Bernie Sanders uses New Zealand shooting to call for assault weapon ban

[jknowgood]

Like machine guns, they should be heavily regulated. It has been shown they can kill 50+ people very quickly. They are why we constantly have a new worst mass shooting.

Assault weapons are able to fire fully automatically and are therefore, by definition, machine guns and already heavily regulated. Don't look now, buy your ignorance is showing. What you meant to say was "ban scary looking black rifles which will do no good but make me feel better."

Semi auto rifles with high cap mags have killed 50+ in multiple events. Need to be heavily regulated.

There have been 1358 people die in mass shootings from 2006 to 2017. We murder more babies in a day. So **** off.

 

[2aguy]

Like machine guns, they should be heavily regulated. It has been shown they can kill 50+ people very quickly. They are why we constantly have a new worst mass shooting.

Then according to your logic, all cars should be banned......the Vegas shooter, shooting into a crowd of over 22,000 people was only able to kill 58 people....a muslim terrorist in France, using a rental truck, was able to kill 86 people in 5 minutes of driving.....

Cars killed 38,000 people in 2017.

Guns killed 10,982 people.

Cars are far deadlier than guns, we need to ban them.

 

[2aguy]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

 

[2aguy]

Go ahead and ban them, it won't change anything, but the left will feel safer.

Funny how’s countries with strong gun control don’t regularly suffer mass shootings.

Except when they do...like France.....with mass shootings whenever the muslim terrorists on government watch lists decide to carry them out......or Britain, where they have almost had 4 mass shootings in the last few years, compared to their normal one every 10 years....dumb luck isn't an example of gun control working...

Which British gun control laws stopped these shooters?

Teenage boys planned to 'kill everyone' at Yorkshire school in Columbine-style gun and bomb massacre, court hears

Two teenage boys planned to “kill everyone” at their Yorkshireschool in a Columbine-style massacre using bombs and guns, a court has heard.

---------------------------



.4/6/18

Doctor found with stash of guns and NHS hitlist jailed

A former doctor has been sentenced to 12 years in prison for stockpiling guns with the intent to endanger life.

Martin Watt was found with three submachine guns, two pistols and 1,500 live cartridges at a property in Cumbernauld, Scotland, last year.

The 62-year-old had lost his job at Monklands hospital in North Lanarkshire in 2012 after disciplinary hearings. His marriage broke down around the same time, the high court in Glasgow was told.

Watt had compiled a list of names and addresses of some colleagues involved in the disciplinary process, which the judge, Valerie Stacey, said Watt had referred to as an assassination list.
=======



Here is the updat, the original is below..

Yep.....this 19 year old got bombs and a glock 19 and 94 rounds of 9mm ammo on the dark web in Britain in order to murder people at the University he used to attend..........

I guess their gun control laws stopped him...right? Or was it pure, dumb luck.....?


-------------

British teen sentenced to life for planned school attack

Despite some of the tightest gun control on the planet, a British man was able to acquire a handgun, extended mags and explosives as part of a plot to attack his former school.

Liam Lyburd, 19, of Newcastle upon Tyne, was sentenced to life imprisonment this week on eight charges of possessing weapons with intent to endanger life.

As noted by the BBC, Lyburd gathered a cache that included a Glock 19, three 33-round magazines, 94 hollow-point bullets, CS gas, five pipe bombs and two other improvised explosive devices despite the country’s long history of civilian arms control.

According to court documents, Lyburd planned to use the weapons in an attack on Newcastle College, from which he had been expelled two years prior for poor attendance. He was arrested last November after two Northumbria Police constables visited him at his home on a tip from an individual who encountered threats and disturbing pictures posted by Lyburd online.

Despite a defense that portrayed the reclusive man as living in a fantasy world, Lyburd was found guilty in July.

The internet-savvy teen obtained the Glock and other items through Evolution Marketplace, a successor to the Silk Road, a long-time “dark web” site in which users could buy and sell everything from illegal narcotics to munitions using Bitcoin cryptocurrency.

In court, Lyburd testified that buying the Glock was so easy it was “like buying a bar of chocolate.”

He obtained funds for his purchases through a complex extortion scheme in which he used online malware to infect computers, which he in turn held for ransom from their owners.

====Teenage boy 'took shotgun to school after being bullied for being fat'


15-year-old boy arrested for taking shotgun and ammunition into school did it because he was being bullied for being too fat, fellow pupils said.

=======




'Gunman' walks into Liverpool nursery school as children were playing inside

Police have sealed off a children's nursery in Liverpool amid reports a gunman walked into the building while youngsters were inside.

Officers were called to Childs Play Nursery in Wavertree, Merseyside, at around 8am this morning.

The man, who is believed to have been carrying what looked like a firearm, walked into the nursery and approached another man.

He then left with a second man on the back of a motorbike.

 

[2aguy]

Like machine guns, they should be heavily regulated. It has been shown they can kill 50+ people very quickly. They are why we constantly have a new worst mass shooting.

