"Common Sense" Gun Control

[daveman]

I'm not impressed by someone misusing the term red herring.

It's just common sense to limit magazine size and I'd limit it to five rounds, like they do in hunting in some states.

You want to argue that limiting magazine size has no effect in a shootout or mass murder situation and that just doesn't make sense to any rational person. The fact is you are irrational and you don't have the sense to realize that when society has to deal with a group of irrational people, we are going to make laws harder on them than we would if they acting like rational people.

You are your own worse enemy. You don't have the numbers to win this battle and you're going to lose either way. We're not going to make laws based on what the kooks want.

Magazine size has no effect on crime either way.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf

Myth: High capacity guns lead to more deadly shootings
Fact: Much of this myth comes from the fact that the general availability of high-capacity handguns briefly preceded the rise in the crack cocaine trade, which brought a new kind of violence in local drug wars.408
Fact: The number of shots fired by criminals has not changed significantly even with the increased capacity of handguns and other firearms. Indeed, the number of shots from revolvers (all with a 6-8 round capacity) and semi-automatics were about the same – 2.04 vs. 2.53.409 In a crime or gun battle, there is seldom time or need to shoot more.
Fact: Fatal criminal shootings declined from 4.3% to 3.3% from 1974 through 1995, when ownership of semi-automatics and large capacity handguns were rising at their fastest rate.410 Fatal shootings of police officers declined sharply from 1988 through 1993.411
Fact: Drug dealers tend to be “more deliberate in their efforts to kill their victims by shooting them multiple times.”412​

Maybe you should call for all guns to be single-shot only.

Check the polls on how many people want a limit on magazine size! You people keep saying it makes no difference, but you aren't going to convince us. We've seen shootouts with police.

Check the polls on how many people like Justin Bieber.

Meanwhile, now you've seen the facts regarding magazine size. But you don't give a damn about facts, do you?

 

[Dubya]

People create violence not weapons.

People were violent before there were guns and they will be violent if guns are taken away.

That is even more reason to have a weapon because if weapons are banned then 2 or 3 people can over power one unarmed man where one man with a weapon can hold them off.

Then they can create it without a gun.

I just said that didn't I ?

people are violent guns are not. guns do not cause violence people do.

I have owned guns since I got an air rifle when I was 6 or 7 and I own several now and I have never once committed an act of violence with or without a gun. Now can you guarantee me that no one will ever commit or attempt to commit an act of violence against me or my wife?

No, you didn't say it. I'm talking about making it too hard for them to get guns.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Will you allow me the same freedom if I lived right next door to you and you KNEW I wasn't right in the head?

There is no way for me to know if you are not right in the head.

Come on. Don't evade. You've known people you wouldn't want living right next door and armed to the teeth. So have I. So has anyone.

Why shouldn't that person have the same right to own any weapon he likes, in any quantity, the same as you?

If you asked everyone who knows me if I owned any firearms most of them would tell you that they have no idea.

So I don't find it implausible not to know how many guns someone living in my neighborhood may have.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Then they can create it without a gun.

I just said that didn't I ?

people are violent guns are not. guns do not cause violence people do.

I have owned guns since I got an air rifle when I was 6 or 7 and I own several now and I have never once committed an act of violence with or without a gun. Now can you guarantee me that no one will ever commit or attempt to commit an act of violence against me or my wife?

No, you didn't say it. I'm talking about making it too hard for them to get guns.

No you're talking about making it too hard for anyone to get guns.

 

[Oldguy]

A responsible person accepts the consequences of everything he does.

Not everyone is responsible and you can count on that. So, what do we do? Nothing? Just allow the irresponsible to wreak havoc on the rest of us?

No. We institute laws to punish them when they do, such as drunk driving laws. No, those laws can't PREVENT someone from driving drunk, but they CAN work to discourage them from doing so. And, that works on me! Fear of being caught has ended my drunk driving days. How about you?

Not at all. Just like no one has the right to sell poisoned food to the public.

Right. So, if we can have laws to prevent the selling of dangerous foods, why not laws to prevent the selling of dangerous weapons?

The weapon itself cannot hurt anyone else. The person wielding the weapon can injure himself and I have never accidentally shot anything in all the years I have owned firearms.

But, others have....regularly. Should we just allow them to continue doing so?

Any AR15 available for public purchase is nothing more than a semiautomatic rifle.

