Thread: Jimmy Kimmel Comments on Guns Last Night

robslob - 10/3/2017 at 12:22 PM

"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html


[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]


Wis608 - 10/3/2017 at 12:32 PM

quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html


[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]


I said to my wife this morning about the Vegas shootings ,that the liberal's and liberal biased media will find some way to blame this on Trump and the republican party. Suprising, huh?


robslob - 10/3/2017 at 12:44 PM

quote:

I said to my wife this morning about the Vegas shootings ,that the liberal's and liberal biased media will find some way to blame this on Trump and the republican party. Suprising, huh?


If you are saying that many Democrats are responsible as well, I would agree with you. That doesn't change the fact that Trump "signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally." He needs to be called out for that. Thank You, Jimmy.


porkchopbob - 10/3/2017 at 12:59 PM

No one has done anything. But when you're in charge, like a head coach, you get the blame. And no one is expecting the Republicans-led House to do anything. Conservative media host and all around creep Bill O'Reilly has already claimed that getting mowed down at a concert is "the cost of freedom". Padded room escapee Alex Jones was quick to say, like Sandy Hook, the whole thing was scripted. So the knuckleheads who sleep with automatic weapons of mass slaughter under their pillow and care more about an embryo than a grown human standing in a crowd will make sure nothing happens in response to this tragedy.

But you go right on ahead and make Trump the victim here. I think we're all used to that.


Wis608 - 10/3/2017 at 04:14 PM

quote:
quote:

I said to my wife this morning about the Vegas shootings ,that the liberal's and liberal biased media will find some way to blame this on Trump and the republican party. Suprising, huh?


If you are saying that many Democrats are responsible as well, I would agree with you. That doesn't change the fact that Trump "signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally." He needs to be called out for that. Thank You, Jimmy.


Did not say that, I just knew it was coming. It was expected. I am surprised he has not been blamed for the Hurricanes as of late.


Wis608 - 10/3/2017 at 04:18 PM

quote:
No one has done anything. But when you're in charge, like a head coach, you get the blame. And no one is expecting the Republicans-led House to do anything. Conservative media host and all around creep Bill O'Reilly has already claimed that getting mowed down at a concert is "the cost of freedom". Padded room escapee Alex Jones was quick to say, like Sandy Hook, the whole thing was scripted. So the knuckleheads who sleep with automatic weapons of mass slaughter under their pillow and care more about an embryo than a grown human standing in a crowd will make sure nothing happens in response to this tragedy.

But you go right on ahead and make Trump the victim here. I think we're all used to that.


Did not make him a victim, don't assume things, we know what that leads to. I could careless either way if people beat him up in the media .Just knew it was coming, kind of par for the course.


BoytonBrother - 10/3/2017 at 04:21 PM

You knew it was coming? Well thank you Nostradamus. Did you figure that one out all by yourself? That's like a liberal saying, "I predicted conservatives would oppose Obamacare."


porkchopbob - 10/3/2017 at 04:43 PM

quote:
Did not make him a victim, don't assume things, we know what that leads to. I could careless either way if people beat him up in the media .Just knew it was coming, kind of par for the course.



So you pivoting a tragedy to Trump receiving blame isn't making him a victim (of false blame)? Because that's exactly what you said, I didn't have to assume anything.


Rydethwind - 10/3/2017 at 06:31 PM

Some things change and some things never do, have not been here for 2 years and everything is the same the same people who just don't understand the second amendment and what it is about would punish 299 million people for what one idiot sick SOB did! is it tragic of course ,am I pissed off at this idiot yes! but am I going to want stricter gun control because of it ?hell no there is NOTHING you or anyone else can do to stop someone hell bent on doing something like this but remember this is not a normal person the rest of the country is ,meanwhile 50,000 die from alcohol and tobacco and you sit there saying nothing while smoking and drinking......


BoytonBrother - 10/3/2017 at 06:52 PM

quote:
would punish 299 million people


You would feel punished? Awww, it'll be ok.


jkeller - 10/3/2017 at 06:54 PM

quote:
Some things change and some things never do, have not been here for 2 years and everything is the same the same people who just don't understand the second amendment and what it is about would punish 299 million people for what one idiot sick SOB did! is it tragic of course ,am I pissed off at this idiot yes! but am I going to want stricter gun control because of it ?hell no there is NOTHING you or anyone else can do to stop someone hell bent on doing something like this but remember this is not a normal person the rest of the country is ,meanwhile 50,000 die from alcohol and tobacco and you sit there saying nothing while smoking and drinking......


You are cordially invited to go **** yourself.


porkchopbob - 10/3/2017 at 06:58 PM

quote:
Some things change and some things never do, have not been here for 2 years and everything is the same the same people who just don't understand the second amendment and what it is about would punish 299 million people for what one idiot sick SOB did! is it tragic of course ,am I pissed off at this idiot yes! but am I going to want stricter gun control because of it ?hell no there is NOTHING you or anyone else can do to stop someone hell bent on doing something like this but remember this is not a normal person the rest of the country is ,meanwhile 50,000 die from alcohol and tobacco and you sit there saying nothing while smoking and drinking......


Nothing worse than when you're walking down the street and some nut job sprays the crowd with rounds of smokes and beers. Good point!

But you're right, there is no way to amend the Constitution or interpret it in response to a repeated cycle of slaughter. Especially when other countries manage to retain gun ownership with restrictions yet without repeated deaths of innocent citizens. Let's just file this incident away until the next one so people can legally own military weapons. **** happens, you know?


BoytonBrother - 10/3/2017 at 07:23 PM

quote:
hell no there is NOTHING you or anyone else can do to stop someone hell bent on doing something like this


LOL, what a fool. You meant to say "there's nothing you or anyone can do, that isn't offensive to me, to stop something like this".


BoytonBrother - 10/3/2017 at 07:44 PM

I would love for Rydethewind to stick around and answer some questions but something tells me he doesn't have enough wits to back up his thoughts. My question for the anti-gun control crowd - if he is a "sick idiot maniac" and "not a normal person", as Rydethewind states, then why let these types buy a gun? Shouldn't a "sick idiot maniac" be forced to take on greater risks to carry out his evil, like research and buy bomb-making materials so the FBI might get to him first, or buy guns on the black market and risk getting robbed? Why should a "sick idiot maniac" simply fill out a form and be handed a gun? I just picture our small towns or row home communities where everyone knows one another, and the local gun shop worker seeing his deranged bipolar neighbor coming in to buy a gun - "Dag gummit, this sick idiot maniac is not worthy of operating a firearm, but here you go!"


Rydethwind - 10/3/2017 at 08:55 PM

I am right here ask away but don't ask if you don't want the truth...


Rydethwind - 10/3/2017 at 08:59 PM

Boyton.. do you or anyone you know walk around with a sign hanging around your neck saying you are a sicko idiot? many people live law abiding lives then one day a crisis or illness makes them snap or loose their sanity how can any law stop that from happening? if they don't have guns they use trucks, or fertilizer bombs or whatever... that was my point and yet still no one says anything about 1200 lives each day lost to tobacco now that is insanity!


goldtop - 10/3/2017 at 09:43 PM

quote:
Boyton.. do you or anyone you know walk around with a sign hanging around your neck saying you are a sicko idiot? many people live law abiding lives then one day a crisis or illness makes them snap or loose their sanity how can any law stop that from happening? if they don't have guns they use trucks, or fertilizer bombs or whatever... that was my point and yet still no one says anything about 1200 lives each day lost to tobacco now that is insanity!


Boy talk about a disconnected....those who die from tobacco choose to smoke it and there is more information available to tell them not to....

I do believe less people in the US smoke now then when I was a kid....most likely from being educated about its hazards...but the hazards of another who takes lives doesn't bother you....1.3 killed in wars 1.5 killed by gun violence it not one incident

PS no one wants your hunting rifle....but not one person needs a military grade weapon other than a soldier in our military


porkchopbob - 10/3/2017 at 09:57 PM

quote:
if they don't have guns they use trucks, or fertilizer bombs or whatever... that was my point and yet still no one says anything about 1200 lives each day lost to tobacco now that is insanity!


Filling your own lungs with smoke is a choice, unlike getting shot to death by someone else at a concert. Kind of insane you're comparing the two.

It's true that every time you leave your house there is a chance that someone else can take your life, intentionally or accidentally. We have many regulations on dangerous items and substances to keep us and our neighbors safe. That's why automatic guns are rare and rarely used in crimes - they are strictly regulated. Heavily regulating and controlling semi-automatic weapons would likely have the same effect.


BoytonBrother - 10/3/2017 at 10:17 PM

quote:
Boyton.. do you or anyone you know walk around with a sign hanging around your neck saying you are a sicko idiot? many people live law abiding lives then one day a crisis or illness makes them snap or loose their sanity how can any law stop that from happening?


Out police forces conduct psychological exams as the last part of the recruitment process to determine if they are fit to be a cop and handle a weapon. Why do they do that? We can't prevent mass shootings but we CAN decrease the frequency of them and the number of fatalities in each.

quote:
if they don't have guns they use trucks, or fertilizer bombs or whatever...


A truck couldn't get to that crowd, nor would it have killed 58 and injure 200 even if it could. Can you please address this aspect? It's about making it as difficult as possible for them to execute their evil - it shouldn't be so easy and risk-free. And you might want to use a different analogy to make your point, instead of an illegal WMD like fertilizer bombs. That doesn't help your cause.

quote:
that was my point and yet still no one says anything about 1200 lives each day lost to tobacco now that is insanity!


You never heard any anti-smoking campaigns? Really?

Look, the bottom line is that I have a deep respect for a firearm. I love guns and I'm grateful that I live in a country where I can own one to protect my family. I respect them so much, that I think only the best Americans deserve the privilege of owning one (and yes, I think it should be a privilege, not a right). Only our nation's best law-abiding, responsible, sane, good people deserve one. The local idiot who doesn't know how to shoot, can't reload, doesn't understand the safety clip, leaves it unlocked, etc......DOESN'T DESERVE ONE. Anyone who wants to own should first prove their responsibility, safety, criminal history, and mental stability. If you can't prove those 4 things, then why are we giving one to them? Because some are afraid they won't be able to prove it, so we give them to everyone so nobody feels bad and has to step up. And these same people are against participation trophies for kids sports.


OriginalGoober - 10/3/2017 at 11:29 PM

Jimmy could do his show from Chicago to raise the issue about out of control gun recklessness day after day until some results are shown. This is as big if not bigger issue than a lone wolf shooter. It would also highlight the issue that most criminals dont care about gun laws.

[Edited on 10/3/2017 by OriginalGoober]


BIGV - 10/3/2017 at 11:58 PM

quote:
quote:
would punish 299 million people


You would feel punished? Awww, it'll be ok.


Condescension is such an effective tool when communicating with someone whose opinion you disagree with.

A) True
B) False


2112 - 10/4/2017 at 02:30 AM

quote:
Jimmy could do his show from Chicago to raise the issue about out of control gun recklessness day after day until some results are shown. This is as big if not bigger issue than a lone wolf shooter. It would also highlight the issue that most criminals dont care about gun laws.

[Edited on 10/3/2017 by OriginalGoober]


Funny how gun lovers like to talk about Chicago, pointing out strict gun laws and lots of gun violence. The problem is that Chicago used to have strict gun laws, but they don't anymore. Chicago used to ban handguns, which is why they got the reputation for strict gun laws. But the Supreme Court overturned that law several years ago. In addition, Illinois was the last state to allow concealed carry just a couple years ago. I'll give you one guess as to when the spike in gun violence started.

http://www.politifact.com/illinois/statements/2017/oct/03/sarah-huckabee-sa nders/chicago-toughest-gun-control-claim-shot-full-holes/


BoytonBrother - 10/4/2017 at 03:05 AM

quote:
[Condescension is such an effective tool when communicating with someone whose opinion you disagree with.

A) True
B) False


You would know. not interested in your pointless quiz.


BoytonBrother - 10/4/2017 at 03:07 AM

quote:
It would also highlight the issue that most criminals dont care about gun laws.


Listen to dumb and dumber trying to make a point, how adorable! He thinks this is about gangs! LOL!!!!!!


adhill58 - 10/4/2017 at 01:21 PM

The people that say, "you will never be able to prevent someone who snapped from hurting people," are exactly right. HOWEVER, why then do we leave the most common and simple way of doing that on a large scale so easily accessible?

Almost anybody can figure out how to point a gun and squeeze the trigger (it's just like a video game). Not that many (in a fit of mental insanity, especially) can go through all the steps of building a successful bomb on a truck.

But, if someone flips out and they already own multiple machine guns, it is pretty easy to go out and hurt a lot of people.

We have had bombings, but we do not have an epidemic of bombings. We have had car attacks, but we do not have an epidemic of car attacks. It is hard to hurt 600 people in an acid attack. It is hard to hurt 600 people in a knife attack. It would be hard to hurt 600 people by throwing hammers out of a 32nd story window before the cops can kill you. There a very few ways to do this much damage while you are committing suicide without machine guns.

Reasonable gun policy is not the "beginning of confiscating all guns" anymore than security checks at airports is the end of airplanes. It is simply doing something to address a deadly problem, INSTEAD OF DOING NOTHING.

There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" and we can continue to debate what was meant by that, but suggesting that James Madison was talking about machine guns is pretty flimsy.

Giving up something that you enjoy for the betterment of society is called civilization...



BoytonBrother - 10/4/2017 at 01:28 PM

Perfectly stated adhill. Unfortunately there are too many who are very sensitive and afraid when it comes to wanting and needing firearms. You would think that we would all want only our best men and women to have them, and not the town fools. But too many believe the local idiots with half a brain should have military assault weapons - that's what America is - we are not better than that.


robslob - 10/4/2017 at 01:51 PM

quote:

The people that say, "you will never be able to prevent someone who snapped from hurting people," are exactly right. HOWEVER, why then do we leave the most common and simple way of doing that on a large scale so easily accessible?

Almost anybody can figure out how to point a gun and squeeze the trigger (it's just like a video game). Not that many (in a fit of mental insanity, especially) can go through all the steps of building a successful bomb on a truck.

But, if someone flips out and they already own multiple machine guns, it is pretty easy to go out and hurt a lot of people.

We have had bombings, but we do not have an epidemic of bombings. We have had car attacks, but we do not have an epidemic of car attacks. It is hard to hurt 600 people in an acid attack. It is hard to hurt 600 people in a knife attack. It would be hard to hurt 600 people by throwing hammers out of a 32nd story window before the cops can kill you. There a very few ways to do this much damage while you are committing suicide without machine guns.

Reasonable gun policy is not the "beginning of confiscating all guns" anymore than security checks at airports is the end of airplanes. It is simply doing something to address a deadly problem, INSTEAD OF DOING NOTHING.

There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" and we can continue to debate what was meant by that, but suggesting that James Madison was talking about machine guns is pretty flimsy.

Giving up something that you enjoy for the betterment of society is called civilization...


That's a completely rational assessment of the issue. THANK YOU.


BrerRabbit - 10/4/2017 at 04:26 PM

You mean I have to give up my bazookas?


Sang - 10/4/2017 at 05:18 PM

quote:
quote:
Jimmy could do his show from Chicago to raise the issue about out of control gun recklessness day after day until some results are shown. This is as big if not bigger issue than a lone wolf shooter. It would also highlight the issue that most criminals dont care about gun laws.

[Edited on 10/3/2017 by OriginalGoober]


Funny how gun lovers like to talk about Chicago, pointing out strict gun laws and lots of gun violence. The problem is that Chicago used to have strict gun laws, but they don't anymore. Chicago used to ban handguns, which is why they got the reputation for strict gun laws. But the Supreme Court overturned that law several years ago. In addition, Illinois was the last state to allow concealed carry just a couple years ago. I'll give you one guess as to when the spike in gun violence started.

http://www.politifact.com/illinois/statements/2017/oct/03/sarah-huckabee-sa nders/chicago-toughest-gun-control-claim-shot-full-holes/



On top of that, articles in the Chicago papers today talk about the fact that most of the guns found in Chicago are from red states that have lax gun laws - mostly Indiana and Wisconsin, but also Mississippi. Sixty percent come from those states, and 40% come from the Chicago burbs. In Illinois you must have a FOID card, and must pass training to get a concealed carry license. (Not that the gangs abide by this). I will try to find the articles to post later.


BoytonBrother - 10/4/2017 at 07:24 PM

Those who bring up Chicago when discussing mass shootings and gun control are flat out stupid. How one can relate gang violence to mentally ill terrorists legally buying WMD's is beyond me.


