Biden calls 9mm ‘high-caliber weapons,’ suggests banning them

It is completely Constitutional to prohibit illegal firearms from crossing the US border when they are being carried by illegals guarding drug running.

But Brandon is choosing not to enforce the laws already in place.

This is not about common sense gun regulation.

We can look back at the Re-Construction period and see how the Black population was disarmed.
Once that occurred, Democrats lynched thousands of Blacks.
Why? Mainly because they either wore blue uniforms during the war or they were voting Republican. In some cases it was due to outright theft.

The current Democrat Party is all about retribution and retaliation. To trust them now would be as foolish as it was back in the 19th century.

 

Now I'm even more pleased I bought the S&W 40 Cal

 

The Second Amendment can be legally changed with a Constitutional Amendment. That is the ONLY way. So go ahead and start the process.

 

For me, I just did.
I'm not really anti-gun, but the lack of control over lethal weapons indicates to me the need for a major change.
Why can't we have a national registry that tracks all guns?
Or, limit how much ammunition someone can hoard?
Or, track ammunition purchases? All the mass murderers stocked up.
https://www.thetrace.org/2021/12/gun-violence-data-stats-2021/
Or, make all gun sales subject to a gun registry, eliminate the loopholes.
Or, or, or, or
There are a million ways to try to curb gun deaths in this country.
More guns=more gun deaths
There is an unwillingness among gun enthusiasts to make any changes.
No compromises=nothing done.

 

Do you agree with banning 9mm?

 

It is kinda odd how folks who typically claim the most concern regarding equality support further entrenching the elites' monopoly on firepower.

 

Men?
Virtually all of your chart has a male perpetrator

What do you believe should be done about the scourge of man?

 

No, I do not.

 

That wasn’t what I asked.
If you want to go off of the original intent of the founders — seeing how Alito is ruling recently that intention matters — that would apply only to muskets.

 

Well, if you don't see a culture issue when black males are 8% of the population and committing 54% of ALL MURDERS I don't know how much easier I can make this. Address those issues and murder dries up by half!

 

Dats wayciss!!!

 

Why do I keep saying this same ignorant point repeated?

There were plenty of repeating arms at the time the second amendment was written.

But just to humorous let's see how consistent you are.... At the time the first amendment was written there was only the written word ans the spoken word.... So does the first amendment not apply to radio television or Internet... right?

 

How would you propose addressing it?

 

That's a question the black community needs to answer now isn't it?

 

Why? I think it's a fair question to ask Buri since he/she brought up the idea.

 

He did not bring up the idea he simply observing an obvious aspect of reality.

You actually don't think the black community itself should address that question!

 

We need to make a thread with that as a public service announcement so that they can stop appearing ignorant.

*Note to moderators before someone runs crying.... The word ignorant simply means uninformed or not knowing.... It is not an insult

 

He stated the issues should be address. It's 100% fair game to ask him what he would propose to address it

I never said such

 

The specific answer to this question is that federal law prohibits it, although the ATF is basically skirting that law already.

I don't think you understand some real basic points about the firearms industry.
First of all, were you aware that "reloading" (essentially, making your own ammunition from components) is a popular hobby? There are probably millions of rounds of ammunition that get made in private citizens' workshops / garages / basements like this every single year.

Secondly, what you or anti-gun politicians probably consider "hoarding" ammunition is usually a woefully-inadequate limit for firearm enthusiasts. At gun shows and stores around here, cases of 1,000 rounds each fly off the shelf so fast they can't keep them in stock. Those people aren't "hoarding" ammunition, they're just buying the supply they'll go through at the range as they practice. Seriously, it's not even remotely uncommon for a single shooter to fire off a 3-figure round count during a single range session. People serious about maintaining their skills practice regularly. A firearms enthusiast might fire a thousand rounds a month. Would you consider it "hoarding" for those people to buy 1,000 round cases of ammunition?

Along those same lines, all tracking ammunition purchases would tell you is that a lot of Americans buy a lot of ammo. There's way too much background purchasing for anyone to detect a particular criminal "stocking up".

This would not have stopped what happened in Uvalde. He purchased his gun legally, through a dealer, after completing a background check.

You need better ideas. The ones you're offering here won't stop spree shooters.

 

Don't mix it in with all your typical personal stuff and maybe I'll give a ****. But if you want conversation that's what it costs.

 

If they could be reasoned with they'd have stopped whining by now, but we both know this is about a fast feel-good answer that isn't really an answer and does nothing to address the actual murder stats.

 

He's an idiot. And of course, he's entirely flopped on his promise that he wasn't going to ban anything from the election. Oh well, we've always known democrat voters weren't the smartest bunch....

 

It's not about "spree shooters" only. If you read the link I posted, there are many more gun deaths and injuries than the spree events.
Yes, I know what reloading is. And you make a good point, that someone who wants to skirt the laws could do it that way.
Then make it where you can only have the ammunition at the firing range, locked up in an air conditioned unit waiting for your return.
Believe it or not, I actually enjoy target shooting, and have owned and fired lots of guns.
My two favs are an AR-15 (or close version). Fun to shoot, and fairly accurate. Shot one in full auto one time.
20 rounds gone in 2 seconds!
Favorite handgun was a .45 Magnum, but magneported and polished, with about a half ounce trigger.
Extremely accurate for a large caliber, all 6 shots in a target from 30 feet first time shooting. I wanted it, but the guy wanted $1200 for it, so I declined.
Point is, I do understand the sportsman aspect. I'm not into killing creatures for the sake of killing them, but I understand why many people like to shoot guns.
We do have a problem in this country where there are people who aren't responsible enough for guns. I don't see why we can't find a solution to this.
To protect the responsible gun owners, we need to come up with real solutions.
All I hear is why something won't work. But I hear no solutions.
The second amendment was made at a time when our country only had state militias for defense. The Federal military branches have that covered now.

 

The very foundation of nation prohibits such an imbalance of power between the Free Citizens and the government. The SCOTUS decision that is due any day now on NY's regulation may include something rather fascinating. While it's not part of the request for relief, a majority of the Justices made it very clear that they did not want the "exceptions" (areas where the government could forbid firearms by citizens) to swallow up the right. That led to a discussion of how to limit that so that it would not become a pretextual gun ban. And from there it got even more interesting.

Right now government has no affirmative responsibility to prevent citizens from being harmed, and the discussion moved to "if you forbid citizens from protecting themselves with firearms, will you ensure their protection from unlawful force?"

It's a very interesting point and I hope the decision develops this point.