So tell me what makes it an "assault" rifle?

According the the recently passed New York law, an assault weapon is any weapon which accepts a removable magazine and which also has at least one other feature, such as a pistol grip, forward pistol grip, thumbhole grip, flash suppressor etc. The old national law was similar except that it had to have 2 other features. The new proposal would also include just one other feature.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Then they can create it without a gun.

I just said that didn't I ?

people are violent guns are not. guns do not cause violence people do.

I have owned guns since I got an air rifle when I was 6 or 7 and I own several now and I have never once committed an act of violence with or without a gun. Now can you guarantee me that no one will ever commit or attempt to commit an act of violence against me or my wife?

No, you didn't say it. I'm talking about making it too hard for them to get guns.

I said people were violent before guns they will be violent if guns are taken away.

Keeping people like me from buying guns and high capacity magazines will not decrease violence.

 

[Oldguy]

There is no way for me to know if you are not right in the head.

Come on. Don't evade. You've known people you wouldn't want living right next door and armed to the teeth. So have I. So has anyone.

Why shouldn't that person have the same right to own any weapon he likes, in any quantity, the same as you?

If you asked everyone who knows me if I owned any firearms most of them would tell you that they have no idea.

So I don't find it implausible not to know how many guns someone living in my neighborhood may have.

But, if you DID know...what's your opinion then?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Slate? That's funny...

You think a list of the executive orders is invalid because I used Slate? did they get something wrong, or are you just stupid?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Rambos don't like the top one...

Dems don't like to be reminded that the top one is capable of the same damage as the bottom one...

You might be limited to 5 rounds on that hunting rifle, but you can buy a 30 round magazine for the bottom one. Which weapon could go into a room of 15 people and kill them all?

Technically, neither can, but, given that you do not understand that people kill, someone who is bent in destruction could use either weapon to kill 15 people in a room.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A responsible person accepts the consequences of everything he does.

Not everyone is responsible and you can count on that. So, what do we do? Nothing? Just allow the irresponsible to wreak havoc on the rest of us?

No. We institute laws to punish them when they do, such as drunk driving laws. No, those laws can't PREVENT someone from driving drunk, but they CAN work to discourage them from doing so. And, that works on me! Fear of being caught has ended my drunk driving days. How about you?

Fine with me. Enact a law that mandates life in prison without parole for any violent crime committed with a gun other than self defense.

Not at all. Just like no one has the right to sell poisoned food to the public.

Right. So, if we can have laws to prevent the selling of dangerous foods, why not laws to prevent the selling of dangerous weapons?

Weapons sold on the market are not dangerous. People can injure themselves or someone else with a safe weapon just as people can injure themselves or someone else with a car if either is used irresponsibly. That's called risk and risk is part of life.

The weapon itself cannot hurt anyone else. The person wielding the weapon can injure himself and I have never accidentally shot anything in all the years I have owned firearms.

But, others have....regularly. Should we just allow them to continue doing so?

If you can stop them without curtailing the rights of those who never have hurt anyone with a weapon then go ahead.

Any AR15 available for public purchase is nothing more than a semiautomatic rifle.

So tell me what makes it an "assault" rifle?

According the the recently passed New York law, an assault weapon is any weapon which accepts a removable magazine and which also has at least one other feature, such as a pistol grip, forward pistol grip, thumbhole grip, flash suppressor etc. The old national law was similar except that it had to have 2 other features. The new proposal would also include just one other feature.

[/QUOTE]

That so called law in New York was specifically designed to ban all semiautomatic weapons. Which as I have been saying all along is the end game here.

 

[Dubya]

I just said that didn't I ?

people are violent guns are not. guns do not cause violence people do.

I have owned guns since I got an air rifle when I was 6 or 7 and I own several now and I have never once committed an act of violence with or without a gun. Now can you guarantee me that no one will ever commit or attempt to commit an act of violence against me or my wife?

No, you didn't say it. I'm talking about making it too hard for them to get guns.

I said people were violent before guns they will be violent if guns are taken away.

Keeping people like me from buying guns and high capacity magazines will not decrease violence.

Then people can learn from their ancestors.

Go to the shooting range, if you need high capacity magazines!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I thought I would take the time to point out why Obama's ideas of common sense do not mesh with the reality of the world.

Here is a summation of each of the executive orders that he signed today.

