The Left is Rallying to Take Your Guns Again

renniks said:

"Their contradiction is apparent in actions, as well as in words. President Joe Biden’s rush to arm Ukrainians stands in contrast with his desire to disarm ordinary Americans."

Click to expand...

Can I get an NLAW too?

Also, the "arming Ukrainians" is being done in coordination with their army. If Red Dawn ever becomes a fact and the Russians invade America, I'd have no issue arming American soldiers either.

HARK! said:

He started by shooting his grandmother. Then he was trespassing; and I assume that he broke the law by bringing those firearms onto shoot property. The he fired a shot. The he shot someone on school property. No telling what other laws he broke in between. If he was still alive; you could gather your friends and hold a candlelight vigil for him; but he'd still fry in Texas. Texas won't put up with these types of repeat offenders. They solve the problem on the first try.

Click to expand...

As others have aptly pointed out, before the first incident, we have no basis that he was a criminal, so you're still prejudicing this whole discussion by assuming facts not in evidence before the day of the crime

Don't start down this path that I'm some bleeding heart and then spin like your vigilante corporal justice is going to solve the problem long term, because both of those assumptions are mistaken.

HARK! said:

No presumption. I'm free to walk into the gun store and buy what I wish. Had you ever considered supply and demand?

Click to expand...

If it's all about satisfying supply and demand why don't we have cocaine at the 7-11?

civilwarbuff said:

The guy sweating should have been black.....at least according to the MSM........

Click to expand...

Nah, it's always the white liberals that trumpet hardest over this kind of stuff.

muichimotsu said:

Forgive me if I don't just believe you blindly. Available and accessible are not necessarily the same in regards to people getting such a weapon

Click to expand...

Modern Sporting Rifles - Semi, Bolt, Lever | Sportsman's Warehouse

Most of those are AK-47's (some are AR-15's chambered in 7.62x39mm). Just like AR-15, an AK-47 is a platform, that many rifle manufacturers make rifles based on that platform. You can also get AK-47's chambered for other calibers, but that's the usually associated caliber for AK-47's.
Also like the AR-15, these AK-47's are semi-automatic, rather than selective fire (which has the capability of going full auto). However, with the right background checks and tax stamp you can own fully automatic AK-47's manufactured before 1986, I believe.

But modern AK-47's in civilian hands? Perfectly available, they're just semi-automatic rifles.

renniks said:

I guess you haven't noticed Ukraine?

"In the United States, even supporters of draconian gun control are announcing they “stand with the brave Ukrainian people” in their armed resistance. The glaring contradiction between these positions — supporting gun confiscation one day and gun distribution the next — seemingly hasn’t dawned on many of these ideologues."

Click to expand...

It is not a contradiction. If the US were to fall under physical invasion from Canada or Mexico and it looked with we might lose, the US could allow guns to be carried outside the home just like they did in Ukraine. But as long as we are not on the verge of losing a war with Canada or Mexico, there is no need to keep everyone armed "just in case."

muichimotsu said:

You don't automatically qualify to own a gun, you have to be licensed for possession in terms of any weapon, unless you just want to flagrantly ignore the law under a delusion that possession is all that matters and not whether one can be confident you are qualified, since a gun is not comparable to other property in nature. You can't just vote at age 5, you have to be 18, is that also a privilege? Sounds like it by your logic

And no, not all weapons are equal, proper training should be warranted for those weapons that have far more deadly capacity than a mere handgun by comparison, the person using them is immaterial if they're no more to be trusted with that than we'd trust them with explosives.

The issue is far more how American culture regards guns rather than the mere access, which is just kindling for the sparks of violence that are ignited seemingly weekly now

Click to expand...

Sounds like you live somewhere either outside of the US, or in a state which should have its laws challenged in the supreme court because that is violation of the second amendment.

You don't have a right you have a privilege in that liberal hellhole most likely.

