California shooting [W:936]

[YoungConserv]

Police: 5 dead in California shooting, including gunman - CNN.com
How could this have happed shooting people was illegal and you've almost abolished the second but yet it still happens. I though making something illegal was supposed to prevent it from happening.Huh it's almost as if these actions have more to do with the person than the inanimate object in his hand. I wonder what the response this time is gonna be they've already stipped gun rights bare in California hiw much more can they do?

 

[Democrat152]

The 2nd is far from abolished, as you know very well. We Democrats never wanted to make all guns illegal, simply take those that are meant for warfare and can cause extreme harm off the market. If you cant get one, you cant kill people with them. The fact that the shooter was using an ASSUALT RIFLE, invalidates your argument that gun rights are striped to the bone. They are not even close. We have tried repeatedly to get these dangerous guns off the streets, but obstructionist republicans wont allow even the most watered-down gun control bill to get through. An new Assault Weapons ban might now have prevented this shooting, but it would've prevented future shooting that are sure to happen. Whether you wish to face it or not, as long as you refuse to act, these tragic events will continue to happen.

 

[tech30528]

The 2nd is far from abolished, as you know very well. We Democrats never wanted to make all guns illegal, simply take those that are meant for warfare and can cause extreme harm off the market. If you cant get one, you cant kill people with them. The fact that the shooter was using an ASSUALT RIFLE, invalidates your argument that gun rights are striped to the bone. They are not even close. We have tried repeatedly to get these dangerous guns off the streets, but obstructionist republicans wont allow even the most watered-down gun control bill to get through. An new Assault Weapons ban might now have prevented this shooting, but it would've prevented future shooting that are sure to happen. Whether you wish to face it or not, as long as you refuse to act, these tragic events will continue to happen.

Calling a semi auto an assault rifle doesn't help your argument at all. The police have fully automatic rifles and they didn't stop him before he killed several people.He had all the time in the world. This could just as easily been done with a revolver or a shotgun.

 

[Democrat152]

You don't have to reload an AR-15 nearly as much as a shotgun or a revolver. The odds are even better if you are prepared, with plenty of extra clips (the size of which we tried to limit, I may add), as this guy was. Also, an Assault Weapon can be Semi or Fully automatic, your the gun advocate here, you should know that. Assault rifles use selective fire, have clips, and is a rifle. Check, Check, and Check.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

The 2nd is far from abolished, as you know very well. We Democrats never wanted to make all guns illegal, simply take those that are meant for warfare and can cause extreme harm off the market. If you cant get one, you cant kill people with them. The fact that the shooter was using an ASSUALT RIFLE, invalidates your argument that gun rights are striped to the bone. They are not even close. We have tried repeatedly to get these dangerous guns off the streets, but obstructionist republicans wont allow even the most watered-down gun control bill to get through. An new Assault Weapons ban might now have prevented this shooting, but it would've prevented future shooting that are sure to happen. Whether you wish to face it or not, as long as you refuse to act, these tragic events will continue to happen.

The 2nd Ammendment wanted us to have guns for warfare, apparently liberals forget that.

 

[jamesrage]

The 2nd is far from abolished, as you know very well. We Democrats never wanted to make all guns illegal, simply take those that are meant for warfare and can cause extreme harm off the market. If you cant get one, you cant kill people with them. The fact that the shooter was using an ASSUALT RIFLE, invalidates your argument that gun rights are striped to the bone. They are not even close. We have tried repeatedly to get these dangerous guns off the streets, but obstructionist republicans wont allow even the most watered-down gun control bill to get through. An new Assault Weapons ban might now have prevented this shooting, but it would've prevented future shooting that are sure to happen. Whether you wish to face it or not, as long as you refuse to act, these tragic events will continue to happen.

1.No semiautomatic rifle is an assault rifle.An assault rifle is a rifle that fires a intermediate cartridge and can fire either in burst mode or auto.If a rifle can not do that then it is not an assault rifle.
2.What the person in the CNN article apparently meant was assault weapon.
3.Assault weapons are not military weapons nor are they meant for warfare.No military uses assault weapons.

 

[jamesrage]

You don't have to reload an AR-15 nearly as much as a shotgun or a revolver. The odds are even better if you are prepared, with plenty of extra clips (the size of which we tried to limit, I may add), as this guy was. Also, an Assault Weapon can be Semi or Fully automatic, your the gun advocate here, you should know that. Assault rifles use selective fire, have clips, and is a rifle. Check, Check, and Check.

No they can't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
An assault rifle is a selective fire (selective between automatic, semi-automatic, and burst fire) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.

