Gun Control Debate #1

[Tillicum]

Food for thought, those 3 brave teachers that gave their lives to protect students, what would have happened if one of them were armed?

Some of the teachers at the school that I went to growing up have now been trained by LE and they're armed. Everyone knows that some of the teachers are armed but they don't know which teachers they are. I think and hope that will deter a shooting there but if not, I think it would definitely limit the amount of injuries.

 

[Karinna]

I agree that they know about fear.

Definitely, among other things like death & loss of their school as they knew it and will never be the same again,

 

[RANCH]

I think some need a refresher on "District of Columbia v Heller".

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held, in a 5–4 decision, that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and requirement that lawfully-owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.

Notice the part I bolded. "Unconnected with service in a militia." The Supreme Court has ruled that the "right to keep and bear arms" is an individual right that all Americans have.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

 

[Betty P]

First off Australia doesn't have the Second Amendment. If their "buy back" confiscation program was so successful why did they have to do it twice?

Would Americans give up their guns voluntarily with a "buy back". I doubt it would be very successful. The Second Amendment would get in the way of any mandatory buy back and would have to be repealed.

I've never heard of a law that limit's how much ammo a person can buy but there have been large capacity magazine bans. Most of those bans limit magazines to 10 rounds. I think that with a bit of practice a person can get just as many rounds on target with a 10 round magazine vs a larger one.

Armor piercing ammo is a complicated subject. I'm not aware of it being a problem. Regular rifle ammo will go thru most vests without being anything special.

Registration works great for confiscation. How does insurance stop someone from killing someone with a gun?

Regardless of your personal opinion of Australia's buy back program, it worked very well. The US used to have similar
programs, though I haven't seen any in several years. No reason we can't start them up again.

Laws against large capacity magazines, etc. - yes, we had those kind of laws for many years and they worked very well. Back in the 30's they were banned outright. No one outside a war zone needs high capacity magazines, nor armor piercing bullets. We have a military and law enforcement agencies who handle killing large numbers of people on our behalf.

Limiting the amount and type of ammo someone can buy is also prudent. I favor a heavy tax on it, as well as registration.

Can you provide an example in the US of registration resulting in confiscation of something? You have to register and license your automobiles and no one can impound them unless you broke the law. Consequences, etc.

Armour piercing bullets are intended to kill police officers and others in law enforcement. They were banned in the US for many years for that reason.

 

[TooCurious]

Got me. I couldn't tell the difference.

I wouldn't know meth if I saw it either, or heroin - but I think they are dangerous and should be eradicated.

Both of those are illegal in every form and it isn't a right to have heroine or meth.

 

[TooCurious]

Regardless of your personal opinion of Australia's buy back program, it worked very well. The US used to have similar
programs, though I haven't seen any in several years. No reason we can't start them up again.

Laws against large capacity magazines, etc. - yes, we had those kind of laws for many years and they worked very well. Back in the 30's they were banned outright. No one outside a war zone needs high capacity magazines, nor armor piercing bullets. We have a military and law enforcement agencies who handle killing large numbers of people on our behalf.

Limiting the amount and type of ammo someone can buy is also prudent. I favor a heavy tax on it, as well as registration.

Can you provide an example in the US of registration resulting in confiscation of something? You have to register and license your automobiles and no one can impound them away unless you broke the law. Consequences, etc.

Armour piercing bullets are intended to kill police officers and others in law enforcement. They were banned for many years for that reason.

Stalin and Hitler both started with common sense gun measures and then went to full blown confiscation with possession being a capital offense. This was less than 100 years ago

 

[Betty P]

I think some need a refresher on "District of Columbia v Heller".



Notice the part I bolded. "Unconnected with service in a militia." The Supreme Court has ruled that the "right to keep and bear arms" is an individual right that all Americans have.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

Sorry, not buying it. Will research and post tomorrow. Didn't the Supreme Court also uphold Prohibition once? Everything can be challenged in US courts, including some court's interpretation of the 2nd amendment.

 

[Karinna]

Many, if not most, schools already have these here in the U.S.

Well good to know. My youngest son went through HS in Florida a few years ago, and one afternoon i got the call as did other parents that a student had brought a gun to school. The situation was very promptly dealt with, and thank god no one was hurt.

 

[Inthedetails]

I think some need a refresher on "District of Columbia v Heller".



Notice the part I bolded. "Unconnected with service in a militia." The Supreme Court has ruled that the "right to keep and bear arms" is an individual right that all Americans have.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

Has a court case come up regarding banning assault weapons - the high-powered weapons? I haven't followed this issue so I don't know (please don't poke fun at people who don't know but are here to learn - not singling you out but the tone in general). I'm assuming the issue has been in the legislative branch and hasn't made it to a court case, but I don't know.

Are there any rulings about assault weapons? The case you cited specifically mentions handguns, rifles, and shotguns....which aren't in reality what most gun-regulation proponents want banned, in my observation.

tia.

 

[Betty P]

Some of the teachers at the school that I went to growing up have now been trained by LE and they're armed. Everyone knows that some of the teachers are armed but they don't know which teachers they are. I think and hope that will deter a shooting there but if not, I think it would definitely limit the amount of injuries.

All of the teachers I know don't want to be armed, nor do they want anyone else in the school besides security guards. Turning our schools into armed fortresses is damaging to children and the process of education. More guns means greater chances of someone getting killed. Better to find more sensible ways to prevent these killings.

 

[Inthedetails]

Sorry, not buying it. Will research and post tomorrow. Didn't the Supreme Court also uphold Prohibition once? Everything can be challenged in US courts, including some court's interpretation of the 2nd amendment.

Absolutely. We have a living document that is the law of the land. Not written in stone.

 

[CADwrest]

Alright, this needs to be out there:

Some of you really need to brush up on what the Assault Weapon Ban did and didn’t do.

1) It grandfathered in existing rifles. They became known as “pre-ban” and got more expensive while the ban was in place.
2) New rifles simply had a few small cosmetic changes made to them and were perfectly legal. Probably 99% of non-gun owners wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.
3) It didn’t ban magazines over 10 rounds, just the manufacture of new ones. Old ones were plentiful and readily available.

The idea that these shootings wouldn’t have taken place if the ban had been renewed is 100% wrong. It didn’t “work well” and it didn’t have a “big impact.” Just read the section from the Wikipedia article about its effectiveness if you don’t believe me. It was a joke of a law and we’re not doing it again.

 

[TooCurious]

Has a court case come up regarding banning assault weapons - the high-powered weapons? I haven't followed this issue so I don't know (please don't poke fun at people who don't know but are here to learn - not singling you out but the tone in general). I'm assuming the issue has been in the legislative branch and hasn't made it to a court case, but I don't know.

Are there any rulings about assault weapons? The case you cited specifically mentions handguns, rifles, and shotguns....which aren't in reality what most gun-regulation proponents want banned, in my observation.

tia.

" rifle", "assault rifle", both rifles. The picture I posted and asked who could identify, they are the same rifle.

 

[Inthedetails]

Both of those are illegal in every form and it isn't a right to have heroine or meth.

I wish it were a right to have a heroine!

Heroine = a woman admired or idealized for her courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.

 

[Tillicum]

Has a court case come up regarding banning assault weapons - the high-powered weapons? I haven't followed this issue so I don't know (please don't poke fun at people who don't know but are here to learn - not singling you out but the tone in general). I'm assuming the issue has been in the legislative branch and hasn't made it to a court case, but I don't know.

Are there any rulings about assault weapons? The case you cited specifically mentions handguns, rifles, and shotguns....which aren't in reality what most gun-regulation proponents want banned, in my observation.

tia.

The AR 15 is a rifle.

 

[TooCurious]

Absolutely. We have a living document that is the law of the land. Not written in stone.

That is the rub, it is not a living document that changes with time

 

[Inthedetails]

" rifle", "assault rifle", both rifles. The picture I posted and asked who could identify, they are the same rifle.

Congrats, you win.

 

[TooCurious]

I wish it were a right to have a heroine!

Heroine = a woman admired or idealized for her courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.

Sorry, autocorrect

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Has a court case come up regarding banning assault weapons - the high-powered weapons? I haven't followed this issue so I don't know (please don't poke fun at people who don't know but are here to learn - not singling you out but the tone in general). I'm assuming the issue has been in the legislative branch and hasn't made it to a court case, but I don't know.

Are there any rulings about assault weapons? The case you cited specifically mentions handguns, rifles, and shotguns....which aren't in reality what most gun-regulation proponents want banned, in my observation.

tia.

Interestingly, I know when LE started using assault weapons.....I watched the precipitous event unfold live on TV news in Los Angeles.

It was a group of bank robbers who outarmed the local LA police and went on a violent shootout with the cops for hours. This happened many years ago but was very frightening.

After that, it wasn’t unusual for LE to have their barracks loaded with assault rifles.

 

[kaen]

It was a joke of a law and we’re not doing it again.

Won't that be determined by the conversation with everything on the table that the FL Gov. is talking about? We might be doing it again or not.... I think it will be up to the will of the people---all people, not just some.