Florida School Shooting

[ndcent]

"When people die of drug overdoses in America, we don't ask the drug dealers how to fix the problem; so when people are killed by guns in America, why should we give a shit what the hell the NRA has to say?"

 

[JohnnyT]

My perspective is that it's a form of compromise already given by law-abiding citizens that is rarely acknowledged. Strictly following the word of 2A we shouldn't need a tax stamp for suppressors, prohibited from owning pre-1986 autos, register for guns in some states, be prohibited from mags over 10 rounds in some areas, outright prohibited from possession, or need to apply concealed weapons permits. As we've learned in the past though, give and inch and the other side takes a mile. That's why the heels are dug in so well on the idea of gun ownership and not accepting additional regulations.



Speaking of militias, there's a reason that concept is not pushed by the left. The last thing the left or even the govt wants is a bunch of like-minded conservatives forming armed organizations and regularly training together. :usa2:

I’m just a simple shotgun owner (since Sandy and only for home protection) so I’m not deep into guns....but what are you referring to with “As we've learned in the past though, give and inch and the other side takes a mile. “??

I hear that often and don’t understand the basis of it. What was “taken”?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Gunslinger-13]

"When people die of drug overdoses in America, we don't ask the drug dealers how to fix the problem; so when people are killed by guns in America, why should we give a shit what the hell the NRA has to say?"

We have drug prohibition. They're all illegal. And yet we still have drug overdoses.

That's called a clue, buddy. It ain't the drugs. It's the people.

Your argument is rediculius in the first place. The NRA doesn't deal Guns for starters. Second the NRA is just a group of gun owners millions strong.

We all want people who use guns illegally to be in prison. And kept there.

This thread is showing how little the anti crowd actually knows about guns, current restrictions and reality in general.

Total ban on drugs and yet thousands die from overdose. But somehow you believe banning guns will stop evil people from committing mass murder.

It's so painful to hear and see how ignorant and asleep people are.

Keep blaming the gun and nothing will change. It's a circle of madness. Wake the hell up!

I mean, come on! You didn't even know about 80% lowers and frames for rifles and handguns that could be easily drilled and finished with a drill press and jig! You laughed at the idea as fantasy.

So yeah, maybe you anti folks should listen to firearms enthusiasts about guns- we actually know about them!!!

Like the difference between 3 ten round magazines and one thirty round magazine is about 3/10's of a second to fire the same 30 rounds.

Like a bump stock is easily replicated with a shoe string.

How about 99% of gun crimes/deaths being perpetrated with hand guns, yet that less than 1% committed with AR-15's... and, and you call for "assault weapons" bans!!!

What's the difference between a colt 6920 ar15 and a Ruger mini 14 ranch rifle? Pretty much nothing other than one "looks scarier" to people who know nothing about guns so they want to ban it!

It's sad to see people with such little info act as if they know solutions to problems they don't even understand in the first place.

 

[Gunslinger-13]

I’m just a simple shotgun owner (since Sandy and only for home protection) so I’m not deep into guns....but what are you referring to with “As we've learned in the past though, give and inch and the other side takes a mile. “??

I hear that often and don’t understand the basis of it. What was “taken”?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Here's a short list of whats been taken:

Full auto
Sound Suppressors
Mail order
Purchase without background checks
Imports that don't meet 92r compliance
Short barreled rifles & shotguns

That's federal level. State level differs for each state.

Here in CO we have a 15 round magazine capacity limit and universal back ground checks. Which have been total failures from stopping any crimes from being committed by the way.

So much has already been taken and each time it does nothing as criminals don't follow laws and continue to kill people. So then anti gun folks want to take more and say it's a "compromise" and "we don't want to take your guns" obviously there is no compromise and obviously they will jbe at continue to take more away- but hey it's "common sense" so who cares about being honest.

 

[JohnnyT]

But somehow you believe banning guns will stop evil people from committing mass murder.


up!

You’re probably a really good, responsible guy but a bit hysterical. Where in this thread was “banning guns” ever suggested? Or that any change would “stop” or completely eradicate mass murder?

Change is needed but no further regulation or controls will ever 100% stop the problem.........but that doesn’t mean you don’t pursue reasonable measures to make progress toward greatly lessening the problem.

Kind of common sense, no?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[JohnnyT]

Here's a short list of what's been taken:



Full auto

Sound Suppressors

Mail order

Purchase without background checks

Imports that don't meet 92r compliance

Short barreled rifles & shotguns



That's federal level. State level differs for each state.



