I've always thought these ideas could definitely help: 1. Mandatory safety training before first firearm purchase. 2. Contact employer/school to see if there are any red flags before initial purchase. 3. Close gun show loophole. 4. More extensive background check. 5. Mag capacity at ten rounds.
Just my .02.
Agreed. But there are too many people who want to ban all guns, or have no laws for guns at all. It’s asinine to think that either will be the realistic solution.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Handguns are the most common weapon type used in mass shootings in the United States, with a total of 146 different handguns being used in 98 incidents between 1982 and May 2022. These figures are calculated from a total of 128 reported cases over this period, meaning handguns are involved in about 77 percent of mass shootings.
The involvement of semi-automatic rifles in mass shootings
Owing to their use in several high-profile mass shootings, there has been much public discussion over suitability or necessity of assault weapons for the purpose of self-defense. While any definition of assault weapon is contentious, semi-automatic rifles are generally the main focus of debates around this issue. Since 1985 there has been a known total 50 mass shootings involving rifles, mostly semi-automatics. This figure is underreported though, as it excludes the multiple semi-automatic (and fully automatic) rifles used in the 2017 Las Vegas Strip massacre – the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, killing 58 and wounding 546. In fact, semi-automatic rifles were featured in four of the five deadliest mass shootings, being used in the Orlando nightclub massacre, Sandy Hook Elementary massacre and Texas First Baptist Church massacre
the problem with the above stat about handguns being the most used in mass shootings, is that "mass shooting" encompasses any shooting that involves 4 or 5 or more casualties, which, for the most part, unless it involves a wealthy white family, no one hears about those. we are obviously talking about "super mass shootings" (my term for purposes of this discussion), where a dozen or two dozens are killed. Often children. Church goers. Concert goers. Grocery shoppers.
CHILDREN. like, seriously. Freaking CHILDREN. 18 kids wouldn't have been killed if an AR15 didn't exist in its current capability. If you can get an AR15 that is CAPABLE of housing a cartridge with more than 5 rounds, you are still going to have these issues. people will still get their hands on the cartridge or modify it or whatever. you get rid of the delivery system; much more difficult to use it.
that's like making tanks legal but the ammunition illegal. someone will find a way to get that ammo for it. the tank? not so much.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
You missed the point.
Why ban AR15 when they can just buy any dozen of other similar guns instead? So don’t ban a gun based on name or what it looks like. Ban the features you don’t like the gun.
If the result is you get a gun that looks like an AR15, but has a fixed magazine of 5 rounds and doesn’t have the capacity to kill dozens of people, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
Not AR-15’s. Assault weapons.
There are a ton of AR-15 knockoffs. Banning a model just means it’s tweaked soit’s different enough to get around a ban.
these shooters are using cheap bushmasters mostly. Banning an AR-15 keeps those legal . XM-15 is one
AR-15 = AR-15 and everything resembling one...do I really need to have all the details at this point? I certainly didn't mean ban all AR-15s but not look a likes
Yes. Because saying you want to ban an AR-5 means you want to by 1 specific rifle. If that’s not what you want, say ban assault rifles. There’s plenty of assault rifles with the same capabilities of an AR15 that don’t “resemble” and AR15.
Its like saying I want to ban menthol cigarettes when I really mean ban all tobacco products. There’s a big difference.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
You missed the point.
Why ban AR15 when they can just buy any dozen of other similar guns instead? So don’t ban a gun based on name or what it looks like. Ban the features you don’t like the gun.
If the result is you get a gun that looks like an AR15, but has a fixed magazine of 5 rounds and doesn’t have the capacity to kill dozens of people, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
I own guns. But there should be stricter laws for owning them. Plus very harsh penalties for breaking those laws. I would absolutely argue that the short barrel foldable stock AR-15 style guns should be discussed about being banned for civilian use. The only reason for such is close quarter battle and concealment, neither of which should apply to any civilian. Longer traditional barrels are very hard to conceal, and are not meant to do so. Restricting magazine capacity is a great idea, but not just for AR. There are handguns that do have 21 round clips… But the anti gun nuts only want guns completely banned, and the crazy gun zealots don’t want any restrictions. We need to talk about reasonable solutions!!!
Oh, and please tell the criminals that they need to follow the laws too, and not use high capacity mags. And the government to not permit criminals to be released from jail 19-20 times and carry on the subways…
More passion about shutting him down and scolding him about "this is not the place to do that" then they have for protecting the elementary school aged kids in their towns.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
Not AR-15’s. Assault weapons.
There are a ton of AR-15 knockoffs. Banning a model just means it’s tweaked soit’s different enough to get around a ban.
these shooters are using cheap bushmasters mostly. Banning an AR-15 keeps those legal . XM-15 is one
AR-15 = AR-15 and everything resembling one...do I really need to have all the details at this point? I certainly didn't mean ban all AR-15s but not look a likes
Yes. Because saying you want to ban an AR-5 means you want to by 1 specific rifle. If that’s not what you want, say ban assault rifles. There’s plenty of assault rifles with the same capabilities of an AR15 that don’t “resemble” and AR15.
