That's nonsense... nothing more than an NRA and "it's my god-given right to have a gun and the gov't has no business knowing about it" crowd deception to sway opinion... a FOX-type strategy (though it could be argued that FOX learned the strategy from the NRA)...

You are right, we need to regulate everything because people like you have proven themselves more capable of having "intelectual" and "logical" thoughts than others. I don't think people should live the way they choose either. I (like you) believe that there are a select group of folks "in the know" who have thoughts on how everything should be done and we should live just like they say (they can be found in "hip" places like cafes and other trendy locaations). And if someone wants to think differently, or act differently, we will just have to eradicate them. I agree, people do not kill people, it is actually that inadiment piece of machinery; if it wasn't for guns there would be no killing in the world. We should go back to the good old days before they had invented guns, then no would die, just like no one was murdered before guns were invented. I don't think we should stop with guns though, cars also force people to kill people. We should make the restrictions to drive a car more reasonalbe for everyone...for our safety; if you have ever had a vehicle related citation, that means you cannot drive, period. Yes, so that means that we will have to ban folks who have gotten a parking ticket in the past too because they are careless when they drive, so that means they are going to kill someone behind the wheel. Let's ban those cellphones in cars, if someone uses one while in the proximity of 25 feet from a car, we will have them fined a few hundred thousand dollors and send them to prison for 5 plus years. Actually, while I'm thinking about the safety of others and how to force them to understand that my way is the only way, I have came up with the idea of banning doctors. We can't trust doctors either, some times they make mistakes and then someone dies, so it is better, just to ban all doctors from practicing. Oh wait, that is right doctors are people, so it's not them it is their tools that make them mistakes, so we need to ban all medicine from the world and doctors are no longer to be allowed to use any tools whatsover...this is to prevent an accident. We also need to kill, or quarentene all the gays and Africans, its the only way to prevent aids.

You are right, we need to regulate everything because people like you have proven themselves more capable of having "intelectual" and "logical" thoughts than others.

I remember his stance on gun-control from his pre-election website (To remove/ban handguns in urban areas).

The problem is, America does not favor "sensible" gun control (background checks, etc. etc. are done, yes) but rather the "lets ban everything" type of gun-control.

That's nonsense... nothing more than an NRA and "it's my god-given right to have a gun and the gov't has no business knowing about it" crowd deception to sway opinion... a FOX-type strategy (though it could be argued that FOX learned the strategy from the NRA)...

The majority of Americans DO hold to the idea that guns have an acceptable role in society... just not largely, or completely, unregulated... and logically suited to the roles they play in society (e.g. there is no logically valid basis for considering a full-auto or semi with a 20 or 30 round magazine to be a legitimate-use weapon... such as hunting for instance, seriously, if you need that much fire-power to take down Bambi then you have no business hunting because you can't do it safely or skillfully... as they are clearly designed to do as much damage as possible, as quickly as possible, against human targets. Self-defense is not a logically valid argument either... with that much fire-power you will likely do as much damage to people and property which are not threatening you as the threat itself and the likelyhood of needing to defend yourself against 10+ threats is so small as to be practically non-existent... if you are such a bad shot that it takes that many rounds for defense, you have no business using a gun to defend yourself... The right of self-defense does not include a right to cause collateral damage).

..........semi with a 20 or 30 round magazine to be a legitimate-use weapon......

You mean like the FN , Cop Killer used? 20 rounds ... Those Clips are protected by the 2nd...

I want one with a Mauser 150-200 round drum ....

The 2nd also has apart about "being necessary to the security of a free State". Therefore there's your legitimate reason for having not only 20-30+round mags, but select fire firearms as well.

And yet THAT part is directly dependent on what preceeds it... the part about "A well regulated militia"... which is why your State NG has them... along with main battle tanks, armed aircraft, artillery, anti-tank/anti-air missiles and aerial bombs, for example, which are also regulated with regard to civilian possession as they have no legitimate civilian use... all legally upheld as Constitutionally lawful regulation rather than 'infringement'...

...so, the NG (the 'well regulated militia') gets the weapons of war and you get the firearms which have legitimate civilian uses... and the 2nd is properly observed...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Well, I am a part of "the people", and it clearly states that my (the people's) right to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Sorry. Nothing in there about "sporting" and other differentiation.