Here in CO we have a 15 round magazine capacity limit and universal back ground checks. Which have been total failures from stopping any crimes from being committed by the way.



So much has already been taken and each time it does nothing as criminals don't follow laws and continue to kill people. So then anti gun folks want to take more and say it's a "compromise" and "we don't want to take your guns" obviously there is no compromise and obviously they will jbe at continue to take more away- but hey it's "common sense" so who cares about being honest.

How do you know they’ve been a complete failure from stopping crimes if the crime never happened and was prevent because of the background checks?

Limiting to a 10 round mag might save 5 lives.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[mynameistory]

And what you feel is an acceptable "limit" doesn't matter because you don't get to speak on behalf of the millions of responsible individuals that own these apparatus, just as I wouldn't get to set acceptable limits on your free speech or due process.

There ARE limitations on free speech. Slander/libel, dangerous speech (yelling "fire" in a crowded theater), etc...

 

[e60ral]

You’re probably a really good, responsible guy but a bit hysterical. Where in this thread was “banning guns” ever suggested? Or that any change would “stop” or completely eradicate mass murder?

Change is needed but no further regulation or controls will ever 100% stop the problem.........but that doesn’t mean you don’t pursue reasonable measures to make progress toward greatly lessening the problem.

Kind of common sense, no?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's the thing, they have been totally brainwashed by an industry and party that have no interest in them thinking critically. There is no real threat of bans, the support doesn't exist, just like there is no real threat of a constitutional amendment.

Both the NRA and Republican party have an interest in tying gun control to a cultural position. They want gun control to be synonymous with apple pie, and baseball games, and family farms, and sitting on the front porch, and southern traditions when there is no reason why it can't be looked at independently. The Republican party wants guns to be synonymous with culture so they can use it as a dog whistle to keep people supporting their awful positions that don't actually help the middle class and the NRA wants to combine it with culture because in actuality the majority of people, and gun owners, support increased gun control.

The reality is that not long ago the NRA supported increased gun control, they were against guns in schools and said absolutely not to arming teachers, and realized that responsible gun owners were okay with gun control. Obama never did a single thing to threaten gun rights, and in fact gun rights were widened while he was president, but the NRA and Republican party were able to use fear mongering throughout his administration to gain influence.


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[e60ral]

Here's a short list of whats been taken:

Full auto
Sound Suppressors
Mail order
Purchase without background checks
Imports that don't meet 92r compliance
Short barreled rifles & shotguns

That's federal level. State level differs for each state.

Here in CO we have a 15 round magazine capacity limit and universal back ground checks. Which have been total failures from stopping any crimes from being committed by the way.

So much has already been taken and each time it does nothing as criminals don't follow laws and continue to kill people. So then anti gun folks want to take more and say it's a "compromise" and "we don't want to take your guns" obviously there is no compromise and obviously they will jbe at continue to take more away- but hey it's "common sense" so who cares about being honest.

This is why gun owners need to be leading the charge for gun control.

Supressors are a great example, they are good and IMO should be required in a lot of situations. But because gun owners don't want to participate, you get gun laws written by people who only see supressors on guns used by assassins in movies.

The majority of Americans want more restrictions on guns, so gun owners can either figure out sensible controls or end up with things like barrel shrouds and other plastic parts being banned


All of us, even the gun owners here, acknowledge that the 2nd amendment is not limitless and gun control is constitutional, so gun owners should be the ones coming up with ideas for what gun control makes sense.

I suggest raising the age to 21 for all gun purchases, requiring background checks for all gun purchases, requiring sellers keep a record of all gun sales, waiting periods for all gun purchases, federal standards for concealed or open carry, requiring a permit to carry a gun, treating high capacity magazines like NFA items, federal gun storage requirements, liability insurance for guns, allow the CDC to study gun violence, and a minimal tax onguns and ammo

None of those things would prevent a law abiding person from owning a gum or carrying a gun for protection

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[ndcent]

Here's a short list of whats been taken:

Full auto
Sound Suppressors
Mail order
Purchase without background checks
Imports that don't meet 92r compliance
Short barreled rifles & shotguns

That's federal level. State level differs for each state.

Here in CO we have a 15 round magazine capacity limit and universal back ground checks. Which have been total failures from stopping any crimes from being committed by the way.

So much has already been taken and each time it does nothing as criminals don't follow laws and continue to kill people. So then anti gun folks want to take more and say it's a "compromise" and "we don't want to take your guns" obviously there is no compromise and obviously they will jbe at continue to take more away- but hey it's "common sense" so who cares about being honest.

