Horrible shooting in Vegas

[QuaoarsKing]

And owning a vehicle is not listed as a right in the Bill of Rights. More specifically under the only on that says "shall not be infringed".

Operating a vehicle is a privilege. That is why the govt can freely do what you pointed out.

As I usually ask..if the deal was presented to you today to repeal the 2nd amendment if another could be abolished... which amendment between 1 and 3-10 would you choose?

I support the 2nd amendment along with the other 9 amendments in the Bill of Rights and have no interest in the trade.

The vast majority of people who support some additional gun safety regulations have no interest in banning all guns or repealing the 2nd amendment or anything drastic like that.

My main point in the post is that cars can be very dangerous and are regulated accordingly, so it makes no sense to bring up cars in a gun argument unless you want to regulate guns similarly, which is sensible but not something a lot of pro-gun activists want. And I realize that regulations would not be able to stop a lot of the mass shootings we see, but they definitely could make a dent in the 99+% of gun deaths that don't occur in mass shootings.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

I enjoy shooting an AR for fun, at targets. It has no other practical use for me personally, although some hunt with them. Regardless, it certainly isn't a necessity for hunting. I would gladly forgo that enjoyment if a law that banned them would end this kind of massacre. I would like to think that the number of people who would go through the black market to get guns just to do something like this would be less than the number who obtain them legally. However, completely not understanding how a person thinks who would do such things, I don't really know. I do know that law-abiding gun owners don't like the idea of conceding any firepower to non-law-abiding ones. It's tough to believe that we could legislate morality, having failed to so so successfully thus far, but maybe we could reduce casualties; who knows?

 

[BELdog]

Please tell me more about how prohibition works.

 

[BELdog]

You are an idiot if you believe that self-driving cars will make accidents less likely. It is equally stupid to believe that banning "certain guns" is going to fix anything in this world.

 

[xxxWalkTheDawg]

I support the 2nd amendment along with the other 9 amendments in the Bill of Rights and have no interest in the trade.

The vast majority of people who support some additional gun safety regulations have no interest in banning all guns or repealing the 2nd amendment or anything drastic like that.

My main point in the post is that cars can be very dangerous and are regulated accordingly, so it makes no sense to bring up cars in a gun argument unless you want to regulate guns similarly, which is sensible but not something a lot of pro-gun activists want. And I realize that regulations would not be able to stop a lot of the mass shootings we see, but they definitely could make a dent in the 99+% of gun deaths that don't occur in mass shootings.

And most people that hold firm to the 2nd Amendment also believe some regulation is OK.

The problem starts when you 1) have people that would be passing a lot of safety regulations not able to explain basic stuff like the difference in semi-auto and automatic and 2) it's perfectly fine for a gun to look one way but not another when it functions exactly the same in either case.

Many people are afraid... and rightfully so.. of the slippery slope. Well you just CANT be against common sense things like magazine capacity restrictions. Well you just CANT be against common sense things like doing away with semi auto rifles. Well you just CANT be against common sense things like doing away with semi auto handguns. Well you just CANT be against registering every gun you own and being subject to audit. Well you just CANT be against the government taking these firearms because you appear to have too many. Well you just CANT be against ammunition limits can you?

Will never happen... right? Well there are multiple people in Congress that would back and sign this tomorrow. I know this because it has been spoken directly by them.

And while we are on the subject of common sense regulations... when can we talk about common sense regulations like banning burning of the flag? The majority of Americans are against that. Why can't we regulate that? Vulgarity? Can we regulate that? Oooh. Hate speech. There is one we can regulate. Why not?

 

[BELdog]

How big of a dumb *** do you have to be to even post this crap?

 

[Shamoan]

no more senseless that the thousands of lives lost daily to abortion, yet equally tragic. we are a savage nation slowly drowning in our own evil. i fear there is something on the horizon that will bring us to our knees.

 

[NWADawg]

Thru history- completely agree- there is evil in this world.

