The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 5, 2017, 08:27 AM   #51
zipspyder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 13, 2017
Posts: 292
Quote:
I don't see anyone "triggered at all.

would it not make more sense to outlaw hunting, shotguns or both, which are the source of a lot more gun violence, orders of magnitude more, than bump fire stocks?

If we "have to start somewhere" why would we not look at the higher overall killing machines like shotguns?

Since most murder, 85% to 95% in all the studies, involves prior criminals, and we need to "start somewhere" what loppholes would you suggest we start looking at, to reasonably compromise? Mirada, warrants, stop and frisk, double jeopardy, etc, which of those need new limits?

Give and take would be helpful. Perhaps no juries for second offence? How about no right to remain silent? that might be a good give and take?

Seriously, you are implying anyone resisting this is somehow extreme. do you feel the ACLU is extreme for not wanting to reduce rights when a crime occurs?

Are you forgetting that every single gun control "group" -- every one -- opposed all the way to the supreme court, any right for you to keep an handgun at home even if it was just a revolver, you had zero criminal history, zero mental issues, were extensively trained, and would be keeping it in a safe?

the problem with portraying slippery slope as a fallacy, is that we know from facts that slippery slope is a strategy.

Someone with a bumpfire stock killed 50 people, let's say some 20 to 25 because it was bumpfire instead of semi auto. Once you are on that track, then mag fed semi auto prohibition makes sense, and any semi auto prohibition makes sense, handgun prohibitions make sense, prove a need to own makes sense -- they all lower lethality potential and reality.


And if we are on the logic of "common sense compromises" where is the other side of the compromises? Why would Feinstien not show she actually means compromise by including support for national reciprocity, national ban on "good cause" requirements, or a say a new law that forbids prohibition of on semi auto firearms that are not bumpfire?
Apparently yes it has triggered some of you. And when did I say or imply "everyone" opposed. Throwing around the NRA handbook of statistics doesn't help anything. I'm talking more about getting to the table just to talk.

Every word you write screams no compromise. They won't budge so we won't budge. I'd be just as happy if this bill died today as anybody but at some point we have to get together and work these issues out sensibly.

Have our gun rights advocates/politicians get in there negotiate and talk to these politicians. How long should we wait? The next big tragedy or the one after that?

PS: If you don't know how to get around bump firing without having a bumpfire stock I'm not sure what to tell you and why you are arguing about this then? Having them ban official bump stocks is a really weak ass bone to throw them for the trouble. Of course that bill would have to be re-wrtiiten to be more specific from what I understand.

Last edited by zipspyder; October 5, 2017 at 08:37 AM.
zipspyder is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 09:09 AM   #52
Bluecthomas
Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2017
Posts: 95
1. I will be picking on of these stocks up in the next few weeks.

2. A mag fed bolt action in the right hands with a good scope, less injured, more dead.
__________________
"We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years."
Benjamin Franklin
Bluecthomas is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 09:54 AM   #53
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 7,069
The devil, in the details !!!

In a previous reply, I stated that the "devil is always, in the details" and even though this new battle has just begun, Here is the first devil and how it can effect some of our current laws. Politicians just ain't stay on point and exploit real issues with their agenda. Let me highlight this devil .......

Quote:
it shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank, a bump-fire device, or any part, combination of parts, 8 component, device, attachment, or accessory that is de signed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.
I am fairly competent in doing trigger work on Ruger 10/22's. This law would prohibit these types of upgrades. .....

Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 10:10 AM   #54
zipspyder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 13, 2017
Posts: 292
@Pahoo, tell me how that highlighted part would effect you from modifying a perfectly legal trigger? All I see is the illegal selling of pre-modified parts. Not saying you are wrong just asking?
zipspyder is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 10:26 AM   #55
Brit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,458
The fact that the Citys with the most crime, are Democratic strongholds has not slipped my mind. They also have the strictest gun laws.

Criminals do not abide by laws, that's why they are criminals.

This deranged person who perpetrated this crime was a millionaire. He could have bought all kinds of illegal stuff, including C4 and like explosives, left a van with a thousand pounds of it, in the street where the fans would flow out of that venue, and caused hundreds of deaths, and left a 20ft hole in the ground!

He had a mental complaint, and did nothing to alert law enforcement, he was on no one's radar, he was just a very rich man, period.

And what will it trigger now (no pun intended) the half-wits like FeinsteinClinton whomever, to come shrieking and blathering. Both of these sick women, with armed guards surrounding them!

I remember Ms Feinstein in one of her rants on Assult Rifle's, on a stage, holding an AK47 style rifle, 30 round magazine in place, safety off! Finger on the trigger, waving it at the audience!

Recently on more than one occasion, calling the current President, Bush!
On TV! She should be in a nice warm home for people who need looking after.

And there is no giving in to "Reasonable new Gun Laws!" This kind, and articulate Liverpool person, me. Has one reply, to any and all. "Piss off!"

I have heard it all before, in England, and Australia. It never ends well.
Brit is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 10:27 AM   #56
Salmoneye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDL
I don't see anyone "triggered at all.
The people in this thread that are calling for the banning of inanimate objects due to their emotional knee-jerk reactions, have clearly been triggered...
Salmoneye is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 10:54 AM   #57
Onward Allusion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Location: IN
Posts: 2,389
Quote:
Looks like she’s trying to ban my left pointer finger, which when placed on top of my right trigger finger increases the rate of fire.

I hope she doesn’t want to cut it off.
Damn, I was thinking that, too.
__________________
"You haven't lived until you've died." - various
People . . . not a big fan . . .
Onward Allusion is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 10:58 AM   #58
JimPage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 941
"If there is no give or take from both sides..."
There has been give and take. We give and they take. Look at the history.
__________________
Jim Page

Cogito, ergo armatum sum
JimPage is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 11:02 AM   #59
TrueBlue711
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2011
Posts: 201
Quote:
My only real worry is the ATF sending letters to owners of these devices demanding they be returned or some such.
How would ATF know where to send these letters? The stocks aren't serialized or registered. They would have to contact every store and website in the country that sells them, demand sale records selling the stocks in the past 6 years (or however long they were out for sale), and then chase you down from that? Maybe they get your name from those records, but would have to do even more digging for your contact info.
TrueBlue711 is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 11:03 AM   #60
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 6,356
So many people that didn’t know anything about bump-firing now support a “Bump-Stock”
Ban.

I’ve heard the same line. “Ima second amendment supporter”
“I hunt”
“I’m a sport shooter”
All supporting a ban of bump stocks. Seems ok right?
No, it’s not alright. Do any of you honestly think that such a bill would be straight forward and honest? Do you think such a bill would be fee of hidden provisions or wording that could be abused?
No one wants a bad person to have guns, we all agree. But most laws involving guns have put a lot of good people in legal jeopardy.
rickyrick is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 11:04 AM   #61
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 2,150
Ok, I"ll step into this pile of doo doo.
I can live w/out slide fire stocks on the market. And you can too.

The intent of the slide fire is to allow your firearm to do something that has been regulated down to a list of registered users for decades. Why, if I cannot put full-auto fire group parts into my ARs w/out NFA approval should i/you/we be able to accomplish the same end using over the counter parts? That makes no sense. This item should have been closed down by the ATF when it first came out.

And I don't care what you say about "giving ground," b/c that ground was given up back in 1986. This limit on open market availability would be simply enforcing what's already on the books (like that ever happened). A sensible determination by ATF when this part came out would have saved us all a bit of headache and a few score lives in Vegas. The fact that the previous administration didn't make the call [here I'm wiping away my invisible crocodile tears like our previous 'great leader'] just makes this incident more frustrating.

Yes, people can always use belt loops, or file down their sears in their garage to accomplish rapid firing, but that doesn't mean that purpose-made parts that allow the same goal should be allowed. Just because people will cook meth in their basement doesn't mean that you need to allow a "pre-school meth kit" to be sold at the corner drug store in the name of "free market" liberty.

Yes, this yahoo apparently had enough liquid assets to buy a legal class 3 weapon, but he didn't. I am not saying that banning bump-fire stocks will make bad people go away; I'm saying that taking these parts off the market will bring the market back into line with the already existing laws. Don't like the laws? Write your congressman or move to [fill in the blank] 3rd world crap hole with an ongoing civil war. I prefer the rule of law even if not every law is ideal as I would like it.

All that said, this bill (as apparently with any firearms-related law by Sen. DF) seems a pile of loosely written crap and shouldn't be passed.

P.S:
And this same topic will come back concerning pistol braces in one shape or another. Guaranteed.
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.
doofus47 is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 11:25 AM   #62
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 6,982
Who knew that Neville Chamberlain had so many illegitimate children and that they all shared an interest in firearms?

All appeasement does is buy you time and make your opposition stronger. We have no need to buy time here. This is poorly written legislation that will die on its own. We have nothing to gain here - the opposition is faithless and has not dealt with us fairly in the past. Why expect it in the future? Not that their good faith matters since they aren't offering any horse trading but just demanding capitulation.

This has nothing to do with preventing firearms deaths. More people die in a month in Chicago. This is about control - control over normal, peacable citizens.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 12:10 PM   #63
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 21,126
Quote:
...but at some point we have to get together and work these issues out sensibly.
If it were sensible, it would have been worked out long ago based on the facts. The bill has been proposed many times before and died because the facts didn't support it.

Emotion and strong feelings don't substitute for facts.

I'm all for being sensible and I'm all for working issues out. But a tragedy doesn't magically turn a bad bill into a good bill. More importantly, passing laws in the heat of the moment is a bad idea even when there's a good reason to do so. Things that would normally be carefully investigated slip through the cracks and there can be really unpleasant unintended consequences.

If this is an issue that really needs to be dealt with, the right way to solve it is to do the proper research, give everyone affected a chance to weigh in, write a good bill, run it through the proper process at a reasonable speed and turn it into law. The WRONG way to deal with it is to pass a bill in a hurry right after a tragedy while people aren't thinking straight.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 12:49 PM   #64
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 953
Quote:
Originally Posted by doofus47 View Post
Yes, people can always use belt loops, or file down their sears in their garage to accomplish rapid firing, but that doesn't mean that purpose-made parts that allow the same goal should be allowed. Just because people will cook meth in their basement doesn't mean that you need to allow a "pre-school meth kit" to be sold at the corner drug store in the name of "free market" liberty.
Your analogy is flawed, unless they chop your fingers off you could still legally bump fire your gun, it's just more difficult by hand, the bump stocks just take most of the technique out of it.

Meth is illegal period.. whether you make it from scratch or from a kit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doofus47 View Post
Yes, this yahoo apparently had enough liquid assets to buy a legal class 3 weapon, but he didn't. I am not saying that banning bump-fire stocks will make bad people go away; I'm saying that taking these parts off the market will bring the market back into line with the already existing laws. Don't like the laws? Write your congressman or move to [fill in the blank] 3rd world crap hole with an ongoing civil war. I prefer the rule of law even if not every law is ideal as I would like it.
If he had used legally registered "machine guns" then what would you say?
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 12:58 PM   #65
LubeckTech
Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2005
Location: Washington, WV
Posts: 42
Would it take a law to ban slidefire socks?

Could ATF just make an administrative ruling which would eliminate the sale, use or even possession of slide fire stocks? From what I have read ATF has said in the past slidefire stocks are "legal" so it seems possible they could reconsider their position. The way I understand the agency they have a great amount of discretion as to how firearms laws are applied.
LubeckTech is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 01:18 PM   #66
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,711
I've been thinking about this since I read the OP this morning. How I usually think about it is "how might I defend this against my anti-gun friends/colleagues?".

In this case, I'd find it hard. Yes, it was the actor, not the object, but the object made it happen and the only real use of said object (i.e. a bump/slide-fire stock) is for having fun. We can't say that they have a legit SD/HD/Hunting use, so it's just about having fun.

The only argument I can think of is no one spoke of banning goods delivery vehicles nor rental companies after the Nice and Berlin vehicle attacks, but beyond that...