Read President Obama's New, Proposed Executive Orders and Legislation on Guns

Now let us see how common sense they are.

1. We have had background checks for decades, for as long as I can remember, which is a lot longer than I care to admit. If the government hasn't figured out how to share the necessary data yet, this is not going to fix it. If they have, why haven't they been doing this already?
2. First off, legal barriers cannot be eliminated by executive decree. Second, those barriers are there to protect the privacy of people who have not broken any laws. Third, the reason it was necessary to create those barriers was that the government requires people to violate their own right to privacy to in the first place.
3. Improve the incentives for states, AKA bribe them with tax money. Once again, this has to come from Congress, he can't just decide to spend money because he wants to spend money. By the way, if the states haven't already jumped on the bandwagon despite the decades of federal bribery what makes Obama think a few billion more is going to make a difference?
4. Direct the AG to review categories of people... People come in categories now? How many categories exist? What are they? What if someone walks into the wrong category?
5. Propose new rules. Something he can actually do, except I see no reason anyone should have to submit to a check if the government illegally seizes their property. What was that? You don't see anything about illegal seizure of property? Simple question, if the seizure was legal in the first place, why do the assholes have to return it?
6. Have the ATF write a letter. Let me repeat that, have the ATF write a letter. A-fucking-mazing, why didn't I think of that?
7. A national safe and responsible gun ownership program. What should we call it? How about the NRA?
8. Have the CSPC review standards for gun locks and safes. Why, have they proven to be defective? Are people accidentally firing gun safes and killing their children? Maybe they put the gun lock on their car by mistake?
9. Require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations. Excuse me? Are we not doing this now? Why do we have serial numbers on guns? Who the fuck does he think he is talking to?
10. Release a report on lost and stolen guns and make it available to law enforcement. That one speaks for itself, doesn't it? Can anyone explain why we kept the report classified in the first place?
11. Nominate an ATF director. Gee willikers Wally, what a novel idea. I thought that was what he did with Todd Jones two years ago, I must be remembering wrong.
12. Train police for active shooter situations. Umm, what?
13. Start enforcing the existing laws. Gee, I wonder why no one ever suggested that before.
14. Direct the CDC to investigate gun violence. This is probably the worst of the lot, violence is not a disease, and asking the CDC to investigate it as such is nothing but propaganda. They don't know enough about criminology to study the issue, if he was serious about it he would give this to the FBI, but they might come up with a solution that does not involve banning guns.
15. Have the Attorney General tell the private sector all about the stuff the private sector invented. I am speechless.
16. Tell people what they already know, Obamacare lets doctors ask questions about things that have nothing to do with health care, which will allow states to report who has guns. (See number 2)
17. Tell doctors that federal law lets them report threats of violence, even if they are not credible.
18. Give money to schools to hire armed guards. I thought this was a dumb idea because it came from the NRA.
19. Centrally pan for emergencies so that people who actually know what the local problems are have no say.
20. Write a letter to states about Medicaid, because they, obviously, never heard of it before.
21. Make Obamacare more complicated by making up new rules about mental health coverage.
22. Commit to making final regulations about mental health parity. Weren't those supposed to be done last year?
23. Talk about mental health on a national level, because no one has ever talked about it before.

No common sense, no serious attempt to determine what the problem is, nothing but the intent to make things better through conversation and a commitment to get the job done.


I don't know about anyone else, but I feel so much better.

For the progressives. Having gone through the list, point out the ones that would have, or will stop another Newtown.....

Be very specific on how this will stop a criminal bent on killing a room full of kids.

For the benefit of the low information voters...those are NOT Executive Orders. That's a list things he INTENDS to do, a plan of action, most of which will be accomplished without an EO.

Yesterday, he acted upon items 1, 3 and 9 by issuing two Presidential Memorandum, which again are NOT Executive Orders and well within his Constitutional authority.

I will post them both next, then you can tell me what's wrong with them.

For the idiots, I specifically pointed out why 3 is not within his authority, and that we already do 9.

Want to try again?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Come on. Don't evade. You've known people you wouldn't want living right next door and armed to the teeth. So have I. So has anyone.

Why shouldn't that person have the same right to own any weapon he likes, in any quantity, the same as you?

If you asked everyone who knows me if I owned any firearms most of them would tell you that they have no idea.

