Parkland, Florida shooting

[Gelcoater]

To use your logic, how many school shootings have occurred in 2018 resulting in death or injury? How many trucks, super soakers, machete attacks have there been on schools resulting in death or injury? What is the total carnage of each?

To ignore the role of a gun is disingenuous at best. It seems that on "enthusiast" websites the prevalence of a groupthink scenario takes over. There are so many people in one place telling each other exactly what they want to hear. Posting up a bullshit Israeli picture and trying to turn it into a narrative that validates a conclusion that you and many others have already drawn is sad and counterproductive to an actual solution.

So what's the solution Rod?

 

[RodnJen]

So what's the solution Rod?

Go at it from all sides. And, if the NRA doesn’t come to the table, legislation will be enacted that is definitely not in their best interest. That’s how reactive legislation works. I sucks but that’s what happens after tragic events or when parties can’t come together for a collective solution.

 

[500bbc]

Coincidence maybe but these facts do speak for themselves...

On June 25, 1962, the United States Supreme Court decided in Engel v. Vitale that a prayer approved by the New York Board of Regents for use in schools violated the First Amendment because it represented establishment of religion. In 1963, in Abington School District v. Schempp, the court decided against Bible readings in public schools along the same lines.

Since 1963, Jeynes said there have been five negative developments in the nation’s public schools:

• Academic achievement has plummeted, including SAT scores.

• Increased rate of out-of-wedlock births

• Increase in illegal drug use

• Increase in juvenile crime

• Deterioration of school behavior

“So we need to realize that these actions do have consequences,” said Jeynes, professor at California State College in Long Beach and senior fellow at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, N.J., “When we remove that moral fiber -- that moral emphasis – this is what can result.”

Other facts included a comparison between the top five complaints of teachers from 1940-1962 -- talking, chewing gum, making noise, running in the halls and getting out of turn in line – to rape, robbery, assault, burglary and arson from 1963 to present.

In summation, the insanity of liberalism...

 

[500bbc]

Go at it from all sides. And, if the NRA doesn’t come to the table, legislation will be enacted that is definitely not in their best interest. That’s how reactive legislation works. I sucks but that’s what happens after tragic events or when parties can’t come together for a collective solution.

We've had semi automatic weapons in this country for 120 years, what changed?

Liberalism is truly a mental disorder.

 

[Cdog]

Go at it from all sides. And, if the NRA doesn’t come to the table, legislation will be enacted that is definitely not in their best interest. That’s how reactive legislation works. I sucks but that’s what happens after tragic events or when parties can’t come together for a collective solution.

Your comment here is sad. You have a child's understanding of what the NRA represents. Unfortunately they are required because your rights are constantly under attack from the power grabbing dip shits that fed you your opinion.

The NRA is nothing more than a constitutional rights lobbyist group. Its a good thing you have no power.

 

[SBMech]

Go at it from all sides. And, if the NRA doesn’t come to the table, legislation will be enacted that is definitely not in their best interest. That’s how reactive legislation works. I sucks but that’s what happens after tragic events or when parties can’t come together for a collective solution.

So because educators refuse to use armed police (simple solution) you are advocating more useless gun laws?

I know math is hard for some people, but your child has 400x more risk to die in a car accident, 40x more likely to die from second hand smoke, and 10x more likely to get hit by a drunk driver. in 2017 181 kids were killed by mentally ill people trespassing on school grounds. 1067 died from Alcohol poisoning. What is the higher risk?

I am by no means saying that any number of children dying is ok, because it is not. Face the facts however, your child has a 5x higher risk of dying from cancer, than being shot. 1200 kids died last year from cancer.

Society is failing, not any sort of "control". You will never be able to control a situation like when someone looses it and freaks out.

I would 100% advocate patrolling officers above anything else.

 

[530RL]

The Country just implemented a very large tax cut, and a change in the tax code that would force local municipalities to cut the amount of spending as those local taxes are no longer deductible.

To now call for an increase in law enforcement on campuses, seems economically inconsistent with the supported policy of cutting taxes and promoting large reductions in spending at the local level.

 

[Sandlord]

Jim Jones killed 918 people

with a pitcher of kool-aid



just sayin

 

[ChumpChange]

The Country just implemented a very large tax cut, and a change in the tax code that would force local municipalities to cut the amount of spending as those local taxes are no longer deductible.