Its like saying I want to ban menthol cigarettes when I really mean ban all tobacco products. There’s a big difference.
And here comes the debate about semantics to avoid the reality that 19 kids just got killed because an 18 year old had access to a weapon that could kill 21 people in the matter of seconds.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
You missed the point.
Why ban AR15 when they can just buy any dozen of other similar guns instead? So don’t ban a gun based on name or what it looks like. Ban the features you don’t like the gun.
If the result is you get a gun that looks like an AR15, but has a fixed magazine of 5 rounds and doesn’t have the capacity to kill dozens of people, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
I own guns. But there should be stricter laws for owning them. Plus very harsh penalties for breaking those laws. I would absolutely argue that the short barrel foldable stock AR-15 style guns should be discussed about being banned for civilian use. The only reason for such is close quarter battle and concealment, neither of which should apply to any civilian. Longer traditional barrels are very hard to conceal, and are not meant to do so. Restricting magazine capacity is a great idea, but not just for AR. There are handguns that do have 21 round clips… But the anti gun nuts only want guns completely banned, and the crazy gun zealots don’t want any restrictions. We need to talk about reasonable solutions!!!
There are handguns w 50 round clips but nobody is buying those.
Everyone wants to ban things. If you make it a little harder to get and maybe cost a little more then 99% of these mass shootings would stop.
If you want to stop gun deaths in general then you'd have to ban every firearm out there.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
Not AR-15’s. Assault weapons.
There are a ton of AR-15 knockoffs. Banning a model just means it’s tweaked soit’s different enough to get around a ban.
these shooters are using cheap bushmasters mostly. Banning an AR-15 keeps those legal . XM-15 is one
AR-15 = AR-15 and everything resembling one...do I really need to have all the details at this point? I certainly didn't mean ban all AR-15s but not look a likes
Yes. Because saying you want to ban an AR-5 means you want to by 1 specific rifle. If that’s not what you want, say ban assault rifles. There’s plenty of assault rifles with the same capabilities of an AR15 that don’t “resemble” and AR15.
Its like saying I want to ban menthol cigarettes when I really mean ban all tobacco products. There’s a big difference.
And here comes the debate about semantics to avoid the reality that 19 kids just got killed because an 18 year old had access to a weapon that could kill 21 people in the matter of seconds.
yep...every fucking time. At least they haven't suggested that we think the "AR" in AR-15 means assault rifle yet but that should be coming soon.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
You missed the point.
Why ban AR15 when they can just buy any dozen of other similar guns instead? So don’t ban a gun based on name or what it looks like. Ban the features you don’t like the gun.
If the result is you get a gun that looks like an AR15, but has a fixed magazine of 5 rounds and doesn’t have the capacity to kill dozens of people, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
I own guns. But there should be stricter laws for owning them. Plus very harsh penalties for breaking those laws. I would absolutely argue that the short barrel foldable stock AR-15 style guns should be discussed about being banned for civilian use. The only reason for such is close quarter battle and concealment, neither of which should apply to any civilian. Longer traditional barrels are very hard to conceal, and are not meant to do so. Restricting magazine capacity is a great idea, but not just for AR. There are handguns that do have 21 round clips… But the anti gun nuts only want guns completely banned, and the crazy gun zealots don’t want any restrictions. We need to talk about reasonable solutions!!!
There are handguns w 50 round clips but nobody is buying those.
Everyone wants to ban things. If you make it a little harder to get and maybe cost a little more then 99% of these mass shootings would stop.
If you want to stop gun deaths in general then you'd have to ban every firearm out there.
What scared me too, was the people who took the firearms class that i took. There are definitely people out there that should not be trying to shoot a gun… It might be a Constitutional right, but OMG. You need to pair that right with an active brain and IQ level… And to have some states with no requirement for carry conceal is scary.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
Ahhh yes that one. The family said it, not him. When he was alive they use to use him as an expert witness on AR-15's vs an assault rifle also if I am not mistaken for court cases.
Silly me to think that everyone who keeps claiming they want to ban AR15s, many of whom know very little about guns, actually don’t mean ban AR15s. And semantics are important. If you want to ban assault rifles, then you need to be able to clearly define what an assault rifle is. But bringing up these questions usually just gets criticism. But yet only 1 side ever gets blamed for lack of change.
Silly me to think that everyone who keeps claiming they want to ban AR15s, many of whom know very little about guns, actually don’t mean ban AR15s. And semantics are important. If you want to ban assault rifles, then you need to be able to clearly define what an assault rifle is. But bringing up these questions usually just gets criticism. But yet only 1 side ever gets blamed for lack of change.