KCJimmy - 10/4/2017 at 09:18 PM

quote:
...How one can relate gang violence to mentally ill terrorists legally buying WMD's is beyond me.
You are right because one kills A WHOLE LOT MORE people than the other every year.

Or I guess if I wanted to reply to your post using your demented logic I should have said, "Oh, so you are ok with gang violence?"

And BTW.. At least the Ryder makes coherent points. I was joking about your drinking so early in the day but now I am starting to wonder.


Jerry - 10/4/2017 at 09:34 PM

quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.




Jerry - 10/4/2017 at 09:38 PM

quote:
quote:
if they don't have guns they use trucks, or fertilizer bombs or whatever... that was my point and yet still no one says anything about 1200 lives each day lost to tobacco now that is insanity!


Filling your own lungs with smoke is a choice, unlike getting shot to death by someone else at a concert. Kind of insane you're comparing the two.

It's true that every time you leave your house there is a chance that someone else can take your life, intentionally or accidentally. We have many regulations on dangerous items and substances to keep us and our neighbors safe. That's why automatic guns are rare and rarely used in crimes - they are strictly regulated. Heavily regulating and controlling semi-automatic weapons would likely have the same effect.


You've never heard of "second hand smoke"?


porkchopbob - 10/4/2017 at 09:54 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
if they don't have guns they use trucks, or fertilizer bombs or whatever... that was my point and yet still no one says anything about 1200 lives each day lost to tobacco now that is insanity!


Filling your own lungs with smoke is a choice, unlike getting shot to death by someone else at a concert. Kind of insane you're comparing the two.

It's true that every time you leave your house there is a chance that someone else can take your life, intentionally or accidentally. We have many regulations on dangerous items and substances to keep us and our neighbors safe. That's why automatic guns are rare and rarely used in crimes - they are strictly regulated. Heavily regulating and controlling semi-automatic weapons would likely have the same effect.


You've never heard of "second hand smoke"?


Are you trying to make my point for me?

We regulate smoking. Heavily. After it was proved to be a health risk to people who couldn't object (often young children in smoke-filled homes who were acquiring asthma) smoking areas have shrunk over the past few decades. There are local ordinances banning smoking from restaurants and public places, airplanes, hospitals, etc. There are televised ad campaigns and Federally mandated warnings on cigarette packaging. People went after the tobacco companies and their lobbyists, and it worked. After a steady effort to find solutions to the effects of smoking, if you want to smoke today, it is largely at your own risk. But you know what? - you can still smoke, no one took peoples' smokes away!

So yeah, everyone went to bat to stop innocent people from developing asthma, emphysema, bronchitis. Maybe we should try this with highly dangerous semi-automatic weapons that have been used to repeatedly murder large numbers of innocent people.

[Edited on 10/4/2017 by porkchopbob]


Jerry - 10/4/2017 at 10:01 PM

quote:
The people that say, "you will never be able to prevent someone who snapped from hurting people," are exactly right. HOWEVER, why then do we leave the most common and simple way of doing that on a large scale so easily accessible?

Almost anybody can figure out how to point a gun and squeeze the trigger (it's just like a video game). Not that many (in a fit of mental insanity, especially) can go through all the steps of building a successful bomb on a truck.

But, if someone flips out and they already own multiple machine guns, it is pretty easy to go out and hurt a lot of people.

We have had bombings, but we do not have an epidemic of bombings. We have had car attacks, but we do not have an epidemic of car attacks. It is hard to hurt 600 people in an acid attack. It is hard to hurt 600 people in a knife attack. It would be hard to hurt 600 people by throwing hammers out of a 32nd story window before the cops can kill you. There a very few ways to do this much damage while you are committing suicide without machine guns.

Reasonable gun policy is not the "beginning of confiscating all guns" anymore than security checks at airports is the end of airplanes. It is simply doing something to address a deadly problem, INSTEAD OF DOING NOTHING.

There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" and we can continue to debate what was meant by that, but suggesting that James Madison was talking about machine guns is pretty flimsy.

Giving up something that you enjoy for the betterment of society is called civilization...





What machine guns are you talking about? If he had some then he had either gone through almost a year of multiple background checks, license checks, fees, fingerprinting, and very costly transfer fees.

Misinformation is one thing that goes rampant after an incident like this. There have been no reports of machine guns being used. There are reports of an aftermarket item called a SlideFire. This effectively makes the rifle push forward against your finger with forward recoil from the stock. The rifle can then be fired at it's cyclic rate, if you practice with it for a while. It does not make the rifle a machine gun or an assault rifle. To me, it's just a way to burn through ammo. It's not effective of putting rounds on target, but it does help you spend more money on ammo.

The shooter was from 900 to 1200 feet away from where the bullets hit, he wasn't aiming at anyone in particular, just doing a "spray and pray" in my opinion.

Now, for a question. did the Founding Fathers set up the 1st Amendment for TV, Radio, Movies, DVD, CD, VHS, cassette, photography, internet, or for Facebook, Snap-chat, Google, Instagram, and other social media venues? It's about your comment on James Madison.


2112 - 10/4/2017 at 10:05 PM

quote:
quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.






Here you go:

Http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun -checks-people-mental-n727221


porkchopbob - 10/4/2017 at 10:16 PM

quote:
Misinformation is one thing that goes rampant after an incident like this. There have been no reports of machine guns being used. There are reports of an aftermarket item called a SlideFire. This effectively makes the rifle push forward against your finger with forward recoil from the stock. The rifle can then be fired at it's cyclic rate, if you practice with it for a while. It does not make the rifle a machine gun or an assault rifle. To me, it's just a way to burn through ammo. It's not effective of putting rounds on target, but it does help you spend more money on ammo.

The shooter was from 900 to 1200 feet away from where the bullets hit, he wasn't aiming at anyone in particular, just doing a "spray and pray" in my opinion.



This is kind of the point. Automatics are heavily regulated because they are very dangerous. Semiautomatics are not as heavily regulated, but he purchased a legal device that made it more like an automatic. So why bother regulating Automatics when this device is legal? Oh, the shooter wasn't doing target practice in a crowd of 22,000 people? No sh1t? Existing regulation contradicts itself and it fatally failed hundreds of people.


Jerry - 10/4/2017 at 10:20 PM

quote:
quote:
Misinformation is one thing that goes rampant after an incident like this. There have been no reports of machine guns being used. There are reports of an aftermarket item called a SlideFire. This effectively makes the rifle push forward against your finger with forward recoil from the stock. The rifle can then be fired at it's cyclic rate, if you practice with it for a while. It does not make the rifle a machine gun or an assault rifle. To me, it's just a way to burn through ammo. It's not effective of putting rounds on target, but it does help you spend more money on ammo.

The shooter was from 900 to 1200 feet away from where the bullets hit, he wasn't aiming at anyone in particular, just doing a "spray and pray" in my opinion.



This is kind of the point. Automatics are heavily regulated because they are very dangerous. Semiautomatics are not as heavily regulated, but he purchased a legal device that made it more like an automatic. So why bother regulating Automatics when this device is legal? Oh, the shooter wasn't doing target practice in a crowd of 22,000 people? No sh1t? Existing regulation contradicts itself and it fatally failed hundreds of people.


Calm down before you pop a blood vessel. You ain't getting any younger ya know.


Rydethwind - 10/4/2017 at 10:22 PM

This may get long but I really want to give you the truth about alcohol and tobacco and guns , dead is dead when someone drinks I am sure they are not thinking of going on a drive and killing people yet it happens now using anti gun thinking we should ban alcohol? right but we all know it will not happen it was tried and failed look up prohibition if you are not informed on it.... Tobacco kills others as well second hand smoke has killed many thousands of people who grew up in smoking homes again it was not done on purpose but still these people are dead yet tobacco still is sold to kill more remember dead is dead.. the method does not really matter how about automobiles?

My point is this we can not always control the things that happen to us and others not matter what laws we pass or make, the guns used in Chicago are illegal guns over 90% are and they are used by criminals !!!! NO law you make pass or whatever are going to obey that law that is why they are criminals it is what they do.

Sick people will do what they do no law will stop one from committing a crime if they have it in their minds to do so because they do not think they are right.... what law will stop anyone who is not committed or was previously committed .... and as it is now committed people can NOT buy a gun.

The second amendment is NOT about hunting or target shooting it is a fail safe for the American people to have the means to take back their Government in the event it become corrupt and tries to do away with the rights guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights . The founding fathers felt this was as important as any other right and it is there to protect all of us but we as a Nation have grown lazy and uniformed and we have grown reliant on the Government and police force to do everything for us and the world of technology and media just make these sick bastards into stars and martyrs...the only thing that I believe will help this problem is education about guns and people being responsible with guns, other than that please tell me what law can be passed that would stop any one of the last 10 idiots with guns.

also almost every day some with a gun helps or stops someone else from hurting another person with a gun, it happens all the time yet where is that news on the 6.00 o clock report?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/25/us/tennessee-church-shooting-hero-trnd/index. html

http://www.davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/american-revolution-against-british-gun- control.html

The second link is about what helped start the Revolutionary war yes GUN CONTROL!

I am more than happy to try and answer anyone's questions as best i can but if you are going to just attack me with no rational facts other than your personal feelings i am out of here and i am sure you don't care but If you want to have a adult conversation I am more than willing...


robslob - 10/4/2017 at 10:39 PM

quote:

This may get long but I really want to give you the truth about alcohol and tobacco and guns , dead is dead when someone drinks I am sure they are not thinking of going on a drive and killing people yet it happens now using anti gun thinking we should ban alcohol? right but we all know it will not happen it was tried and failed look up prohibition if you are not informed on it.... Tobacco kills others as well second hand smoke has killed many thousands of people who grew up in smoking homes again it was not done on purpose but still these people are dead yet tobacco still is sold to kill more remember dead is dead.. the method does not really matter how about automobiles?

My point is this we can not always control the things that happen to us and others not matter what laws we pass or make, the guns used in Chicago are illegal guns over 90% are and they are used by criminals !!!! NO law you make pass or whatever are going to obey that law that is why they are criminals it is what they do.

Sick people will do what they do no law will stop one from committing a crime if they have it in their minds to do so because they do not think they are right.... what law will stop anyone who is not committed or was previously committed .... and as it is now committed people can NOT buy a gun.

The second amendment is NOT about hunting or target shooting it is a fail safe for the American people to have the means to take back their Government in the event it become corrupt and tries to do away with the rights guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights . The founding fathers felt this was as important as any other right and it is there to protect all of us but we as a Nation have grown lazy and uniformed and we have grown reliant on the Government and police force to do everything for us and the world of technology and media just make these sick bastards into stars and martyrs...the only thing that I believe will help this problem is education about guns and people being responsible with guns, other than that please tell me what law can be passed that would stop any one of the last 10 idiots with guns.

also almost every day some with a gun helps or stops someone else from hurting another person with a gun, it happens all the time yet where is that news on the 6.00 o clock report?


When did alcohol or tobacco kill 59 innocent people and injure hundreds of others in ONE incident? And your post makes NO distinction between the right to bear arms (which I support) and the right for a private citizen to own an assault rifle (which I do NOT support).


2112 - 10/4/2017 at 10:42 PM

quote:
This may get long but I really want to give you the truth about alcohol and tobacco and guns , dead is dead when someone drinks I am sure they are not thinking of going on a drive and killing people yet it happens now using anti gun thinking we should ban alcohol? right but we all know it will not happen it was tried and failed look up prohibition if you are not informed on it.... Tobacco kills others as well second hand smoke has killed many thousands of people who grew up in smoking homes again it was not done on purpose but still these people are dead yet tobacco still is sold to kill more remember dead is dead.. the method does not really matter how about automobiles?

My point is this we can not always control the things that happen to us and others not matter what laws we pass or make, the guns used in Chicago are illegal guns over 90% are and they are used by criminals !!!! NO law you make pass or whatever are going to obey that law that is why they are criminals it is what they do.

Sick people will do what they do no law will stop one from committing a crime if they have it in their minds to do so because they do not think they are right.... what law will stop anyone who is not committed or was previously committed .... and as it is now committed people can NOT buy a gun.

The second amendment is NOT about hunting or target shooting it is a fail safe for the American people to have the means to take back their Government in the event it become corrupt and tries to do away with the rights guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights . The founding fathers felt this was as important as any other right and it is there to protect all of us but we as a Nation have grown lazy and uniformed and we have grown reliant on the Government and police force to do everything for us and the world of technology and media just make these sick bastards into stars and martyrs...the only thing that I believe will help this problem is education about guns and people being responsible with guns, other than that please tell me what law can be passed that would stop any one of the last 10 idiots with guns.

also almost every day some with a gun helps or stops someone else from hurting another person with a gun, it happens all the time yet where is that news on the 6.00 o clock report?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/25/us/tennessee-church-shooting-hero-trnd/index. html

http://www.davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/american-revolution-against-british-gun- control.html

The second link is about what helped start the Revolutionary war yes GUN CONTROL!

I am more than happy to try and answer anyone's questions as best i can but if you are going to just attack me with no rational facts other than your personal feelings i am out of here and i am sure you don't care but If you want to have a adult conversation I am more than willing...



I always enjoy the guns are needed to take our government back argument. We've had a couple congressmen shot by wackos who I'm sure felt like that was what they were doing. Didn't work out very well for them, and it won't work out any better for anybody else (unless we go back to single shot black power riffles again).


porkchopbob - 10/4/2017 at 10:42 PM

quote:
quote:
This is kind of the point. Automatics are heavily regulated because they are very dangerous. Semiautomatics are not as heavily regulated, but he purchased a legal device that made it more like an automatic. So why bother regulating Automatics when this device is legal? Oh, the shooter wasn't doing target practice in a crowd of 22,000 people? No sh1t? Existing regulation contradicts itself and it fatally failed hundreds of people.


Calm down before you pop a blood vessel. You ain't getting any younger ya know.


Ah, gotcha, this is the part of the thread where instead of having a conversation you get all passive aggressively chippy. Cool. Fun chat!


Rydethwind - 10/4/2017 at 10:47 PM

quote:
quote:

This may get long but I really want to give you the truth about alcohol and tobacco and guns , dead is dead when someone drinks I am sure they are not thinking of going on a drive and killing people yet it happens now using anti gun thinking we should ban alcohol? right but we all know it will not happen it was tried and failed look up prohibition if you are not informed on it.... Tobacco kills others as well second hand smoke has killed many thousands of people who grew up in smoking homes again it was not done on purpose but still these people are dead yet tobacco still is sold to kill more remember dead is dead.. the method does not really matter how about automobiles?

My point is this we can not always control the things that happen to us and others not matter what laws we pass or make, the guns used in Chicago are illegal guns over 90% are and they are used by criminals !!!! NO law you make pass or whatever are going to obey that law that is why they are criminals it is what they do.

Sick people will do what they do no law will stop one from committing a crime if they have it in their minds to do so because they do not think they are right.... what law will stop anyone who is not committed or was previously committed .... and as it is now committed people can NOT buy a gun.

The second amendment is NOT about hunting or target shooting it is a fail safe for the American people to have the means to take back their Government in the event it become corrupt and tries to do away with the rights guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights . The founding fathers felt this was as important as any other right and it is there to protect all of us but we as a Nation have grown lazy and uniformed and we have grown reliant on the Government and police force to do everything for us and the world of technology and media just make these sick bastards into stars and martyrs...the only thing that I believe will help this problem is education about guns and people being responsible with guns, other than that please tell me what law can be passed that would stop any one of the last 10 idiots with guns.

also almost every day some with a gun helps or stops someone else from hurting another person with a gun, it happens all the time yet where is that news on the 6.00 o clock report?


When did alcohol or tobacco kill 59 innocent people and injure hundreds of others in ONE incident? And your post makes NO distinction between the right to bear arms (which I support) and the right for a private citizen to own an assault rifle (which I do NOT support).


What is the point of the second amendment if you are not able to have weapons that will be of use in a fight with the government or any other group or gang or country whatever remember Guns are for law abiding citizens I have no idea what a criminal would do as i am not one.. on alcohol and Tobacco what about trains , airplanes big trucks etc they are caught drinking all the time but that is not the point the point is dead is dead no matter what the cause many things kill people are we going to enact laws against all of them?


Jerry - 10/4/2017 at 10:55 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.






