Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, March 16, 2019

One day after 28-year-old white supremacist Brenton Tarrant killed 49 people in a mass shooting at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern stated that her country's "gun laws will change." Attorney General David Parker took those statements further, announcing at a vigil at Auckland's Aotea Square on Saturday that New Zealand will ban semi-automatic rifles.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"New Zealand bans semiautomatic rifles less than 24 hours after the Christchurch mass shooting. Imagine: elected officials putting public safety over gun manufacturers' profits," tweeted Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, a grassroots group fighting to end gun violence in the United States.

"Americans deserve better than lawmakers who are letting gun lobbyists write our nation's gun laws."

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2019-03-16 12:07 PM | Reply

#1 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2019-03-16 12:07 PM | FLAG: I'd post something long and salient if I wasn't, just now, headed out to the gun club to target shoot with my semi-auto rifle😎

#2 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-03-16 02:56 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Great because laws work so well, that will stop those bad people.

#3 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 03:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yeah, that'll work.(not)

The weapon could of been bombs, cars, piano wire, etc. It is the mindset, not the tool.

#4 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 03:40 PM | Reply

The weapon could of been bombs, cars, piano will ire, etc.
#4 | POSTED BY DMTDUST

49 people dead due to piano wire?

Due to cars?

Clearly the DMT has turned your brain into dust.

#5 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-03-16 03:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Great because laws work so well, that will stop those bad people.
#3 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

Gracie is on record as being in favor of abolishing all laws, because bad people break them.

Anyone else want to join her?

#6 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-03-16 03:49 PM | Reply

Do you know what the worse killing of students was in the US? Sandyhook? en.wikipedia.org

Where there is a will there is a way. Yeah, I know, piano wire. Silly, but the point is that if someone wants to do something terrible, they will. Would I like to see people not use guns? yes. Will laws stop people from killing people with guns? No. The underlying problems are what drives these behaviours.

Racism, mental illness, societal stress...

As far as killing people with vehicles, remember that 86 people died in Nice in via ramming:
en.wikipedia.org

#7 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 04:07 PM | Reply

#6 The rest of us know reading is fundamental. Vowing to do something is not abolishing something. There are ample laws on the books that do noting to prevent crimes. Thanks for your participation and Bless your heart.

#8 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 04:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#7 Clown signed a change.org petition to ban assault car antennas started by Buffalo Bob.

#9 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 04:21 PM | Reply

Great because laws work so well, that will stop those bad people.
#3 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

Gracie is on record as being in favor of abolishing all laws, because bad people break them.

#10 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-03-16 04:25 PM | Reply

#7 | Posted by DMTDust

Australia banned assault weapons and enacted gun control measures after mass shootings there.

Guess how many there have been in the 22 years since that ban? ONE

In 2002, a mentally impaired student at Monash University in Melbourne shot two people dead and injured five others. He came to his rampage with six handguns, not an assault rifle. Had he been carrying an AR-15, the toll would have been far worse. But even so, Australian lawmakers added a new National Handgun Agreement, a separate buyback act, and a reformulated gun trafficking policy to their legislative arsenal.

There has been no similar shooting spree since.

How Australia All But Ended Gun Violence

fortune.com


In the 10 years the assault weapons ban was in place there was a dramatic drop in the number of mass shootings in the United States.

#11 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-16 04:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"New Zealand bans semiautomatic rifles less than 24 hours after the Christchurch mass shooting. Imagine: elected officials putting public safety over gun manufacturers' profits," tweeted Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, a grassroots group fighting to end gun violence in the United States. - #1 | Posted by Corky at 2019-03-16 12:07 PM
Obama also announced that the gun laws would change on the day of the shootings: "We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."
Just because one person has vowed to make a change doesn't mean a) the change has taken place or b) the change ever will take place. I'm concerned that the ignorant comment by Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, is being used to mislead people that NZ has actually made any change to their gun laws. Too bad instead of showing her the mistake, someone ran with her untrue comment for a political purpose.

#12 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-03-16 05:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- headed out to the gun club to target shoot with my semi-auto rifle😎

Are the targets there of school kids? They might as well be.

Gun makers appreciate your support, school kids not so much.

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2019-03-16 05:09 PM | Reply

"Obama also announced that the gun laws would change on the day of the shootings: "We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."

That's not an announcement that gun laws would change.

That's trying to get people like you to see the need for change.

Obama was stupid to think people like you can change, but I understand his point.

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 05:48 PM | Reply

"Obama also announced that the gun laws would change on the day of the shootings"

(The day of the shootings is literally every day in America, by the way.)

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 05:50 PM | Reply

#10 #6 The rest of us know reading is fundamental. Vowing to do something is not abolishing something. There are ample laws on the books that do nothing to prevent crimes. Thanks for your participation and Bless your heart.

#16 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 05:55 PM | Reply

"The weapon could of been bombs, cars, piano wire, etc. It is the mindset, not the tool.
#4 | POSTED BY DMTDUST"

You don't seem dumb, but that comment was dumb.
It is the mindset and the tool.

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 05:55 PM | Reply

"There are ample laws on the books that do nothing to prevent crimes."

Yet you oppose new gun laws that would actually prevent crimes.

I guess you like crime.

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 05:56 PM | Reply

Snoofy how many violent gun crimes will be prevented because the person says, well ----, I can't use this gun I bought on a street corner, stole or bought legally in violence because it's against the law? Do you honestly think the Pulse the massacre would have never happened if there was a law? That the mass murder in New Zealand would have been prevented by that nut job had there been a law?

You and others here mock people who offer thoughts and prayers because it makes us feel better to be compassionate because you feel they don't work. Well skippy all another gun law is nothing but a feel good measure for anti gun people. A law won't prevent a person on a mission.

#19 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"thoughts and prayers"

dont stop bullets

#20 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-03-16 06:20 PM | Reply

#20 Neither do gun laws by people who are lawless.

#21 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:21 PM | Reply

locks dont stop thieves from getting in your house.

stop locking your doors.

#22 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2019-03-16 06:22 PM | Reply

Home invasion/robbery is against the law. If laws worked locks would not even be an issue. So you agree, laws don't matter to lawless people. The same person that would B&E (it's against the law) will commit a gun crime because they are lawless, laws be damned.

#23 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:24 PM | Reply

Street drugs are against the law but nearly every first responder in the U.S. carries Narcan to reverse the overdose that happens every 10 minutes in the U.S. Why carry Narcan if laws work?

#24 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:27 PM | Reply

Rape laws? Animal abuse? Child abuse? Pedophilia? Elder abuse? The list of laws are endless. Which ones work on a lawless person and or group on a mission to do a single crime or mass murder?

#25 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:32 PM | Reply

"Why carry Narcan if laws work?" - #24 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:27 PM

Why have radar guns if speeding laws work?

#26 | Posted by Hans at 2019-03-16 06:32 PM | Reply

"Why carry Narcan if laws work?"

Why have any laws at all then?

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:34 PM | Reply

#26 Thank you for proving my point. It's against the law to speed but people break that law everyday, not everyone, but the ones who think laws don't apply to them or they are above the law. I'm 57, never had a speeding ticket. The need for radar guns exist because, well you know why.

#28 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:36 PM | Reply

"Snoofy how many violent gun crimes will be prevented"

Any number greater than zero is enough for me.

"because the person says well ----, I can't use this gun I bought on a street corner"

That's not how laws work.

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:37 PM | Reply

So, there are some 300 million guns in the US. What is your solution then? Seriously.

Do you think that the vast majority of people who own guns, do nothing terrible with them are going to hand them over? I know people across the divide, be it right winger militia types to far left anarchist who don't/won't go along with that.

People will find a way if their intent is bad. Look at the Nice France deaths caused primarily with a van, or the example I gave of the greatest school massacre in the US.

No, it isn't the tool. But it is sure easier to focus on the bandaid and not the underlying cause of the infection.

An inanimate object is just that. You cannot put the blame on it alone. There is a sickness in this country and it is systemic. There are many causes that drive these terrible events. If taking away guns actually would change that, then yes, but the illness runs deep back into the foundings of the culture and you won't root it out that way.

#30 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 06:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Which ones work on a lawless person and or group on a mission to do a single crime or mass murder?"

Ones like this:
"Coast Guard officer accused of wanting to kill Democrats and journalists was inspired by Norwegian mass shooting, feds say"
www.cnn.com

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:39 PM | Reply

#27 Make as many laws as you want. Fill a football field with new laws. The bottom line is there are lawless people. And those people will always find a way around a law to get what they want to do what they want to do. Pass as many laws as you do gas. If you think that will stop a mass murder because there is a new gun law, go for it. My thoughts and prayers are a new gun laws work.

#32 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:40 PM | Reply

"Do you think that the vast majority of people who own guns, do nothing terrible with them are going to hand them over?"

Seems like the choice is hand them over or do something terrible with them.

So, what do you think the majority of people who own guns and do nothing terrible with them would do?

What would you do? Something terrible, right?

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:41 PM | Reply

Why have any laws at all then?
#27 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Gracie is on record as being in favor of abolishing all laws, because bad people break them.
#6 & #10 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

#34 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-03-16 06:41 PM | Reply

"And those people will always find a way around a law to get what they want to do what they want to do"

Yeah, that's why there's been another 9/11 every day since 9/11, because those people always find a way.

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:42 PM | Reply

"No, it isn't the tool. But it is sure easier to focus on the bandaid and not the underlying cause of the infection."

So then what's your plan for treating the underlying cause?

Sometimes you can only treat the symptoms. Like when you have a cold. So, why is only treating the symptom a problem, exactly?

It's not. You just like playing with guns, the way you like playing with Hot Wheels cars when you were a boy.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:44 PM | Reply

#31 And? If he was hell bent on doing that, he would have, if he hadn't been caught. The laws didn't matter to him anymore then it did to any other person who breaks a law.

#37 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:44 PM | Reply

Snoofy will you please explain to Clown the difference between vowing to make a law versus abolishing an existing one? I've tried three times.

#38 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:47 PM | Reply

"The laws didn't matter to him anymore then it did to any other person who breaks a law."

So what?
Unless you're saying get rid of laws, whet are you saying?

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:52 PM | Reply

pics.me.me

#40 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 06:54 PM | Reply

Following the racist mass murder of Muslims in New Zealand, Trump shrugged off the threat of white nationalism, saying "I think it's a small group of people that have very, very serious problems."

This is the first time Trump has minimized the size of his rallies.

-- Victor Laszlo (@Impolitics) March 16, 2019

#41 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-16 06:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Still waiting to hear what DMTDust would do when they come for his guns.
Go out in a blaze of glory, or continue living but without his fun toys?
My money's on despite the tough talk, he'd ----- out and hand over the guns.
Unfortunately we won't ever be able to bet on that because our country is too cowardly to confront gun violence, mostly because of people like DMTDust here.

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:55 PM | Reply

"I think it's a small group of people that have very, very serious problems."
--Donald Trump

Sounds familiar:

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
--Margaret Mead

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:56 PM | Reply

Haven't had one for 40 years. Was raised around them as my family was both military and hunters. There was never a fetish about them. Do I like to shoot? Sure. I recently bought a rifle for target shooting, and maybe returning to hunting after not doing so for 50 years. Yeah, I am a complete gun fetish kind of guy, if that gives you comfort.

#44 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 06:57 PM | Reply

Sounds like when they come to take your guns, you'd hand them over.

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 06:58 PM | Reply

#39 I said make as many laws as your heart desires. But to think just because a law is made it will be followed is ridiculous. Here is the expected crime rates in Jacksonville for 2019, each and every one of those listed are again current laws:
Aggravated Assault 2,859
Arson 68
Burglary 3,151
Larceny and Theft 20,200
Motor Vehicle Theft 1,085
Murder and Manslaughter 87
Rape 619
Robbery 451
Crime Rate (Total Incidents) 31,647
Property Crime 24,382
Violent Crime 4,015

Laws don't for for lawless people. I never said abolish laws. Just pointing out laws don't work on people that no regard for laws.

#46 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 06:59 PM | Reply

Nobody is coming for guns, so chill Winston.

www.youtube.com

#47 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:00 PM | Reply

Sounds familiar:

No .. unless you think "committed citizens" have very very serious mental health issues.