So people’s inability to mail order a full auto suppressed assault rifle is a problem for you?

 

[Off-choader]

This is why gun owners need to be leading the charge for gun control.

Supressors are a great example, they are good and IMO should be required in a lot of situations. But because gun owners don't want to participate, you get gun laws written by people who only see supressors on guns used by assassins in movies.

The majority of Americans want more restrictions on guns, so gun owners can either figure out sensible controls or end up with things like barrel shrouds and other plastic parts being banned


All of us, even the gun owners here, acknowledge that the 2nd amendment is not limitless and gun control is constitutional, so gun owners should be the ones coming up with ideas for what gun control makes sense.

I suggest raising the age to 21 for all gun purchases, requiring background checks for all gun purchases, requiring sellers keep a record of all gun sales, waiting periods for all gun purchases, federal standards for concealed or open carry, requiring a permit to carry a gun, treating high capacity magazines like NFA items, federal gun storage requirements, liability insurance for guns, allow the CDC to study gun violence, and a minimal tax onguns and ammo

None of those things would prevent a law abiding person from owning a gum or carrying a gun for protection

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

haha and how exactly would a "minimal tax on guns and ammo" prevent mass murders?

 

[Off-choader]

Hey guys most gun owners want gun control! Trust me I heard in on _______(insert your mainstream media source here)!!!!!


This is absolute nonsense propaganda that I have heard on this thread many times, Every poll the MSM puts out says the opposite until they reset it or rig it to support there BS agenda.

w e d o n ' t w a n t g u n c o n t r o l

I want the laws we have to be enforced, I want mental illness to be a higher priority and FBI/police reports of threatening individuals to be taken more seriously.

 

[JohnnyT]

That's the thing, they have been totally brainwashed by an industry and party that have no interest in them thinking critically. There is no real threat of bans, the support doesn't exist, just like there is no real threat of a constitutional amendment.

Both the NRA and Republican party have an interest in tying gun control to a cultural position. They want gun control to be synonymous with apple pie, and baseball games, and family farms, and sitting on the front porch, and southern traditions when there is no reason why it can't be looked at independently. The Republican party wants guns to be synonymous with culture so they can use it as a dog whistle to keep people supporting their awful positions that don't actually help the middle class and the NRA wants to combine it with culture because in actuality the majority of people, and gun owners, support increased gun control.

The reality is that not long ago the NRA supported increased gun control, they were against guns in schools and said absolutely not to arming teachers, and realized that responsible gun owners were okay with gun control. Obama never did a single thing to threaten gun rights, and in fact gun rights were widened while he was president, but the NRA and Republican party were able to use fear mongering throughout his administration to gain influence.


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I would normally take umbrage at your Republican commentary as I’m firmly red but what the party has reduced to is sincerely demoralizing but I have hope for the post-Trump future......assuming there is one. Where we are now holistically as a nation is a disgrace.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[e60ral]

Btw no one respond to off-choader, their username, photo, and signature make it exceedingly clear that they are just a troll. Ignore them, don't respond to any of their posts.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[JohnnyT]

So people’s inability to mail order a full auto suppressed assault rifle is a problem for you?

Ha ha. Spit out some beer reading this one. OMG. Considering “full auto” as being “taken” away is beyond words but I’m thinking blatant reckless ignorance may be close.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[e60ral]

Full auto is banned because of a law introduced by a Republican and signed into law by Reagan with the approval of the NRA

 

[Off-choader]

Btw no one respond to off-choader, their username, photo, and signature make it exceedingly clear that they are just a troll. Ignore them, don't respond to any of their posts.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

ahahahahah ndcent did the exact same thing to me earlier in this thread...

You are very toxic sir, None of your lies resonate with me, so you and ndcent call me names, when that fails then you both tell everyone to ignore me as if my opinions don't matter because I disagree. yer tactics are textbook liberal.


"e60ral - im calling for a small tax increase on guns and ammo for the safety of the country"

Bruh wait wha?!

"e60ral - everyone quick ignore off-choader!"

I bet you would love to strip my 1st amendment rights if you could, sorry we can't agree on anything but ill keep all freedoms outlined in the constitution.


again everything you say is void because you called for gun control then turned around and said that you and your antifa buddies are arming yourselves with guns so that you can take away the guns of anyone who disagrees with you.

