GMC wrote Honestly they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person

By that logic they should remove the laws which prohibit murder.
'Honestly, they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'

NO NO NO and absolutely NO.

Why the hell do you think that taking guns away will take away these killings? It won't. Before I get into this, let's look at why we have the right to bear arms first. The Second Amendment protects a fundamental right and should be read broadly because it implements the right of self-defense. Self-defense is the ultimate right of all individuals to preserve life. The rights to a free press, free speech, assembly, and religion are extremely important but none of them matters very much if you cant defend your own life against aggression. None of them matters very much when an evil government is fully armed and its citizens are disarmed. Article I, Section 8, clauses 15 and 16 of the U.S. Constitution refer to Congresss powers concerning the state militias. Clause 15 empowers Congress to call forth the state militias into national service for specific purposes. Clause 16 empowers Congress to organize, arm and discipline the state militias, and to govern the militias while they are in national service. The Second Amendment confines Congresss power by guaranteeing that the Congress cannot govern the militias right out of existence and thereby disarm the people". We have guns for self defense, be it from each other or from our government. The second amendment was put in place so we the people could defend ourselves from a tyrannical government. Take away our guns and now the US government gets to do what they want to us. The USA could very well und up like Nazi Germany.

Now, let's say what these morons think is a good idea, guns are banned, gone. Let's not get into the fact that my family relies on hunting for food, let's skip that detail. The law says guns are illegal, much like crack cocaine. Also like crack cocaine, the law abiding citizen does not have it (guns and crack), but criminals do. This means that now the law abiding citizens are un-armed with very little way to protect themselves against the criminal with a gun. I'll tell you right now that if the government tries to take away my gun rights, so be it, but I'll be damned if you take my guns away. I won't give mine up, and I know my neighbors won't give theirs up.

Now let's look into another aspect. Why do these idiots go into movie theaters or schools and kill people? Who the hell knows, they just want to kill a lot of people. Now guns are gone, bam, no more. What is super easy to make and does a lot more damage? Pipe bombs, pressure cooker bombs, etc. Hell, if I'm making one, I might as well make 5 to maximize damage. Look at what you done. A gun with a 30 round mag can kill 30 people. 5 pipe bombs in a school can kill a lot more.

The idea that taking guns away will stop violence is asinine. If I want you dead I will use a damn shovel if I have to. Bottom line is, guns are not bad, people are bad. There are back ground checks to getting guns, and I can guarantee you that the mentally un stable do not pass that test. What do they do? They break into my house, steal my gun, and shoot up the school. After all, why would they spend 1k+ on a gun to go kill people? You look at all the mass murders, how many of those guns where stolen?

All in all, taking away guns will make it worse on law abiding citizens, make it worse on the citizens over all, and simply will not work. I hate to break it to you, but people are crazy. This is a sick point of view, but it is also the truth, technically speaking these mass shootings is a good thing for the earth beings that it is over populated already.

221B wrote The whole "people kill people" thing needs to stop. Sure, people kill people... with guns. And quite frequently here in the U.S. Our yearly benchmark is 8,000 people every year will be killed in homicide from a handgun (this excludes other guns).

And to those who believe our legislators actually vote against stronger gun regulatory laws in an attempt to uphold our second amendment right, here's an interesting fact. The gun industry boasts about making an impact just under $43 billion last year on our economy. But sure, your right to take photos with your rifles and pistols is what's really important to the legislators.

A gun does not just get up and decide I want to shoot up a school. A person does. The gun is merely the tool the person uses, much like how the lawn mower is the tool you use to mow your lawn.

Roughly 30k people die each year from guns. That is about the same number from car wrecks. Should we take away cars too?

Woodkid wrote

GMC wrote Honestly they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person

By that logic they should remove the laws which prohibit murder.
'Honestly, they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'

He said we don't need more laws, not that we should take laws away...

002 wrote

221B wrote The whole "people kill people" thing needs to stop. Sure, people kill people... with guns. And quite frequently here in the U.S. Our yearly benchmark is 8,000 people every year will be killed in homicide from a handgun (this excludes other guns).