I am going to guess the google search words for you was "small group".

Try this one ....

We realize the media is skewed, we know it's owned by a small group of people, we realize it's biased.
~Marianne Williamson

Sound familiar....

Its so easy, I see why you do it, you don't even need to think.

#48 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-03-16 07:02 PM | Reply

There is one way to find out.

#49 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:02 PM | Reply

Guess I should preview my post before hitting post. Sorry for the typos.

#50 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:02 PM | Reply

"Just pointing out laws don't work on people that no regard for laws."

So then do you thin the sole reason there's so much more gun violence in America than in any other modern country is because Americans have so much less regard for the law?

Because I think the problem is that we give people with no regard for the law practically unrestricted access to firearms.

If gangs had to fight with knives and chains we'd all be a lot safer. Why can't you acknowledge that? Seriously, why?

#51 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:04 PM | Reply

Know how many laws were broken today here in Jacksonkill on this one crime alone 'Armed robbery left 1 dead, 1 injured'?

#52 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:05 PM | Reply

"No .. unless you think "committed citizens" have very very serious mental health issues."

Wow.
Talk about missing the point.
Margaret Mead didn't say the change would be good.

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:06 PM | Reply

"Know how many laws were broken today here in Jacksonkill on this one crime alone 'Armed robbery left 1 dead, 1 injured'?"

So since the laws won't work, how about we just take away all the guns instead?

#54 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:07 PM | Reply

What is your plan to get people to comply with that?

#55 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:09 PM | Reply

#51 And why can't you acknowledge that 'most' guns used in gangs and violent crimes are not obtained legally? In Jacksonvkill alone in 2018 430 guns were stolen from UNLOCKED cars. That should be a law as well if you own a gun that was not secured and stolen is a crime in itself, IMHO. In 2017 the number was 521.

#56 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:11 PM | Reply

"What is your plan to get people to comply with that?"

Get a right-winger to support it.

#57 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:11 PM | Reply

"#51 And why can't you acknowledge that 'most' guns used in gangs and violent crimes are not obtained legally?"

Except that they were obtained legally once upon a time.
If obtaining them were never legal, we wouldn't have as many guns as people in this country, now would we?

#58 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:12 PM | Reply

"That should be a law as well if you own a gun that was not secured and stolen is a crime in itself, IMHO. In 2017 the number was 521."

You want a law that the barn door must be closed after the horses have bolted?
Why?

#59 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:13 PM | Reply

#54 Sure thing because Prohibition worked so well? BAM we were rid of alcohol. All you do by taking away guns is create a black market for guns and you are in the same boat. People will own guns and not use them in a crime and people will buy guns for the sole purpose of using them in a crime. Surely you acknowledge there is a blackmarket for almost everything not legal or against a law.

#60 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:16 PM | Reply

"There is a sickness in this country and it is systemic. There are many causes that drive these terrible events. If taking away guns actually would change that, then yes, but the illness runs deep back into the foundings of the culture and you won't root it out that way."

Taking the guns away would make the sickness a lot less deadly to us all.

I don't know why doing just that is a problem for you. I think it's because you think guns are fun, and the sickness isn't really that big an issue for you, me, or most anybody on the DR in the first place because of our socioeconomic status.

#61 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:18 PM | Reply

Well, you have Lindsay Graham. And no, I am not a right winger, though I dislike the Democrats/Republicans as they are wings of one party, I think most Republicans are nut cases, closely followed but not so odious by the Democrats. I come from the deep left.

Most of my liberal friends are all armed, and they won't jump on your clowncar for many reasons.

"That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
― George Orwell

#62 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:18 PM | Reply

"All you do by taking away guns is create a black market for guns and you are in the same boat. "

No, you're not, because buying things on the black market is not nearly as easy as buying things at Wal*Mart.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:19 PM | Reply

"That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
― George Orwell

It's not that anymore.
It's practically a symbol of white privilege and white nationalism now.
Especially for those open carry nutjobs.

#64 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:21 PM | Reply

#59 Because owning a gun comes with responsibility and that is keeping said gun secure and safe. Being kept in an unlocked car or not in a locked gun case when not in use contributes to crime. I'm all for that being a crime if the legally owned gun is stolen and is used in a crime or accidental shooting.

#65 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:21 PM | Reply

"#59 Because owning a gun comes with responsibility and that is keeping said gun secure and safe."

Nope. Absolutely incorrect.
That's not in the Second Amazement, and laws like that are often struck down because they infringe the right itself.

#66 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:22 PM | Reply

#12 | Posted by Avigdore

Australia, with a population 5x that of NZ, did it lightning fast

#67 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-16 07:22 PM | Reply

"Taking the guns away would make the sickness a lot less deadly to us all." The question is how are you going to do that?

I appreciate your thoughts and feelings that it might make all of the deaths decrease but let me give you the example of... London. Has a higher death rate then New York now. People running around with knives are on the main the killers though they have guns there brought in from the continent etc. Now Parliament wants to ban long knives, or swords. Will they ban cricket bats when the lawless use those?

Again, it is the underlying causes.

#68 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If taking away guns actually would change that"

There is one way to find out, DMTDust. :)

#69 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:24 PM | Reply

"London. Has a higher death rate then New York now. "

Yeah. About that. www.bbc.com

"So, as Mr Trump visits the UK, and with six months' data for the first half of 2018, how do London and New York now compare?

The figures are pretty clear. In the first six months of this year, there were 80 homicides in London, including one in the City of London which has its own police force.

Over the same period in New York there were 141 homicides - 61 more than London."

#70 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:26 PM | Reply

Don't be a Trumper, DMTDust.

#71 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:26 PM | Reply

Go for it then. I think I will move away for awhile until the dust settles. Gonna use the army to go block by block?

#72 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:27 PM | Reply

"Gonna use the army to go block by block?"

Well, it worked in New Orleans after Katrina.

#73 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:28 PM | Reply

#71 Come on. I have owned guns for 39 years. Long before I ever heard of Trump. It began as a single woman living in Miami to living north of Panama City in the country married with children to now living in Jacksonkill. My personal use is for protection. When I was married we had guns used for hunting. My sons first gun was a BB gun when he was five. He was taught gun safety and you ate what you killed. There was no sport hunting or sport fishing. Guns were used only as protection and or a means to gather food.

