Gun Laws Debate - Ozark, MO

The 2nd amendment says it just fine

its okay

I think that it would be good to change the laws to eliminate guns that are used in combat for the average civilian to possess. No one needs a gun that fires umpteen times repeatedly - which is the type of guns that are sought out to use in mass killings - like Newtown. We don't need to make it easier for killers. We need to make it safer for the rest of us. No one needs a hunting gun with repetitive continuous fire. We also can't believe that teachers should be allowed to have them in classrooms - many teachers aren't capable of keeping track of things on a day to day basis. A child could get ahold of such gun. Many little boys are fascinated with guns and once they knew they were in the room they would seek it out. And if the gun were locked away it wouldn't really be able to be effective in most slayings. We have to have stiffer laws or we are going to continue to have more mass murderers slaying innocent victims. Many many amendments have been amended - this certainly wouldn't be the first one...or the last...

Safety first.

safetyfirst wrote:

I think that it would be good to change the laws to eliminate guns that are used in combat for the average civilian to possess. No one needs a gun that fires umpteen times repeatedly - which is the type of guns that are sought out to use in mass killings - like Newtown. We don't need to make it easier for killers. We need to make it safer for the rest of us. No one needs a hunting gun with repetitive continuous fire. We also can't believe that teachers should be allowed to have them in classrooms - many teachers aren't capable of keeping track of things on a day to day basis. A child could get ahold of such gun. Many little boys are fascinated with guns and once they knew they were in the room they would seek it out. And if the gun were locked away it wouldn't really be able to be effective in most slayings. We have to have stiffer laws or we are going to continue to have more mass murderers slaying innocent victims. Many many amendments have been amended - this certainly wouldn't be the first one...or the last...
Safety first.

Is it possible that mental health is the issue? So if someone kills with a car, do we ban cars? If they use a knife, do we ban knives? If they poison someone with anti-freeze, let's ban anti-freeze? If you say a clip can only hold 5 cartridges, what's to keep a mentally ill person from getting their hand on multiple firearms? Let's think this out! Why is it that every time an issue comes up, we have to make a new law?

just do

Chester wrote:

<quoted text>
Is it possible that mental health is the issue? So if someone kills with a car, do we ban cars? If they use a knife, do we ban knives? If they poison someone with anti-freeze, let's ban anti-freeze? If you say a clip can only hold 5 cartridges, what's to keep a mentally ill person from getting their hand on multiple firearms? Let's think this out! Why is it that every time an issue comes up, we have to make a new law?

OMG, isn't it time to limit the guns? NOBODY is taking away your right to have a gun - for a law-abiding citizen - but NOBODY needs the automatic/assault weapons. I think the Ozark Redneck label really comes out when we discuss gun control. The government is NOT taking your hunting rifles, or even your handguns (with a valid permit) but limiting the number of guns, getting the fascination out of the house of anyone with anger control/mental health issues is a good idea. We have ours with trigger locks, in locked cases & they're used for hunting. However, if we had teen-agers who had drug/mental issues, we would get them out of the house as we try to get the person help! Yes, the media, the lack of mental health care, the violent video games that parents use as babysitters for their children, don't help our societal violence problems, but meanwhile - PUT AWAY the DANGEROUS GUNS!!!!!!!!!!

Just because the gun was used as the instrument in a crime doesn't make it the element of the problem.

jinny wrote:

Just because the gun was used as the instrument in a crime doesn't make it the element of the problem.

It makes it an ACCESSORY to the problem & that's good enough for me & millions of other people (including current gun owners) to trust that the problem of automatic/assault weapons should be banned from the general public. Of COURSE it's the twisted people who are the direct problem, but do you REALLY think there's any reason for any people other than police/military to own those types of weapons? Come on, Rednecks - use your brains! Show America that even in the hick Ozarks, we realize there's a limit to the guns that should be out among the general public!!!

George wrote:

<quoted text>It makes it an ACCESSORY to the problem & that's good enough for me & millions of other people (including current gun owners) to trust that the problem of automatic/assault weapons should be banned from the general public. Of COURSE it's the twisted people who are the direct problem, but do you REALLY think there's any reason for any people other than police/military to own those types of weapons? Come on, Rednecks - use your brains! Show America that even in the hick Ozarks, we realize there's a limit to the guns that should be out among the general public!!!

Under that train of thought you should ban automobiles at the same time. Your argument is old, tired and lame.

George wrote:

<quoted text>It makes it an ACCESSORY to the problem & that's good enough for me & millions of other people (including current gun owners) to trust that the problem of automatic/assault weapons should be banned from the general public. Of COURSE it's the twisted people who are the direct problem, but do you REALLY think there's any reason for any people other than police/military to own those types of weapons? Come on, Rednecks - use your brains! Show America that even in the hick Ozarks, we realize there's a limit to the guns that should be out among the general public!!!

Nonsense. No automatic weapon has been used in a mass incident in this country that I can remember, yet you lump it into the argument because it adds a little more fear factor to your point. As for assault weapons, you have bought into the hype. An assault weapon, as defined by the government, has almost nothing to do with the way the gun operates. It has everything to do with appearance. It looks "military", so it must be more dangerous. The dreaded AR-15 that is often the example of an "assault rifle" fires a round considerably smaller and less lethal than common deer rifle rounds, and does so at a rate of fire similar to the numerous other semi-auto hinting rifles down at bass pro.

jinny wrote:

<quoted text>
Under that train of thought you should ban automobiles at the same time. Your argument is old, tired and lame.