So I don't find it implausible not to know how many guns someone living in my neighborhood may have.

But, if you DID know...what's your opinion then?

Opinions are like assholes everyone has one and the world would be a better place if we didn't show them to everyone.

Words to live by.

But if that so called crazy guy with the guns never hurt anyone with them I don't really care how many he has.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Presidential Memorandum -- Improving Availability of Relevant Executive Branch Records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
SUBJECT: Improving Availability of Relevant Executive Branch Records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System
Since it became operational in 1998, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has been an essential tool in the effort to ensure that individuals who are prohibited under Federal or State law from possessing firearms do not acquire them from Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs). The ability of the NICS to determine quickly and effectively whether an individual is prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm depends on the completeness and accuracy of the information made available to it by Federal, State, and tribal authorities.
The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA) (Public Law 110-180) was a bipartisan effort to strengthen the NICS by increasing the quantity and quality of relevant records from Federal, State, and tribal authorities accessible by the system. Among its requirements, the NIAA mandated that executive departments and agencies (agencies) provide relevant information, including criminal history records, certain adjudications related to the mental health of a person, and other information, to databases accessible by the NICS. Much progress has been made to identify information generated by agencies that is relevant to determining whether a person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms, but more must be done. Greater participation by agencies in identifying records they possess that are relevant to determining whether an individual is prohibited from possessing a firearm and a regularized process for submitting those records to the NICS will strengthen the accuracy and efficiency of the NICS, increasing public safety by keeping guns out of the hands of persons who cannot lawfully possess them.
Therefore, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct the following:
Section 1. Improving the Availability of Records to the NICS. (a) Within 45 days of the date of this memorandum, and consistent with the process described in section 3 of this memorandum, the Department of Justice (DOJ) shall issue guidance to agencies regarding the identification and sharing of relevant Federal records and their submission to the NICS.
(b) Within 60 days of issuance of guidance pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, agencies shall submit a report to DOJ advising whether they possess relevant records, as set forth in the guidance, and setting forth an implementation plan for making information in those records available to the NICS, consistent with applicable law.
(c) In accordance with the authority and responsibility provided to the Attorney General by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Public Law 103-159), as amended, the Attorney General, consistent with the process described in section 3 of this memorandum, shall resolve any disputes concerning whether agency records are relevant and should be made available to the NICS.
(d) To the extent they possess relevant records, as set forth in the guidance issued pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, agencies shall prioritize making those records available to the NICS on a regular and ongoing basis.
Sec. 2. Measuring Progress. (a) By October 1, 2013, and annually thereafter, agencies that possess relevant records shall submit a report to the President through the Attorney General describing:
(i) the relevant records possessed by the agency that can be shared with the NICS consistent with applicable law;
(ii) the number of those records submitted to databases accessible by the NICS during each reporting period;
(iii) the efforts made to increase the percentage of relevant records possessed by the agency that are submitted to databases accessible by the NICS;
(iv) any obstacles to increasing the percentage of records that are submitted to databases accessible by the NICS;
(v) for agencies that make qualifying adjudications related to the mental health of a person, the measures put in place to provide notice and programs for relief from disabilities as required under the NIAA;
(vi) the measures put in place to correct, modify, or remove records accessible by the NICS when the basis under which the record was made available no longer applies; and
(vii) additional steps that will be taken within 1 year of the report to improve the processes by which records are identified, made accessible, and corrected, modified, or removed.
(b) If an agency certifies in its annual report that it has made available to the NICS its relevant records that can be shared consistent with applicable law, and describes its plan to make new records available to the NICS and to update, modify, or remove existing records electronically no less often than quarterly as required by the NIAA, such agency will not be required to submit further annual reports. Instead, the agency will be required to submit an annual certification to DOJ, attesting that the agency continues to submit relevant records and has corrected, modified, or removed appropriate records.
Sec. 3. NICS Consultation and Coordination Working Group. To ensure adequate agency input in the guidance required by section 1(a) of this memorandum, subsequent decisions about whether an agency possesses relevant records, and determinations concerning whether relevant records should be provided to the NICS, there is established a NICS Consultation and Coordination Working Group (Working Group), to be chaired by the Attorney General or his designee.
(a) Membership. In addition to the Chair, the Working Group shall consist of representatives of the following agencies:
(i) the Department of Defense;
(ii) the Department of Health and Human Services;
(iii) the Department of Transportation;
(iv) the Department of Veterans Affairs;
(v) the Department of Homeland Security;
(vi) the Social Security Administration;
(vii) the Office of Personnel Management;
(viii) the Office of Management and Budget; and
(ix) such other agencies or offices as the Chair may designate.
(b) Functions. The Working Group shall convene regularly and as needed to allow for consultation and coordination between DOJ and agencies affected by the Attorney General's implementation of the NIAA, including with respect to the guidance required by section 1(a) of this memorandum, subsequent decisions about whether an agency possesses relevant records, and determinations concerning whether relevant records should be provided to the NICS. The Working Group may also consider, as appropriate:
(i) developing means and methods for identifying agency records deemed relevant by DOJ's guidance;
(ii) addressing obstacles faced by agencies in making their relevant records available to the NICS;
(iii) implementing notice and relief from disabilities programs; and
(iv) ensuring means to correct, modify, or remove records when the basis under which the record was made available no longer applies.
(c) Reporting. The Working Group will review the annual reports required by section 2(a) of this memorandum, and member agencies may append to the reports any material they deem appropriate, including an identification of any agency best practices that may be of assistance to States in supplying records to the NICS.
Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
(d) Independent agencies are strongly encouraged to comply with the requirements of this memorandum.
Sec. 5. Publication. The Attorney General is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
BARACK OBAMA