Modern Firearms - Assault Rifles
Assault rifles are primary offensive weapons of modern troops. Today's AR (Assault Rifles) usually have calibers ranging from 5.45mm to 7.62mm, magazine capacity of 20-30 or more rounds, selective full auto and single shot modes of fire, plus, in some models, 2 or 3 round burst mode.

assault rifle -- Encyclopedia Britannica
assault rifle, military firearm that is chambered for ammunition of reduced size or propellant charge and that has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic and fully automatic fire.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain cosmetic, ergonomic, or construction features similar to those of military firearms.

 

[Democrat152]

No military uses Assault weapons...Are you joking? The AR-15, the gun used in the shooting, was developed originally developed of War. The M4 is an assault weapon is in use in the military, now. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I quote what you just said, "An assault weapon is a selective fire (selective between automatic, SEMI-AUTOMATIC ,and burst fire) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine". I'm afraid you proved me right. By the way david, the founding fathers intended for the Constitution to be updated, that is the purpose of amendments, and amendments can be repealed.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

The 2nd is far from abolished, as you know very well. We Democrats never wanted to make all guns illegal, simply take those that are meant for warfare and can cause extreme harm off the market. If you cant get one, you cant kill people with them. The fact that the shooter was using an ASSUALT RIFLE, invalidates your argument that gun rights are striped to the bone. They are not even close. We have tried repeatedly to get these dangerous guns off the streets, but obstructionist republicans wont allow even the most watered-down gun control bill to get through. An new Assault Weapons ban might now have prevented this shooting, but it would've prevented future shooting that are sure to happen. Whether you wish to face it or not, as long as you refuse to act, these tragic events will continue to happen.

What guns can't cause extreme harm? Not sure how that factors with the 2nd Ammendment.

 

[Democrat152]

Not all guns are capable of spraying dozens of bullets in a matter of seconds. I don't have a problem with guns other than Assault Weapons. They can cause extreme harm on a massive scale.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Not all guns are capable of spraying dozens of bullets in a matter of seconds. I don't have a problem with guns other than Assault Weapons.

So give us a specific list of guns.

 

[Democrat152]

Any rifle capable of fully or semi- automatic fire. If you want an exact list, you can visit the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 on Opencongress.org.

 

[jamesrage]

No military uses Assault weapons...Are you joking? The AR-15, the gun used in the shooting, was developed originally developed of War. The M4 is an assault weapon is in use in the military, now. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I quote what you just said, "An assault weapon is a selective fire (selective between automatic, SEMI-AUTOMATIC ,and burst fire) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine". I'm afraid you proved me right. By the way david, the founding fathers intended for the Constitution to be updated, that is the purpose of amendments, and amendments can be repealed.

1.The civilian AR-15 is not the same as the military versions who Armalite sold to colt firearm,Colt who renamed the military versions as M16s and the civilian semiautomatic versions as AR15.
2.Civilian M4s are not military M4s.
3.Assault weapon and assault rifle are not synonymous terms.Assault weapons cant not switch between burst and semi or auto and semi. Look at the links.
4.You have not been proved right.

 

[Black Dog]

Not all guns are capable of spraying dozens of bullets in a matter of seconds. I don't have a problem with guns other than Assault Weapons. They can cause extreme harm on a massive scale.

I have a semi-auto 45 with a 5" barrel and 16 round magazines. It is not an assault weapon. How many people do you honestly think I could shoot with it? Raven arms makes a machine pistol that fires 9mm full auto. It is not an assault weapon and it has 30 round magazines or larger. How many people could you kill?

Semi-auto rifles make up around what? 3 or 4% of gun crime? That is what you want to ban huh?

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Any rifle capable of fully or semi- automatic fire. If you want an exact list, you can visit the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 on Opencongress.org.

I've read the junk legislation. How does that fit with the 2nd Ammendment. Must I remind you the 2nd ammendment is to arm a militia for defense for personal, or in the case of a need for a last resort against a tyrannical government or invasion.

So the weapons ban is unconstitutional as it would prohibit us from doing that.

 

[Surtr]

Any rifle capable of fully or semi- automatic fire. If you want an exact list, you can visit the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 on Opencongress.org.

So, to you, this is an assault weapon:

 

[Democrat152]

Here's what I got when I searched Assault Weapons in Wikipedia: Assault weapon is a political and legal term that refers to different types of firearms and weapons, and is a term that has differing meanings, usages and purposes.

