Assault weapons are for the Military only

[Anonymous]

Honestly, the "Bushmaster" used to pump 3-11 exploding bullets each into those 20 six year old children is a military weapon, and has no purpose outside of war. It's sale to the public is a violation of its ATF approval( hope lawyers are looking at this angle) .

It's very simple, our soldiers are trained and then supervised in battle for a very strict chain of command. Our military understands the dangers of arming the mentally ill, which is why they don't allow them to enlist and why any aberrant behavior results in immediate military discharge so that they are no longer put anywhere near a weapon. Ours litany gets this, so why do these Right wing groups and the NRA , who claim to be so Red, White, and Blue American disrespect this basic standard procedure the military follows: carefully supervise those you arm and no arming nut cases.

Honestly, if Nancy Lanza had tried to join the Marines at her age, with her weird ideas about " prepping for the end of the world as we know it" do you see them signing her up and sending her to basic training or how about her son? Do we let people with Autosm into the marines. So, why is some gun store selling her a military grade assault weapon ??? And what kind of idiot let this kid fire rounds at a firing range???

It is very simple, outlaw the commercial sale of these weapons and their ammo to the public AND most importantly: file suit against the manufacturer for wreck less endangerment, violation of public safety and wrongful death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the "Bushmaster" used to pump 3-11 exploding bullets each into those 20 six year old children is a military weapon, and has no purpose outside of war. It's sale to the public is a violation of its ATF approval( hope lawyers are looking at this angle) .

It's very simple, our soldiers are trained and then supervised in battle for a very strict chain of command. Our military understands the dangers of arming the mentally ill, which is why they don't allow them to enlist and why any aberrant behavior results in immediate military discharge so that they are no longer put anywhere near a weapon. Ours litany gets this, so why do these Right wing groups and the NRA , who claim to be so Red, White, and Blue American disrespect this basic standard procedure the military follows: carefully supervise those you arm and no arming nut cases.

Honestly, if Nancy Lanza had tried to join the Marines at her age, with her weird ideas about " prepping for the end of the world as we know it" do you see them signing her up and sending her to basic training or how about her son? Do we let people with Autosm into the marines. So, why is some gun store selling her a military grade assault weapon ??? And what kind of idiot let this kid fire rounds at a firing range???

It is very simple, outlaw the commercial sale of these weapons and their ammo to the public AND most importantly: file suit against the manufacturer for wreck less endangerment, violation of public safety and wrongful death.

Ammunition for sale in the US does not "explode". :-)

Oh, and the military is not allowed to act as a police or arme militia within the borders.

Nancy was sold a legal assault weapon which she did not maintain control of or access to. If anybody needs to be sued, it is her estate.

I don't know any preppers and I may think that they are a little eccentric, however, I am not sure that they are by definition 'crazy.'

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, the "Bushmaster" sale was legal. But it shouldn't have been -- and hopefully will soon be banned along with other assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the "Bushmaster" sale was legal. But it shouldn't have been -- and hopefully will soon be banned along with other assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Why should it not have been legal? The person who purchased it legally, did not use it to commit a crime. However, she should be held accountable for not securing it. What percentage of gun owners commit crimes with their legally purchased weapons.

I agree that owners should be required to keep these weapons secured. That is pat of the responsibility of gun ownership. But I am not sure that we should be making emotional arguments to ban guns when they serve a real purpose every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/mom-kills-intruder_n_1183336.html

[Anonymous]

It's perfectly legal to purchase a "Bushmaster".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the "Bushmaster" sale was legal. But it shouldn't have been -- and hopefully will soon be banned along with other assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Why should it not have been legal? The person who purchased it legally, did not use it to commit a crime. However, she should be held accountable for not securing it. What percentage of gun owners commit crimes with their legally purchased weapons.

I agree that owners should be required to keep these weapons secured. That is pat of the responsibility of gun ownership. But I am not sure that we should be making emotional arguments to ban guns when they serve a real purpose every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/mom-kills-intruder_n_1183336.html

Glad that you were able to dig up that example from a year ago. Since Friday's shooting two police officers were killed outside a convenience store and four people, including a child, were killed in a murder suicide in CO. And those are just the murders I am aware of. For every example you give of self-defense, there are probably hundreds, if not thousands, of murders. Many legal guns are also used in domestic disputes. You or a family member are 4.5 times more likely to be injured or killed if there is a gun in the house. But please feel to keep spinning your self-defense excuse. Anyone with half a brain can see through it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the "Bushmaster" sale was legal. But it shouldn't have been -- and hopefully will soon be banned along with other assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Why should it not have been legal? The person who purchased it legally, did not use it to commit a crime. However, she should be held accountable for not securing it. What percentage of gun owners commit crimes with their legally purchased weapons.

I agree that owners should be required to keep these weapons secured. That is pat of the responsibility of gun ownership. But I am not sure that we should be making emotional arguments to ban guns when they serve a real purpose every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/mom-kills-intruder_n_1183336.html

The bushmaster is a war weapon and has no purpose in a civil society. Its parent company has just divested itself . Next, on to making it and all similar assault weapons illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's perfectly legal to purchase a "Bushmaster".

not for long. you are about to loose your penis extender

[Anonymous]

the only bush you'll be mastering with rednecks is that of your obese-toothless sister's.

[Anonymous]

glocks and sigs should be leo/military only as well. They are just as deadly (if not more so IMO than an AR) since they are easily concealable.

even with a 10 round mag limit, you can swap mags extremely fast on a semi-auto handgun like a glock, sig, fn, hk, etc.

That's why IMO, all handguns should be banned for public use except for fixed-cylinder revolvers (can't use a speedloader on them).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the "Bushmaster" sale was legal. But it shouldn't have been -- and hopefully will soon be banned along with other assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Why should it not have been legal? The person who purchased it legally, did not use it to commit a crime. However, she should be held accountable for not securing it. What percentage of gun owners commit crimes with their legally purchased weapons.

I agree that owners should be required to keep these weapons secured. That is pat of the responsibility of gun ownership. But I am not sure that we should be making emotional arguments to ban guns when they serve a real purpose every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/mom-kills-intruder_n_1183336.html

What real purpose did her Bushmaster serve? Do you think it's her go-to gun for self defense? Did she imagine her house would be surrounded by a paramilitary group, there would be a standoff, and she would be picking off her opponents from the bedroom window?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the "Bushmaster" used to pump 3-11 exploding bullets each into those 20 six year old children is a military weapon, and has no purpose outside of war. It's sale to the public is a violation of its ATF approval( hope lawyers are looking at this angle) .

It's very simple, our soldiers are trained and then supervised in battle for a very strict chain of command. Our military understands the dangers of arming the mentally ill, which is why they don't allow them to enlist and why any aberrant behavior results in immediate military discharge so that they are no longer put anywhere near a weapon. Ours litany gets this, so why do these Right wing groups and the NRA , who claim to be so Red, White, and Blue American disrespect this basic standard procedure the military follows: carefully supervise those you arm and no arming nut cases.

Honestly, if Nancy Lanza had tried to join the Marines at her age, with her weird ideas about " prepping for the end of the world as we know it" do you see them signing her up and sending her to basic training or how about her son? Do we let people with Autosm into the marines. So, why is some gun store selling her a military grade assault weapon ??? And what kind of idiot let this kid fire rounds at a firing range???

It is very simple, outlaw the commercial sale of these weapons and their ammo to the public AND most importantly: file suit against the manufacturer for wreck less endangerment, violation of public safety and wrongful death.

Ammunition for sale in the US does not "explode". :-) Read the coroner's report, asshole

Oh, and the military is not allowed to act as a police or arme militia within the borders.

Nancy was sold a legal assault weapon which she did not maintain control of or access to. If anybody needs to be sued, it is her estate.

I don't know any preppers and I may think that they are a little eccentric, however, I am not sure that they are by definition 'crazy.'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the "Bushmaster" sale was legal. But it shouldn't have been -- and hopefully will soon be banned along with other assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Why should it not have been legal? The person who purchased it legally, did not use it to commit a crime. However, she should be held accountable for not securing it. What percentage of gun owners commit crimes with their legally purchased weapons.

I agree that owners should be required to keep these weapons secured. That is pat of the responsibility of gun ownership. But I am not sure that we should be making emotional arguments to ban guns when they serve a real purpose every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/mom-kills-intruder_n_1183336.html

What real purpose did her Bushmaster serve? Do you think it's her go-to gun for self defense? Did she imagine her house would be surrounded by a paramilitary group, there would be a standoff, and she would be picking off her opponents from the bedroom window?

She was a "prepper" and their leader exhorts them on his website to buy this type of weapon because he believes ( and Obama being elected is proof to him) the TEOWAWKIT is coming ( the end of the world as we know it ) and that people should stock a years worth of food and water, train themselves in minor surgical procedures and , yes, become skilled in using military assault weapons because they believe that they will have to " shoot to kill" to defend their property against the hoards who will be coming for their campbells soup and bottled water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Ammunition for sale in the US does not "explode". :-)

The PP you were responding to probably was referring to the "fragmenting" of the bullet inside the children's bodies. I'm not a gun person -- is this description accurate?

A February report by Guns and Ammo magazine noted a growing demand in recent years for AR-15-type rifles – and specifically those loaded with .223 caliber bullets – for use in home defense. The .223 caliber load is popular, the article says, because it has better fragmentation upon impact, meaning it will deal a lot of damage with less chance of accidentally continuing through the target and endangering whoever's in the background.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/newtown-massacre-bushmaster-223/story?id=18000884#.UNFK1EItVFI

[Anonymous]

LOL if it were shaped differently it would be ok? The difference is auto / semi morons. I best the assault weapons ban people don't have a clue what the difference is and have ever shot one.