GUN CONTROL laws ARE in place to PREVENT the Texas Church Shooting.AIR FORCE DID NOT FOLLOW THE LAWS

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ColonelAngus, Nov 9, 2017.

  1. Chuz Life
    Offline

    Chuz Life Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2015
    Messages:
    4,691
    Thanks Received:
    605
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +3,023
    And the criminals. . .

    Where do they fall on your list as being a problem?
     
  2. Jamesonrules
    Offline

    Jamesonrules BANNED

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2017
    Messages:
    74
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +27
    Crime is a problem, guns don't solve that. They do however kill 30,000 Americans a year.
     
  3. NYcarbineer
    Online

    NYcarbineer Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    112,848
    Thanks Received:
    13,333
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Location:
    Finger Lakes, NY
    Ratings:
    +40,938
  4. Reasonable
    Offline

    Reasonable Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    11,351
    Thanks Received:
    1,298
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +8,174
    As long as citizens can obtain military type weapons that should only be used by the police and our military NOTHING IS IN PLACE.
    Our North American neighbors to the south and north don’t have these types of slaughters like we do.
    As of the most recent massacre in Texas, Columbine is no longer one of the 10 worst mass shootings in US history. 3 of the top 5 are all in the last year & a half.

    Republicans and fellow wingnuts solution: Do Nothing.
     
  5. Chuz Life
    Offline

    Chuz Life Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2015
    Messages:
    4,691
    Thanks Received:
    605
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +3,023
    How many of those 30000 killed per year are being killed by guns that have no operator?
     
  6. Chuz Life
    Offline

    Chuz Life Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2015
    Messages:
    4,691
    Thanks Received:
    605
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +3,023
    The 2nd amendment was written to secure the people's right to keep and bear MILITARY arms as needed to defend our rights and our freedoms even against our own government.

    Thev2nd amendment was NOT written to secure our right to arms for ANYTHING else. The right to keep and bear arms for hunting and such was already a no brainer.

    If you want to remove the people's right to keep and bear military arms to defend ourselves even against our own government? Amend the fucking Constitution or fuck off.

    Good luck with the amendment thing.

    Lol. Not!
     
  7. SavannahMann
    Online

    SavannahMann Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2016
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    316
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,221
    You are hearing part of it. Let’s say that you start a baseball league. You decide that only solid wood bats are allowed. The players in your league decide it’s bullshit, and the umpires agree. They allow aluminum bats at a game. You don’t want to look like an ass, so you ignore it. The next game some more players are using the aluminum bats.

    The next year, you decide that bats will be provided by the league, and you provide only wooden ones. The umpires again ignore you, and the players keep going with aluminum.

    Why did you need the new rule? The previous one indicated the intent.

    Let’s look at the laws that were broken by the shooter in Texas.

    1) Conspiracy. In planning to commit a crime, you have committed a crime. Sort of like a Catholic who confesses to feeling up a girlfriend. Not only was copping a feel a sin, but planning on doing it was a sin.

    2) Possession of firearms by a convicted felon. Not only did the Air Force drop the ball, but the shooter himself committed a felony by falsifying his form 4473. We’re up to two felonies, and nobody’s been shot yet.

    3) Walking towards the church with the guns out. That’s “Brandishing”. That’s also a crime. Using the weapons to intimidate or frighten someone is brandishing unless you are doing so to stop an attack.

    Nobody has been shot. Nobody is dead, or wounded. Yet, three crimes at least have been committed. Probably more. None of those laws prevented a crime. No law has ever prevented a crime. The laws are revenge orientated. They punish people for the actions that they have taken. You don’t get busted for buying a car that can exceed the speed limit. You get busted for exceeding the speed limit. You don’t get arrested for drinking, unless it’s in violation of your probation or parole or you are under age. You get busted for acting like a fool in public, or for driving while intoxicated. You can drink yourself into a stupor when you are home just fine and legally. You can do it at a friends house. You commit a crime when you do something we do not approve of.

