At least 1 dead and 15 injured after Chiefs victory parade

[swissvale72]

I'm clearly not as conversant on much of this topic as are many of you, but seems to me that the most heinous mass murders are indeed committed by known mentally ill people having legally purchased assault weapons, given one by their parents, etc....Sandy Hook, Parkland, Uvalde, Las Vegas, Highland Park, etc.

Therefore, if I ruled the world...or at least the USA, what I would do:

*Renew the assault weapons ban:
-one of you experts can tell me what's wrong with this...why anyone needs an AR-15 or whatever. Yes, 12-guage shotgun would wreak damage, but that never seems to be the weapon of choice.

*Make the actual "death" part of death penaty wayyyy easier to achieve. No need to allow years worth of appeals, etc. when there's absolute clarity that the defendant did it. In those cases, one year max for appeals. And...I don't give a FUCK about the means of execution...how "cruel and unusual" it might be, etc.

*The proliferation of handguns to idiots, like in KC. I don't know how we stop that, other than wayyyy stiffer, and immediate penalties, for illegal gun ownership.

*Oh...and fuck the insanity defense. And this comes from someone just retired from 47 years working with emotionally troubled people. You kill somebody, I don't care how crazy you are....I guess too crazy to ever be let out into general society again.

Those are for starters, if I ruled this section of the world.

[Thrillsseeker]

So that is the goal with this? To "lesson" the issue? Doesn't that mean people will still die for no reason even though it's lessoned?

Why can't we have BOTH harsher punishment and less guns?

Who is going to educate and teach gun responsibility? How is that done?

Yes people will die. Lesson the gun related deaths yes. I don’t believe for a minute gun deaths will end up ever getting to zero. Not ideal I know but pls share if you have a way of making it zero.

Why less guns? What would that do?

Gojira has it right. It starts with the home. Parents. From there, Idk I’d say school should teach it again but that seems very very unlikely.

My vote would be exactly as I stated. Also have to include more stringent background checks or something so a nut job cant just walk in and buy the gun they want to kill ppl with.

I don't know how to stop it with realistic steps. It is just crazy to me that the country is so saturated with guns that it's past the point of no return. There is no way to fix the issue. Only reason I say less guns is because it seems like we are the only civilized country that these things happen. Maybe I'm wrong. Other countries yea they may have an incident here and there but here it seems commonplace.

Regarding the Assault Weapon ban. The stats I see show since it was repealed under Bush II, since then the number of mass shootings have gone crazy vs when the ban was in place. Maybe I'm looking at wrong stats.

I don't know.

I think though if this Mom who died yesterday had been in England and went to a city wide celebration she would have gone home. Here in America she is dead. Just seems insane that that's a thing here in America and people are just like Welp?

If referring to me, my apologies if I came across as having a “welp” attitude. Not at all. Its sickening that in this country a disagreement ends with people getting shot, killing a mother, shooting several kids. For ducks sake thats horrible. I’m not opposed at all going back in time with hangings, firing squad for scum like this.

[jewelsongs]

A man in Richmond, California, was arrested last month with a cache of 248 illegally owned guns and 1 million rounds of ammo in his home, the state attorney general said on Thursday.

The man, who was not named, is "alleged to be legally barred from owning weapons," California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement.

Bureau of Firearms agents searching the man's home on January 31 found 11 military-style machine guns, 133 handguns, 37 rifles, 60 assault rifles, 7 shotguns, and 3,000 large-capacity magazines, Bonta said.

Authorities also found 1 million rounds of "miscellaneous caliber ammunition" and dozens of rifle receivers and pistol frames, said the attorney general.

[langer]

Anyone with two eyes and a brain can look at an electoral map and tell you where the strongest gun laws are in place and where the worst gun crime stats are. It's not in rural Texas or Florida.

The top 5 states with the most gun deaths per capita (rates per 100,000)

1.) Mississippi 33.9
2.) Louisiana 29.1
3.) New Mexico 27.8
4.) Alabama 26.4
5.) Wyoming 26.1

Is "gun crime" the same as "gun deaths"?

