One thing that many people seem to miss is that our military has a high number of those "southern rednecks" who highly value the 2nd Amendment.
That said, there are plenty of current examples of groups of individuals with nothing much more that rifles successfully opposing a highly trained and well armed military. Iraq and Afghanistan anyone?
And you should not be so dismissal about the desire to disarm America.
Just read Slashdot, Huffingtonpost, Demunderground, DailyKOS, New York Times Op Eds and reader's comments, etc. There is plenty of support on the Left for completely banning guns.
Then hear high profile politicians discuss how confiscation is "on the table".
And then there is the clear intent of the legislation that Obama proposed to completely ban some kinds of guns, arbitrarily call "Assault weapons", leaving the actual definition to bureaucrats. Today, an "Assault Rifle" is an AR-15. Tomorrow it will be a Mini-14, the next day a 10-22.
Don't think for a second that if Obama and his sycophants thought they had a chance to repeal the 2nd and confiscate all the firearms in the U.S, that they wouldn't try.
No explosive shells. Already outlawed except under strict licensing conditions. No automatic weapons. Already outlawed except under strict licensing conditions. No fragmenting explosives. I don't think anyone but the military can get those.
So it seems it's all taken care of. Sure, people don't get to have that feel good sense that they "did" something, but it's no different because even if Obama got what he wanted, it still wouldn't stop anything.
So I see how you think. One guy was killed accidentally so it means all their stores, their livelihood, possessions and possibly their lives should be put into jeopardy, handed to the rioters.
It was a riot. they had a right to defend themselves and their stores from total annihilation. Others died for much less.
Someone who shoots you in the head for your wallet is not an unsafe gun owner. Someone who engages in drive by shootings is not an unsafe gun owner. Someone who suits up in body armor and goes to a Mall to kill as many as possible is not an unsafe gun owner.
These people are criminals.
I will even go so far as to say there is no such thing, except in very rare and unusual situations) that there is no such thing as an accidental shooting. There are intention shootings and negligent shootings.
No, actually, they didn't. They had no opinion other than that a sawed off shot gun was not appropriate for use in the militia (a fact dispelled during WWII).
The 2008 ruling was the first time the Court every looked at the question of who "the people" were. Turns out that they are the same "people" mentioned in all the other Amendments...go figure.
A nation that (stupid judgement deleted) hands out rifles for opening bank accounts clearly has no respect for the power and deadliness of firearms. Where do they do this? I want to open an account there.
You are correct. I originally misread the post as "ownership" instead of "assault". I actually saw that as I reviewed the text before posting. But, as I had spent a whole 5 minutes writing the post and it was so good, I decided to post it anyway. Also, it was time for dinner and had to "get off that damned computer".
In my defense, citing statistics that a gun is deadlier when used to attack someone is silly. The fact that the outcome was only 7.5 times deadlier points to poor shooting skills or inadequate performance from the ammunition.
If you are a loser 45 year old then you are 7.5 times more likely to waste money.
Lastly (on the Google search results) if your PSA values are between 2.0 to 2.9 ng/mL you are 7.5 times more likely to die of Prostate cancer.
But nothing about guns being 7.5 times more deadly than....what? Hammers? nope. Baseball bats? hmmm..nope. I know! knives! drag...sorry, not knives either.
So I have to conclude you just pulled that out of your ass. Hint: Brady Gun Control propaganda is about the same thing as your ass.
Slashdot Mirror
And because he was a bit of a loon. Not really someone who know's what they are doing.
Mass shootings occur in "Gun Free Zones" and law abiding citizens respect those laws.
Crazies hell bent on killing people obviously don't. But you look for examples of citizens, stopping the crazies.
Do you understand why you don't find anything? Think it through slowly. Take your time to review the question if you need to.
One thing that many people seem to miss is that our military has a high number of those "southern rednecks" who highly value the 2nd Amendment.
That said, there are plenty of current examples of groups of individuals with nothing much more that rifles successfully opposing a highly trained and well armed military. Iraq and Afghanistan anyone?
And you should not be so dismissal about the desire to disarm America.
Just read Slashdot, Huffingtonpost, Demunderground, DailyKOS, New York Times Op Eds and reader's comments, etc. There is plenty of support on the Left for completely banning guns.
Then hear high profile politicians discuss how confiscation is "on the table".
And then there is the clear intent of the legislation that Obama proposed to completely ban some kinds of guns, arbitrarily call "Assault weapons", leaving the actual definition to bureaucrats. Today, an "Assault Rifle" is an AR-15. Tomorrow it will be a Mini-14, the next day a 10-22.
Don't think for a second that if Obama and his sycophants thought they had a chance to repeal the 2nd and confiscate all the firearms in the U.S, that they wouldn't try.
I don't think I even heard the word "magazine" used for such things until I was an adult.
