30 minutes ago, morrobay said:

 

Disingenuous is conflating removing guns from law abiding citizens who have them for self defense and sport with removing guns from whackos who have a history. 

 

Law abiding citizens don't need, nor are they constitutionally entitled to possess, weapons of mass murder for sport or self defense.

 

Nowhere in this entire discussion, have I spoken of individual handguns -- only those with high capacity firing capability that can be used as weapons of mass murder.

 

You're the one doing the conflating.

 

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

 

The topic is about how this is all Trump’s fault, quit deflecting.

 

No deflection, just pointing out the biased nature of the media's coverage.

 

Since you beg the question, neither of these shootings is Trump's "fault". He has never, to my knowledge, advocated violence and has been fortright and unequivocal in condemning the perpetrators of the El Paso and Dayton attacks.

 

Using the logic of his opponents, one might just as well argue that the Chicago shootings, which left seven dead and and 53 injured over the same weekend, were the President's responsibility. 

 

Rather than their predictable finger-pointing, Trump's critics should be calling for tighter gun controls and closer monitoring of social media, to identify individuals with extremist agendas who may be a threat to public safety.

19 hours ago, Atens4 said:

No guns = no killins.

It is a self inflicted problem in the US. Every one out side the US look at this with disbelief 

How does gun control eliminate the 400,000,000 guns already in American.  I know you are not going to answer but I thought the question should be asked.   

5 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Law abiding citizens don't need, nor are they constitutionally entitled to possess, weapons of mass murder for sport or self defense.

 

Nowhere in this entire discussion, have I spoken of individual handguns -- only those with high capacity firing capability that can be used as weapons of mass murder.

 

You're the one doing the conflating.

 

How many shots is a weapon of mass murder?

1 minute ago, marcusarelus said:

How does gun control eliminate the 400,000,000 guns already in American.  I know you are not going to answer but I thought the question should be asked.   

You have to start somewhere. 

3 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

 

I think records indicate that more than 50% of the guns in America are owned by about 3% of the population. About 200 million guns in the hands of about 10 million people. Not saying they're whackos (beyond being gun nuts), but how many weapons does one person need for self defense and/or sport?

 

I think records indicate that more than 50% of the guitars in America are owned by about 3% of the population. About 200 million guitars in the hands of about 10 million people. Not saying they're whackos (beyond being guitar nuts), but how many guitars does one person need to be entertaining? My sister has at least 20 guitars, yet she can only play one at a time. My brother in law has about 15 motorcycles in all states of repair. I like to fish, and would guess I have at least 50 outfits dating back to what my father fished with, why I got as gifts as a kid and stuff I have accumulated over the years. How many cars does Jay Leno have?

 

What difference does it make? Are these mass shooters typically gun enthusiasts with hundreds of weapons?  I don't think so, and in any event, they only really need one. It seems (although I'm not sure) most of these guys obtain their weapon legally after passing a background check.

22 minutes ago, Sujo said:

And planes are made to kill people are they?

 

Also note that to get on a plane you need security checks. You also have a snowballs chance in hell of getting into a cockpit these days.

 

Didnt hear people complain too much about their right to fly with no safety measures.

You are kidding right?  Here is a photo of snowball

CNN is reporting the shooters mother called police about his weapon of mass murder and the cops did nothing about it.  

 

As in so many things cops at fault.  Train em better.  

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/07/us/el-paso-crusius-gun-warning/index.html

Whites in America,,the new minority. 

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 If you wanna have a legitimate debate, that's fine. But stop spewing outright falsehoods.

 

You know the Democratic Congress passed and President Clinton signed the 10 year assault weapons ban back in 1994 

 

 

I would like to have a legitimate debate. We should have 10 years of data that will prove that sales of assault rifles are what were driving the increase in mass shootings.

 

Can you post the data that shows the decline in mass shootings over that period? 

19 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You have a point. Let's stop licencing pilots. Let anyone who wants to pilot a plane.

Yes, had we been requiring pilots to be licensed back then, it would have prevented the 9/11 disaster.

 

Great thinking.

11 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

You are kidding right?  Here is a photo of snowball

Comprehension not strong in this one.

10 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

CNN is reporting the shooters mother called police about his weapon of mass murder and the cops did nothing about it.  

 

As in so many things cops at fault.  Train em better.  

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/07/us/el-paso-crusius-gun-warning/index.html

Too right. Cant be blaming the shooter or his acces to guns can we. Always someone elses fault

24 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Law abiding citizens don't need, nor are they constitutionally entitled to possess, weapons of mass murder for sport or self defense.

 

Nowhere in this entire discussion, have I spoken of individual handguns -- only those with high capacity firing capability that can be used as weapons of mass murder.

 

You're the one doing the conflating.

 

 

I agree. For the sake of honest, informed debate, would you please define what constitutes "...weapons of mass murder..."? That way we'll all know exactly what should be legal and what should be outlawed. 

5 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Too right. Cant be blaming the shooter or his acces to guns can we. Always someone elses fault

 

No need to be blaming the shooter. This was clearly Trump and the easy availability of guns fault.