What does the lack of deductibility play into what the States collect? It's not like they lowered the state taxes because they can no longer be deducted on a Federal level. The states are still collecting the same amount as before the tax bill!!!!

 

[DaveC]

The left likes to paint the NRA as a small, kook-fringe, corrupt, elitist organization that has no backing whatsoever in an attempt to marginalize the NRA message. This is done purposefully to portray them as a nefarious, evil organization who conspires to kill young children. This is politics at its finest.(sarcasm)

In fact the NRA represents tens of millions gun owners in this country with its mission to preserve their constitution gun rights. (an estimated 100+ million US citizens own a gun or 30% of the population) Even though the NRA membership is not that high, non-member gun owners benefit from their lobbying efforts.

The gun lobby is necessary because of the opposition forces that actively work against gun rights. If that did not occur then the NRA would have no money or power.

If this was just about gun control then we really wouldn't be having this discussion. But many on the left have moved beyond gun control to wanting outright gun bans. Therein lies the problem and the conflict. Bans are not gun control but instead they are depriving citizens of their rights.

The left actively disguises their need for bans as gun control on purpose. It helps further their gun banning agenda. (In CA they non longer disguise their gun banning agenda though)

The bottom line is that the NRA is a legitimate lobbying organization that represents a vast number of Americans who have rights. Their involvement therefore is not only legitimate but also necessary if we are to represent everyone in the gun control discussion. (or we can do it like CA that excludes the right from the discussion altogether)

 

[DaveC]

The other problem we have with the gun control discussion is there is absolutely no middle ground among the parties to compromise. You got the vocal far left on one side and the vocal far right on the other.

The left calls for "gun control" but what they really mean is some sort of ban. Well banning is not gun control. Banning is the removal of someones rights and that requires some serious discussion first. They need to slow their roll just a tad in order to get something done.

The right accuses the left of disguising a gun banning agenda as a gun control proposal so the right refuses to even consider the left's gun control proposals since they are afraid of a trojan horse.. Well sometimes they are correct but others times there have been some compromises made that should be considered.

The bottom line is we need to have a serious discussion on common sense gun control measures and the left needs to stop talking about bans. If they don't they will get shut down quickly and there will NOT be a discussion.

Additionally we have many reasonable gun control measures on the books already that go unenforced. Sure there might be some better ideas and ways to beef up current laws with better solutions so we should hear about those ideas. Also the rules vary by state with some being very strict.

But the effort by the left to categorize our country as being completely lax on gun control laws is disingenuous because we are not.

Finally I think the federal government should stay out of it and let local control at the state level decide. A good example is CA's draconian rules which have some support with the tards in SF and LA but are pretty much rejected by everyone else. Half the shit that they pull in CA in terms of gun control would be rejected in other states. So why should CA rules promulgate beyond our borders? They shouldn't. But let CA do their thing.

As long as we continue to play political games then nothing will get done.

 

[Cdog]

The other problem we have with the gun control discussion is there is absolutely no middle ground among the parties to compromise. You got the vocal far left on one side and the vocal far right on the other.

The left calls for "gun control" but what they really mean is some sort of ban. Well banning is not gun control. Banning is the removal of someones rights and that requires some serious discussion first. They need to slow their roll just a tad in order to get something done.

The right accuses the left of disguising a gun banning agenda as a gun control proposal so the right refuses to even consider the left's gun control proposals since they are afraid of a trojan horse.. Well sometimes they are correct but others times there have been some compromises made that should be considered.

The bottom line is we need to have a serious discussion on common sense gun control measures and the left needs to stop talking about bans. If they don't they will get shut down quickly and there will NOT be a discussion.

Additionally we have many reasonable gun control measures on the books already that go unenforced. Sure there might be some better ideas and ways to beef up current laws with better solutions so we should hear about those ideas. Also the rules vary by state with some being very strict.

But the effort by the left to categorize our country as being completely lax on gun control laws is disingenuous.

Finally I think the federal government should stay out of it and let local control at the state level decide. A good example is CA's draconian rules which have some support with the tards in SF and LA but are pretty much rejected by everyone else. Half the shit that they pull in CA in terms of gun control would be rejected in other states. So why should CA rules promulgate beyond our borders? They shouldn't.