I don't have a license. I just walked into a gun store, asked about a gun I was interested in buying, had my information put into NICS for a background check, and buy a firearm, and hope to never have to use it on anything that's living honestly.
I hope the only things I ever shoot are made of paper, aluminum, or plastic. I like shooting. I don't like hurting things. I support hunting, but.. couldn't bring myself to kill an animal myself unless I was starving or it was threatening me.
But paper doesn't bleed, and aluminum cans make a nice plinking sound.

HARK! said:

Maybe you missed what has stood in the way of making that a reality on page 1.

Hopefully the SCOTUS will settle this soon.

Docket for 20-843

Click to expand...

"I keep breaking my hand when I punch this wall. I know, the answer is that I'm not punching it hard enough"

The US already has more firearms in the hands of the public than any other country. Including more concealed firearms.

Thus, the solution to a national crisis of homicide by firearms is to allow concealed firearms into more communities. Because adding millions upon millions of firearms into the hands of the public has worked so well at reducing gun violence.

Tell me: is there any statistical difference between permit-less open and concealed carry states and states with strong gun control laws when it comes to general crime, and firearms violence? Because a quick eyeballing of the data suggests that there's a correlation between levels of concealed carry and levels of firearm violence.

HARK! said:

Like a car? ..or a chainsaw, or a knife, or a pack of matches, a gas oven, a pressure cooker, a can of gasoline, an oxyacetylene rig, an axe, a bow and arrow, household chemicals? Where does having to get permission to use the tools that are around us end, in the name of safety? Should we all have our own private rubber rooms to protect us from each other?

Cars were first licensed because the noise would scare horses, and cause chaos in the streets.

Well maybe as the horse and buggy days are over; maybe those licenses have outlived their intended purpose.

Click to expand...

You must observe that the tools you listed have use aside from killing many people in a short period of time.

Gene2memE said:

"I keep breaking my hand when I punch this wall. I know, the answer is that I'm not punching it hard enough"

The US already has more firearms in the hands of the public than any other country. Including more concealed firearms.

Thus, the solution to a national crisis of homicide by firearms is to allow concealed firearms into more communities. Because adding millions upon millions of firearms into the hands of the public has worked so well at reducing gun violence.

Tell me: is there any statistical difference between permit-less open and concealed carry states and states with strong gun control laws when it comes to general crime, and firearms violence? Because a quick eyeballing of the data suggests that there's a correlation between levels of concealed carry and levels of firearm violence.

Click to expand...

Facts are irrelevant to addicts. Some idolize drugs, some idolize gambling, while many idolize guns. Only for guns do Americans willfully sacrifice our children. We accept that our leadership will not even try to decrease gun violence in America. We accept our children being sacrificed on a weekly basis because we love our addiction more than each other. We vote for candidates for their stance on a single issue. I'm fixin to start voting on the issue of guns. If a candidate will not even discuss doing things to improve gun violence I won't give them a second look. That's what it will take. We must demand our leaders find helpful solutions if we expect anything to improve.

Statistics will not matter to people who cannot open their minds or will not value lives of living children over their own self-interests. When you're an addict you cannot listen to reason. These zealots are addicted. The needs of the many are unimportant to addicts. Addicts will always prioritize their needs. Until they realize life has become unmanageable. I'm afraid life in America is becoming unmanageable for many.

America cannot sustain this level of tribalism and insanity much longer I fear. The bible tells us as much. Americans purportedly believe the bible. Yet here we are. Idolizing our guns. Dividing into groups that fight each other. Judging everyone who dares have an opinion. Apparently our mirrors in which we see ourselves aren't working too well either. Thank you God for faith. We won't have to deal with this mess once you bring us home.

Jamdoc said:

Modern Sporting Rifles - Semi, Bolt, Lever | Sportsman's Warehouse

Most of those are AK-47's (some are AR-15's chambered in 7.62x39mm). Just like AR-15, an AK-47 is a platform, that many rifle manufacturers make rifles based on that platform. You can also get AK-47's chambered for other calibers, but that's the usually associated caliber for AK-47's.
Also like the AR-15, these AK-47's are semi-automatic, rather than selective fire (which has the capability of going full auto). However, with the right background checks and tax stamp you can own fully automatic AK-47's manufactured before 1986, I believe.