Here you go:

Http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun -checks-people-mental-n727221



So you're talking about the "Implementation of The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007".
Have you read it, or taking at face value an article with a misleading title?

The act went in opposition of U.S.C. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 922, g, 4.
It would basically call for the Social Security Administration to list as "mentally ill" anyone who needed help with basic things such as balancing a checkbook, instead of reporting those who have been adjudicated by a court of law as being mentally ill. It would have nominally violated the HIPAA rights of disabled recipients, and the 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights of the recipient.
it really would have been the true definition of denying a right without due process.
Those who have been adjudicated by a court as mentally ill were not given the right to purchase and own firearms, so the title is factually false.


Rydethwind - 10/4/2017 at 11:06 PM

for those who may not know it is legal in this country to own machine guns it is NOT legal to make a semi auto gun into a machine gun and to own one legally you have to get finger printed and pass every check there is for about a year and pay a 200 dollar tax to own that weapon you can not lend it or have it out of your possession you want to know how many Americans spend there time and never harm anyone?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwW4PEeuL_Q


Jerry - 10/4/2017 at 11:24 PM




When did alcohol or tobacco kill 59 innocent people and injure hundreds of others in ONE incident? And your post makes NO distinction between the right to bear arms (which I support) and the right for a private citizen to own an assault rifle (which I do NOT support).


Who owns an assault rifle?


2112 - 10/4/2017 at 11:32 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.






Here you go:

Http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun -checks-people-mental-n727221



So you're talking about the "Implementation of The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007".
Have you read it, or taking at face value an article with a misleading title?

The act went in opposition of U.S.C. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 922, g, 4.
It would basically call for the Social Security Administration to list as "mentally ill" anyone who needed help with basic things such as balancing a checkbook, instead of reporting those who have been adjudicated by a court of law as being mentally ill. It would have nominally violated the HIPAA rights of disabled recipients, and the 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights of the recipient.
it really would have been the true definition of denying a right without due process.
Those who have been adjudicated by a court as mentally ill were not given the right to purchase and own firearms, so the title is factually false.


So, you think somebody who doesn't have enough mental capacity to balance a checkbook should have the right to buy guns? Seriously, you care less for the safety of innocent people than you do about guns.


Jerry - 10/4/2017 at 11:43 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.






Here you go:

Http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun -checks-people-mental-n727221



So you're talking about the "Implementation of The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007".
Have you read it, or taking at face value an article with a misleading title?

The act went in opposition of U.S.C. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 922, g, 4.
It would basically call for the Social Security Administration to list as "mentally ill" anyone who needed help with basic things such as balancing a checkbook, instead of reporting those who have been adjudicated by a court of law as being mentally ill. It would have nominally violated the HIPAA rights of disabled recipients, and the 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights of the recipient.
it really would have been the true definition of denying a right without due process.
Those who have been adjudicated by a court as mentally ill were not given the right to purchase and own firearms, so the title is factually false.


So, you think somebody who doesn't have enough mental capacity to balance a checkbook should have the right to buy guns? Seriously, you care less for the safety of innocent people than you do about guns.


Good response there. There are plenty of people out there who can't do some things that we take for granted, or think as menial tasks, but are not mentally ill. Are you for labeling people mentally ill and denying them a constitutional right because they can't balance a checkbook without going through due process?


2112 - 10/4/2017 at 11:47 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.






Here you go:

Http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun -checks-people-mental-n727221



So you're talking about the "Implementation of The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007".
Have you read it, or taking at face value an article with a misleading title?

The act went in opposition of U.S.C. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 922, g, 4.
It would basically call for the Social Security Administration to list as "mentally ill" anyone who needed help with basic things such as balancing a checkbook, instead of reporting those who have been adjudicated by a court of law as being mentally ill. It would have nominally violated the HIPAA rights of disabled recipients, and the 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights of the recipient.
it really would have been the true definition of denying a right without due process.
Those who have been adjudicated by a court as mentally ill were not given the right to purchase and own firearms, so the title is factually false.


So, you think somebody who doesn't have enough mental capacity to balance a checkbook should have the right to buy guns? Seriously, you care less for the safety of innocent people than you do about guns.


Good response there. There are plenty of people out there who can't do some things that we take for granted, or think as menial tasks, but are not mentally ill. Are you for labeling people mentally ill and denying them a constitutional right because they can't balance a checkbook without going through due process?


I'm saying we shouldn't allow them deadly weapons unless they can prove they are mentally competent. The world is dangerous enough withour crazy people having guns.


OriginalGoober - 10/5/2017 at 12:31 AM


Let's see Jimmy start saying that Liberal Hollywood and Silicon Valley should stop glamourizing violence.


Rydethwind - 10/5/2017 at 12:49 AM

quote:

Let's see Jimmy start saying that Liberal Hollywood and Silicon Valley should stop glamourizing violence.


Oh you are good very good.....


Jerry - 10/5/2017 at 01:33 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.






Here you go:

Http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun -checks-people-mental-n727221



So you're talking about the "Implementation of The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007".
Have you read it, or taking at face value an article with a misleading title?

The act went in opposition of U.S.C. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 922, g, 4.
It would basically call for the Social Security Administration to list as "mentally ill" anyone who needed help with basic things such as balancing a checkbook, instead of reporting those who have been adjudicated by a court of law as being mentally ill. It would have nominally violated the HIPAA rights of disabled recipients, and the 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights of the recipient.
it really would have been the true definition of denying a right without due process.
Those who have been adjudicated by a court as mentally ill were not given the right to purchase and own firearms, so the title is factually false.


So, you think somebody who doesn't have enough mental capacity to balance a checkbook should have the right to buy guns? Seriously, you care less for the safety of innocent people than you do about guns.


Good response there. There are plenty of people out there who can't do some things that we take for granted, or think as menial tasks, but are not mentally ill. Are you for labeling people mentally ill and denying them a constitutional right because they can't balance a checkbook without going through due process?


I'm saying we shouldn't allow them deadly weapons unless they can prove they are mentally competent. The world is dangerous enough withour crazy people having guns.


So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


BoytonBrother - 10/5/2017 at 01:55 AM

quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.


jkeller - 10/5/2017 at 02:01 AM

quote:
quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.




None of that is in the Constitution. Nope, I checked. Nothing about efficiency, mental stability, background checks. Nothing. How dare you think that common sense is more important than owning an arsenal.


adhill58 - 10/5/2017 at 02:14 AM

quote:
quote:
The people that say, "you will never be able to prevent someone who snapped from hurting people," are exactly right. HOWEVER, why then do we leave the most common and simple way of doing that on a large scale so easily accessible?

Almost anybody can figure out how to point a gun and squeeze the trigger (it's just like a video game). Not that many (in a fit of mental insanity, especially) can go through all the steps of building a successful bomb on a truck.

But, if someone flips out and they already own multiple machine guns, it is pretty easy to go out and hurt a lot of people.

We have had bombings, but we do not have an epidemic of bombings. We have had car attacks, but we do not have an epidemic of car attacks. It is hard to hurt 600 people in an acid attack. It is hard to hurt 600 people in a knife attack. It would be hard to hurt 600 people by throwing hammers out of a 32nd story window before the cops can kill you. There a very few ways to do this much damage while you are committing suicide without machine guns.

Reasonable gun policy is not the "beginning of confiscating all guns" anymore than security checks at airports is the end of airplanes. It is simply doing something to address a deadly problem, INSTEAD OF DOING NOTHING.

There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" and we can continue to debate what was meant by that, but suggesting that James Madison was talking about machine guns is pretty flimsy.

Giving up something that you enjoy for the betterment of society is called civilization...





What machine guns are you talking about? If he had some then he had either gone through almost a year of multiple background checks, license checks, fees, fingerprinting, and very costly transfer fees.

Misinformation is one thing that goes rampant after an incident like this. There have been no reports of machine guns being used. There are reports of an aftermarket item called a SlideFire. This effectively makes the rifle push forward against your finger with forward recoil from the stock. The rifle can then be fired at it's cyclic rate, if you practice with it for a while. It does not make the rifle a machine gun or an assault rifle. To me, it's just a way to burn through ammo. It's not effective of putting rounds on target, but it does help you spend more money on ammo.

The shooter was from 900 to 1200 feet away from where the bullets hit, he wasn't aiming at anyone in particular, just doing a "spray and pray" in my opinion.