I'm thinking not. You lump suicide in there, that's not being accurate and explaining the issue.

If you look at gun murders the numbers tell the true story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_viole ... s_by_state

This KC event was a mass shooting. Gun crime in KC is increasing. WIll someone be banning all guns in KC? It's easier to blame the NRA than to try to fix what's going on. It's better for the problem to exist for some., solving it would be a disaster for them.

They were indiscriminately shooting people. Who does that? Why would they decide to do something like this? Was a law stopping them?

https://abcnews.go.com/US/kansas-citys- ... =107271175

In 2021, Missouri had the ninth-highest rate of gun deaths in the U.S., according to firearm mortality by state data from the Centers for Disease Control.

[StillerInCT]

Anyone with two eyes and a brain can look at an electoral map and tell you where the strongest gun laws are in place and where the worst gun crime stats are. It's not in rural Texas or Florida.

The top 5 states with the most gun deaths per capita (rates per 100,000)

1.) Mississippi 33.9
2.) Louisiana 29.1
3.) New Mexico 27.8
4.) Alabama 26.4
5.) Wyoming 26.1

They were indiscriminately shooting people. Who does that? Why would they decide to do something like this? Was a law stopping them?

[/quote]

The real answer is that this is more of a mental health issue than a gun issue. The gun doesn't fire itself. But what happens every time health care reform gets brought up? Nearly the exact same thing that happens when gun law reform comes up.

Why do other developed countries seemingly have this issue mitigated? Because they've addressed the gun issue or they've addressed the health care issue and in many cases, both. Here in the US, we claim to care every time there are mass shootings for a week or so, and then...let's be honest, we just hope it goes away on its own until the next time which is probably a few days after the last mass shooting has lost our collective attentions.

If we want to solve this problem then there has to be progress made on one of these two issues..at least. But there is rarely a willingness to compromise and meet in the middle anymore because red vs blue has become Steelers vs Ravens. Politics is some weird game that we feel like we have to win at. And in the end, we all lose and we will continue to lose. But hey...we're just going to have to live with the consequences.

[CKSteeler]

*Make the actual "death" part of death penaty wayyyy easier to achieve. No need to allow years worth of appeals, etc. when there's absolute clarity that the defendant did it. In those cases, one year max for appeals. And...I don't give a FUCK about the means of execution...how "cruel and unusual" it might be, etc.

The "assault weapon," particularly the supposedly uber deadly AR-15, is rarely the weapon of choice used in gun crimes or mass shootings as defined by the left. The majority of shootings are conducted with simple handguns. Rifles/assault weapons are used in less than 3% of gun crimes.

So what happens when you ban those "assault weapons" and gun crimes don't change? When mass shootings still occur? Because it's not going to stop there which is ONE reason why Americans won't let it start there.

This very shooting was carried about by two "juveniles." Do you think they were strapped with AR's or an assault weapon? How many did they manage to shoot again?

You can do the damage with a semi-automatic weapon, shotgun, or many other means. Source? It's been done.

Constitutional rights aren't unique to the United States. Source: I'm a dual US / EU citizen.

Yea, tell me more about all that free speech in the UK. Or Canada. But yea, they have the progressive dream of "rights" which the state has every ability to regulate to their heart's content and redefine at a whim.

You know what you never hear the left arguing for, though? EU nation style abortion laws. Or election laws like universal iD.

If we want to solve this problem then there has to be progress made on one of these two issues..at least. But there is rarely a willingness to compromise and meet in the middle anymore because red vs blue has become Steelers vs Ravens. Politics is some weird game that we feel like we have to win at. And in the end, we all lose and we will continue to lose. But hey...we're just going to have to live with the consequences.

Yea, if only we had government provided healthcare (I'm pretending for a second that this isn't what we already effectively have with Medicaid and Medicare and the current laws on the books), the problem would be solved.

The solution to all of life's problems is always more government.

