Both Sides of the Gun Debate Need to Listen to This

[alang1216]

I have actually driven a car in a Mall (true story), but neither the Mall's parking garage, nor the Mall itself are taxpayer funded roads. (another true story)

Good point, someday you'll have to tell the story. Now try to drive onto the White House grounds. It is taxpayer funded.

 

[Pop23]

And? With all of those regulations, cars still kill more people than guns.

Since cars are more dangerous than guns, do you want to raise the age to drive to 21? Since people like you think 18-20 year olds can't own a gun?

In 2016, there were about 222 million licensed drivers in the United States. In 2017, there were about 126.22 million households in the United States of which about 42% had a gun and 2.58 people per household for a total of 137 million people in homes with a gun. That includes minors so figure a ballpark number of 100 million.

In a recent year I found 33,636 deaths due to "injury by firearms". Motor vehicle accidents claimed 40,100 deaths in 2017.

My eyeballs tell me that guns are almost twice as dangerous as driving even though we drive considerably more than we use guns.

How many murderers drove their cars to the murder scene. Why blame the gun when the car was also used.............

Good lord you are now just an annoyance.

And what would additional training do? Stop criminals from violent actions? Answer, NO. Would removing AR's stop them? Answer, Highly unlikely. Would additional training stop suicides? Answer, I can't find anything that convinces me it would. Would banning AR's stop suicides? No AR's are almost never the gun of choice in suicide. I've just covered 99% of gun deaths. 1% of 33,636 is 336 per year is all you could possibly impact.

So Car Deaths, not related to murders or suicides (I'll put that at 2% of the total) are at 39,298 and gun deaths not related to Murder or Suicide at 336.

You were saying you want cars banned then?

 

[Pop23]

I have actually driven a car in a Mall (true story), but neither the Mall's parking garage, nor the Mall itself are taxpayer funded roads. (another true story)

Good point, someday you'll have to tell the story. Now try to drive onto the White House grounds. It is taxpayer funded.

You serious? Drinking this early?

Ask car dealers how them cars get displayed in malls (that was a hint)

The White House? Is there no limit to your stupidity?

 

[alang1216]

And what would additional training do? Stop criminals from violent actions? Answer, NO. Would removing AR's stop them? Answer, Highly unlikely. Would additional training stop suicides? Answer, I can't find anything that convinces me it would. Would banning AR's stop suicides? No AR's are almost never the gun of choice in suicide. I've just covered 99% of gun deaths. 1% of 33,636 is 336 per year is all you could possibly impact.

So Car Deaths, not related to murders or suicides (I'll put that at 2% of the total) are at 39,298 and gun deaths not related to Murder or Suicide at 336.

You were saying you want cars banned then?

When I see a uniformed cop with a gun I feel more secure since I know he has been trained how and when to use it. Any one else and I have no idea.

I don't recall ever saying I wanted to ban ARs, only large clips.

Some of us think suicides are people too.

 

[Pop23]

And what would additional training do? Stop criminals from violent actions? Answer, NO. Would removing AR's stop them? Answer, Highly unlikely. Would additional training stop suicides? Answer, I can't find anything that convinces me it would. Would banning AR's stop suicides? No AR's are almost never the gun of choice in suicide. I've just covered 99% of gun deaths. 1% of 33,636 is 336 per year is all you could possibly impact.

So Car Deaths, not related to murders or suicides (I'll put that at 2% of the total) are at 39,298 and gun deaths not related to Murder or Suicide at 336.

You were saying you want cars banned then?

When I see a uniformed cop with a gun I feel more secure since I know he has been trained how and when to use it. Any one else and I have no idea.

I don't recall ever saying I wanted to ban ARs, only large clips.

Some of us think suicides are people too.

OMG. Banning large clips do nothing for the 99% I outlined above. How many times do you think suicidal people shoot? I'm guessing less than twice (I don't know, but a large clip is kinda a moot point in these 99%)

 

[alang1216]

OMG. Banning large clips do nothing for the 99% I outlined above. How many times do you think suicidal people shoot? I'm guessing less than twice (I don't know, but a large clip is kinda a moot point in these 99%)

Limiting clip size seems like something that might hinder a mass shooter while having little or no impact on legitimate users? Or are there legitimate reasons for large capacity magazines. Low hanging fruit.

 

[Pop23]

OMG. Banning large clips do nothing for the 99% I outlined above. How many times do you think suicidal people shoot? I'm guessing less than twice (I don't know, but a large clip is kinda a moot point in these 99%)

Limiting clip size seems like something that might hinder a mass shooter while having little or no impact on legitimate users? Or are there legitimate reasons for large capacity magazines. Low hanging fruit.

Why not just stop the cause of the shootings in the first place. You can save a few, or save all.

Seems a logical choice to save all. Quit putting these kids on ADHD and SSRI's (antidepressants) and this ends.

 

[alang1216]

Why not just stop the cause of the shootings in the first place. You can save a few, or save all.

Seems a logical choice to save all. Quit putting these kids on ADHD and SSRI's (antidepressants) and this ends.

I'm guessing it is not that simple but if it helps I'm all for it.

 

[2aguy]

And what would additional training do? Stop criminals from violent actions? Answer, NO. Would removing AR's stop them? Answer, Highly unlikely. Would additional training stop suicides? Answer, I can't find anything that convinces me it would. Would banning AR's stop suicides? No AR's are almost never the gun of choice in suicide. I've just covered 99% of gun deaths. 1% of 33,636 is 336 per year is all you could possibly impact.

So Car Deaths, not related to murders or suicides (I'll put that at 2% of the total) are at 39,298 and gun deaths not related to Murder or Suicide at 336.

You were saying you want cars banned then?

When I see a uniformed cop with a gun I feel more secure since I know he has been trained how and when to use it. Any one else and I have no idea.

I don't recall ever saying I wanted to ban ARs, only large clips.

Some of us think suicides are people too.

Can you please define a "large" magazine.

That would be a good start and then you could explain why you want them banned.....since banning them achieves nothing. Criminals either don't need them or will get them if they want them, and mass shooters can easily shoot unarmed people with 10 round magazines as they did in Florida, Virginia tech, columbine....

The only people who need standard magazines are law abiding gun owners who will face criminals and mass shooters and who will be on their own with no backup....

 

[2aguy]

OMG. Banning large clips do nothing for the 99% I outlined above. How many times do you think suicidal people shoot? I'm guessing less than twice (I don't know, but a large clip is kinda a moot point in these 99%)

Limiting clip size seems like something that might hinder a mass shooter while having little or no impact on legitimate users? Or are there legitimate reasons for large capacity magazines. Low hanging fruit.

At first blush, it seems like a good idea, but when you actually think deeper about it, you see that it does nothing except deprive law abiding gun owners of extra bullets they might need to survive, and it is also a back door ban on semi auto pistols that hold more than 10 rounds...

If you are really interested in understanding why magazine bans are not necessary.....here...

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1525107116674926

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----


http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1525107116674926

In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.

 

[Pop23]

Why not just stop the cause of the shootings in the first place. You can save a few, or save all.

Seems a logical choice to save all. Quit putting these kids on ADHD and SSRI's (antidepressants) and this ends.

I'm guessing it is not that simple but if it helps I'm all for it.

Simple as hell. Ban their use on anyone under the age of 21, then on only the most severe cases.

It ends

 

[2aguy]

OMG. Banning large clips do nothing for the 99% I outlined above. How many times do you think suicidal people shoot? I'm guessing less than twice (I don't know, but a large clip is kinda a moot point in these 99%)

Limiting clip size seems like something that might hinder a mass shooter while having little or no impact on legitimate users? Or are there legitimate reasons for large capacity magazines. Low hanging fruit.

As for magazine capacity......

What do you mean by large capacity....anti gunners often use a bait and switch, leading uninformed Americans to believe they are talking about 100 round drum magazines, but then passing legislation with that power to ban standard magazines of 15-19 rounds, making the pistols useless for the owners because they can't use the magazine anymore?

Now, if you mean 15-19 rounds... a criminal who is going to commit rape, robbery or murder does not need a lot of bullets......they can compel compliance against an unarmed, isolated victim with a 5 shot snub nose. If they want 15-19 round magazines, they can get them through the black market.

Mass shooters do not need 15-19-30 round magazines as the paper I linked to shows...shooting unarmed people can easily be done with 10 round magazines....as the Parkland shooter did...

So who needs 15-19-30 rounds....the law abiding citizen who may be facing one or more armed attackers in an ambush, where they are isolated, alone and without backup. How many rounds do you want to have with you when the lives of your family or friends are in the balance, or even just your own life.....should some anti gun activist tell you that your life and the life of your family is only worth 10 bullets?

And then you get into the actual combat situation. When you are in a fight for your life, adrenaline spikes in your body....your vision narrows, your muscle coordination for small tasks deteriorates......so lets say you have to shoot more than 10 rounds..now you have to change a magazine while in a rush, since you are under attack, and while your body is not cooperating......so what is easy at the range becomes more difficult while under attack.

Then...what if you are injured.....or you loose the use of a hand or arm? And now, you have to change that 10 round magazine one handed, with an adrenaline spike while under attack....

Can you see where the standard 5-9 extra bullets might mean life or death for the law abiding, good person?

When the fire department shows up at your home for a fire....are they limited to 100 gallons to save your house? Do you put a limit on them or do you allow them to use whatever they need to save lives and your property?