    We don’t pass laws to prevent a behavior, we pass laws to punish a behavior. Psudofed is now located behind the counters of pharmacies. This is a critical ingredient for Crystal Meth. We passed laws that you can only buy so much, one pill a day generally speaking, to cut the amount of Meth that is out there.

    Meth production is up more than 800%. Seriously, it has increased. It doubled, and doubled again, and then doubled again. All it did was move production from someone’s kitchen to factory like facilities ala Breaking Bad. We haven’t prevented jack shit. So do we admit defeat, and just move the Psudofed back to where it was, and get rid of the nonsensical crap that doesn’t work to make it easier for the 99% of the people who want it for allergies? Nope. We claim we are preventing, and we’re not preventing jack shit.

    If we went back to morons cooking in their kitchens, we would actually reduce Crystal Meth more than it is now. But we won’t admit we were wrong. We are just going to keep on with a failing plan.

    Let’s for the sake of argument say that Feinsteins bill passes and becomes law. High Capacity magazines are now slowly becoming extinct. What happens? All the existing ones are grandfathered in. Warehouses full of them will be sold for huge profits. If it looks like the law will pass manufacturers will crank them out around the clock trying to beat the date the law goes into effect. Tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands more will go onto the street, legally.

    Another mass shooting will happen, but let’s pretend it doesn’t. Let’s forget those for a while and deal with the reality of shootings. If you are shot with a handgun, especially one of the popular high capacity magazine weapons, you have roughly speaking an 80% chance of survival. I’m not making that up. https://www.amazon.com/Gunshot-Wounds-Ballistics-Techniques-Investigations/dp/0849381630/

    Now, if those pistols are no longer available, the advantage, the high capacity magazine, is no longer a selling point. It’s like a big car with a four cylinder engine, it doesn’t make any sense. It’s better to get a revolver with a big powerful cartridge inside.

    That means the return of the Magnums to our streets. Magnum gunshot wounds are most often described as catastrophic. Magnums tend to tear clean through the body of a person, increasing the rate of blood loss, one of the causes of death, and increasing the rate at which Shock sets in.

    By getting rid of the higher capacity option, you’re increasing the lethality of the choices that people will make. Remember when the Brady Law was the thing, we tried this. What happened was Revolvers made a big comeback. Big magnums were the way to go since you had so few shots anyway, you might as well make the most of them.

    I know, I bought my first .357 Magnum then. I fell in love with the cartridge, and the weapons that fire them. It is still my preferred cartridge. 9mm is for plinking IMO. I like it, but if my life was on the line, I’d choose a magnum.

    This is a normal test of what happens to ballistic gel when you shoot a .357 Magnum.

    EA257D9C-5D6E-4F71-952B-4FFBFA1A7DA7.jpeg

    This by the way is a much worse wound to have than a 9MM. Especially when you consider that the FBI found that cops who are trained, and maintain currency, average a 30% hit rate.

    Lower capacity magazines mean that higher capability cartridges will be chosen, the old .45 ACP’s will be back again. God Forbid. That means more deaths, not fewer.

    If you knew about guns, you wouldn’t support this nonsense of banning this or that. For you, they are dangerous. No such thing. There are no dangerous weapons, other than those which are poorly maintained or manufactured poorly. There are only dangerous people.
     
  8. SavannahMann
    Online

    SavannahMann Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2016
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    316
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,221
    Try that sometime. Please do.
     
  9. waltky
    Offline

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    24,102
    Thanks Received:
    2,188
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +5,245
    Sens. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Martin Heinrich, D-N.M. sponsor bill to close gun loophole...
    [​IMG]
    The loophole that let the church shooter buy a gun — and the bill that aims to close it
    November 8, 2017 - Just two days after the horrific mass murder in a Texas church Sunday, Sens. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., introduced legislation to “close the background check loophole exploited by the Sutherland Springs, Texas, shooter.”
     

Share This Page