Mass Shootings Maine

[5-Points 3,530]

15 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Without comparing to me, you’re saying you think you could kill more people with a shotgun than an AR?

I'm saying the lethality of any firearm is largely based on the shooter's proficiency with his or her weapon of choice. And one person can do as much, or more, damage with a shotgun or a handgun as somebody else can do with an AR or any other semi-auto rifle. 

 

 

[TimHauck 2,873]

1 minute ago, 5-Points said:

I'm saying the lethality of any firearm is largely based on the shooter's proficiency with his or her weapon of choice. And one person can do as much, or more, damage with a shotgun or a handgun as somebody else can do with an AR or any other semi-auto rifle. 

 

 

Thanks for avoiding the question 

[IGotWorms 4,058]

2 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

More people are killed with hand guns.  We all know this.  Also, that wasn't the argument I made earlier.  Why is a .22 rifle perfectly fine but the rifle I linked to earlier so much worse?  I never got a straight answer.  For some reason a different gun with different caliber gets brought up.

It’s different issues.

If we’re talking domestic violence, yes, handguns and such are probably the main firearms used. Likely true for most accidental shootings as well.

But when we’re talking mass shootings where 20, 30, 50, 60 people are killed and maybe hundreds wounded, yeah, that’s almost definitely some serious firepower.

That you would even argue otherwise is bizarrely disingenuous. I don’t know where you guys originally got off on this “AR15 is not technically an assault rifle” bullsh1t but you need to come off it

[5-Points 3,530]

11 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Thanks for avoiding the question 

Sorry, I thought I was answering your question. 

[IGotWorms 4,058]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

If you’re saying an AR-15 doesn’t serve a useful purpose in society then you are saying all semiautomatic rifles don’t serve a useful purpose in society. 

Yes, they don’t. Period.

[TimHauck 2,873]

3 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Sorry, I thought I was answering your question. 

How bout this:

Can the most proficient shooter in the world with an AR-15 kill more people in a crowded bar than the most proficient shooter in the world with a shotgun?

[5-Points 3,530]

50 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Yes the way to do that is full registration of all guns, universal background checks, and federal red flag laws. We libs can’t do it by ourselves. 
 

You guys are the problem not us .

A) That won't stop bad guys from doing bad sh!t

2) Once again, you seem to suggest that people are the problem. I think you're blaming the wrong people 

[5-Points 3,530]

12 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

How bout this:

Can the most proficient shooter in the world with an AR-15 kill more people in a crowded bar than the most proficient shooter in the world with a shotgun?

Maybe 

You guys seem to think that an AR is the be all end all of killing machines. They aren't. NATO adopted the 5.56 round, which is essentially the .223 round most AR's are chambered in, precisely because it is less lethal than the 7.62 round that guns like the AK fire. A person using a shotgun with a rifled barrel, slugs, and a drum magazine can do a great deal more damage than somebody else with an AR. 

It isn't the gun. It's the person using the gun that is the problem. 

 

[Fireballer 2,642]

Ok since this guy didn’t use an actual AR, what should we push to ban now?

[Hardcore troubadour 15,430]

Obama had the house and the senate. Nothing. Biden had the house and the senate, nothing.  Just like Obama didn’t codify abortion when he had the chance. They see the political capital these type of issues provide.  Same reason nothing has been done about social security.  

[League Champion 1,911]

It's mental health, we should feel sorry for him. Ohh wait, it wasn't a Tranny or Minority. BAD WHITE MAN! 

[IGotWorms 4,058]

5 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Obama had the house and the senate. Nothing. Biden had the house and the senate, nothing.  Just like Obama didn’t codify abortion when he had the chance. They see the political capitol these type of issues provide.  Same reason nothing has been done about social security.  

True

[League Champion 1,911]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’m not afraid of guns. I just don’t think that some of them, like AR-15s, serve any useful purpose in society. But it’s too late now. 

 

[TimHauck 2,873]

35 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Ok since this guy didn’t use an actual AR, what should we push to ban now?

I thought the reports are that it was an “AR-10”?

[League Champion 1,911]

Just now, TimHauck said:

I thought the reports are that it was an “AR-10”?

Good thing it wasn't an AR-17. The AR-15 is 2 ARs safer

[Nomad99 742]

16 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I thought the reports are that it was an “AR-10”?

AR 10 is 7.62 vs 5.56

[The Real timschochet 6,764]

1 hour ago, Patented Phil said:

And what I’m trying to tell you is WHY Conservatives “won’t let you do that.”  But you have no interest in understanding.  

I understand why. I’ve been talking to conservatives about this for years. I get their viewpoint on this issue. I just disagree with it. 

[Nomad99 742]

45 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

True

If the Dems had convinced RBG to retire,  instead of selfishly hanging on like a dinosaur.....they could of had it their way.

[The Real timschochet 6,764]

45 minutes ago, League Champion said:

 

But that’s not MY logic. I don’t want to make any guns illegal. 

[Nomad99 742]

58 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Maybe 

You guys seem to think that an AR is the be all end all of killing machines. They aren't. NATO adopted the 5.56 round, which is essentially the .223 round most AR's are chambered in, precisely because it is less lethal than the 7.62 round that guns like the AK fire. A person using a shotgun with a rifled barrel, slugs, and a drum magazine can do a great deal more damage than somebody else with an AR. 

It isn't the gun. It's the person using the gun that is the problem. 

 

Give me a Spas with a drum mag any day.....

[The Real timschochet 6,764]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

A) That won't stop bad guys from doing bad sh!t

2) Once again, you seem to suggest that people are the problem. I think you're blaming the wrong people 

A) Obviously bad guys ignore laws they don’t like. The purpose of laws is to make that more difficult for them. 
B.) I don’t blame anyone. And I’m not trying to punish anyone. 

[Gepetto 1,368]

Getting rid of AR-15s doesn't solve the problem; couldn't get rid of them anyway, several already out there. There are other guns, other weapons, bombs. The problem that needs to be addressed is our society, social structure, people falling through the cracks, recovery help for life circumstances like death of a loved one, loss of job, failing out of school, divorce; can't let those people not be helped. Mental health for all especially those right as they're being affected by mental illness need help.

[Nomad99 742]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

But that’s not MY logic. I don’t want to make any guns illegal. 

If you want to enact laws that HAVE A REAL, MEASURABLE AFFECT ON BAD GUYS, without handicapping lawful citizens.....I'm all aboard & have your back.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,103]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

A) Obviously bad guys ignore laws they don’t like. The purpose of laws is to make that more difficult for them. 
B.) I don’t blame anyone. And I’m not trying to punish anyone. 

So we'll make it hard for criminals by taking guns away from law-abiding citizens?  Do you realize how silly that sounds?

Also, if you're willing to take away a Constitutional Right from everyone else, which one would you like to give up (other than the 2nd)?

[The Real timschochet 6,764]

6 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

So we'll make it hard for criminals by taking guns away from law-abiding citizens?  Do you realize how silly that sounds?

Also, if you're willing to take away a Constitutional Right from everyone else, which one would you like to give up (other than the 2nd)?

OK, I suppose I’m going to have to repeat this for the 5th time or so today: I don’t want to take any guns away. 
 

I want federal registration, universal background checks, federal red flag laws. I don’t want to seize any guns and none of the items I want is a violation of the 2nd Amendment. In fact, a national registration of all firearms would be in keeping with the intent of the 2nd to have a “well-regulated” militia. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,430]

15 minutes ago, Nomad99 said:

If the Dems had convinced RBG to retire,  instead of selfishly hanging on like a dinosaur.....they could of had it their way.

There was an assault weapons ban at one time. The scotus had nothing to do with it going away.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,103]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

OK, I suppose I’m going to have to repeat this for the 5th time or so today: I don’t want to take any guns away. 
 

I want federal registration, universal background checks, federal red flag laws. I don’t want to seize any guns and none of the items I want is a violation of the 2nd Amendment. In fact, a national registration of all firearms would be in keeping with the intent of the 2nd to have a “well-regulated” militia. 

The SCOTUS says otherwise. 

[The Real timschochet 6,764]

1 minute ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

The SCOTUS says otherwise. 

When? I don’t believe they have ever commented on registration or background checks. Have they? 

[Fireballer 2,642]

50 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I thought the reports are that it was an “AR-10”?

It was a Ruger SFAR.  Which has the same capabilities of countless .308 rifles that have wood stocks and sold as hunting rifles.  This is where the whole “ban assault rifles” is lost on me.  Its literally arbitrary characteristics that make people put tactical-looking guns in to that category.

[Hawkeye21 2,399]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

Yes, they don’t. Period.

So, you don’t think I should be allowed to own my .22 rifle?  I guess my brother-in-law should turn in his .17 rifle too. What should I be allowed to own? 

[League Champion 1,911]

21 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

want federal registration, universal background checks, federal red flag laws. 

Agree . Banning guns is not the answer, taking them out of bad people's hands is the answer. 

It's way too easy to purchase a gun. I have a FFL and I can purchase, sell as many guns as I want, anywhere, anytime and even that's too easy. There has to be better way of vetting. Forget HIPPA Laws, they need not apply to gun licensing. I'm ok with a 2 week cooling off period as well. Gun safety courses and training must be mandatory. 

But the biggest problem we have are stolen guns. This is where the bulk of crimes are committed. I can guarantee you that out of the 20+ murders that will happen in Chicago alone this weekend, absolutely ZERO will be committed with a legally purchased registered gun. 

[Nomad99 742]

2 hours ago, Patented Phil said:

I’m anti-gun, just so you know.  

You aren't a vegetarian are you?

[IGotWorms 4,058]

48 minutes ago, Nomad99 said:

If the Dems had convinced RBG to retire,  instead of selfishly hanging on like a dinosaur.....they could have had it their way.

Sorta.

If that had happened and they hadn’t allowed republicans to steal a seat, then yes

[Fireballer 2,642]

33 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

OK, I suppose I’m going to have to repeat this for the 5th time or so today: I don’t want to take any guns away 

You’ve repeatedly stated your desire to do so, but that it’s not possible.  You still want to, unless you’ve lied in all your other posts

[IGotWorms 4,058]

13 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

So, you don’t think I should be allowed to own my .22 rifle?  I guess my brother-in-law should turn in his .17 rifle too. What should I be allowed to own? 

That’s a leap I didn’t make.

[BuckSwope 654]

2 hours ago, Fireballer said:

Ok since this guy didn’t use an actual AR, what should we push to ban now?

All gunz! 

[Nomad99 742]

3 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Yes the way to do that is full registration of all guns, universal background checks, and federal red flag laws. We libs can’t do it by ourselves. 
 

You guys are the problem not us .

You want laws that are effective?

Try this......MANDATORY 5 YEAR SENTANCE FOR FELON FOUND WITH FIREARM.....NO PAROLE. 

MANDATORY 10 YEAR SENTANCE FOR COMMITTING A CRIME WITH A FIREARM.....NO PAROLE....20 YEARS 2ND OFFENSE. 

MANDATORY LIFE SENTANCE FOR COMMITTING A CRIME WITH FIREARM RESULTING IN DEATH.....NO PAROLE. 

MANDATORY DEATH SENTANCE FOR 1ST DEGREE MURDER WITH FIREARM. 

But no......that's cruel & unusual punishment. 

[Hawkeye21 2,399]

4 minutes ago, Nomad99 said:

You want laws that are effective?

Try this......MANDATORY 5 YEAR SENTANCE FOR FELON FOUND WITH FIREARM.....NO PAROLE. 

MANDATORY 10 YEAR SENTANCE FOR COMMITTING A CRIME WITH A FIREARM.....NO PAROLE....20 YEARS 2ND OFFENSE. 

MANDATORY LIFE SENTANCE FOR COMMITTING A CRIME WITH FIREARM RESULTING IN DEATH.....NO PAROLE. 

MANDATORY DEATH SENTANCE FOR 1ST DEGREE MURDER WITH FIREARM. 

But no......that's cruel & unusual punishment. 

I like your intentions here but it’s hard to take you seriously when you misspell the same word four times. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,430]

The biggest obstacle to getting reasonable gun owners to back reasonable gun control regulations is that the left has shown time and again that they can’t be trusted to stop there. The slippery slope is real. There’s no denying it anymore. 

[squistion 2,200]

2 minutes ago, Nomad99 said:

You want laws that are effective?

Try this......MANDATORY 5 YEAR SENTANCE FOR FELON FOUND WITH FIREARM.....NO PAROLE. 

MANDATORY 10 YEAR SENTANCE FOR COMMITTING A CRIME WITH A FIREARM.....NO PAROLE....20 YEARS 2ND OFFENSE. 

MANDATORY LIFE SENTANCE FOR COMMITTING A CRIME WITH FIREARM RESULTING IN DEATH.....NO PAROLE. 

MANDATORY DEATH SENTANCE FOR 1ST DEGREE MURDER WITH FIREARM. 

But no......that's cruel & unusual punishment. 

If there was a mandatory death sentence for jaywalking, that would certainly be effective too. But that would also be cruel and unusual punishment and as a civilized society, we have decided that we don't want that.