#74 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:32 PM | Reply

Used bullets, blackpowder and bows & arrows to hunt depending on the season.

#75 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:33 PM | Reply

"Guns were used only as protection and or a means to gather food."

The military says it's protecting you too, when it drones a wedding.

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:35 PM | Reply

Snoofy that is another discussion and you know it. It's actually been a pleasure having a civil back and forth with you but if this is now going off topic I will wish you a goodnight.

#77 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:38 PM | Reply

"Over the same period in New York there were 141 homicides - 61 more than London." Thanks, I was remembering an article I saw earlier that said elsewise. I take your correction.

You know, you do nothing for straight out discussion by calling or inferring by the use of labels, like "Trumper". If you are all about trolling people rather than having an honest discussion, then go for it.

I want the killing of kids and others to stop as well, but so far I am not seeing solutions besides taking guns away from law abiding citizens. That is a very difficult course of action that will create a whole new set of problems.

And I think Mr. Orwell's quotes still stands. The state can always go south on its citizens, and what recourse will they have if such occurs? We have seen the state murder its citizens before.

"The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world not destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside ... Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them ... the weak will become prey to the strong." - Thomas Paine

I think it perfectly valid for someone to have a gun for self protection, if they have reason to fear for themselves or their families.

#78 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The problem is there's no way to know which gun owner is responsible and which gun owner is going to let their crazy son kill them in their sleep then drive to the school she works at and murder 20 little kids.

Once you can figure out how to do that, I'm okay with people having relatively free access to guns.

Without that, guns should be very heavily restricted.

I don't even see how there can be another side to this.

#79 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:42 PM | Reply

"You know, you do nothing for straight out discussion by calling or inferring by the use of labels, like "Trumper"

You don't do much for it when you channel Trump's propaganda. All I did was call out your disinformation.

#80 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:43 PM | Reply

#78 | Posted by DMTDust

Sounds like a move to Idaho might be your best bet

#81 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-16 07:44 PM | Reply

"The state can always go south on its citizens, and what recourse will they have if such occurs? We have seen the state murder its citizens before. "

Black people see it every day, that's why they kneel during the Pledge of Allegiance.
Philando Castile is probably the most egregious exmaple that springs immediately to mind.
His gun didn't protect him, his gun created the justification for the state to legally and justifiably kill him.

Our guns will provide us exactly the same level of protection that they did for Philandro, should our number come up.

#82 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 07:46 PM | Reply

A good law would be to have any gun owner using a gun safe.

And, I think that woman who gave her nutcase/baby anything he wanted i.e guns was directly responsible for what happened.

I don't channel Trump's -----. If you want to keep the conversation going, drop the trolling.

#83 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:46 PM | Reply

See my post above about how Australia's moves changed things so dramatically. ONE mass shooting in 22 years ... with handguns. Had he had an assault rifle, the casualties would have been in the dozen.

After THAT shooting, they further restricted gun ownership. Since then? Not a single incident.

But they don't have the NRA bribing politicians and making grown men scared of shadows.

Besides, someone seeking to do you harm isn't going to shout a warning. Nope. They'll have the drop on you and your gun may very well be the instrument that kills you.

Common sense.

#84 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-16 07:50 PM | Reply

A law I would agree with written and enforced by our justice system? 30 years to life to death row for any crime committed using a gun. 10-20-life isn't working, and well, you know why. And drop the age of an 'adult' using the gun in the process of a crime to 16. Bring back in house boot camps for juveniles who use guns in a crime who are under 16 followed by a 10 year prison sentence when they turn 16 where they can get a degree or technical training.

#85 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 07:54 PM | Reply

Again, it is the underlying causes.

#68 | Posted by DMTDust

The underlying cause(s) is the massive proliferation of guns.

We never had these problems in the U.S. until the NRA's sole purpose became the mouthpiece of gun manufacturers. Before that, a shotgun behind a door worked just fine, and the only people who carried pistols also carried large amounts of cash or diamonds or whatnot.

I still have my dad's pistol and rifle. The ones we only used for target practice.

Boo!!!

#86 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-16 07:55 PM | Reply

DMT

Read this:

www.drudge.com

#87 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-16 07:56 PM | Reply

I saw it. (And BTW, I despise the NRA and the ----- they push). The question I come back to, is how do you get people to give their guns up without a massive problem evolving out of that? I am not being obtuse, I would love to see the genie put back into the bottle, and I haven't an answer to my question.

#88 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 08:01 PM | Reply

#88 Which is why I don't belong to the NRA. AARP, RNC, etc. I choose who I support. I don't pay memberships or make donations for organizations to speak on my behalf.

#89 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 08:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I guess it is official, Muslim is now a race.

#90 | Posted by jdmeth at 2019-03-16 09:44 PM | Reply

A new DR romance...

Posted by gracieamazed at 2019-03-16 08:12 PM | Reply | Flagged newsworthy by DMTDust
Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:42 PM | Reply | Flagged newsworthy by gracieamazed
Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 07:24 PM | Reply | Flagged newsworthy by gracieamazed
Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-16 06:37 PM | Reply | Flagged newsworthy by gracieamazed

#91 | Posted by Hans at 2019-03-16 10:31 PM | Reply

Prohibition worked on alcohol and drugs, it will work just as well on guns too! Just say no. See what happens when you have to use deadly force against a hundred million of your fellow countrymen.

#92 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-03-16 10:46 PM | Reply

And I think Mr. Orwell's quotes still stands

ACTUALLY

The full quote is:

"Even as it stands, the Home Guard could only exist in a country where men feel themselves free. The totalitarian states can do great things, but there is one thing they cannot do: they cannot give the factory-worker a rifle and tell him to take it home and keep it in his bedroom. That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage, is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."

Mr. Orwell was explaining that in a healthy democracy, the government will arm it's citizens in time's of trouble, as a militia. This is not an argument for no gun control.

Of course, even in this Mr. Orwell was wrong. Hitler, too, relaxed gun ownership laws (for non-Jews) and certainly didn't lead a democracy, though he did come to power through democratic means.

Now you know the rest of the story.

