Another Mass Shooting In Las Vegas

Ownership of a auto-fire rifle or pistol is illegal without having been granted a license...very true. Also illegal to murder. Most citizens obey these laws. The question is if someone is willing to commit wholesale murder, do you seriously think a gun ban or law will stop them from committing the act?

^^^ Short answer NO and NO Gun bans never stop violent people

So, after 7 pages and 103 posts:
NO ONE STILL HAS A FUCKING CLUE ON HOW TO FIX, SLOW DOWN, OR STOP THE SHOOTINGS?

I have read all the blah blah blah about guns are not to blame BS but, the question remains:
WHY DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE BUTT STOCK, UNLIMITED SIZE MAGAZINE'S TO GO HUNTING, TO GO SHOOTING, TO PROTECT YOUR FAMILY?
the answer is: YOU DO NOT.
BETTER GUN CONTROL/SCREENINGS IS THE ANSWER

next time i go hunting to shoot a deer:
I will need a fucking machine gun or home made bomb to catch one.


CG Originally Posted by Copierguy0

There's this amazing thing called the Bill of Rights. You'll notice it's not called the Bill of Needs.

As long as I don't harm other people, you should not try to have government infringe on my rights. Likewise, you may have recreational activities that I find unpleasant, but I have no right to use government to force you to stop if your activity isn't harming anyone.

It’s not going to be fixed. Every other November, Americans go to the polls and vote for the entirely foreseeable and likely partially preventable slaughter of 60,000 or so of their fellow citizens. It’s what the people want. They don’t care about safety, that is crystal clear. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

And it's painfully obvious and crystal clear you mention nothing of the unarmed millions whose lives were forfeited when they could not fight back. Why do you not mention current day Venezuela, Iran 2011? Iran 1979? North Korea in the last 70 years? Current and past Africa? All of the Middle East in the last 50 years? The Kurds? Russia and her satellites in the Stalin era? Pol Pot? Please tell me why.

If gun bans are so effective, then why are there large numbers of shooting deaths in Chicago weekly. They have the strongest gun control in the nation. All gun control does is make law abiding citizens targets.

If gun bans are so effective, then why are there large numbers of shooting deaths in Chicago weekly. They have the strongest gun control in the nation. All gun control does is make law abiding citizens targets. Originally Posted by huskerred

According to who?

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Info on Chicago and a whole bunch of other gun statistics. Enjoy.

This is the kind of gun that was being used when the 2nd amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791. so, get off your high horse about the 2nd amendment.



Loading and Firing a French Musket in the Age of Napoleon 1791-1815. Success or failure of Napoleon rested in the hands of his soldiers. ... The musket used throughout this time was the 1777 pattern French Infantry musket.

http://www.militaryheritage.com/load...enchmusket.htm



http://www.militaryheritage.com/musket4.htm

CG Originally Posted by Copierguy0

I'm not sure how the sophistication of weapons then vs today matters in the argument?

To be clear, the only difference in the Vegas head line would be that he aquired his guns illegally.

He would still have got them.

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Info on Chicago and a whole bunch of other gun statistics. Enjoy. Originally Posted by DentBick

Thanks for the link but it didn't answer my question.

Now-- before I say this.. let me say that I have no problem with gun ownership...

But as to the argument of "if they are illegal, then he would have just gotten them illegally". Why are there few if any reports of mass shootings in places where guns aren't legal? Hasn't been a mass shooting in Australia since the one that prompted the gun banning. When was the last mass shooting in Sweden? London? For a civilized, first world nation, we certainly seem to have excessive numbers of mass shootings compared to other first world nations. Really, compared to many developing (and often violent) nations.

^^^ Only per the liberal media Australia has one of the highest crime rates per cap in the world , Sweden requires gun ownership ( standing army thing )
I wish the media would report FACTS to people.

^^^ Only per the liberal media Australia has one of the highest crime rates per cap in the world , Sweden requires gun ownership ( standing army thing )
I wish the media would report FACTS to people. Originally Posted by rexdutchman

I think you are confusing Sweden with Switzerland. And even in Switzerland, your statement that they "require gun ownership" is not exactly true.

http://factmyth.com/factoids/switzer...s-to-own-guns/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Switzerland

Chicago has very strict laws, but they have one of the highest gun murder rates in nation. The Dems blame Indiana because people can go over to that state to buy their weapons. Originally Posted by latinbreeze

There are places all over the US that you can visit to purchase a gun and a no one will give zero fucks about what your name is and what you about to use the gun for.

As we speak, gangs and cartels are trafficking guns into the US day by day. Hell, you can even go to a gun show and purchase a gun from a dealer who just really wants to make his bottom line.

Point is: Guns are easily accessible in this country. Revoke 2A and you'll see an increase on the gun sales in the streets.

Now-- before I say this.. let me say that I have no problem with gun ownership...

But as to the argument of "if they are illegal, then he would have just gotten them illegally". Why are there few if any reports of mass shootings in places where guns aren't legal? Hasn't been a mass shooting in Australia since the one that prompted the gun banning. When was the last mass shooting in Sweden? London? For a civilized, first world nation, we certainly seem to have excessive numbers of mass shootings compared to other first world nations. Really, compared to many developing (and often violent) nations. Originally Posted by Grace Preston

Right, they just bomb airports, cafes, shopping malls, theaters, and soccer games...or knife attacks, or run over people with trucks. Evil ALWAYS finds a way...it will be with us always. Check out what's happening in Venezuela right now, the Iranians are teaching them how to control the entire unarmed population....just as they did their own in 2011. Question. What if the citizens of Iran had the right to bear arms in 2011? Do you think we would be worried about a nuclear armed Iran in the near future? I submit that the citizens of Iran would have made this problem a moot situation if they had gotten just a little help they pleaded for. The Obama administration missed the chance to nip this whole thing in the bud. Just how far could Nicolas Madero continue with his destiny of the destruction of Venezuela if the citizens were armed? Both of these situations cannot happen here, for the simple reason we have the firepower to stop it...granted by the Constitution as an unalienable right...let's not fetter it away looking at zoomed in microcosms of time.

I think you missed the first sentence-- the whole "I'm not against gun ownership" part. Because I'm not. I own guns and I've served in the military.

I'm only saying-- that a lot of arguments used by BOTH sides don't hold water.