 

[jordanrb81]

That's just it: the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and are not causing these issues. We as a society are not doing enough to prevent these occurrences and are perhaps enabling them (media coverage, lack of enforcement of laws, ignoring red flags, lack of security, parenting failures, overuse of prescriptions, etc). And what you feel is an acceptable "limit" doesn't matter because you don't get to speak on behalf of the millions of responsible individuals that own these apparatus, just as I wouldn't get to set acceptable limits on your free speech or due process.

I think you're missing my point the vast majority isn't enough 100% is enough also we are a part of society and we owe it to our fellow man to act responsibly. I agree totally that we need to enforce current laws and really change the way we deal with mental health. I also am not trying to speak on behalf of anyone, I am saying we need to start a national conversation and reach a consensus. this is a democracy, or hadn't you heard.

I think most would agree that a 60 round magazine serves no useful purpose. the 3/10ths of a second argument is neat and all if you want to focus on the negative, I would encourage people to try and support the positive. I hear you, reducing magazine counts won't fix the problem. real question, what benefit do they provide? what material benefit will be lost without them, I mean you just busted your whole argument if you can reload a 10 round magazine so fast, why do you need a 60 round? same thing with a bump stock ok so someone can duplicate that with a drill and a shoe string, well ok great so then you won't miss them... what useful purpose does a bump stock provide a normal responsible law abiding gun owner? I think there are some easy ways to make sense of guns in this country, but as a gun owner I can assure you I wouldn't shed a tear if these things went away tomorrow, that said, and as I already pointed out I think there's nothing wrong with 12, 14, 15 round capacity so my whole point with my first post is instead of living in the ridiculous and dealing in absolutes why not have an intelligent discussion about where a reasonable mutually agreeable limit can be found?

 

[jordanrb81]

We have drug prohibition. They're all illegal. And yet we still have drug overdoses.

That's called a clue, buddy. It ain't the drugs. It's the people.

Your argument is rediculius in the first place. The NRA doesn't deal Guns for starters. Second the NRA is just a group of gun owners millions strong.

We all want people who use guns illegally to be in prison. And kept there.

This thread is showing how little the anti crowd actually knows about guns, current restrictions and reality in general.

Total ban on drugs and yet thousands die from overdose. But somehow you believe banning guns will stop evil people from committing mass murder.

It's so painful to hear and see how ignorant and asleep people are.

Keep blaming the gun and nothing will change. It's a circle of madness. Wake the hell up!

I mean, come on! You didn't even know about 80% lowers and frames for rifles and handguns that could be easily drilled and finished with a drill press and jig! You laughed at the idea as fantasy.

So yeah, maybe you anti folks should listen to firearms enthusiasts about guns- we actually know about them!!!

Like the difference between 3 ten round magazines and one thirty round magazine is about 3/10's of a second to fire the same 30 rounds.

Like a bump stock is easily replicated with a shoe string.

How about 99% of gun crimes/deaths being perpetrated with hand guns, yet that less than 1% committed with AR-15's... and, and you call for "assault weapons" bans!!!

What's the difference between a colt 6920 ar15 and a Ruger mini 14 ranch rifle? Pretty much nothing other than one "looks scarier" to people who know nothing about guns so they want to ban it!

It's sad to see people with such little info act as if they know solutions to problems they don't even understand in the first place.

you've actually got the drug issue upside down and backwards. I have been arguing this issue since I was 14 (I actually have some trophies and awards because of it) drugs need to be legal SO THEY CAN BE REGULATED. we are actually very lucky guns are legal so we have the opportunity to regulate them.

this could get way off topic but think it through. if heroin (that's the nastiest stuff I could think of) were legal it wouldn't be being cut with all manor of other things which is the real #1 cause of overdoses, the FDA would be regulating the formulas being sold. additionally do you know why people shoot heroin? economics, it's the biggest bang for your illicit fix buck. Do you know the production cost of heroin? super low, imagine if Glaxo or Bayer were manufacturing heroin, you could buy a pill the size of a multivitamin for about $6.00 and you wouldn't need a needle. we could tax it, regulate it, use the taxes to expand treatment reduce Hepatitis, HIV from needle sharing, stop or reduce violent crime because addicts wouldn't need to rob people or business' to support their drug habits, terrorism would lose it's number one funding option all by making illegal drugs legal, and then regulating them. I could go on but this isn't the time or place.

 

[bofa]

There ARE limitations on free speech. Slander/libel, dangerous speech (yelling "fire" in a crowded theater), etc...

Please tell me you understand the difference between liability and government persecution...