Reply to Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][
Your revised first amendment analogy is getting more compelling now that you've moved away from the "need" framework.  I agree that the widely recognized "public safety" limitations to the first amendment serve as a model for reasonable additional regulation on firearms. [b] However, a ban on all semi-automatic weapons is a non-starter--they simply have too many legitimate applications.  
[/b]
IMO, people seriously interested in meaningful gun control ought focus on background checks for all transfers, criminal liability for negligent transfer/storage, and similar measures designed to keep firearms out of the wrong hands.  
[/quote]
Can you spell out for me the many legitimate applications?  All I ever hear is target practice, which I think is only legitimate in that it's fun.

I'm all for the background checks, criminal liability, etc., but it appears impossible to keep firearms out of the wrong hands.  They're in the right hands until those hands turn wrong.[/quote]

I'm no expert (I come from a gun-owning family in "gun country" but am not a gun guy myself), but semi-autos have legitimate hunting applications and are often recommended for home defense.  For many people in non-urban areas, those are essential (not recreational) uses.

Bottom line is that Orlando shooting would have happened with virtually any modern firearm.  I suppose one could argue that "only" 30 would have died if shooter had been carrying multiple revolvers or a bolt-action weapon, but I don't find much consolation in that.  Focusing on type of weapon is not useful, IMO.

Agree on limitations of background checks, though as a PP noted, the shooter in Orlando should obviously have been flagged.  Similarly, [b]Sandy Hook shooter should NEVER have been allowed to possess a firearm[/b]--red flags everywhere.  A more effective and widespread background check system would be darn good place to start.
[/quote]

Wasn't he using his mom's gun? In other words, he was not in possession of anything, legal or not. He simply had access. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics