Democratic senator calls for ban on military-style weapons
Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey says it’s time to ban military-style weapons.
Click here for reuse options!“It’s time for Congress to finally act on gun violence and ban military-style weapons, put limits on clips and magazine sizes, ban those on the terrorist watchlist from purchasing firearms and require background checks on all gun sales,” Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania said in a statement.
“We know that the shooter in Orlando used a high-powered weapon that allowed him to fire a large number of bullets in rapid succession,” he said.
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
121 responses to Democratic senator calls for ban on military-style weapons
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Suzanne McFly June 12th, 2016 at 16:36
Well better late than never, should of done this years ago.
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 16:39
it’s past time to do that.
Larry Schmitt June 12th, 2016 at 16:44
But republicans still control congress. And the NRA controls republicans.
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 16:45
and the murdered were gay, so they won’t give a damn.
Esef Brewer June 12th, 2016 at 17:01
Sad but true.
Mike June 12th, 2016 at 16:52
It’s not the weapon, it’s the shooter …
We don’ need to ban assault rifles, we need to tighten up background checks, maybe include an interview (like in Israel) close the gun show loop hole, and improve access/identification of the mentally ill.
It makes no difference whether the round that tears through your heart is a 7.62, 5.56, or 9mm or if it came from a scary looking gun …
Statistically, assault weapons are responsible for a very small fraction of shootings and banning them would achieve absolutely nothing
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 16:58
banning them would be a start. this guy had no criminal background and no apparent psych history that would indicate he was a threat. either with a handgun or an assault riffle. the point is, it would have been very difficult to murder 50 and injure 53 with a 6 shooter don’t cha think?
Mike June 12th, 2016 at 17:51
Cmon, banning stuff never works …
Tighten up the background checks …like I said … This guy was on the FBI watchlist, how does a guy on the FBI watchlist get to buya weapon … It’s just like Dylan Roof and many others … As soon as we look into their backgrounds we find a lot of legal reasons they shouldn’t have been allowed to purchase a weapon.
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 18:03
they go hand in hand. they do need to act on the background checks, that’s a given. but, there is no need for assault riffles, ban them now.
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 18:14
Or at the very least, require extensive background checks and expensive comprehensive insurance. Assault weapons should be a different class of weapon and not considered a gun for the general public.
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 19:25
Please define “assault weapon”…
Is it “scary black gun”, or something else?
OldLefty June 12th, 2016 at 19:30
From the DOJ;
“In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use.”
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 19:50
OK- you’re talking about the guns that the DOJ allowed to be sold illegally so they could track them…
OldLefty June 12th, 2016 at 20:09
That was from the DOJ in the 1990s
This is the actual bill
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/hr4296/text
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 19:33
Derp … it will be what the lawmakers define as assault weapon. Using a little bit of common sense will go a long way, try it sometime.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:41
Why always with the insults? How are you a mod?
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 21:22
You’re a troll saying stupid things. When you start saying something intelligent you will be treated with the respect intelligent comments deserve.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 21:23
You have issues.
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 21:45
Hell, I have issues with my issues, so what? You’re still a troll.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 21:51
I see, so everyone that disagrees with you or has a different point of view is a troll, got it.
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 21:53
If that is what you think, run with it and have fun.
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 19:20
Mike-
Why don’t we just torture everyone on the FBI “watchlist”? Why do we let them to even vote? Heck, we should let any cop w/ a rageboner invade their house on a whim. Or, maybe they even need dedicated Federal troops living with them. And, we can’t let them talk about it, right?
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 19:52
How many “Rights” can we violate because LISTS!
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 20:06
How many people can we let die prematurely because we are scared to act? That could end up being a long list of dead people. Rights? … what about the right to life?
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:11
The Orlando shooter purchased his guns legally. Gun control laws would not have stopped this.
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 20:16
Not having weapons with large clips might have reduced the casualties. A requirement ot have expensive insurance may have made it difficult for him to obtain the weapons he used. There are many things that could have been done to minimize the damage. To think otherwise is just plain dumb and defeatist in thinking. It you want to live life as a defeated person that’s your choice, but it’s not mine.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:19
You do not trample the rights (see 2nd Amendment) of everyone to maybe hinder (not stop) a few deranged people. How about dealing with deranged people better before trampling the rights of everyone.?
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 21:27
Your perceived rights are not what you think they are. Laws have been interpreted and can be reinterpreted. The 2nd Amendment is not at all clear in regards to today’s technology. You can’t own a nuclear missile now can you? There is a ban on individuals owning nuclear missiles and guess what, it’s working out just fine.
Budda June 12th, 2016 at 20:00
You’re expressing fantasies like they make sense.
Mike June 12th, 2016 at 21:20
You’re a bit incoherent … push the button and the nurse will help you out.
Get well soon
Buford2k11 June 12th, 2016 at 19:41
you have a point about the effectiveness of bans…that is why a different approach is necessary…BUT, something has to happen to staunch the flow of Blood in our Nation…Doing nothing is the republican thing, not ours…
Mike June 12th, 2016 at 21:14
You said it better than I did ….
eyelashviper June 12th, 2016 at 18:13
According to reports coming out, he was investigated by the FBI three times…
It gets dicey since he was never charged, but it seems just too easy to get guns, especially high power rapid fire weapons.
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 19:12
the point is, it would have been very difficult to murder 50 and injure 53 with a 6 shooter don’t cha think?
In three HOURS? I think I could do that with a “cap and ball” muzzleloader…
And google “speed loader”.
Budda June 12th, 2016 at 19:57
Cap and ball….I don’t think do. While reloading you’d be overwhelmed and beaten …badly.
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 20:07
Derp
Esef Brewer June 12th, 2016 at 17:00
Well, in this case it was an assault weapon causing the largest mass shooting in US history. What purpose does an assault rifle serve? I hunt and have never used an assault rifle. I protect my house and have never needed an assault rifle to make me feel protected. The worthless traitorous republican congress, that has blocked all reasonable and sensible effort to real in these weapons, need to be removed from office.
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 17:00
exactly.
Mike June 12th, 2016 at 17:24
Should we stop selling cars that can go over 75 mph …??? Anyone going faster than that is breaking the law and risking lives.
What purpose do Twinkies serve.??? They’re freakin deadly …
How about cigarettes, alcohol, or any of a million products that give us more grief than benefit
Banning something is the lazy man’s way of solving an unpleasant problem he either doesn’t want to address or doesn’t know how to address.
It didn’t work when we banned alcohol ! Or drugs, or drunk driving …public awareness and groups like MADD did more to effect change than. Any law or regulation…I’m trying to think of something we banned and it got better
Countries like Finland and Switzerland have gun ownership rates equal to or greater than ours, why are their murder rates so much lower …??? What are doing right …???
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 18:08
the purpose of a vehicle is to get from point A to point B. what some idiot chooses to do with it can’t be controlled. the purpose of a swimming pool is to swim, but, you can’t control some idiot who chooses to drown someone. but, an assault riffle and guns period, sole purpose is for killing. and in this case, an assault riffle was used to murder as many as possible in a very short period of time. 50 confirmed dead and 53 in the hospital. don’t be surprised if any of the 53 die because of their wounds.
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 18:35
Part of it may be the lifelong military training that men are required to partake in as part of different factions of defense forces.
Automatic weapons are banned, registration and licensing are required.
Registration is also required for inherited firearms.
(Hunting rifles are not subject to the same laws.)
Background checks are also required.
In America, you can walk down to a gun show and buy a semi-automatic rifle with cash in hand, no ID needed and no training required.
In America, you need a background check… but if it takes longer than 3 days, you can get the gun anyway (unless I’m misunderstanding that rule).
So, basically, our laws are incredibly weak and suck at controlling firearm ownership and usage.
Mostly thanks to the NRA and Republicans… and some Democrats.
Mike June 12th, 2016 at 19:04
Add to that this idiot was on some sort of FBI watchlist while buying an assault rifle and it doesn’t raise a red flag … WTF …why have a watchlist if no one is watching…???
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 19:59
He was removed from the list actually, after investigations didn’t turn up any actionable intel.
Apparently, he bought the guns within the last week, so his background check didn’t ding the terrorist database, since he was no longer on it.
Methinks that if you’re ever on a terrorist watch list, it should be a permanent red flag for purchasing firearms.
If you’ve been released from the watch list, it would still flag the person for a secondary check/review, at the very least.
Mike June 12th, 2016 at 21:04
Agreed
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 19:38
Registration is also required for inherited firearms.
Really? I inherited three guns from my father (he died when I was 17 in 1982). 12 gauge shotgun, .22 pistol, .308 long gun. No requirement to register them in Ohio- sadly, they all were lost in a tragic boating accident. Really!…
LOL
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 19:52
Sorry for your loss!
(But really, I am.)
And yup, in Switzerland, apparently you need to register inherited firearms.