Now, for a question. did the Founding Fathers set up the 1st Amendment for TV, Radio, Movies, DVD, CD, VHS, cassette, photography, internet, or for Facebook, Snap-chat, Google, Instagram, and other social media venues? It's about your comment on James Madison.


Look, you know what I meant when I said "machine gun". I don't care if I am technically correct or not. I do not care to know about the differences between classes of guns other than ones that are used for reasonable purposes and ones used to commit mass murder or make some loser feel like he has more power than his little ego tells him everyday. I am talking about guns that some P.O.S. can use to shoot 600 people in a matter of a few minutes. I don't care how they were modified or any of the other stuff that doesn't have any relevance to the innocent dead and injured people.

And... No, I don't think James Madison was talking about VHS or DVD or anything else we use without harming people today. HOWEVER, I doubt he was talking about child pornography either, yet that has since been correctly banned to protect innocent lives.


goldtop - 10/5/2017 at 03:09 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The people that say, "you will never be able to prevent someone who snapped from hurting people," are exactly right. HOWEVER, why then do we leave the most common and simple way of doing that on a large scale so easily accessible?

Almost anybody can figure out how to point a gun and squeeze the trigger (it's just like a video game). Not that many (in a fit of mental insanity, especially) can go through all the steps of building a successful bomb on a truck.

But, if someone flips out and they already own multiple machine guns, it is pretty easy to go out and hurt a lot of people.

We have had bombings, but we do not have an epidemic of bombings. We have had car attacks, but we do not have an epidemic of car attacks. It is hard to hurt 600 people in an acid attack. It is hard to hurt 600 people in a knife attack. It would be hard to hurt 600 people by throwing hammers out of a 32nd story window before the cops can kill you. There a very few ways to do this much damage while you are committing suicide without machine guns.

Reasonable gun policy is not the "beginning of confiscating all guns" anymore than security checks at airports is the end of airplanes. It is simply doing something to address a deadly problem, INSTEAD OF DOING NOTHING.

There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" and we can continue to debate what was meant by that, but suggesting that James Madison was talking about machine guns is pretty flimsy.

Giving up something that you enjoy for the betterment of society is called civilization...





What machine guns are you talking about? If he had some then he had either gone through almost a year of multiple background checks, license checks, fees, fingerprinting, and very costly transfer fees.

Misinformation is one thing that goes rampant after an incident like this. There have been no reports of machine guns being used. There are reports of an aftermarket item called a SlideFire. This effectively makes the rifle push forward against your finger with forward recoil from the stock. The rifle can then be fired at it's cyclic rate, if you practice with it for a while. It does not make the rifle a machine gun or an assault rifle. To me, it's just a way to burn through ammo. It's not effective of putting rounds on target, but it does help you spend more money on ammo.

The shooter was from 900 to 1200 feet away from where the bullets hit, he wasn't aiming at anyone in particular, just doing a "spray and pray" in my opinion.

Now, for a question. did the Founding Fathers set up the 1st Amendment for TV, Radio, Movies, DVD, CD, VHS, cassette, photography, internet, or for Facebook, Snap-chat, Google, Instagram, and other social media venues? It's about your comment on James Madison.


Look, you know what I meant when I said "machine gun". I don't care if I am technically correct or not. I do not care to know about the differences between classes of guns other than ones that are used for reasonable purposes and ones used to commit mass murder or make some loser feel like he has more power than his little ego tells him everyday. I am talking about guns that some P.O.S. can use to shoot 600 people in a matter of a few minutes. I don't care how they were modified or any of the other stuff that doesn't have any relevance to the innocent dead and injured people.

And... No, I don't think James Madison was talking about VHS or DVD or anything else we use without harming people today. HOWEVER, I doubt he was talking about child pornography either, yet that has since been correctly banned to protect innocent lives.


They avoid addressing the topic by playing word games...Our legislators have made it clear that the right to own assault weapons is greater than the right to the safety of our children and all innocent people....Their actions speak loudly or in this case inaction....


adhill58 - 10/5/2017 at 03:22 AM

"New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982), is a precedential decision given by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously that the First Amendment right to free speech did not forbid states from banning the sale of material depicting children engaged in sexual activity, even if the material was not obscene.[1]"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------
That's just quickly from wikipedia, but as you can see, people use the Bill Of Rights to argue in favor of some really bad stuff. But, anything can be regulated to protect innocent people............even if some other American enjoys it.


Rydethwind - 10/5/2017 at 02:50 PM

Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....


goldtop - 10/5/2017 at 03:10 PM

quote:
Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....


More thumb violins music coming....rhetoric.....Why can't I have a tank??? or a bazooka or an anti aircraft gun...that's just an improvement on the musket??? how far was a musket accurate??? could it kill from 500 yards away and mow down 500+ people from one shooter?? without reloading after every shot...did a musket have belts drums and magazines full of high caliber projectiles???

No....we regulate many things within our amendments...like ya can't yell fire when there isn't one

We can't buy tanks or bazookas or anti-aircraft guns...or cannons...they're all improvements on the musket

I'm fine with assault weapons put in the same category as tanks, bazookas and anti-aircraft guns...because that is what they are intended for



[Edited on 10/5/2017 by goldtop]


BoytonBrother - 10/5/2017 at 04:11 PM

Rydethewind, are you against people having to demonstrate complete responsible operation of a firearm before exercising their 2nd amendment right, and what are your thoughts on our police forces subjecting recruits to psychological evaluations prior to hire?


BrerRabbit - 10/5/2017 at 10:27 PM

Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.




adhill58 - 10/6/2017 at 01:16 AM

quote:
Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....


Again, none of your little game of semantics helps the nearly 600 dead or injured people in Las Vegas. I don't care what you call any of these tools of mass murder, this guy used them to hurt 600 people in ten minutes. How can you say these are great things to have available in our society?


Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 04:33 PM

quote:
quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.



Do you know if all those officers who passed your mental tests can fully disassemble, properly clean and lubricate, and reassemble their service weapons?

What about those who could are physically unable to do so would you deny them the right to defend themselves? How about the one handed man that lives in a gang area? How about his right to defend himself?

Are you willing to just let them go by the wayside?


Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 04:33 PM

quote:
Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.






That is why you wear hearing protection.


BoytonBrother - 10/6/2017 at 05:00 PM

quote:
Do you know if all those officers who passed your mental tests can fully disassemble, properly clean and lubricate, and reassemble their service weapons?


They go through firearm training, which is the point. You have great points, but your side-step strategy of just asking additional questions, instead of answering mine, is ineffective.

quote:
What about those who could are physically unable to do so would you deny them the right to defend themselves? How about the one handed man that lives in a gang area? How about his right to defend himself?


LOL, what is your point? Why couldn't a one-handed man fire a gun responsibly? Oh, you are focusing on semantics to detract from the point of my post - not working on me.

quote:
Are you willing to just let them go by the wayside?


I'm not going to give you the respect of answering your questions when you completely avoided addressing my point. Address the point of my post, and I'll gladly do the same for you.


Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 05:11 PM

quote:
quote:
Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....


More thumb violins music coming....rhetoric.....Why can't I have a tank??? or a bazooka or an anti aircraft gun...that's just an improvement on the musket??? how far was a musket accurate??? could it kill from 500 yards away and mow down 500+ people from one shooter?? without reloading after every shot...did a musket have belts drums and magazines full of high caliber projectiles???

No....we regulate many things within our amendments...like ya can't yell fire when there isn't one

We can't buy tanks or bazookas or anti-aircraft guns...or cannons...they're all improvements on the musket

I'm fine with assault weapons put in the same category as tanks, bazookas and anti-aircraft guns...because that is what they are intended for



[Edited on 10/5/2017 by goldtop]


Goldtop, you've got to get out more.
Yes, you can own a tank. angelfire.com/hero/cade/company.html

Anti-aircrfat gun, sure https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=459912

Bazooka, why not. https://www.ima-usa.com/products/original-u-s-m20-a1-b1-3-5-inch-super-bazo oka-launcher-inert-rocket?variant=26172821701

I own a cannon, a very small one, but it works. If you check out government auctions some interesting things come up, such as a Minute Man missile.

Oh, you can also buy assault weapons if you go thorough the same background criteria you would have to pass to own the tank.

The firearms sold to the general public are not assault rifles.


Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 05:29 PM

quote:
quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.



