Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

So you want to regulate the behavior of gun owners? Psych profiles, extensive background checks, etc? Makes sense.

DP. Actually, the PP likely wants you to acknowledge that the people who commit mass shootings are crazy - and to tell the public why - without downplaying or omitting inconvenient facts. Hiding the motivations of mass shooters helps no one.

DP

Ahhh... So the answer is we need to acknowledge them. So whenever there's a mass shooting we just shrug, say "oh they were crazy," and accept the loss of another dozen dead kids or churchgoers or shoppers or wherever else in a place where people congregate as totally acceptable collateral damage, and go on about our lives. Not bothering to make sure that other crazy people don't also get guns and commit mass shootings. Because, where it comes to "we don't have a gun problem, we have a mental health problem" we're gonna refuse to have red flag laws because, "hey, what if they think I'm crazy and come to take away my paranoid zombie armageddon stockpile of AR-15s and ammo" and also refuse to do anything about treating the mental health problem, because paying for someone else with my taxpayer dollars makes it "communism" or something, right?

Do I have that all captured correctly? Because I don't think I've heard anything different or better in terms of proposals from the pro-2A posters in this thread.

They were crazy before they committed a crime. Nothing was done about it, because we prefer to leave the crazies alone. That's the problem. People who are neither insane nor criminals are not the problem, and regulating their behavior further accomplishes nothing useful.

Well, they actually are the problem - because people who allegedly aren't criminals and allegedly aren't crazy are the ones who keep funneling guns to the criminals and crazies. So ONLY focusing on the crazies isn't going to solve it. We need significantly greater accountability.

I would mandate that EVERY gun transfer needs to be registered, and to go into a persistent, searchable database. I would mandate a requirement that guns be locked up when not in one's immediate possession. A persistent, searchable database would quickly reveal who the bad actors are. If someone has bought 200 guns in the last 10 years then law enforcement should be able to expect to show up at their home and have all 200 guns produced and shown to them as evidence they didn't do anything wrong with them. If not, they need to be investigated and prosecuted as being a gun runner and/or accomplice to other gun crimes.

In fact I'd mandate we treat guns the way we do cars. Require training and passing a safety test before being allowed to handle or own guns. Have health requirements - not only do I not want crazy people owning guns, I don't want people with blindness or other impairments that would interfere with their ability to safely handle and use a gun to be owning and handling guns. I would also require registration as noted above, and as with vehicles, require periodic inspection. If you bought shotguns I want to see proof that you haven't sawed them off or otherwise illegally modified them. If you bought an arsenal of ARs and handguns I want you to be able to present and account for every single one of them. If a gun was stolen or lost, you need to report it immediately. If you have a questionable history of "losing" gun after gun after gun then you should be flagged as either a straw buyer who is illegally buying guns for others, or if you actually lost them you should be flagged as too irresponsible to have guns. There should also be insurance requirements that you pay in to that will cover the expenses of every gun mishap nationally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

So you want to regulate the behavior of gun owners? Psych profiles, extensive background checks, etc? Makes sense.

DP. Actually, the PP likely wants you to acknowledge that the people who commit mass shootings are crazy - and to tell the public why - without downplaying or omitting inconvenient facts. Hiding the motivations of mass shooters helps no one.

DP

Ahhh... So the answer is we need to acknowledge them. So whenever there's a mass shooting we just shrug, say "oh they were crazy," and accept the loss of another dozen dead kids or churchgoers or shoppers or wherever else in a place where people congregate as totally acceptable collateral damage, and go on about our lives. Not bothering to make sure that other crazy people don't also get guns and commit mass shootings. Because, where it comes to "we don't have a gun problem, we have a mental health problem" we're gonna refuse to have red flag laws because, "hey, what if they think I'm crazy and come to take away my paranoid zombie armageddon stockpile of AR-15s and ammo" and also refuse to do anything about treating the mental health problem, because paying for someone else with my taxpayer dollars makes it "communism" or something, right?

Do I have that all captured correctly? Because I don't think I've heard anything different or better in terms of proposals from the pro-2A posters in this thread.

They were crazy before they committed a crime. Nothing was done about it, because we prefer to leave the crazies alone. That's the problem. People who are neither insane nor criminals are not the problem, and regulating their behavior further accomplishes nothing useful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

Rhetorical oversimplication. Tiresome.

Unresponsive name-calling, how tiresome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

So you want to regulate the behavior of gun owners? Psych profiles, extensive background checks, etc? Makes sense.

We do, Plenty of laws on the books relative to firearms, as well as to other activities. The problem is enforcing the laws, all the laws, in the face of bad behavior. If penalties are neither sure nor impactful, they don't deter anyone. Criminals in jail cannot commit further crimes against the public. Criminals who receive trivial sentences, are released without bail, or who are enabled by policies imposed on law enforcement which limit its effectiveness, remain criminals. The mentally ill who are not dealt with effectively can, depending on their specific issues, become violent if unsupervised. We can deal with violence and crime, we just don't want to, often because we characterize the criminals as somehow not responsible for what they do, so we leave them to it. We could end carjacking by outlawing cars, how about that? Or, we could deal with carjackers in a manner which denies them access to cars in the future, by leaving them in jail. Ditto for gun crime - commit a crime with a gun, you should be done, but all too often such criminals receive light sentences and are back on the street.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

So you want to regulate the behavior of gun owners? Psych profiles, extensive background checks, etc? Makes sense.

DP. Actually, the PP likely wants you to acknowledge that the people who commit mass shootings are crazy - and to tell the public why - without downplaying or omitting inconvenient facts. Hiding the motivations of mass shooters helps no one.

DP

Ahhh... So the answer is we need to acknowledge them. So whenever there's a mass shooting we just shrug, say "oh they were crazy," and accept the loss of another dozen dead kids or churchgoers or shoppers or wherever else in a place where people congregate as totally acceptable collateral damage, and go on about our lives. Not bothering to make sure that other crazy people don't also get guns and commit mass shootings. Because, where it comes to "we don't have a gun problem, we have a mental health problem" we're gonna refuse to have red flag laws because, "hey, what if they think I'm crazy and come to take away my paranoid zombie armageddon stockpile of AR-15s and ammo" and also refuse to do anything about treating the mental health problem, because paying for someone else with my taxpayer dollars makes it "communism" or something, right?

Do I have that all captured correctly? Because I don't think I've heard anything different or better in terms of proposals from the pro-2A posters in this thread.

Anonymous wrote:Sawed off shotguns, machine guns, 3D printed plastic guns, and hand grenades have stringent restrictions on their use. Why not allow them too? What’s the difference?

It is perfectly legal to buy this 26.5” shotgun in Virginia gun stores.

https://www.mossberg.com/590-shockwave-6-shot-50659.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

So you want to regulate the behavior of gun owners? Psych profiles, extensive background checks, etc? Makes sense.

Do the same thing for voter registration and I’m in 100%.

Get Congress to ban bump stocks.

Precedent doesn't matter. SCOTUS has shown that they can twist arguments, language, and reasoning to achieve a desired end. Yes, a more liberal SCOTUS will be required, but an amendment is not required. The Second Amendment is not sacred and can be re-interpreted.

Ah but it is. It is the amendment that allows all of the rest to stand.

Koolaid Klux Klan. What have you done to protect anyone with your guns? You a Uvalde coward or hero?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

So you want to regulate the behavior of gun owners? Psych profiles, extensive background checks, etc? Makes sense.

DP. Actually, the PP likely wants you to acknowledge that the people who commit mass shootings are crazy - and to tell the public why - without downplaying or omitting inconvenient facts. Hiding the motivations of mass shooters helps no one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

Rhetorical oversimplication. Tiresome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

So you want to regulate the behavior of gun owners? Psych profiles, extensive background checks, etc? Makes sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

Okay, let’s do what Switzerland does then, starting with permit-to-purchase.

We already have that in my state.

Now, when do I get my state-issued fully automatic SIG 550, like most Swiss households have?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of blah blah blah about semantics and minor nuances of weapon functionality in these last two pages. But no action.

That's unacceptable.

One mass shooting is too many mass shootings.

We need action, not words.

If you don't want confiscation and you want to preserve 2A that's all fine and good but you still need to come up with a proposal that will make America safer, because without one you are failing America and you are standing in the way of people who want America to be safer.

So what's your proposal? (Hint: "the existing laws" clearly aren't working.)

What's your alternative to "existing laws"? Confiscation? The Second Amendment exists to prevent this very activity.

Any proposal requires an honest, clear-eyed view of the root cause of mass shootings. But let's not stop there. How about we look at the root cause of shootings in general? (Hint: It's not the availability of guns - just ask the Swiss and other countries that have relatively high gun ownership rates).

What’s the root cause? And what’s the solution?

The root cause is behavior, not whether tools or technology are misused. Endless varieties of crime occur using endless tools or technology, or just exploiting human physical weakness or gullibility. Identify and neutralize bad behavior.

Anonymous wrote:How do AR-15's compare with the muskets in 1776? Are they better?

How does posting on the internet in 2025 compare to being a Towne Cryer in 1776?

Should your right to freedom of speech be restricted because you aren’t writing with a quill pen or Gutenberg press?