United States & Gun Control discussion.

Ok. Good points. I agree that injured doesn't always equate to bullet wounds. Yes, one could inflict a lot of damage in that setting on semi alone. But...he chose an area where he could use plunging fire to inflict the most damage. This is where auto/ bump is most effective.

Edited to clarify plunging vs grazing fire.
 
Last edited:
This is not the time to bring up these issues...

You would think. But within 24 hours there were people saying the victims didn't deserve sympathy, because they were country music fans who probably voted for Trump.

ETA: There has been a petition to the New York State Bar Association started for a formal ethics review of Hayley Geftman-Gold for her comments on social media following the LV shooting. Sign the Petition
 
Last edited:
This is not the time to bring up these issues...
You're right, I expected better of our leaders once upon a time. But the quote never let a tragedy go to waste is attributed to Rahm Emanuel. Perhaps ask the Democrats why they couldn't even give it 48 hours before they started thumping.
 
Yes, quite interesting. I think the ban on semi-auto should be repealed in Australia. Considering we've had no incidents for some time, it's time to rethink the options.

Sadly that’s what is likely coming here in Canada. They already gave the RCMP the power to classify and ban firearms; we are now basically a police state.
 
The people interested in the banning all guns won't see this as a win. This is dangerously close to becoming another bullshit AR ban of the '90s that only really banned cosmetic/comfort mods. Does a collapsible buttstock increase the lethality of a rifle? How about a flash suppressor?
 
Obviously I disagree with the article, but these are the kinds of arguments being made for gun control. Like any debate, we focus on what we want to believe in support of that cause.

Trump Said the Presence of Another Gun Stopped the Sutherland Springs Shooting From Being Worse. Did It?

Gun advocates argue it’s hard to know how many shootings were nipped in the bud by armed civilians before those incidents became mass shootings, and some say the reason more armed bystanders don’t stop mass shootings is because the killers target gun-free zones such as schools. The statistics cited in gun debates can vary and are often interpreted differently. What’s clear, however, is the strong relationship shown in several studies between the number of guns and the number of gun-related deaths, even when controlling for factors such as poverty and crime. The armed bystander in the Sutherland Springs shooting might have saved lives. But his actions do not necessarily mean that this mass shooting was not, as Trump put it, a “guns situation.”
 
In the event the perp is gunned down in medias res, the ammo and artillery he brings to the show is a pretty good indication of his intentions. If a guy walks in armed with only a six-gun, it's pretty clear he wasn't planning a mass cas event.

The only way it would've stopped being worse is if somebody in the church managed to cap the motherfucker in progress.
 
I am as pro-2A, pro-gun as you can get. I admit it's a shit sandwich...there are no 'easy answers.' On the very end of the spectrum, if they illegalized every gun today, there is no way they can confiscate the estimated 300 million guns out there. But they aren't going to illegalize every gun; they may try to illegalize some guns (a la Brady Bill), which do nothing to prevent, deter, or decrease gun crime. "Sensible" gun laws usually aren't, and the pro-gun/anti-gun lobbies force a kind of tension with equal force pulling, so nothing moves.

If I had the answers, I would be on TV every night. But I don't, so the best I can do every time shootings occur is pray for the families and folks involved, and move on.
 
If we are to live in a Free society, and I mean Free. Then there needs to what is considered an acceptable number of casualties in regards to gun crimes as well as Terrorist attacks. Shall Not Be Infringed is non-negotiable and some states are currently infringing on their population.

The stats are clear, the more legal ownership, the less crime on the aggregate.

Saying the 2nd Amendment is anachronism of the 18th century is the same thing as saying the 1st Amendment is. If you want it removed from the Constitution, there are avenues of approach to do that. However, we restricted drinking once...the country half rebelled. And we have way more DUI related deaths than firearms related deaths today.
 
One of the problems with gun reform or whatever is who will they find to modify the 2nd Amendment? Exactly. Since no one can or will do that, people attempt to legislate around it, eroding the Constitution because we are too weak to make the hard choice. This applies to other amendments as well, but it is clearly displayed with the 2nd.
 
Back
Top