Las Vegas: Worst Mass Shooting in US History

[fishonjazz]

I'm aware that is the law. I'm also aware that people sale guns illegally quite often. I have bought multiple guns and own guns, I have never gone through a background check to buy one. My friend's dad owns multiple fully automatic guns. He converts many semi's but he has also purchased many through back channels and gun shows in Utah that are great place for making those contacts.

I also guns and have never had a background check.

The fact that you and I own guns probably blows dutch mind

 

[fishonjazz]

just as stupid as banning guns.

because guns are not the problem. mental health is. over prescription is the problem!



all those drugs, have lots of side effects! 80% of americans are on some kind of drug. not saying ban drugs, but maybe just look into that. before going the venezualan and national socilaist way and start banning guns. becuase it will not help. and will lead to a slippery slope.


their whjere a lot less mass shooting in the 90's 80's and 70's when the gun laws where more lax!

Doubling down

 

[Gameface]

https://www.google.com/amp/www.sfch...e-to-top-Google-Facebook-results-12247474.php
Yeah, Ok. I made it up.

I never said you made it up.

I said that was not in my google searches. It wasn't.

 

[MVP]

I own guns and want to continue to own my guns. I don't want guns taken away.

But why would you need more than one hand gun with 6 bullets for self defence? What if government offers to buy it from you for lets say 10k per gun? You would still rather keep them all?

 

[Stoked]

But why would you need more than one hand gun with 6 bullets for self defence? What if government offers to buy it from you for lets say 10k per gun? You would still rather keep them all?

Depends on the scenario. For example a shotgun can be far more effective for self defense than a hand gun if someone breaks into your home at night. If you are in a situation where the target is further away a rifle is more effective than a handgun.

If the gov was willing to buy my guns for 10k that would be my new business. Buying weapons for far cheaper than 10k and then selling them back to the gov.

 

[Ron Mexico]

But why would you need more than one hand gun with 6 bullets for self defence? What if government offers to buy it from you for lets say 10k per gun? You would still rather keep them all?

I have mixed feelings about all gun control stuff. I don't think the answer is cut and dry. I think all sides of the argument are valid. It's not an easy answer. But yes I would personally sell my guns to the government for that amount of money.

I own a pump action shotgun for self defense in my home. It's the best deterrent in my opinion. I don't even keep bullets in it. I have never had to get it out. Honestly owning dogs keeps people away from my house. Most my guns are for hunting or just to go clay pigeon shooting with these days. They are pretty much exclusively for recreational proposes. I have never needed a gun for self defense and don't anticipate needing one for that reason. although having one just in case is comforting.

 

[MVP]

If the gov was willing to buy my guns for 10k that would be my new business. Buying weapons for far cheaper than 10k and then selling them back to the gov.

lol, no more buying in my proposed scenario. You are left with one gun for self defence and not allowed to own more unless yours if damaged or broken in which case you need to prove it and return it for exchange. I guess you may have some riffle for hunting if you are registered hunter and have a licence for it.

 

[Gameface]

This is an idea I've floated here before and I was talking about it with someone at work yesterday.

What if we went to a militia system? Individuals couldn't own an arsenal and certain types of guns, magazine capacities, etc. were restricted. But the militia could maintain an armory. The militia would have certain safety and education requirements as well as liability insurance. Militias could be local or national (different licensing requirements) and could potentially range from just a few members (although it would be difficult for just a few people to afford the licensing and liability costs) to thousands of members.

Is this a compromise that either side could agree to?

Individuals could still own hunting rifles and could get licensed to own handguns. But number of guns and types would be restricted.

 

[Stoked]

This is an idea I've floated here before and I was talking about it with someone at work yesterday.

What if we went to a militia system? Individuals couldn't own an arsenal and certain types of guns, magazine capacities, etc. were restricted. But the militia could maintain an armory. The militia would have certain safety and education requirements as well as liability insurance. Militias could be local or national (different licensing requirements) and could potentially range from just a few members (although it would be difficult for just a few people to afford the licensing and liability costs) to thousands of members.

Is this a compromise that either side could agree to?

Individuals could still own hunting rifles and could get licensed to own handguns. But number of guns and types would be restricted.

Wouldn't that be "infringement" though? In this scenario we buy into the 2nd amendment being mostly a militia thing, for the discussion fine. Ok. But that takes us back to infringement of the right on militias and having requirements would be infringement would it not?

Perhaps no the liability insurance as the ACA passed and that seems more like settled law...

Not coming out for or against this idea. Just trying to think it through and discuss it.

 

[fishonjazz]

Wouldn't that be "infringement" though? In this scenario we buy into the 2nd amendment being mostly a militia thing, for the discussion fine. Ok. But that takes us back to infringement of the right on militias and having requirements would be infringement would it not?

Perhaps no the liability insurance as the ACA passed and that seems more like settled law...

Not coming out for or against this idea. Just trying to think it through and discuss it.

Maybe the 2nd ammendment is due for an ammendment lol

 

[Stoked]

Maybe the 2nd ammendment is due for an ammendment lol

There are ways to do that.

 

[franklin]

This forum is retarded. How did this turn into yet another gun vs. anti-gun discussion? Do you all really need me to spell out the major difference between this mass killing and pretty much every other school or theater or whatever radicalized mass killing over the past couple of decades? There is a glaring distinction in this incident that separates it from the others. Raise your hand when you realize what it is. Guns isn't the correct answer.