So what you are saying is that stupid kids use "clip" and adults use "magazine".
That's why all the gun banners use "clip", because they think like stupid kids.
Easy.
No explosive shells. Already outlawed except under strict licensing conditions.
No automatic weapons. Already outlawed except under strict licensing conditions.
No fragmenting explosives. I don't think anyone but the military can get those.
So it seems it's all taken care of. Sure, people don't get to have that feel good sense that they "did" something, but it's no different because even if Obama got what he wanted, it still wouldn't stop anything.
So I see how you think. One guy was killed accidentally so it means all their stores, their livelihood, possessions and possibly their lives should be put into jeopardy, handed to the rioters.
It was a riot. they had a right to defend themselves and their stores from total annihilation. Others died for much less.
Yes, you are correct.
In most mass shootings the shooter has had plenty of time to walk around, causally reloading and shooting...Columbine, Sand Hook, etc.
Because sometimes when the government confiscates your property, the 5th Amendment doesn't really count.
Someone who shoots you in the head for your wallet is not an unsafe gun owner.
Someone who engages in drive by shootings is not an unsafe gun owner.
Someone who suits up in body armor and goes to a Mall to kill as many as possible is not an unsafe gun owner.
These people are criminals.
I will even go so far as to say there is no such thing, except in very rare and unusual situations) that there is no such thing as an accidental shooting. There are intention shootings and negligent shootings.
Unless you were Jewish. You people keep leaving that out.
So, I'd expect that the analogy here in the U.S. would be something along the lines of..."except you you are a politician or connected journalist."
Wait! That's how it is now!
Many common and very expensive "hunting rifles" are semi-automatics and magazine fed.
The problem you face is that firearms do not fall neatly into categories that you can pick and choose from to say this is bad, that is good.
No, actually, they didn't. They had no opinion other than that a sawed off shot gun was not appropriate for use in the militia (a fact dispelled during WWII).
The 2008 ruling was the first time the Court every looked at the question of who "the people" were. Turns out that they are the same "people" mentioned in all the other Amendments...go figure.
I own a revolver so I"m not skilled at changing mags.
My brother owns a 1911. After some instruction and about 10 mins practice I could reload the 1911 in 2 seconds.
Not as fast as the sub second time for this guy but the point is that changing mags is not difficult to do and do quickly.
Spoken like a true Taliban...oh...wait.
A nation that (stupid judgement deleted) hands out rifles for opening bank accounts clearly has no respect for the power and deadliness of firearms.
Where do they do this? I want to open an account there.
Instead of being all smug and snarky, why don't you respond to what he says about the Min-14.
To recap...same ammunition, same magazines, same everything except appearance. One is now illegal and the other is not.
Tell me, is that "common sense" regulation? It's the same as banning a Ford Mustang because it's a "racing car" and not a BMW M3.
Hello?! Is anyone home in there?
The Supreme Court says you FAIL.
Google "fastest reloader".
So 7 vs. 10 rounds will get you about 1 second less shooting, even with a less practiced individual.
Magazine restrictions are for making stupid people feel safer.
And imposed a complete ban on firearms and other weapons ownership by Jewish citizens.
So, how do you deport millions to death camps? You have to disarm them first. So the Nazis did disarm those it wished to oppress.
I suspect that there was significantly less looting of the Korean owned stores than there was of the London stores.
Looting is historically a crime punishable by death, on the spot..."Looters will be shot".
You are correct. I originally misread the post as "ownership" instead of "assault". I actually saw that as I reviewed the text before posting. But, as I had spent a whole 5 minutes writing the post and it was so good, I decided to post it anyway. Also, it was time for dinner and had to "get off that damned computer".
In my defense, citing statistics that a gun is deadlier when used to attack someone is silly. The fact that the outcome was only 7.5 times deadlier points to poor shooting skills or inadequate performance from the ammunition.
1. Go to Youtube,
2. Search for "LA Riots Korean"
3. Observe the 2nd Amendment in action.
I found that you are 7.5 time more likely to die from a Broken Heart
Also, if teens drink they are 7.5 time more like to die.
If you are a fat ass, you are 7.5 time more likely to have Choledocholithiasis.
If you are a loser 45 year old then you are 7.5 times more likely to waste money.
Lastly (on the Google search results) if your PSA values are between 2.0 to 2.9 ng/mL you are 7.5 times more likely to die of Prostate cancer.
But nothing about guns being 7.5 times more deadly than....what? Hammers? nope. Baseball bats? hmmm..nope. I know! knives! drag...sorry, not knives either.
So I have to conclude you just pulled that out of your ass. Hint: Brady Gun Control propaganda is about the same thing as your ass.
To focus only on guns is to set yourself up for another failure.
I would be ill advised for anyone tracking a phone to go to the address and accuse the occupants of having it.
There are many possible outcomes, most are less than optimal.