• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

AR-15 massacres 9 shoppers and cop!

Should private ownership of assualt rifles be banned?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 26 72.2%
  • No.

    Votes: 7 19.4%
  • Maybe/Unsure.

    Votes: 3 8.3%

  • Total voters
    36

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Freedom for security, that's the trade-off.
The point is a law isn't gonna bother or dissuade somebody who is criminally minded.

It's not like guns aren't going to be accessible.
There are countless venues of acquisition with cartels and the underworld.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Most mass shooters are white males who are non-Muslim
Sounds racist, stereotyping whites as mass shooters.

I only said that because that was among the many responses that were givin to the very same statement elsewhere in the internet world. ;0]

Your not completely wrong though, although Muslims have quite a rap sheet themselves.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Do you mean like my tube fed 22 long rifle squirrel gun? Should it be banned?
If it makes proper restrictions easier to implement, then sure.

Canada doesn't class rimfire semi-auto rifles as restricted weapons; that might be workable as a compromise, but I'm fine with them being banned along with semi-auto firearms generally.
Do you think we should go back 185 years to only single shot weapons?
Bolt and pump action weapons have a legitimate place in hunting and sport shooting.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
I make no falsehoods. The AR15 is a product of the Vietnam war, it is not hard to convert them, and for the most part and generally speaking revolvers will not fire faster than an AR15. I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm saying your average shooter will most likely not be able to make it happen.

Is that why they slowed down in places that banned them? And here they haven't been working on solutions. All they do is blame the mentally ill (which is a tragedy on its own), insist we need more guns and everyone needs a gun, and not consider research that shows owning a gun is a risk for the owner.
How many AR-15's have you converted to fully automatic?
I would have to say not a single one.
For if you had, you would know it is not nearly as easy as you are making it sound...
Can it be done? yes.
Is it easy? no.

Yes, because California hasn't had one...wait..
 

We Never Know

No Slack
That's not a bad idea. It would be hard to go on a killing spree with a flintlock.
They would use bombs.

Dent get me wrong, I think something needs to be done about these mass shootings but keep in mind the moss shooters make up a very very tiny fraction of gun owners.

What was it it read on RF the other day.... Something like "don't treat all muslims bad because of the actions of a few"
Now apply that to gun owners as well.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
If it makes proper restrictions easier to implement, then sure.

Canada doesn't class rimfire semi-auto rifles as restricted weapons; that might be workable as a compromise, but I'm fine with them being banned along with semi-auto firearms generally.

Bolt and pump action weapons have a legitimate place in hunting and sport shooting.

And that may be fine for your wants or needs. Many don't share your wants or needs.
Or we could just ban all guns from the cities and suburbs. If its not in the country, no guns allowed.

The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office
 
Last edited:

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
The standard AR-15 magazine holds 30 bullets and can be swapped out quickly, allowing a shooter to fire more than a hundred rounds in minutes, whereas a six shot revolver holds 6 bullets and each of its chambers needs to be reloaded after being emptied.
Even using a 100 round drum it takes longer than 60 seconds to empty it.
The fastest a 100 round drum was emptied here at the local shooting range was 119 seconds.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
And that may be fine for your wants or needs. Many don't share your wants or needs.
Or we could just ban all guns from the cities and suburbs. If its not in the country, no guns allowed.
Why not just be direct about your position and say that you want to keep arming criminals?

The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office
Shows just what sorts of restrictions are actually allowed by the Second Amendment, doesn't it?
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
They would use bombs.

Dent get me wrong, I think something needs to be done about these mass shootings but keep in mind the moss shooters make up a very very tiny fraction of gun owners.
They also make up a very, very tiny fraction of murderers.

Firearm violence is mostly about handguns. Do nothing about them and you aren't being serious about the issue.

What was it it read on RF the other day.... Something like "don't treat all muslims bad because of the actions of a few"
Now apply that to gun owners as well.
Sure.

Hunters, competitive shooters, and antique firearm collectors shouldn't be tarred with the same brush as people who keep caches of guns to be ready to use them against people (euphenistically called "self defense" weapons).
 

Suave

Simulated character
The point is a law isn't gonna bother or dissuade somebody who is criminally minded.

It's not like guns aren't going to be accessible.
There are countless venues of acquisition with cartels and the underworld.

Perhaps legislation like the National Firearms Act of 1934, which effectively prevented gangsters from having fully automatic guns, could also be implemented in order to keep gangsters (edited) **or the criminally insane** from having semi auto assault rifles.
 
Last edited:

We Never Know

No Slack
Why not just be direct about your position and say that you want to keep arming criminals?


Shows just what sorts of restrictions are actually allowed by the Second Amendment, doesn't it?

Read this again. "Or we could just ban all guns from the cities and suburbs. If its not in the country, no guns allowed."

99.999% of mass shootings happen in cities and/or suburbs with higher populations.
So like I said ban guns from being in cities and suburbs.

I don't see it that way. Its no different than having to leave your pistol in your truck to go into some place.
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Read this again. "Or we could just ban all guns from the cities and suburbs. If its not in the country, no guns allowed."

99.999% of mass shootings happen in cities and/or suburbs with higher populations.
So like I said ban guns from being in cities and suburbs.

I dent see it that way. Its no different than having to leave your pistol in your truck to go into some place.
You may not have noticed, but people can freely travel from cities and suburbs to the country.
 
Top