Laconic and inscrutable. I like it.
Even when shown to your face how wrong you are…like 98% of the time…all you’ve got is to “lol”.
Just like Sam Adams.
Yet the answer is to attack the rights of the law abiding in the name of “public safety”.
If they can’t even manage to get something as simple as a background check right how are they supposed to get the over 300 million legal firearms collected since there is no record of who owns them or where most of them are?
quit making things up.
With the knowledge they don’t have over 7,500 miles of uncontrolled land borders and more than 3000 miles of sparsely patrolled sea borders.
Nobody is ignoring them, your side would just ensure we have more of them and higher casualty counts if we were to follow your “wisdom”.
Not to mention thousands of state, county, and local firearms laws and ordinances.
Fun, coyotes, hogs, wolves. …
As for efficiently killing humans sometimes that’s the best way to defend your own life or the lives of others.
Perhaps the OP would be happier if the perp’s had chosen fire rather than gunfire.
Palestine Texas, diversity robbery.
He was a Felon … he could not legally possess a gun. However, law enforcement is partially culpable … they knew he had illegally acquired the gun, contacted him to turn it in, but never followed up on it to confiscate it.
Then what are you doing in this thread? By your own admission, there is nothing to see here.
That’s what happens when people who don’t know what they are talking about talk. 
“High-capacity magazines? He had a pistol!”
Yeah… my suggested controls were not inspired by or limited to the weapon used in this attack.
Nice strawman, though.
like which one?
To not knock down your door and confiscate the guns you already own.
Well, like any real strawman - the one without a brain.
The bolded words from your post that I responded to were “near auto firing rates.” Nothing in that about “high-capacity magazines.”
But since you brought it up, what is a high-capacity magazine in your mind? How many rounds did the magazine in pistol he used hold? Would it have made a difference to the unarmed victims had he used two “low-capacity” magazines?
By the way, you are also using the term “strawman” incorrectly.
My point, which clearly buzzed your tower, was that I was talking about gun controls in general, not the pistol used in this particular attack.
You used the term “near auto firing rates,” it’s up to you to clarify it. The same goes for “high-capacity magazines.”
A. You’re not the boss of me, but…
B. “near auto firing rates” e.g. bump stocks
C. “high-capacity magazines” = oh, let’s say more than 5 rounds for an AR-15. A 2A’er on here suggested that banning 30-round banana clips would be pointless, because a shooter can eject and insert a new clip in 0.5 seconds. (Really. 
) So you wouldn’t have time to rush him during a reload.
Fine. If the high school is attacked by a Ranger, they’re screwed. But I’m guessing most suicidal ostracized HS boys, or deranged gun-toting loners, won’t have the nerves or motor skills under pressure to do that. So, on one of the 5 reloads required when your 30-round clip is replaced by my 5-round clip, some brave student or teacher may take him down. So only one life, or 10, or 30 is saved. Good enough for me.
Strawman? They’re your “controls”. Which incident do they address?
