If such a large majority agrees with gun control, what's stopping us?

Agreed. I’m all about personal freedoms.

 

OK, how can something so tragic be so comical. Easy, make the entire thing based on real life situations

 

No, they don't.

 

WTF does Trump have to do with this? We're talking about guns. Do you think the 14th Amendment is only about Trump or something?

No, Congress cannot "regulate basically ANYTHING". The Supremacy Clause only applies to the powers granted to the federal government. And certainly does not apply to the things which are forbidden it. Your understanding of the US Constitution, its branches and their roles and powers are sorely misinformed.

 

The answer to the op's question is this.....
That pesky little thing called the Constitution that gives people pesky little things called rights, that it doesn't matter if you agree with them or not, they still exist.

 

that's mainly a myth. tell me-with a billion or so normal capacity magazines for AR style rifles and GLOCK handguns floating around the USA, how is someone not deterred by the consequences of committing mass murder, going to be deterred by the consequences of possessing a normal capacity magazine?

 

and the constitution and the courts and the fact that most gun owners won't agree to Democrat gun grabbing schemes which have nothing to do with public safety

 

Obama's supreme court picks have always voted against gun rights

 

To answer the question, because gun grabbers are mostly ignorant of that which they go on about.

 

The "right" may be to be able to have firearms. It is not so eternally certain that "right" means absolutely all types of firearms. As long as some type is available, the "right" may be judged as fulfilled. Just wait until the firearms extremists have pushed the rest of the population far enough. Then they will see where their intransigence has gotten them. When they won't even admit that safety training could be required, we can see that they have a radical agenda not in tune with their fellow countrymen.

 

Sorry but that is false. You cannot restrict the Right to bear arms down to say... muskets and consider the Right fulfilled. The Right applies to arms "that are in common use".

 

I don't belong to the NRA and I oppose most of their laws for personal reasons. I know you don't believe my personal needs are important, but I suspect they are similar to other gun owners.

The poll said most people want semiautomatic weapons banned. I assume that includes all semiautomatic pistols which is my preferred method of home defense. As I have mentioned numerous times, our home is out in the country with law enforcement response time of fifteen or more minutes. We would already be dead by then with a home invasion.

I prefer not to have a loaded gun in the house. It takes too long to load rounds individually if someone starts breaking in. Therefore, I prefer a semiautomatic pistol which uses a magazine. I keep a pistol and a loaded magazine out of the pistol. If I detect someone trying to break in, I can insert the magazine in a couple of seconds.

 

Do you see how those kinds of remarks are really just an admission you have no cogent argument to make?

 

What evidence do you have to prove polls indicating large majorities want stricter gun control are inaccurate?

 

As a gun owner I don't understand why normal, law abiding, non-criminal citizens shouldn't be allowed to have firearms.

 

I see you aren't able to answer the question and, as usual, result to insulting language.

 

Here's one
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title10&edition=prelim

 

From the founders themselves! But not in a BOOK written by ONE of them. In the discussions DURING the approval of the Amendment held by ALL of them.

There were MANY opinions at the time from many of the framers about what the 2nd A should include, address and mandate. Only ONE of those opinions made it through Congress and was ratified by the states.

If you have anything to contribute to that debate, the place to do it is the indicated thread. But "documented", doesn't mean "crap that you pull out of your ass" (no disrespect intended.... just a figure of speech). It means real DOCUMENTED arguments about what went on right before and during the discussions leading to the approval of the amendment. There are two threads in which this is analyzed seriously based on historical records.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/history-101-why-the-2nd-amendment.586263/
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...form-part-of-a-well-regulated-militia.589757/

If you have anything SERIOUS to contribute, please do so in the corresponding thread

 

Ignorance of facts, propadanda and reluctance to be honest about current numbers of ownership legal and illegal.

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/

https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx

People are ignorant when it comes to numbers of gun owners, they choose to tally dishonestly.. The biggest scam is guestimating the numbers of owners. Who knows? No one knows because the U.S. has free flow across its borders and that alone makes it impossible to accurately assess anything. To further complicate accuracy is privacy and lying. Many Americans own a plethora of controlled substances and contraband. The best you will achieve is driving ownership of a firearm in to total secrecy.

Americans love their guns, Americans will tell you/agree with what you want to hear just to shut you up

 

What's stopping us from applying gun control? Two things:
1. Minority of those who are against gun control are smarter than the majority of those who support gun control
2. Gun manufactures lobby

But the more important question is: why do we want gun control, to save human lives or maybe because some political parties talk so loud about the gun control, because they want to protect some businesses who endanger human lives more than legal arms?

To find it I would like to see numbers:

how many Americans died from legally purchased arms (excluding suicides). According AI Bard: it is estimated that there were approximately 14,000 gun-related murders in the United States in 2022, of which a significant portion were likely committed by people who legally owned firearms.

how many Americans died because they could not afford medical care? According to AI Bard: According to a 2021 study published in the journal PNAS, an estimated 45,800 Americans die each year because they lack access to affordable health insurance.

how many Americans died because medical errors? According to AI Bard: According to a 2016 study published in the journal BMJ, an estimated 251,000 Americans die each year from medical errors.

So you decide what is more urgent case of saving American lives – gun control, which is responsible for less than 14,000 death or maybe something else.

BTW: I am against gun control, not as protection against criminals, but as protection against government. The attempt to steal 2020 election by Donald Trump proves we need protection from the government.

 

His participation in the insurrection, and now aspiring to become President is the only thing relevant to the 14th A I can think of. However, irrelevant to this thread.

If you have anything else to discuss that is not relevant to this thread, which is about policies with which both Republicans and Democrats agree, open a thread

Yes! Definitely not about guns. I mean, other than Trump, it's as much about guns as it is about anything you can own but is subject to federal regulations.

Actually it's the opposite. It refers to powers NOT explicitly granted to the federal government (thus the conjunction "and"). So long as they are not expressly prohibited. There are two options: either it's the Legislative or the Judicial branch who decide which laws can or cannot exist. I believe it should be Congress. Right wingers right now think that it should be the Judicial because, temporarily, they happen to have a majority of activist right-wing partisan justices in the Supreme Court. It has been a struggle for a long time. SCOTUS rejecting a law that would be favored by 80% of Americans would surely lay the ground to an interesting Constitutional battle that would settle the matter once and for all IF SCOTUS wanted to take up the fight. Which I doubt they would....

However, the whole thing is a different topic. Open your own thread if you want to debate that.

 

How is that saving lives?

 

I'm not saying your personal reasons are not important. Just that they don't trump saving the life of others. I don't know if they're in conflict but, if they are, you lose....

 

You keep ignoring one fact. I can't speak for all or most guns owners, but I have little doubt they share similar concerns.

There is one major flaw in your arguments. There are already over four hundred million guns in the US. Ban guns and only the law abiding will get rid of their guns. That will result in the law abiding being defenseless. The goal should be to get the lawless to get rid of their guns.

Explain how me getting rid of my guns will prevent tragedies like that which occurred in Maine.

 

Dumb people deserve to live too.

I disagree that this is the most important question. The most important question is what is the right thing to do? What will save lives? If doing their right thing works in favor of somebody's personal egotistical interest, I say go for it! I don't mind...

We can walk and chew gum. No idea why you think it's a choice.

I see. So you are one of those who believe that an AR-15 is going to defend you against a military-grade drone flown from hundreds of miles away that is basically going to pulverize your house with one shot, if you decided tthat you're a threat to the government. Well... I'm not sure that will work out the way you apparently expect it to.