Common Sense Gun Laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

+2. There should be another ban. I have yet to see any demonstration of real harm that befell anyone as a result of the AWB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

+2. There should be another ban. I have yet to see any demonstration of real harm that befell anyone as a result of the AWB.

Being deprived of your human rights is a pretty serious harm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

The Las Vegas shooter had no criminal record before he killed 58 people. Trying to put more criminals behind bars is a great idea, but how do you handle somebody who, at the time he purchased all those firearms, was a law-abiding citizen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

+2. There should be another ban. I have yet to see any demonstration of real harm that befell anyone as a result of the AWB.

Being deprived of your human rights is a pretty serious harm.

Too bad. Ask the women of America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

The Las Vegas shooter had no criminal record before he killed 58 people. Trying to put more criminals behind bars is a great idea, but how do you handle somebody who, at the time he purchased all those firearms, was a law-abiding citizen?

That's the crux of it all and why the "put more criminals behind bars" is a non-serious response that the GOP uses to distract. As is the common excuse about addressing mental health (which they also don't want to do anything about). If anything, the GOP wants to make it EASIER to acquire guns. The reality is that we are living in a devolving dystopia, and it's going to take some future generation (not this one obviously) to fix it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

+2. There should be another ban. I have yet to see any demonstration of real harm that befell anyone as a result of the AWB.

Being deprived of your human rights is a pretty serious harm.

Get over it. The left needs to pay off enough SCOTUS justices and poof...2A will all of a sudden mean something very different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

The Las Vegas shooter had no criminal record before he killed 58 people. Trying to put more criminals behind bars is a great idea, but how do you handle somebody who, at the time he purchased all those firearms, was a law-abiding citizen?

Um, you respect their freedom?

How would you,

“handle somebody who: publishes all those books? Goes to all those churches? Has all those abortions?“

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

The Las Vegas shooter had no criminal record before he killed 58 people. Trying to put more criminals behind bars is a great idea, but how do you handle somebody who, at the time he purchased all those firearms, was a law-abiding citizen?

Um, you respect their freedom?

How would you,

“handle somebody who: publishes all those books? Goes to all those churches? Has all those abortions?“

This is the dystopia we live in. It isn't a human right to own a gun. It's been enabled by tortured interpretation of the second amendment. There's nothing to be done about it until more reasonable politicians and justices are put forth by future generations. Until then, we must live and die to this madness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

The Las Vegas shooter had no criminal record before he killed 58 people. Trying to put more criminals behind bars is a great idea, but how do you handle somebody who, at the time he purchased all those firearms, was a law-abiding citizen?

Um, you respect their freedom?

How would you,

“handle somebody who: publishes all those books? Goes to all those churches? Has all those abortions?“

This is the dystopia we live in. It isn't a human right to own a gun. It's been enabled by tortured interpretation of the second amendment. There's nothing to be done about it until more reasonable politicians and justices are put forth by future generations. Until then, we must live and die to this madness.

‘Tis you who are living in a dystopian world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

The Las Vegas shooter had no criminal record before he killed 58 people. Trying to put more criminals behind bars is a great idea, but how do you handle somebody who, at the time he purchased all those firearms, was a law-abiding citizen?

Um, you respect their freedom?

How would you,

“handle somebody who: publishes all those books? Goes to all those churches? Has all those abortions?“

This is the dystopia we live in. It isn't a human right to own a gun. It's been enabled by tortured interpretation of the second amendment. There's nothing to be done about it until more reasonable politicians and justices are put forth by future generations. Until then, we must live and die to this madness.

How do future generations rid of this corruption? A very large majority of Americans would already reject this situation and say they want stricter gun controls. But almost none of them have the zillions of dollars apparently needed to fund the proper candidates or give to the proper SCOTUS justices.

[Anonymous]

Guns aren't the problem. There are many places in the US where people have lots of guns with low crime rates.

The problem are criminals commit crimes at obscene rates. Lock up the criminals and watch crime drop. It's so simple everyone smarter than Fox Butterfield can understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guns aren't the problem. There are many places in the US where people have lots of guns with low crime rates.

The problem are criminals commit crimes at obscene rates. Lock up the criminals and watch crime drop. It's so simple everyone smarter than Fox Butterfield can understand.

That is your view but it is a minority view by quite a bit. The situation just does not reflect the views of the American public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guns aren't the problem. There are many places in the US where people have lots of guns with low crime rates.

The problem are criminals commit crimes at obscene rates. Lock up the criminals and watch crime drop. It's so simple everyone smarter than Fox Butterfield can understand.

And how do you handle the mentally ill slaughtering classrooms of children? Six year-olds watching their friends explode while waiting for their turn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assault weapons bans work, don’t let the NRA “culture issues” sway you. They work.

+1. They were banned before and should be banned again. It was fine.

How?

In today's Cargill/bump stock opinion, the following statement from
Sotomayor/Kagan/Jackson will have major implications for any attempted AR-15 ban cases. Their dissent reads: "Within a matter of minutes, using several hundred rounds of
ammunition, the [Las Vegas] shooter killed 58 people and wounded over 500. He did so by affixing bump stocks to COMMONLY AVAILABLE, SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES."

This statement in a precedent S.Ct case on firearms is a devastating legal admission by the left leaning members of our highest court that AR-15s are “commonly available.”

If you have read the Heller decision, the standard for a gun which CANNOT BE BANNED, is “in common use.”

Until you re-write the BOR, any attempt to ban the AR-15 is unconstitutional.

How about trying to put more criminals behind bars instead?

How exactly is it unconstitutional? The previous AWB wasn't ruled to be unconstitutional. You still are able to buy any number of other types of semi-auto rifles and firearms in common use, so you aren't being infringed. And, just because a previous court ruled a certain way in Heller doesn't mean it's a decision that can't be changed by the legislature or other future actions. Remember, Roe was also "settled law" per a supreme court decision, only to be overturned.