And automobiles ARE NOT LEGAL until one is 16, are they? Plus, people usually lock their doors & take the keys out. People also USE automobiles for transportatin - what purpose do these types of guns serve?!?! Wake up before more mass shootings continue to take place! The argument may seem "old, tired, and lame" but it makes perfect sense & needs to be attended to!

Cometland wrote:

<quoted text>
Nonsense. No automatic weapon has been used in a mass incident in this country that I can remember, yet you lump it into the argument because it adds a little more fear factor to your point. As for assault weapons, you have bought into the hype. An assault weapon, as defined by the government, has almost nothing to do with the way the gun operates. It has everything to do with appearance. It looks "military", so it must be more dangerous. The dreaded AR-15 that is often the example of an "assault rifle" fires a round considerably smaller and less lethal than common deer rifle rounds, and does so at a rate of fire similar to the numerous other semi-auto hinting rifles down at bass pro.

WTF? Are you so ignorant & closed-minded that you actually believe that there's "fear factors" and "hype" rather than TRUTH to the fact that too many weapons are out there, falling into the wrong hands!? I pray that you never know the feelings that had to have been felt in Aurora, CO or Newtown, CT!!

Concerned wrote:

<quoted text>WTF? Are you so ignorant & closed-minded that you actually believe that there's "fear factors" and "hype" rather than TRUTH to the fact that too many weapons are out there, falling into the wrong hands!? I pray that you never know the feelings that had to have been felt in Aurora, CO or Newtown, CT!!

Yes, I'm close-minded. When people start injecting automatic weapons into the discussion, even though nobody has used one in a mass killing in any recent memory, that is called "hype". When folks like yourself throw around the term "assault rifle" while refusing to discuss what that term even means, that is an attempt to induce "fear".

I know it probably makes life simpler to think it, but these guns aren't "falling into the wrong hands". Criminals buy them on the black market. They steal them from law abiding citizens. They don't get them through any means that another law will prevent. The Sandy Hook scumbag killed his mother. Illegal. He stole her guns. Illegal. He of unsound mind concealed them in his car. Illegal. He transported them to the school. Illegal. He entered the school. Illegal. He shot 26 people. Very illegal. If we could only pass a law that would make another element to his actions illegal, then just maybe we could prevent this. Sound about right?

Do you really believe an assault weapon ban will prevent these things from taking place ?? Get real.

Concerned wrote:

<quoted text>
WTF? Are you so ignorant & closed-minded that you actually believe that there's "fear factors" and "hype" rather than TRUTH to the fact that too many weapons are out there, falling into the wrong hands!? I pray that you never know the feelings that had to have been felt in Aurora, CO or Newtown, CT!!

"Too many". How many are too many?

Why the uproar on "automatic/assault" weapons; as George calls them? Name one shooting involving an automatic weapon.....name just one. You can't, there hasn't been any.

George says put away dangerous guns? Which guns are safe? All are dangerous in the hands of the mentally ill.

Single shot, bolt action, semi-automatic...they all started as military weapons before becoming mainstream firearms; all are "military style".

Colombine didn't use "assault" weapons.
Aurora, CO, no "assault" weapons.
U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords' shooting, no "assault" weapons.

Chicago had over 500 murders in 2012 in a city with some of the toughest gun laws in the nation. Clearly banning, regulating, and outlawing only affect the rights of the law abiding citizens.

Mexico has outlawed virtually all types of firearms, I guess that is why it is so safe there!

George wrote:

<quoted text>
It makes it an ACCESSORY to the problem & that's good enough for me & millions of other people (including current gun owners) to trust that the problem of automatic/assault weapons should be banned from the general public. Of COURSE it's the twisted people who are the direct problem, but do you REALLY think there's any reason for any people other than police/military to own those types of weapons? Come on, Rednecks - use your brains! Show America that even in the hick Ozarks, we realize there's a limit to the guns that should be out among the general public!!!

More fodder from a mental eunuch.

George;

Who is next? Are you going to put blame on the automobile manufacturer for being an accessory to the crime? They did make thier product readily available to the mentally ill man that drove it to the scene of the crime.

Anyone pay attention to the world news? China has had the mentally ill go into schools and attack children with machetes.

When are we going to recognize that the problem is what needs addressed and not the means for which it was carried out?

In Japan, there are tight controls on guns & the crime is VERY minimal. This just makes sense. Other countries can dispute how Americans cling to the gun and cry with outrage that "Guns don't kill people." Sheer nonsense, but it's going to take an act of Congress to stop the idiocy I've read on this thread!

Wondering wrote:

In Japan, there are tight controls on guns & the crime is VERY minimal. This just makes sense. Other countries can dispute how Americans cling to the gun and cry with outrage that "Guns don't kill people." Sheer nonsense, but it's going to take an act of Congress to stop the idiocy I've read on this thread!

Once again you're comparing apples to oranges. I'll keep my second amendment rights and my gins thank you.