An automatic weapon was not used at sandy hook

I know right, these obvious "right wing" (economic free market) loonies keep shooting up places all over.

Except...not.

We do have a history of left wing loonies killing off half of their population.

 

Then they will just switch to 17 round handguns. Oh wait, handguns have been used most in these shootings.

 

If you're talking about 6 rounds, you're probably talking about a wheel gun. Most likely a revolver. The type of gun you'd have to reload each around individually. But what if you have multiple attackers coming after you? You wouldn't even use one of those rounds as a warning shot.

 

He thinks that only Obama should have a gun and it should be a single-shot pistol, and Obama will respond to you in time if you're being beaten to death in the street or your daughter is being tied up.

 

Okay, so you think semi-auto shotguns and rifles should be banned but not semi-auto handguns. Tell me, do you know what the most commonly used weapon in the perpetration of crime is in the US?

 

I think you should have been able to follow that; but you didn't. So be it.

I already answered that.

No... civilians do not need semi-auto or automatic weaponry; only military and law enforcement would need those.

 

I find that libs understand what a 'machine-gun' is....So let's just tell them that Lanza didn't use a 'machine-gun' at least they'd have to think before belching the Daily Kos talking points. BTW they also seem to confuse guns with people...."Gun crime" is one of my favorites. "Gun play" that's a good one too. We are constantly ASSAULTED by the leftist propaganda talking points.

 

You are showing that the gun lobby is over. People have seen through it for what it is. A big bunch of arrogant head cases who don't care about the basic civil rights of anyone but themselves and include small children in the list of those they don't care about.

It makes me confused that people trying to condescend can't spell initiatives (if that is what is was intended to be).

Listen. Some people, who are equally as entitled as gun nuts to shape the gun debate, do not have a need to know an automatic from a semi because it is irrelevant. Both are lethal weapons which require to be kept out of the hands of dangerous and irresponsible people in order to protect the populace.

 

Help us out by getting rid of all guns, not just machine guns.

 

Anders Breivik springs to mind.

 

Amen to that!!

 

I care about crime, which is the general case when you talk about guns. You're meaningless pontificating need not apply here. Evidently, you don't care about crime.

I guess if that's what you want it to be. Sidetracked much?

Actually, it does make a difference. Your ignorance of the difference including what each type of weapon is used for just strays away from the facts. If you don't know anything about guns, you don't know which type of guns criminals or mass shooters general go for. You don't know which types of guns are more dangerous than the other. You don't know which type of guns are more ideal for which type of environment.

But ignorance sure as hell never stopped anyone from voicing their opinion. Why should it now?

Everything under the sun can be used as a lethal weapon. The point is, you clearly can't tell the hole from a gun barrel from a hole in a ground or your anus, but somehow want to place you opinion.

You're not making me sick, but you are making me laugh. What a joke your post turned out to be.

 

Americans treasure their 2nd Ammendment rights. The "gun lobby" didn't appear in Washington D.C. until people like you started trying to ban them in Washigton D.C. If anything is over, it's the anti gun lobby.

Actually you have no idea how people view this issue. You don't even pay attention to the surveys that show overwhelming opposition to non solutions like more gun control. You see what you want to see.

Spelling? Really? You demonstrate weakness in your argument when you pettifog the conversation to spelling and grammar.

Apparently it's very relevent because the gun grabbing Left keeps trying to construct the "scary looking gun" image in the American psyche.

Nothing you propose serves this end. Congratulations on being absolutely useless to the discussion.

 

And of course your remedy is to take them out of the hands of law abiding citizens, which does nothing.

BTW, these shootings are actually very small statistically but are used as an emotional springboard to take away the rights of law abiding citizens.

The debate on "high capacity magazines" is also stupid since it will make no difference.

With one pistol of 10-round capacity and one pistol of 15-round capacity, Cho killed more people than anyone has ever killed in a single U.S. shooting incident. He didn’t need any massive magazines or custom weapons. The embarrassingly simple reason that magazine size restrictions can’t lessen the lethality of mass shooters is that it doesn’t matter how many rounds fit in a magazine if a shooter has multiple magazines. When one runs out, they can simply drop it and pop another in, a process which takes five seconds at most. Less than half a second for some. Cho was able to carry out this massacre because he carried a backpack containing 19 magazines, a fact not well-publicized.

 

Perhaps. Even so, I haven't seen any cases where feathers, or toenail clippers, or guitar amps were used to kill large numbers of people (and certainly not quickly). I'm tired of the false equivalents; they're BOGUS.

Bottom line:

Automatic and semi-automatic weapons can kill or maim many people QUICKLY; guns are made for KILLING. Please, stop trying to compare them with TV remotes... or other things "under the sun"; I'm sick of that sh__!!

That's really stupid.

It's not funny to most right now, and I don't expect many to tolerate your nonsense right now. Oh yes, there are people seriously WANTING to clamp controls onto things, and they really do have good reason to do so. So, take the way people feel right now are a joke if you want... but I think you'll be underestimating their overall resolve to change things in America.

 

But not everyone agrees, on what those "rights" allow for.

The debate isn't happening for nothing.

 

Right, it is happening because of emotion for something that is really a statistically small event and the resulting laws will be ineffectual from stopping anything.

 

It shouldn't matter, the weapon. What matters is the purpose of the 2nd amendment. Whether or not that purpose would be hindered if you limited the types of arms people can own.

 

Even the effects of the mass murders upon this nation are up for debate.

In my view, I saw the massacre of the classroom full of kids as a tipping point; a threshold. It wasn't the mere emotion of that single incident. It was like the last poke of a bear with a stick, just before it woke up.

And hey, the NRA and other proponents of over-the-top weapons proliferation, didn't really get things under control... so why SHOULDN'T the American people rise up and demand some changes?? If YOUR kids were shot in the head, chest and face multiple times... what questions would you ask? What demands would you place upon this society?

The NRA and others allowed the moral vacuum to enlarge, never truly addressing the problem... but ALWAYS promoting greater weapons proliferation. And in that, what have they helped?

You bet you ass... people are going to rise up after this slaughter of children (and whatever happens thereafter). You'd have to be out of touch, to expect otherwise.

 

Why does the media ignore the most heinous school killing in American history?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

 

I point out the stupidity of using board terms. The only person who used it as a false equivalent was you in an attempt to strawman. I'm talking about real weapons. If you want to talk about TV remotes, be my guest.

It is stupid and yet we have these people still trying to advocate gun control without knowing the first thing about using a weapon.

Stupid, yes. But accurate.

I do think the way you feel is a joke, as I lack empathy for anyone who don't take the time to understand. Change also means learning. Something people just don't want to do. No one has to tolerate my 'nonsense' but I don't have to tolerate anyone else's ignorance.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

Well, the problems with that "right" have warranted a brand new debate of the same. So be it.

 

Remember that, as you promote the further proliferation of unnecessary firepower into this society.

 

I imagine the gun laws were pretty lax back then too.

 

Yes, using the deaths as a "tipping point" for an agenda. You cannot address the problem with ineffectual laws. The shooters come in three types, the ideological like Ft Hood, the psychotic like Loughner, and the socially disconnected like Lanza. The money spent on helping put people out of jobs in the gun industry and limiting what law abiding citizens can do while ignoring the real problem in our society is just band-aid mentality.