The deadly ignorance of the left!


#1

I’ve watched and listened to progressives talking gun control for decades !
Theses Progressives are talking about banning most semiautomatic gas operates rifles !
Now they are moving to the 5.56 / 223 bullets as some kind of evil supper creation bullet !
Shooters know the 5.56 / 223 is in use primary because of the weight and size of the round .
When we look at the power and wound channel and compare it against the round it replaced the 308 it is apparent what was given up for the weight !



In their rush to push their agenda they and in their ignorance they are going to push the next mental disturbed person to much more deadly weapons .
Any body the knows anything about firearms would not pick a 223 / 5.56 for close work there are much better choices available .

#2

And who said that they just after the .223… if you believe that then you believe that they are only after gas operated semiautomatics… The one thing that progressives are extremely good at is patience. They are experts at compromise. If the issue starts out at 1 side believing that ’ 0 ’ is the answer and the left believe it is ‘100’, they will ‘compromise’ with you until you give them all 100… Its why compromising on uncompromisable principle is so damned dangerous.


#3

Truth brother the progressive movement want to disarm America !
The shooting pubic better wake up . NO COMPROMISE NO NEW GUN RESTRICTIONS and for good the republic show up and vote the vermin out of office !


#4

I don’t think it’s physically possible for them to ban semi-autos. The amount of semi-auto rifles out there right now means they would have to grandfather all of them in. It also wouldn’t happen over night and manufacturers would ramp up production like crazy. There would then be enough pre-ban rifles floating around out there that any kind of “ban” would be pointless. I don’t want to see any action on this front but even if they did who is going to enforce it and how?


#5


#6

Bingo that is where they are driving us to read about the model the Australian gun grab !


There are a lot of people that don’t want an armed citizenry in America .


#7

Yep. We are going to have our way too. We had an assault weapons ban once already so its clearly constitutional. All the mass shootings in the last several years have been with semi-automatic assault rifles.


#8

There is no legal reason anyone in this country needs a rifle with a clip holding more than 4 bullets. Effective semi automatic fire when hunting is limited to two shots at best. The idea that anyone has a constitutional right to own one is absurd. The AR-15 and its ilk are nothing more than killing machines and can be regulated.


#9

Except for the fact that the right to own one is granted by the constitution.


#10

And not just rifles but handguns also ought to be covered by this restriction. The magazines (detachable and internal) are key to scaling the destructiveness of firearms. There are also some concerns about ammunition, but those are secondary to magazine capacity.

Beyond that, the occurrence of weapon use can be reduced by destroying the legal framework of laws that encourage weapon use: stand-your-ground, practical-police-immunity, concealed-carry, open-carry, no-liability-coverage-requirement, fake-gun-education-classes, etc.

And while we have gun purchase checks, we can make them more effective.

I do think that law enforcement and the military should be exempted. It makes sense for them to have weapons on and off-duty.


#11

Actually the constitution is rather ambiguous on it.


#12

Just stop.

An assault weapons ban will not make an appreciable dent in the numbers of people killed by guns in the US.

Let’s assume that these 17 children are the only ones that have died in a mass shooting this year.

In the meantime, there have been over 1,200 who have been killed in other places with other weapons.

It is time to confront the gun fetishists on their nonsense. It is time to take a good hard at the 2nd Amendment. I would favor a repeal, but realize that this is politically impossible.

But certainly we can make gun fetishists the next drunk drivers.


#13

Tell me about all the people killed with rifles ?
According to FBI: UCR Table 12, there were approximately 374 people shot and killed with rifles of any kind. There were 1,604 people killed with “knives or cutting instruments.”
Table 12 also shows that more people were killed via the use of “hands, fists, feet, etc.,” than were killed by rifles of any kind. In fact, the tally shows that the death numbers were not even close. While approximately 374 people were shot and killed with rifles, roughly 656 people were beaten to death with “hands, fists, feet, etc.”
You don’t know what you are talking about just parrot repeating liberal dogma .
Elections have consequences .


#14

Matt you don’t know anything about hunting and you know less about fire arms !
Elections have consequences we have Neil Gorsuch !
President Trump Appointed Four Times as Many Federal Appeals Judges as Obama in His First Year


#15

Granted by the constitution and confirmed by the supreme court !


#16

No it is not at all ambiguous but that hasn’t stop you from talking about shit you know absolutely nothing about before I don’t see it changing anytime soon !
It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Heller v. District of Columbia.


#17

No you can’t repeal,the 2nd Amendment !
Stop guessing do some research so you know what you are talking about !
According to FBI: UCR Table 12, there were approximately 374 people shot and killed with rifles of any kind. There were 1,604 people killed with “knives or cutting instruments.”
Table 12 also shows that more people were killed via the use of “hands, fists, feet, etc.,” than were killed by rifles of any kind. In fact, the tally shows that the death numbers were not even close. While approximately 374 people were shot and killed with rifles, roughly 656 people were beaten to death with “hands, fists, feet, etc.”


#18

The Ludicrous knows Left the 2nd Amendment is about the right to posess firearms but it’s diverting attention to the type of weapon and it’s propaganda machine( CNN) continues to focus its Diatribe on it.
Most reasonable people would look at what occurred and figure out what caused it to occur. Today adults and children have brains made of Silly Putty and have been Brainwashed by the Liberals propaganda and Liberal Educators.


#19

I beg to differ. EVERY mass shooting that has been in the news in the last 2 years involved a semi-automatic weapon. I’m not saying that’s all that should be done, but its a good start.

@imjimo - semi-automatic assault rifles are the best place to start right now. There is a national conversation about it and your side is folding.


#20

I propose something that might be a different way of looking at it.

Link gun ownership to the militia, as implied by the text of the 2nd amendment.

Owners would need to keep their registered weapons in a local armory run by local militia. The militia would provide firearms training to owners, security for the weapons, and hold ultimate responsibility for use, storage and cataloging of them. Membership probably would require a course of training over two weeks, say, to become certified on any particular weapon. Withdrawals of the weapons for specified reasons, like hunting, would be allowed to members who have passed all training and are in good standing. Magazines would be allowed during training, however smaller clips only during withdrawal periods, based on required purpose (so someone clearing a ranch of wild hogs will have means to do so, whereas a deer hunter has a different requirement). Guns must be returned after each withdrawal period.

Any guns found outside of this system would be confiscated and bearers as well as owners would be prosecuted under a new set of laws that would consider those responsible the same as those who bear.

Those who don’t want to participate would be eligible for a buy-back.

Perhaps long-time members could be allowed a derringer for home defense or concealed carry if required by job.