I would disagree though when it comes to senseless/anonymous mass shootings carried out by individuals in the US. If you charted out mass shootings by decade from 1930 thru today, it would exponentially rise.

We are all evil. One of the biggest lies of this world is that people are basically good. We are born with a sin nature and we all have areas in our life where we are more prone to show it. Whether it's porn, drunkenness, violence, or whatever. It's been that way since the forbidden fruit. Why do we expect lost folks to act like they are not. If they believe that their whole existence begins and ends in this world, what do morals matter? I'm surprised their aren't more folks that doing ridiculous stuff like this.

 

[BELdog]

That scenario you describe probably would have killed many more than he killed with his rifles.

 

[DAWG61]

How big of a dumb *** do you have to be to even post this crap?

How so bud? You need your hunting rifles and semi-automatic's during times you aren't hunting? Why is that exactly? A pistol isn't enough for you to feel safe? I refrained myself earlier from you jacking off to what type of gun was being used to kill 58 people and injure 500 more but the restraint has now been lifted with your comment. So let's hear it gun lover. Tell us why everyone should have hunting rifles outside of hunting areas.

 

[EngDawg]

And most people that hold firm to the 2nd Amendment also believe some regulation is OK.

The problem starts when you 1) have people that would be passing a lot of safety regulations not able to explain basic stuff like the difference in semi-auto and automatic and 2) it's perfectly fine for a gun to look one way but not another when it functions exactly the same in either case.

Many people are afraid... and rightfully so.. of the slippery slope. Well you just CANT be against common sense things like magazine capacity restrictions. Well you just CANT be against common sense things like doing away with semi auto rifles. Well you just CANT be against common sense things like doing away with semi auto handguns. Well you just CANT be against registering every gun you own and being subject to audit. Well you just CANT be against the government taking these firearms because you appear to have too many. Well you just CANT be against ammunition limits can you?

Will never happen... right? Well there are multiple people in Congress that would back and sign this tomorrow. I know this because it has been spoken directly by them.

And while we are on the subject of common sense regulations... when can we talk about common sense regulations like banning burning of the flag? The majority of Americans are against that. Why can't we regulate that? Vulgarity? Can we regulate that? Oooh. Hate speech. There is one we can regulate. Why not?

To WalkTgeDog you listen.

 

[KurtRambis4]

The 2A isn't about

protecting you from some thug trying to steal your car. Nor is it about 17ing hunting. This is what liberals don't understand.

 

[johnson86-1]

This is perfectly legal under the NFA:

If that's not easy to make, I think I would be perfectly happy to amend the second amendment to allow its prohibition.

 

[RocketDawg]

But he didn't. Reportedly the staff had been in and out as normal and didn't see anything unusual.

Wonder what the "platforms" consisted of. He supposedly had one for each window.

And how did he get that particular 2 bedroom suite, especially during a time when that huge music event was going on? Did he specifically request it? He'd almost have had to, but it might raise some suspicion?

 

[QuaoarsKing]

protecting you from some thug trying to steal your car. Nor is it about 17ing hunting. This is what liberals don't understand.

I think we all understand pretty well it was written to allow people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. While that position was sensible in the 18th century, it doesn't really work in the 21st -- your personal collection of guns won't be anywhere enough to protect you from the modern U.S. government and military if it ever goes dictatorial and oppressive.

 

[KurtRambis4]

See, I don't think you do.

If that's the case, why all the banter about "huntin rafles n getting mugGed by BAndItos!!!1"?

I think we all understand pretty well it was written to allow people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government

You say that position was plausible in the 1700s, but not now, bc of US might, but that's a straw man and completely irrelevant. It's the principle.

Under that line of thinking, Freedom of the Press does not apply to modern day forms of media.

 

[Felonious Junk]

I swear man. Gun defenders can come up with every possible comparison to cast doubt on necessary gun ownership meanwhile thousands of people die every year bc anyone can get their hands on instruments whose sole design is to kill. Guns have no purpose other than that.