Assault weapons are able to fire fully automatically and are therefore, by definition, machine guns and already heavily regulated. Don't look now, buy your ignorance is showing. What you meant to say was "ban scary looking black rifles which will do no good but make me feel better."

Semi auto rifles with high cap mags have killed 50+ in multiple events. Need to be heavily regulated.

A rental Truck killed more people than any rifle, in 5 minutes of driving.....the Vegas shooter killed 58 and he had to shoot into an unsuspecting crowd from a distance, 22,000 tightlly packed people.....the muslim terrorists used a 20 dollar rental truck to kill 86 people in 5 minutes of driving....

Cars killed 38,000 people in 2017.

Guns killed 10,982....we need to ban cars and trucks...they are deadlier than all guns.

Also, knives kill more people every single year than all rifles do...we need to ban all knives...also clubs and hands and feet...

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles...still kill fewer people each year than knives... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

 

[karpenter]

Senegalese "Migrant" Kidnaps 51 Kids
Sets School Bus Ablaze
Unrelated To The NZ Attack
Italy bus fire: driver hijacks and sets fire to school coach full of children 'in retaliation' for migrant drownings

What Do We Ban

 

[2aguy]

People like to use the word assault weapon because it sounds scary but the guns are in reality semi automatic rifles. So what they are calling for is a ban on semi automatics and given that pretty much every gun that it is legal to own is a semi automatic what you are really calling for is a total gun ban.

They know this.....they also understand that most Americans do not understand this. This is the anti-gunner bait and switch.....say you only want "Assault Weapons" and "weapons of war," then, when the law is passed and you have banned all semi-auto rifles, pistols and shotguns, as well as revolvers......it is too late to get them back.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

The terrorist ignore gun control laws.
View attachment 251398

Let see it is against the law to murder, kidnap and rob people, so how many more laws will it take to get criminals to obey?

Trick question because criminals never obey the law and new laws just make more criminal for our police state society...

 

[B. Kidd]

Bernie's poll numbers are beginning to crater.

Geez, I wonder why?

 

[skye]

Senegalese "Migrant" Kidnaps 51 Kids
Sets School Bus Ablaze
Unrelated To The NZ Attack
Italy bus fire: driver hijacks and sets fire to school coach full of children 'in retaliation' for migrant drownings

What Do We Ban

Ban the migrants.

By the way, it's horrible what that Senegalese monster tried to do....thanks God most of the children were able to escape.

 

[Nosmo King]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

 

[B. Kidd]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

Whaddya gonna do about it?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Yeah, Sanders has finally lost me now.

I cannot support anyone that calls for ANY gun bans of any kind of gun.

IT is truly a slippery slope I will not touch.

 

[Nosmo King]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

Whaddya gonna do about it?

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

Whaddya gonna do about it?

Rely on common sense. Donate to anti-gun lobbying groups. Write my congressman and senators. Vote. Fight the NRA.

This is America and all voices can be heard.

 

[2aguy]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

Here...again.....you need to read this again, slowly, sounding out the words.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

 

[Brain357]

Like machine guns, they should be heavily regulated. It has been shown they can kill 50+ people very quickly. They are why we constantly have a new worst mass shooting.

You cannot own a machine gun. Dumbass.

Yes you can. Dumbass. They are heavily regulated.

 

[Brain357]

Like machine guns, they should be heavily regulated. It has been shown they can kill 50+ people very quickly. They are why we constantly have a new worst mass shooting.

Then according to your logic, all cars should be banned......the Vegas shooter, shooting into a crowd of over 22,000 people was only able to kill 58 people....a muslim terrorist in France, using a rental truck, was able to kill 86 people in 5 minutes of driving.....

Cars killed 38,000 people in 2017.

Guns killed 10,982 people.

Cars are far deadlier than guns, we need to ban them.

Cars are easy to defend against. I have no fear on the third floor of this building. Plus cars have very important uses. But you know all this and prefer to keep lying while people die.

 

[Brain357]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

Hence why machine guns are heavily regulated.

 

[Brain357]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

Here...again.....you need to read this again, slowly, sounding out the words.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

But when they decide to kill, 50+ people are killed really quickly. Like machine guns and bombs, these weapons of mass killing should be heavily regulated for obvious reasons.

 

[Defiant1]

Bernie Sanders Uses New Zealand Shooting to Call for ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban - Big League Politics

The socialist is indicating that he would be an enemy of the Bill of Rights if he obtains the presidency.




Never let a good crisis go to waste isn't that right Demotwats

take the speech
take the guns
take the colors we wear

fk you leftist pos hitler mother fkrs you pricks are pathetic.

How would banning assault rifles infringe upon your right to bear arms? Could you still bear a shotgun, a revolver, a bolt action rifle? These are arms too.

Are you permitted to bear any kind of weapon? Grenade launchers, mortars, nuclear warheads?

Here....Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains this to you.....

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

Your right to bear any damn weapon you choose does not exist.

You may bear bolt action rifles, single action pistols, pump action shot guns.

But not fully automatic rifles without special permits and left licenses..
why? Public safety.

Hence why machine guns are heavily regulated.

unconstitutionally