Why would you want to limit how many bullets you can have to save your life....especially when the rule you want doesn't stop criminals or mass shooters in any way?

 

[Darkwind]

3. Gun control regulations infringes upon the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

What's an 'arm'?

What definition will you accept?

 

[Darkwind]

Here is somebody else that knocked it out of the park. The Governor of Kentucky. It is not about gun control it is about controlling morals.

He did indeed.

 

[OnePercenter]

Canada, as well as every other small penis average size countries have rational gun laws, why not the United States?

Canada has growing gun crime....we have gun crime that is going down....

Canada.....

Police can't explain increase in shootings in Toronto | CBC News

The two shootings come as Toronto is experiencing a year of increased gun violence, up 35 per cent from last year. The number of victims has also increased, up by 80 per cent over last August, according to police statistics.

Deputy Chief Peter Sloly can't say why there have been so many shootings this year, adding that he's noticed an uptick in gun violence across the country.

"It's a concerning trend we're seeing this year," Sloly told CBC News. "We've put extra resources on the street, we've got extra intelligence coming in, we have extra support from our communities."

But Mayor John Tory thinks he knows why the city is witnessing so much gun play.

"There's some level of gang activity involved," he said. "There is the illegal gun trade that continues to be a real problem especially when it comes to the Canada-U.S. border."


-----------
Firearms: Making sense of Toronto’s cycle of violence

The number of people killed or injured by guns in Toronto so far this year is already higher than 2014, reversing a recent downward trend. But while gun violence appears to be going up in Ontario’s capital, criminologists say this apparent increase in gun violence doesn’t necessarily mean the city is becoming more dangerous.
This week alone, there have been seven shootings over a span of four days, two of them fatal, Toronto Police spokeswoman Caroline de Kloet said Friday.

********

Mr. Pugash said the number of shooting events this year – 162, as of Aug. 20 – is now on par with the number on the same date in 2012, the year police previously noted a spike in gun violence.


Police don’t know the reasons behind this year’s increase, Mr. Pugash said, and it’s an issue that could be impacted by an “infinite number of factors.”


Toronto Sun

TORONTO - Welcome to Toronto’s Summer of the Gun 2015.

It’s a headline neither Toronto Police nor city hall want to see.

There is no question statistics can be made to look a lot of different ways, but some statistics are just plain ugly.

Scary, actually.

For example, 36 more people have been shot so far this year in Toronto than at this point last year.

Toronto Police statistics show a 90% increase in people wounded by gunfire and a 48% increase in shootings (135 compared to 91).

And there have been 106 more shooting victims (those hit by gunfire, as well as those victimized by it).

In fact, the 227 shooting victims so far this year is 31 more than the total for all of 2014.

It’s true not all shooting victims have been hit by gunfire, but as Deputy Chief Peter Sloly points out, every gun shot, whether into the air or a tree, is one that could ricochet and strike an innocent victim like we saw in 2012 when a two-year-old was hit.

If you add the death and injury statistics, Toronto has seen 88 dead or wounded by gunfire in 2015 compared to 53 at this time last year. That’s a 66% increase.

It’s a big spike.

Shocking, horrifying numbers that seem to have just snuck up on us.

Many seem worried about the controversial carding issue, but these scary stats aren’t getting the same media attention. It doesn’t feel like a particularly violent summer, but the stats indicate otherwise.





And more, with stories...



'Brazen criminals' behind spike in Toronto gun crime, says deputy chief | CBC News



Another Canadian city with gun crime....



UPDATED: Why does Moncton have such high gun-crime rates?

United States....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...



--------
-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Vegas. October 1, 2017, 58 dead, 500+ injured because it's more important to sell guns than to protect peoples lives.

Nice, France. July 14, 2016, 86 dead 458 injured because it's more important to allow people to drive trucks than to protect people's lives.

So we should let people have AR-15's because we let them drive trucks?

The AR-15 civilian rifle is no different from any other rifle......it is not a military weapon, it has never been used by the military, and it is protected by the 2nd Amendment, there is no "let" people do anything, they have a Right, to own that weapon.

So you wouldn't have any objection to a maximum five-round magazine for AR-15's?

 

[Geaux4it]

and comments from both side are welcome

-Geaux

Who is talking about taking everyone's guns?

The democrats

-Geaux

 

[Skull Pilot]

If you're going to set your standard at a 0% accident rate you might as well buy a bullet, rent a gun and kill yourself now because there is not a zero chance that getting out of bed won't result in a fatal accident

I have taken all reasonable precautions so I can get out of bed safely. I don't think we can say the same about guns.

There you go. YOU take precautions you do not force other to take precautions so you can feel safe

 

[2aguy]

Canada has growing gun crime....we have gun crime that is going down....

Canada.....

