“Hell yes we are going to take your AR-15”

[jc456]

Alex Jones Warns Beto: Keep Your Filthy Hands Off Our 2nd Amendment!
Establishment puppet Beto O’Rourke has become the mouthpiece of the victim disarmament lobby and has pledged, quote “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47!”





LMFAO!! you losers don't even know the half of reality..

Alex Jones, I bet he is shaking in his pants. LOL

Schumer is, he's gone out and demonized Beto's rant. Why do you supposed Schumer made this statement? just asking cause you think you're cute.

Chuck Schumer Says He Doesn’t Know Any Democrats Who Support Beto’s Gun Grab

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The free world calls that a TYRANNY and a COUP. The Constitution provides a remedy for that.

View attachment 279910

View attachment 279911

The Puckle gun could fire 9 shots per minute. I'm not seeing much comparison to the rate of fire for modern guns.

That's because it was designed over THREE HUNDRED years ago, idiot. Right around the same time as the piano and tuning fork were first being invented. No one was comparing it to a modern machine gun. That was unbelievable state of the art for its day. Jesus, talking to you, is like talking to a babbling idiot. I feel like I need a frontal lobotomy to come down to your level of itinerant stupidity.

Yet you presented it as proof that the founding fathers were able to envision the modern fire power we have today. Make up your mind which way you want to go on that.

Do you honestly believe that they had no ability whatsoever to envision improvements in weaponry?

It doesn't even ******* matter. It says do not infringe, there should be no infringement whatsoever. recent supreme court cases have indicated that weapons in common use or protected. I don't agree with that finding but it does screw over your argument. If you don't like it, amend. Otherwise shut your ******* commie mouth.

. it's really that simple amend or shut the **** up.

.

You're dealing with a total ******* idiot who like Rightwinger, no matter what you say or present in B&W, they will simply deny and try to deliberately twist things around because THEY SIMPLY DO NOT WANT YOU TO OWN GUNS.

PERIOD.

They find you a personal threat to their existence.

It's not about crime, safety or anything else. They know they cannot be trusted with guns so assume you are like them. You might as well talk to the wall because they have a dream that involves telling others how they can and cannot live their lives. The best thing they could do is donate their bodies to science so we can dissect their brains to find out what went wrong with them.

I agree with you, and even think it is much deeper than that.

Assuming he is not simply trying to erode the right of self-defense so that the communist revolution can succeed (he probably is) he and others like him live in a state of denial.

He cannot accept the truth that humans are violent by nature. He cannot cope with the thought of defending himself or others from violence, with violence. He believes that violence can be suppressed. He believes that society exists to control others, rather than existing SOLELY to allow conditions that foster voluntary non-violent co-existence of competing individuals.

His entire understanding of humanity and life itself is limited to that which is directly in front of him. Completely child-like. He and millions like him believe that humans being subjugated by a faceless government entity, rather than an identifiable group of other humans, is somehow different. Or, maybe he knows it is not different. He is simply trying to disguise his ultimate theft and enslavement of other humans by use of the faceless entity. Maybe his is that diabolical, or maybe he just doesn't understand what he is truly proposing.

Either way, he refuses to acknowledge the truth about society being useless if it demands a surrender of the means of extreme violence, rather than promote conditions where such violence is unnecessary. It all goes back to early humanity. Tribe A of primitive humans would never surrender its weapons to Tribe B, because to do so would be to surrender all food and other resources to Tribe B. The two can only co-exist if they both have the means to discourage an attack from the other.

I suspect that he wants us surrender our weapons so he can use government to plunder the fruits of our labor and resources without resistance (communism/socialism).


.

 

[toobfreak]

this talk about NUKE's , Drones with Missiles is just silly . Second Amendment is about Small Arms issued and carried by the individual Comat soldier and primarily owned as a hedge against Tyranny . These Small Arms can also be used for other Lawful purposes like self defense ,and all other legal purposes . The RARE 'Black Swan events of Walmart shootings are no reason to mess with Americans RIGHT to effective and efficient Weapons . ----------- Heck , ALL weapons protected by the Second were Weapons of WAR from the very beginning in the USA and weapons of war are what is protected by the Second Sealy .

the whole NUKE argument is stupid. while it does point out "look, weapons CAN be regulated" great. so can voting privlidges. so can speech. so can a lot of things. the question is, where do you draw the line.

since the gun-grabbers can't define an "assault rifle" in a manner that only effects the AR15, they broaden the scope and move the line.

the fight isn't about the AR15 in the end, it's about where the line is drawn.