There's some other differences with Europe that are starting to go away. And you are seeing a stark increase in violent crimes in the EU where those differences are going away fastest. But you aren't allowed to talk about them.

And when you compare the US's homicide rates to other nations with similar demographics, you get ridicule from the left because those are, well, shithole countries.

The mass shootings are shocking events, but they get the media coverage they do because it allows the left to point at a fake boogieman, the white male, and pretend it's a them issue even though going by the definition of mass shootings determined by the left, it's actually not a white male issue. And gun crimes/homicides in general? Most definitely not a white male issue.

So yea, it's really fair to compare the US to some homogeneous Nordic country when it comes to gun crime or crime in general. Well, shockingly, if you look at Nordic populations here in the US, the crime rate is pretty damn low, too.

Mass shootings are a canard, and the reason they continue to happen at this rate is because they have become the outlet through which disaffected individuals know they can gain the most notoriety.

Yet most gun crimes are not committed by the mentally ill. They are committed by, well, criminals.

[StillerInCT]

Constitutional rights aren't unique to the United States. Source: I'm a dual US / EU citizen.

Yea, tell me more about all that free speech in the UK. Or Canada. But yea, they have the progressive dream of "rights" which the state has every ability to regulate to their heart's content and redefine at a whim.

Those are two countries. Neither one is in the EU. Constitutional rights are factually not unique to the United States.

Mass shootings are a canard, and the reason they continue to happen at this rate is because they have become the outlet through which disaffected individuals know they can gain the most notoriety.

Fine. Then we just live with it.

[CKSteeler]

Constitutional rights aren't unique to the United States. Source: I'm a dual US / EU citizen.

Yea, tell me more about all that free speech in the UK. Or Canada. But yea, they have the progressive dream of "rights" which the state has every ability to regulate to their heart's content and redefine at a whim.

Those are two countries. Neither one is in the EU. Constitutional rights are factually not unique to the United States.

Ok, name your country, StillerinCT. I picked the two nations with the closest culture to the US. No, constitutions aren't strictly speaking prohibited to the US. We gave a few of those European and Asian countries constitutions in the 20th century. But name the country, and we can do a deep dive on how strong said constitution is and what real protections exist of rights.

[swissvale72]

*Make the actual "death" part of death penaty wayyyy easier to achieve. No need to allow years worth of appeals, etc. when there's absolute clarity that the defendant did it. In those cases, one year max for appeals. And...I don't give a FUCK about the means of execution...how "cruel and unusual" it might be, etc.

The "assault weapon," particularly the supposedly uber deadly AR-15, is rarely the weapon of choice used in gun crimes or mass shootings as defined by the left. The majority of shootings are conducted with simple handguns. Rifles/assault weapons are used in less than 3% of gun crimes.

So what happens when you ban those "assault weapons" and gun crimes don't change? When mass shootings still occur? Because it's not going to stop there which is ONE reason why Americans won't let it start there.

This very shooting was carried about by two "juveniles." Do you think they were strapped with AR's or an assault weapon? How many did they manage to shoot again?

You can do the damage with a semi-automatic weapon, shotgun, or many other means. Source? It's been done.

Constitutional rights aren't unique to the United States. Source: I'm a dual US / EU citizen.

Yea, tell me more about all that free speech in the UK. Or Canada. But yea, they have the progressive dream of "rights" which the state has every ability to regulate to their heart's content and redefine at a whim.

You know what you never hear the left arguing for, though? EU nation style abortion laws. Or election laws like universal iD.

If we want to solve this problem then there has to be progress made on one of these two issues..at least. But there is rarely a willingness to compromise and meet in the middle anymore because red vs blue has become Steelers vs Ravens. Politics is some weird game that we feel like we have to win at. And in the end, we all lose and we will continue to lose. But hey...we're just going to have to live with the consequences.

Yea, if only we had government provided healthcare (I'm pretending for a second that this isn't what we already effectively have with Medicaid and Medicare and the current laws on the books), the problem would be solved.

