HitsRus;1875117 wrote:The more I read about the meticulous planning and attention to detail that the murderer went thru in carrying this out, the more ridiculous seems the discussion about gun control. This guy was going to kill a lot of people, and he would have done it one way or the other. To suggest this is a result of a "gun problem" is superfluous and disingenuous. Trying to advance that political agenda in light of this is like dancing on the graves of the victims.

Gosh it is hard to dance on graves covered with gun shells. Why is it so horrible to discuss methods to prevent or limit the chance of another gun massacre when one happens. No one says we are dancing on the graves of the victims of a plane crash or a building fire when we discuss causes and methods of prevention when these catastrophes happen. NRA, the Congressional cowards they control, and a herd of gun nuts constantly use this excuse to frustrate reform and cost more lives.

like_that;1875017 wrote:Said, please tell us more about what you are learning from browncafe.com. Must be some very intelligent discussions over there.

You are more than capable of seeing what the "browncafe" is. Quit being so lazy. Most of the discussions over there are just like here, random forum trollers/posters.

justincredible;1875036 wrote:I



I'm a threat to no one, why should I turn in my firearms on the whims of politicians looking to secure votes? What is the benefit to society by taking my guns or throwing me in jail if I refuse to comply with a clearly unconstitutional act?

Why are explosives illegal? What happened in the Vegas shooting was indiscriminate, correct?

salto;1875143 wrote:What happened in the Vegas shooting was indiscriminate, correct?

Ultimately, anyone who answers yes or no to this is being presumptuous. That we don't know the motive or targeting is not grounds to suggest there were none. It's only grounds for suggesting that we don't know whether or not there were.

iclfan2;1875132 wrote:You can also shoot similarly by using your thumb tucked into a belt loop, or teach yourself how to do it with your shoulder. The stock just makes it easier. Also the guy had an hour, banning it wouldn't have stopped it. However the stock also serves no real purpose so if you want to ban it then fine. It'll pretend make people feel safer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's keeping the government from passing safety regulations that guns must be engineered with internal mechanical safeties that you cant operate it that way? It can be done. There's ways to make sure you can't operate it by jerry-rigging it.

salto;1875143 wrote:Why are explosives illegal?

Probably because they are considered inhumane and "unsporting" for hunting/fishing and are not effective for self-defense, among other reasons.

kizer permanente;1875146 wrote:What's keeping the government from passing safety regulations that guns must be engineered with internal mechanical safeties that you cant operate it that way? It can be done.

That's sounds like a hell of a plan, however, the black market will never go away nor will criminal minds.

kizer permanente;1875146 wrote:There's ways to make sure you can't operate it by jerry-rigging it.

Guns are so simplistic to work on or even build your own it's virtually impossible to extinguish modifications of a gun. It doesn't matter what you do with guns a criminal will find ways to alter them for their particular needs. Smart guns are not an option, that will be decoded as well.

With that said, what is a realistic solution to stop mass killings from happening? These types of deranged individuals will find a way to carry out their deeds one way or another, wouldn't matter if guns existed or not, their ways will always result in a mass of innocent lives lost. Penalties for these crimes need to be so harsh that a monkey wouldn't do it, unfortunately a high percentage of these cowards claim their own lives before the laws of the land can punish them. We live in different times, guns are not the problem.

You know, first of all, I hate the fact that this should even have to cross somebody's mind... but....

Watching the footage of this, in particular when Aldean left the stage: the first thing that happens is that they turn on the stadium lights or flood lights, right over the majority of the crowd. It might have been an automatic procedural thing when a star leaves the stage or it might have been just a reflexive action in the midst of confusion. It might have been so that people could easily identify the exits. I don't know.
But the fact crosses my mind that it would only serve to help an active shooter easily see people or see the greatest group of people.
So, since shootings have occurred now at concerts in England and now here in the US, maybe that should be something that is planned for the future - how to manage the lights. Keep the lights dimmer, not so bright, not helping an active shooter to identify where bodies are.
I don't know, maybe that wouldn't help a thing either :/

salto;1875142 wrote:You are more than capable of seeing what the "browncafe" is. Quit being so lazy. Most of the discussions over there are just like here, random forum trollers/posters.