The AR15 is a reasonable place for that line.

In your misguided opinion.

I think a reasonable place for that line is the standard load out of a foot soldier or marine.

If you insist on further diminishing the right, I will insist on motherfucking machine guns to minors.

Or you can stop now. You choose.

.

Insist all you want. Your wishes don't count anyway.

the wishes of gun-grabbers mean just as much.

Less. Far less. Anyone who labels everyone who simply enjoys the sport of shooting, target practice, competition, hunting, collecting, or values the history of firearms and the constitutional context and social value in keeping the public safe --- a "gun nut" --- does not deserve to be even considered an American.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Alex Jones Warns Beto: Keep Your Filthy Hands Off Our 2nd Amendment!
Establishment puppet Beto O’Rourke has become the mouthpiece of the victim disarmament lobby and has pledged, quote “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47!”





LMFAO!! you losers don't even know the half of reality..

Alex Jones, I bet he is shaking in his pants. LOL

Schumer is, he's gone out and demonized Beto's rant. Why do you supposed Schumer made this statement? just asking cause you think you're cute.

Chuck Schumer Says He Doesn’t Know Any Democrats Who Support Beto’s Gun Grab

Schumer knows that real Democrat objective must be kept quiet. He knows that Beto's gun-grabbing rhetoric is a loser message that will destroy the Democrat party before they can get enough power to steal all our weapons.

Make no mistake, Schumer is a gun-grabbing commie. He just knows that he can't say it or he will lose all hope of achieving it.

.

 

[sealybobo]

Are you referring to #484 where I clearly answered your question dumb ass?
View attachment 279984

and exactly how does:

"Nope. I'm simply pointing out how you are wrong. I'm laughing at the absurd things you post."

answer the question on how you feel about losing due process for a singular gain?

The first word. NOPE.

so you don't see red flag laws as bypassing due process? then as a follow up it would stand to reason you don't see them bypassing due process for "other" issues as they come along.

am i correct in comprehending your overly verbose response?

No. I don't see bypassing due process as something that will happen. I suspect some might want that to happen, but I don't see them succeeding.

except that if i come take your guns because a neighbor said you are dangerous, how is that *not* bypassing due process? where is my trial? where is my right to explain myself?

to me this is bypassing due process because the request doesn't launch an investigation or to see if there is merit to it, it means take my guns cause my neighbor is mad at me. so, to me, red flag laws "do" bypass due process. i would be furious with trump or any elected official if they were to do this because they take power, they never give it back.

Well they shouldn't make it so just anyone can turn you in and get your guns confiscated but if a family member calls the cops and says you're dangerous, should we wait for after you go on your rampage? And depends on the circumstances. If a neighbor says you threatened to shoot them that's not enough. If they say you pointed your AR15 at them and threatened them, then they should take your guns away until after your trial.

How did they lock up Jeffery Epstein before his trial? Wasn't he innocent until proven guilty?

 

[M14 Shooter]

How did they lock up Jeffery Epstein before his trial? Wasn't he innocent until proven guilty?

The state had a warrant for his arrest.

 

[iceberg]

That's because it was designed over THREE HUNDRED years ago, idiot. Right around the same time as the piano and tuning fork were first being invented. No one was comparing it to a modern machine gun. That was unbelievable state of the art for its day. Jesus, talking to you, is like talking to a babbling idiot. I feel like I need a frontal lobotomy to come down to your level of itinerant stupidity.

Yet you presented it as proof that the founding fathers were able to envision the modern fire power we have today. Make up your mind which way you want to go on that.

Do you honestly believe that they had no ability whatsoever to envision improvements in weaponry?

It doesn't even ******* matter. It says do not infringe, there should be no infringement whatsoever. recent supreme court cases have indicated that weapons in common use or protected. I don't agree with that finding but it does screw over your argument. If you don't like it, amend. Otherwise shut your ******* commie mouth.

. it's really that simple amend or shut the **** up.

.

You're dealing with a total ******* idiot who like Rightwinger, no matter what you say or present in B&W, they will simply deny and try to deliberately twist things around because THEY SIMPLY DO NOT WANT YOU TO OWN GUNS.

PERIOD.

They find you a personal threat to their existence.

