number, and they make up the most of that amount.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Someday perhaps Americans will support legislation limiting the number of weapons owned and their storage.

Why? What would that change?

This guy was a model citizen. He was never in trouble with the law, he was financially successful, he never bothered anybody, and he bought his guns legally.

So what law could have stopped this guy from doing what he did?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's the thing. When the DC Sniper killed all those people, they found the gun stores that sold him guns (Despite being a convicted felon) to be liable.

Then low and behold, Congress passed a law that immunizes gun sellers.

Not really......

Sanders also voted in favor of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005, which provided some protections for licensed manufacturers, dealers, sellers of firearms or ammunition, and trade associations from civil lawsuits resulting from the misuse of firearms or ammunition. But gun makers and dealers did not receive a “total pass,” as Clinton claimed.

As the Congressional Research Service pointed out in a 2012 report, the legislation included six exceptions where civil suits could still be brought, including cases in which a firearm seller acted with negligence, cases involving the transfer of a firearm with the knowledge that it would be used to commit a crime, and cases in which manufacturers and sellers marketed or sold a firearm in violation of state or federal law.

FactChecking the Fourth Democratic Debate - FactCheck.org

 

[jillian]

Source: CNBC.COM
Article: Democrat on Las Vegas shooting massacre: 'Time for Congress to get off its a-- and do something'

"Following the shooting, some top Democrats — often proponents of tighter restrictions on guns — urged the Republican-controlled Congress to take action to prevent similar mass shootings.


"This must stop. It is positively infuriating that my colleagues in Congress are so afraid of the gun industry that they pretend there aren't public policy responses to this epidemic," said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., in a statement. "There are, and the thoughts and prayers of politicians are cruelly hollow if they are paired with continued legislative indifference. It's time for Congress to get off its a-- and do something."

Well it certainly didn't take long for the buzzards-D to form up and start picking the corpses clean of any politically advantageous morsels they could get their bloody beaks on.

One wonders why the Democrats didn't pass any of this gun control legislation back when they had a lock on Congress in 2009, guess there wasn't any political advantage in it for 'em then.

anyone normal should call for sane gun regulation, numb nuts

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

then simply tell me how banning bump devices and >20 round mags would have stopped this.

not saying we can't stop it. but how will the actions *force* a change? "hope" won't do it and you'll never get that past the NRA.

I have a very simple solution.

Make the gun sellers responsible. ALlow victims of gun violence to sue the people who sell guns to the crazies.

Yesterday, stock in MGM dropped 5%? Why? Because the survivors of yesterday's attack will sue the owners of the Mandalay for not catching this guy as he set up a sniper's nest in their hotel.

But the people who sold him 28 guns and thousands of rounds of ammunition, they are immunized from legal action.

How were they to know WTF he was doing? Do you think they have a camera set up in every hotel room or something?

 

[bodecea]

Remember this gun control law? Mulford Act - Wikipedia

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

so - just what laws need to be passed?

-10 for anyone who proposes a law already on the books.

Based on Sundays shooting

- Ban devices that allow you to modify semi-automatics to fire at high rates
- Ban magazines larger than 20 rounds

So what do you suppose banning 20+ magazines would do? Do you know how quickly one can change a magazine..... especially if you practice changing them?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

http://www.slidefire.com/

Bump firing is a well-established capability that uses the recoil of a semi-automatic firearm to fire multiple shots in rapid succession. The patented Slide Fire® rifle stock allows shooters to safely and accurately bump fire their rifles without compromising safety and accuracy.

The Slide Fire® stock is fun, exciting and entertaining. As always, practice safe firearm procedures when using any firearm. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has approved the Slide Fire stock where firearms are legal. Our patented technology allows for an alternate shooting technique whereby safe, reliable rapid fire is possible.

View attachment 152511

like this is some sort of "news" to a gun guy

--LOL

a much better system is the binary trigger

takes some getting used to

Evidently, the shooter in Vegas was very familiar with them

Now, why does anyone need these firing ranges outside of shooting up a concert or maybe a classroom full of small children?

Calif. schools police buy 14 AR-15s to protect students

Florida man uses AK-47 to defend himself against three armed assailants (VIDEO)

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Do they really think any law will stop mass-shootings?
No.

How many mass shooting has Australia had since they banned guns? None.

How many mass shootings has the UK had since they banned guns. They've had one.

Yes, laws can really stop these things from happening.

Australia Admits Gun Control FAILURE; Announces Change

 

[MikeK]

FYI That quote is wrongly attributed to me.

Sorry.