We have already had too many compromises on the 2nd amendment. The takers take without giving anything back in return. Adding stupid non effective laws restricting thou which “shall not be infringed”.

We are up front and honest about our intent. The 2nd amendment is not about hunting or collecting or fun times. It’s the ability to own the tools for personal protection and to over throw a tyrannical government.

No compromise unless other over reaching laws are overturned.

Remove SBR’s and suppressors from NFA.
Remove the 86 Hughes amendment and restore it to pre 86 laws.

Now what do “they” want to trade for?

 

[DaveC]

Negotiate. I like your style

But actually I am more along the lines of fuck em, they get nothing. They had 8 years and did nothing during that time. So fuck em.

We have already had too many compromises on the 2nd amendment. The takers take without giving anything back in return. Adding stupid non effective laws restricting thou which “shall not be infringed”.

We are up front and honest about our intent. The 2nd amendment is not about hunting or collecting or fun times. It’s the ability to own the tools for personal protection and to over throw a tyrannical government.

No compromise unless other over reaching laws are overturned.

Remove SBR’s and suppressors from NFA.
Remove the 86 Hughes amendment and restore it to pre 86 laws.

Now what do “they” want to trade for?

 

[500bbc]

Your comment here is sad. You have a child's understanding of what the NRA represents. Unfortunately they are required because your rights are constantly under attack from the power grabbing dip shits that fed you your opinion.

The NRA is nothing more than a constitutional rights lobbyist group. Its a good thing you have no power.

WTF you talking about?

It's simple, no NRA no gun crime!

 

[500bbc]

Go at it from all sides. And, if the NRA doesn’t come to the table, legislation will be enacted that is definitely not in their best interest. That’s how reactive legislation works. I sucks but that’s what happens after tragic events or when parties can’t come together for a collective solution.

How's about this side, the one that hasn't existed since the country was founded, the one that started all the school shootings.

Meds, all the school shooters have them in common. Know what else? No meds in their system when they go off.

 

[Activated]

Coincidence maybe but these facts do speak for themselves...

On June 25, 1962, the United States Supreme Court decided in Engel v. Vitale that a prayer approved by the New York Board of Regents for use in schools violated the First Amendment because it represented establishment of religion. In 1963, in Abington School District v. Schempp, the court decided against Bible readings in public schools along the same lines.

Since 1963, Jeynes said there have been five negative developments in the nation’s public schools:

• Academic achievement has plummeted, including SAT scores.

• Increased rate of out-of-wedlock births

• Increase in illegal drug use

• Increase in juvenile crime

• Deterioration of school behavior

“So we need to realize that these actions do have consequences,” said Jeynes, professor at California State College in Long Beach and senior fellow at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, N.J., “When we remove that moral fiber -- that moral emphasis – this is what can result.”

I am so happy i went to high school after 1963.

 

[Cdog]

WTF you talking about?

It's simple, no NRA no gun crime!

But but but!!! Someone’s got to do something!!!!

 

[500bbc]

But but but!!! Someone’s got to do something!!!!

Up their meds, not the lunatics, the nuts that blame the firearms.

 

[River Lynchmob]

Here's something that is rarely discussed (I have not read the whole thread so forgive me if it has been addressed), the role of the family. What kind of a household do these kids grow up in? Do they have absentee parents? Do these kids parents want to be their friends and not do the heavy lifting that comes along with raising kids? I can all but guarantee you that these kids parents are not there, if they were they would notice their kids actions long before they ever reached this level. The deterioration of the family plays a bigger role in these shootings than anyone will ever admit because it does not fit the narrative. It can't be the kids or their upbringing because if we were to put blame on a person and hold them accountable there would be hell to pay...no one is responsible for their actions so lets place blame on an inanimate object.

 

[DrunkenSailor]

We have already had too many compromises on the 2nd amendment. The takers take without giving anything back in return. Adding stupid non effective laws restricting thou which “shall not be infringed”.

We are up front and honest about our intent. The 2nd amendment is not about hunting or collecting or fun times. It’s the ability to own the tools for personal protection and to over throw a tyrannical government.

No compromise unless other over reaching laws are overturned.

Remove SBR’s and suppressors from NFA.
Remove the 86 Hughes amendment and restore it to pre 86 laws.

Now what do “they” want to trade for?

This has always been my argument but with the advances in technology i fear a gun is going to be of little use against our military. We would need much more firepower than we have now to even get on the same levels as the afghanis. Protection against those who would seek to do us harm absolutely. Protection from a government who wished to do us harm? We wouldn't have a chance. While we have been over here arguing about guns the is military has been developing technology that would make sure that you never saw a human to take a shot at. Yeah maybe you get lucky and your small arms fire brings down a drone but I doubt you would even see the machine that killed you. We have allowed this for our protection and national pride but who are we really fighting against? Some dudes in caves on the other side of the world? The russians? The chinese?

 

[wsuwrhr]

Here's something that is rarely discussed (I have not read the whole thread so forgive me if it has been addressed), the role of the family. What kind of a household do these kids grow up in? Do they have absentee parents? Do these kids parents want to be their friends and not do the heavy lifting that comes along with raising kids? I can all but guarantee you that these kids parents are not there, if they were they would notice their kids actions long before they ever reached this level. The deterioration of the family plays a bigger role in these shootings than anyone will ever admit because it does not fit the narrative. It can't be the kids or their upbringing because if we were to put blame on a person and hold them accountable there would be hell to pay...no one is responsible for their actions so lets place blame on an inanimate object.

I read this morning that the kid has a substantial inheritance.

 

[Cdog]

This has always been my argument but with the advances in technology i fear a gun is going to be of little use against our military. We would need much more firepower than we have now to even get on the same levels as the afghanis. Protection against those who would seek to do us harm absolutely. Protection from a government who wished to do us harm? We wouldn't have a chance. While we have been over here arguing about guns the is military has been developing technology that would make sure that you never saw a human to take a shot at. Yeah maybe you get lucky and your small arms fire brings down a drone but I doubt you would even see the machine that killed you. We have allowed this for our protection and national pride but who are we really fighting against? Some dudes in caves on the other side of the world? The russians? The chinese?

The use of a firearm is still very relevant. Otherwise LE wouldn’t carry several everyday. Talk to any ME vet and they will tell you how hardened the dirt farmers are with small arms and improvised explosives. We’re separated from that kind of life and nobody here wants that. Yet the mere threat of its possibility is enough to keep some people on their feet & acting right. After all we're all just mere animals.

Posse Comitatus act limits the feds to act on American soil. This not only suggests the threat is taken seriously but limits what power hungry politicians and military yes men can do here on US soil. Keep in mind the people using that technology are just like you and I. They are our family, friends & neighbors. Who knows what technology will bring in the future though. I know the robots opening the door video the other day made me pause for a second. But anything made by man can be destroyed by man and the person looking to do harm to others can be stopped by 1 bullet.

The typewriter & computer didn’t change the application of the first amendment. The 2nd amendment is more than the ownership of arms. It’s the inalienable right to self preservation.

 

[River Lynchmob]

I read this morning that the kid has a substantial inheritance.

I saw that as well...$800k

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[wsuwrhr]

I saw that as well...$800k

https://www.yahoo.com/news/nikolas-cruz-apos-carer-wants-110810348.html

 

[CigAjerk]

I like the way this guy explains it

 

[Cdog]

The use of a firearm is still very relevant. Otherwise LE wouldn’t carry several everyday. Talk to any ME vet and they will tell you how hardened the dirt farmers are with small arms and improvised explosives. We’re separated from that kind of life and nobody here wants that. Yet the mere threat of its possibility is enough to keep some people on their feet & acting right. After all we're all just mere animals.

Posse Comitatus act limits the feds to act on American soil. This not only suggests the threat is taken seriously but limits what power hungry politicians and military yes men can do here on US soil. Keep in mind the people using that technology are just like you and I. They are our family, friends & neighbors. Who knows what technology will bring in the future though. I know the robots opening the door video the other day made me pause for a second. But anything made by man can be destroyed by man and the person looking to do harm to others can be stopped by 1 bullet.

The typewriter & computer didn’t change the application of the first amendment. The 2nd amendment is more than the ownership of arms. It’s the inalienable right to self preservation.

I’ll also add, this is why the identity politics and tribalism occurring right now is so dangerous. Pitting us against them happening in our country right now is playing with fire. I see it from all sides lately. Boomers verses millennials. Women verses Men. Black verses white. All of this is contributing to the madness. Once you see your fellow countryman as the wall between you and your happiness a person tends to de humanize them. Divide and concur.

 

[Outdrive1]

I see more gun control and restrictions coming from this and Vegas shooting. No way around it. I personally think it’s a waste of time, a bad idea, and it’s not going to change anything. We live in a country where the majority rules and I truly believe the majority of people will push for it. Stock up now. The politicians will do and say anything for votes. POTUS included.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rivermobster]

Here's something that is rarely discussed (I have not read the whole thread so forgive me if it has been addressed), the role of the family. What kind of a household do these kids grow up in? Do they have absentee parents? Do these kids parents want to be their friends and not do the heavy lifting that comes along with raising kids? I can all but guarantee you that these kids parents are not there, if they were they would notice their kids actions long before they ever reached this level. The deterioration of the family plays a bigger role in these shootings than anyone will ever admit because it does not fit the narrative. It can't be the kids or their upbringing because if we were to put blame on a person and hold them accountable there would be hell to pay...no one is responsible for their actions so lets place blame on an inanimate object.

And there it is . Finally the Real truth comes out .

My solution would be to dismantle CPS completely and let parents go back to beating their children!

Kids and criminals alike both know the penalties for mis behavior are minimal at best .

Let's get rid of all these idiot liberals and reinstate the death penalty as well.

Let the punishment fit the crime, no matter how old you are.

 

[Cdog]

I see more gun control and restrictions coming from this and Vegas shooting. No way around it. I personally think it’s a waste of time, a bad idea, and it’s not going to change anything. We live in a country where the majority rules and I truly believe the majority of people will push for it. Stock up now. The politicians will do and say anything for votes. POTUS included.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Figuratively speaking I assume? After all that is the difference between a democracy and what we have a Representative Republic. But don't tell jennifer lawrence that. HAHA!

 

[SBMech]

I see more gun control and restrictions coming from this and Vegas shooting. No way around it. I personally think it’s a waste of time, a bad idea, and it’s not going to change anything. We live in a country where the majority rules and I truly believe the majority of people will push for it. Stock up now. The politicians will do and say anything for votes. POTUS included.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He sells out the NRA and all us 2nd supporters he will not be getting votes lol... I still believe gun owners are a majority in this great nation.

I hope for both of us you are wrong.

 

[Outdrive1]

He sells out the NRA and all us 2nd supporters he will not be getting votes lol... I still believe gun owners are a majority in this great nation.

I hope for both of us you are wrong.

I get it. It’s just my opinion though. I think most of us can live with the bump stock concession and background checks if that’s the concession to quite the masses. I don’t think either has an impact on future shootings, if there are any.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SBMech]

I get it. It’s just my opinion though. I think most of us can live with the bump stock concession and background checks if that’s the concession to quite the masses. I don’t think either has an impact on future shootings, if there are any.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yea anything they do other than add police patrols is not going to change anything, but hey, that's politics for ya, mostly lip service in the name of the greater good, for the smallest portion of the populace. We need more "?" bathrooms!

 

[MSum661]

I’ll also add, this is why the identity politics and tribalism occurring right now is so dangerous. Pitting us against them happening in our country right now is playing with fire. I see it from all sides lately. Boomers verses millennials. Women verses Men. Black verses white. All of this is contributing to the madness. Once you see your fellow countryman as the wall between you and your happiness a person tends to de humanize them. Divide and concur.

Simply put, Certain groups of People in the U.S. believe everything they read on the Internet, thus the peer pressure-herd mentality, "Politics, Tribalism." In this minute by minute electronic day and age, it takes very little effort and cost to move and shake things up against OUR Country now. What these natural born domestic followers do not realize is that some of this action could be sparked by a Foreign adversary.
We are the Target for the Number 2 Amendment written on Our Bill of rights and for that reason WE the People are a threat across the World.
Make no mistake about it. The Threat is real.

Example: Use a School Shooting, translate that into an issue to continue the ongoing process to restrict our right to own Firearms, Assemble Marches to attack OUR Bill of Rights, and repeat process until eventually were so weakened that the 2nd amendment is no longer recognizable going into Future generations.

A bump stock here, a trigger type there, certain types of scopes, Barrel lengths, etc., etc. may not sound like much of a change at the time, but Adversaries think in terms of 100 years+. Our New Country sees outlooks within minutes or days.
We are slipping and about 50% of our Population is not Good with that.

all this JMHO.