In this sense it is pretty hard to pit having a laugh as a viable argument against reducing the number of dead and wounded in an incident like this.

I think in many respects slide-fire stocks could be a sacrificial lamb to keep the anti-gun crowd at bay. No action after an incident like this, be it for solid reasons or not, would not sit well with many of the electorate...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 01:21 PM   #67
Snuffy308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2005
Posts: 150
Until we realize this ain't no argument over a silly piece of plastic we are forever lost. Please wait to click on the attachment until after you read this post. I'm sure it will "trigger" many. When I was a kid back in the late 50s, early 60s the public park just a half block from where I lived had a program during the school summer recess call "play school". It lasted a week and was about 3 hours a day in the morning. During that time the park director, and elderly woman named Mrs. Deas, would guide us in making various arts and crafts. The attachment was one of those crafts. Yea, it was most "made", we just stained it and used one small nail to put it together. But this was a public park mind you, funded by the city's taxpayers and ran by a city paid employee. Can you even imagine anything like this happening today? Somewhere we lost a large part of what we are as nation and kids today will never experience the freedoms that we enjoyed and sadly took for granted. And no, I'm not willing to compromise on anything.image.jpeg

Last edited by Evan Thomas; October 5, 2017 at 01:29 PM. Reason: Merged posts.
Snuffy308 is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 01:33 PM   #68
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 2,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barthlemew Roberts
Who knew that Neville Chamberlain had so many illegitimate children and that they all shared an interest in firearms?

All appeasement does is buy you time and make your opposition stronger. We have no need to buy time here. This is poorly written legislation that will die on its own. We have nothing to gain here - ...
I concur. Any model for reaching an agreement that settles a dispute between parties is a poor model for this episode.

Newt Gingrich spoke at my club more than 20 years ago, and one of his assertions stuck with me. He noted that businessmen don't understand politics because they think that as you spend capital you are left with less of it. On the contrary, in politics as you fight the fight, as you spend your political capital you acquire greater attention, focus and opportunity for alliances.

Giving Diane Feinstein someone else's silly stock isn't a road block for her or a savings for us. It communicates our weakness and lack of resolve and let's each emotive nanny voter know that she is their leader; it's a victory for her that gives her political momentum.

If you parked a car on a hill and you didn't want it to crash at the bottom, you wouldn't push it ten feet down the hill and hope that's all that comes of it. Yet, in politics people feel a need to look moderate or reasonable with statements like "I drive a lot and I'm not in favor of a car wreck at the bottom of this hill, but a 10 foot roll isn't like a full blown car crash".

The initial act may not be terrible, but the momentum it imparts will be.
zukiphile is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 01:58 PM   #69
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 6,356
We are the United States in name only. We don’t have the same country anymore, at least not in whole, but it’s coming to a region near you soon.
rickyrick is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 01:58 PM   #70
Psychedelic Bang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2009
Location: FL USA
Posts: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by zukiphile View Post
Newt Gingrich spoke at my club more than 20 years ago, and one of his assertions stuck with me. He noted that businessmen don't understand politics because they think that as you spend capital you are left with less of it. On the contrary, in politics as you fight the fight, as you spend your political capital you acquire greater attention, focus and opportunity for alliances.
Wow.
__________________
"Was always kinda partial to Roy Rogers actually. I really like those sequined shirts..."
Psychedelic Bang is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 02:13 PM   #71
Snuffy308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2005
Posts: 150
What I haven't been able to glean is where does the NRA stand on the proposed legislation? My membership is up for renewal and my decision will hinge on their position. And yes, I'm perfectly willing to die on this hill. Not one more step backwards.
Snuffy308 is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 02:17 PM   #72
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metal god
Quote:
or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.
The bold section would have to be removed at minimum and maybe read( to allow the firearm to effectively work as a fully automatic rifle )
Setting aside the question of whether such a ban is justified or not... it's important for the hypothetical ban to be worded as narrowly as possible. Something like this:
Quote:
Rapid Fire Device: An ancillary device that, when attached to the firearm, harnesses mechanical energy by means of a crank, lever, or recoil-actuated spring, or other combination of parts, to repeatedly and automatically actuate the trigger of the firearm without the operator having to manually and deliberately actuate the trigger for each individual shot.
There are too many ways in which many semi-automatic firearms operate that is similar to the operation of a fully-automatic firearm. If the law were worded in a way that delves into the actual operation of the firing mechanism itself, it could become a Trojan horse for a sweeping semi-auto ban.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 02:18 PM   #73
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuffy308
What I haven't been able to glean is where does the NRA stand on the proposed legislation?
As I write this, AFAIK the NRA leadership has been silent on the matter, at least in public.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak

Last edited by carguychris; October 5, 2017 at 02:59 PM. Reason: clarification
carguychris is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 02:20 PM   #74
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pond, James Pond View Post
I've been thinking about this since I read the OP this morning. How I usually think about it is "how might I defend this against my anti-gun friends/colleagues?".

In this case, I'd find it hard. Yes, it was the actor, not the object, but the object made it happen and the only real use of said object (i.e. a bump/slide-fire stock) is for having fun. We can't say that they have a legit SD/HD/Hunting use, so it's just about having fun.

The only argument I can think of is no one spoke of banning goods delivery vehicles nor rental companies after the Nice and Berlin vehicle attacks, but beyond that...

In this sense it is pretty hard to pit having a laugh as a viable argument against reducing the number of dead and wounded in an incident like this.

I think in many respects slide-fire stocks could be a sacrificial lamb to keep the anti-gun crowd at bay. No action after an incident like this, be it for solid reasons or not, would not sit well with many of the electorate...
Well you could approach this in a few ways.
On the one hand 2a is actually about having the means to overthrow a tyrant.. so on that basis you should have parity with any thing the government has.. of course that was long lost and I doubt you could pull off such a creditable argument since your basis for what should be legal seems to be rooted in SD/Hunting.. If you don't believe it no one else will either.

Another way you could approach it is the guy could have just bought the real deal.. he didn't need a bump stock.. it actually would have been worse probably if he had as a true FA will have a even higher rate of fire.

Anyone who thinks banning bump stocks would have stopped his plans is mistaken. infact his plans could have been carried out without modification regardless if they are banned or not... he simply had the means to make it happen unaltered.

Lastly and this may do very little given your crowd, Bump firing was not invented by the stocks.. it makes it easier yes but you don't need any gadgets to do it.. It was not long ago Semi auto's of a certain type and characteristic was the target of bans.. The same argument was used against them.. to many bullets, to fast a rate of fire.

If you indulge the argument that bump stocks should be banned because of the results obtainable you play right into the argument that all semi auto's are to deadly to be of legit use.. SD or Hunting even.

As you feed bump stocks to the beast careful you don't slip down it's throat along with the lamb.

Bottom line? What makes you think bump stocks will be the end of it? Feinstein her self said she would take all guns if she could but it's not politically possible.

You only fool your self in thinking it stops with bump stocks, History shows us this.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old October 5, 2017, 02:24 PM   #75
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 4,143
Quote:
Having actually used a bumpstock, I think people are confusing rate of fire with lethality. Even actual military full auto has limited applications, full auto putting out a random rate of fire between 400-600rpm into a 10' x 10' beaten zone at 100m is kind of dubious utility in my mind. But even if we assume that this is a valid threat everywhere you cram 20,000 people into two acres, there are still serious problems.
Ok, as you can see my signature I am of a somewhat contrary view.

None of what I am writing is a solution to all problems, no more than there is one cure for cancer.

So contrary to your flawed assertion, an automatic weapon in a crowd of 20,000 is going to kill a hell of a lot more people than a Semi auto.

I have no issue with magazine limits. I <was upset> when I saw that someone made a 30 round magazine for a Glock (as did an acquaintance who is a government hating die to the wool 2nd amendment type).

I work with equipment and a mechanic/technician and now engineer. Equipment has safeties. The more lethal, the more safeties and interlocks.

The intent is if one fails the other does not. You also test those safeties, you deliberately test them and see if the thing runs when it should not.