The solution to all of life's problems is always more government.

There's some other differences with Europe that are starting to go away. And you are seeing a stark increase in violent crimes in the EU where those differences are going away fastest. But you aren't allowed to talk about them.

And when you compare the US's homicide rates to other nations with similar demographics, you get ridicule from the left because those are, well, shithole countries.

The mass shootings are shocking events, but they get the media coverage they do because it allows the left to point at a fake boogieman, the white male, and pretend it's a them issue even though going by the definition of mass shootings determined by the left, it's actually not a white male issue. And gun crimes/homicides in general? Most definitely not a white male issue.

So yea, it's really fair to compare the US to some homogeneous Nordic country when it comes to gun crime or crime in general. Well, shockingly, if you look at Nordic populations here in the US, the crime rate is pretty damn low, too.

Mass shootings are a canard, and the reason they continue to happen at this rate is because they have become the outlet through which disaffected individuals know they can gain the most notoriety.

Yet most gun crimes are not committed by the mentally ill. They are committed by, well, criminals.

Is it not so, CK, that the episodes I've referenced were all carried out with an AR-15 or other "assault" weapon, as were the slaughters in Buffalo and El Paso (didn't intend to make this a race issue, but you've brought it into the convo, and those two were definitely attacks against people of color). NO ONE suggested that the KC episode was an assault weapon event. I believe I've already ceded that, and have no answer, other than stiffer penalites for the proliferation of illegal handguns. Does a low percentage of carnage committed by AR-15s and other assault weapons mean that we should be okay with it? Answer: we obviously are okay with it, cuz every time it happens, all that's offered are "thoughts and prayers."

[jebrick]

If they start by banning guns for people under 21 it would help. A large chunk of these types of dispute leading to gunshots are juveniles. The case in Chicago where the parents are held responsible for their child's action should help a little if only to make parents more cautious. Strengthen the ATF to crack down on straw sales and dealers selling to people who should not have weapons.

Should they go as far as Australia? I think so but with the gun manufacturers telling everyone to buy more guns because the boogie man is coming to get you, it would be difficult.

[CKSteeler]

Fine. Then we just live with it.

I don't pretend to have an easy solution to what I view as ultimately a cultural issue. But maybe, and call me crazy here, it'd be better if the media didn't spread the manifesto of every mass shooter sans the transgendered individual who wanted to kill little white Christians? One was hidden away from the public whereas every other infamous killer's mug and ideology is plastered in every headline.

There is an issue with mental illness, though I'd warn the left AND right to think long and hard before jumping to stripping away a mostly harmless population of a fundamental right and creating an even greater stigma around mental illness. Red flag laws are dangerous precisely because they can serve as yet another roadblock for someone looking to get help from getting it.

To reiterate, I fundamentally view this as a cultural issue whether we are talking about gun crimes or mass shootings or the mass shootings that gain the most media attention.

[swissvale72]

Fine. Then we just live with it.

I don't pretend to have an easy solution to what I view as ultimately a cultural issue. But maybe, and call me crazy here, it'd be better if the media didn't spread the manifesto of every mass shooter sans the transgendered individual who wanted to kill little white Christians? One was hidden away from the public whereas every other infamous killer's mug and ideology is plastered in every headline.

There is an issue with mental illness, though I'd warn the left AND right to think long and hard before jumping to stripping away a mostly harmless population of a fundamental right and creating an even greater stigma around mental illness. Red flag laws are dangerous precisely because they can serve as yet another roadblock for someone looking to get help from getting it.

To reiterate, I fundamentally view this as a cultural issue whether we are talking about gun crimes or mass shootings or the mass shootings that gain the most media attention.

Yeah, really unfortunate that when 20 6-year-olds are gunned down at school, or 17 or so high schoolers, that the "media" covers it.