It's not about crime, safety or anything else. They know they cannot be trusted with guns so assume you are like them. You might as well talk to the wall because they have a dream that involves telling others how they can and cannot live their lives. The best thing they could do is donate their bodies to science so we can dissect their brains to find out what went wrong with them.

called them both on it quite politely today (for the most part!) and bulldog would simply refuse to answer direct questions and rightwinger did what he always does only this time he turned me into the internet police.

both are just here to stir up shit.

The board has an ignore function.

And I normally use it. Today I took some off to try again.

Ill post my way, you post yours.

 

[sealybobo]

this talk about NUKE's , Drones with Missiles is just silly . Second Amendment is about Small Arms issued and carried by the individual Comat soldier and primarily owned as a hedge against Tyranny . These Small Arms can also be used for other Lawful purposes like self defense ,and all other legal purposes . The RARE 'Black Swan events of Walmart shootings are no reason to mess with Americans RIGHT to effective and efficient Weapons . ----------- Heck , ALL weapons protected by the Second were Weapons of WAR from the very beginning in the USA and weapons of war are what is protected by the Second Sealy .

the whole NUKE argument is stupid. while it does point out "look, weapons CAN be regulated" great. so can voting privlidges. so can speech. so can a lot of things. the question is, where do you draw the line.

since the gun-grabbers can't define an "assault rifle" in a manner that only effects the AR15, they broaden the scope and move the line.

the fight isn't about the AR15 in the end, it's about where the line is drawn.

------------------------------------ should be no line because as you say or as I say , the line can always be redrawn Iceberg .

it's always being redrawn. they banned AR's before and it didn't do a lick of good.

What happened the last time the US banned some semi-automatic guns

The final report concluded the ban’s success in reducing crimes committed with banned guns was “mixed.” Gun crimes involving assault weapons declined. However, that decline was “offset throughout at least the late 1990s by steady or rising use of other guns equipped with [large-capacity magazines].”

so - we ban one and other gun use rises. the rest is a mixed bag of cherry picking. my overall concern is when other gun violence rises, we once again address the guns.

not the reason for the violence.

Your own ******* article explains why the ban didn't work. LOOPHOLES!!! Close the mother ******* loopholes

Though the ban applied to many semi-automatic firearms, there were some important loopholes. It contained a “features test” provision which specifically prohibited semi-automatic weapons containing two or more military-style features, such as a folding or telescoping stock and a flash hider. As a result, gun manufacturers could — and did — make minor cosmetic changes that removed the features to transform banned firearms into legal ones.

CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES! This isn't rocket science. It's common sense shit you gun nuts won't allow.

 

[toobfreak]

The Puckle gun could fire 9 shots per minute. I'm not seeing much comparison to the rate of fire for modern guns.

That's because it was designed over THREE HUNDRED years ago, idiot. Right around the same time as the piano and tuning fork were first being invented. No one was comparing it to a modern machine gun. That was unbelievable state of the art for its day. Jesus, talking to you, is like talking to a babbling idiot. I feel like I need a frontal lobotomy to come down to your level of itinerant stupidity.

Yet you presented it as proof that the founding fathers were able to envision the modern fire power we have today. Make up your mind which way you want to go on that.

Do you honestly believe that they had no ability whatsoever to envision improvements in weaponry?

It doesn't even ******* matter. It says do not infringe, there should be no infringement whatsoever. recent supreme court cases have indicated that weapons in common use or protected. I don't agree with that finding but it does screw over your argument. If you don't like it, amend. Otherwise shut your ******* commie mouth.

. it's really that simple amend or shut the **** up.

.

You're dealing with a total ******* idiot who like Rightwinger, no matter what you say or present in B&W, they will simply deny and try to deliberately twist things around because THEY SIMPLY DO NOT WANT YOU TO OWN GUNS.

PERIOD.

They find you a personal threat to their existence.

It's not about crime, safety or anything else. They know they cannot be trusted with guns so assume you are like them. You might as well talk to the wall because they have a dream that involves telling others how they can and cannot live their lives. The best thing they could do is donate their bodies to science so we can dissect their brains to find out what went wrong with them.

I agree with you, and even think it is much deeper than that.

Assuming he is not simply trying to erode the right of self-defense so that the communist revolution can succeed (he probably is) he and others like him live in a state of denial.

He cannot accept the truth that humans are violent by nature. He cannot cope with the thought of defending himself or others from violence, with violence. He believes that violence can be suppressed. He believes that society exists to control others, rather than existing SOLELY to allow conditions that foster voluntary non-violent co-existence of competing individuals.