And to those who believe our legislators actually vote against stronger gun regulatory laws in an attempt to uphold our second amendment right, here's an interesting fact. The gun industry boasts about making an impact just under $43 billion last year on our economy. But sure, your right to take photos with your rifles and pistols is what's really important to the legislators.

A gun does not just get up and decide I want to shoot up a school. A person does. The gun is merely the tool the person uses, much like how the lawn mower is the tool you use to mow your lawn.

Roughly 30k people die each year from guns. That is about the same number from car wrecks. Should we take away cars too?

Those arguments never make any sense. A gun is a tool made to easily harm/kill people/animals. Just point in random directions and keep pulling that trigger. Multiple casualties are almost guaranteed considering where you are at the time. That is literally what a gun is made for. It is for easy destruction at a distance. Vehicles aren't made for destruction. They are made for transportation. The death rate on those are terrible as well, which is why we are improving their safety and also creating self-driving cars. How about we just alter civilian guns as we are doing with cars? Regulate what clips/mags they can have. Or, we could just make them not have clips/mags and only hold one round. The second amendment wouldn't technically be harmed and less casualties if someone wants people dead.

Also, what is always up with this "law abiding citizen" stuff? Everyone is a law abiding citizen until they're not. How can you compare it to drugs? Are guns parts or scrap metal available in general stores to make guns? How many people have the equipment to shape metal and make guns? Making drugs is so much easier, which is why they are everywhere. We would still have a slight problem with guns due to black markets and whatnot, but it shouldn't be anywhere comparable with drugs (and the prices of the guns would be a lot higher if guns were harder to get.) I also find it humorous nowadays when people talk about us potentially becoming like Nazi Germany. One, our troops would have to agree and go through with that. Two, our military is so much more advanced than us that the "war" would just be them slaughtering us with or without guns. I think it would be almost comparable to Israel and Palestine. Also, if the government does pass laws for you to not have guns, tries to take them away, and you go against it, you would no longer be a law abiding citizen. Anyway, very few people can consider themselves "law abiding citizens." There are many laws that everyday people break that they don't even know about.

I'm not someone that is going to say we should ban guns entirely, but they should be harder for people to get. Being ok with how things are when there is a mass shooting that blows up the news every few months is insane. When something is broken, you fix it. A lot of people may not like the change, but one will have to come sooner or later.

002 wrote

Woodkid wrote

GMC wrote Honestly they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person

By that logic they should remove the laws which prohibit murder.
'Honestly, they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'

He said we don't need more laws, not that we should take laws away...

He specifically said 'Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'
If we were in a world where guns being illegal was already a reality in America, his logic would be the same as saying that murder shouldn't be illegal because criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway.

As for your big tirade above about how guns being banned shouldn't happen, most of us aren't saying that guns should be banned outright. We're saying that more rules and regulations should be put on who can buy guns.

It's easy to argue against the people who say that guns should be banned outright, I think you'll have a harder time disagreeing with the people who just want more regulations, assuming you don't think anything should change with the current gun laws.

You did mention that most of the guns are stolen. One of the new rules which could be put in place is to ensure that people who want to buy a gun pass a gun storage safety check and must be able to demonstrate that they have a place in their home where they can securely store a gun. Is that going to stop all mass shooters? Probably not, but it will stop some.

I'm also not sure what the current law is on mentally unstable people living with mentally stable people. If that is how they are living then the mentally stable person should not be allowed to buy a gun and keep it in the same home as the mentally unstable person.

Small changes like this could lead to drastic countrywide change and hopefully reduce the number of mass shootings - and shootings in general - while giving those who can use guns safely the freedom to do so.

Yin wrote

002 wrote

221B wrote The whole "people kill people" thing needs to stop. Sure, people kill people... with guns. And quite frequently here in the U.S. Our yearly benchmark is 8,000 people every year will be killed in homicide from a handgun (this excludes other guns).

And to those who believe our legislators actually vote against stronger gun regulatory laws in an attempt to uphold our second amendment right, here's an interesting fact. The gun industry boasts about making an impact just under $43 billion last year on our economy. But sure, your right to take photos with your rifles and pistols is what's really important to the legislators.