You misspelled 'thread', on top of being on the wrong side of the issue. fwiw

Michael Moore has laid out a proposal for a 28th amendment. Good luck with that.

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/353886-michael-moore-proposes-28th-amendment-to-regulate-gun-ownership

Dumbest shit I've ever seen. Why is this fat slob still a thing. Waiver from a wife to buy a gun?? LOL OK!!

The democrats have to tread carefully on gun control for the 2018 elections

My biggest problem with Gun Control conversations is that the media are literally gun retarded. They have no one working at a paper or magazine that knows shit about guns. So their opinions and headlines are so easily called out as wrong it makes the conversation impossible to even start. You have poor hillbillies that know 1000 times more about guns than these faux intellectuals.

justincredible;1875264 wrote:Michael Moore has laid out a proposal for a 28th amendment. Good luck with that.

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/353886-michael-moore-proposes-28th-amendment-to-regulate-gun-ownership

Yeah, that has no chance...
That's still better than what more WSJ Op-ed and now NYT writer Brett Stephens offered today, calling for a repeal of the 2nd Amendment. He is usually on the conservative side, but geesh on this one.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opinion/guns-second-amendment-nra.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

ptown_trojans_1;1875268 wrote:Yeah, that has no change.
That's still better than what more WSJ Op-ed and now NYT writer Brett Stephens offered today, calling for a repeal of the 2nd Amendment. He is usually on the conservative side, but geesh on this one.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opinion/guns-second-amendment-nra.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Stephens is their "conservative" write. The media is so lost.

isadore;1875265 wrote:

I wish you well on your quest to disarm America.

Repealing the 2nd accomplishes nothing without either also repealing the 4th or flat ignoring it. Wonder which the writer supports.

While I'm wondering, I'd like to know if he knows which of these two is the larger number over the last week - people killed and wounded illegally with firearms, or people successfully defending themselves in that same period with a firearm (hint: the answer is the latter, even this week).

justincredible;1875273 wrote:I wish you well on your quest to disarm America.

gosh a ruddies, nothing ventured nothing gained. We got the 3/5s, we got the 18th, the 2nd is next in our efforts to make a "more perfect union."

I hope they try it. Will guarantee republican reign for years.

source of the problem: a reactionary Supreme Court
Right wing courts gave us
Scott vs Sanford
Plessey vs Ferguson
and the death sentence for so many
DC vs Heller

Bio-Hazzzzard;1875184 wrote:That's sounds like a hell of a plan, however, the black market will never go away nor will criminal minds.




Guns are so simplistic to work on or even build your own it's virtually impossible to extinguish modifications of a gun. It doesn't matter what you do with guns a criminal will find ways to alter them for their particular needs. Smart guns are not an option, that will be decoded as well.

With that said, what is a realistic solution to stop mass killings from happening? These types of deranged individuals will find a way to carry out their deeds one way or another, wouldn't matter if guns existed or not, their ways will always result in a mass of innocent lives lost. Penalties for these crimes need to be so harsh that a monkey wouldn't do it, unfortunately a high percentage of these cowards claim their own lives before the laws of the land can punish them. We live in different times, guns are not the problem.

Sure it's always going to happen, but you don't need a cheap part that's easy to install available to help. What does that do?

isadore;1875290 wrote:source of the problem: a reactionary Supreme Court
Right wing courts gave us
Scott vs Sanford
Plessey vs Ferguson
and the death sentence for so many
DC vs Heller

You and your meme do not understand commas and grammar.

NRA urging new rules for bump stocks.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41519815

like_that;1875323 wrote:NRA urging new rules for bump stocks.

Amazing....so come up with practical and effective gun control ideas, and the right is perfectly reasonable.

gut;1875324 wrote:Amazing....so come up with practical and effective gun control ideas, and the right is perfectly reasonable.

Yeah, I still will believe it when I see it pass both Houses.
They didn't say they wanted them eliminated, just subject to additional regulations.
I'm guessing if the bills put forth suggest they will be banned, the NRA will come out against it and the bill will die.

Swap bump stocks with suppressors on the NFA list.