Biden vows to ban assault weapons 'come hell or high water'

Delete

 

Glad we have a good countryman here

 

I'm glad that you found the NPR link to be interesting.

Long, long ago when I was a "young person", there were also lots of ways in which we were going to change things for the better along with complaints from older people about "this new generation" and how they were different.

I don't have children but most all of my nephews are committed 2nd Amendment supporters and I believe that there are far more younger people participating in one of the many shooting sports including far more women than I expected. (1)

Re:

I imagine most responses you've already gotten mention that we have a Bill of Rights, not a "Bill of Needs".
At the time the Bill of Rights was composed, civilians were allowed to own firearms every bit as lethal or "high powered" as the US Military. Concurrently, inventors were making numerous multi shot and repeating firearms so I'm sure that the Founding Fathers anticipated that firearms would become more sophisticated with the passing of time.

I've already stated that if a firearm only saves your life once, it has paid for itself.
I can remember one instance in which I really needed and was grateful to have had an AR-15.

Briefly put, I used to live in a high crime neighborhood in a large inner-city.
Some home invaders cut the phone line to my next door neighbors (3 unarmed nurses) and proceeded to plunder the place until I heard the screams, grabbed my AR-15, ran next door and was able to repel the home invaders.
Since I had no idea how many home invaders there were and to what degree they were armed, I really felt that at that time I really needed something like an AR-15 or something comparable.

Even though I called the police before running next door, they didn't show up until 30 minutes after the home invaders had left.
Can you see that there are some entirely justified applications for an AR-15 other than sport and recreational target shooting?

Finally, even though I've had extensive experience with firearms and taught others to shoot safely, there are people of some temperament that I have discouraged from owning a firearm.

Even though owning a firearm is a constitutional right, it is a right that should be exercised with caution, care and mutual respect.

Thanks,




(1) "Women are here and they're taking over competitive shooting"

 

every cop in Cincinnati is carrying a 17 shot Smith and wesson. Few actually do that sort of work. and tell me your experience in this issue-RAIDS AND GANG ARRESTS where the police are INITIATING THE ACTION versus a shopkeeper who has a bunch of Antifa thugs trying to burn down his store or home invaders attacking a home at 2 AM in the morning. Who needs better weapons?

 

and people don't die from anyone owning a 30 round magazine or an AR 15 do they? people die from anal sex if one of the two (or far more) involved has aids, people die to someone having a 30 round magazine if they engage in felonious shooting of others.

 

I want most of them repealed

 

The police don't generally carry around assault rifles on the beat.

You need to weigh up having essentially a machine gun v the issues that they create. Is it worth having your schools shot up by maniacs verses that illusion of extra safety that having a machine gun imbibes you?

 

When your generation dies off there might be some progress.

 

why does the coddled younger generation hate freedom so much" progress is not less freedom to rational folks.

 

I guess you cannot fathom that someone willing to shoot up a school is not worried about a law against them having a machine gun. Tell us-since you seem to be such a keen student of constitutional law-what firearms are properly protected by the second

 

I guess you can't fathom that the laws that govern guns will determine how easy it is to access (for all intents and purposes) a machine gun.

 

lets apply that to say fentanyl. all your desired gun laws do is make it harder for law abiding people. not criminals. but of course that is your goal as you have constantly admitted-you want to ban lawful people from having guns for political reasons

 

People that shoot up schools usually do not have a criminal history. The guns are accessed from home.

 

that's not true either. most of the school shootings don't get much coverage unless the shooters a white male with no record. 75% of mass shootings involve people using handguns and by people with felony records. Lanza accessed the weapon he used by killing his mother. The VA Tech shooter spent months getting his firearms and did so with a 10 round magazine pistol. If they don't have records, and are premeditating murder-it seems anything sort of bans is not going to stop them and if guns are banned, they will still get them

 

Tut tut, you changed from school shootings to mass shootings. Nice try.

If it's harder to access the necessary weaponry to kill children on mass then the school shootings will be less likely.

 

the point remains-most school shootings involve handguns and felons.

if its harder to access weapons, law abiding citizens will be disarmed at far higher rates than premeditating murderers who are willing to violate all sorts of laws or felons who already are breaking laws by merely possessing firearms. Do you deny that?

 

I can see that you've memorised your talking points well. Here's one back at you: mass shootings involving assault weapons or high-capacity magazines are far deadlier.

.
Harder to access assault weaponry (high magazines and shoot rate). That's what we are talking about.

Of course, feel free to change tack whenever cornered.

 

ebe

so explain how Choi racked up one of the highest kill totals at VA Tech with ten round handguns. what is an assault weapon? how are you going to keep normal capacity magazines away from premeditated murderers? all you can do is harass lawful users which of course is your goal

 

oh BTW what firearms do you think are protected from government bans or restrictions by the second amendment

 

A good thing Choi didn't have a machine gun.

They will be harder to get, therefore less likely to be able to be obtained.

 

you really demonstrate you don't know much about firearms with that comment. Are you going to tell us what firearms you believe are protected against governmental bans by the second amendment, the tenth amendment and perhaps the ninth amendment? Your logic suggests you want complete gun bans-

 

Let's ask the American forefathers. No, wait...

I guess 200 years on Americans need to decide that for themselves. If they can't agree then I suggest majority-rules.

 

See my post above.

 

oh I figured you couldn't tell us because we both know you want to ban them all, I have a great idea-gun banners try to take the guns away from those who own them

 

It's a close call. I guess time will tell

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23141651/gun-control-american-approval-polling