Gun Laws Debate - Connersville, IN

people kill people not guns

The US need to reform idots in government

The Oklahoma bombing wasn't commited with guns. The unibomber didn't use guns. If someone is going to kill, they will. As far as I know murder is unlawful.

Theres too much gun crime. People kill people WITH guns! There just needs to be more restrictions. I dont understand why a citizen would ever need an assault rifle. Thats crazy! People only need maybe one handgun for protection if necessary. And maybe one gun for hunting. Other countries dont carry guns like US and they are better off that way.

NO! Use the ones in place now.

abcd wrote:

Theres too much gun crime. People kill people WITH guns! There just needs to be more restrictions. I dont understand why a citizen would ever need an assault rifle. Thats crazy! People only need maybe one handgun for protection if necessary. And maybe one gun for hunting. Other countries dont carry guns like US and they are better off that way.

if you dont like the gun laws here .move to one of outher countries you were about youll be safe there

abcd wrote:

Theres too much gun crime. People kill people WITH guns! There just needs to be more restrictions. I dont understand why a citizen would ever need an assault rifle. Thats crazy! People only need maybe one handgun for protection if necessary. And maybe one gun for hunting. Other countries dont carry guns like US and they are better off that way.

Go smoke some crack and get your free check and welfare you people crack me up take away guns and the only ones that will have them will be the crooks and big gov

http://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/2...

This is some good reading here. Educate yourself by visiting this page. This was a good law back then and still is today but the toys/guns have changed. One can understand both sides of this issue but it gets carried away by the political circus. I own a sawed off shotgun for household protection and don't own any hunting guns.

Even NRA members surely are upset by this guys ability to purchase all these guns and ammo with seemingly no questions ask.

informed : since you wanna call us out on this, I will give THIS. " seemingly no questions asked" in your post. WRONG !! ANYTIME you LEGALLY buy a firearm, there are MANY questions asked and you must TESTIFY, under penalty of perjury and falsifying a FEDERAL document ( ATF/Treasury)that your statements are TRUE. Then comes the Brady check NO MATTER what your answers were. This idiot in Colorado had NOTHING in his background to pop up a flag. He obtained the guns legal. Buying ammo, over the Internet, is stupid EVEN IF legal. The freight costs, due to an explosive material, is enormous. It is much CHEAPER for me to go to Wulff gun shop or Rem-Bu. Even then, Jim Wulff or Steve Wicker will CARD YOU ! Law says you gotta be over 18. As an NRA mamber, I am upset over WHAT HE DID, NOT his ability to "purchase guns and ammo with NO questions asked", because THAT did not happen. The guns did not kill. His DERANGED MIND did the killing ! But yes...now the politicians will RUN with this. In MY view, only Federal Firearms License holders should be allowed to buy ammo via Internet, UPS, FedEx or US Postal Service. THAT would not bother me at all.

junkie wrote:

<quoted text>Go smoke some crack and get your free check and welfare you people crack me up take away guns and the only ones that will have them will be the crooks and big gov

Exactly, Junkie. Truthfully if a spectator had been in the theater legally armed, they could have taken that idiot out. Unfortunately if someone is bound and determined to commit an act of this nature, they will find a way to do so. The instrument or means they use isn't the point.

Nope

6. Thou shalt not kill.

All the countries that do have gun control laws incidents like Columbine & the movie theater shootings are almost none existent. Take a hint all you gun crazy f*cks.

Can you imagine our police not carrying guns like England's police force. Yet in England they don't have too because the citizens don't have all these guns like we have here.

Gun conrtol will not help. look at Mexico they have gun control and they are out of control.

I beleave no change is required to the current laws because quite simply, I could climb in my car that im licensed to drive and mow down a dozen people just as easy as pulling the trigger on any gun.

because if people didnt have guns to protect themselfs then crimals would have control of everything

just inforce the ones they have

Restrict assault rifles? Come on. It is far easier to conceal a handgun. Far more homicides are performed with handguns than assault rifles, by an order of magnitude. Yes, the man unloaded a mass of rounds, but it was semiautomatic. He could have just as easily unloaded as many or more with multiple handguns AND had the same carry weight AND concealed them better.

Hell, why stop at gun control. He had IEDs. Maybe we should put even more restrictions on hydrocarbons and strong oxidizing agents (kitchen bomb materials). It's a WAG, but I would guess he made his IEDs from pretty easily accessible chemicals rather than built a small lab for RDX or other semi easy to make explosives (with the know how and access to industrial chems found at numerous factories). With his background both are feasible, but there was no mention of a mini lab.

The point is, restrictions wouldn't have prevented this man from doing his evil deed. This isn't conjecture. This is fact. He had the IEDs. Take assault rifles out of the scenario and he would have tossed his kitchen pipe bombs in that crowded theater. He didn't make them for nothing.