But modern AK-47's in civilian hands? Perfectly available, they're just semi-automatic rifles.

Click to expand...

The question is whether it's remotely prudent, to say nothing of a simple requirement of licensure or the like would not be overreach for something that can fire more regularly. Are we just going to say fully automatic weapons are fair game too for everyone to own?

HARK! said:

The more law abiding citizens who are carrying protection, the harder it is for an armed criminal to get away with murder. One doesn't need to read a chart to recognize this axiom.

Click to expand...

Except those law abiding citizens are not guaranteed to obey the laws as it comes to guns, certainly not 100%. There's a risk involved, yes, but in terms of any kind of vigilance, this seems more like giving the car keys to a teen and expecting them to not eventually get in trouble

HARK! said:

Like a car? ..or a chainsaw, or a knife, or a pack of matches, a gas oven, a pressure cooker, a can of gasoline, an oxyacetylene rig, an axe, a bow and arrow, household chemicals? Where does having to get permission to use the tools that are around us end, in the name of safety? Should we all have our own private rubber rooms to protect us from each other?

Cars were first licensed because the noise would scare horses, and cause chaos in the streets.

Well maybe as the horse and buggy days are over; maybe those licenses have outlived their intended purpose.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure we don't expect licensure for all of that, because we ideally expect people to not be stupid and inept in their usage.

Argument ad absurdum much? No one has advocated safety as the sole factor, it's a simple balancing test of freedom alongside safety, not either/or.

Yeah, I'm sure everyone killed by cars would love to hear that your logic is that licenses aren't needed because of a citation you can bring up from a time when virtually no one alive today would remember that

Pretty sure there's a bigger reason for why cars are licensed, same as why getting a license to operate a firearm is not the overreach you characterize it as. Public welfare is not unimportant just because you think everyone should have unfettered freedom, because that's counter to any kind of rational understanding of how civil society works, where we balance positive and negative liberty.

Kettriken said:

You must observe that the tools you listed have use aside from killing many people in a short period of time.

Click to expand...

so do AR-15's, especially in Texas and the south.
People hunt razorbacks with them, it's open season on them because they're such a dangerous nuisance, an invasive species that breeds rapidly and has to be culled.
there are entire business around flying yuppies around in helicopters culling hogs with AR-15's or even actual fully automatic machine guns.
You want at least a semiautomatic rifle for them because they travel in groups and they will charge and they are dangerous.

Jamdoc said:

Sounds like you live somewhere either outside of the US, or in a state which should have its laws challenged in the supreme court because that is violation of the second amendment.

You don't have a right you have a privilege in that liberal hellhole most likely.

I don't have a license. I just walked into a gun store, asked about a gun I was interested in buying, had my information put into NICS for a background check, and buy a firearm, and hope to never have to use it on anything that's living honestly.
I hope the only things I ever shoot are made of paper, aluminum, or plastic. I like shooting. I don't like hurting things. I support hunting, but.. couldn't bring myself to kill an animal myself unless I was starving or it was threatening me.
But paper doesn't bleed, and aluminum cans make a nice plinking sound.

Click to expand...

So you admit you need a hunting license? What's the difference? That you think it's perfectly logical for anyone to be able to buy something that is pretty much purely designed to kill people and that merely because someone's intent is to protect others that there should be NO regulation or restriction in terms of gun ownership?

You can't talk out of both sides of your mouth like you simultaneously care about freedom above all else and then supposedly have concerns about public safety. The situation you describe only sounds fine if we assume everyone regards guns in the same way, but that's demonstrably not true and many would use it to enact violence for terroristic ends

Infringement of the second amendment is not creating simple requirements of background checks or such, if that's what you're insinuating. If anything, I should be far more concerned, I live in the Bible Belt, thank you very much, maybe don't assume about where I live because of me speaking in a way you construe to indicate how things are where I live rather than the ideal state of compromise in gun ownership and public safety.