The writers of the constitution made mistakes. While they were probably the single greatest concentrated group of intellectuals (yea I know the Trmpistas hate that smart people are needed) this country has ever had one place. They also were both human and trying to develope a whole new system different than what they felt were the flaws of the English system.

I know its not popular among the second amendment ranters, but the 2nd amendment fits in context with the constitution , god did not list the right to keep and bear arms in the 10 commandments did he?

The purpose of the 2nd is to PROTECT those other rights, not a right unto itself.

When was the last time you saw a 2nd Amendment action that protected other rights. For all the ranting and raving all they do is driven to keep that right come hell or high water and regardless of its flaws. Been a hell of a lot of things they should have fought for and did not. Sat on their butts.

The freedom of speech, religion etc are inalienable.

They also enshrined Slavery into the constitution as a compromise. Women could not vote because they all agree they had the vapors. Anyone want to argue my wife is not my equal?

They set up the Senate, the House of Lords and petti dictators (read the rules and actions of the Senate if you don't think so). Those Senator were APPOINTED by the powers that held the righsn of power, not us (note that goes changed to)

They crated the Electoral collage as that was controlled by the high powers and we do not get to elect our President by popular vote (but do everyone else?)

The US Constitution is not some sancrosacnt document handed down and created by god. Its got its high spots and its abysmally low spots (Slavery being one).

The Sub Text of the 2nd Amendment was that Malitias are a counter to government . That was a theory, it proved to be totally wrong. Any time a Mililatia was involved in a battle alongside Government forces, they ran. Undisciplined, untrained clowns. The group in Michigan a case in point. It IS a failed idea.

You can try to ignore it, but the right to keep and bear arms is directly related to Militia, otherwise that would have been a separate clause.

While most have not read the founding fathers, I have. they were whip smart intelligent and they did not make a mistake in that. Those sucker could write like no one since.

NO RIGHT IS UNLIMITED

Your right to free speech does not allow you to pass on state secrets.

Your right to assembly does not allow you to assemble to riot (and kill black people as was done in the worst massacre in US history aide and abided by the national guard)

So don't tell me we can't restrict guns and make logical and sane choices in how to deal with it.

Been down to the range lately? How many people do you see that should have their gun rights removed? 30%, 50%, inept, ignorant, incompetent , dangerous. I have pulled 3 from walking down rang while firing was going on.

I had a guy walk down range with an AR slung down (not up) when there are NO GUNS ALLOWED DOWN RAGNE.

My step son who was a rebel flag waving Westerner went shooting with me for the first time a couple of months ago. He was shocked at the ARs. What do they need those for he asks?

I have talked to other people who were die hard 2nd amenderters and its the same, this has gotten out of hand.

So when we have Bump stocks and silencer they want to turn loose, no way.

Does the government have to seize all bumps stocks? Nope, make them illegal, seizure, heavy fines and they will got away and they will not easily be put in public hands.

Restrict magazine to 10 or 20 rounds in a rifle, no more than butt length in a pistol.

Don't give me that crap that a big mag makes no difference because they can change magazine.

Like a safety, its an interruption, its a chance to take action or escape and most of them are clowns who do not practice and they can fumble it. All I need is 3 seconds to get on them.

We had something like 19,000 gun deaths by suicide in 2015.

An Entire Army Division wiped out. 10s of thousand more of loved ones and family who are traumatized.


So yes, I want some restrictions '.

I want research allowed in gun deaths so we can lower that, we won't stop it but we can do better like we did with Aids.

There is no magic solution but what we have is grossly insane let alone not working. Bet your head against the wall or see what can be done.

Only 30% in the US own guns, lots of them, but 30%. Its called getting marginalized .

The US Constitution is subject to amendment and the rights to restrictors. Don't tell me otherwise.

I am damned well ready to talk about it and I am damned well ready to deal with those who are trying to shout the majority down.
__________________
One of the Adorables

Last edited by JohnKSa; October 5, 2017 at 09:33 PM. Reason: Language
RC20 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10573 seconds with 9 queries