Another Shooting, Nashville

[robinb]

The Nashville Waffle House re-opened yesterday and customers are stopping by to pay their respects to the victims and support the employees:

https://wtop.com/consumer-news/2018/04/tears-flow-as-victims-of-waffle-house-shooting-remembered/

 

[Domo]

Change is always on the horizon.
What that change turns out to be will be determined by whom has the necessary fortitude to enforce the changes if they are just, or to resist if the changes are unjust.
If changes weren't made we in America would all be having tea and crumpets in the afternoon.

Trust me, tea and crumpets are an AWESOME combination

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Those ideas would have very wide support, so why do we not do it, that is what is frustrating people. No law will make everything perfect, by my goodness we can at least try to make things safer, we do not even try.

The part that has widespread support is the idea of requiring background checks for private party used gun sales. All dealer sales require a check regardless of used or new, gun show or otherwise, and only dealers may sell new. Additionally, online sales are required to flow through dealers, so again those are checked whether new or used. The only missing piece of the puzzle so to speak is the transfer of used guns through private parties face to face.

Achieving this final piece without constitutional hiccups is a challenge, however (not just 2nd Amendment, BTW). It’s my belief this can be accomplished best by bringing the entire nation into the same system - gun owners or not - through the state ID/drivers license processs.

 

[Colleen27]

I think we need these on the Federal level, TBH. Hard to regulate guns in Illinois if you aren't regulating them the same in Missouri, Indiana or Iowa.

Yep. State and local gun control is meaningless because people and therefore weapons can flow freely across state and city lines. Unless something is done at the federal level, all we can hope for is stricter after-the-fact penalties for gun crimes in places that have local gun laws.

 

[UncleMike101]

Trust me, tea and crumpets are an AWESOME combination

I presumed you'd like that reference........

 

[UncleMike101]

Yep. State and local gun control is meaningless because people and therefore weapons can flow freely across state and city lines. Unless something is done at the federal level, all we can hope for is stricter after-the-fact penalties for gun crimes in places that have local gun laws.

And that would be a giant leap toward resolving a number of the problems that we have today.
First, we need to vigorously enforce the thousands of laws already on the books pertaining to the criminal misuse of firearms.
Second we need to pass legislation that makes it clear to Criminals that they will be punished severely for crimes that they commit.
Personally I'd favor a minimum sentence of mandatory life in prison without chance of parole for any violent crime involving the misuse of firearms.
Couple that with a mandatory death penalty for murder involving the misuse of a firearm and maybe, just maybe, the fact that we're not going to tolerate that type of behavior any more might sink into the pea sized brains of those individuals who have a predilection to commit murder and other crimes against innocent Citizens.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

I truly think it's because of the people on those extreme ends. One side pushes, the other pushes back, and no one wins. We get a bill that says the age limits for purchases, and some guy on one side will add a rider to ban magazines with more than 5 onto it, or on the other side will add a rider for unbanning full on assault rifles. Then nothing gets passed because both of those things are over the top.

One day, DH and I were at the local shooting range. I had to take a class on their rules at the range, as it was my first time there (DH had been there before and had completed it already). The range was running a concealed weapon class that day, and some of the people there should not have had a gun in their hands. One woman had the gun in hand while in line for the class, chatting with her friends (and honey, they were all WASPs if I've ever seen one). She waved that gun around while talking. The sheriff that was there to process the applications for the class walked over to her, removed the gun from her hand and told her she wouldn't be taking the class that day; and that if she wanted that gun back, she needed to talk to the nice deputies at the station house and explain to them why he took her gun away. She had never held a gun before, she said, so she didn't know the rules on it. The sheriff said that is why she didn't need to have the gun or a CC permit that day. The tantrum she threw rivaled those over-tired 2 year olds at WDW. She ended up with cuffs on, for disturbing the peace, and the sheriff shut down the CC class for the day. I just wanted to smack her, but went on to my class, and learned that while I am right handed, I am a left handed shooter.

I don't know why I added that story, but I like it, so it's staying.

There is no discussion right now about banning all guns in any way. What are the gun protestors right now advocating for? One of the reasons nothing happens is the right push the agenda fear that any change in stronger gun laws means they are coming for all your guns.

 

[Domo]

The problem with banning guns is that you never know what such an action would do until you try it.

There only realistic answer to the conundrum is to learn from the examples others have set. Whatever those are.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

But

There is no discussion right now about banning all guns in any way. What are the gun protestors right now advocating for? One of the reasons nothing happens is the right push the agenda fear that any change in stronger gun laws means they are coming for all your guns.

A) it’s a slippery slope. Once you take some, you can take more. Once you take more, you can take all. Will it ever come to “all”? Probably not & we all believe that. But, it most certainly will come down to “more”. The people who are okay with you taking “some” know that the next step is “more”, and they’re not okay with that.

B) there’s a significant portion that are not okay with you taking “some” even IF you could 100% assure them you would stop there.

C) nobody who is asking to take “some” guns has made any promises about where they will stop. I have asked you - SPECIFICALLY YOU - twice to specify just which guns you think are okay for us to have and which are not. And twice, you have refused to answer. How can we be expected to hold an open dialogue when people are being secretive about their goals and intentions?

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

What can we say about an opinion piece put out by one of the very “entertainment sources” that YOU told us you wished didn’t exist? Well, it’s an opinion. Everyone is entitled to one.

Obviously, your opinion is that the 2nd Amendment does not protect the right to own AR-15’s. So, now for the question you’ve been avoiding for 2 days:

Do you believe the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own guns that don’t look like AR-15’s, but function in exactly the same manner. Yes, or no.

I said they give opinions mixed with real news, watch it before you comment, is citing the Constitution according to the Supreme Court, so is not an opinion. Watch the Video. He gives facts, towards latter half of this the Constitution protects your First Amendment Rights to own a gun, it is a protected law but there are limits, this is law and does not protect your right to own an AR 15 or other weapons of war. So AR 15s are not protected. Supreme Court Judge Scalia himself a republican

 

[Hikergirl]

There is no discussion right now about banning all guns in any way. What are the gun protestors right now advocating for? One of the reasons nothing happens is the right push the agenda fear that any change in stronger gun laws means they are coming for all your guns.

These are you words from a previous post
So all this is is about stronger gun laws, closing gunshow loophole, etc., and there is some talk about going after the assault type rifles, or semi automatic type rifles, or bump stocks, etc.

There are alot of people who own semi-auto rifles so what exactly does this mean?
I have a problem with anyone "going after" my legally purchased, legally owned under the 2A guns, any of them.
You have yet to be specific about that statement, haven't seen an answer so maybe you are the one lying and spreading fear by making statements like that.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

But

A) it’s a slippery slope. Once you take some, you can take more. Once you take more, you can take all. Will it ever come to “all”? Probably not & we all believe that. But, it most certainly will come down to “more”. The people who are okay with you taking “some” know that the next step is “more”, and they’re not okay with that.

B) there’s a significant portion that are not okay with you taking “some” even IF you could 100% assure them you would stop there.

C) nobody who is asking to take “some” guns has made any promises about where they will stop. I have asked you - SPECIFICALLY YOU - twice to specify just which guns you think are okay for us to have and which are not. And twice, you have refused to answer. How can we be expected to hold an open dialogue when people are being secretive about their goals and intentions?

But I have answered you over and over, regular guns are protected by the Constitution according to the Supreme Court, AR 15s or other weapons of war are not are not and my beliefs are in line with that and having discussions of stronger gun laws, closing gun show loophole etc. Please watch entire video I just copied you above.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

Yup.....
In the 2008 DC v. Heller case, the Supreme Court ruled that the protected firearms are those that are in “common use for lawful purposes.”
Since there are well over five million AR type firearms, and many more millions of semi auto firearms that only differ cosmetically from AR's, in use daily in this country it would appear to be logical to presume that they are in "common use for lawful purposes."
As for Mr Melders opinion.
He is not only mistaken, he is disingenuous as well.
The SCOTUS has never, in session, ruled on whether Citizens may, or may not, posses, own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer an AR, or any other semi automatic firearm.
Period.........

Actually you hear Supreme Court Justice Scalia, republican by the way, himself say so. People have tried to change this but The Supreme Court has ruled that weapons of war including AR 15s not protected by constitution. He, Justice Scalia says so himself not an opinion, that the Constitution never meant there would be no limits either to owning guns.

 

[Hikergirl]

But I have answered you over and over, regular guns are protected by the Constitution according to the Supreme Court, AR 15s or other weapons of war are not are not and my beliefs are in line with that and having discussions of stronger gun laws, closing gun show loophole etc. Please watch entire video I just copied you above.

What is the difference between a "regular" gun and a weapon of war?

 

[supernova]

What is the difference between a "regular" gun and a weapon of war?

Automatic/semi-automatic? High round capability?

 

[Domo]

Automatic/semi-automatic? High round capability?

I'd agree, at the very least. Rate of fire influenced by recoil, design and so on, size of magazine - the bigger the more lethal - accuracy over distance, design of round (is it armour piercing?), stuff like that.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

Well, shoot, if we're going to use opinion pieces, let's go for it.

https://newrepublic.com/article/125498/its-time-ban-guns-yes-them

https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ban-guns-in-america
(At least 183 people agree with the ban the guns idea)

https://www.facebook.com/Bangunsintheus
(107 likes there)

http://www.vpc.org/studies/unsafe.htm

There are people calling for gun bans. There are even posters here who call for full on gun bans, in past gun threads. So, yes, on the EXTREME end of one side, there are people calling for gun bans.

Not opinion The Supreme Court you hear Judge Scalia himself say this https://redirect.viglink.com/?forma...o-2nd-amendment-right-to-ar-15s-1171097667761

 

[longboard55]

All legal
a problem and troubled 18 year old purchases several semi automatics and a tuck load of ammunition

an out of state student living in student housing with a history of mental illness purchases a quiver of semi automatics, body armour and 1000s of rounds in a short period of time

a person with a serious gambling problem purchases 60 semi automatics and bump stocks to convert them to fully automatic

But all we need to do is enforce current laws and there is no need for new ones?

Lets see what November brings

 

[Hikergirl]

Automatic/semi-automatic? High round capability?

Are you questioning yourself? I'm not sure if you are questioning me.