OK, here is your complete post and the answers for it.
1) To show competency in disassembly and reassembly of the firearm you would first have to purchase it and practice under the supervision of an armorer since I doubt police agencies will have a copy of every firearm available to the general public.
2) Shooting and safety compliance classes I will gladly tell legislators to put my tax money to. People need to know how to correctly place rounds on target and what shoot-don't shoot stands for. Again, you would have to own the weapon for training since different firearms handle differently, even ones of the same make and model, not to mention sights are never set the same.
3) Who would administer the psychological tests? Would that be government officials, doctors, clerks, administrative assistants? What criteria would they use? How are the tests working? Seems there have been a lot of unwarranted police shootings of unarmed civilians lately.
4) Our finest? I guess you've never heard of the 14th Amendment?

Have I answered all your questions?


Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 05:37 PM

quote:
quote:
Do you know if all those officers who passed your mental tests can fully disassemble, properly clean and lubricate, and reassemble their service weapons?


They go through firearm training, which is the point. You have great points, but your side-step strategy of just asking additional questions, instead of answering mine, is ineffective.

quote:
What about those who could are physically unable to do so would you deny them the right to defend themselves? How about the one handed man that lives in a gang area? How about his right to defend himself?


LOL, what is your point? Why couldn't a one-handed man fire a gun responsibly? Oh, you are focusing on semantics to detract from the point of my post - not working on me.

quote:
Are you willing to just let them go by the wayside?


I'm not going to give you the respect of answering your questions when you completely avoided addressing my point. Address the point of my post, and I'll gladly do the same for you.


How is a one handed man going to disassemble/reassemble a firearm?

Also, I'm not sidestepping. I am asking questions that you obviously haven't thought of, or you just don't care about people defending themselves.


BoytonBrother - 10/6/2017 at 06:49 PM

quote:
OK, here is your complete post and the answers for it.
1) To show competency in disassembly and reassembly of the firearm you would first have to purchase it and practice under the supervision of an armorer since I doubt police agencies will have a copy of every firearm available to the general public.
2) Shooting and safety compliance classes I will gladly tell legislators to put my tax money to. People need to know how to correctly place rounds on target and what shoot-don't shoot stands for. Again, you would have to own the weapon for training since different firearms handle differently, even ones of the same make and model, not to mention sights are never set the same.
3) Who would administer the psychological tests? Would that be government officials, doctors, clerks, administrative assistants? What criteria would they use? How are the tests working? Seems there have been a lot of unwarranted police shootings of unarmed civilians lately.
4) Our finest? I guess you've never heard of the 14th Amendment?

Have I answered all your questions?


Yes. Thank you!

My comments about taking apart and re-assembling a gun wasn't meant to be taken literally, but an example of how knowledgeable a gun owner should be before purchase, IMO. The practice can can occur at local ranges, or with family members. I'm not pretending to have the logistics and implementation ironed out, but if we want to do it, we can.

As for the competency exams, the same people who administer the police tests - that group should expand. We both probably agree that 99% of our cops are good ones who don't murder suspects. I like that percentage. I don't think 99% of our gun owners are competent in knowledge, safety, and stability. We need to get there though.

So agree about knowledge and safety exams. That's a huge first step, and a perfect compromise. Why can't we put that into action? Why does the anti-gun control crowd oppose that? Do you hold the NRA and right-wing politicians partly accountable for not being able to get this done?


Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 07:03 PM

quote:
quote:
OK, here is your complete post and the answers for it.
1) To show competency in disassembly and reassembly of the firearm you would first have to purchase it and practice under the supervision of an armorer since I doubt police agencies will have a copy of every firearm available to the general public.
2) Shooting and safety compliance classes I will gladly tell legislators to put my tax money to. People need to know how to correctly place rounds on target and what shoot-don't shoot stands for. Again, you would have to own the weapon for training since different firearms handle differently, even ones of the same make and model, not to mention sights are never set the same.
3) Who would administer the psychological tests? Would that be government officials, doctors, clerks, administrative assistants? What criteria would they use? How are the tests working? Seems there have been a lot of unwarranted police shootings of unarmed civilians lately.
4) Our finest? I guess you've never heard of the 14th Amendment?

Have I answered all your questions?


Yes. Thank you!

My comments about taking apart and re-assembling a gun wasn't meant to be taken literally, but an example of how knowledgeable a gun owner should be before purchase, IMO. The practice can can occur at local ranges, or with family members. I'm not pretending to have the logistics and implementation ironed out, but if we want to do it, we can.

As for the competency exams, the same people who administer the police tests - that group should expand. We both probably agree that 99% of our cops are good ones who don't murder suspects. I like that percentage. I don't think 99% of our gun owners are competent in knowledge, safety, and stability. We need to get there though.

So agree about knowledge and safety exams. That's a huge first step, and a perfect compromise. Why can't we put that into action? Why does the anti-gun control crowd oppose that? Do you hold the NRA and right-wing politicians partly accountable for not being able to get this done?



We used to have marksmanship and safety classes in schools here until some groups complained about it. Hell, some people don't even want the Eddie Eagle videos that teach kids not to touch a firearm unless an adult is with them. The videos teach Don't touch, get away, and tell an adult. Some folks don't want anything to do with the NRA even if it's safety training. They go crazy about being indoctrinated into the "gun mindset".
We first have to get over that hurdle so kids can learn gun safety.
The biggest reason small children die due to firearms is that they are curious. If a child has the training and sees a gun, they know it's dangerous, they know to not touch, they know to tell an adult, and they don't die due to someone not teaching them those few rules.


BrerRabbit - 10/6/2017 at 07:10 PM

quote:
Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.

quote:
That is why you wear hearing protection


Ya think?

Nah, that permanent ringing in your ears is the liberty bell.

Better to blast yourself deaf and bellyache about silencers:

quote:
Silencers....in Europe every gun is sold with one the reason is to quiet the noise from the guns to save peoples hearing they do NOT make a gun silenced they just make them to a decibel that does not damage the human ear , they are far far from silent the U.S should have them available for sale with any gun purchase if that had been law i would still be able to hear.










Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 07:18 PM

quote:
quote:
Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.

quote:
That is why you wear hearing protection


Ya think?

Nah, that permanent ringing in your ears is the liberty bell.

Better to blast yourself deaf and bellyache about silencers:

quote:
Silencers....in Europe every gun is sold with one the reason is to quiet the noise from the guns to save peoples hearing they do NOT make a gun silenced they just make them to a decibel that does not damage the human ear , they are far far from silent the U.S should have them available for sale with any gun purchase if that had been law i would still be able to hear.




I still laugh at the old tv shows where the bad guy screws a silencer on a revolver.


BrerRabbit - 10/6/2017 at 07:38 PM

A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.


Jerry - 10/6/2017 at 07:49 PM

quote:
A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.


Only if you want a blown barrel with shrapnel going all over the place.
I've seen rifles and shotguns that had mud in the muzzle. Not a pretty sight, and the damage done to the shooter
was anything from just burns on the hand to blindness and head injury.


adhill58 - 10/6/2017 at 10:00 PM

quote:
quote:
A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.


Only if you want a blown barrel with shrapnel going all over the place.
I've seen rifles and shotguns that had mud in the muzzle. Not a pretty sight, and the damage done to the shooter
was anything from just burns on the hand to blindness and head injury.


Sounds like you are hanging with the trained and responsible gun owners the NRA is always bragging about.


jkeller - 10/6/2017 at 10:16 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.


Only if you want a blown barrel with shrapnel going all over the place.
I've seen rifles and shotguns that had mud in the muzzle. Not a pretty sight, and the damage done to the shooter
was anything from just burns on the hand to blindness and head injury.


Sounds like you are hanging with the trained and responsible gun owners the NRA is always bragging about.


He is an expert.


BrerRabbit - 10/6/2017 at 11:12 PM

Thx for the advice. Will skip the potato.


Rydethwind - 10/6/2017 at 11:36 PM

Globally, tobacco use killed 100 million people in the 20th century, much more than all deaths in World Wars I and II combined. Tobacco-related deaths will number around 1 billion in the 21st century if current smoking patterns continue. Among middle-aged persons, tobacco use is estimated to be the most important risk factor for premature death in men and the second most important risk factor in women (following high blood pressure) in 20102025. To understand better how to address this issue, tobacco deaths need to be monitored closely, and this can be done best if death registries systematically collect data on tobacco use status. Currently, data on tobacco deaths mostly come from individual epidemiological studies.

National Right to Life estimates that, since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion 43 years ago in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton , more than 58 million unborn children have lost their lives. Each one of those abortions is a tragedy, not just because an innocent child died, but because of the lasting impact the abortion itself had on the mothers of those children.

Drinking too much can harm your health. Excessive alcohol use led to approximately 88,000 deaths and 2.5 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) each year in the United States from 2006 2010, shortening the lives of those who died by an average of 30 years.1,2 Further, excessive drinking was responsible for 1 in 10 deaths among working-age adults aged 20-64 years. The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2010 were estimated at $249 billion, or $2.05 a drink.3

(CDC) show that on an average day, 93 Americans are killed with guns.

To calculate this, Everytown relies on a five-year-average of data from the CDC, whose National Vital Statistics System contains the most comprehensive national data, currently available through 2015.1
View CDC data on people killed by guns each year

On average there are nearly 12,000 gun homicides a year in the U.S.
12,000x10=120,000 in 10 years do the math people your chances of being shot slim quit beating a dead horse I applaud your passion and effort but use both where it can do the most good!


Jerry - 10/7/2017 at 12:09 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.


Only if you want a blown barrel with shrapnel going all over the place.
I've seen rifles and shotguns that had mud in the muzzle. Not a pretty sight, and the damage done to the shooter
was anything from just burns on the hand to blindness and head injury.


Sounds like you are hanging with the trained and responsible gun owners the NRA is always bragging about.


Actually, some of the rifles were M-16s at Ranger school. People who should know to check the muzzle, but when you've been awake for several days in sub freezing weather (sometimes -60 chill factor), your mind isn't on what it should be. Anything in the muzzle makes a gun into a potential bomb.


jkeller - 10/7/2017 at 12:20 AM

quote:
Globally, tobacco use killed 100 million people in the 20th century, much more than all deaths in World Wars I and II combined. Tobacco-related deaths will number around 1 billion in the 21st century if current smoking patterns continue. Among middle-aged persons, tobacco use is estimated to be the most important risk factor for premature death in men and the second most important risk factor in women (following high blood pressure) in 20102025. To understand better how to address this issue, tobacco deaths need to be monitored closely, and this can be done best if death registries systematically collect data on tobacco use status. Currently, data on tobacco deaths mostly come from individual epidemiological studies.

National Right to Life estimates that, since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion 43 years ago in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton , more than 58 million unborn children have lost their lives. Each one of those abortions is a tragedy, not just because an innocent child died, but because of the lasting impact the abortion itself had on the mothers of those children.

Drinking too much can harm your health. Excessive alcohol use led to approximately 88,000 deaths and 2.5 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) each year in the United States from 2006 2010, shortening the lives of those who died by an average of 30 years.1,2 Further, excessive drinking was responsible for 1 in 10 deaths among working-age adults aged 20-64 years. The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2010 were estimated at $249 billion, or $2.05 a drink.3

(CDC) show that on an average day, 93 Americans are killed with guns.

To calculate this, Everytown relies on a five-year-average of data from the CDC, whose National Vital Statistics System contains the most comprehensive national data, currently available through 2015.1
View CDC data on people killed by guns each year

On average there are nearly 12,000 gun homicides a year in the U.S.
12,000x10=120,000 in 10 years do the math people your chances of being shot slim quit beating a dead horse I applaud your passion and effort but use both where it can do the most good!


That's great. Another false equivalency. I am convinced, based on your posts, that you consider incidents like , you completely ignore the victims right to life. So noted.Las Vegas, Aurora, Sandy hook, Virginia Tech and Columbine to be the price of freedom. When you talk about rights, you do not consider the victim's right to life. The country you want isn't free except for the minority who believe that they should be able to own any weapon that they want to.


Jerry - 10/7/2017 at 01:14 AM

quote:
quote:
Globally, tobacco use killed 100 million people in the 20th century, much more than all deaths in World Wars I and II combined. Tobacco-related deaths will number around 1 billion in the 21st century if current smoking patterns continue. Among middle-aged persons, tobacco use is estimated to be the most important risk factor for premature death in men and the second most important risk factor in women (following high blood pressure) in 20102025. To understand better how to address this issue, tobacco deaths need to be monitored closely, and this can be done best if death registries systematically collect data on tobacco use status. Currently, data on tobacco deaths mostly come from individual epidemiological studies.

National Right to Life estimates that, since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion 43 years ago in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton , more than 58 million unborn children have lost their lives. Each one of those abortions is a tragedy, not just because an innocent child died, but because of the lasting impact the abortion itself had on the mothers of those children.

Drinking too much can harm your health. Excessive alcohol use led to approximately 88,000 deaths and 2.5 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) each year in the United States from 2006 2010, shortening the lives of those who died by an average of 30 years.1,2 Further, excessive drinking was responsible for 1 in 10 deaths among working-age adults aged 20-64 years. The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2010 were estimated at $249 billion, or $2.05 a drink.3

(CDC) show that on an average day, 93 Americans are killed with guns.

To calculate this, Everytown relies on a five-year-average of data from the CDC, whose National Vital Statistics System contains the most comprehensive national data, currently available through 2015.1
View CDC data on people killed by guns each year

On average there are nearly 12,000 gun homicides a year in the U.S.
12,000x10=120,000 in 10 years do the math people your chances of being shot slim quit beating a dead horse I applaud your passion and effort but use both where it can do the most good!


That's great. Another false equivalency. I am convinced, based on your posts, that you consider incidents like , you completely ignore the victims right to life. So noted.Las Vegas, Aurora, Sandy hook, Virginia Tech and Columbine to be the price of freedom. When you talk about rights, you do not consider the victim's right to life. The country you want isn't free except for the minority who believe that they should be able to own any weapon that they want to.


Did he say that, or are you just trying to cherry pick your way out of something?


BoytonBrother - 10/7/2017 at 01:31 AM

quote:
On average there are nearly 12,000 gun homicides a year in the U.S.
12,000x10=120,000 in 10 years do the math people your chances of being shot slim quit beating a dead horse I applaud your passion and effort but use both where it can do the most good!


Says the guy worried about a home invasion gun battle, LOL. Please, what a joke. Let's compare those odds. Stop with the b.s., and just cut to the chase as to why you are so against demonstrating competency before purchasing a firearm. Every response has been non-sensical and filled with holes, no pun intended.


Jerry - 10/7/2017 at 01:44 AM

quote:
quote:
On average there are nearly 12,000 gun homicides a year in the U.S.
12,000x10=120,000 in 10 years do the math people your chances of being shot slim quit beating a dead horse I applaud your passion and effort but use both where it can do the most good!


Says the guy worried about a home invasion gun battle, LOL. Please, what a joke. Let's compare those odds. Stop with the b.s., and just cut to the chase as to why you are so against demonstrating competency before purchasing a firearm. Every response has been non-sensical and filled with holes, no pun intended.


Only because you didn't like the answers given you.


BoytonBrother - 10/7/2017 at 01:50 AM

then tell me where the sense is: we don't need gun control because there is a low probability of being killed by a gun. we don't need gun control because we need to protect ourselves from the even lower odds of being subjected to a home invasion shootout.

I'm supposed to listen to that logic.....really?


Jerry - 10/7/2017 at 02:35 AM

quote:
then tell me where the sense is: we don't need gun control because there is a low probability of being killed by a gun. we don't need gun control because we need to protect ourselves from the even lower odds of being subjected to a home invasion shootout.

I'm supposed to listen to that logic.....really?


Where is anybody saying that?


Jerry - 10/7/2017 at 02:58 AM

Sorry for making my manners this late, but hey Ryde. Nice to see you back.


adhill58 - 10/7/2017 at 03:40 AM

quote:
quote:
then tell me where the sense is: we don't need gun control because there is a low probability of being killed by a gun. we don't need gun control because we need to protect ourselves from the even lower odds of being subjected to a home invasion shootout.

I'm supposed to listen to that logic.....really?


Where is anybody saying that?


Boyton sums it up exactly. Except... there is also the argument about protecting ourselves against the United States Military in packs of three or four hillbillies with modified non-automatic guns.

[Edited on 10/7/2017 by adhill58]


This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
http://allmanbrothersband.com/

Url of this website:
http://allmanbrothersband.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=127&tid=145356