Shooter did not use an AR 15

[MegaPoke]

Will you at least agree that there is a conversation that needs to be had and all sides need to have a seat at the table and see if we cannot come up with some ideas that protect EVERY right of EVERY citizen?

I'm fine with that. Just don't know that it needs to happen every time a terrorist does a terroristy thing. It's crazy to me that so many people's response to terrorism is to discuss how many of our rights to sacrifice. Paris proves there's no point at which people are actually 100% free of death by gun. Oklahoma City, Boston and Belgium prove guns aren't even remotely irreplaceable with other more efficient ways to murder and maim.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

How does me, for example, owning 3,000 semi-automatic weapons disrupt your, for example, ability to enjoy your "constitutionally protected right" to domestic tranquility, general welfare, and liberty?

Disclaimer: I'm a real piker, I only own 4 semi-automatic weapons and none of them is an AR-15.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

A quick query: would be jihadists -- more or less likely to obey a ban on so-called assault weapons such as the AR-15, than your average citizen?

Follow-up: will a U.S. total ban on civilian ownership of AR-15's and similar rifles eradicate them from the world scene and from this great land of ours?

 

[MegaPoke]

A quick query: would be jihadists -- more or less likely to obey a ban on so-called assault weapons such as the AR-15, than your average citizen?

Follow-up: will a U.S. total ban on civilian ownership of AR-15's and similar rifles eradicate them from the world scene and from this great land of ours?

Gotta try something so we can say we tried. Participation trophy is really more important than fixing anything.

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

I support terrorists and criminals being banned from owning AR-15's.

 

[MegaPoke]

I support terrorists and criminals being banned from owning AR-15's.

Common sense. I'm in.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

Another quick query: if liberals and liberal politicians in particular "aren't coming for your guns", then why do they incessantly and with much vigor and rancor bring up the Heller decision?

The Heller decision addressed gun laws in DC (and by extension Chicago) that made it illegal (in almost all circumstances) for a private citizen to possess ANY handgun. It did not prohibit all gun control laws, as evidenced by the fact that there are currently still gun control laws.

 

[ctrawick]

True?

 

[ctrawick]

True?

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/1/9437187/obama-guns-terrorism-deaths

 

[MegaPoke]

Gonna need @07pilt to take a break from his gender sensitivity training and break this down for me. It looks like @squeak is gonna be ok!

 

[imprimis]

how then can they say it's paranoid fantasy to think you might need a gun like this to defend yourself against more than a bugler or home

A policeman at Dallas Love Field had to shoot nine times (handgun) at a criminal before he stopped charging at the policeman. One well placed AR round might have been sufficient.

And 3,000 innocent people died on 9/11 without a single shot being fired.

 

[ctrawick]

Gonna need @07pilt to take a break from his gender sensitivity training and break this down for me. It looks like @squeak is gonna be ok!

I thought Solider said she is a girl, already?

 

[Ostatedchi]

Bvillepoker, does the mere fact that I own a firearm fundamentally intrude on any of your God given and constitutionally protected rights? At what arbitrary number would it in your opinion?

It is already illegal and we all would agree that we don't have a right to use that firearm in any way to interfere with your rights. But I think the fact that I own it doesn't infringe in any way on any right you have.

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

Bvillepoker, does the mere fact that I own a firearm fundamentally intrude on any of your God given and constitutionally protected rights? At what arbitrary number would it in your opinion?

It is already illegal and we all would agree that we don't have a right to use that firearm in any way to interfere with your rights. But I think the fact that I own it doesn't infringe in any way on any right you have.

This is the problem with guys like bville. He seems like a really good guy but, like other liberals, lets his emotions and not reason drive the discussion.

 

[Ostatedchi]

Bvillepoker is a great guy and my best friend. We just disagree on a number of these types of issues. But he is slooooowly seeing the light.

 

[BvillePoker]

Damn it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut and not talked on this subject. But the toothpaste is out. First, N. Pappa I am a registered republican. Second, your emotions for your perspective drive your stance in the discussion too. Third, I have gotten way better in my life time at taking a look at my position and applying reason and logic to it and considering that I am not always right and most times can listen to a person and give their opinions the same reason and logic application. Yes my emotions do have a lot to do with my opinions on current social issues. I make no apologies for it. I see someone hurting I want to help. I see someone hungry I want to help. I see people die and I don't want more to die if it can be stopped. I am a human with emotions of kindness, compassion, and empathy. I hope that comes across in the way I manage my life, family and the laws I would like to have. And @Ostatedchi is my best friend and we disagree about a lot of things and he has changed my stance on a lot of things because he has my respect because he will have a discussion and listen as much as he talks and does not insult me in doing so. He is a pretty damn smart guy and I am a pretty smart guy and I try to apply logic and reason to his opinions too.

Now @Ostatedchi as far as arbitrary numbers etc. I don't know. But I want to have a discussion about that and I think there is a number that infringes on nobody's rights. I think that there is a lot of things that can be done before we get to asking that question. For example I think there should be a single database that combines multiple federal, justice department, and local sources that can be used for background checks. I think the process that allows people to change ownership of a gun can be greatly improved to make sure that all owners meet the requirements for gun ownership and allows better tracking of firearms to establish responsibility for a firearm and how it is used. I think there can be some regulations about safely storing guns and ammunition to reduce the possibility of someone who is not the owner obtaining a gun to misuse. I think gun manufacturers can do a better job of developing safety mechanisms for guns. Now I could change my mind on some or all of these as to whether they are good or bad ideas if I had a discussion with people/s that presented a reason or logic that I had not thought about. I am a smart guy but I have not thought of everything and for that reason the most important thing in my opinion is that we start having this conversation with all perspectives on the issue at the table to see if we cannot come up with some things that can help without infringing on anyone's rights. If we are all as smart as we espouse to be on message boards surely we can help and save a few people. What we are doing now is not good enough in my, yes emotional, opinion and I would rather not see hundreds more die if we can do something that is reasonable to all parties to help.

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

Nothing wrong with emotions but it's a fair question to ask exactly how many guns is enough. Sounds like one isn't too many...three...100......500?
See, that's the problem. You could have 500 guns in your basement and it doesn't make me fear for my life. If Skandar Akbar has just one it could be a real problem.

I would like to see a reasonable democratic leader and a reasonable rebublican leader put forward some common sense improvements to the system that the entire country could get behind. Banning a scary looking deer rifle would not be considered common sense.

 

[Medic007]

Folls with the amount of money invested to own a significant number of firearms have gun safes to protect that investment. Folks that only own one, not so much. Folks with a bunch of guns don't get theirs stolen. Folks with one without a safe do get theirs stolen.

I will actually trust a collector in gun safety issues much more than the guy who owns one Glock.

 

[AC_Exotic]

 

[AC_Exotic]

 

[BvillePoker]

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

Source: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

 

[JonnyVito]

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

Source: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

You are counting pistols Obama says those are ok at least for now. Have to use semi auto rifle stats.that is the debate here.

 

[imprimis]

3,000 people murdered on 9/11 without a single shot fired.

The deadliest mass school murder rampage killed 44 in 1927 without a single shot being fired.