I don't get why Democrats are going after "assault weapons" and not handguns

LibertyLemming

VIP Member
Oct 31, 2012
1,988
151
83
USA
I mean if you really think gun control will save lives, despite that not being proven true, wouldn't you want to ban the guns that are involved in most deaths?

In 2009, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 66.9% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm. Two-thirds of all gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides. Of the 30,470 firearm-related deaths in the United States in 2010, 19,392 (63.6%) were suicide deaths, and 11,078 (36.4%) homicide deaths.

75% of gun homicides are committed with a handgun.

4% with rifles, all rifles, not just assault weapons.
5% shotguns.

Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg


Not that I support any gun restrictions, but at least don't be complete tools with your attempts at taking away my liberty

OH ! Almost forgot, Connecticut has bans on defined 'assault weapons,' which includes selective fire firearms unless purchased before October 1, 1993, and a limited list of semiautomatic AR, AK, and SKS variants. However, it does not restrict magazine capacity. Guess that isn't working out so well.
 
Last edited:
Handguns are not on their agenda. Well except for that dumb bitch in Cali
 
I mean if you really think gun control will save lives, despite that not being proven true, wouldn't you want to ban the guns that are involved in most deaths?

In 2009, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 66.9% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm. Two-thirds of all gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides. Of the 30,470 firearm-related deaths in the United States in 2010, 19,392 (63.6%) were suicide deaths, and 11,078 (36.4%) homicide deaths.

75% of gun homicides are committed with a handgun.

4% with rifles, all rifles, not just assault weapons.
5% shotguns.

Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg


Not that I support any gun restrictions, but at least don't be complete tools with your attempts at taking away my liberty.

Its a question of chipping away at the smaller groups of gun owners, in the hopes the larger groups of gun owners sacrifice the smaller to maintain thier own rights.

Thats why they go after "scary gun" owners first, so as not to piss of the hunters and the guys with handguns.

Thats why they carve out exemptions for law enforcement, even when retired, because they know when the police oppose thier policies, they are dead in the water.

Thats why they love it when liberal states like NY pass even harsher weapon restrictions, so they can point to those in state gun owners who "are now under the restrictions, and are JUST FINE"
 
In an ideal situation hand guns would be restricted as well.

Right, an ideal paradise is a place where everyone gets told how to live.

Except for RDD, of course. he has this sad belief that he would be one of the ruling class, not one of the Peons.

I figured he would be in the class where, during a robbery, he would just get butt-fucked to death, because he was too much of an anti-constitutionalist. "Wait robber, you mean you DIDNT turn in your gun?" :confused:
 
I mean if you really think gun control will save lives, despite that not being proven true, wouldn't you want to ban the guns that are involved in most deaths?

Because the constitution allows it and the democrats honor it. It's not written that people can have assault weapons.

They honor it only because they know they cant oppose it and stay elected. Thier need to control other people demands they be unarmed.
 
Liberals believe that the state should have a monopoly on force.
An armed citzenry gets in the way of this.

But, more directly to the point:
Gun control has nothing to do with public safety.
 
I mean if you really think gun control will save lives, despite that not being proven true, wouldn't you want to ban the guns that are involved in most deaths?

Because the constitution allows it and the democrats honor it. It's not written that people can have assault weapons.

But it allows for handguns? What version are you reading lol?
 
I mean if you really think gun control will save lives, despite that not being proven true, wouldn't you want to ban the guns that are involved in most deaths?

Because the constitution allows it and the democrats honor it. It's not written that people can have assault weapons.

They honor it only because they know they cant oppose it and stay elected. Thier need to control other people demands they be unarmed.

The democrats honor the constitution because they stand for freedom and liberty, just like our founding fathers. Unlike the GOP that like to use the constitution as toilet paper.
 
Right, an ideal paradise is a place where everyone gets told how to live.

Except for RDD, of course. he has this sad belief that he would be one of the ruling class, not one of the Peons.

I figured he would be in the class where, during a robbery, he would just get butt-fucked to death, because he was too much of an anti-constitutionalist. "Wait robber, you mean you DIDNT turn in your gun?" :confused:

Why do robbers have guns in "an ideal situation"?
 
I don't get why Democrats are going after "assault weapons" and not handguns

I do. Their hysteria, like most of their policies, are based on emotion and irrational fear, not facts and logic, and they also know a handgun ban is politically impossible.
 
I mean if you really think gun control will save lives, despite that not being proven true, wouldn't you want to ban the guns that are involved in most deaths?

Because the constitution allows it and the democrats honor it. It's not written that people can have assault weapons.

But it allows for handguns? What version are you reading lol?
The Constitution does not allow for the banning of any weapon that is suitable for service in the militia and is part of the ordinary military equipment in common use.

Clearly, this includes both handguns and 'assault weapons'.
 

Forum List

Back
Top