Another MASS SHOOTING tonight this time in Washington D.C.

No need, you already answered. So you favor only outlaws and gov thugs owning them.

 

You asked whether it is virtually impossible to own handguns in dc. Not whether there are any laws imposing restrictions on those who own handguns in dc.

 

The restrictive laws make it nearly so.

 

No.....Isn't the White House in DC, and isn't Blair House (where the Aussie PM is right now) just across the road from the White House?

 

DC consists of more than that. I doubt very few people even know the PM's name, much less where he is. Most shootings in DC are black on black, gang violence, like much of the US gun violence. It lefty media wont cover it, tomorrow you can be sure it's just another DC shooting. If they do, it was a 'white supremacist'.

 

Curious response you gave, but only of passing interest. Yes, The Australian PM is there as a Guest of some State Dinner or whatever being hosted tomorrow by Trump, allegedly only his second in his term, the first being for the Canadian PM.

And yes, I would not expect you to know his name. We have changed PMs here very regularly in the last 5/6 years. He is a conservative happy clapper rejoicing under the name of Scott Morrison.

 

So you can rest easy, no one cares about, or is targeting your PM. Maybe he will allow you to have a Red Ryder BB gun?

 

Oh come on. Let's do this in baby steps. First, a pocket knife, okay?

 

the second amendment guarentees the right to bear arms only to law abiding, able minded people. Anyone committed of a felony or a violent/gang related misdemeanor, or who is found by a license mental health professional to have mental issues which could make them a danger to themselves or others, are barred from owning guns.

 

Or the shooter was never properly entered into the system in the first place because of stupid government policies - Parkland for instance.

 

Ask your PM.

 

Parkland was a case of both. The FBI didn't do their jobs yes, but Cruz wouldn't have been able to buy his weapons if a government clerk hadn't ****ed up his files. The gun he used in the shooting was bought legally despite a criminal and mental health history which should have barred him. The clerk responsible for entering his information into the federal database made a series of idiotic mistakes, and the federal workers performing the background check on him couldn't access his actual records until it was too late. Because they couldn't find any criminal or mental health records he was able to pass the background check, and the mistakes weren't realized until after the shooting.

 

So what does that tell ya?


new laws wont work...

 

He has nothing to do with pocket knives. That is a State issue.

 

And are a statistically insignificant component of gun violence

 

Where in the constitution is that located?

Sure, it's possible at a state level, but not federal.

 

Wouldn't this be like an average day in Chicago?

 

The 2nd A does not restrict it as such. Those restrictions came much later.

 

It has nothing to do with what I want. Everyone who breaks the law is an outlaw. You don't know that? Maybe you know any other country where it is different?. If you do, please tell what country you know where the people who disobey the laws are not criminals. That should be interesting.

 

Arizona has one of the highest violent crime rates in the U.S.

 

Is all of that in the beginning or towards the end of the 2nd. amendment? I never saw it and I don't think it's there.

 

Slow night compared to Chicago.

 

Please quote 2A.

 

Well, we have a thing called jury nullification for one...

 

I don't understand what that means.