#93 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-03-16 10:52 PM | Reply

A law I would agree with written and enforced by our justice system? 30 years to life to death row for any crime committed using a gun. 10-20-life isn't working, and well, you know why. And drop the age of an 'adult' using the gun in the process of a crime to 16. Bring back in house boot camps for juveniles who use guns in a crime who are under 16 followed by a 10 year prison sentence when they turn 16 where they can get a degree or technical training.
#85 | Posted by gracieamazed

yes, the prison-industrial complex has been soooooo effective. and it is plain immoral to try 16 year old children as adults.

#94 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-03-16 10:55 PM | Reply

"The question I come back to, is how do you get people to give their guns up without a massive problem evolving out of that?"

A problem more massive than 25 gun deaths a day, 80 if you count suicides?

I understand your point, I just think the human toll of our inaction is about two or three 9/11s a year. Which should be enough to do something.

Frankly I'm surprised there haven't been more Muslims that come here to jihad us with legally obtained firearms. Which in turn leads me to conclude think the terror threat is almost completely a manufactured fear.

#95 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-16 11:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Excellent points.

#96 | Posted by DMTDust at 2019-03-17 02:40 AM | Reply

I can't use this gun I bought on a street corner,

#19 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

I'm not certain you even know what a gun is.

Ever shot or even seen a gun before?

If you actually have any idea what a gun is or what it looks like enlighten us all and tell us the last time you saw one for sale on a street corner.

I know you feel like you're helping by making ---- up and posting it anonymously on the internet.

You're not.

The NRA should pay ------- like you to keep your teeth together.

#97 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-03-17 08:02 AM | Reply

There are a pile of things that can be done, unfortunately none of them put money in the pockets of the 1%.

#98 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-03-17 08:05 AM | Reply

prison-industrial complex

#94 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

One of the major causes behind gun violence.

There is no rehabilitation. It costs money.

If a person is ssssoooo dangerous that they aren't allowed to vote or to hold certain jobs or be around knives or whatever why would they ever let them out of prison?

What makes money is having as many people in cages for having weed on them or whatever and then making sure they make their way back by any means necessary.

#99 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-03-17 08:15 AM | Reply

"- headed out to the gun club to target shoot with my semi-auto rifle😎"

A way of expressing solidarity with the grieving people in New Zealand. Gun nuts are simply horrible people. I will never forget Charlton Heston's speech after Columbine. He was someone I actually respected....until that day. What a piece of human excrement.

#100 | Posted by danni at 2019-03-17 08:16 AM | Reply

"A law I would agree with written and enforced by our justice system? 30 years to life to death row for any crime committed using a gun. "

I don't care, pass your foolish law and pretend it will make a difference. Do you honestly believe some punk with a gun considers the difference between a 30 year sentence and a 10 year sentence before he commits a crime? The problems are much more complicated than that and could be dealt with better through screening while they are still students in middle school. IMHO. The clues are available at that time to recognzize the real threats and try to change their future behavior but it would cost money and we don't want to spend the money it would take to do that. That is the real crime, society knows how to deal with what is wrong but we don't want to spend the money it would take to deal with it. I know, it wouldn't catch all of it but it would catch most of it. Think about the opportunity we have to improve our society and increase our safety but which we are ignoring. Then we spend much more on incarcerating the people who commit these horrible criimes after they commit those crimes while we could have spent less on preventing these crimes.

#101 | Posted by danni at 2019-03-17 08:26 AM | Reply

tell us the last time you saw one for sale on a street corner.

#97 | POSTED BY MRSILENCEDOGOOD AT 2019-03-17 08:02 AM | REPLY

It's "the street corner". It's "people you know in the hood" or "people you know with hood rat connections".

I've been offered auto mac11s for $50 (still warm), a $900 USP for $80, wonder 9 clones, a $3k Kimber 1911 for $200.

There are 2 kinds of throwaway guns. One kind is decoy for law enforcement to find, the other kind is one you shoot somebody with and ditch.

#102 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-17 08:53 AM | Reply

and knowing some rural Kiwis, they're not giving up a damn thing. You'll never find their firearms. Mass non-compliance exactly like it is here.

#103 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-17 08:55 AM | Reply

It's "people you know in the hood" or "people you know with hood rat connections".
I've been offered auto mac11s for $50 (still warm), a $900 USP for $80, wonder 9 clones, a $3k Kimber 1911 for $200.
There are 2 kinds of throwaway guns. One kind is decoy for law enforcement to find, the other kind is one you shoot somebody with and ditch.

#102 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG AT

Liar.

#104 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-03-17 09:16 AM | Reply

Anyone who hasn't watched too many ignore assed TV shows want to try?

#105 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-03-17 09:16 AM | Reply

I've got this figured out, gang. Sitz is actually Corey Booker's imaginary friend T-Bone the make believe gangster.

#106 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-03-17 09:29 AM | Reply

Oh poor silence. Such a coddled wheto he's never seen the hood, let alone been in it.

#107 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-17 09:45 AM | Reply

#107

I grew up on West Cleveland.

I live in East Toledo.

Oddly enough, on the 2 occasions anyone has ever tried to sell a gun they wanted more than I would pay for it new because of an optic they had added or extra magazines or whatever.

I guess I just don't have the same street cred that you do, T-Bone.

#108 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-03-17 10:18 AM | Reply

Third & Fifth Ward Houston are effectively open-air gun/drug/hooker markets. With bbq.

You'd be arrested for going in there for being white.

#109 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-17 10:42 AM | Reply

This iced out age is coming to an end though, craft brew hipsters are gentrifying Fifth Ward.

#110 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-17 10:45 AM | Reply

The weapon could of been cars

How do you drive a car around the inside of a mosque?

#111 | Posted by JOE at 2019-03-17 10:52 AM | Reply

Guns were used only as protection and or a means to gather food.

#74 | Posted by gracieamazed

99% of time one of these mass shootings happens it's committed with an assault weapon designed for the military. THAT's what we're talking about. Not bolt action hunting guns or pistols used for personal protection.

Australia banned assault weapons after a couple of horrific mass shootings. After they banned assault weapons there was ONE mass shooting in 22 years (2 dead), and that was done with multiple pistols. Had he had an assault weapon many more would have died.