Presidential Memorandum -- Tracing of Firearms in Connection with Criminal Investigations

January 16, 2013
*
*
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
*
SUBJECT: Tracing of Firearms in Connection with Criminal Investigations
*
*
Reducing violent crime, and gun-related crime in particular, is a top priority of my Administration. A key component of this effort is ensuring that law enforcement agencies at all levels -- Federal, State, and local -- utilize those tools that have proven most effective. One such tool is firearms tracing, which significantly assists law enforcement in reconstructing the transfer and movement of seized or recovered firearms. Responsibility for conducting firearms tracing rests with the Department of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Over the years, firearms tracing has significantly assisted law enforcement in solving violent crimes and generating thousands of leads that may otherwise not have been available.
*
Firearms tracing provides two principal benefits. First, tracing is an important investigative tool in individual cases, providing law enforcement agents with critical information that may lead to the apprehension of suspects, the recovery of other guns used in the commission of crimes, and the identification of potential witnesses, among other things. Second, analysis of tracing data in the aggregate provides valuable intelligence about local, regional, and national patterns relating to the movement and sources of guns used in the commission of crimes, which is useful for the effective deployment of law enforcement resources and development of enforcement strategies. Firearms tracing is a particularly valuable tool in detecting and investigating firearms trafficking, and has been deployed to help combat the pernicious problem of firearms trafficking across the Southwest border.
*
The effectiveness of firearms tracing as a law enforcement intelligence tool depends on the quantity and quality of information and trace requests submitted to ATF. In fiscal year 2012, ATF processed approximately 345,000 crime-gun trace requests for thousands of domestic and international law enforcement agencies. The Federal Government can encourage State and local law enforcement agencies to take advantage of the benefits of tracing all recovered firearms, but Federal law enforcement agencies should have an obligation to do so. If Federal law enforcement agencies do not conscientiously trace every firearm taken into custody, they may not only be depriving themselves of critical information in specific cases, but may also be depriving all Federal, State, and local agencies of the value of complete information for aggregate analyses. *
*
Maximizing the effectiveness of firearms tracing, and the corresponding impact on combating violent crimes involving firearms, requires that Federal law enforcement agencies trace all recovered firearms taken into Federal custody in a timely and efficient manner.
*
Therefore, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct the following:
*
Section 1. Firearms Tracing. (a) Federal law enforcement agencies shall ensure that all firearms recovered after the date of this memorandum in the course of criminal investigations and taken into Federal custody are traced through ATF at the earliest time practicable. Federal law enforcement agencies, as well as other executive departments and agencies, are encouraged, to the extent practicable, to take steps to ensure that firearms recovered prior to the date of this memorandum in the course of criminal investigations and taken into Federal custody are traced through ATF.
*
(b) Within 30 days of the date of this memorandum, ATF will issue guidance to Federal law enforcement agencies on submitting firearms trace requests.
*
(c) Within 60 days of the date of this memorandum, Federal law enforcement agencies shall ensure that their operational protocols reflect the requirement to trace recovered firearms through ATF.
*
(d) Within 90 days of the date of this memorandum, each Federal law enforcement agency shall submit a report to the Attorney General affirming that its operational protocols reflect the requirements set forth in this memorandum.
*
(e) For purposes of this memorandum, "Federal law enforcement agencies" means the Departments of State, the Treasury, Defense, Justice, the Interior, Agriculture, Energy, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security, and such other agencies and offices that regularly recover firearms in the course of their criminal investigations as the President may designate.
*
Sec. 2. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof.
*
(b) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
*
Sec. 3. Publication. The Attorney General is authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
*
BARACK OBAMA

