Thomas Jefferson and many of the Founding Fathers were alive when the revolver was invented. Rapid firing weapons equal to semiautomatic of today have been around for 150 years.
AA flight attendant arrested at ORD checkpoint on Friday with gun
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
- Status
Thomas Jefferson and many of the Founding Fathers were alive when the revolver was invented. Rapid firing weapons equal to semiautomatic of today have been around for 150 years.
Military weapons are fully automatic. AR-15 is not. It looks similar, internal parts of post ban are different and illegal to convert to fully automatic. Major illegal to to anyway.
I don't use one, some guys do. Not a deer/elk hunter. They use a bigger round, more deadly. Those guns are also semi-automatic and will be just as deadly if used on unarmed targets.
You want to take ban those too?
The Supreme Court has recently ruled on the founders meaning of militia,.....you might want to check it out before u use this worn out old anti second amendment arguement.......and far as high powered rifles,....where does it say i cant?.....and your point is?
Kev3188
Veteran
Took me about 5 seconds to find a legal end around to that. Not "fully automatic" since you have to pull the trigger each time, but can still unload 30-40 rounds in about 4 seconds...
I just quoted the 2nd amendment. That's "worn out?" Remember, it was me that said it was originally crafted with a defensive mindset. You continue to contest that, but haven't provided any evidence, other than to tell me to go "check things out."
BS. Totally inaccurate and uninformed. You must have an amazing finger to move it back and forth 10 times per second.
The 2nd amendment was crafted by extremely intelligent men. They knew exactly what they were doing. They defined the word militia and who is considered to be a member. Despite your good intentions, no amount of feel good, knee jerk legislation will change what those men enshrined in our constitution.
As I posted, that maniac could have doen the same evil deed with weapons from 150 years ago.
Kev3188
Veteran
Don't need to pull the trigger back and forth to bump fire it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD213VW6WjY
I still haven't seen anywhere where I've called for a repeal of the 2nd. That's a world away from a reasonable control (or ban) on high powered assault rifles, no many how many times people try to conflate the two issues.
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
I do not understand why the Lanza mother (who knew her son had mental health issues) bought and used these guns with her son at the local shooting club. Also, did she keep the guns in a locked safe? How selfish was this woman??
Legislation to ban guns will not address the present issue of the 280 million guns out there today.
I fear that our USA society has grown to accept random mass shootings as a cost-of-living free. Same as driving on the highway with drunk drivers who kill 50,000 of our fellow citizens each.
But hey, let's not offend anyone who may be a lethal danger to our families' lives....
Legislation to ban guns will not address the present issue of the 280 million guns out there today.
I fear that our USA society has grown to accept random mass shootings as a cost-of-living free. Same as driving on the highway with drunk drivers who kill 50,000 of our fellow citizens each.
But hey, let's not offend anyone who may be a lethal danger to our families' lives....
The "worn out" is your spin ,....which is a very old one....Read and inform yourself please,.....start with the second amendment itself,....this time don't stop at the word Militia ,...but read its entirity,....then read the Supreme Court ruling " Heller versus the District of Columbia " to educate yourself to what minds greater than yours and mine on constitutional law have said as recently as a couple years ago..... geez !
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #100
There are reports that she was stockpiling guns, ammo, food and other supplies, so I'd say she was perhaps a little unbalanced herself.
The good news is that drunk driving deaths are down to just slightly over 10,000 per year:
http://www.centurycouncil.org/drunk-driving/drunk-driving-fatalities-national-statistics
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
Kev3188
Veteran
I've read Heller. I get it.
One more time; the right to bear arms, and the legal availablilty of high powered assault rifles are two separate items.
I'm sure the people who get caught in the crossfire think the exact same thing...
Still avoids the question of why an AR15 is even available on the public market...
In other words NO. When the founding fathers wrote our Constitution they made it amendable. The technology for killing that exists today was not available when the Constitution was written.
Like I said I do not own a gun, but have no objection to guns being available within reason. One of your peers on the pro gun side said that we should lock up all the nuts before they hurt anybody, but I also suspect that his voting patterns (and yours)are what lead to reduced government spending on healthcare to the point where public institutions dumped mentally ill people on the streets and made treatment unobtainable.
Whats really sad is that he would put his right to own guns ahead of those unfortunate others to not be in jail over something that they have not done yet.
Yes that is good news and it probably has something to do with the fact that the government restricted peoples freedom to drink alcohol and drive their cars.
I do not see the correlation between the two.
Criminals and people who become criminals for the first time will always find a way to obtain a firearm. If a person drove a vehicle into a crowd of people would we ban vehicles? If a person drove a vehicle into a crowd of people and was under the influence of Alcohol would we ban alcohol and vehicles? Who do we go after next? Is it guns or bullets that kill people? Neither. it is the person behind the trigger or behind the wheel that has the potential to kill people. We always hear and read about drinking in moderation and not getting behind the wheel of a vehicle under the influence. How many times has this lead to fatalities? Yet vehicles and alcohol are still legal to purchase, own and operate. Why should firearms be any different? Sure you can argue about military grade weapons in the hands of civilians but that is not the issue from the anti-gun advocates. Lets not mix up the two. Criminals will always have firearms. People who can not obtain a firearm legally will always find a way to obtain one through other means. This is fact and we have to deal with it. Legally owning a firearm is not the problem. What one does with it illegally is. Address that issue.
Criminals and people who become criminals for the first time will always find a way to obtain a firearm. If a person drove a vehicle into a crowd of people would we ban vehicles? If a person drove a vehicle into a crowd of people and was under the influence of Alcohol would we ban alcohol and vehicles? Who do we go after next? Is it guns or bullets that kill people? Neither. it is the person behind the trigger or behind the wheel that has the potential to kill people. We always hear and read about drinking in moderation and not getting behind the wheel of a vehicle under the influence. How many times has this lead to fatalities? Yet vehicles and alcohol are still legal to purchase, own and operate. Why should firearms be any different? Sure you can argue about military grade weapons in the hands of civilians but that is not the issue from the anti-gun advocates. Lets not mix up the two. Criminals will always have firearms. People who can not obtain a firearm legally will always find a way to obtain one through other means. This is fact and we have to deal with it. Legally owning a firearm is not the problem. What one does with it illegally is. Address that issue.
- Status
