Ban Assault Weapons

Page 16 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


I knew it wasnt a great argument but it does remind people that most often the person dealing with heavily armed criminals isnt Joe Home owner, its the cops.

Retired Navy Capt. Mark Kelly, Giffords husband as well as a former astronaut and also a witness, said a limit on the size of ammunition magazines could have made a dramatic difference when a man opened fire in Arizona two years ago.

He "showed up with two 33-round magazines, one of which was in his 9 millimeter. He unloaded the contents of that magazine in 15 seconds. Very quickly. It all happened very, very fast. The first bullet went into Gabby's head. Bullet number 13 went into a nine-year old girl named Christina Taylor Green....

"If he had a 10-round magazine -- well, let me back up. When he tried to reload one 33-round magazine with another 33-round magazine, he dropped it. And a woman named Patricia Maisch grabbed it, and it gave bystanders a time to tackle him.

"I contend if that same thing happened when he was trying to reload one 10-round magazine with another 10-round magazine, meaning he did not have access to a high-capacity magazine, and the same thing happened, Christina Taylor Green would be alive today."
Click to expand...

-Mark Kelly- Gabby Giffords Husband at todays gun control hearing.
 
I have respect for Mark Kelly and much sympathy for Gabby Giffords and certainly their words are a sad narrative of the horror that results from an unstable wack-a-do going on a gun-toting rampage.

What's omitted from a large number of the reports regarding today's hearings is the testimony from the NRA, GOA, and other pro-gun owners and organizations.

However, what will be all over the info-tainment channels at 6 o'clock is the above testimony intentionally presented to illicit an emotional reaction.
 
Wayne LaPierre in 1999:

"We think it's reasonable to provide mandatory instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone."
Click to expand...

So why not have a total background check? Why is the NRA so adamant about relaxing background checks?
 
What is a "total background check"?

In New Jersey, in order to purchase a handgun, I must submit to a criminal background check, a mental health background check, and provide two non-family member character references. The State background checks do not include the national background check, NICS, which is done at the time of purchase. Isn't that "total" enough?

Personally, as a law abiding person with no criminal record or mental health issues, I believe the number of background checks in New Jersey to be unreasonable.

Background checks are also a 4th & 14th Amendment issue. Think of this way, according to Roe vs Wade, the SCOTUS determined that a woman's decision to have an abortion is protected by the right to privacy under due process clause of the 14th Amendment. This decision confirmed what was written in the 4th Amendment that people are secure in their person, house, papers, and effects (effects in this context means, the things you own, your personal property) from unreasonable searches and seizures. So, if a woman shall not be deprived of her pursuit of life, liberty, or property without due process (which just happens to be her right to have an abortion) then how and why is it "reasonable" for gun owners to subject themselves to searches/background checks in order to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights?

On the surface, it is literally and wholly unreasonable for a citizen to be subjected to any type of search/background check in order to exercise the right(s) guaranteed by another Amendment. Do we require searches/background checks for a person who is going to hold a public rally? Heck no! And why? Because it would be an egregious violation of the 1st Amendment!

Please understand that I am not directly comparing abortion to gun ownership. However, I am drawing a parallel to the principle of what is the right to privacy and to be secure in your person, home, and effects; whether it is a woman's right to do as she chooses with her person or whether it is any person's right to not be subjected to unreasonable searches/background checks when exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.
 


Funny, as I thought it you, wanna, and Gamer, all talking about going back to a democracy over a republic....
 


Something change? You're making reasonable and sensible comments. :)

Mark's argument is wishful in a sense. Using a high capacity magazine means it is heavier. I see a lot of people drop them when trying to load weapons because they're not used to the weight of it. I've seen people drop 30 round magazines out of AR-15s. I've seen people have their handgun magazines drop out. It comes with how experienced someone is with their hands and their tools. But that is just the same argument in reverse.

Using a .22 caliber round would have been just as dangerous. In fact, it would have killed Gabby. It is an Israeli tactic to use a .22 in close range, behind the ear, to assassinate people in public. The bullet lacks penetrating power to exit the skull, therefore bouncing around in the head and killing the person. .22s are not being targeted for the ban and are still allowed high capacity magazines. That to me proves the people making the legislation don't quite understand what they're doing.
 
Background check.. that takes out a lot of dealers. Gun shows for example, you can walk in, check your gun, and sell it there to anyone who comes in.

The argument will be criminals will buy them there. If that were the case, why have all the guns that have been used been legally purchased at gun stores? 😀 Plus, when you buy a gun often you "go on the books" saying X person sold ABC to Y person. There is a written record of it. So if the gun is traced, and they can be traced, you can follow the path to how the person got the firearm.

But hell, what's the point of tracing it? Great, you know where the gun came from.. what does anyone benefit from it though? Unless it was reported stolen I guess.
 
You cant do a background check on a suspicious character driving a car when driving illegally, if theyre illegal.
The feds already have said they wont do anything or much.
So, in a stretch, the illegals have more rights.
Let me put it this way, it does matter to people, and having one huge paper trail could be dangerous
 
Oh, and as for trusting our governement
President Obama signed legislation Friday ensuring long-promised paid leave benefits for members of Minnesota’s “Red Bull” National Guard unit and more than 49,000 Guard troops across the country.

The president’s signature came a week after Congress cleared the measure recouping time-off benefits that had been promised before the soldiers shipped overseas last year
http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/154131005.html

Last October, the Pentagon said nearly 500 Minnesota Red Bulls would be paid money owed to them for back-to-back deployments.

But, 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS found only about half of them have received paychecks four months later.

http://kstp.com/news/stories/s2915005.shtml
 


Did you see on TV, the Federal gun tracing report?

They're still in the stone age doing it all by hand, a paper work nightmare of epic proportions, some of it has been put on microfiche type film, but the majority is individual files in boxes and books.

If that place ever caught fire and burned, they wouldn't have a clue as to the whereabouts of any guns they're keeping track of.
 


I would like to point out there's a big difference between someone using a high capacity magazine with little to no training and someone experienced using them. The practice of reverse taping the mags together is quite effective in having 60 rounds available, but takes serious practice in the magazine swap out, it has to become a fluid movement. In the event of causing maximum collateral damage why even use a gun at all, that's just stupid! IMO

The 22 bouncing around inside the head lacking the penetrating power to exit the skull is definitely not the characteristics of a 22 magnum round, so for that statement to be accurate totally depends on the 22 ammo used.
 


Oh I know. I know exactly how it works. In fact, I work for the government and I see this kind of stupidity everyday and nothing can change it.

If they recover a gun, they should be able to go back to the gun manufacturer to see where that gun was sent/sold to an FFL. From there, the FFL keeps their records for who they sold that gun to. From there, the Feds have to hunt down that person and see if they own it, or who they sold it to. That's where the trail can dry up. Now if the gun is listed as stolen, that's one thing. If it isn't listed as stolen, that's where tracing can become useful.

Everyone wants a gun registry. Except, no one understands what it's supposed to do, somehow they get a warm and fuzzy thinking if it is registered something will be better.
 
If all the bad guys have the guns meaning anyone desiring to impress their will upon yours, then what happens to the crying whiny complainers of today!

They get ******!

That's what!

It's pretty simple actually there's nothing complicated about it, bottom line is, gun control is the first step back to organized slavery except this time it will be the entire population.

Banning assault weapons is just the second step.

The first step is creating the reason to do it.



 
OMG, I'm 60 years old, I love my country, but I do not agree with some of the **** our government does!

Especially when their actions are the very ones that will bring the downfall of our country, I am not up to current events as you are so regarding false flag events you'd need to be more specific.

Personally I've grown sick and tired of watching all this play out knowing full well we've been lied to so many times, you cannot believe anything coming from the governmental mouth!

What surprises me most is the massive amount of ignorance within our own population, (the sheeple), that take every thing they hear as gospel and never question it.

Unfortunately at this point of our history, 100s of thousands will have to die to set things right, or the children of this country will have no country.

That raw reality will only bite them in the a$$, when they're scavenging for food to eat after the fact, but by that time our country will already be a lost cause, disarmed and beaten from the inside.

I will not be alive during that time period, they will have to take my weapons from my dead body!

Not because I am a gun fanatic, the gun is just a tool to me, but because once you give up your gun, you are dead anyway!

 


Because the guard didnt need to be armed, it could have been anyone.

From what I read earlier this kid targeted one student and then immediately surrendered (Or gave up when confronted, Im sure we will find out in time).

So the reaon Fox didnt bring it up is because it doesnt add to the narrative that you NEED an ARMED guard in a middle school.

Besides it must be tough being a guard at a school, imagine being judge jury and executioner for a 14 year old kid.
 


Well two things, respectfully.... I havent been able to find any reference to the guard having to even remove his gun, I doubt you have either (If you have link it up).

Secondly an armed guard didnt stop the first kid from getting shot, did it?
 
Ive been hunting, shooting, grew up with BB guns etc.
Only time I was ever startled by someone carrying a gun was when I went to Cozumel, when the local police/military drove down the street in their jeeps with machine guns sticking out all over., they all dressed in their uniforms etc.
I have to add I havnt ever been shot with a gun, BB gun yes, no real guns have ever been pointed at me.

Having the police carrying the guns, and not knowing if theyre to face a young teen or a group of mature men at a school only makes the response further away.
 


Since we are doing the imagination game, Lanza could have easily gunned that dude down, especially since body armor is very easy to get (As the Auroa shooter showed us).

Or do we need to have turrets, around every school? Maybe some concertina wire to keep shooters from flanking the guards, well technically 4 guard towers would be best, with snipers on the roof. We could have large metal doors that are controlled access doors, with a search at the front door, and before class starts.

Oh wait... Im thinking of a prison.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom