Simple SOLUTION to gun control

[Noomi]

Sorry, but that's the dumbest "solution" I've seen anyone come up with...and that's saying a lot.

I love my guns and want to keep them. I also support sensible gun laws.

Sensible gun laws have done nothing to prevent mass shootings, though.

 

[ABikerSailor]

All you gun grabbers that are upset by the fact the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own weapons... simple solution.

Since no law that bans semi automatics will survive a court challenge and since no law banning magazine sizes will either, go for what you REALLY want.

Ask for an amendment to repel the 2nd. Or are you afraid that admitting your goal is the elimination of all firearms will not pass muster with the citizenry?

I don't care how many guns you have.

However..................you should only be able to carry 15 rounds/gun.

Please provide a sound argument to support this; be sure to explain how this would not violate the constitution.

Nothing in the Constitution about the amount of ammo you can carry. It just states that you have the right to bear arms, ammo wasn't listed because at the time of the writing, a REALLY good musketman was known as a "Minuteman" because they could fire, reload, and fire in a minute or less. Firing off 60 rounds in that same minute was something that wouldn't even been concieveable to the Founding Fathers.

As far as how safe it would be? Jared Laughtner was stopped in his shooting spree because he had to reload, giving the people around him time enough to react and bring him down.

A practiced person (such as I'd been when I was a member of the Security Force) can change a clip and reload in about 2 seconds. However...........unless you practice that REGULARLY, you're gonna take anywhere from 5-8 seconds to do so, and a human being can cover a lot of ground (around 15 ft) in 5 seconds, resulting in a better chance of stopping the shooter by tackling them.

Next?

 

[Old Rocks]

What do gun folks use those assault and semi-auto weapons for? Do you hunt with them?

Are any guns off-limits for regular folk? How about an uzi (is that even a gun)? lol

Just curious.

How about self defense and home defense? Where did it state in the Second Amendment that the "right to bear arms" was supposed to be solely for hunting?

If you are incapable of defending yourself with five shots in a high powered rifle, you really shouldn't have that gun.

 

[candycorn]

Let me try this. Can we agree that a belt-fed weapon shouldn't be sold to the general public? If not, why not?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Let me try this. Can we agree that a belt-fed weapon shouldn't be sold to the general public? If not, why not?

According to some of these idiots a gatling gun capable of firing 3,000 rounds/min should be legal because somehow it qualifies as "arms".

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Let me try this. Can we agree that a belt-fed weapon shouldn't be sold to the general public? If not, why not?

According to some of these idiots a gatling gun capable of firing 3,000 rounds/min should be legal because somehow it qualifies as "arms".

They are legal to have I know several reenactors that have one and they shoot live rounds
They are simple to make I recall one of my friends made the one he has.
OH and do you now know the difference is between a clip and magazine?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What do gun folks use those assault and semi-auto weapons for? Do you hunt with them?

Are any guns off-limits for regular folk? How about an uzi (is that even a gun)? lol

Just curious.

How about self defense and home defense? Where did it state in the Second Amendment that the "right to bear arms" was supposed to be solely for hunting?

If you are incapable of defending yourself with five shots in a high powered rifle, you really shouldn't have that gun.

I guess the cops and military are piss poor shots. Maybe they shouldn't allow them to carry with all that ammo.

 

[JoeB131]

All you gun grabbers that are upset by the fact the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own weapons... simple solution.

Since no law that bans semi automatics will survive a court challenge and since no law banning magazine sizes will either, go for what you REALLY want.

Ask for an amendment to repel the 2nd. Or are you afraid that admitting your goal is the elimination of all firearms will not pass muster with the citizenry?

Well, I dispute that the 2nd Amendment was ever about private gun ownership to start with. It was about the right of states to maintain militias, that was effectively ended when State Miliitias were replaced with the National Guard.

And as a practical matter, even a constitutional amendment isn't going to do that much good when you already have 200 million guns out there. the 18th Amendment didn't end alcohol consumption, abortions were readily available before Roe v. Wade, the War on drugs is a joke, and you'd never know prostitution was illegal after a visit to Craig's List.

All that said, sensible laws limiting what kind of guns can be purchased and background checks actually do make a lot of sense.