It's always the same stupid argument over and over. What about cars they kill people? If we change one law then which one will they change next? Gotta have my guns!!

Meanwhile someone's child just got shot in school and you rednecks just can't let it go.

 

[KurtRambis4]

Good, solid points.

Would read again. 10/10.

 

[turkish]

I swear man. Gun defenders can come up with every possible comparison to cast doubt on necessary gun ownership meanwhile thousands of people die every year bc anyone can get their hands on instruments whose sole design is to kill. Guns have no purpose other than that.

It's always the same stupid argument over and over. What about cars they kill people? If we change one law then which one will they change next? Gotta have my guns!!

Meanwhile someone's child just got shot in school and you rednecks just can't let it go.

If only all gun grabbers were as astute as you, we rednecks wouldn't have a thang to worry about.

 

[mstateglfr]

It's a hypothetical situation. Say the US public came to a magical agreement. One side gets to abolish the 2nd amendment. And as a response.. the pro gun side gets its choice.

Which one does the anti gun cross their fingers in hope the pro gun side doesn't pick... or does pick.

When you constantly ask tjis hypothetical, do people actually engage in the fauxintellectual discussion it would create?
I cant imagine many people want to play the game of total hypothetical with no basis in ever happening when it comes to sucj a charged issue as arms control. But i guess there are odd ducks out there and im sure you can troll real nice like in person to egg people into engaging in such a pointless hypothetical.

 

[mstateglfr]

Another obvious problem is an unwillingness to walk down the logical path of what gives, or does not give, life "value". If we are only bags of animated bones, products of evolution, from some primordial soup then you can't really have an argument that in a Darwinian/survival of the fittest world there is any inherent "value" to life, only power, individual feelings and individual will matter in such a world.

Uh...what?
Why can life only be valued by those who reject evolution?
...thats how your post reads- if were are a product of evolution, then life cant have value.

That's absurd. Completely absurd. I cant even come up with a well reasoned counter since its so ridiculous.

All life can be respected for its preciousness and appreciated for its uniquness, regardless of everyone's views of religion.
All that needs to happen is to look over at parebts who lost a child to a gun shot and its simple to see how irreplaceable and precious life is. Religion isnt a requirement for such an obervation, or any of the other examples which would form the collective view of life being valued.

 

[xxxWalkTheDawg]

I swear man. Gun defenders can come up with every possible comparison to cast doubt on necessary gun ownership meanwhile thousands of people die every year bc anyone can get their hands on instruments whose sole design is to kill. Guns have no purpose other than that.

It's always the same stupid argument over and over. What about cars they kill people? If we change one law then which one will they change next? Gotta have my guns!!

Meanwhile someone's child just got shot in school and you rednecks just can't let it go.

Whew doggie!!! You got all us dare professuh!! No retort to that master intellect!

 

[Felonious Junk]

Hey dipshits just keep doing things the way they've always been done. Surely the death toll will subside.

More and more dead children but damnit you will not have your guns taken. Congrats

 

[KurtRambis4]

Solid points.

Would read again. 10/10.

 

[xxxWalkTheDawg]

When you constantly ask tjis hypothetical, do people actually engage in the fauxintellectual discussion it would create?
I cant imagine many people want to play the game of total hypothetical with no basis in ever happening when it comes to sucj a charged issue as arms control. But i guess there are odd ducks out there and im sure you can troll real nice like in person to egg people into engaging in such a pointless hypothetical.

like it or not. It's a perfectly good question. There is no debate the 2nd amendment is part of the Bill of Rights.

Everytime a shooting occurs... several people begin screaming about "common sense" regulations.

Ok. Why does no one talk about "common sense" control of speech? Why can't we regulate who gets a chance to speak? After all, Hate speech and its effects got a girl killed in Charlottesville didn't it? Common sense free speech regulation could criminalize racist speech. And that would bring the country together. How about we regulate assembly? That's common sense. No items that can be deemed insensitive to anyone at any assembly. Why would anyone be against that common sense legislation?

What about some 4th amendment common sense reforms? Do we really need a warrant to search a place or residence if there is reasonable suspicion that illegal activity is going on? If we are pretty sure? What about if all signs point to a possible crime that may be about to take place? We could make some common sense reforms to possibly save lives. Right?

What about some common sense reforms in the 8th? If we could really make prison hell... that would make a better deterrent to crime? Right? This would make criminals less apt to rob, rape, and murder and that would save lives and make society more harmonious. I mean it's common sense.

And that trial by jury stuff? What if it's a pretty fair judge? I mean.. it would be quicker to let a judge just rule on certain non-capitol crimes to speed up the process. Especially if it's pretty likely the criminal did it. Rape trials and drug related trials could really be streamlined. Or on the other hand... what about only jury trials for criminal matters.. none of the civil stuff. Again, it would really speed it up.

But that's stupid.. right? I mean we can't consider any of this. People have rights you know.

 

[msstatelp1]

I swear man. Gun defenders can come up with every possible comparison to cast doubt on necessary gun ownership meanwhile thousands of people die every year bc anyone can get their hands on instruments whose sole design is to kill. Guns have no purpose other than that.

It's always the same stupid argument over and over. What about cars they kill people? If we change one law then which one will they change next? Gotta have my guns!!

Meanwhile someone's child just got shot in school and you rednecks just can't let it go.

Take every argument you use about controlling guns and change "guns" to "free speech" and see how it sounds.

 

[Felonious Junk]

Why are you changing it? No one is talking about anything other than thousands of deaths by means of a gun.

 

[KurtRambis4]

You're right.

We should just make all guns illegal and stop all of the murdering. Also, the govt will always be there for our best interests.

 

[Felonious Junk]

So you prefer the murdering? And good luck overthrowing the government! I'll be rooting for you.

 

[Bulldogg31]

It's amazing that I can walk into Dicks Sporting Goods and buy a weapon that will put a hole in someone the size of a grapefruit, but I can't buy an ounce of weed.

And I'm a hunter.

 

[sandwolf.sixpack]

like it or not. It's a perfectly good question. There is no debate the 2nd amendment is part of the Bill of Rights.

Everytime a shooting occurs... several people begin screaming about "common sense" regulations.

Ok. Why does no one talk about "common sense" control of speech? Why can't we regulate who gets a chance to speak? After all, Hate speech and its effects got a girl killed in Charlottesville didn't it? Common sense free speech regulation could criminalize racist speech. And that would bring the country together. How about we regulate assembly? That's common sense. No items that can be deemed insensitive to anyone at any assembly. Why would anyone be against that common sense legislation?

What about some 4th amendment common sense reforms? Do we really need a warrant to search a place or residence if there is reasonable suspicion that illegal activity is going on? If we are pretty sure? What about if all signs point to a possible crime that may be about to take place? We could make some common sense reforms to possibly save lives. Right?

What about some common sense reforms in the 8th? If we could really make prison hell... that would make a better deterrent to crime? Right? This would make criminals less apt to rob, rape, and murder and that would save lives and make society more harmonious. I mean it's common sense.

And that trial by jury stuff? What if it's a pretty fair judge? I mean.. it would be quicker to let a judge just rule on certain non-capitol crimes to speed up the process. Especially if it's pretty likely the criminal did it. Rape trials and drug related trials could really be streamlined. Or on the other hand... what about only jury trials for criminal matters.. none of the civil stuff. Again, it would really speed it up.

But that's stupid.. right? I mean we can't consider any of this. People have rights you know.

Nicely done.

 

[KurtRambis4]

Who said

anything about overthrowing the govt and being for murder?

You're great with these platitudes.