[CKSteeler]

Is it not so, CK, that the episodes I've referenced were all carried out with an AR-15 or other "assault" weapon, as were the slaughters in Buffalo and El Paso (didn't intend to make this a race issue, but you've brought it into the convo, and those two were definitely attacks against people of color). NO ONE suggested that the KC episode was an assault weapon event. I believe I've already ceded that, and have no answer, other than stiffer penalites for the proliferation of illegal handguns. Does a low percentage of carnage committed by AR-15s and other assault weapons mean that we should be okay with it? Answer: we obviously are okay with it, cuz every time it happens, all that's offered are "thoughts and prayers."

It is so. But none of that means that those weapons were the only means of committing those atrocities. We've seen very deadly shootings, to include some of the deadliest, carried about with simple handguns.

The Virginia Tech shooter is a prime example. Two semiautomatic pistols, killed 32 to not include the perpetrator himself. Wounded another 23 (17 shot).

Perhaps the most notorious mass shooting still, Columbine, was carried about with a semiautomatic handgun and a 9mm rifle.

There was an assault weapons ban already in place and it was very easily evaded by tweaking the designs of firearms to comply with the law. The ATF is always behind, but even if you effectively banned the nebulous assault rifle, it's not going to stop the shootings. I don't even think it makes them less deadly.

[CKSteeler]

Yeah, really unfortunate that when 20 6-year-olds are gunned down at school, or 17 or so high schoolers, that the "media" covers it.

The identity of the shooters has become a political football. Their motives which vary across the spectrum. Their identities, races, sexual preferences etc. Why did the media and FBI claim to hide the transgendered shooters manifesto, but publish every other manifesto they could get their hands on?

I don't know precisely what a responsible media would do after a mass shooting. I certainly don't believe it's the government's role to dictate coverage. But if they couldn't hide behind the fact that the KC shooters were juveniles, my strong suspicion is that this case would have been memory holed like so many other inconvenient to the narrative cases.

I don't know that we need to highlight the killer and their motives more prominently than the victims. Or at all at this point. I do believe that is the primary motivating factor for many of these shooters the media pays attention to.

[swissvale72]

Is it not so, CK, that the episodes I've referenced were all carried out with an AR-15 or other "assault" weapon, as were the slaughters in Buffalo and El Paso (didn't intend to make this a race issue, but you've brought it into the convo, and those two were definitely attacks against people of color). NO ONE suggested that the KC episode was an assault weapon event. I believe I've already ceded that, and have no answer, other than stiffer penalites for the proliferation of illegal handguns. Does a low percentage of carnage committed by AR-15s and other assault weapons mean that we should be okay with it? Answer: we obviously are okay with it, cuz every time it happens, all that's offered are "thoughts and prayers."

It is so. But none of that means that those weapons were the only means of committing those atrocities. We've seen very deadly shootings, to include some of the deadliest, carried about with simple handguns.

The Virginia Tech shooter is a prime example. Two semiautomatic pistols, killed 32 to not include the perpetrator himself. Wounded another 23 (17 shot).

Perhaps the most notorious mass shooting still, Columbine, was carried about with a semiautomatic handgun and a 9mm rifle.

There was an assault weapons ban already in place and it was very easily evaded by tweaking the designs of firearms to comply with the law. The ATF is always behind, but even if you effectively banned the nebulous assault rifle, it's not going to stop the shootings. I don't even think it makes them less deadly.

Okay....I'm not particularly conversant with weaponry, and would be labeled an extreme leftist if I suggested banning the semi-automatics as well. But....how about re-instituting the assault weapon ban....AND...stop selling guns to people with documented histories of concerning mental illness. Anecdotally, it seems that in most of these mass shootings with assault weapons, the report is that this WAS a person who easily could have been considered dangerous....were information shared....and that they purchased their weapon legally.

[StillerInCT]

Yea, tell me more about all that free speech in the UK. Or Canada. But yea, they have the progressive dream of "rights" which the state has every ability to regulate to their heart's content and redefine at a whim.

Those are two countries. Neither one is in the EU. Constitutional rights are factually not unique to the United States.

