Sunday at 9:14am via mobile ·
I'm completely fine with banning assault weapons. Why would anyone need a Semi-Automatic weapon for anything but carnage.
Like · · Unfollow Post
20 people like this.
Why.....maybe some people are arming themselves in anticipation of societal collapse. Just a thought.
Sunday at 9:51am · Like · 2
You're missing the point of the 2nd amendment, it's not just so we can hunt or shoot cans. It's to ensure freedom of the state from all oppressors, including (and I am NOT implying this) the federal govt. We are always supposed to have the ability to install a new govt in a time of crisis (again not implying), taking away "assault" weapons makes us a big step weaker. They won't stop there, as soon as assault weapons are gone they will come for something else
Sunday at 10:00am · Like · 2
Next step is Hitler disarming the masses. Now I know that is a stretch, but the Jews in Germany thought the same thing in the 30s
Sunday at 10:02am · Like · 3
I hear you DK, But the day that our country turns into Syria, I'm packing up and leaving. Our family has left country after country over the generations and its the reason why we are alive today. My machine gun is not going to be able to take on the entire country. This scenario is a hypothetical in any event. But what is real is our innocent citizens dying because too many power hungry psyco's are killing us without our ability to stop them, because the unnecessary speed of the weapons are the enemy. We should always sleep with one eye open, be aware of whats going on wherever you live, and leave if you must. I don't want to die a hero fighting a battle that I can not win. I'd rather live somewhere else. In the meantime we owe our loyalty to the country that we live in and the safety of its citizens from the thugs who are removing babies from their mommies and daddies arms.
Sunday at 10:02am · Like · 2
Point taken DL. I guess I'll be here until the end. I happen to think this country is worth fighting for.
Sunday at 10:06am · Unlike · 1
I respect that DK. Truly I do. You would be a guy I trust armaments with. But for every one of you who is normal and a good citizen, there are 100's of thugs who are destroying our ability to live safely.
The men who fought back in Warsaw and the Partisans will remain the greatest Hero's of our time.
Sunday at 10:10am via mobile · Like
Just remember those "Thugs" are already breaking the law, so therefore banning guns just takes them out of the hands of us the law abiding. I know it sounds counter productive, but more guns (for the law abiding) is the answer.
Sunday at 10:54am · Like · 1
Jason S, The problem is that this weaponry is being sold as we speak to the crazies who don't display any criminal record until their first crime, which we sadly get to hear about all over the news once the tragedy has already taken place. Tighter controls are necessary. In this case the shooter's mother had purchased the three guns legally, but really was the semi-automatic that she had purchased going to be used by her to be prepared for a government uprising? I can't imagine that she was planning to be a commando or a resistance fighter. The guns are just to easily available and the immediate torture that it causes our society on a daily basis is too much for any society. We have some real triage to do in the present which IS effecting our lives in real time. The argument for a Hypothetical "resistance fight" is destroying our actual ability to live in the present.
Sunday at 11:13am · Like · 1
From what I read she was an active shooter and enthusiast. She purchased the guns after her husband left her with kids in a big home. She went to ranges and practiced safe shooting. Now if you want to question her child raising fine, but her son killed her and stole her car and guns. He did NOT use the "automatic" weapon in the shooting, so with 2 handguns he did all that damage, so are we talking banning handguns now? Stricter screening and some kind of mental testing is something I am willing to hear more on, but as the sad incident in China proved if you want to cause mass carnage you will find a way. Restricting my ability to buy because someone might steal from me is not the answer.
Sunday at 11:26am · Like · 2
Jason S, Whatever the reason, Her being a gun enthusiast or otherwise. Her right to enjoy her guns robbed the families of 26 victims from ever seeing their loved ones again. Her passion and desire to enjoy her guns seem selfish in light of the damage her hobby and recreation caused.
Sunday at 11:39am · Like · 1
I disagree, her son robbed those families. You are shifting blame, he was an adult who, evil or crazy (both?), made a decision. He alone is responsible. Would you want the mother charged with a crime if she was alive?
Sunday at 11:46am · Like · 1
Jason S, He would not have been successful at this carnage if her hobby was miniature golfing.
Sunday at 11:52am · Like
Again I disagree, he tried to buy a gun and was denied, if he was willing to kill his own mother, he would have found another way to acquire a weapon. Then you would be blaming his friend or neighbor.
Sunday at 11:56am via mobile · Like · 2
Also, there was definitely a large measure of irresponsibility on the part of his mother.
Every parent has a good feeling about their children. We know when our kids are struggling with keeping up in a math class, let alone other more severe issues. Somehow these guns were not secured properly enough from a child at risk. I can't hold her without blame.
Sunday at 11:59am via mobile · Like
And yes Jason, anyone a neighbor or otherwise that is not securing their weapons in a secure place is also not a person who should have arms.
These are not toys. They are guns, and our standard has to be higher.
Sunday at 12:03pm via mobile · Like
In every case of security. Nothing will ever be completely fool proof, but all experts advise to harden the target to protect yourself from attack, as attackers will generally not attack your target of you have made it more difficult. Same is true with guns, the harder it would have been for him to access guns, the less likely this would happen. What ever argument you make, these guns were all to easily available to him as demonstrated by the tragic result.
Sunday at 12:07pm via mobile · Like
You're assuming, that the guns were splayed out on a table, neighbor as well, if the guns were locked up all he needed was to steal keys. I agree that the upbringing needs to be looked at, though there have been plenty of people who showed no signs that did crazy things.
Sunday at 12:08pm · Like · 1
Believe me, my keys would never be found.
Sunday at 12:10pm via mobile · Like
You keep getting farther and farther from reality, sure we could have bio-lock safes that hold guns and another combination lock box that hold the bullets, and we could bury them in the ground and build a house on top of them, but yeah.
Sunday at 12:11pm · Like · 1
And that's the kind of ownership requirements one should have before trusting anyone with a weapon that kills.
Prove you are responsible and normal before someone sells you a gun that is easier to get than a refill on your prescription.
Sunday at 12:11pm via mobile · Like
It's not further away. A combination lock would be fine. It's what most people use on their bicycles. Should they not use it for weapons that can cause murder?
Sunday at 12:13pm via mobile · Like
In any case, I'm definetly ok with my original statement. Semi-Automatic assault weapons are simply not necessary. The rest becomes theoretical.
Sunday at 12:19pm via mobile · Like
All this is predicated on law abiding people. Criminals do not apply, safety measure are absolutely necessary, but it goes back to restrictions, more laws do not make us safer.
Sunday at 12:25pm · Like · 1
Less guns available EVERYWHERE leaves less guns to be acquired legally or illegally in situations like these.
Again, Semi Automatics just have no place or any acceptable rationale when they are used as they have been.
We have not had to fight the government (British) for more than 200 years. We do
Have to fight the thugs and irresponsible gun owners that have caused our murder on a daily basis.
Sunday at 12:33pm via mobile · Like
Now you are talking worldwide gun control?!? You get right on that, start with the mid-east, I'll be gun shopping.
Sunday at 12:39pm · Like
No Jason, just here and what get smuggled over our borders.
Sunday at 12:43pm via mobile · Like
Since you don't live in another country, it would seem best to be worried about where you live.
Sunday at 12:44pm via mobile · Like
Certainly places like Israel have good reasons to arm their citizens.
Sunday at 12:45pm via mobile · Like
And if you lived there we would be talking about a whole other unique set of necessities.
Sunday at 12:47pm via mobile · Like
I think we have a good reason to arm our citizens, the porous borders are a good reason for that.
Sunday at 12:47pm · Like · 1
Not to mention the cities (in the US) with the most strict gun control are the cities with the worst crime.
Sunday at 12:49pm · Like · 1
We're back to the reason for the 2nd Amendment, to do the job the Federal Govt won't/can't do.