A gun does not just get up and decide I want to shoot up a school. A person does. The gun is merely the tool the person uses, much like how the lawn mower is the tool you use to mow your lawn.

Roughly 30k people die each year from guns. That is about the same number from car wrecks. Should we take away cars too?

Those arguments never make any sense. A gun is a tool made to easily harm/kill people/animals. Just point in random directions and keep pulling that trigger. Multiple casualties are almost guaranteed considering where you are at the time. That is literally what a gun is made for. It is for easy destruction at a distance. Vehicles aren't made for destruction. They are made for transportation. The death rate on those are terrible as well, which is why we are improving their safety and also creating self-driving cars. How about we just alter civilian guns as we are doing with cars? Regulate what clips/mags they can have. Or, we could just make them not have clips/mags and only hold one round. The second amendment wouldn't technically be harmed and less casualties if someone wants people dead.

Also, what is always up with this "law abiding citizen" stuff? Everyone is a law abiding citizen until they're not. How can you compare it to drugs? Are guns parts or scrap metal available in general stores to make guns? How many people have the equipment to shape metal and make guns? Making drugs is so much easier, which is why they are everywhere. We would still have a slight problem with guns due to black markets and whatnot, but it shouldn't be anywhere comparable with drugs (and the prices of the guns would be a lot higher if guns were harder to get.) I also find it humorous nowadays when people talk about us potentially becoming like Nazi Germany. One, our troops would have to agree and go through with that. Two, our military is so much more advanced than us that the "war" would just be them slaughtering us with or without guns. I think it would be almost comparable to Israel and Palestine. Also, if the government does pass laws for you to not have guns, tries to take them away, and you go against it, you would no longer be a law abiding citizen. Anyway, very few people can consider themselves "law abiding citizens." There are many laws that everyday people break that they don't even know about.

I'm not someone that is going to say we should ban guns entirely, but they should be harder for people to get. Being ok with how things are when there is a mass shooting that blows up the news every few months is insane. When something is broken, you fix it. A lot of people may not like the change, but one will have to come sooner or later.

If we limit what guns, or what mags where legal, that would infringe upon the right to bear arms. Also mag limits are already in place in some states. For example I believe a shot gun you can have 1 in the chamber, and 3 in the mag. As for a rifle, say you limit it to a 10 round mag. All I need is some sheet metal and a bigger spring and I can make as big of a mag as I want.

If you think about, why do a lot of shootings happen? Because of drugs / gangs. To be completely honest, if you legalized every drug you would see a massive decrease in shootings. Making a gun is stupid easy. All you need is something to hit the primer of the bullet hard enough. Our military is full of kids fresh out of high school that will do what they are told. We have multiple retired veterans who disagree with the government but have the training. Civilians out number military personnel, unless you want to be bombing the major cities, it would be a fair fight. There is an estimated 270 million to 310 million guns in the US which is just about enough for one for each person. There are less than 5 million people in the military. Considering if the US military had orders to fire upon it's own civilians, most would decline, if we had guns we would win.

Just like how you said everyone is a law abiding citizen until their not, most people are mentally stable until their not. What do you recommend we do? One thing I will tell you I am pissed off about is my brother and I went to cabelas where he purchased an AR-15 chambered in 7.62. That's not the problem, the problem is he is an 18 year old, who took a gun to school (granted is was an unloaded bb gun), and he walked out with that gun that day. What the hell happened to the 3 day waiting period? First and foremost, there should be a waiting period if they got rid of that, secondly I don't thing any of your high powered bolt action rifles (hunting rifles) should have any restrictions on them, but rifles like the AR's you should have to take a safety class on them, and there should be at least a 1 week waiting, or cool off period. The same with pistols. Shot guns are a little more iffy because they are used to kill birds, deer, and people. If you are buying a shot gun, you had better plan ahead though because if you are buying the day of hunting you are an idiot. There should be a waiting period on those as well.

Let me tell you another thing. At my old public high school, we had a cop there. He always parked out front, and probably 95% of the kids had to walk by his car to get to a class. Not a big deal, but he had an AR type rifle between his seats, with the mag in it. One could presume it was loaded, but no way of knowing. All it takes is a busted window and boom, I can shoot up the school.

