House Democrats introduce bill prohibiting sale of semi-automatic weapons

a reply to: face23785

The anti gunners simply can't understand they're acting like wait for it;

NAZI's!

Next thing ya know they're gonna be herding us in to cattle cars.

originally posted by: loveguy
Seems futile trying to educate those bent on being ignorant creeps...

Occasionally you run into anti-gunners that are open-minded and will listen to you explain their misconceptions. In my experience it's pretty rare though.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: face23785

The anti gunners simply can't understand they're acting like wait for it;

NAZI's!

Next thing ya know they're gonna be herding us in to cattle cars.

Yeah I love how the left calls Trump Hitler and then they demand he take away guns.

the irony...

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: face23785

The anti gunners simply can't understand they're acting like wait for it;

NAZI's!

Next thing ya know they're gonna be herding us in to cattle cars.

Yeah I love how the left calls Trump Hitler and then they demand he take away guns.

the irony...

What can one really say?

Stupid is as stupid wants?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: projectvxn

Yeah well I'm certainly not alone. People are pissed about kids getting shot up every other week. Lots of people. Millions of people. They are sick and tired of it and they WANT SOLUTIONS. Not just finger pointing. Solutions.

We can't all be Mr. Spock with no emotion whatsoever.

Yes and those kids that get killed in places like Chicago, Baltimore, LA, Oakland, New York, Washington D.C. because gun control works so well. Where is the outrage with all those who have illegal firearms thanks to things like Fast and Furious. All those firearms that were illegally brought in. No one weeps or seems to care for those victims, even tho they have these amounts of deaths or more EVERY week No one seems to like bring up the fact that gun control does not work. All that gun control is, is population control. Every criminal caused homicide is bad, but they are done by criminals not law abiding citizens, and the law abiding citizens need to stop being punished.

a reply to: soberbacchus

To answer both posts. Heroin is illegal. Gun bans are proposed from time to time as an appeal to emotion, striking when the iron is hot. Ultimately it is to legislate morality. That they don’t like guns they try to remove them. I don’t like mayonnaise, people get sick off it all the time. Main ingredient in most salad dressings. But despite my dislike, I don’t call for a ban on mayo. Enjoy it if you like it. To say it doesn’t effect me personally isn’t true either as I vomit every time it is slipped past me.

Democrats depend on useful idiots and uninformed supporters. Which was the point of culling higher IQ’s. Sorry it wasn’t clearer.

a reply to: Xcathdra>>>> What they won't discuss is that the support of gun ownership crosses both party lines, both genders, all age groups, all racial and socioeconomic classes. So they may be able to trot out the party faithful to demand gun control, but when push comes to shove, they won't get support for the gun bans. Lump gun control in with PROMISES for social programs and economic aid may get some conned but they'll get riled up when they see that they still have poverty, now even worse, they still have violent crime, now even worse. They'll turn on the left and any turncoat conservatives and demand guns be returned to them. I always said that these shootings increased the demand for gun ownership and the deep state had to be scratching their red baboons asses trying to figure out what they were doing wrong. Now it appears they've given up trying to win the voters over, now they're faking support for gun control with the MSM's help.

a reply to: violet

That is all we ask.

Give a fair listen to all sides, and make up your own mind.

a reply to: Xcathdra

If Paul Ryan is smart, he'll sit on this bill until august. Then dust it off and make the dems vote on it right before the election.

If they vote for it, they're basically giving away all hope of a majority.
If they vote against it, they're hypocrites and you can play it up as though they're hiding their true intentions.

This bill is a political gift to republicans, if only they would use it.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Maybe but if you listen to Democrats they truly believe the majority of Americans want to get rid of the 2nd amendment and guns. Certain Democrats have become so out of tough it is becoming dangerous.

Also the reasons the left are desperately trying to avoid the Deputies not entering the school issue is because it completely undercuts their argument. Democrats claim civilians dont need guns because cops will be there to protect them. In Florida 17 people died because cops failed to do their job and had one of those 3 teachers who died been armed it may have ended this before it began.