If someone can't shoot a home invader with 8 or 10 shots from a pistol, or a hunter can't down prey with a rifle and thinks he needs an AK or AR, they have no business owning them in the first place.

It's long past time to get rid of assault weapons in America.

#112 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-17 11:08 AM | Reply

...ONE mass shooting in the 22 years since they banned assault weapons

#113 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-17 11:09 AM | Reply

The Kiwis can do whatever they want. There is no 2nd amendment protecting an individual's right to keep and bear arms.

#114 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-03-17 01:11 PM | Reply

The Kiwis can do whatever they want. There is no 2nd amendment protecting an individual's right to keep and bear arms.

#114 | Posted by madbomber

They had muskets which could only fire 1 or 2 rounds a minute after reloading.

Why can't I own mortars or RPGs or nukes or cruise missiles? They are 'arms.' Explain that!

The founding fathers never envisioned a world where any yahoo could buy weapons that can fire 100 rounds as fast as you can pull the trigger.

And the 2nd Amendment was specific in the fact that weapons should be carried by members of 'organized militias' in the defense of the country, not any yahoo with a few hundred bucks and a ride to a gun show.

#115 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-17 02:07 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

It's the weapons manufactured for the MILITARY that are killing people in mass shootings. They serve no other purpose than what they were designed to do: kill as many people in as short a time as possible.

They are not hunting rifles. They were designed for the military, not for people with gun fetishes.

#116 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-17 02:09 PM | Reply

99% of time one of these mass shootings happens it's committed with an assault weapon ...

There's bulls**t, hyperbole and myth then there's statistics.

Weapons Selection across Mass Shootings

The majority of mass shooting events were carried out with a single firearm (67.1 percent), although multiple weapons were used in approximately one-third of events (Figure 2). Handguns were the most commonly used weapon, with at least one being used in 75.6 percent of events (Figure 3). When only a single weapon was involved, handguns were significantly more likely to be used than any other type of gun (68.9 percent of events).[13] In 28.5 percent of events, at least one rifle was used. To a lesser extent (0.9 percent), other types of guns, such as machine guns, were used by shooters. rockinst.org

#117 | Posted by et_al at 2019-03-17 04:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And the 2nd Amendment was specific in the fact that weapons should be carried by members of 'organized militias' in the defense of the country ...

More ignorant bulls**t but then there's history. The Second Amendment is a codification of the common law right of an individual to keep and bear arms. scholar.valpo.edu

#118 | Posted by et_al at 2019-03-17 04:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I'm not sure how anyone who speaks English can claim that the 2nd amendment affirms the right of the militia to keep and bear arms. That's not what it says at all.

#119 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-03-17 05:53 PM | Reply

"They had muskets which could only fire 1 or 2 rounds a minute after reloading."

Do you think the framers would have not created the 2nd amendment had 30 round magazines existed?

#120 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-03-17 05:59 PM | Reply

"They are not hunting rifles. They were designed for the military, not for people with gun fetishes."

The single shot long guns you mentioned that only fired 1-2 rounds per minute were designed for military use as well...so... there's that. Should those weapons be banned?

#121 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-03-17 06:01 PM | Reply

How does a country vow to do anything!? Terrible writing.

#122 | Posted by Merovigan at 2019-03-17 09:00 PM | Reply

They had muskets which could only fire 1 or 2 rounds a minute after reloading.

#115 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY AT 2019-03-17 02:07 PM | FLAG:

The first machine gun came out 70 years before the Constitution was signed. The first rapid fire revolvers were over 250 years old at the time. Volley guns had been in use for 678 years.

Besides this talking point being historically illiterate, the logic is shoddy. If the 2nd Amendment doesn't cover technological progression, then none of the Amendments cover it. Your phone is subject to search and seizure without probable cause, you have no free speech online, etc. Just let that stupid talking point die.

#123 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-18 08:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

In the USA every week a toddler is responsible for shooting some one... we are more likely to be killed or injured by an American born toddler still in training pants than a foreign born terrorist

True fact.

#124 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-03-18 09:05 AM | Reply

Do you think the framers would have not created the 2nd amendment had 30 round magazines existed?

I think they would have written it in a way that was less subject to disingenuous misinterpretation had they known that people like Antonin Scalia would exist.

The 2nd Amendment was read by the Supreme Court and virtually all federal courts of appeal to be conditioned on the weapon having some relation to a militia for two centuries. It wasn't until the early 2000s that rightwing justices decided to decouple the beginning of the one-sentence amendment from the latter portion of the sentence.

#125 | Posted by JOE at 2019-03-18 10:37 AM | Reply

Besides this talking point being historically illiterate, the logic is shoddy. If the 2nd Amendment doesn't cover technological progression, then none of the Amendments cover it. Your phone is subject to search and seizure without probable cause, you have no free speech online, etc. Just let that stupid talking point die.

#123 | Posted by sitzkrieg

The entire constitution was designed to cover unforseen progression. It's meant to change over time. And be interpreted differently over time. It's not the 10 commandments.

#126 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-03-18 11:59 AM | Reply

Do you think the framers would have not created the 2nd amendment had 30 round magazines existed?

#120 | Posted by madbomber

Do you think the framers thought that everyone has the right to nuclear missles?

#127 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-03-18 12:00 PM | Reply

Rightwingers think the Constitution is a suicide pact.

#128 | Posted by JOE at 2019-03-18 12:18 PM | Reply

#126 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-03-18 11:59 AM | FLAG:

No ----. Thank you for agreeing that the founders weren't retarded enough to consider technology.

#129 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-18 12:24 PM | Reply

wow I botched that phrasing lol.

#130 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-03-18 12:24 PM | Reply

wow I botched that phrasing lol.

#130 | Posted by sitzkrieg

The point is - the framers would have been open to altering the second ammendment when it became possible for any lunatic to buy a device that could enable them to kill a hundred people in a few seconds.

#131 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-03-18 01:04 PM | Reply

The entire constitution was designed to cover unforseen progression. It's meant to change over time. And be interpreted differently over time.
#126 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

False. The Constitution applies certain principles. As technology advances those principles (like freedom of speech) are applied. It was not written to be an ever-evolving document. There is no logic to that premise. The framers inserted the amendment process as a means of changing the document.