Woodkid wrote

002 wrote

Woodkid wrote

GMC wrote Honestly they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person

By that logic they should remove the laws which prohibit murder.
'Honestly, they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'

He said we don't need more laws, not that we should take laws away...

He specifically said 'Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'
If we were in a world where guns being illegal was already a reality in America, his logic would be the same as saying that murder shouldn't be illegal because criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway.

As for your big tirade above about how guns being banned shouldn't happen, most of us aren't saying that guns should be banned outright. We're saying that more rules and regulations should be put on who can buy guns.

It's easy to argue against the people who say that guns should be banned outright, I think you'll have a harder time disagreeing with the people who just want more regulations, assuming you don't think anything should change with the current gun laws.

You did mention that most of the guns are stolen. One of the new rules which could be put in place is to ensure that people who want to buy a gun pass a gun storage safety check and must be able to demonstrate that they have a place in their home where they can securely store a gun. Is that going to stop all mass shooters? Probably not, but it will stop some.

I'm also not sure what the current law is on mentally unstable people living with mentally stable people. If that is how they are living then the mentally stable person should not be allowed to buy a gun and keep it in the same home as the mentally unstable person.

Small changes like this could lead to drastic countrywide change and hopefully reduce the number of mass shootings - and shootings in general - while giving those who can use guns safely the freedom to do so.

" his logic would be the same as saying that murder shouldn't be illegal because criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway." Where in the sam hell did you get that idea from? Making murder legal is almost an incentive to kill someone. That means I could kill the guy at Walmart who is a dick to me, that means I could kill my dad to get money if he won the lottery, etc. He simply said we don't need more laws, you are making a horrible assumption.

"One of the new rules which could be put in place is to ensure that people who want to buy a gun pass a gun storage safety check and must be able to demonstrate that they have a place in their home where they can securely store a gun." So now what happens when my house gets robbed? I have to hope I can get to the gun safe in time, remember the code, load my gun, and get ready before he enters the room? Bad idea. I get where you are coming from, it would have stopped people like the sandy hook killer, but it would put more lives in danger. Sure most of your guns should be locked away, but you should always have at least a pistol by your bed for self defense.

Unfortunately it is hard because most of the changes that would stop the killings, would make it easier for people to rob you.

002 wrote

Woodkid wrote

002 wrote

Woodkid wrote

GMC wrote Honestly they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person

By that logic they should remove the laws which prohibit murder.
'Honestly, they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'

He said we don't need more laws, not that we should take laws away...

He specifically said 'Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'
If we were in a world where guns being illegal was already a reality in America, his logic would be the same as saying that murder shouldn't be illegal because criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway.

As for your big tirade above about how guns being banned shouldn't happen, most of us aren't saying that guns should be banned outright. We're saying that more rules and regulations should be put on who can buy guns.

It's easy to argue against the people who say that guns should be banned outright, I think you'll have a harder time disagreeing with the people who just want more regulations, assuming you don't think anything should change with the current gun laws.

You did mention that most of the guns are stolen. One of the new rules which could be put in place is to ensure that people who want to buy a gun pass a gun storage safety check and must be able to demonstrate that they have a place in their home where they can securely store a gun. Is that going to stop all mass shooters? Probably not, but it will stop some.

I'm also not sure what the current law is on mentally unstable people living with mentally stable people. If that is how they are living then the mentally stable person should not be allowed to buy a gun and keep it in the same home as the mentally unstable person.

Small changes like this could lead to drastic countrywide change and hopefully reduce the number of mass shootings - and shootings in general - while giving those who can use guns safely the freedom to do so.

" his logic would be the same as saying that murder shouldn't be illegal because criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway." Where in the sam hell did you get that idea from? Making murder legal is almost an incentive to kill someone. That means I could kill the guy at Walmart who is a dick to me, that means I could kill my dad to get money if he won the lottery, etc. He simply said we don't need more laws, you are making a horrible assumption.

"One of the new rules which could be put in place is to ensure that people who want to buy a gun pass a gun storage safety check and must be able to demonstrate that they have a place in their home where they can securely store a gun." So now what happens when my house gets robbed? I have to hope I can get to the gun safe in time, remember the code, load my gun, and get ready before he enters the room? Bad idea. I get where you are coming from, it would have stopped people like the sandy hook killer, but it would put more lives in danger. Sure most of your guns should be locked away, but you should always have at least a pistol by your bed for self defense.

Unfortunately it is hard because most of the changes that would stop the killings, would make it easier for people to rob you.

If I'm not mistaken most mass shootings are committed with automatic weapons. So I'd be willing to accept people having a handgun by their beds as long as their automatic weapons are safely put away.

Handguns have a lot less killing potential than automatic weapons, so while mass shootings might still happen they would be a lot less devastating.

Besides, who said they have to be locked away in a safe? They could be in the bedroom of the owner, so long as the bedroom is secure and their son full of teenage angst can't get in.

Woodkid wrote

002 wrote

Woodkid wrote

002 wrote

Woodkid wrote

GMC wrote Honestly they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person

By that logic they should remove the laws which prohibit murder.
'Honestly, they don't really need more laws. Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'

He said we don't need more laws, not that we should take laws away...

He specifically said 'Laws ain't going to stop someone from killing some person.'
If we were in a world where guns being illegal was already a reality in America, his logic would be the same as saying that murder shouldn't be illegal because criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway.

As for your big tirade above about how guns being banned shouldn't happen, most of us aren't saying that guns should be banned outright. We're saying that more rules and regulations should be put on who can buy guns.

It's easy to argue against the people who say that guns should be banned outright, I think you'll have a harder time disagreeing with the people who just want more regulations, assuming you don't think anything should change with the current gun laws.

You did mention that most of the guns are stolen. One of the new rules which could be put in place is to ensure that people who want to buy a gun pass a gun storage safety check and must be able to demonstrate that they have a place in their home where they can securely store a gun. Is that going to stop all mass shooters? Probably not, but it will stop some.

I'm also not sure what the current law is on mentally unstable people living with mentally stable people. If that is how they are living then the mentally stable person should not be allowed to buy a gun and keep it in the same home as the mentally unstable person.

Small changes like this could lead to drastic countrywide change and hopefully reduce the number of mass shootings - and shootings in general - while giving those who can use guns safely the freedom to do so.

" his logic would be the same as saying that murder shouldn't be illegal because criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway." Where in the sam hell did you get that idea from? Making murder legal is almost an incentive to kill someone. That means I could kill the guy at Walmart who is a dick to me, that means I could kill my dad to get money if he won the lottery, etc. He simply said we don't need more laws, you are making a horrible assumption.

"One of the new rules which could be put in place is to ensure that people who want to buy a gun pass a gun storage safety check and must be able to demonstrate that they have a place in their home where they can securely store a gun." So now what happens when my house gets robbed? I have to hope I can get to the gun safe in time, remember the code, load my gun, and get ready before he enters the room? Bad idea. I get where you are coming from, it would have stopped people like the sandy hook killer, but it would put more lives in danger. Sure most of your guns should be locked away, but you should always have at least a pistol by your bed for self defense.

Unfortunately it is hard because most of the changes that would stop the killings, would make it easier for people to rob you.

If I'm not mistaken most mass shootings are committed with automatic weapons. So I'd be willing to accept people having a handgun by their beds as long as their automatic weapons are safely put away.

Handguns have a lot less killing potential than automatic weapons, so while mass shootings might still happen they would be a lot less devastating.

Besides, who said they have to be locked away in a safe? They could be in the bedroom of the owner, so long as the bedroom is secure and their son full of teenage angst can't get in.

Your making a fool out of your self. A handgun has the same potential as a automatic gun. Automatic guns are not used in most mass shootings. The typical weapon used is a pistol, not an assault weapon like the semi-automatic AR-15 rifle. Assault weapons were used in 24.6 percent of mass shootings, handguns in 47.9 percent. And limiting the size of magazines weapons can carry wouldnt help, they said, because any ban would impact new sales and there is an ample supply of large capacity magazines already in circulation.