Ok, name your country, StillerinCT. I picked the two nations with the closest culture to the US. No, constitutions aren't strictly speaking prohibited to the US. We gave a few of those European and Asian countries constitutions in the 20th century. But name the country, and we can do a deep dive on how strong said constitution is and what real protections exist of rights.

Netherlands. Which uses has a civil law system making it harder to actually remove my protections from government than in a common law system such as the US where US court interpretations can have a major impact on the execution of rights and protections.

[StillerInCT]

Fine. Then we just live with it.

I don't pretend to have an easy solution to what I view as ultimately a cultural issue. But maybe, and call me crazy here, it'd be better if the media didn't spread the manifesto of every mass shooter sans the transgendered individual who wanted to kill little white Christians? One was hidden away from the public whereas every other infamous killer's mug and ideology is plastered in every headline.

There is an issue with mental illness, though I'd warn the left AND right to think long and hard before jumping to stripping away a mostly harmless population of a fundamental right and creating an even greater stigma around mental illness. Red flag laws are dangerous precisely because they can serve as yet another roadblock for someone looking to get help from getting it.

To reiterate, I fundamentally view this as a cultural issue whether we are talking about gun crimes or mass shootings or the mass shootings that gain the most media attention.

It's very much a cultural issue. We have a culture in the US that worships guns. I know people whose entire personality is gun ownership.

I'm not against guns. I've been shooting at a range and skeet shooting. Thoroughly enjoy both. But we have a big fucking problem here. There's going to have to be *some* concessions if we're ever going to mitigate or solve this issue. Otherwise, we just continue down this path and just accept it as a way of American life.

[Jizz Shooter]

Torture to death. Public torture is the answer to the problem.

Anything else is just mental masturbation.

[StillerInCT]

Torture to death. Public torture is the answer to the problem.

Anything else is just mental masturbation.

It's not though if notoriety is the goal of these nuts.

[Jizz Shooter]

Torture to death. Public torture is the answer to the problem.

Anything else is just mental masturbation.

It's not though if notoriety is the goal of these nuts.

Ohh I think MR'ers would be thinking twice after seeing the tortures.

[.Kodiak]

Ohh I think MR'ers would be thinking twice after seeing the tortures.

I just can't go there.

But you definitely have a point that the vast majority of these are murder-suicides with the intention of causing as much shock, grief and notoriety as possible.

There was a time, briefly, where the news groups made a conscientious choice not to identify the shooter. That lasted for like one incident.

No one can convince me that a huge factor in the rise of these shootings the past 25 years doesn't have a lot to do with how the media covers these events, going back to really the start with Columbine

[955876]

I imagine back in the day people hated being fed to the lions.

Even if you are a miserable cunt and want to die, that emotion likely changes after you’ve had a bit of time to reflect and you know that tomorrow you are being fed to the lions.

Or a bunch of hungry pigs. They can cut through bone like butter.

You need at least 16 pigs to finish the job in one sitting. They will go through a body that weighs 200 lbs in about 8 minutes. That means a single pig can consume two pounds of uncooked flesh every minute.

Hence the expression, “as greedy as a pig”.

No numbing agents. Nothing to make you go to sleep first. Just you and some hungry pigs.

[.Kodiak]

No numbing agents. Nothing to make you go to sleep first. Just you and some hungry pigs.

The only flaw in this logic is that these shooters are rarely taken alive.

The only thing you can really take away from them is the notoriety they're hoping to achieve. The media coverage is porn for these nuts just like Al Qaeda recruitment videos back in the day. Normal people watch that coverage just horrified, but the nutjobs, well....

[Steelafan77]

After reading through this thread some really great points from both sides of the aisle.

Mostly keeping it civil and realistic, except maybe the public torture scenario….

The laws were instilled as a means to preserve this great [Greatest] Republic ever in history.

That said there’s no way the founding fathers could’ve known the type of weapons there would be for future generations.

I believe the 2nd Amendment is as good a foundation as we could’ve imagined.

To bastardize it would be a crime in and of itself. Both sides need to find an agreeable realistic resolution. What that is at this point seems to be a mystery.

I do know Removing civilian access to weapons over history has proven catastrophic and the results are frightening.

We all know the opposing side to this when we look at our own recent history, again frightening.

Something no one has mentioned. If you did thank you. Could it be the newer identity crisis problem, wide open border combined with a defunding police and soft on crime narratives could be playing a bigger role now?

I’m going to out myself age wise but I think it important for discussion. Anyone remember going to high school and seeing vehicles in the school parking lot with either a hunting rifle and/or shotgun placed in the back window on gun racks? No red neck jokes please….

I do not recall mass shootings in those days. Seems No one ever had a reason to mass kill. The doors of those vehicles were left unlocked. In fact back in those days so were the front doors of many homes!

Anyway, Anyone could’ve had the opportunity to access those loaded firearms and create mass shooting scenarios. By either unlawfully taking a loaded rifle or shotgun out of a parked vehicle or walking into any home and taking those firearms from someone’s house.

Why wasn’t there any scenarios like that? If there was I don’t recall them off the top of my head.

This is where I agree with an open carry policy. Self preservation these days are more prevalent because of some liberal policies that allow little if any punishment fitting for crimes committed.

The world has changed. Not for the better either, in my opinion.

[955876]

No numbing agents. Nothing to make you go to sleep first. Just you and some hungry pigs.

The only flaw in this logic is that these shooters are rarely taken alive.

The only thing you can really take away from them is the notoriety they're hoping to achieve. The media coverage is porn for these nuts just like Al Qaeda recruitment videos back in the day. Normal people watch that coverage just horrified, but the nutjobs, well....

True. The ones that are though, feed em to the lions, pigs, or some great white sharks.

Nobody wants to get eaten alive.

[StillerInCT]

Torture to death. Public torture is the answer to the problem.

Anything else is just mental masturbation.

It's not though if notoriety is the goal of these nuts.

Ohh I think MR'ers would be thinking twice after seeing the tortures.

Honestly the rat in a bucket torture would be a brutal way to go out. Out of all the medieval torture method, this one always made me cringe.

[StillerInCT]

After reading through this thread some really great points from both sides of the aisle.

Mostly keeping it civil and realistic, except maybe the public torture scenario….

The laws were instilled as a means to preserve this great [Greatest] Republic ever in history.

That said there’s no way the founding fathers could’ve known the type of weapons there would be for future generations.

I believe the 2nd Amendment is as good a foundation as we could’ve imagined.

To bastardize it would be a crime in and of itself. Both sides need to find an agreeable realistic resolution. What that is at this point seems to be a mystery.

I do know Removing civilian access to weapons over history has proven catastrophic and the results are frightening.

We all know the opposing side to this when we look at our own recent history, again frightening.

Something no one has mentioned. If you did thank you. Could it be the newer identity crisis problem, wide open border combined with a defunding police and soft on crime narratives could be playing a bigger role now?

I’m going to out myself age wise but I think it important for discussion. Anyone remember going to high school and seeing vehicles in the school parking lot with either a hunting rifle and/or shotgun placed in the back window on gun racks? No red neck jokes please….

I do not recall mass shootings in those days. Seems No one ever had a reason to mass kill. The doors of those vehicles were left unlocked. In fact back in those days so were the front doors of many homes!

Anyway, Anyone could’ve had the opportunity to access those loaded firearms and create mass shooting scenarios. By either unlawfully taking a loaded rifle or shotgun out of a parked vehicle or walking into any home and taking those firearms from someone’s house.

Why wasn’t there any scenarios like that? If there was I don’t recall them off the top of my head.

This is where I agree with an open carry policy. Self preservation these days are more prevalent because of some liberal policies that allow little if any punishment fitting for crimes committed.

The world has changed. Not for the better either, in my opinion.