Presidential Memoranda | The White House

No actual response to my questions about why, since we have had background checks for decades, this is not already being done? Is he actually changing an executive branch policy that violated the law, which make him personally responsible for sandy Hook, or is he just showing off for the hordes of people that want him to do something?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Dems don't like to be reminded that the top one is capable of the same damage as the bottom one...

You might be limited to 5 rounds on that hunting rifle, but you can buy a 30 round magazine for the bottom one. Which weapon could go into a room of 15 people and kill them all?

You can buy a 30 round mag for either.

Don't confuse him with facts.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No, you didn't say it. I'm talking about making it too hard for them to get guns.

I said people were violent before guns they will be violent if guns are taken away.

Keeping people like me from buying guns and high capacity magazines will not decrease violence.

Then people can learn from their ancestors.

Go to the shooting range, if you need high capacity magazines!

Yeah keep believing that people will just magically learn not to be violent. Maybe Santa Claus actually exists too.

And you haven't told me how preventing a person who has never once committed a violent act with a gun from buying any gun or magazine he wants will decrease violence.

And BTW I'll say it again. I do not own one 30 round magazine for any of my rifles because I know that I can shoot just as many rounds in virtually the same time with 2 15 round mags and besides the larger capacity mags are more likely to jam.

And I only ever use my weapons at a shooting range but I will also use them if some criminal motherfucker tries to break into my house when i am home and if I want to put 30, 60, 90 or 1000 rounds into that criminal scum what business is it of yours?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So if these ideas aren't worth a damn, let's hear your common sense solutions.

I already pointed out that common sense says there aren't any solutions, unless you have figured out how to implement the PreCrime Bureau from Minority Report. I remember how that ended, even if you don't.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So if these ideas aren't worth a damn, let's hear your common sense solutions.

I don't need a solution because there is none.

People will kill each other with or without guns. People will commit suicide with or without guns.

If you're talking about Sandy Hook, then you have to realize that that tragedy could have been prevented by 2 sets of steel doors more effectively than any gun ban could have.

Criminals will always prey on society and each other so until you tell me how to eliminate all crime the only common sense solution is to allow people to protect themselves with any weapon they feel comfortable using.

So to summarize

You're selfish and lazy. Got it.

Lazy is code word racists use to disparage blacks, why are you racist?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Probably.

But as I said one can buy a 10, 20, or 30 round mag for either rifle.

I can tape two 10 round mags together and still fire 20 rounds almost as fast as one person can empty one 20 round mag.

I know the old tape trick, I'm a Vietnam Era Marine Corps Veteran. Why do you people act like you are the only ones who know about guns? Are you a bunch of children?

Why are you against limiting magazine size?

Why do you people think that the size of a magazine is anything but a red herring.

You just admitted that there are very effective ways of firing just as many rounds in almost the same amount if time with smaller mags so really what is the reason for limiting the size of the mag?

BTW I don't own even one 30 round mag for any of my rifles because I know I can get off as many shots as I want with my 10 and 15 round mags.

New York just passed a law making those illegal, for some reason 7 is the magic number there. (For some obscure reason, police are exempted from this limit.) I see a new arms race where each progressive state sees how small they can make magazines.

 

[9thIDdoc]

We have had background checks for decades, for as long as I can remember, which is a lot longer than I care to admit. If the government hasn't figured out how to share the necessary data yet, this is not going to fix it. If they have, why haven't they been doing this already?

That makes no sense.

You sound like a defeatist.

Like we should just accept a mass murder 4-5 times a year.

Why not? If you are silly enough to believe that more gun control laws are going reduce mass murders, you are silly enough to believe anything.