RedRocket1647545505

Neither did I. I'm asking how you KNOW that popular (read: Majority) opinion is anti-AR15? What data can you cite? You, yourself, have stated that the CDC is not allow to collect data on such things due to the Dickey amendment. So how do you know it's the majority opinion? I imagine if you are to poll the people you tend to hang around, then yea, it probably sounds like the majority of people are anti-AR15. However, if we were to do the same around the folks I tend to hang around, then it would seem the majority of people are pro-AR15. I'm not ignoring the public outcry; I'm ignoring the Left's outcry. And there usually tends to be a lot of it. And again, how do you know the minority opinion is anti-gun control? Should we use the same polls that OVERWHELMINGLY predicted the 2016 election? I hear they were pretty accurate in their pro-Left assessment. :gabe:

How do you know this without your CDC research?

Tell them not to take you to Grant. We don't take children and we're full anyways.

I don't necessarily agree with argument that everyone with any mental illness should have to be scrutinized. There are obviously varying levels of mental illness. Some Seasonal Affective Disorder hardly means you're the next school shooter. A history of violence? Well, that's probably a little more in line with what we should be watching for. And if you're mad about medical records not interlacing with the NICS system; thank HIPAA.

I'm for this as a first line of defense. I don't understand why this would be so difficult. Yea, it would be pricey, but not outrageous. What are your kids worth to you? inb4 Some sort of mandate is passed by Congress for this and the supplies/install are done by a company affiliated with.........a member of the .gov #Halliburton

Lol. This thread got real funny, real quick.

That's the only way we're different?

http://image.pennlive.com/home/penn-media/width600/img/daily-buzz/photo/2018/01/12/tide-pod-challenge-has-teens-popping-poisonous-laundry-pods-in-their-mouthsjpg-a409c4cfc605f538.jpg :gabe:

:dumb:

I agree, buying modded b16 honda civics IS a stupid road to go down. See, we agree on something.

Their intent is to increase rate of fire at the severe loss of accuracy. They do not change the internal function of the gun. Its still one bullet per trigger pull.

Clearly wasn't a very educated one.

Are we going to hold car dealers to that same standard if the person they sell to gets drunk and kills someone?

Which the bump stock still does not do. Vegas guy could have done a lot more damage without one. As with most of these morons who commit these murders, they have proven themselves over and over to not be 'gun guys'. Some of the stupid shit they do (besides the whole murder thing) blows my mind.

Umm. Did he not pass the Federal Background check? WTF else are they supposed to do, start stereotyping and discriminating? I could see how well that would go. "Well, you're a black guy and your kind tends to shoot each other, so I'm not gonna sell this to you even though you jumped through all the hoops the .gov put in place."

Depending on how this is written, it could be very encompassing and not so good for other things in the industry. Want a better trigger? Nope, can't do that. Want a magazine release? Nope, no more of those either. Buffers, springs, gas blocks, etc; all potentially on the chopping block as they can affect the cyclic rate of a semi-auto firearm. If it just specifically states 'bump stocks', fine, I'll take the hit on that even though I think it's pointless (as well as the stocks themselves) legislation. But, if it says any device capable of increasing the rate of fire, well then, I've got a big issue with that.

I couldn't agree more.

Because the NRA is responsible for these shootings.

Never said that. I also never see the US military firing on civilians.

Can someone tell me the last time the US Military won a war against a guerrilla army? Seems to me that's been quite a big problem for them since, what? Vietnam? Korea? They have a hard time killing what isn't wearing a uniform.

While I agree that might work for preventing GUN violence, I don't see how that is going to prevent violence in general. Also, If all of mine are secure in a safe, why should I have to give them up? I also agree that there are no .gov solutions.

I'm standing at ground zero 3-4 days a week. My clarity is pretty good.

I'd never be opposed to it if it addressed the root problem. Honest question. What do you propose?

I'm arguing for inches? I'm arguing to stop the bleeding, not put a fucking bandaid on it.

My point was that it's still a raging problem despite there being a total ban. It again goes back to the American mindset these days. People want what they want, immediately. I can't tell you how many people I run into in my profession that expect to be pain-free. That's not a reasonable request despite the average American thinking it is. We have this mindset that there's a pill for everything. I'm in pain, I take a pill. I still have pain, I take more pills (than the physician prescribes). Still pain? More pills. Oh shit, I'm now physically and psychologically dependent on them. I'll do that until I can't afford it anymore. Then I'll turn to heroin. From that point, I might have 3 years to live. Pain has never killed anyone. Heronin kills most. Thank your .gov for the prescription drug problem.