Glad you asked Rucker.
I feel we aren't filtering out and vetting our fabulous gun nuts nearly enough.
There should probably be some psychological testing involved before a person can be deemed fit to own a firearm.
We have 30,000 board certified psychiatrists and about 100,000 licensed psychologists, not all of whom have the training to determine if someone is sane enough (however that is defined), not all of whom would want to grant a certification that would allow anyone regardless of mental health to buy a gun, and virtually none of whom have much available time in their practice to take on new patients. 100 million of them. You do the math.
And thats just for starters.
The word you're looking for is "non-starter".
Civilians shouldn't have these Mass Murder Machines like these AR15s and such with the 30 round magazines in residential neighborhoods.
Civilians have owned magazine fed semiautomatic rifles since 1905. Civilians owned AR-15s for 48 years before a civilian ever used one in a mass shooting.
We've had mass shootings with "assault weapons", semiautomatic rifles not classfied as "assault weapons", bolt action rifles, lever action rifles, semiautomatic shotguns, pump action shotguns, double barrel shotguns, pistols, revolvers, .22 rifles and .22 pistols. Evidently these are all Mass Murder Machines.
AR-15s and 30 round magazines are bearable arms in common use for lawful purposes and thus protected by the Second Amendment (see DC v Heller and Caetano v Massachusetts). How do you expect any ban to be Constitutional?
I dont think reasonable people want that around their families.
They should be more concerned with the cars in their driveways, the knives in their kitchen and the hammers in their garages. To be frank, they should be more concerned with the stairs, chairs and bathtubs in the homes, all of which cause more deaths every single year than have ever been caused by someone using an AR-15 in a mass shooting since 1964, according to CDC and Mother Jones data.