 

[RCDave]

 

[j21black]

A couple pretty cool things I caught on Facebook last night and this morning.....Worth a read and a watch.....

http://fox59.com/2014/09/08/exclusi...utionary-security-system-to-thwart-shootings/

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10156386751733689

 

[j21black]

This has always been my argument but with the advances in technology i fear a gun is going to be of little use against our military. We would need much more firepower than we have now to even get on the same levels as the afghanis. Protection against those who would seek to do us harm absolutely. Protection from a government who wished to do us harm? We wouldn't have a chance. While we have been over here arguing about guns the is military has been developing technology that would make sure that you never saw a human to take a shot at. Yeah maybe you get lucky and your small arms fire brings down a drone but I doubt you would even see the machine that killed you. We have allowed this for our protection and national pride but who are we really fighting against? Some dudes in caves on the other side of the world? The russians? The chinese?

I agree - very little use if the military is used against the general population. I also like to think, a great majority of them would refuse to follow or give those orders (may soon be a mute point with robotics). I remember a few years ago I saw an officer excerpt from a question the military was apparently asking their high ranking commanding officers under Obama that asked them if the would kill large groups of American citizens if ordered to do so. They story was if they said no, they were removed from command. I saw it online, so maybe it is false, but I wouldn't put anything past Obama and his team.

I do know a retired Army General who is still very well connected, next time I see him I'll pick his brain on the subject.

 

[Carrera205]

And there it is . Finally the Real truth comes out .

My solution would be to dismantle CPS completely and let parents go back to beating their children!

Kids and criminals alike both know the penalties for mis behavior are minimal at best .

Let's get rid of all these idiot liberals and reinstate the death penalty as well.

Let the punishment fit the crime, no matter how old you are.

A large part of the destruction of the family comes from the liberal/feminist movement. Not long ago it was considered taboo to be a divorcee and you were considered a failure and outcast. The threat of that kept marriage intact for the majority of family's and allowed proper child rearing. Since the new era its "I missed out on the fun times" or whatever excuse and then its divorce rape and cash prizes for the divorcee. Nothing holds a woman back from leaving their male. And women are responsible for the majority of divorces (80 percent or more) that's a fact.
. And society says its ok because they are "finding themselves".

 

[j21black]

I myself have dated various single mothers who left the father and are out banging one guy after another.

Bless their hearts......

 

[Carrera205]

Bless their hearts......

While it was cool at the time thinking back to the effects it will have on their child makes me sad.

 

[500bbc]

Simply put, Certain groups of People in the U.S. believe everything they read on the Internet, thus the peer pressure-herd mentality, "Politics, Tribalism." In this minute by minute electronic day and age, it takes very little effort and cost to move and shake things up against OUR Country now. What these natural born domestic followers do not realize is that some of this action could be sparked by a Foreign adversary.
We are the Target for the Number 2 Amendment written on Our Bill of rights and for that reason WE the People are a threat across the World.
Make no mistake about it. The Threat is real.

Example: Use a School Shooting, translate that into an issue to continue the ongoing process to restrict our right to own Firearms, Assemble Marches to attack OUR Bill of Rights, and repeat process until eventually were so weakened that the 2nd amendment is no longer recognizable going into Future generations.

A bump stock here, a trigger type there, certain types of scopes, Barrel lengths, etc., etc. may not sound like much of a change at the time, but Adversaries think in terms of 100 years+. Our New Country sees outlooks within minutes or days.
We are slipping and about 50% of our Population is not Good with that.

all this JMHO.

The death from 1000 cuts...

 

[DaveC]

This should be required viewing in school

I like the way this guy explains it

 

[RiverDave]

The other problem we have with the gun control discussion is there is absolutely no middle ground among the parties to compromise. You got the vocal far left on one side and the vocal far right on the other.

The left calls for "gun control" but what they really mean is some sort of ban. Well banning is not gun control. Banning is the removal of someones rights and that requires some serious discussion first. They need to slow their roll just a tad in order to get something done.

The right accuses the left of disguising a gun banning agenda as a gun control proposal so the right refuses to even consider the left's gun control proposals since they are afraid of a trojan horse.. Well sometimes they are correct but others times there have been some compromises made that should be considered.