The problem is, this debate has been dominated by the extremists on both sides for so long sensible moderate people can't get a word in edgewise.

 

[thanatos144]

Progressives just piss themselves when they see any gun even in the movies .... Irrational fear ..... They know they can never get thier true facist country with a armed population. I mean Hitler knew that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't care how many guns you have.

However..................you should only be able to carry 15 rounds/gun.

Please provide a sound argument to support this; be sure to explain how this would not violate the constitution.

Nothing in the Constitution about the amount of ammo you can carry. It just states that you have the right to bear arms, ammo wasn't listed because at the time of the writing, a REALLY good musketman was known as a "Minuteman" because they could fire, reload, and fire in a minute or less. Firing off 60 rounds in that same minute was something that wouldn't even been concieveable to the Founding Fathers.

As far as how safe it would be? Jared Laughtner was stopped in his shooting spree because he had to reload, giving the people around him time enough to react and bring him down.

A practiced person (such as I'd been when I was a member of the Security Force) can change a clip and reload in about 2 seconds. However...........unless you practice that REGULARLY, you're gonna take anywhere from 5-8 seconds to do so, and a human being can cover a lot of ground (around 15 ft) in 5 seconds, resulting in a better chance of stopping the shooter by tackling them.

Next?

A practiced person (such as I'd been when I was a member of the Security Force) can change a clip and reload in about 2 seconds.

When did the U.S. Military start using SKS or go back to the M1 as a main battle rifle? A practiced person would not call a magazine a clip. A proficient person would call it what it is a MAGAZINE.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

All you gun grabbers that are upset by the fact the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own weapons... simple solution.

Since no law that bans semi automatics will survive a court challenge and since no law banning magazine sizes will either, go for what you REALLY want.

Ask for an amendment to repel the 2nd. Or are you afraid that admitting your goal is the elimination of all firearms will not pass muster with the citizenry?

Well, I dispute that the 2nd Amendment was ever about private gun ownership to start with. It was about the right of states to maintain militias, that was effectively ended when State Miliitias were replaced with the National Guard.

And as a practical matter, even a constitutional amendment isn't going to do that much good when you already have 200 million guns out there. the 18th Amendment didn't end alcohol consumption, abortions were readily available before Roe v. Wade, the War on drugs is a joke, and you'd never know prostitution was illegal after a visit to Craig's List.

All that said, sensible laws limiting what kind of guns can be purchased and background checks actually do make a lot of sense.

The problem is, this debate has been dominated by the extremists on both sides for so long sensible moderate people can't get a word in edgewise.

Well, I dispute that the 2nd Amendment was ever about private gun ownership to start with. It was about the right of states to maintain militias, that was effectively ended when State Miliitias were replaced with the National Guard.

You can dispute it all you want, it doesn't hold true.

 

[Full-Auto]

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

Assault weapons ban. Yup, I'm still there.

As for the definition, look, do you have a brain? If you do, I would hope you also possess the common sense to note the difference between a "hunting rifle" and an AR-15. I don't know how your mommy raised you, but I'm not going to explain every last detail to you.

Words don't seem to get, I guess these kids only like picture books.


What I consider not to be a assault rifle:

What I consider to be an "Assault weapon"

Man, if people don't have common sense they're hard to argue with.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Assault weapons ban. Yup, I'm still there.

As for the definition, look, do you have a brain? If you do, I would hope you also possess the common sense to note the difference between a "hunting rifle" and an AR-15. I don't know how your mommy raised you, but I'm not going to explain every last detail to you.

Words don't seem to get, I guess these kids only like picture books.


What I consider not to be a assault rifle:

What I consider to be an "Assault weapon"

Man, if people don't have common sense they're hard to argue with.

You're basing your opinion on what something looks like.
however going by how a firearm function this is also an assault weapon and with less chance of failure to function than a magazine feed firearm.

 

[PratchettFan]

Assault weapons ban. Yup, I'm still there.

As for the definition, look, do you have a brain? If you do, I would hope you also possess the common sense to note the difference between a "hunting rifle" and an AR-15. I don't know how your mommy raised you, but I'm not going to explain every last detail to you.

Words don't seem to get, I guess these kids only like picture books.