And yet THAT part is directly dependent on what preceeds it... the part about "A well regulated militia"... which is why your State NG has them... along with main battle tanks, armed aircraft, artillery, anti-tank/anti-air missiles and aerial bombs, for example, which are also regulated with regard to civilian possession as they have no legitimate civilian use... all legally upheld as Constitutionally lawful regulation rather than 'infringement'...

...so, the NG (the 'well regulated militia') gets the weapons of war and you get the firearms which have legitimate civilian uses... and the 2nd is properly observed...

...I don't suppose you want to try and argue that you "need" an M-1 or an F-22 to take down Bambi or stop that B&E at your house... ?

Notice that I used the correct (by media and most of the general publics standards) terms of "clips" and "bullets".

Sorry, but the NG wasn't formed until until several years aften the Bill of Rights was written. Try again on that arguement, when you know your facts.

The cost would be too prohibitive to make owning anything that was capable of a lot of destruction possible for all but a handful of people.

Absolutely irrelevant... the 2nd provides the right to possess... it says nothing about the right to afford... That too is a FACT...

Nor does it say anything about "sporting" and "non-sporting"...and That too is a FACT.

In NJ flash-hiders are illegal but muzzle-brakes arent. Deadly...unsporting...HORRIBLE flash-hiders, oh noez!!!

What makes another 2 rounds in a magazine non-sporting in a pistol with a 4" barrel? It's used for IPSC/IDPA/Self-Defence/Whatever.

...also, it is rather defeating of the 'self-defense' argument... kind of hard to defend youself against a "shooter" if you can't see where the shots are coming from, no...? The only good reason to be opposed is if you have designs on "pulling a Whitman"...


6 to 10 rounds is more than sufficient for any of that... if you can't reload fast enough with those limits you really have no business engaging in IPSC or any other sporting event... just laziness, really, rather than 'sportsmanship'...

... And if you need more than 6 to 10 rounds for self-defense then you are as big a danger to the innocent as the one being defended against and have no business using a gun for self-defense, even against a barn... a great many cops have no business using guns either... the majority of the worst shots I have ever encountered were police...

It's quite obvious you have never looked into IPSC or IDPA and what it takes to be competative.

You ever shoot a 5.56 caliber weapon at night?

I want a FH on my AR if I have to use it at night. Being blinded by your own weapon SUCKS. I hate it.

It is very common to expend more than 6-10 rounds in a SD scenario.

Why do you think cops carry back-up mags even when their primary holds 17 rounds?

Your post stems from a lack of experience/knowledge.

It seems very obvious to me that the easy availablity of high powered guns is a factor "the general easy availability of guns and ammo here ...let's face it , it's a different story to have to go on a "mass stabbing spree."

“Tokyo's Akihabara district, a popular shopping area for consumer electronics, was still in shock on Monday following a killing spree by a 25-year-old man who plowed a rented truck into an intersection full of pedestrians, then began stabbing bystanders at random. The rampage, which left seven dead and 10 injured, was another reminder of a violent side of Japan that is not often discussed.
Japan has one of the lowest crime rates in the developed world, yet the country still sees spasms of stunningly brutal, often random killings. The June 8 Akihabara massacre occurred exactly seven years after a former school janitor with a history of mental illness stabbed eight children to death and injured many others at their elementary school near Osaka. The nation has seen a spate of stabbings already this year, including a shopping-mall knife attack in March in which one was slain and seven were injured.”

it's certainly not guns.

America is a violent country compared to other modern Western cultures. The availability of guns plays a big part in the level of violence. To suggest otherwise is to ignore the realities.

^^^How on earth did you extrapolate this from what I posted?

Buddy, you're trying to argue that the availability of guns isn't related to the large number of incidents of gun violence in your country.

Why not try something easier, like teen pregnancy isn't related to teenagers having sex?

So if you can justify not liking guns/blaming them for crime, I can justify racism/racial profiling, etc.

Buddy, you're trying to argue that the availability of guns isn't related to the large number of incidents of gun violence in your country.