3 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

No need to be blaming the shooter. This was clearly Trump and the easy availability of guns fault.

I see. It's either one or the other. Couldn't possibly be both.

14 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I agree. For the sake of honest, informed debate, would you please define what constitutes "...weapons of mass murder..."? That way we'll all know exactly what should be legal and what should be outlawed. 

Weapons designed to kill and repeat killing at a fast rate.

6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I see. It's either one or the other. Couldn't possibly be both.

I thought Trump and the easy availability of guns was both.

 

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

Weapons designed to kill and repeat killing at a fast rate.

So rifles designed for rapid fire, non-lethal shooting sports events are okay?

4 minutes ago, mogandave said:

So rifles designed for rapid fire, non-lethal shooting sports events are okay?

As long as you dont paint them black then they become scary to liberals.

37 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I agree. For the sake of honest, informed debate, would you please define what constitutes "...weapons of mass murder..."? That way we'll all know exactly what should be legal and what should be outlawed. 

 

Congress passed the federal assault rifles ban in 1994 that remained in effect to 2004... They took a stab at definitions in that.

 

For my opinion, I'd give you six shots of a standard revolver...or similar in a rifle.

 

I wouldn't give you this from Dayton. I wouldn't give you 41 shots in 30 seconds.

 

 

1 hour ago, marcusarelus said:

How many shots is a weapon of mass murder?

'

This for starters, and anything like it:

 

 

 

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

what makes his comment particularly cluess is that certain aspects of gun control is actually overwhelmingly popular when broken down into specifics like background checks. A recent Fox News poll confirms this.

Fox News Poll: Voters favor gun measures, doubt Congress will act

By a 13-point margin, voters consider protecting against gun violence more important than protecting gun rights (53-40 percent).

In addition, there’s substantial support for specific measures to reduce gun violence, including: requiring criminal background checks on all gun buyers (91 percent), requiring mental health checks on all gun buyers (84 percent), raising the age to buy all guns to 21 (72 percent), putting armed guards in schools (69 percent), and banning assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons (60 percent).

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-voters-favor-gun-measures-doubt-congress-will-act

 

The average American isn't bought and sold by the NRA, and fearful of its wrath.

 

Most Republicans and some Democrats in Congress are. 

 

Until they put the safety of Americans over political interest, the slaughter will continue.

 

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

You have to start somewhere. 

Do you do anything about the 400,000,000 weapons in the hands of Americans now?

7 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

The average American isn't bought and sold by the NRA, and fearful of its wrath.

 

Most Republicans and some Democrats in Congress are. 

 

Until they put the safety of Americans over political interest, the slaughter will continue.

 

No congress just lazy.  House head of black caucus talking on CNN a couple of minutes ago when asked if would come back from 6 week vacation and she said no.  

22 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

'

This for starters, and anything like it:

 

 

 

How about 24 shots in 24 seconds?  

 

22 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

'

This for starters, and anything like it:

 

 

 

24 shots in 24 seconds 1851 four easily holstered revolvers.  Made by kit and ball easy to make yourself and powder easy to make your self.  I guess you don't know much about guns or watch any Clint Eastwood movies.  

 

21 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Congress passed the federal assault rifles ban in 1994 that remained in effect to 2004... They took a stab at definitions in that.

 

For my opinion, I'd give you six shots of a standard revolver...or similar in a rifle.

 

I wouldn't give you this from Dayton. I wouldn't give you 41 shots in 30 seconds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You should love this:

 

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=revolver+speed+loader+trick+shooting+videos&view=detail&mid=33475080046C1CDF84C833475080046C1CDF84C8&FORM=VIRE

Quote

 

limiting the amount of ammunition allowed in a magazine is the next line of defense, Freilich said. When magazines hold fewer rounds, a shooter must stop to reload. The pause in action can save lives by giving those in danger time to flee or law enforcement a chance to intervene, he said.

"Restricting magazine capacity is probably the single most effective thing we can do to restrict the lethality of mass shootings," Freilich said.

...

What constitutes a large capacity magazine varies among states. California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and the District of Columbia define it as a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds, according to Giffords. In Colorado, it's a magazine capable of holding more than 15 rounds. Vermont law defines it as a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds for use in a long gun or more than 15 rounds for use in a handgun.

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/05/us/large-capacity-magazine-dayton-ohio-shooting/index.html

Just now, mogandave said:

 

 

 

You should love this:

 

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=revolver+speed+loader+trick+shooting+videos&view=detail&mid=33475080046C1CDF84C833475080046C1CDF84C8&FORM=VIRE

 

Until either of you are willing to agree that weapons of mass murder should be banned, you're just wasting time and air on a pointless debate.  And I don't hear either of you showing any willingness to ban anything...no matter how deadly or capable of inflicting mass casualties/death.

 

2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/05/us/large-capacity-magazine-dayton-ohio-shooting/index.html

There is nothing new about the large cap magazine regulations.