Police can't explain increase in shootings in Toronto | CBC News

The two shootings come as Toronto is experiencing a year of increased gun violence, up 35 per cent from last year. The number of victims has also increased, up by 80 per cent over last August, according to police statistics.

Deputy Chief Peter Sloly can't say why there have been so many shootings this year, adding that he's noticed an uptick in gun violence across the country.

"It's a concerning trend we're seeing this year," Sloly told CBC News. "We've put extra resources on the street, we've got extra intelligence coming in, we have extra support from our communities."

But Mayor John Tory thinks he knows why the city is witnessing so much gun play.

"There's some level of gang activity involved," he said. "There is the illegal gun trade that continues to be a real problem especially when it comes to the Canada-U.S. border."


-----------
Firearms: Making sense of Toronto’s cycle of violence

The number of people killed or injured by guns in Toronto so far this year is already higher than 2014, reversing a recent downward trend. But while gun violence appears to be going up in Ontario’s capital, criminologists say this apparent increase in gun violence doesn’t necessarily mean the city is becoming more dangerous.
This week alone, there have been seven shootings over a span of four days, two of them fatal, Toronto Police spokeswoman Caroline de Kloet said Friday.

********

Mr. Pugash said the number of shooting events this year – 162, as of Aug. 20 – is now on par with the number on the same date in 2012, the year police previously noted a spike in gun violence.


Police don’t know the reasons behind this year’s increase, Mr. Pugash said, and it’s an issue that could be impacted by an “infinite number of factors.”


Toronto Sun

TORONTO - Welcome to Toronto’s Summer of the Gun 2015.

It’s a headline neither Toronto Police nor city hall want to see.

There is no question statistics can be made to look a lot of different ways, but some statistics are just plain ugly.

Scary, actually.

For example, 36 more people have been shot so far this year in Toronto than at this point last year.

Toronto Police statistics show a 90% increase in people wounded by gunfire and a 48% increase in shootings (135 compared to 91).

And there have been 106 more shooting victims (those hit by gunfire, as well as those victimized by it).

In fact, the 227 shooting victims so far this year is 31 more than the total for all of 2014.

It’s true not all shooting victims have been hit by gunfire, but as Deputy Chief Peter Sloly points out, every gun shot, whether into the air or a tree, is one that could ricochet and strike an innocent victim like we saw in 2012 when a two-year-old was hit.

If you add the death and injury statistics, Toronto has seen 88 dead or wounded by gunfire in 2015 compared to 53 at this time last year. That’s a 66% increase.

It’s a big spike.

Shocking, horrifying numbers that seem to have just snuck up on us.

Many seem worried about the controversial carding issue, but these scary stats aren’t getting the same media attention. It doesn’t feel like a particularly violent summer, but the stats indicate otherwise.





And more, with stories...



'Brazen criminals' behind spike in Toronto gun crime, says deputy chief | CBC News



Another Canadian city with gun crime....



UPDATED: Why does Moncton have such high gun-crime rates?

United States....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...



--------
-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Vegas. October 1, 2017, 58 dead, 500+ injured because it's more important to sell guns than to protect peoples lives.

Nice, France. July 14, 2016, 86 dead 458 injured because it's more important to allow people to drive trucks than to protect people's lives.

So we should let people have AR-15's because we let them drive trucks?

The AR-15 civilian rifle is no different from any other rifle......it is not a military weapon, it has never been used by the military, and it is protected by the 2nd Amendment, there is no "let" people do anything, they have a Right, to own that weapon.

So you wouldn't have any objection to a maximum five-round magazine for AR-15's?

Yes...why on earth would you limit what a law abiding person can have in their AR-15 civilian rifle? There is no reason to limit magazine capacity...it doesn't effect mass shootings and it doesn't stop criminals...

 

[MrShangles]

It’s against the law to have an unregistered gun.

Not where I live it isn't unless you want an 'assault rifle' or fully automatic. Rifles and pistols don't require registration.

And where is this, I have one unregistered also, but I purchased it from a friend. If I purchase a new one it has to be registered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OnePercenter]

Vegas. October 1, 2017, 58 dead, 500+ injured because it's more important to sell guns than to protect peoples lives.

Nice, France. July 14, 2016, 86 dead 458 injured because it's more important to allow people to drive trucks than to protect people's lives.

So we should let people have AR-15's because we let them drive trucks?

The AR-15 civilian rifle is no different from any other rifle......it is not a military weapon, it has never been used by the military, and it is protected by the 2nd Amendment, there is no "let" people do anything, they have a Right, to own that weapon.

So you wouldn't have any objection to a maximum five-round magazine for AR-15's?

Yes...why on earth would you limit what a law abiding person can have in their AR-15 civilian rifle? There is no reason to limit magazine capacity...it doesn't effect mass shootings and it doesn't stop criminals...

So you would have no objection. Done.