Another thing that I don't think anybody has mentioned is that the middle class can no longer live on a single income thus requiring both parents to work full-time. Thankfully my parents worked opposing shifts so there was always someone around, but that's becoming less and less prevalent these days. Parents are probably missing the warning signs because they're overextended and absent out of necessity. I didn't know it at the time but I was growing up when this issue became more and more widespread. I remember my father coaching baseball and essentially being a babysitter after the parents just dropped the kids off and usually it was those kids that were the "troublemakers". I know of at least 2 or 3 of them that have spent time in prison.

[gojira5150]

You don’t. You lesson it with harsh punishment. Gun restrictions will not work. Throw the book at these chumps. Eliminate gun free zones. Open carey. Educate and teach gun responsibility. (Kudos gojira)

Thx. I believe in responsible gun ownership. I have 4 Rules that I drill into their heads:

1 -ALWAYS assume a gun is loaded if handed to you. Clear it no matter what.

2 - You don't put your trigger finger on the trigger when handling a firearm. You put your finger on the trigger when ready to fire.

3 - Never aim a firearm unless you are ready to take a life.

4 - You DO NOT shoot to wound or scare. You shoot to kill.

I teach them center mass. Head shots are very hard to pull off.

B.R.A.S.
Breathe
Relax
Aim
Squeeze (on exhale)

Are we talking about hunting deer or humans?

Hunting Deer AND defending your Family/Home from assailants.

I have a real story. I was home one day sick. Well 3 ARSEHOLES decided they were going to perform a home invasion (thinking I was not home). Well, my sliding glass door shattered (while I was upstairs), I grabbed my Mossberg 500 12ga and started down the steps, I Racked that Mossberg and those A-HOLES fled as fast as they could (back thru the sliding glass door they broke). You see the sound Click Clack is a sound criminals know oh so well. I was about to send 3 A-HOLES to Hell.

My Mossberg 500 Tactical Persuader holds 5 shells and mine go like this:
00 Buck
Slug
00 Buck
Slug
00 Buck

No need for police to show up that day if they didn't run. Would have called the meat wagon.

BTW - I also have Body Armor. Level IIIA plates

Now what would you have done in that scenario, and you have NO weapons to defend yourself or your home.

[955876]

My Mossberg 500 Tactical Persuader holds 5 shells and mine go like this:
00 Buck
Slug
00 Buck
Slug
00 Buck

No need for police to show up that day if they didn't run. Would have called the meat wagon.

BTW - I also have Body Armor. Level IIIA plates

Now what would you have done in that scenario, and you have NO weapons to defend yourself or your home.

Without a firearm you would have been fucked.

We used the Mossberg when I was in the Marines.

I have a Remington 870 12 gauge now.

Something to think bout regarding the slugs. Those can over penetrate so could be dangerous in a home defense situation. Miss and that slug could end up in another room or neighbors home.

00 Buck penetrates as well but likely not as much as the slug.

00 Buck at self defense range is devastating. You’d still be well armed with a tube full of 00 buck.

Now if you are in the woods and worried bout bear then load up those slugs.

[gojira5150]

*Renew the assault weapons ban:
-one of you experts can tell me what's wrong with this...why anyone needs an AR-15 or whatever. Yes, 12-guage shotgun would wreak damage, but that never seems to be the weapon of choice.

*The proliferation of handguns to idiots, like in KC. I don't know how we stop that, other than wayyyy stiffer, and immediate penalties, for illegal gun ownership.

You see Swiss Law-Abiding Citizens should have what the Military & Police have. Now saying all this if I was to go into a combat situation with a AR15 I would not do so well as the civilian AR15 has no selector switch from single shot>semi> full auto. Here in Commiefornia I can only have a 10rd Mag and Single Shot AR15.

As has been stated AR15's are used in less than 1% of firearm killings. 98% are handguns and of those I would estimate 90% are 9mm. An AR15 is a perfect hunting rifle and as such are highly preferred.

Did you know more people in the USA (per year) are killed by Hammers, Knives & Hands/Feet than AR15's. Should we ban hammers & knives.