"In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain cosmetic, ergonomic, or construction features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the chamber, without requiring the manual operation of a bolt handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction with one, two, or more other features such as a pistol grip, a folding or collapsing stock, a flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug.[1] Most assault weapons are rifles, but pistols or shotguns may also fall under the definition(s) or be specified by name"


Assault weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I misspoke when I referred to Assault rifles, I meant assault weapons. Its 9AM here, and I haven't slept since I got up this time yesterday morning, so cut me some slack.lol. Anyways, it does not matter whether they have been outfitted for "civilian use", they are still dangerous weapons, as yesterday's events, along with those at Newtown(and others), have proved.
Also manta, that 3 to 4% (I would welcome certification for that), consists of 20 children and 6 teachers, and 5 people killed yesterday, and many more. Are you really calling them expendable?

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Here's what I got when I searched Assault Weapons in Wikipedia: Assault weapon is a political and legal term that refers to different types of firearms and weapons, and is a term that has differing meanings, usages and purposes.

"In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain cosmetic, ergonomic, or construction features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the chamber, without requiring the manual operation of a bolt handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction with one, two, or more other features such as a pistol grip, a folding or collapsing stock, a flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug.[1] Most assault weapons are rifles, but pistols or shotguns may also fall under the definition(s) or be specified by name"


Assault weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I misspoke when I referred to Assault rifles, I meant assault weapons. Its 9AM here, and I haven't slept since I got up this time yesterday morning, so cut me some slack.lol. Anyways, it does not matter whether they have been outfitted for "civilian use", they are still dangerous weapons, as yesterday's events, along with those at Newtown(and others), have proved.
Also manta, that 3 to 4% (I would welcome certification for that), consists of 20 children and 6 teachers, and 5 people killed yesterday, and many more. Are you really calling them expendable?

You still haven't answered my post #15 above.

 

[Black Dog]

Here's what I got when I searched Assault Weapons in Wikipedia: Assault weapon is a political and legal term that refers to different types of firearms and weapons, and is a term that has differing meanings, usages and purposes.

"In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain cosmetic, ergonomic, or construction features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the chamber, without requiring the manual operation of a bolt handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction with one, two, or more other features such as a pistol grip, a folding or collapsing stock, a flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug.[1] Most assault weapons are rifles, but pistols or shotguns may also fall under the definition(s) or be specified by name"


Assault weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I misspoke when I referred to Assault rifles, I meant assault weapons. Its 9AM here, and I haven't slept since I got up this time yesterday morning, so cut me some slack.lol. Anyways, it does not matter whether they have been outfitted for "civilian use", they are still dangerous weapons, as yesterday's events, along with those at Newtown(and others), have proved.
Also manta, that 3 to 4% (I would welcome certification for that), consists of 20 children and 6 teachers, and 5 people killed yesterday, and many more. Are you really calling them expendable?

Until 1984 the term "assault weapon or rifle" meant a military rifle capable of 3 round burst or full auto select fire. It is a made up political term to demonize all semi auto weapons, period. Until the "cosmetic" assault weapons ban of 84, when any "evil black gun" that looked like it's military counterpart were made the issue. When in reality they are not. What happened at the Boston Marathon, should make this abundantly clear.

 

[Democrat152]

You still haven't answered my post #15 above.

Give me time, theres one of me and a lot of you. Wait your turn.lol

 

[Democrat152]

I say again, I do not support banning all weapons, just Assault Weapons. It has been done before, and if it wasn't unconstitutional then, its not now. District of Columbia v. Heller supports that, saying "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose".

 

[haymarket]

In a few days, this will be forgotten and disappear from the national radar. These type of events would have to happen every week for a year or two before there was any sort of national outrage that eventually built up over these things which would then be directed into national gun control and regulation efforts.

In the meantime, the occasional massacre at an elementary school or movie theater or campus is just part of the price we pay.

 

[Black Dog]

Give me time, theres one of me and a lot of you. Wait your turn.lol

I don't agree with your positions on guns, but as far as this goes I know the feeling, lol.

 

[Democrat152]

In a few days, this will be forgotten and disappear from the national radar. These type of events would have to happen every week for a year or two before there was any sort of national outrage that eventually built up over these things which would then be directed into national gun control and regulation efforts.

In the meantime, the occasional massacre at an elementary school or movie theater or campus is just part of the price we pay.

The average American citizen has a short attention span, and seemingly even shorter memory. It is saddening.

 

[Black Dog]

I say again, I do not support banning all weapons, just Assault Weapons. It has been done before, and if it wasn't unconstitutional then, its not now. District of Columbia v. Heller supports that, saying "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose".

No it has not been done before, at all. Certain states banned full auto's. Semi auto's have never been banned for being a semi-automatic weapon. In 1984 they banned certain cosmetic property's of "assault weapons" like a pistol grip was banned so the manufactures changed to a thumb hole stock. Bayonet lugs were banned. Although for the life of me I have no idea when the last person in the US was bayoneted to death. None of the changes or cosmetic bans affected crime at all, nothing.

So no.