The bottom line is we need to have a serious discussion on common sense gun control measures and the left needs to stop talking about bans. If they don't they will get shut down quickly and there will NOT be a discussion.

Additionally we have many reasonable gun control measures on the books already that go unenforced. Sure there might be some better ideas and ways to beef up current laws with better solutions so we should hear about those ideas. Also the rules vary by state with some being very strict.

But the effort by the left to categorize our country as being completely lax on gun control laws is disingenuous because we are not.

Finally I think the federal government should stay out of it and let local control at the state level decide. A good example is CA's draconian rules which have some support with the tards in SF and LA but are pretty much rejected by everyone else. Half the shit that they pull in CA in terms of gun control would be rejected in other states. So why should CA rules promulgate beyond our borders? They shouldn't. But let CA do their thing.

As long as we continue to play political games then nothing will get done.

I don’t know why people use that phrase “common sense” with gun control.. what does that even mean?

As far as I’m concerned the first part of the “common sense” would be removing the 1986 automatic weapons ban.

 

[Sleek-Jet]

Sitting here watching the walk-outs and the shouting about gun control... this is about trying to control something you have no control over. It is an irrational response to an irrational act.

And the answer is always "we need more laws". But there are sufficient laws on the books to nearly prevent mass shootings. But it is always some excuse as to why the laws weren't enforced. So how are more laws going to help? Short answer is they aren't.

A letter in the WSJ today referenced Australia and their gun laws. Per the letter the gov't impounded 600,000 guns. There are nearly 500 times that amount in the US right now. Banning anything would just create an instant black market that would henceforth be uncontrollable. Who's going to win that one?

There is no simple answer, but lets start by vigorously enforcing what laws are on the books right now and see how that works out.

 

[sintax]

And the answer is always "we need more laws". But there are sufficient laws on the books to nearly prevent mass shootings. But it is always some excuse as to why the laws weren't enforced. So how are more laws going to help? Short answer is they aren't.

Well.... I mean murder is illegal isnt it? Shouldn't that be enough to stop these shooters? If breaking that law is not a problem, what makes them think getting a gun by other means would tip any moral scale.

A letter in the WSJ today referenced Australia and their gun laws. Per the letter the gov't impounded 600,000 guns. There are nearly 500 times that amount in the US right now. Banning anything would just create an instant black market that would henceforth be uncontrollable. Who's going to win that one?

Exactly, because we all saw how well the "War on drugs" played out, and that prohibition thing they tried.... The last thing we want/need is another foothold for the cartels to have in this country.

 

[500bbc]

I don’t know why people use that phrase “common sense” with gun control.. what does that even mean?

As far as I’m concerned the first part of the “common sense” would be removing the 1986 automatic weapons ban.

"Common sense" to those assholes means confiscation...

 

[Cdog]

 

[RitcheyRch]

This is all over the news today

http://ktla.com/2018/02/21/father-d...of-ammunition-found-in-temple-city-gun-cache/

Ponder is banned from owning a gun because of his previous 2001 felony convictions for possession of a machine gun and counterfeiting money, Becerra said at a news conference in downtown L.A.

State Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms investigators who raided the Ponder home were looking for four illegal firearms that Ponder had registered, the attorney general said.

They found 28 firearms and 66,000 rounds of ammunition. The cache included:

• 13 AR-15-style rifles
• 11 “ghost guns” with no serial number, meaning they can’t be traced
• two fully automatic machine guns
• several rounds of tracer ammunition

 

[Old Texan]

So I says to myself, what side should I be on based on folks in the entertainment industry......2 from each side.

Anti Gun- Madonna and Rosie O

Pro-Gun- Tom Selleck and Charlton Heston.
Argue that

 

[DaveC]

You read that whole thing and thats all you got from it?

Well we can use California as an example of how NOT to do it

Most of what we need is already on the books it just needs enforcement.

The rest is just bullshit

I don’t know why people use that phrase “common sense” with gun control.. what does that even mean?

As far as I’m concerned the first part of the “common sense” would be removing the 1986 automatic weapons ban.

 

[Go-Fly]

Here we are, one week out and all that is being talked about is guns in one form or another. There will be no lets look at it form all sides. It's all now about finding that one magic gun law that makes it all go away. Next it's the blame game, then off to the next mass shooting.