Jump to content

Washington state seeks to ban sale of 'assault weapons,' high capacity magazines


Recommended Posts

Posted

Always wondered why they are always described as 'assault' weapons.

 

Why are they not called 'defence' weapons? This is the main reason/excuse that they are sold to the public in the first place.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Gun control laws as are any other laws on the books WILL NEVER PREVENT MASS SHOOTINGS, GUN VIOLENCE OR ANY OTHER CRIME FROM HAPPENING they are only instruments to hold a person accountable AFTER they have BROKEN THE LAW.  There is a reason police dont arrest and prosecute guns they arrest and prosecute people.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Kleepanna said:

How I own several and I dont condone mass shootings

If you have many then you like them and are ok with that they are beeing sold easy over the counter.

That is a way to condone mass shootings.

  • Sad 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Benmart said:

Become an American citizen if you are not already and vote to change things. Otherwise, your comments are meaningless. Your last sentence is juvenile and pointless.

+1

  • Sad 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Matzzon said:

Exactly my point! The number of people killed in mass shootings in the United States doesn't even come close to the number of people killed in Europe, Africa, and Asia because they didn't have access to firearms to protect themselves. Thanks for proving my point for me! Oh, one other thing, the deadliest mass shootings in American history weren’t even mentioned in the data you referenced because the two deadliest mass shootings in American history were carried out by the United States government.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, oslooskar said:

because the two deadliest mass shootings in American history were carried out by the United States government.

 

That´s probably why they not classify as mass shootings.

Posted

When I grew up, with guns, mass shootings were virtually unheard of and guns easily available. When I was 10 I could buy ammunition at the grocery store. It was on the same shelf as candles, matches, and other related hardware goods. Something else, not guns, has gone horribly wrong, or maybe a few things. If one is serious, that's a good place to start looking. Might wind up fixing  other things along the way.

 

  • Like 2
Posted

7 States finally change, a lot more to go. Of course we all know that an AR15 or

similar gun is a great hunting rifle if you are after 30 or 40 wild animals at

the same time. The USA still has a long way to go in changing the brain set of

their Right to bear arms, or bare arms crowds.  It is so confusing this English language.

Geezer

  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, oslooskar said:

Exactly my point! The number of people killed in mass shootings in the United States doesn't even come close to the number of people killed in Europe, Africa, and Asia because they didn't have access to firearms to protect themselves. Thanks for proving my point for me! Oh, one other thing, the deadliest mass shootings in American history weren’t even mentioned in the data you referenced because the two deadliest mass shootings in American history were carried out by the United States government.

 

Europe, africa, asia are not countries.

Posted
1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Europe, africa, asia are not countries.

Europe, Africa, and Asia are many countries, which greatly strengthens the argument you try to blithely negate.

 

  • Like 2
Posted
12 hours ago, oslooskar said:

You're right! They're classified as massacres.

Ok, then they did not belong then, so they didn´t forget anything, right?

Posted
2 hours ago, Matzzon said:

Ok, then they did not belong then, so they didn´t forget anything, right?

Wrong! They, like you, don't seem to understand that all massacres, of four or more people, carried out by firearms are mass shootings. Hence, all mass shootings are massacres but not all massacres are mass shootings. 

Posted
12 hours ago, sunnyboy2018 said:

Gun control laws have eliminated or reduced mass shootings in all the countries where the laws have been introduced.

What countries might those be?

Posted
1 hour ago, oslooskar said:

Wrong! They, like you, don't seem to understand that all massacres, of four or more people, carried out by firearms are mass shootings. Hence, all mass shootings are massacres but not all massacres are mass shootings. 

Then the world must be very lucky that you seem to be "The One" that understands much better.

Posted
4 hours ago, Matzzon said:

Then the world must be very lucky that you seem to be "The One" that understands much better.

On the contrary, the world understands all too well that the Wounded Knee Massacre and the My Lai Massacre were the deadliest shootings in American history; you're the only one who is having trouble connecting the dots.

 

Posted
40 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Because some leftist progressives incorrectly assumed that AR-15 is short for "Assault Rifle 15" and not "ArmaLite Rifle 15" simply because it would fit their political agenda...?

You are of course, precisely correct, but the AR-15 isn't the only weapon classed as an assault weapon. 

Posted
1 hour ago, MaxYakov said:

Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don't let our people have guns. Why should we let them have ideas? 
 Joseph Stalin

 

If it's about saving lives, then why not put the freeway speed limit down to 40 MPH and ban motorcycle use?

It's one of those American things, like the anti-abortion movement.

They call themselves pro-life but coincidentally these same people usually support the death penalty.  And once the child is born they care nothing about the quality of its life.

 

Posted

Something to bear in mind is Washington state's neighbors.  Idaho is solid red and known for right-wing tinfoil hatters, successionist movements, etc.  You may recall this came up in the OJ trial, one of the cops was a white power type who belonged to a group of them up there.  DT won the state by 30 points in 2016.

Eastern Oregon definitely has elements that lean heavily in that direction, with some wiseacre types referring to that part of the state as "western Idaho."

I can see that a motivating factor for Washington state taking this step is to discourage that element from moving there.

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...