Page 1 of 75
Mr. President, do NOT ban assault weapons!
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:09 pmby New Axiom
I just received an email today from Vice President Joe Biden calling for the banning of AR-15s and similar weapons from civilian ownership. I completely disagree with this. I myself own an MP-15, and use it for target shooting every other weekend. I use it as a sporting weapon, not a weapon of murder. I agree that we should force the employment of background checks on all purchasers purchasing ANY weapon, but banning a certain type of weapon is just plain stupid. I can also agree that it is unconstitutional and violates the second amendment. Sure, we'll still have the right to bear arms such as bolt action rifles, if they ban ARs. But, no where does it say that civilians have the right to NOT a own assault weapons, let alone does the government have the right to take them away. Additionally, if they ban assault weapons, criminals will just use another weapons, and slowly the government will ban every firearm ever. Sure, people use assault weapons for mass shootings, but statistically I'd bet that most gun violence is linked to handguns becuase they are easier to carry and hide.
In a nutshell, I agree with the call for enforced background checks on all weapon purchasers, but banning weapons is just stupid.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:14 pmby Annorax
New Axiom wrote:I just received an email today from Vice President Joe Biden calling for the banning of AR-15s and similar weapons from civilian ownership. I completely disagree with this. I myself own an MP-15, and use it for target shooting every other weekend. I use it as a sporting weapon, not a weapon of murder. I agree that we should force the employment of background checks on all purchasers purchasing ANY weapon, but banning a certain type of weapon is just plain stupid. I can also agree that it is unconstitutional and violates the second amendment. Sure, we'll still have the right to bear arms such as bolt action rifles, if they ban ARs. But, no where does it say that civilians have the right to NOT a own assault weapons, let alone does the government have the right to take them away. Additionally, if they ban assault weapons, criminals will just use another weapons, and slowly the government will ban every firearm ever. Sure, people use assault weapons for mass shootings, but statistically I'd bet that most gun violence is linked to handguns becuase they are easier to carry and hide.
In a nutshell, I agree with the call for enforced background checks on all weapon purchasers, but banning weapons is just stupid.
MOLAN LABE
Most gun violence is with hand guns and most of that from the poor inner cities, if they really cared about gun violence they would start there.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:15 pmby Washington Resistance Army
In all seriousness an assault weapons ban probably wouldn't be upheld nowadays if it was challenged using more recent SCOTUS rulings.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:16 pmby Conserative Morality
Aye, I agree. 'Assault' weapons don't really have a lot of features that facilitate the kind of gun violence you see in the US. If anything, the features they have make it harder. Handguns are where we should be focusing on.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:16 pmby The balkens
No.
NO.
NOOOOO!!!!!
For all the people spouting "not all muslims" we seriously need a "Not all gun owners" hashtag.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:16 pmby The balkens
Conserative Morality wrote:Aye, I agree. 'Assault' weapons don't really have a lot of features that facilitate the kind of gun violence you see in the US. If anything, the features they have make it harder. Handguns are where we should be focusing on.
no.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:17 pmby Ifreann
Maybe you should be saying this to Joe Biden, not us.
Annorax wrote:New Axiom wrote:I just received an email today from Vice President Joe Biden calling for the banning of AR-15s and similar weapons from civilian ownership. I completely disagree with this. I myself own an MP-15, and use it for target shooting every other weekend. I use it as a sporting weapon, not a weapon of murder. I agree that we should force the employment of background checks on all purchasers purchasing ANY weapon, but banning a certain type of weapon is just plain stupid. I can also agree that it is unconstitutional and violates the second amendment. Sure, we'll still have the right to bear arms such as bolt action rifles, if they ban ARs. But, no where does it say that civilians have the right to NOT a own assault weapons, let alone does the government have the right to take them away. Additionally, if they ban assault weapons, criminals will just use another weapons, and slowly the government will ban every firearm ever. Sure, people use assault weapons for mass shootings, but statistically I'd bet that most gun violence is linked to handguns becuase they are easier to carry and hide.
In a nutshell, I agree with the call for enforced background checks on all weapon purchasers, but banning weapons is just stupid.
MOLAN LABE
Most gun violence is with hand guns and most of that from the poor inner cities, if they really cared about gun violence they would start there.
It's "molon labe"
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:17 pmby Conserative Morality
Excellent response, Balk. Truly, you have ascended to the level of the Russian apologists we used to argue with. Bravo.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:19 pmby The balkens
Conserative Morality wrote:Excellent response, Balk. Truly, you have ascended to the level of the Russian apologists we used to argue with. Bravo.
whats funny is that the NRA is actually paying me.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:19 pmby Washington Resistance Army
The balkens wrote:Conserative Morality wrote:Excellent response, Balk. Truly, you have ascended to the level of the Russian apologists we used to argue with. Bravo.
whats funny is that the NRA is actually paying me.
Heller Foundation pays better, fyi.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:20 pmby The balkens
Washington Resistance Army wrote:The balkens wrote:whats funny is that the NRA is actually paying me.
Heller Foundation pays better, fyi.
i work double for the dollarlydoos.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:22 pmby New Axiom
Christ people, stay on topic.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:22 pmby Kernen
Conserative Morality wrote:Excellent response, Balk. Truly, you have ascended to the level of the Russian apologists we used to argue with. Bravo.
The reasons that a handgun is such a lethal tool in the hands of a criminal are the same reasons that a handgun is such a valuable tool in the hands of a law abiding citizen looking to protect themselves. Even if additional layers of safety requirements were placed on handguns, they wouldn't be banned.
I've always believed that the problem of gun violence in the US stems not from a lack of regulation but a lack of enforcement on existing regulation. Straw purchases are still absurdly easy to set up.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:22 pmby The Black Forrest
Well? How many mass killings has Australia had since Port Arthur?
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:23 pmby Washington Resistance Army
New Axiom wrote:Christ people, stay on topic.
An assault weapon ban likely wouldn't last long anyways because of
Heller and
Caetano, I wouldn't worry much.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:23 pmby Ostroeuropa
It takes 18-24 months for the United States to vet and verify the intentions of people seeking refugee status in the United States.
FBI Director James Comey has admitted that even with the 18-24 month timeframe, it is impossible for the United States to fully vet Syrian refugees because the quality of the background check is only as good as the databases they can pull information from.
ISIS is said to possess Syrian passport printing equipment as well as passport blanks, providing the terror group the ability to give their fighters new identities to sneak into the west. Even if our intelligence agencies are able to access Syrian databases - unlikely since Syria is a failed state - there is no guarantee that a refugee is who they say they are.
Even if it is determined that a refugee applicant supported ISIS, the Obama administration has enacted regulations to allow people who provide "limited material support" to a terror organization to gain entry into the US anyway. Previously, any proof of supporting terrorism was an immediate disqualifier
Barack Obama has taken a process that takes 18-24 months, which experts say still isn't enough time to fully vet refugee applications, and reduced the entire process to just 3 months.
24 months -> 3 months = 87.5% reduction
Barack Obama has declared that it is too easy to buy a gun in the United States of America.
Under federal law, it is illegal for someone to purchase or possess firearms if (1) they are convicted of a felony or imprisoned for a term exceeding one year; (2) they are convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence; (3) they are a fugitive from justice; (4) they are unlawfully addicted to illegal drugs; (5) they have been adjudicated as mentally defective or involuntarily committed to a mental hospital; (6) they have been dishonorably discharged from the US military; (7) they have renounced their US citizenship; (8) they are an illegal alien; or (9) they are the subject of a restraining order.
The standard for deciding which Americans are allowed to have guns is higher than the standard Barack Obama and Clinton used to decide which Syrian rebels could have guns (spoiler: they gave guns to ISIS)
Sources in link;
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/com ... /?sort=topThe perspective here is totally skewed. The reaction to Orlando makes no sense in this context.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:23 pmby Vassenor
The Black Forrest wrote:Well? How many mass killings has Australia had since Port Arthur?
Everyone knows that's a false equivalence because reasons.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:23 pmby Washington Resistance Army
The Black Forrest wrote:Well? How many mass killings has Australia had since Port Arthur?
4 I think.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:23 pmby Conserative Morality
Kernen wrote:The reasons that a handgun is such a lethal tool in the hands of a criminal are the same reasons that a handgun is such a valuable tool in the hands of a law abiding citizen looking to protect themselves. Even if additional layers of safety requirements were placed on handguns, they wouldn't be banned.
I've always believed that the problem of gun violence in the US stems not from a lack of regulation but a lack of enforcement on existing regulation. Straw purchases are still absurdly easy to set up.
The handgun isn't a valuable tool in the hands of a 'law-abiding citizen'. Jesus, do you know how rare it is that someone successfully defends themselves against a crime with a firearm?
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:23 pmby The balkens
The Black Forrest wrote:Well? How many mass killings has Australia had since Port Arthur?
Well it did give us the glorious /k/ube.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:24 pmby Xadufell
What if I told you... AR-15s aren't fully automatic and shouldn't be called "assault weapons".
But honestly though, what is this argument? "Yee, we shud ban ass-ault wepons cuz sum gai shot up peeple." How about we get more law abiding citizens guns and abolish "gun-free zones". Outlaws take advantage of gun free zones, imagine if someone had a gun and was able to shoot and kill the gunman at Orlando? And this b-s that "Oh, if citizens have guns they gone kill more people" shouldn't be acknowledged if everyone could get familiar with how to operate and accurately fire a firearm.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:24 pmby Ostroeuropa
If the US wants less gun crime, they need to end the war on drugs. Not ban guns or restrict their usage more.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:24 pmby Ralkovian Grand Island
Looks like I'm buying some assault rifles.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:25 pmby The East Marches
Conserative Morality wrote:Aye, I agree. 'Assault' weapons don't really have a lot of features that facilitate the kind of gun violence you see in the US. If anything, the features they have make it harder. Handguns are where we should be focusing on.
Get that trash reasonable opinion off this NSG. Hyperbole only please.
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:25 pmby Washington Resistance Army
Ralkovian Grand Island wrote:Looks like I'm buying some assault rifles.
Have fun paying $20,000+.