William June 12th, 2016 at 23:51
WRONG!
In 2005 over 10% of households contained handguns, compared to 18% of U.S. households that contained handguns. In 2005 almost 29% of households in Switzerland contained firearms of some kind, compared to almost 43% in the US
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
eyelashviper June 12th, 2016 at 18:11
No civilian needs an assault rifle. Period….
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 19:41
I will keep asking… What makes it an “assault” rifle?
Budda June 12th, 2016 at 19:52
If it can fire 15/30 rounds in less than a minute?
Dwendt44 June 12th, 2016 at 19:57
In part, yes. The rate of fire for an AR-15 is over 600 rounds per minute, the AK-47 is similar. ARs are also light weight, shorter barrel, high reliability. Magazines of 20,30 or more rounds are a must. You can get a 50 and/or a 100 round magazine for the AR-15.
And, if you know where to look, conversion kits to make them fully automatic are still out there and available.
Comicus June 12th, 2016 at 23:42
Those conversion kits are a scam. If the kits worked as alleged, the manufacturers and sellers would be imprisoned.
Dwendt44 June 13th, 2016 at 00:05
Not true.
Comicus June 13th, 2016 at 17:49
It’s true. In order to use such a kit, one must re-machine or replace the receiver to accept the modification and have a bolt specifically designed for automatic fire. The only legal source for the full auto bolt would be a rifle manufactured before 5/19/1986. Any other source is illegal. The FOPA of 1986 bans the importation and domestic sale of fully automatic weapons manufactured after the law’s passing in the US. Any firearm manufactured and sold lawfully must be designed to render it impossible to modify for fully automatic fire. The AR-15s, AK47s and their variants have entirely different actions than their military counterparts.
Budda June 13th, 2016 at 06:20
Better answer then mine.
west coast raffy June 12th, 2016 at 20:01
I can do that with my .38 six shooter… (google “speedloader”) What else?
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 21:31
Then speed loaders get banned.
Budda June 13th, 2016 at 06:19
Good for you. I know all about ‘speedloaders’. You also should know that your six shooter is not as accurate as a long gun.
( I thought most .38 revolvers only held 5 rounds)
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 20:12
Honestly… it’s a misnomer.
They really should be using a different word instead of something that means to physically attack someone or something else.
I mean, going by the definition of “assault”, every weapon is an assault weapon.
But that’s kinda splitting hairs.
It’s obviously meant to convey something that has abilities beyond what is required for basic defense or hunting, a type of weapon used for military measures or mass killing.
Basically, there is no civilian use for assault style weapons.
causeican June 12th, 2016 at 20:51
It’s like pornography. You know it when you see it.
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 21:30
When it comes to legally regulating them, it will be what the lawmakers decide they are. Until then it is just a distracting topic that trolls use to derail a thread.
Warman1138 June 12th, 2016 at 17:09
It’s time for congress to finally act on gun violence? A GOP led congress? Where were they before this last tragedy with all the ones previous and every single day? Trying to tell us all, we need more guns and less restrictions for them to prevent more shootings.
allison1050 June 12th, 2016 at 18:06
Oh come now Senator Casey. Please allow me to carry that thought further if I may, if anyone thinks that they are in need of a weapon that looks like that then may I suggest that they go to the nearest recruitment office and volunteer. Hell, let’s face it, most of those that own them seem to be unemployed in any event.
amersham46 June 12th, 2016 at 18:51
Ain’t goin to happen till the Dems control Congress
Dwendt44 June 12th, 2016 at 19:47
Even then I wouldn’t bet much that that idea will get any serious traction.
The NRA has it’s fingers in a lot of Congressmen’s pockets.
With several manufacturers for each model of gun, AK-47 and AR-15, they have a lot of prime sponsors to protect.
Even a good number of Democrats are afraid to actually challenge the NRA.
amersham46 June 12th, 2016 at 19:51
start simple , allow only bolt action or lever action and maximum clip capacity of 7 rounds
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 20:14
(Oddly enough, Senator Sanders is not one of those who are afraid!)
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 19:50
All semi-automatic weapons can be called “military style” which means it is meaningless.
Dwendt44 June 12th, 2016 at 19:58
No so.
Richard Banville June 12th, 2016 at 19:58
Then ban all semi-automatics. There is no sane reason for any citizen to possess military-style weapons, none whatsoever. Ban them all. Melt them down.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:00
That would mean banning almost all guns.
Richard Banville June 12th, 2016 at 20:02
Exactly.
