should the US prohibit people under the age of 21 from purchasing or owning large capacity guns ?

Do you think raising the age to purchase a firearm will help reduce the number of mass shootings?

  • Yes

    Votes: 13 26.0%
  • No

    Votes: 27 54.0%
  • I'm not sure but it couldn't hurt

    Votes: 6 12.0%
  • Im not sure but that may be a violation of the 2nd Amendment

    Votes: 4 8.0%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    50
If he's in the process and is an active threat to the surrounding populous, then yes, cap his ass. But if he survives, he should be tried in court.

He has a more than even chance of surviving. Ever seen a bunch of cops high on adrenaline firing their weapons? He may have to shoot himself.
 
Perhaps, but you are also comparing apples to oranges.

What you are doing is making comparisons between near or absolute single-culture societies to ours. We are the most multi-culturial society on the planet. Without our minorities, our violent crime rate would be very comparable to the nearly all white places you speak of. In the US, 54% of our murders are committed by just 13% of our population which are blacks. Given the fact most murders are by males, most murders are committed by 7 to 8% of our population which are black males.

As we have always said, it's not the weapon, but the people.

In other words you make a law that all people in a middle-class white suburb must have a firearm in the household. Their violent crime statistics will not change. Then make a law that no guns are allowed in a high-crime minority city, their violent crime rate will not change either. They will always find a way to get guns.

In the end, by disarming law abiding citizens, what you end up with is a country where only the criminals and police have the guns.
That's the objective in the end.
 
It was until just after Hickock was murdered. The Community had enough and appointed one of the best Sheriffs in history. One of the things he did was made it illegal for handguns to be possessed on main street whether it's open carried or concealed. Seth Bullock hired probably the meanest law and order deputies ever assembled. It went from a hell raising town to a civilized community almost over night. And no citizen was killed to do it in 1877. The Wild Wild West of Deadwood ended. Before that, there was a homicide every 24 hours in Deadwood.
Where did you get this, some dime novel? There were no such statistics kept in that era.
 
Has it ever been tried all across the US? And then has it been enforced vigorously? Nope. But the old Western Bans were and they worked right after the shooting and killing by the Marshals and Sheriffs stopped. Well, with the exception of Deadwood Dakota Territory where no one screwed with those Sheriffs, Marshals and Deputies as they knew they would be killed dead on the spot. In Dallas TX, the Town Marshal gave you one warning. If you ignored it, he shot you down with no warning. Didn't take people very long to stop carrying short arms.
More Movie BS being peddled as fact.
 
I think I heard a Sheriffs say that if we stop 19 out of 20 it's worth it. But we will never be able to stop all of them. We stopped a 17 year old headed for a middle school with his daddy's AR and 4 30 round mags under a rain slicker. They bagged him inside the 1000 foot safety parameter. He found himself surrounded by 5 very nervous cops with weapons drawn screaming at him. Some old lady thought the kid looked funny wearing a rain slicker on a warm sunny day and called it in.
If so called assault weapons are banned and cease being used all you'll have is a situation where it's easier to sneak guns in without being caught before they start their rampages.

Handguns are already the most commonly used type of firearms in school shootings.
 
True. But you are looking at a multiheaded hydra situation here. Lop off one head and two more spring up.

Stop one school shooter and two more will pop up. I just think that the frequency won't change one bit.
The more press and outrage these incidents generate the more likely it is more will happen with the goal being to "best" the last shooter.

Media drives these psycho's as much as anything else.
 
Perhaps, but you are also comparing apples to oranges.

What you are doing is making comparisons between near or absolute single-culture societies to ours. We are the most multi-culturial society on the planet. Without our minorities, our violent crime rate would be very comparable to the nearly all white places you speak of. In the US, 54% of our murders are committed by just 13% of our population which are blacks. Given the fact most murders are by males, most murders are committed by 7 to 8% of our population which are black males.

As we have always said, it's not the weapon, but the people.

In other words you make a law that all people in a middle-class white suburb must have a firearm in the household. Their violent crime statistics will not change. Then make a law that no guns are allowed in a high-crime minority city, their violent crime rate will not change either. They will always find a way to get guns.

In the end, by disarming law abiding citizens, what you end up with is a country where only the criminals and police have the guns.
Bullshit.
 
Hmm, I should do a poll here. Do I respond to a question in which the petitioner calls me a dumbass right off the bat? Yes or no?
If you didn't get that he was referring to Mexicans, then you are a dumb ass. Of course, you being a dumb ass is common knowledge anyway.
 
one thing most of these school shooters have in common [besides being crazy] is the vast majority have been under the age of 21 ... so the question is should the US ban large capacity firearms for people under the age of 21 ? would Americans that support the 2nd amendment agree to such a ban ? lets face the facts [and no i am not anti 2nd amend] there is a reason people under the age of 21 are not allowed to buy alcohol ... and that reason is when people that young imbibe they are statistically more likely to hurt themselves or others ... now i know that many of our military are under the age of 21 and handle automatic weapons but they are also under supervision from the chain of command and they were prepared through rigorous training ie..basic training ect .... the military does not hand a young man or woman an firearm the minute they are sworn into the armed forces ... they are trained first ... so should we ban large capacity firearms from non service members under the age of 21 ?
I voted no. In the UK, it's 18. But to apply for and hold a shotgun licence, there's no age limit by law, even 9 year olds hold shotgun certificates. Safe guns is just more than age, it's a tiny part of the issue.
 
If you didn't get that he was referring to Mexicans, then you are a dumb ass. Of course, you being a dumb ass is common knowledge anyway.
Still proving yourself a fool and a jackass I see.

Most violent crime not related to domestics can be tied to drugs and gangs in most of our major cities

Where do you think the bulk of the opiates peddled by these gangs are coming from and who do you think is behind those shipments?

The Cartels you moron.
 
Exactly. It's the same when they discuss climate change. To end the conversation, I ask what metrics would we need to meet to shut them up forever? CO2 emissions? One billionth of one particle of something? What? And if you could give me some metric, what will it cost us to accomplish it?

Very seldom does anybody address my question because they know there is no answer. Fighting climate change is a never ending process and can't ever be done.

So we give into their demands, and as you stated, doesn't do a lick of good. That was just the first step of many to solve a problem that can't logically be solved by taking any gun away.

I wish some Republican like Trump would do something similar. Okay, we'll give into your restrictions, but if it doesn't stop murders or mass shootings, we remove those restrictions and you never bring them up again. You'd see how fast they'd shut the hell up.
I just read the other day that our future is continents all coming back together as one world continent in our future, which they estimate will kill us all during the process. So, I guess we don't have to worry about climate change after all. But, we could spend umpteen godzillions of dollars trying to stop all the continents from reforming into one. LOL
 
The banning of guns was a response to the violence, and it was effective. Gun violence was greatly reduced. They weren't the most violent places after the ban. You should get an adult to read a history book to you every once in awhile.
There really wasn't that much gun violence in the "Wild" West.
 

Forum List

Back
Top