We have reached a point in the United States in regards to guns where the idea of gun control is an impossible task. What we have entered is an era of trying to implement some form of carnage control. All of the currently proposed action and possible laws if fully implemented would at best increase the survivability of some that may become caught up at the scene of a gun wielding madman. Both the Jared Lee Loughner, the Tucson, AR shooter, and Colin Ferguson, Long Island train shooter, were taken down by others on the scene as they tried to load fresh magazines into their semiautomatic handguns. Loughner started shooting with a 33 round magazine in his 9mm Glock model 19 semiautomatic handgun and when he tried to reload and dropped the magazine he was trying to load. A similar thing happened with Colin Ferguson on a Long Island, New York commuter train as he was trying to reload a third 15-round magazine in his semiautomatic handgun. The bottom line is the regulations being proposed would just give those under fire a chance to fight back or escape sooner with fewer initial rounds fired and possibly fewer lives lost, in effect carnage control not gun control. http://DTPollard.com
The worst school massacre was the Bath massacre. It was a bombing... in 1926... with materials I can buy from my local farm store. That's where he got it too The worst school shooting was VA Tech. Two handguns. Your argument fails on a faulty assumption that these weapons kill more people.
This has nothing to do with actually controlling gun violence, its all about gaining political clout with their base. Ask yourself why the democrats let the previous assault weapon ban quietly expire.
just think if they had magazine capacity limmited back in the early 1960s the man from uncle would of been killed in fire fights with the other agents https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Elq-z2RYxHo [video=youtube;Elq-z2RYxHo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Elq-z2RYxHo[/video]
So as long as when your 5 year old is shot 11 times with an AR-15 it isn't the worst massacre then you are happy?!
You appear to be trying to make an emotional plea... I assume this is because you recognize the failure of your argument? I know... facts are a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)... but no reason to bring my family into the mix. I know my 5 year old, for instance, is 99 times more likely to get shot with a handgun, than an assault rifle. I also know she is 700 times more likely to die of salmonella poisoning... and... I am not all emotional about it.
Ayuh,... 'n I think yer the definition of an Internet Troll... You post a thread, 'n Leave,..... Never to return again.... No debate in that, now is there,..??
so now you not counting numbers mass deaths, as if there not a bigger emotional experience? jim jones use poison in coolade to do this
Actually, if you are really concerned about mass death, then you would agree to ban all guns without complaint, because all guns result in more deaths in this country than were killed durring the 9/11 attacks, EVERY SINGLE YEAR. It doesn't matter how many other ways there are to kill people, there is NO justification for makeing devices specifically designed to kill large numbers of people in a short time, and leagally selling them to random civillians wthout so much as a single licence oor background check. Nobody is allowed to use "secret" cars, so why is it acceptable for there to be the secret sale of guns? You don't need them. We, as a nation, do not need them. What we need is to stop excusing the deaths of innocent people in the name of false security and flights of fantasy.
so making threads here won't change anything or anyone's minds write all the democratic congress people, in particular those for rural states and tell em to introduce a couple of bills and get them voted on. If I were a Democrat I would be pissed that my party of choice was so weak minded and wishy washy. Is Harry Reid and the Democratic Senate really that weak ? You guys might as well vote Republican next time.