#132 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-03-18 01:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"They are not hunting rifles. They were designed for the military, not for people with gun fetishes."

FYI: The 2nd Amendment was not written in care the deer turn against us. [It was never about hunting].

#133 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-03-18 01:14 PM | Reply

#133 If you plan on ovetthrowing our government you might want to start stocking up on tanks, nukes, missiles, jet fighters, etc. I look forward to seeing you try.

#134 | Posted by JOE at 2019-03-18 01:21 PM | Reply

It was not written to be an ever-evolving document. There is no logic to that premise. The framers inserted the amendment process as a means of changing the document.

#132 | Posted by JeffJ

Yes it was. Which is why we have a process for AMENDMENTS. AMENDMENT means CHANGE.

As in the Second AMENDMENT.

#135 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-03-18 01:21 PM | Reply

#134 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-03-18 01:21 PM | FLAG: It's about being able to if the govt ever became a tyranny over 'We The People', and what makes you the the military would turn on the American public?

I was actually taught about the purpose in one of the classroom blocks in basic training many decades ago, but I'd bet that they no longer teach the reason the 2nd exists.

Haven't you ever wondered why in the Bill Of Rights [of the people] that it comes in right behind Freedom Of Speech? Just look to Venezuela to see what happens when the govt tramples over the people[who are unarmed], or the old USSR as another example. Here's another example: "The Khmer Rouge began their reign with the murder of surrendering officials of ... Cambodia was long the subject of strict gun control polices, dating back to ... Hitler and Pol Pot tried to keep guns out of the hands of ordinary citizens. ... and disarmed Jews during World War II recognized that the Nazis were ..."

#136 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-03-18 01:46 PM | Reply

"It's about being able to if the govt ever became a tyranny over 'We The People', ..." - #136 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-03-18 01:46 PM

Amazing!

That's the exact same "argument" made by the Black Panthers in the 1960s, by the Symbionese Liberation Army in the 1970s, and by people like the Weavers and David Koresh in the 1990s.

They, too, thought the government had become a tyranny over 'We The People' (in their case, them).

And do you want to know what the American people and their law enforcement thought?

They thought they were criminals who got what they deserved.

#137 | Posted by Hans at 2019-03-18 01:53 PM | Reply

Yes it was. Which is why we have a process for AMENDMENTS. AMENDMENT means CHANGE.
As in the Second AMENDMENT.

#135 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I agree regarding amendments. In the post I was responding to you made it sound like the entire document was to be subject to constant 'reinterpretation' so that it can literally mean whatever politicians want it to mean.

#138 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-03-18 01:57 PM | Reply

I agree regarding amendments. In the post I was responding to you made it sound like the entire document was to be subject to constant 'reinterpretation' so that it can literally mean whatever politicians want it to mean.

#138 | Posted by JeffJ

That's what the supreme court is for. Politicians can't change the interpretation of the constitution, but the court can.

#139 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-03-18 02:00 PM | Reply

The 2nd Amendment was not written in care the deer turn against us. [It was never about hunting].
#133 | POSTED BY MSGT

So what WAS it about? And is it still relevant today?

The 2nd Amendment is not a suicide pact nor is it
written in stone.

It is nice to see that there are still Countries out there where Something Can Be Done!!

#140 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-03-18 02:00 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

The point is - the framers would have been open to altering the second ammendment when it became possible for any lunatic to buy a device that could enable them to kill a hundred people in a few seconds.
#131 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-03-18 01:04 PM

Cannons were available and owned by civilians at the time of the signing.

#141 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-03-18 02:01 PM | Reply

Cannons were available and owned by civilians at the time of the signing.

#141 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

Just proof that there have always been idiots in America.

A nuclear weapon can be carried in a suitcase.

Do you think everyone should have their own personal nuke? (To deterr tyrannical Governments, of course!!)

#142 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-03-18 02:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Do you think everyone should have their own personal nuke? (To deterr tyrannical Governments, of course!!) - #142 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-03-18 02:14 PM
I made no judgement on whether people should have a personal nuke, just as I made no judgement on the availability of cannons in the 1700's. I merely reminded Speaksoftly that civilians at the time had the capability at the time to do as he'd stated.

No, I don't think that everyone should have their own personal nuke. Not sure what such a non-sequitur has to do with the conversation, though.

#143 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-03-18 02:35 PM | Reply

I merely reminded Speaksoftly that civilians at the time had the capability at the time to do as he'd stated.

#143 | Posted by Avigdore

Yeah great false equivalency.

I doubt many maniac civilians could easily get their hands on a cannon.

#144 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-03-18 03:32 PM | Reply

#123 | Posted by sitzkrieg

Please provide evidence that ONE 'machine gun' that could be carried by an individual was used in the Revolutionary War.

WEAPONS AVAILABLE IN THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR ERA

The "Puckle Gun" you reference was never used in a war. It was designed to be used on a ship, not carried through battlefields. And it was also a flintlock weapon, as were ALL rifles and pistols available during the Revolutionary War. No quick reloading possible for any of them.

There were ZERO multiple fire weapons available for use in the Revolutionary War

Your so called point about weapons used in the era the 2nd Amendment was drafted is moot.

#145 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 04:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

The US constitution was signed by 39 of the 55 delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
The multi-shot Girandoni air rifle was an airgun designed by Tyrolian inventor Bartholomäus Girandoni circa 1779. The Girandoni air rifle was in service with the Austrian army from 1780 to around 1815. This rifle had a lethal combat range of 125 to 150 yards. It had the advantage of a high rate of fire, no smoke from propellants, and low muzzle report. It had a detachable magazine containing 19 rounds of ammunition. A single shot from the Girandoni could penetrate a one-inch wood plank, or take an elk.

arizonadailyindependent.com
Oh well.

#146 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-03-18 04:22 PM | Reply

"It was not written to be an ever-evolving document. There is no logic to that premise. The framers inserted the amendment process as a means of changing the document.
#132 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

So then what's your explanation for why it took 150 years from the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Obergfels decision, which legalized gay marriage based on the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

What evolved over those 150 years to bring about that change in interpretation?