What I consider not to be a assault rifle:

What I consider to be an "Assault weapon"

Man, if people don't have common sense they're hard to argue with.

You're basing your opinion on what something looks like.
however going by how a firearm function this is also an assault weapon and with less chance of failure to function than a magazine feed firearm.

Well, yeah. But you have to admit it's pretty. I want one.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Assault weapons ban. Yup, I'm still there.

As for the definition, look, do you have a brain? If you do, I would hope you also possess the common sense to note the difference between a "hunting rifle" and an AR-15. I don't know how your mommy raised you, but I'm not going to explain every last detail to you.

Words don't seem to get, I guess these kids only like picture books.


What I consider not to be a assault rifle:

What I consider to be an "Assault weapon"

Man, if people don't have common sense they're hard to argue with.

You're basing your opinion on what something looks like.
however going by how a firearm function this is also an assault weapon and with less chance of failure to function than a magazine feed firearm.

Well, yeah. But you have to admit it's pretty. I want one.

No this is pretty my baby looks almost like this one. The only Firearm I have that stay's locked up in a case.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You're doing an awful job of supporting your argument.

"The guns were bought from a private party, which -never- required a background check, whether at a gun show or between friends or relatives"

There ya go champ, you found the loophole. How bout this, I won't call it a 'loophole' I'll call it the "gunshow problem". Does that help?

Nope. The law doesnt change because you are at a gun show.
This, there's no "gun show" loophole, or "gun show" problem.

See, this is where the differences between you and I become apparent. You seem to have no qualms with the fact that over 2,000 assault weapons cross the US boarder into mexico EACH DAY, and that had lead to the death of 50,000 people.

Pretty sad that you people have been reduced to using crime in Mexico as a reason to expand gun control laws here. Sounds to me like the Mexicans need to improve their border security - but, no, YOUR solution is to further limit the rights of law-abiding Americans.

I, on the other hand, -knowing the majority of these guns in the cartels hands stem from private gunshows- am strongly disturbed by this fact.

"Private gunshows"
This is what it looks like when an useful idiot regurgitates someone else's talking points.

Irrelevant to anything I just said, and so, no, its not worth saying - unless, of course, you believe that the protections afforded to our rights by the constitution are limited to the technologies in place at the time the BoR was ratified.

What I'm saying is that there was NO CONCEPT of 100-round magazine assault rifes at the time.

Which, as I said, is irrelevant to what -I- said.
Good to see that you do not believe the 4th amendment protects your cell phone conversations, BTW.

 

[PratchettFan]

You're basing your opinion on what something looks like.
however going by how a firearm function this is also an assault weapon and with less chance of failure to function than a magazine feed firearm.

Well, yeah. But you have to admit it's pretty. I want one.

No this is pretty my baby looks almost like this one. The only Firearm I have that stay's locked up in a case.

Very nice. You can't beat the classics.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I don't care how many guns you have.
However..................you should only be able to carry 15 rounds/gun.

Please provide a sound argument to support this; be sure to explain how this would not violate the constitution.

Nothing in the Constitution about the amount of ammo you can carry.

Nothing in the Constitution mentions the number of words you can use in your blog.
You must then agree that the govrnment can limit that and not run afoul of the 1st amendment.

It just states that you have the right to bear arms, ammo wasn't listed because at the time of the writing, a REALLY good musketman was known as a "Minuteman" because they could fire, reload, and fire in a minute or less. Firing off 60 rounds in that same minute was something that wouldn't even been concieveable to the Founding Fathers.

This is relevant.. how?

As far as how safe it would be? Jared Laughtner was stopped in his shooting spree because he had to reload, giving the people around him time enough to react and bring him down.

Ancedotal and thus meaningless.

Next?

Yes - please continue with your attepmt at a sound argument.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What do gun folks use those assault and semi-auto weapons for? Do you hunt with them?

Are any guns off-limits for regular folk? How about an uzi (is that even a gun)? lol

Just curious.

How about self defense and home defense? Where did it state in the Second Amendment that the "right to bear arms" was supposed to be solely for hunting?

If you are incapable of defending yourself with five shots in a high powered rifle, you really shouldn't have that gun.

You arent a competent judge.