Democrats dont seem to understand the function of law enforcement. Even the US Supreme Court has ruled law enforcement has no constitutional obligation to protect the individual from harm.

The purpose of law enforcement is to protect society as a whole and not the individual.

Gun control (or firearms regulation) is the set of laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, or use of firearms by civilians.

a reply to: Xcathdra>>>> Has anyone considered that it may be the Russians pushing this gun banning here in the US? That would certainly be what they've wanted in the past and apparently the Russians are out of control on our social media. Russians want guns banned in the US. That is not good.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: soberbacchus

To answer both posts. Heroin is illegal. Gun bans are proposed from time to time as an appeal to emotion, striking when the iron is hot.

Gun bans certainly do have an emotional component, but it would be false to claim they are proposed as an appeal to emotion since gun bans do in fact work to dramatically reduce these events.
Claiming otherwise is a dishonest position that gun-rights fanatics adopt.

Effectiveness is a different question than constitutional rights though and the debate around the 2nd amendment. Otherwise, just because something can reduce the murder rate does not mean it should be law.

And the right wing lives and breaths "appeal to emotion". They employ it to avoid rational discussion. This thread is full of hyperbole in place of logic and facts.

Ultimately it is to legislate morality. That they don’t like guns they try to remove them.

People should have easy and unrestricted access to shoulder launched surface to air missles. Legislating the ownership of SLSAMs is legislating morality. It is only immoral people that would use them to bring down an aircraft. banning them is legislating morality.

I don’t like mayonnaise, people get sick off it all the time. Main ingredient in most salad dressings.

Yes, because an AR-15 is like mayonnaise. It is these arguments that lead people to believe their is not a rational or intelligent component to those defending Gun Ownership. That is unfortunate for all involved.

Democrats depend on useful idiots and uninformed supporters.

Said the man who just equated an AR-15 to Mayonnaise?

Democrats? Trump has advocated banning bump stocks.

But guys JoshuaCox said nobody was coming for the guns, he equated it to a rape fantasy. Surely he wasn't wrong? I can't possibly believe he was wrong.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Sorry, I did not directly equate AR-15’s to mayo, you did while attempting to further a straw man argument. I equated an item that sometimes harms people that I dislike to an item that sometimes harms people that you seemingly dislike. Honestly it takes deliberate irresponsible actions to occur such as leaving out in the sun or countertop after opening compared to pointing at a person and pulling the trigger.

But if I wanted to equate an AR-15 to a condiment/ingredient I would have to say capers. Not everyone likes them 7-10 million out of upwards of 400 million owned guns, but those that do have them. I would figure that would roughly equal capers usage in the US, although capers usage might actually be more common than AR15’s to be honest, especially in salads.

I advocate banning bump stocks myself. They cause less control over the firing of a rifle. I’ll tell you another one, I was at my local gun store and was shown a Springfield 1911 that had an exceptionally hair trigger. I didn’t like it at all and considered it unsafe. I also recommended they raise the price another $150 to price it out the hands of the less responsible buyers for that reason. This is a gun store that will hold back certain Beretta’s for me to decide if I want that particular model for my collection. So they at least value my patronage and opinion. Of course I research oddball guns for them whenever a question comes up like an Italian made Mauser, that whole mutual respect sort of thing.

You see, I am one of the first to admit that guns are not for everyone. But also shouldn’t be removed from everyone. You know, kinda like mayonnaise.

I will say it again fellas.....All guns that do not require you to hold the trigger down and rapidly fire are semi-automatics including all pistols which is why the NRA and people who like to fire guns for activity purposes will never comply.Also you can assault people with every single gun on the planet.Why the term assault rifle is misunderstood.There is also large rounds of high capacity in pistols.If you have 2 pistols you could kill more people.This country does not have use correct terms with guns.This is also another reason the NRA and gun loving people are not dumb enough to cave in to which basically would be destroying a 2nd Amendment right.
In order for things to get done proper language would have to be used.Even still,millions would not comply anyways and neither would schools because they have their right to protect themselves.Also need to look at Mexico.Massive drugs and worse gang and gun violence.