His entire understanding of humanity and life itself is limited to that which is directly in front of him. Completely child-like. He and millions like him believe that humans being subjugated by a faceless government entity, rather than an identifiable group of other humans, is somehow different. Or, maybe he knows it is not different. He is simply trying to disguise his ultimate theft and enslavement of other humans by use of the faceless entity. Maybe his is that diabolical, or maybe he just doesn't understand what he is truly proposing.

Either way, he refuses to acknowledge the truth about society being useless if it demands a surrender of the means of extreme violence, rather than promote conditions where such violence is unnecessary. It all goes back to early humanity. Tribe A of primitive humans would never surrender its weapons to Tribe B, because to do so would be to surrender all food and other resources to Tribe B. The two can only co-exist if they both have the means to discourage an attack from the other.

I suspect that he wants us surrender our weapons so he can use government to plunder the fruits of our labor and resources without resistance (communism/socialism).

.

All that and more. Look how invested some of these people are in even opposing and ridiculing this discussion! You would think it is a personal mandate of theirs to see Americans disarmed. Millions of people who have not so much as hurt a fly much less committed any crime. They relish the thought of not only banning ALL guns from legal sale but to put the NRA and every manufacturer and all the people working for them out of business.

These are the same people who have created all the wars by likewise arguing that you can solve everything in the world with diplomacy! Because of their kind, Little Kim and Iran have been permitted UN resolution after UN resolution, meeting after meeting, decade after decade, until they are fully armed and have everything they want and we've gotten nothing, when these people could have been stopped easily years ago.

They are the mentally ill whose every action results in the exact OPPOSITE of their stated intent.

 

[iceberg]

called them both on it quite politely today (for the most part!) and bulldog would simply refuse to answer direct questions and rightwinger did what he always does only this time he turned me into the internet police. both are just here to stir up shit.

Ice, you are describing at least 80% of the hardline far right idiots here. You cannot have any reasonable, intelligent conversation with them. It is not a matter of facts. There is no debate. Most of them like Faun start EVERY post about how stupid you are and what a blithering idiot you are. He doesn't even come out unless he can ridicule someone else. You are dealing with vile ignorant people who hate everything about America and are here just to blow everything up, so why bother even being polite to them? They will only return the respect with spit in your face. They live to troll.

And I described much if the same of most of the left here. Bulldog and rightwinger are both "VERY LEFT" whe it suits their snark needs of the moment. Please feel free to look back at how they responded to what I was trying to do.

This is not a riggt/left issue. Both sides have their share of idiot drones.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your own ******* article explains why the ban didn't work. LOOPHOLES!!! Close the mother ******* loopholes

How, exactly, do you plan to do that?
What specific language would you use?

 

[sealybobo]

"What’s the purpose for an AR15?"
Exactly like any other firearm it's purpose is make holes in things that are out of reach. It is used for target shooting/competition, hunting to feed families, defense of home family livestock and self, emergency preparedness, collection, and investment. The reasons a person might want one are none of your business.

"Like a machine gun we might deem ar15s too dangerous for the general public to possess."
You do not have the right or the authority to do. UnConstitutional. Nor is the AR-15 any more dangerous than any other gun car or jet aircraft.

"We can’t stop nuts from taking a semi auto pistol that carries ten rounds. But at least most of the people hav a chance to get away."
Really? Exactly how do you intend to do that? High capacity magazines are common and long-lasting and easily fabricated? Also almost all weapons that use any sort of magazine can be converted to handle high capacity magazines. And even if could make such a ban effective I doubt if the police and military will appreciate the handicap.

"Your right is taking the rights away from all the people who die because even dumb Americans can buy wmds."
Untrue. Obviously you are the one advocating taking people's rights away. Does the word "tyranny" ring any bells with you.?

That's a good point. A semi auto handgun is just as powerful or can be but it's not as good from far away. So if you take one into a crowd and people start running you'll kill much fewer people with the handgun. And a CCW holder in the room might have a chance against you. I say ban assault rifles. I have a pretty powerful Ruger 450 Bushmaster. It only holds 4 rounds. That should be legal. It's a hunting gun. I like the person who said the purpose of a AR15 is to put holes in things. What things? Is it used to hunt deer or bear? Ok, how many bullets do you need? We should only allow 4 round magazines. If you can't hit the bear in 4 shots you suck and should be eaten by the bear.

If you are shooting paper plates then you just have to reload after 4 shots. Apparently you guys say that won't slow you down one bit so don't cry about nuthin.

AR-15s are not assault rifles. Nor are they especially powerful. What do you really want banned? They are indeed used to hunt all manner of things. They are especially favored by women and other smallish people who have difficulty handling more powerful rounds. They are indeed used to hunt deer and bear. They are also used to hunt wild hogs which can be quite dangerous and may show up in groups of two doz. or more and in many places there is no limit on how many you can or should kill due to the damage they do to the land and other species. View attachment 280039 View attachment 280039 View attachment 280039 View attachment 280039 View attachment 280044

My ruger 450 bushmaster only holds 3 in the mag and one in the chamber.

So you want to allow wmd's that are killing American citizens on a daily basis for the rare time that DOZENS of wild dogs will attack someone? What a crock of bullshit.

Show me the last time a person was attacked by DOZENS of wild dogs and used an AR15 to save their lives.

You can have a AR15 as long as you pass the background check.

And as all of you have said, limiting the number of rounds you can have in your magazine isn't going to slow you up one bit. So now PLEASE make the argument that you NEED 10 rounds in the mag because any less will slow you up. I want to see you guys contradict yourselves on this one.

 

[sealybobo]

Your own ******* article explains why the ban didn't work. LOOPHOLES!!! Close the mother ******* loopholes

How, exactly, do you plan to do that?
What specific language would you use?

The lawmakers will do it. And the gun lobbyists will not have a seat at the table.

 

[iceberg]

the whole NUKE argument is stupid. while it does point out "look, weapons CAN be regulated" great. so can voting privlidges. so can speech. so can a lot of things. the question is, where do you draw the line.

since the gun-grabbers can't define an "assault rifle" in a manner that only effects the AR15, they broaden the scope and move the line.

the fight isn't about the AR15 in the end, it's about where the line is drawn.

The AR15 is a reasonable place for that line.

In your misguided opinion.

I think a reasonable place for that line is the standard load out of a foot soldier or marine.

If you insist on further diminishing the right, I will insist on motherfucking machine guns to minors.

Or you can stop now. You choose.

.

Insist all you want. Your wishes don't count anyway.

the wishes of gun-grabbers mean just as much.

Less. Far less. Anyone who labels everyone who simply enjoys the sport of shooting, target practice, competition, hunting, collecting, or values the history of firearms and the constitutional context and social value in keeping the public safe --- a "gun nut" --- does not deserve to be even considered an American.

Having arguements to break down which idiot is a bigger idiot is along the lines of which turd smells the worst.

 

[toobfreak]

called them both on it quite politely today (for the most part!) and bulldog would simply refuse to answer direct questions and rightwinger did what he always does only this time he turned me into the internet police. both are just here to stir up shit.

Ice, you are describing at least 80% of the hardline far right idiots here. You cannot have any reasonable, intelligent conversation with them. It is not a matter of facts. There is no debate. Most of them like Faun start EVERY post about how stupid you are and what a blithering idiot you are. He doesn't even come out unless he can ridicule someone else. You are dealing with vile ignorant people who hate everything about America and are here just to blow everything up, so why bother even being polite to them? They will only return the respect with spit in your face. They live to troll.

And I described much if the same of most of the left here. Bulldog and rightwinger are both "VERY LEFT" whe it suits their snark needs of the moment. Please feel free to look back at how they responded to what I was trying to do.

This is not a riggt/left issue. Both sides have their share of idiot drones.

True, but at least the rightwing nuts do not want to fundamentally socialize us into a totalitarian, socialist state.

 

[iceberg]

and exactly how does:

"Nope. I'm simply pointing out how you are wrong. I'm laughing at the absurd things you post."

answer the question on how you feel about losing due process for a singular gain?

The first word. NOPE.

so you don't see red flag laws as bypassing due process? then as a follow up it would stand to reason you don't see them bypassing due process for "other" issues as they come along.

am i correct in comprehending your overly verbose response?

No. I don't see bypassing due process as something that will happen. I suspect some might want that to happen, but I don't see them succeeding.

except that if i come take your guns because a neighbor said you are dangerous, how is that *not* bypassing due process? where is my trial? where is my right to explain myself?

to me this is bypassing due process because the request doesn't launch an investigation or to see if there is merit to it, it means take my guns cause my neighbor is mad at me. so, to me, red flag laws "do" bypass due process. i would be furious with trump or any elected official if they were to do this because they take power, they never give it back.

