Interesting, given the Amendment very clearly says keep and bear. Can’t wait to see the logic on this one.
What do you think that add on charge deters?
Driving without a seat belt.
It worked
Naw, it didn’t. People did it because they chose to and a lot still don’t.
Your analogy doesn’t really work anyway. Closest I can think of on a gun is the safety. You want to fine people for carrying with their safety off, go ahead.
@PurpnGold one of the problems you have is you are trying to make guns “unsafe”. They aren’t. It’s like those fools who want to be able to sue gun manufacturers for mass shootings. They aren’t fooling anybody.
The gun, unless it malfunctions, isn’t inherently “unsafe”.
That’s the wrong trail. You have to focus on the people if you want to make a difference.
It doesn’t take any longer to kill 10 people with a pistol than it does with an AR platform rifle.
The Las Vegas incident was an anomaly, thank goodness. That guy about half-assed knew what he was doing.
A car going 155 on our roadways is a clear danger to others, what danger does an AR in the hands of a law abiding citizen present? We don’t ban the car because someone may misuse it, we ban the misuse.
2 Likes
Actually we do ban cars because someone might misuse them. That’s why we have minimum age limits for drivers licenses and require drivers to pass driving & vision tests before being allowed to operate a vehicle. If you want to make a pure constitutional argument, that’s fine, but there is precedent for requiring individuals to pass tests and checks in order to operate various devices and machinery in public settings. Because, while it may not end all criminal activity, it’s at least a safeguard to society to disqualify those who might.
It will be overturned just like most of the cases that come out of that circus court.
They should have a rule that if a judge gets overturned _____ number of times they are put on review and possibly removed from office.
2 Likes
Does taking away one of the tools stop the act? Take away the carpenter’s power saw and he can still cut wood with a hand saw.
What you are proposing is not like mandating seat belts to save lives, it like taking away the car.
2 Likes
So did that Muslim target White people? Since all the victims were White.
No we don’t. And there is no age limit or license required to own one or operate one … unless you want to do so on the public roadways. That prohibition is perfectly allowable because there is no right to drive a car on the roadway. Driving is a priviledge, not a right.
2 Likes
Seems like there are only three possibilities … racism or religion based terrorism or both. If the shooter were a white, right-wing Christian and the victims people of color and/or minority religion, we know absolutely that the left wokes would be going bananas over it.
No I am trying to make gun ownership safer. Gun are dangerous tools. A car is a dangerous tool.
I do not think guns should be outlawed. I’m actually in the process of getting one myself. I think we should consider various safety measures to make the ownership and operations “safer”
Yep that’s a possibility if all victims are white. Even more so if he skipped over black people.
Now you’ve done it. The libs don’t like for you to mention that a muslim shooter is Muslim.
Very non pc. 
1 Like
What’s the value for the seat belt wearer…and then answer the same for the gun owner?
For someone with previous encounters with police including aggravated assault and on an FBI watch list, how did this idiot qualify to be able to purchase a ■■■■■■■ firearm in Colorado?
Yes I know, the gun is not unsafe. That’s what I just said
The ownership and operation are not unsafe now. It’s not a car. My pistol was designed in 1906. It has 3 safeties on it from Day 1.
How are you going to make it safer?
And what does “safety” have to do with mass shootings?
His juvenile record was probably sealed.
1 Like
Waiting on details and wondering if this mook used his stimmy to buy the weapon.
2 Likes
