I've explained this numerous times in numerous threads. I guess because you're "new" here, maybe you haven't seen those posts? Though despite the fact that you have 14 posts as of this moment, you're acutely aware of my stance on banning and the crux of previous arguments. That's interesting, but sure - I'll play along. You say that criminals have access to "bazookas" and grendaes...can you show me the last time a bad guy used a "bazooka" or grenade in any civilian attack here in the United States? Banning "bazookas" or heavy artillery weapons works because no one has them. They're incredibly expensive to obtain, almost unavailable (unless you have a corrupt military contact) and really, what's the point in going through all the difficulty to get them when you can just build a home-made bomb with some parts from Home Depot and a quick browse of the internet? Banning "assault rifles" (such a stupid term, but let's stay with it) is not so much about the right or wrong as it is about the effectiveness of the ban. Assault rifles have been banned several times before in several municipalities. The two I can quote you right off was the Federal Assault Rifle ban during the Clinton years which the government said had no noticeable effect at all. All it did was raise the street price of the hundreds of millions already in circulation. It didn't even make the existing ones illegal - because the government realized there was no way to practically do this. New York State tried later on, and still has one in effect. They even put a buyback program for those weapons banned and only 4% of those estimated to have the weapons actually came forward. Of course, there's no way to know for sure as there is no national registration list of those who own said rifles, so no one really knows who owns them and who does not. Now that I've answered your questions, please tell me. Who are you under this new sock puppet? I'd just like to know which previous user I am talking to.
Singed Toe doesn't understand the simple logic that making a thing illegal makes it harder to obtain. That Johnny nutjob would not on a whim be able to run to the local store and get an ar15 when he gets mad at his school. Why he cannot understand this simple logic is a mystery.
I never said that making a thing illegal doesn't make it harder to obtain. As usual, you don't listen to anything but your own parroting. What I said is that Johnny Nutjob would be able to go out and get a banned weapon with little or no effort despite your ban, since there are just so many of them on the street already. All you will do is restrict those who follow the law (and aren't your problem if you are concerned about safety). I also pointed out that, if you were truly concerned about the safety in schools, you would consider other, more effective solutions such as a guard, or better law enforcement proactive behavior for known trouble makers and criminals. But this would put the responsibility on the individual, not the inanimate object. But hey, show us all those pictures of all the kids again - that's really emotionally moving. Unfortunately you ignore all the kids killed by gun violence in Chicago, or Detroit, or Philadelphia, or Baltimore, or... Because it doesn't fit the narrative.
I know first-hand that the NICS system works pretty well. I had a ticket for cell use while driving and I was in DC during the court date. I'd sent in the check but it was never cashed. I come home and try to receive a Tavor X95 purchased online and the transfer didn't go through bc (unknown at the time) of the outstanding cell ticket. I racked my brain to figure out why I didn't pass the NICS and found the ticket. Went downtown same day and paid it off. Went to the FFL 90 minutes later and it was already cleared and I got the firearm. The majority of mass shooters are bipolar at minimum. I don't think that anyone that has been committed to a psych inst. should be allowed to own a firearm. The fallacy that being old enough to enlist equates to gun ownership is mental. 21. Any minor committing a crime with a firearm owned by a parent should result in felony charges for the parent. I think that we should be abolish the NFA, even the full-auto provision. Limit all magazines to ten rounds with a bullet button. The majority of mass killings are aided by high-cap. Make the reload take ten seconds and a guy is going to be bum-rushed. Full-auto is useless in terms of efficiency. AWB are useless as there are more than 50MM AR-15s in the US.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." I benefit from the 2A, but knowing the quality of shooters at my local range... they ain't well-regulated.
The "gun show" loophole is a problem if guys from out of state are buying without as much as an ID check. Most people at gun shows will pass an NICS, but perhaps as much as 10% are there because they're felons. armslist.com is the craigslist of firearms. Zero regulation. I have used it but I require the buyer's name beforehand and do a background check, but most of the people already have valid CCWs so no need to run their name. Congress will shut it down (loophole) if we have a mass shooting and the guy bought outside of the NICS transfer system.
Exactly! Holy Christ why is this so hard for folks to grasp? You're using terminology way above the pay grade of the average avid pro gun control individual. I'm not sure banning all high capacity mags does much. First, there are so damned many out there already and easy to get. Second, you can 3D print them now. Third, someone who has trained (granted, not most of these crazy kids) can tape two 10 caps together upside down from each other, and flip them in under 2 seconds. Leaving one in the chamber during the flip, and you're pretty close to safe during the reload.
True about the mags; no different than banning ARs. Even more difficult to control. Make possession a crime. I know... I don't have a single 10rd mag. lol. I don't want to acquiesce, but I don't see a compromise.