Well they shouldn't make it so just anyone can turn you in and get your guns confiscated but if a family member calls the cops and says you're dangerous, should we wait for after you go on your rampage? And depends on the circumstances. If a neighbor says you threatened to shoot them that's not enough. If they say you pointed your AR15 at them and threatened them, then they should take your guns away until after your trial.

How did they lock up Jeffery Epstein before his trial? Wasn't he innocent until proven guilty?

I'm not too far from you and IF this goes into play it needs serious oversight for the potential abuse it can cause.

If Billy Bob down the street loves to fire his guns at night and that is already illegal, then no issue. Get him on existing laws. If they are not breaking any laws then it's a much harder path.

 

[iceberg]

called them both on it quite politely today (for the most part!) and bulldog would simply refuse to answer direct questions and rightwinger did what he always does only this time he turned me into the internet police. both are just here to stir up shit.

Ice, you are describing at least 80% of the hardline far right idiots here. You cannot have any reasonable, intelligent conversation with them. It is not a matter of facts. There is no debate. Most of them like Faun start EVERY post about how stupid you are and what a blithering idiot you are. He doesn't even come out unless he can ridicule someone else. You are dealing with vile ignorant people who hate everything about America and are here just to blow everything up, so why bother even being polite to them? They will only return the respect with spit in your face. They live to troll.

And I described much if the same of most of the left here. Bulldog and rightwinger are both "VERY LEFT" whe it suits their snark needs of the moment. Please feel free to look back at how they responded to what I was trying to do.

This is not a riggt/left issue. Both sides have their share of idiot drones.

True, but at least the rightwing nuts do not want to fundamentally socialize us into a totalitarian, socialist state.

No but they have their own set of inherent issues.

 

[M14 Shooter]

My ruger 450 bushmaster only holds 3 in the mag and one in the chamber.

So?

So you want to allow wmd's...

There you go with the "WMD" lie again.

...that are killing American citizens on a daily basis...

If by "daily basis" you mean an average of 10 per year, sure.
Why do you need to lie to make a point?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your own ******* article explains why the ban didn't work. LOOPHOLES!!! Close the mother ******* loopholes

How, exactly, do you plan to do that?
What specific language would you use?

The lawmakers will do it.

Ah.
You have no clue how to do it.
Not surprised.

 

[iceberg]

this talk about NUKE's , Drones with Missiles is just silly . Second Amendment is about Small Arms issued and carried by the individual Comat soldier and primarily owned as a hedge against Tyranny . These Small Arms can also be used for other Lawful purposes like self defense ,and all other legal purposes . The RARE 'Black Swan events of Walmart shootings are no reason to mess with Americans RIGHT to effective and efficient Weapons . ----------- Heck , ALL weapons protected by the Second were Weapons of WAR from the very beginning in the USA and weapons of war are what is protected by the Second Sealy .

the whole NUKE argument is stupid. while it does point out "look, weapons CAN be regulated" great. so can voting privlidges. so can speech. so can a lot of things. the question is, where do you draw the line.

since the gun-grabbers can't define an "assault rifle" in a manner that only effects the AR15, they broaden the scope and move the line.

the fight isn't about the AR15 in the end, it's about where the line is drawn.

------------------------------------ should be no line because as you say or as I say , the line can always be redrawn Iceberg .

it's always being redrawn. they banned AR's before and it didn't do a lick of good.

What happened the last time the US banned some semi-automatic guns

The final report concluded the ban’s success in reducing crimes committed with banned guns was “mixed.” Gun crimes involving assault weapons declined. However, that decline was “offset throughout at least the late 1990s by steady or rising use of other guns equipped with [large-capacity magazines].”

so - we ban one and other gun use rises. the rest is a mixed bag of cherry picking. my overall concern is when other gun violence rises, we once again address the guns.

not the reason for the violence.

Your own ******* article explains why the ban didn't work. LOOPHOLES!!! Close the mother ******* loopholes

Though the ban applied to many semi-automatic firearms, there were some important loopholes. It contained a “features test” provision which specifically prohibited semi-automatic weapons containing two or more military-style features, such as a folding or telescoping stock and a flash hider. As a result, gun manufacturers could — and did — make minor cosmetic changes that removed the features to transform banned firearms into legal ones.

CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES! This isn't rocket science. It's common sense shit you gun nuts won't allow.

OK so civil discussion is over.

Later.