I realize that it’s a rather extreme position, but I hope that staking out an extreme position will at least move the conversation towards SOME kind of action.
But who am I kidding. If the NRA-funded politicians didn’t do anything after Sandy Hook, they certainly won’t act now.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:04
That is more than idiotic.
FDRliberal June 12th, 2016 at 20:54
“More guns equals more safety” is about the most idiotic thing one could imagine.
ANNG14 June 13th, 2016 at 09:48
It’s like let everyone have a gun so no one will get shot.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:07
The Orlando shooter had legally purchased his weapons. Gun control laws would not have stopped this.
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 20:15
Good ones could have.
Like say, if you are ever on a terrorist watch list, you should never be able to purchase a firearm without a secondary review by the FBI.
Not to mention if semi-automatic weapons were illegal, he wouldn’t have been able to purchase one i the store he went to.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:20
Almost all guns are semi-automatic.
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 20:27
Yeah, technically, there are semi-automatic pistols and the like.
So, it would make sense to include “high capacity” to the designation, I imagine.
(I’m in favor of “high capacity” meaning more than 10 bullet magazines.)
Dwendt44 June 13th, 2016 at 00:02
Wrong again.
Ron Theison June 12th, 2016 at 21:35
So he would have just bought one on the black market, you know the same market where you can easily buy any type of illegal drug you want. The cat is out of the bag as regards firearms.
bpollen June 13th, 2016 at 00:04
You just won’t stop with the “why have laws because criminals break them” K-Mart substitute for logic. Way to stretch intellect.
Mensa Member June 13th, 2016 at 00:11
>> The cat is out of the bag as regards firearms.
And guys like you let it out.
And you have blood on your hands.
Kick Frenzy June 13th, 2016 at 21:02
Yeah, because we always base laws on what’s available on the black market.
That’s why it’s legal to make snuff films, sell children as sex slaves and to buy and sell stolen goods in the open.
Please, think before you attempt to communicate with other humans.
Richard Banville June 13th, 2016 at 00:19
“The Orlando shooter had legally purchased his weapons. Gun control laws would not have stopped this.”
Then we have to make it impossible for ANYONE to purchase military-grade hardware that can lead to massacres like this.
whatthe46 June 13th, 2016 at 00:24
stop making so much damn sense please.
Ron Theison June 12th, 2016 at 21:33
You want some kind of action? We need to declare war on ISIS and go and wipe them out completely. We are at war and people need to realize that.
bpollen June 13th, 2016 at 00:03
If you haven’t signed up to serve yet, then I have no reason to have any more respect for your opinion on the subject than I do any pansy chicken-hawk. Those brave souls who say “I’ll stay here and pound my chest while you guys take the risk.” I think the operative word is coward… “chickenshit” will do in a pinch.
Richard Banville June 13th, 2016 at 00:18
ISIL (I prefer to call them Da’esh) had nothing to do with this.
Yes, we have action in the Middle-East against these murderous goons. But this homophobic Afghan-American was not in league with Da’esh. He was a wannabe who “pledged allegiance” to Da’esh in a 911 call. He had no link to any foreign terrorist group.
By all means yes, let’s wipe out Da’esh for their crimes in Iraq and Syria. But this guy had nothing to do with them except that he was a fanboy.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:00
As long as there are people willing to kill people, people will need the right to be armed.
We have the 2nd Amendment not to protect against the fools we have voted for now, but in case we vote for Mussolini or Hitler like fools in the future.
Most gun deaths are from:
2006 Total (30896)
55% Suicides (16992)
41% Homicides (12667)
2% Unintentional (accidents) (618)
1% Legal Intervention (309)
1% Other (309)
2010 Total (31,076)
62% Suicides (19392)
35 % Homicides (11,078)
2% Unintentional (accidents) (606)
Better mental health is the best way to decrease suicides.
Solutions to gun violence:
1. Remove public-sector gun free zones.
2. Enact better mental health laws and treatment. (Mandatory treatment for those adjudicated violent mentally ill.)
3. End the drug war and decriminalize drugs.
Allow teachers to be armed if they wish. Require they are trained.
We know what happened to unarmed Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks in Ottoman Empire/Turkey during WWI.
We know what happened to the unarmed Jews in Europe during WWII.
We know what happened to unarmed Cambodians in Cambodia during the 1970’s.
We know what happened and is happening to unarmed Darfurians in Darfur.
We know what happened to unarmed Tutsi in Rwanda.
We know what is happening to the unarmed in Africa today.
We know what is happening to the unarmed in the Middle East today.
How is the liberal agenda of disarming America still a thing?
Statistics: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 20:20
Because there is no liberal agenda to disarm America.
There is a need to rid our streets of semi-automatic death machines that serve no purpose other than large scale murder able to be committed in a short span of time.
That doesn’t mean you can’t own hand guns or rifles or even shotguns.
You will never need, or be able to effectively use, a semi-automatic gun for self defense.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:25
Hand guns, rifles and shotguns are semi-automatic guns.
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 20:30
SOME hand guns, rifles and shotguns are semi-automatic.
fify
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 20:31
All are, except single shot loaders.
Kick Frenzy June 12th, 2016 at 21:08
Anything that does not automatically load the next round is not semi-automatic.
Pump shotguns are not.
Pistols not designed to kick the next round into place automatically are not.
Rifles that require manual loading of the next round are not.
In other words, “some” is correct, not “all”.
TKList June 12th, 2016 at 21:11
We said the same thing.
bpollen June 13th, 2016 at 00:00
Nope. You said all. Here’s the money quote:
“Hand guns, rifles and shotguns are semi-automatic guns.”
He said “Nuh-uh.”
Now you are contending that “is so” and “is not” are the same thing?
Ammosexuals tend to make the most incompetent trolls.
Kick Frenzy June 13th, 2016 at 21:04
No, we didn’t.
mea_mark June 12th, 2016 at 21:35
He is a troll, he’s just here to derail the thread. He hasn’t said anything of significance yet, just talking (derailing points) points.
Kick Frenzy June 13th, 2016 at 21:05
Honestly, I’m not sure TK is a troll.
Might just be ignorant of reality.
*shrug*
bpollen June 12th, 2016 at 23:55
You realize that “except” means that your blanket statement about semi-automatic is WRONG. Damn… went to all that trouble to type up that (heheh) “devastating” rebuttal, and YOU had to correct yourself.
Ron Theison June 12th, 2016 at 21:31
Oh come on – the gun banners are never satiated. Ban semi-automatic rifles and pump shotguns will be next on the list.
bpollen June 12th, 2016 at 23:52
Nothing like stereotyping instead of having an actual defensible point, is there? Debate for the terminally lazy.
Kick Frenzy June 13th, 2016 at 20:58
First of all, “gun banners” is the wrong terminology… none of us are saying to ban all guns, just make smart laws.
Second, please describe the last time there was a ban that wasn’t enough for those who support common sense gun laws.
I mean, you claim they’re never satisfied, so you must have a basis in reality for that statement, yes?
Or maybe we should talk about gun lovers and how there’s always too many rules and anytime something is retracted or laws sunsetted or rules defined, they always want more “freedom” and allowed more types of guns and more ways to be able to carry them in public… and in more public places, like schools, churches and playgrounds?
Or does that not fit the narrative you like to pretend reflects reality?
FDRliberal June 12th, 2016 at 20:52
Meanwhile, over in the real world, the USA has 3 to 10 times the number of overall deaths by firearms and homicides by firearm per 100,000 as any other developed country on the planet. Even the mildest gun legislation cannot be passed due to propagandized paranoids who fantasize about fending off M-1 tanks and F-15 jets in a dark American Dystopian Nightmare.
bpollen June 12th, 2016 at 23:49
1. Remove public-sector gun free zones.
Somebody has been snorting the kool-aid. Yeah, the BEST answer for gun violence is MOAR GUNZ!
2. Enact better mental health laws and treatment. (Mandatory treatment for those adjudicated violent mentally ill.)
But criminals just ignore laws, so mental health laws won’t accomplish anything more than sensible gun legislation would. Almost undoubtedly less. The criminally insane are not responsible for the vast majority of killings. And you have to identify them BEFORE they commit their crimes. The most common comment about mass shooters from the neighbors: “He seemed so quiet.”
3. End the drug war and decriminalize drugs.
I agree with the suggestion, but I think that it is only going to have minimal impact on killings. Wouldn’t have stopped Dylann Roof, Omar Mateen, Robert Dear, Jared Loughner, George Hennard, James Huberty, Jiverly Voong, James Holmes, Charles Starkweather, Charles Whitman, Syed Farouk, Chris Harper-Mercer, Mohammod Abdulazeez, Aaron Alexis, John Zawahiri, Adam Lanza, Radcliffe Houghton, Andrew Engeldinger, Wade Michael Page, L. Goh, Scott Dekraai, Omar S. Thornton, Amy Bishop, Nidal Malik Hasan, Steven Kazmierczak.. and EVERY OTHER MASS SHOOTER IN AMERICAN HISTORY.
I bet your “solutions” are straight from the NRA.
Jodie June 13th, 2016 at 10:10
The only “drug” I don’t mind being legal nationwide in the US is pot. I really don’t want any of that other stuff legalized. I think autos and semi-autos should be banned outside of military and police use. I think ALL guns should be required to be left in a safe when not in use by or under the supervision of an adult. And I think “Muricans” need to stop letting small children learn how to shoot guns. You can teach a child gun safety without teaching them how to actually shoot a gun at a young age.
Ron Theison June 12th, 2016 at 21:30
I see, so you really think that the drug cartels south of the border will not add guns to the list of things they already bring across? Come back to reality my friend.
bpollen June 12th, 2016 at 23:29
Again with the “criminals don’t obey laws” reason for not having laws. Never has made a lick of sense, but don’t let that stop you from trying to make it plausible through repetition.
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 23:51
you do realize that we have American drug cartels right? they are Americans and they are THIS SIDE OF THE BORDER. stop laying blame on everyone else. we don’t have a clean backyard.
whatthe46 June 12th, 2016 at 23:52
“The Aryan Brotherhood, also known as the Brand, or the AB, is a white supremacist prison gang and organized crime syndicate in the United States with about 10,000 members in and out of prison.[7][8] According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the gang makes up less than 0.1% of the prison population, but it is responsible for up to 30% of murders in the federal prison system.[9][10][dubious – discuss] The AB has focused on the economic activities typical of organized crime entities, particularly drug trafficking, extortion, inmate prostitution, and murder-for-hire.”
****But you’re afraid of one homophobic muslim. I can see why you’re not afraid of the group described above though.
bpollen June 12th, 2016 at 23:28
Let’s see what the provenance of the AR-15 is:
From Wikipedia: The term “AR-15” was chosen by Colt for the civilian models it produced after selling the rifle to the US military as the M16 rifle, and many people and references use the term “AR-15” exclusively for civilian models.
So, new name, new market, and it’s suddenly not “military style”… Just like if I sell a toilet to the military, it’s a totally different thing when I sell the “civilian version.”
Mensa Member June 13th, 2016 at 00:04
>> All semi-automatic weapons can be called “military style” which means it is meaningless.
Are all semi-automatic weapons designed to kill lots of people quickly?
If so, they have no place on the streets.
Ron Theison June 12th, 2016 at 21:28
Here we go with the usual call to ban a certain type of firearm. In France, a country where firearms are hard to legally get, 130 people were killed with FULLY AUTOMATIC rifles. Ban them here and the terrorists will still be able to get them – just like they did in France.
bpollen June 12th, 2016 at 23:23
But they didn’t just get to walk into the local Le Walmarte to buy them. And they have open borders to carry them across. And arms merchants will sell to anybody, regardless of who they intend to kill.
Let’s not bother trying to outlaw corporate malfeasance because people will break those laws. Rape- same thing. Murder -why outlaw that since people still do it? Arson? Nope, they still do it. Pedophilia? Damn, laws don’t prevent that.
Of course, the best thing is to do nothing, or claim that MORE guns would have solved the problem. That’ll sure fix everything.
Mensa Member June 13th, 2016 at 00:07
“Ron Theison”s argument is basically, “Since we can’t stop all mass killings, we shouldn’t bother to stop any.”
William June 12th, 2016 at 23:41
Here we go again with the comparison of France with the USA. OK I’m game. Take a look at the graph. Notice anything? I eagerly await your “yeah but” response.
Jodie June 13th, 2016 at 10:04
I have a friend that lives in England…He’s horrified at how often we have mass shootings over here.
robert June 13th, 2016 at 04:50
Because we all know hand guns don’t and are incapable of killing people…..next
William June 13th, 2016 at 00:03
Spread their shame. http://www.nracongress.com/all-nra-recipients.html
Jodie June 13th, 2016 at 10:00
I get that some people feel the need to own a gun to protect themselves or own rifles for hunting. That’s all fine. But if you feel like you need an auto or semi-auto for protection, you obviously need to move. It’s sad when you can’t even feel safe sending your kid to school anymore. Yes, I’m aware that there’s countless ways to kill someone. But an auto or semi-auto rifle can take out dozens of people before people even realize what’s going on. There’s really no need for them outside of military or police use.