Mass shooting in Orlando - Politics

[3db]

As noted earlier, my problem is with the definition of an "assault weapon". For semi-auto rifles, thats:

So the definition by law classifies this an assault rifle as it possess several of these capabilities, one of which makes far more deadly than its non assaualt variant..simply having to repeatedly pull a trigger instead of manually loading a bullet into the chamber. The shooter threw your arguement of the usefullness of a 22 calibre out the window. Like I said before, assault rifles should not be permitted in the hands of the general public, especially where background checks are so lax.

 

[Chu Gai]

I would be leery linking a Constitutionally guaranteed right to an FBI Watchlist or No-Fly list.

Right now we have a very clearly defined set of criteria one must meet to purchase or own a firearm. For some reason our govt chooses not to enforce those requirements, not to prosecute violators, and not to heartily prosecute any crime committed with a firearm. Indeed, we see states restoring lost rights to convicted felons. Yet I see discussions about Watchlists and No-Fly lists?

Who controls the Watchlist or No-Fly list? Is there only one of each list? How does a name get on them... or off them? How would we feel about a govt watchlist that determines some individuals who are not allowed to worship in a mosque? That's another Constitutionally guaranteed right. Or how about an FBI list that decides some people can be retried for a crime of which they were previously acquitted? Another guarantee.

Please don't waste time arguing about my analogies. I'm just saying I am leery of letting some watchlist or no-fly list, created and controlled in secret by a govt institution, revoke a Constitutionally guaranteed right. It is a slippery slope.

The late Ted Kennedy was once on the no fly list. He should've been on the no drive list.

 

[Chu Gai]

So the definition by law classifies this an assault rifle as it possess several of these capabilities, one of which makes far more deadly than its non assaualt variant..simply having to repeatedly pull a trigger instead of manually loading a bullet into the chamber. The shooter threw your arguement of the usefullness of a 22 calibre out the window. Like I said before, assault rifles should not be permitted in the hands of the general public, especially where background checks are so lax.

But the shooter had an exceedingly comprehensive background test.

 

[everettT]

Yes but the NRA is in the back pocket of many of the congressman so to have a free vote on this is kinda moot at this point.

I could care less about the NRA and their lobby fwiw. I personally know of no one that has an issue with the 2nd amendment, which includes family and friends. The NRA to me is different to some. I see them stand up to constitonal threats, do I agree with every argument no, but I do believe in the constitution.

 

[3db]

This story, among others, illustrates such a proposition isn't necessarily a good idea. Of note, I don't hear much from Congress about the carnage that goes on Chicago. 7 dead last weekend. Many more shot.

We can ping pong back and forth all day with examples of why or why not on the merits of carrying concealed weapons. Let me ask you this, how many mass killing sprees were done by axe or other non firearm items?

 

[Steve81]

So the definition by law classifies this an assault rifle as it possess several of these capabilities, one of which makes far more deadly than its non assaualt variant..simply having to repeatedly pull a trigger instead of manually loading a bullet into the chamber.

The definition means that other semi-automatic rifles are totally OK, regardless of rate of fire, caliber, etc. Only semi-automatic rifles with two of those (largely cosmetic/irrelevant) features were banned. This is something noted by both pro-gun and gun control groups.

The shooter threw your arguement of the usefullness of a 22 calibre out the window.

Sorry, but if you don't know the difference between 22 Long Rifle and .223 Remington, you don't know diddly about guns.

 

[everettT]

We can ping pong back and forth all day with examples of why or why not on the merits of carrying concealed weapons. Let me ask you this, how many mass killing sprees were done by axe or other non firearm items?

911. Ask Isreal how many

 

[3db]

I could care less about the NRA and their lobby fwiw. I personally know of no one that has an issue with the 2nd amendment, which includes family and friends. The NRA to me is different to some. I see them stand up to constitonal threats, do I agree with every argument no, but I do believe in the constitution.

You may not care but it doesn't change the situation. The arguement for the right to bear arms is out date and its excuse for boys to keep their toys.

 

[3db]

The definition means that other semi-automatic rifles are totally OK, regardless of rate of fire, caliber, etc. Only semi-automatic rifles with two of those (largely cosmetic/irrelevant) features were banned. This is something noted by both pro-gun and gun control groups.
Sorry, but if you don't know the difference between 22 Long Rifle and .223 Remington, you don't know diddly about guns.

Let me ask you this,,, if thegun was not a semiautomatic, would he have been able to kill as many people as he did?

 

[everettT]

You may not care but it doesn't change the situation. The arguement for the right to bear arms is out date and its excuse for boys to keep their toys.

I guess we can disagree. Since I'm in the US and it's in the constitution as a right, I'll enjoy that right.

 

[Steve81]

Let me ask you this,,, if thegun was not a semiautomatic, would he have been able to kill as many people as he did?

It doesn't matter because nobody even remotely relevant to the political discussion here is even considering throwing out the idea of a wholesale ban on semi-automatic firearms / double action revolvers, only the scarier looking ones. The why is pretty simple: if you only have one shot before you have to reload, good luck defending yourself.

 

[Steve81]

Let me ask you this, how many mass killing sprees were done by axe or other non firearm items?

Arson, bombs (remember Oklahoma City?), simply driving a vehicle into a crowd of people, and so on. Machetes were pretty popular for this as well.

 

[Chu Gai]

We can ping pong back and forth all day with examples of why or why not on the merits of carrying concealed weapons. Let me ask you this, how many mass killing sprees were done by axe or other non firearm items?

Should've added box cutters to that list! Look, I'm as horrified as you and others when it comes to those massive casualties occurring. But the numbers in question pale in comparison to the number of other murders - a child shot in her room studying by a drive by, an illegal alien who keeps coming back and takes the life of a woman in CA, etc. You live in a different country with different demographics, different history, an entirely different gov't. In your country, it's OK to change 'O Canada' lyrics because of gender considerations.

Yes, the NRA is a lobby and politicians, including democrats, take monies from. What about the teacher's unions, real estate organizations, Wall Street? Is it OK just because they fit in with wth someone's belief system?

 

[everettT]

The gun below was my choice for deer hunting, in the wrong hands from a 1/2 mile away would cause serious damage. It's bolt action, should it be banned?

 

[3db]

It doesn't matter because nobody even remotely relevant to the political discussion here is even considering throwing out the idea of a wholesale ban on semi-automatic firearms / double action revolvers, only the scarier looking ones. The why is pretty simple: if you only have one shot before you have to reload, good luck defending yourself.

And visa versa..good luck going on a shooting spree.

 

[3db]

The gun below was my choices deer hunting, in the wrong hands from a 1/2 mile away would cause serious damage. It's bolt action, should it be banned?

I'm stating assault rifles (and let me be clear...semi automatic and automatic weapons) should be banned. If the shooter brought the rifle you use for deer hunting into that night club, he would not have killed as many people as he did. So my answer to this is no.

 

[Steve81]

And visa versa..good luck going on a shooting spree.

The thing is, shooting sprees are a lot less common than situations that call for people to defend themselves. Shooting sprees can to some extent be prevented by other means (such as stronger background check systems). More to the point, as has already been highlighted to you, individuals bent on killing lots of other people have a range of options beyond firearms. If Omar Mateen drove a U-Haul full of home made TATP into Pulse, would that have been a whit better?

 

[Steve81]

I'm stating assault rifles (and let me be clear...semi automatic and automatic weapons) should be banned. If the shooter brought the rifle you use for deer hunting into that night club, he would not have killed as many people as he did. So my answer to this is no.

Ever heard of the Beltway Sniper? Do you think Omar Mateen would have been far less dangerous if he used a couple of semi-automatic pistols?

 

[3db]

Arson, bombs (remember Oklahoma City?), simply driving a vehicle into a crowd of people, and so on. Machetes were pretty popular for this as well.

I guess its ok to maintain status quo and keep semi and automatic weapons available to the general populous for those infrequent mass shootings because they have been so effective by the laymen to stop all those bombings (only two I remember making the news), poisonings and driving car into crowds.

 

[3db]

Ever heard of the Beltway Sniper? Do you think Omar Mateen would have been far less dangerous if he used a couple of semi-automatic pistols?

Its the automatic nature, the ability to shoot so quickly that made it so deadly. Seriously?