Sunday at 12:50pm · Like · 1
I don't know Jason, when was the last time that you felt that you needed to defend yourself with an Ak-57? With all do
Respect Jason, I would sooner trust our border patrol officers than our rogue vigilante citizens running around with machine guns. That's scary and possibly the problem in the first place in many instances that we are describing. In some sick sense these murderers all thought that they were administering justice (their own kind). I still prefer regular law and statues than all the crazies who think that their sense of justice should govern the streets.
Sunday at 1:06pm via mobile · Like · 1
Also, the men that wrote the constitution and the amendments were not dealing with the Semi Automatics that we are facing. They were establishing a country independent of the colonizing British. Their circumstance were different than ours and they did the best they knew for their time and their circumstances.
It's the reason that we have amendments in the first place. To amend.
Sunday at 1:11pm via mobile · Like · 1
We must NEVER surrender our Second Amendment rights. Our forefathers intended that the citizenry always be capable of defending our democracy should an oppressive form of government ever take power. Gun control has never worked - it simply leaves innocent citizens at the mercy of criminals who do not bother with legally obtaining firearms anyway. But crime is not the issue here - control of the population is. That is why dictatorial governments, whether they be fascist, communist or socialist always seek to disarm their own citizens as soon as they take power.
Sunday at 1:20pm · Like
Let's get the "machine gun" word out of the vocab, they are long illegal in the US. A semi-automatic rifle like the AK-47 is an extreme, but I know people who own them and hunt with them. No one has ever said the word vigilante, that's your word. Also, the Constitution applies just as much now as it did then, give it a read, it's not evolving or growing. You're right we did amend the Constitution, with more freedom. The Freedom of speech and religion and the freedom to own guns for a purpose. So we have Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Sunday at 1:27pm · Like
Which is supported by Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Sunday at 1:27pm · Like
If you take away the 2nd, the 1st goes with it. Bye bye America and off to find a new home (for you).
Sunday at 1:28pm · Like
The extent to which the citizenry is armed is the question at hand.
The challenge is not actually to the 2nd amendment right, it's to the right of what? How armed do we need to be. Do we need to have nuclear heads in our garages? Because that's what the government has? Obviously not. Therefore the question again is do we really need semi automatics easily in the hands of every Tom, Dick, or Harry in order not to be accused of violating our first amendment rights? Some control is necessary. The question is why does anyone need a semiautomatic, or ammunition clips that achieve a similar result.
Sunday at 1:30pm via mobile · Like
DL....you make many lucid and compelling points. I doubt you and I are very far apart in our positions. Thank you for your comments. I have nothing but respect for your perspective.
Sunday at 1:37pm · Like
I've never said no regulation, but the level of armament should be up to the individual, whatever you feel comfortable with when the unthinkable happens. I know you said "theoretical" but that has happened in the last century. Like I said before while I am NOT saying it is time to take up arms against the Govt, we ARE on a slippery slope, ask a Holocaust survivor what Germany was like in the 20's and 30's in comparison to today and he will scare you with some of his answers. I know this first hand.
Sunday at 1:38pm · Like · 1
In Israel we are happy that so many capable people have guns. What you need is gun control? When the Intada started my son applied. He is a Rabbi and it took three months of background searches, classes and tests for him to get the gun. Many lives have been saved here by citizens being armed and in the right place at the right time. One person armed in that school that knew what thet were doing could have changed the whole picture. D
Sunday at 1:39pm · Like · 1
There are many controls in place. Take California for example, the law states you can only have one 10 round magazine loaded at any given time. But last night a man managed to shoot 50 rounds at Fashion Island mall. So he either reloaded his 10 rounds 5 times or broke the law. You cannot legally purchase magazines in CA that hold more than 10 rounds. So what to we do, make more laws? Ban more guns?
Sunday at 1:41pm · Like · 1
We have laws, we need to enforce them, harshly. Let people know that breaking them is not a good idea.
Sunday at 1:43pm · Like · 2
my point exactly DGW. I am military trained....lethal force is a last resort. I hope I never need to use it again. I can't help but blame this murderer's mother for not securing these instruments of death.
Sunday at 1:43pm · Like
May HaShem heal the wounds of the families and friends of the victims. amen
Sunday at 1:46pm · Like
DK, From the moment that I desired your friendship it was because I honored your stance. I do today as well. I honor you, your training and your great character and courage. Again, you and those like you are the few that I would entrust my life with. People like you are tried tested and true.
Don't be surprised if I show up to your house in the event of an uprising. It is one of the few places I would feel safe.
G-D Bless you and THANK YOU!
Sunday at 2:08pm via mobile · Like · 1
DK, Israel is a completely different situation. For the most part nearly every citizen has been trained and served in the military. Their guns are issued in a "right of passage" sort of way with training and under observation all while united for a comon goal; survival under very difficult circumstances. Kids from the age of 16 or younger are already profiled for their positions in the military. That's two years before they even begin their training. It's truly apples and oranges. People like DK, should be armed, kids who's training are video games shouldn't.
Also Jason, Sadly those who survived the holocaust did so either by leaving or by simply making it long enough through concentration camp or hiding. Very few Partisans made it, certainly compared to the population, but no doubt that their courage served to mangle communications and disrupt even further mass destruction of our people.
At the end, I don't know if any minority would survive a population of people who wishes for its destruction. It wouldn't matter how many guns you had. You couldn't beat the military as a whole. It would just be a futile attempt to weaken it.
Most Jews I know will tell you of all the different countries their families were once from. It's another good reason to keep Israel strong as a place that welcomes Jews and has the arms to defend her people in a more meaningful way than all the machine guns anyone could stock pile.
But in the meantime, until any one of us are faced with any of these decisions, I prefer one rule of law then all the vigilantes who think themselves just in looking for their own way to settle a score. Everyman who has committed domestic violence has thought that his wife had it coming and deserved it. Thats just an anecdotal example I understand, but everyone has some sense of sick reason for picking up a weapon. Go to the jails and you will hear every one of those justifications/reasons/causes.
Again, I prefer one rule of law. Not the makings of every individual who seeks his own sense of justice.
Sunday at 3:26pm via mobile · Like
Yes yes, more laws. That will make it all better. I am no vigilante, nor do I want to be. You speak of not being able to beat the govt but I am talking about not letting the govt get to the point of needing some kind of defeat. Stop the ballooning govt, before things get to the point where people are forced to fight or flight. Again the German people were told the disarming was for their own good. Since you feel it's ok to imply I am some sort of justice seeking vigilante, I feel ok in saying your ideas are like a sheep being lead to slaughter.
Sunday at 4:18pm via mobile · Like · 1
This is what ultra-strict gun laws get you; http://my.chicagotribune.com/#story/chi-shootings-violence-december-14-december-15-20121214/
Sunday at 4:24pm via mobile · Like · Remove Preview
Hardly Jason, one thing I've never been accused of is being a sheep. I've also not accused YOU of being a vigilante, but I am speaking of a crazed group that would be, and others who have already demonstrated that they have been. I've never advocated being silent or week or unaware, but I will not selfishly weigh my own civil liberties over or against the greater good of the population and cause it harm.
I am a grateful American, and the well being of it's citizens is paramount to me. Especially since it is this same group of citizens and country that have granted me and my family and you and yours refuge from those who have harmed us in the past. Show some appreciation. You may have rights, but moreover you have duties.
I will not DEMAND my right over my DUTY to the citizens of this country.
Sunday at 5:06pm via mobile · Like
Demanding your rights IS your duty.
Sunday at 5:09pm via mobile · Like · 1
That moms right to have guns killed 28 people who will never have any rights again. She neglected her duty.
Again, the right for a " just in case" scenario created a "definite" tragedy.
Sunday at 5:21pm via mobile · Like
I appreciate and thank you for a spirited discussion, I hope I didn't offend you. We will have to agree to disagree, a stalemate if you will.
Sunday at 5:29pm · Like · 1
Funny, that was my next comment when I saw a notification from you.