Las Vegas Mass Casualty Attack

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,831
On another page, you said Australia did something that mattered. You know that's not true right? They bought back a third of their guns a long time ago and it had no material impact on gun murders. Now that could be because gun ownership roared right back and beyond where it was before.

I've listed them before and can do it again if you want - mass shooting after mass shooting after mass shooting - all people who should have never been able to legally buy guns but law enforcement didn't do their job. Its really difficult to justify adding new rules and legislation - especially if the benefits are murky at best - when you already don't enforce the ones you already have in place.

How many mass shootings have they had since 1996? I can’t find any...

Some interesting stats here
https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
How many mass shootings have they had since 1996? I can’t find any...

Some interesting stats here
https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html

But India has 46m guns and zero mass shooters...that can’t be right because...guns.

Comparing our society to others and trying to extrapolate is shaky business. We are a violent society. We probably have the highest per capita domestic violence murders in the world. We probably have one of the highest suicide rates.

Those two things factor greatly into gunnd with stats. Take all guns away and those numbers won’t chsnge, only the methods.

But you seem to favor gun restrictions. Please share what you would ban and why.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,530
I have always had the understanding that Switzerland had the highest rate of private gun ownership in Europe because their milita required it. And the lowest gun murder rates? Honestly not certain, but thought that was close to accurate. ( But Fact check me)

But....guns!

Is it possible there are other root causes?
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
It’s pretty inexcusable that Sweden has not yet banned hand grenades. :rolleyes:

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/6/trump-right-immigration-gang-violence-sweden-finds/


Private business has the right to refuse to sell firearms to persons under 21. I think government laws banning such sales are unconstitutional 2nd amendment violations.

There is long standing legal precedent recognizing the age of adulthood to be 18. 18 year old males were identified in early federal law as “militia members”. 18 year old males are also required to register for the draft. Laws preventing them from acquiring firearms are absolutely a violation of their 2A rights whether you believe 18 yos are “mature enough” to own guns or not. If you advocate raising the age in this matter you should advocate for a Constitutional Amendment to establish it so.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/7/florida-gun-shop-owner-refused-sell-cruz-ar-15/
 

BuzzStone

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,489
Location
Landrum SC
There is long standing legal precedent recognizing the age of adulthood to be 18. 18 year old males were identified in early federal law as “militia members”. 18 year old males are also required to register for the draft. Laws preventing them from acquiring firearms are absolutely a violation of their 2A rights whether you believe 18 yos are “mature enough” to own guns or not. If you advocate raising the age in this matter you should advocate for a Constitutional Amendment to establish it so.

Just because there is a long standing precedent does not make it right. Advancements in medical technology have proven that the human brain does not fully develop until about the age of 25. The fact is that the human brain is still right in the middle of critical development at the age of 18 with key factors like Risk Determination being developed later in life.
 

collegeballfan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,694
The court rightfully upheld the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. You can read the full opinion here where he addresses Breyer’s “interest-balancing” argument. Quite frankly these liberal “this is what I think the Constitution should mean now because this is what I feel” type of judges need to be eliminated off the court as rapidly as possible.

Here’s Scalia’s majority opinion summary:


64 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER Opinion of the Court
In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful fire arm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the Dis trict must permit him to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home.
***
We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns, see supra, at 54–55, and n. 26. But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amend ment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.
We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.
It is so ordered.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Thanks for the help. Note that Scalia specifically addresses "...handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. "
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Just because there is a long standing precedent does not make it right. Advancements in medical technology have proven that the human brain does not fully develop until about the age of 25. The fact is that the human brain is still right in the middle of critical development at the age of 18 with key factors like Risk Determination being developed later in life.

Just because you do not like it does not make it less unconstitutional.

Based on your logic pot should never be legalized for anyone under age 25 btw. Alcohol consumption before age 25 also. Pot and alcohol consumption are not recognized in our bill of rights either.
 
Last edited:

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
It’s also stupid to stipulate an 18yo is a threat to commit mass murder with a gun because his brain won’t fully develop for another 7 years.

Normal 18 yos are fully capable of recognizing murder is wrong and a crime.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
So are 15 year olds, are you suggesting that they should be allowed to purchase firearms as well?

Smh.

Are 15 yos required to register for the draft? Are they generally allowed to leave home and live as adults in any state? Has federal law ever stipulated the age of sb adult to be 15?
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
Thanks for the help. Note that Scalia specifically addresses "...handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. "
I suppose you failed to read the part about any lawful fire arm or possibly misinterpreted what it actually said. Here I provided it again:

64 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER Opinion of the Court
In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful fire arm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.

Prohibiting citizens from possessing lawful firearms is a violation of the 2nd Amendment. You don’t have to pull the old “I use it for hunting” alibi which is total BS by the way. The basic litmus test for whether or not you can have it is:
A. Is it a lawful firearm?
B. Is it operable for immediate self-defense?

This rules out machine guns, nuclear weapons, hand grenades, a howitzer, a javelin, etc. It does permit semi-automatic weapons that has everyone all in a lather over. Here’s a couple of ideas:

A. Why don’t we start incarcerating criminals? Take guns out of the hands of violent felons, etc.
B. Take the parts of the Youth PROMISE Act, throw out the bad parts ie ignoring juvenile criminal activity & develop the good parts, ie school vouchers, working to rebuild families, etc.
C. Investigate whether or not psychiatric drugs are a contributing factor in these people going on rampages. It appears to be at Parkland, Sandy Hook, Columbine, and many others. An extremely high percentage if you look into it. Why is there no media coverage of this- Pharmceutical companies and BIG POLITICAL donations to both sides of the aisle.

These items would actually have an impact. This other grandstanding is just politically motivated garbage & in my opinion you’re either naive or disingenuous if you believe it to be impactful. There’s plenty of places in the US where there’s strict gun laws & it has no effect other than making it more dangerous for law abiding citizens to live.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
http://time.com/5171653/marco-rubio-large-capacity-magazine-parkland-shooting/

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/report-parkland-shooter-did-not-use-high-capacity-magazines/

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article202486304.html

It’s truly concerning when ignorant politicians are contemplating legislative action through ignorance. These morons have probably never held an AR15, or standard 30 round magazine, much less fired one. But they are knowledgeable and wise enough to make laws concerning them...smh.

The last 2 reports allege Cruz utilized 10 round magazines, not standard 30 round or even 20 round mags because they supposedly fit in his duffel bag better. Their source is a Florida State Rep, a Democrat, who also alleges Cruz’s AR was low quality and “breaking apart” as it malfunctioned.

I’m willing to bet she’s even more ignorant on ARs and probably wrong to some degree and maybe on all counts.

Friggin morons. Including that weak resolved panderer Rubio.
 

awbuzz

Helluva Manager
Staff member
Messages
12,104
Location
Marietta, GA
A. Why don’t we start incarcerating criminals? Take guns out of the hands of violent felons, etc.
B. Take the parts of the Youth PROMISE Act, throw out the bad parts ie ignoring juvenile criminal activity & develop the good parts, ie school vouchers, working to rebuild families, etc.


These ^^ two alone would take a big notch out of crime and "street violence".
 
Top