There's no way in hell this bill will even get traction, let alone pass.

It's WAY too far, too quickly.

They'll need to activate at least 3 more school shooters within a month to get this thing to pass.

But to illustrate yet more points of why a ban on all semi-automatics is indeed based on unfamiliarity of firearms.

Did you know that you can take any semi-automatic pistol or rifle including the AR-15, load up and insert the magazine, point the gun in any direction and pull the trigger for hours on end and it will not fire? A round has to be chambered first.

Load up any double action revolver (not on the list to be banned by the way) and close the cylinder, it will go bang on the first pull of the trigger. Same thing holds true for a hammerless double barreled shotgun when loaded and closed.

Single action revolvers can be fanned. The rate of fire can be actually be faster than a semi-automatic rifle or pistol due to the difference in physical dexterity and strength required to perform the respective actions.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Gun bans certainly do have an emotional component, but it would be false to claim they are proposed as an appeal to emotion since gun bans do in fact work to dramatically reduce these events.
Claiming otherwise is a dishonest position that gun-rights fanatics adopt.

Effectiveness is a different question than constitutional rights though and the debate around the 2nd amendment. Otherwise, just because something can reduce the murder rate does not mean it should be law.

And the right wing lives and breaths "appeal to emotion". They employ it to avoid rational discussion. This thread is full of hyperbole in place of logic and facts.

This is hilarious especially the last two sentences. I know this is a waste of time but here goes.

Most arguments made by liberals are from a 100% emotional standpoint. They do not apply reason, logical thoughts, or statistical facts to back up their arguments.

Would a Ar15 ban really help?


On April 20, 1999 The Columbine High School massacre occurred. 15 deaths occurred. The weapons of choice were a Intratec Tec-DC9 Hi Point 995 Carbine, Savage 67H pump action shotgun, Stevens 311D double barreled sawed off shotgun, 4 knives, 99 explosives. The Ar15 was not in their arsenal.

On April 16, 2007 The VA Tech shooting occurred. 33 Deaths occurred. The weapons of choice were a Glock 19 pistol; Walther P22 pistol. The Ar15 was not in his arsenal and almost double the amount of people were killed.

The Ar15 has been sold since the 1950's. School shootings were unheard of then. Did this gun magically become able to go in schools and shoot itself, did they start to imbue them with the power to make people use them in shootings?

No the gun did not change, society changed. If you look at statistics every decade since the 50s the rise in fatherless broken homes increased each decade. Do you know what also increased along with it? YEP! School shootings.

Both these statistics went up step with step with each other. School shootings mirrored the rise in fatherless homes.

Weapons have been here in the USA forever yet these mass shootings are relatively new. 360000 people in the US have been killed by guns since 1982. Around 324000 of these kills were done by an ILLEGALLY obtained firearm.

If you look at the past 96 mass shootings since 1982 you would see MOST do not include a semi-automatic rifle of any sort.

The Ar15 is being used as a scapegoat.

In order to stop these shootings, you would literally have to melt down every single gun in America which is impossible.

So when it comes to guns nothing you do is gonna change the shootings unless you have the power to snap your fingers and make every single firearm magically disintegrate.

You must find the root of the problem and that isn't the gun. As I have shown and proven these mass shootings are relatively a recent phenomenon even though guns have been around in the US forever.

Just about every one of these mass shooters had two key elements. Most had mental issues and most were in a (FATHERLESS HOME)

You wanna fix the issue then fix those two things above and watch these shootings dwindle down to something extremely rare and surprising.

Your suppose bans will do NOTHING to someone who is capable and willing to kill a mass amount of people.

There is your rational discussion Mr Liberal.

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
But guys JoshuaCox said nobody was coming for the guns, he equated it to a rape fantasy. Surely he wasn't wrong? I can't possibly believe he was wrong.

Gun control.

The lefts version of legitimate rape.