50+ dead in mass shooting - Las Vegas

[johnhannibalsmith]

Realistically, it is probably only a logical middle ground if it is in fact effective at stopping this sort of event. Otherwise, the middle keeps moving closer to the edges.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Because of what I do and where I do it...I have illegally carried a concealed handgun on my person most nights for the past 25 years. But...even I can't help but notice that the vast majority of these atrocities occur because common citizens are carrying military weaponry. Isn't there a logical "middle-ground" that can be reached...whereby the citizen retains his "right to bear arms"...while we also prevent the insane among us from having the ability to kill or maim 500+ innocent people at a single sitting?

I agree with you.

Here's the problem the way I see it.

The gun advocates will NEVER trust any attempt by democrats to come up with sensible legislation because they know that some democrats (not all) will not stop at sensible. They really want to disarm everyone.

If you agree with that statement, that means the republicans have to be the ones to do it. They will be more sensitive to the fears of gun advocates and could conceivably enact legislation in a way that would be tolerable to the gun advocates.

The problem here is that the republicans get money from the NRA and some of their base is not going to trust anyone trying to regulate guns because they will still fear slippery slope confiscation. So it's really tough for republicans to do it even if they want to.

[davew]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Right...a mentally unstable person was able to pass whatever check he needed to, to purchase guns that he had no business having.

Maybe it shouldn't be so easy to get a gun.

If the guy wanted to kill as many people as he could, don't you think he could have used a semi-truck, bomb, airplane, fire, poison gas,.... if he could not get a gun?

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by davew

If the guy wanted to kill as many people as he could, don't you think he could have used a semi-truck, bomb, airplane, fire, poison gas,.... if he could not get a gun?

Seriously?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I agree with you.

Here's the problem the way I see it.

The gun advocates will NEVER trust any attempt by democrats to come up with sensible legislation because they know that some democrats (not all) will not stop at sensible. They really want to disarm everyone.

If you agree with that statement, that means the republicans have to be the ones to do it. They will be more sensitive to the fears of gun advocates and could conceivably enact legislation in a way that would be tolerable to the gun advocates.

The problem here is that the republicans get money from the NRA and some of their base is not going to trust anyone trying to regulate guns because they will still fear slippery slope confiscation. So it's really tough for republicans to do it even if they want to.

So, without your usual pro-republican spin...you think that the democrat legislators are too stupid to realize that they cannot disarm the criminals as easily as they can disarm the law-abiding citizens...while the republicans are too corrupt to refuse the money that the NRA gives them so they could continue with their current stance on the "citizen-weapons" issue.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Because of what I do and where I do it...I have illegally carried a concealed handgun on my person most nights for the past 25 years. But...even I can't help but notice that the vast majority of these atrocities occur because common citizens are carrying military weaponry. Isn't there a logical "middle-ground" that can be reached...whereby the citizen retains his "right to bear arms"...while we also prevent the insane among us from having the ability to kill or maim 500+ innocent people at a single sitting?

And the only people you will affect will be law abiding citizens.

Criminals will continue to do whatever they want.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

Maybe an ex law enforcement officer like Ralph can let us know what regulations criminals and insane people are likely to follow. That is for all you calling for more gun control laws. I have no law enforcement background other than my dad was a cop. My uneducated view is criminals and the mentally insane do no follow laws, so more laws will have no effect on them. If someone knows different let me know.

The only comment I have is, you are either going to follow the law, or you are not.

I believe it’s a conscious decision on whether you do or not. Why you make the choices you do......or they do......therein lies the mystery

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

And the only people you will affect will be law abiding citizens.

Criminals will continue to do whatever they want.

When we enact anti-drug laws, Ralph...are we trying to "disarm" the criminal drug users? We KNOW that the criminals will disobey the anti-drug laws...but we create these drug-laws anyway.

[classhandicapper]

Interesting stats on gun control from Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.c312ca79f7b4

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

So, without your usual pro-republican spin...you think that the democrat legislators are too stupid to realize that they cannot disarm the criminals as easily as they can disarm the law-abiding citizens...while the republicans are too corrupt to refuse the money that the NRA gives them so they could continue with their current stance on the "citizen-weapons" issue.

I'd say that's a pretty good summary, but my attempt wasn't to call the democrats stupid. The politics are tough.

For the record, I don't spin. I lean right on most issues. So calling them as I see them leans toward republicans on more issues than democrats.

[davew]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Seriously?

Yes, it is not like someone cut him off driving and he pulled out a pistol. Some serious planning and preparation went into this.

[Mulerider]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

The problem here is that the republicans get money from the NRA and some of their base is not going to trust anyone trying to regulate guns because they will still fear slippery slope confiscation. So it's really tough for republicans to do it even if they want to.

The slippery slope is not far-fetched, depending on how the legislation is crafted.

Remember a couple of decades ago when the NRA was crucified in the media for trying to defeat legislation that would ban "cop-killer" bullets? Here's the real story:

In the '80s, teflon-coated handgun bullets were developed for law enforcement use that would penetrate standard body armor. NBC got wind of it, and produced a sensationalist prime-time piece called "Cop-Killer Bullets," despite the fact that the bullets had never been available to the public, no officer had ever been killed by one, and that law enforcement had asked NBC not to air it. NBC ignored the requests.

Shortly after the airing, Congress got involved. A New York congressman, Mario Biaggi (D), proposed legislation that would outlaw any bullet capable of penetrating certain bullet resistant material.

Enter the NRA. As written, the bill would have outlawed virtually every modern hunting rifle cartridge in existence..all of which will punch through standard bulletproof vests like a hot knife through butter. The NRA protested the bill as written. The media saw its opportunity: The NRA supports cop-killer bullets! And the myth still persists to this day.

The truth of the matter is the NRA worked to craft alternative legislation that would ban the sale of armor-piercing handgun ammunition, and that bill (H.R. 3132, 1986) was eventually enacted with the full support of Rep. Biaggi.

NBC didn't report that part.

Sorry. I've been in these trenches a long time.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by jms62

Religion is like a Horse Trainer always an excuse when it goes horribly wrong.

Hey...it beats blaming a gun. Besides, how can you not see that human beings are fundamentally flawed?

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Hey...it beats blaming a gun. Besides, how can you not see that human beings are fundamentally flawed?

Trust me....anyone who reads your posts knows just how flawed human beings are.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Trust me....anyone who reads your posts knows just how flawed human beings are.

Post of the Year...IMO.