 

[mstateglfr]

Everytime a shooting occurs... several people begin screaming about "common sense" regulations.

Ok. Why does no one talk about "common sense" control of speech? Why can't we regulate who gets a chance to speak?

Long post. Ill just addrrss this first point and assume it applies to the rest kmod your rant.

We do regulate speech.
There are limits to speech.

Simple as that- speech is already regulated. Not only that, but what type of speec is and isnt acceptable has continually been refined, especially thru the last 100 years.

Just apply the above reality to the rest of what i assume are incorrect points by you. Tldr n ****.

 

[Dolphus Raymond]

Fifty-nine dead and over 500 wounded. Will this be the tipping point? Not yet but we are slowly getting there. If 20 plus dead children at Sandy Hook Elementary School did not bring change this event will not do so either. After Sandy Hook, congress still could not find the courage to pass background checks for "gun shows". Chew on that one for a minute.
I am a avid hunter, which, by default, makes me a gun owner and as far as I'm concerned, the ATF could melt down every damn assault weapon in this country tomorrow. Want to shoot one? Do as I did and become a "grunt".
Fifty-nine dead and over 500 wounded. **** the NRA and that coward Ted Nugent.
And please spare me the excuse that "gun control does not work". ********.

 

[57stratdawg]

If 20 six-year olds in Newton wasn’t the tipping point, I don’t know what will be.

Oreilly called it “the price of freedom” today. The majority of conservative Americans agree with him.

 

[Bulldogg31]

Fifty-nine dead and over 500 wounded. Will this be the tipping point? Not yet but we are slowly getting there. If 20 plus dead children at Sandy Hook Elementary School did not bring change this event will not do so either. After Sandy Hook, congress still could not find the courage to pass background checks for "gun shows". Chew on that one for a minute.
I am a avid hunter, which, by default, makes me a gun owner and as far as I'm concerned, the ATF could melt down every damn assault weapon in this country tomorrow. Want to shoot one? Do as I did and become a "grunt".
Fifty-nine dead and over 500 wounded. **** the NRA and that coward Ted Nugent.
And please spare me the excuse that "gun control does not work". ********.

Yep. I've never had a deer stand there long enough for me to empty a magazine.

 

[catvet]

The people screaming for more GUN control, usually have full time body guards that carry, wait for it, semiautomatic weapons. They are the same folks that have passed over 5000 gun control laws that are never enforced. The second amendment is the necessary tool to enforce all of my other rights. If you want to see a massacre then look what history shows us about the gun grabbers: Hitler's first order was for all to turn in their guns. They were defenseless after that and history records over 100,000,000 deaths that followed.

You own a pistol because you don't trust your fellow man. You own a semiautomatic because you don't trust your government. They have done little over the past 20 years to make me want to give up any rights.

 

[57stratdawg]

A semi automatic isn’t protecting you from the US Military today.

 

[thatsbaseball]

After hurricane Harvey and again after last night's tragedy two high profiled, highly educated young liberal professionals were fired by their respective employers for their hateful rhetoric. Kenneth Storey, a prof at the University of Tampa, said that Harvey was Karma for the state of Texas voting Republican. Haley Geftman-Gold , a lawyer and VP at CBS , said that she felt no sympathy for the victims in Las Vegas because they were probably mostly Republican. IMO Guns currently aren't even on the Top Ten list of problems in this country right now....we're in deep ****.

 

[xxxWalkTheDawg]

We do regulate speech.
There are limits to speech

I'm not talking about yelling fire in a theater.

I'm talking about standing on a platform in a public area. I'm talking about groups of people that may chant and exclaim insensitive remarks to another group. If we could just enact some reforms then no one could be insulted or otherwise belittled.

What about speakers who are known to say inflammatory things? Can we enact common sense reforms to prevent this? Common sense reforms could have prevented Charlottesville and lives could have been saved.

And just randomly and incorrectly calling it a rant doesn't automatically dismiss the point.