#147 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-18 04:35 PM | Reply

AVIGDORE

From your link:

"While the detachable air reservoir was capable of around 30 shots, it took nearly 1,500 strokes of a hand pump to fill those reservoirs.... In addition, the weapon was very delicate and a small break in the reservoir could make it inoperable."

Sorry, not practical, not used. Who can say if they even knew about it in America?

You guys who fawn over weapons designed for the military in anyone's hands are a hoot!! The guns that kill massive numbers of people in a short amount of time.

Australia banned them 22 years ago. As a result, they've since had ONE mass shooting committed by a guy who brought multiple hand guns. Had he had an AR or AK he would have killed dozens instead of TWO.

#148 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 04:36 PM | Reply

We'll just put you guys down as being 'pro-mass shootings,' because they'll continue as long as individuals can own weapons designed for the military to kill as many people in as short a time as possible.

#149 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 04:40 PM | Reply

Sorry, not practical, not used. Who can say if they even knew about it in America? - #148 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 04:36 PM

Did you not get to the next sentence? Here it is again: The Girandoni air rifle was in service with the Austrian army from 1780 to around 1815.
Blows away your 'not practical, not used' comment. Your understanding of the flow of information in the 1700's is woefully lacking.

We'll just put you guys down as being 'pro-mass shootings,' because they'll continue as long as individuals can own weapons designed for the military to kill as many people in as short a time as possible.
#149 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 04:40 PM

Pro-mass shooting? That's the handgun...per the link in #117, handguns were used in over 75% of mass shootings.
Perhaps a bit more reading and a lot less assumption would help.
You want to ban handguns, the most commonly used weapon in mass shootings, choose a representative to push those laws. I'm behind you 100% pushing for that.

#150 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-03-18 05:23 PM | Reply

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.

We have no need for militias nor assault weapons in the hands of civilians. There are no more 'well regulated militias.' We have over 2 million armed, highly trained forces ready and willing to do that.

We'll put you down as another 'pro-mass shooting' yes.

#151 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 05:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

AVIGORE

All the more reason to close the gun show loophole, require background checks and a waiting period for ALL purchases, require liability insurance (like auto owners), a true 'national database' that keeps track of mental health and criminal activity, and make gun owners responsible for keeping their weapons where no one is going to steal them, theft being the primary source of guns 'bad guys' who shouldn't have them do.

40 years ago, most people allowed to carry pistols were those who couriered large amounts of cash or other valuables. The NRA has made idiots with gun fetishes feel like they have to have them. As a result, America has a real problem with gun violence. If there weren't so many, there wouldn't be so many in the hands of people who have no business with them in the first place.

Ya, you're pro-mass shootings.

#152 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 06:02 PM | Reply

Not sure what such a non-sequitur has to do with the conversation, though.

#143 | Posted by Avigdore

I love arguing about non-sequitur 2nd Amendment minutiae with Russians??

#153 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-03-18 06:08 PM | Reply

I love arguing about non-sequitur 2nd Amendment minutiae with Russians??

#153 | Posted by donnerboy

Russians or NRA trolls. As my dad used to say, "same difference."

Someone the other day pointed out that after 3 deaths from romaine lettuce it was pulled from the shelves, as have been a myriad of products deemed unsafe.

But these NRA gun-fetish-stricken morons (who must believe, for some idiotic reason, we still have well regulated militias) think we should do nothing to end the needless deaths of tens of thousands of Americans a year.

#154 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 06:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"we still have well regulated militias"

The NZ shooter appeared to be very "well-regulated", the whole time he was slaughtering those 50 Innocents.

#155 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-03-18 06:24 PM | Reply

We have no need for militias ...

Twenty states with active militias, including yours, and the federal government disagree.

#156 | Posted by et_al at 2019-03-18 06:58 PM | Reply

If only twenty states have militias, it must be the case that a militia is not necesssary for the security of a free state.

The other option is those thirty states themselves aren't free.

Both can't be true.

#157 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-03-18 07:04 PM | Reply

All the more reason to close the gun show loophole, require background checks and a waiting period for ALL purchases, require liability insurance (like auto owners), a true 'national database' that keeps track of mental health and criminal activity, and make gun owners responsible for keeping their weapons where no one is going to steal them, theft being the primary source of guns 'bad guys' who shouldn't have them do.
40 years ago, most people allowed to carry pistols were those who couriered large amounts of cash or other valuables. The NRA has made idiots with gun fetishes feel like they have to have them. As a result, America has a real problem with gun violence. If there weren't so many, there wouldn't be so many in the hands of people who have no business with them in the first place.
Ya, you're pro-mass shootings. - #152 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 06:02 PM

I've no issue with mandating background checks or waiting periods on all purchases. I do have a problem with requiring insurance, because it will serve no purpose other than allowing only the wealthy to have access to self defense (liability policies do not pay out in the event of intentional acts - accidental acts are already covered by homeowners and renters policies). I've no problem with maintaining a list of everyone with a mental illness, but you'll run afoul of rights of privacy. Laws to require weapons be locked when not in use? No problem from me.
Ya' you're an idiot.

#158 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-03-18 08:28 PM | Reply

Due you still support selling ARs and AKs despite them being the weapon of choice for mass shooters?

Also, it should be noted that due to the velocity at which they fire bullets, injuries are far more severe than those caused by pistols.

#159 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 08:51 PM | Reply

PS - the idiot isn't me. I'm logical. If a weapon designed for the military is causing multiple deaths I'm for banning it. Logical.

#160 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 08:53 PM | Reply

Due you still support selling ARs and AKs despite them being the weapon of choice for mass shooters? - #159 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 08:51 PM
Any reason you're pushing a lie, like that?
As has been repeatedly shown to you, the weapon of choice for mass shooters is the hand gun - pistols. The link remains in #117 for you to peruse and rectify your ignorance. Until then, I'll just remain satisfied pointing out your falsehoods.

PS - the idiot isn't me. I'm logical. - #160 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-03-18 08:53 PM
See, you've got a bit of a quandary here. There are 2 choices: either you're a liar passing off false statements like your #159, or you're too ignorant to know that you're wrong...an idiot if you will.
So are you wrong about being an idiot, or are you a liar?
Logical.

#161 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-03-18 09:05 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort