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

That's grounds for impeachment.

I would like to see a system set up where suicidal people can voluntarily and temporarily surrender their guns for safekeeping and then receive them back when they are better.

The left seldom agrees, but that is because they do not care about trying to save lives.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many of them don't. The left speaks for other people without justification.

As for those young people who do hate our freedom, many of them will grow out of it when they get older and gain a bit of wisdom.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is incorrect. Self defense guns are for preserving life.

Target shooting guns are also not designed to take life.

Hunting guns are the only ones that are designed to take life. And that is their proper purpose.

 

No. Banning them would be unconstitutional. It is wrong to violate people's civil liberties.

"If it works" is meaningless because the only purpose of such a ban is to harass law-abiding people.

Name calling.

Wrong. But it is telling that the left wishes for a future without freedom.

You are wrong.

Judges like to ridicule that argument when they hear it, because it is such a ridiculous argument.

No one is assembling that amount of power.

Name-calling.

We're free people here in America. We don't have to justify ourselves as having a need before we acquire a gun.

If we choose to go buy a gun, then we go buy that gun. Merely because we have chosen to do so.

And rightly so.

No assault rifle that was legally owned by an American civilian has ever been used to commit a crime.

They do not create any issues.

No machine gun or assault rifle has ever been used to shoot up an American school.

No. Future generations will love freedom too.

But it is telling that the left desires a future with no freedom.

People who are bent on committing massacres will always find the tools they need to carry them out.

There has never been a mass shooting (or any crime at all) carried out using an assault weapon that was legally owned by an American civilian.

Luckily the Framers overruled you. The Constitution always trumps the will of the voters.

That said, majority rules is exactly how the NRA blocks gun control so successfully.

Leftist gun bans are not very popular with rural voters.

 

If you shoot and kill in self defense you are still taking life.

I guess soldiers carry guns just because it looks cool.

 

That does not mean that it is the purpose of the gun.

A shooting that stops the attack without killing the attacker --> successful self defense.

A shooting that fatally wounds the attacker, but they kill the defender before dying --> unsuccessful self defense.

 

to inflict casualties on the opposition

 

Biden is a noted idiot, and his wife says he shouldn't be subjected to a mental competency test.

Its seems like it's one unconstitutional thing after another with this guy. His ARB plan, is unconstitutional.

'The Supreme Court's recent ruling against New York's restrictions on public possession of firearms' shows 'that the state's ban on "assault weapons" is likewise unconstitutional.'

'the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment applies to weapons "in common use" for "lawful purposes,"'

'"AR-15 rifles are among the most popular firearms in the nation, and they are owned by millions of Americans. A recent survey of gun owners indicates that about 24.6 million Americans have owned up to 44 million AR-15 or similar rifles….And according to industry sources, more than one out of every five firearms sold in recent years were rifles of the type banned by New York."'

https://reason.com/2022/07/14/this-...hat-assault-weapon-bans-are-unconstitutional/

CIVIL RIGHTS UPDATE: Illinois Judge Rules State’s Gun Ban and Registry Unconstitutional.

'Due to the latest ruling, the law being deemed unconstitutional applies to the entire state.'

 

What is an "assault weapon"? Fifty states... fifty different definitions... and none of them are the same as the military definition.
"Machine guns" aren't really an issue. It already takes a Class III license to own one.

 

the less someone knows about guns, the more vocal they tend to be against them

 

A semi-automatic gun designed for quick, efficient killing.

 

That's not the definition in California where it requires two of six items to be included: pistol grip, bayonet lug, removable magazine, flash suppressor, and two other items which I forget at the moment. When I lived in CA I bought an M1A (A M-14 which only fires semi-auto, not full auto) which does everything an AR-15 can do but with a bigger bullet and longer range. Under the CA definition of "assault weapon" it did not qualify and was easier to get. So, by your definition a FULLY AUTOMATIC weapon is NOT an "assault weapon". Cool. So an M-16 is NOT an assault weapon (it fires FULL auto)? Be sure to let the lawmakers know as they strive to ban assault weapons. So a 22 caliber that fires semi-auto is an assault weapon? Let people know... that's a brand new definition. I have a Saiga chambered in 308. It will do everything an AR-15 can do only at a longer range and with a bigger bullet but it was designed as a hunting rifle... so its not an "assault weapon"... right?

 

The term assault weapon appears to be confusing then. It sounds like everything is politicised and they just go after ar15s or the latest massacre weapon du Jour. As I said earlier Biden is simply virtue signalling. And it seems that federal law doesn't have much jurisdiction anyhow.

In New Zealand & Australia they simply banned semi-automatics federally. Simple.

But obviously not feasible for the US. Who knows what will happen, but it's pretty obvious you guys won't give your guns back. So I'm guessing nothing.

 

I hope you're right.

 

Yes, it is the purpose of the gun in that situation (kill or wound).

Right.

There is no point in playing word-games. The military doesn't even use the term to refer to the weapons they carry.

 

The CDC seems to conflate the two. Just an observation.

 

No, they do not. They differentiate between diseases and murder, as does common sense.

 

Semi-auto guns are not assault weapons.

Assault weapons were heavily restricted some 90 years ago, and no assault weapon that is or was legally owned by an American civilian has been used to commit a crime ever since.

It is tragic that those nations abolished their freedom.

 

That is incorrect. The purpose of a self defense weapon is to protect life.

 

So, if you kill an attacker, then no one is hurt. If that's your argument, then so be it.

 

Nah. They view both as a public health issue. I disagree as you do. I’m just making the observation the CDC treats them the same.

 

innocent life

 

Oh that's a nutty little rabbit hole. Pass.

Some say it's tragic when kids brains get blown out and guts spilt over the classroom so a few mucho losers can compensate for various forms of "smallness".

 

Yes... but -those- people cannot express themselves without thinking about other people's penises.

 

you sometimes wonder of sexual disfunction and hoplophobia are related mental illnesses

 

why do most of us correctly think that your constant spewing anti gun hatred really has little to do with kids being murdered?

 

Nah.
They know cannot present a sound argument / rebuttal, so they are forced to respond with middle-school level insults.
Speaks more toward their level of education and maturity than anything else.