Today's shooting in America thread

As an American with an American wife and American kids in an American high school, with American friends, one couple who lost their American child in a mass shooting by an American, I will weigh in and say that — fundamentally — it is not the employment of guns by professional criminals that worries me. I can avoid bad parts of town. I can avoid doing things that might put me in contact with professional criminals who employ guns as a way to earn.

What I worry about is the crazy lunatic who is able to get his hands legally on a weapon that is designed to destroy as much as possible in as short a time as possible in a place where it one is normally and statistically less likely to be in harm’s way, and to go out in a blaze of “glory”. Yes, we should invest more in mental health or whatever, and yes, a determined imbalanced human on a suicide mission is going to find a way, but neither of these issues erases the line on what kind of weapon I can and cannot buy legally. Why is the line drawn where it is, and why not more strictly?

The legal access to certain kinds of weapons that can kill faster and more aggressively is my worry — not 2A, not the Pandora’s box. I am in no position to determine what specific types of weapons should and should not be allowed to be purchased by a consumer. Perhaps the gun expert on this thread can opine on his view.
 
Last edited:
As an American with an American wife and American kids in an American high school, with American friends, one couple who lost their American child in a mass shooting by an American, I will weigh in and say that — fundamentally — it is not the employment of guns by professional criminals that worries me. I can avoid bad parts of town. I can avoid doing things that might put me in contact with professional criminals who employ guns as a way to earn.

What I worry about is the crazy lunatic who is able to get his hands legally on a weapon that is designed to destroy as much as possible in as short a time as possible in a place where it one is normally and statistically less likely to be in harm’s way, and to go out in a blaze of “glory”. Yes, we should invest more in mental health or whatever, and yes, a determined imbalanced human on a suicide mission is going to find a way, but neither of these issues erases the line on what kind of weapon I can and cannot buy legally. Why is the line drawn where it is, and why not more strictly?

The legal access to certain kinds of weapons that can kill faster and more aggressively is my worry — not 2A, not the Pandora’s box. I am in no position to determine what specific types of weapons should and should not be allowed to be purchased by a consumer. Perhaps the gun expert on this thread can opine on his view.
I have an idea how about you can only legally own weapons that were available when the 2A was written , I presume that would be single shot muskets but as I know Jack about American constitution amendment history I could well be wrong .
 
Because THAT is what it’s all about, right???

UFB!
In many cases it absolutely is what it's all about.

That aside, the firearms industry in the USA is worth around $20 BILLION A YEAR. It's no surprise that the industry and the NRA are ACTIVELY promoting fear of violent crime. They have created an artificial arms race between the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys' and the proliferation of firearms in the USA has a direct lineage to this promotion of fear.

That's the real problem.
 
I have an idea how about you can only legally own weapons that were available when the 2A was written , I presume that would be single shot muskets but as I know Jack about American constitution amendment history I could well be wrong .
I have one!
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.