LOL....we aren't writing legislation on these boards. Silly to me to think that some of you can't make that connection.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
But yet when I mention ban the features of assault rifles and AR15s that you don’t like, the response is just “no, ban AR15s!” If it’s not a specifics gun you’re trying to ban, then why are you against banning the features you don’t like? I brought that up and you said no. Which, again, leads me to believe you just don’t like a specific gun.
But yet when I mention ban the features of assault rifles and AR15s that you don’t like, the response is just “no, ban AR15s!” If it’s not a specifics gun you’re trying to ban, then why are you against banning the features you don’t like? I brought that up and you said no. Which, again, leads me to believe you just don’t like a specific gun.
how about this? just ban all guns/cartriges with the CAPABILITIES of mass casualties without having to reload?
Silly me to think that everyone who keeps claiming they want to ban AR15s, many of whom know very little about guns, actually don’t mean ban AR15s. And semantics are important. If you want to ban assault rifles, then you need to be able to clearly define what an assault rifle is. But bringing up these questions usually just gets criticism. But yet only 1 side ever gets blamed for lack of change.
Ok, ban it all....and then lets start using semantics to see what we bring back. In?
Silly me to think that everyone who keeps claiming they want to ban AR15s, many of whom know very little about guns, actually don’t mean ban AR15s. And semantics are important. If you want to ban assault rifles, then you need to be able to clearly define what an assault rifle is. But bringing up these questions usually just gets criticism. But yet only 1 side ever gets blamed for lack of change.
LOL....we aren't writing legislation on these boards. Silly to me to think that some of you can't make that connection.
Exactly...here I'm assuming that people paid to write legislation will utilize experts to help determine the proper wording....
But yet when I mention ban the features of assault rifles and AR15s that you don’t like, the response is just “no, ban AR15s!” If it’s not a specifics gun you’re trying to ban, then why are you against banning the features you don’t like? I brought that up and you said no. Which, again, leads me to believe you just don’t like a specific gun.
Actually YOU said "we don't need to ban AR-15s" and I said "Yeah we need to ban AR-15s"
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I get where mace is coming from. he's trying to come up with solutions and is getting mocked by people who, let's be honest here, don't really know the specifics of what we are talking about. many of us know the point we want to get to, but we don't the specific verbiage.
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
Question... without trying to sound like a doosh... it's a legit question
What will it take for you to no longer be a "2A Guy?" And for my own understanding... what makes you a 2A guy?
What do you mean by “2A guy”? Do you mean stricter laws, or just owning guns in general?
I see the same circle every time this comes up. Most gun owners are okay with, or even want stronger gun laws and common sense laws. But when we disagree with 1 thing people lose their mind.
We don’t need to ban AR15s. One, from my understanding, they aren’t used in all these mass shootings which they are usually reported to have been used. That list that was posted earlier isn’t accurate. So it’s not like banning 1 gun is going to solve much. AR15 has become a common term to basically refer to assault rifles. It’s like saying Kleenex when you need a tissue.
Ive said before ban features. Ban high capacity magazines, or even detachable magazines. You can have an AR15, but with a fixed magazine of 5 rounds it poses a much smaller threat. But too often people want to ban a gun or features based off what it looks like and not the function.
Yeah we need to ban AR-15s....even the guy that invented them says so
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
But yet when I mention ban the features of assault rifles and AR15s that you don’t like, the response is just “no, ban AR15s!” If it’s not a specifics gun you’re trying to ban, then why are you against banning the features you don’t like? I brought that up and you said no. Which, again, leads me to believe you just don’t like a specific gun.
Actually YOU said "we don't need to ban AR-15s" and I said "Yeah we need to ban AR-15s"
he said that because there are (apparently) many types of guns similar to AR15's, but if you only ban AR15's, it does basically nothing. hence his Kleenex analogy. AR15 is the trademark, not the type.
But yet when I mention ban the features of assault rifles and AR15s that you don’t like, the response is just “no, ban AR15s!” If it’s not a specifics gun you’re trying to ban, then why are you against banning the features you don’t like? I brought that up and you said no. Which, again, leads me to believe you just don’t like a specific gun.
Actually YOU said "we don't need to ban AR-15s" and I said "Yeah we need to ban AR-15s"
he said that because there are (apparently) many types of guns similar to AR15's, but if you only ban AR15's, it does basically nothing. hence his Kleenex analogy. AR15 is the trademark, not the type.
Right...and again, we aren't writing legislation here. I don't want to type 1000 words for every kleenex that needs to be listed. Don't we all get that point?
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
What kind of country and citizenry allows this to continue to happen?
a country in which the supreme court didn’t even rule on an individuals right to own a gun until 2008
Yep, that’s true.if you actually read the second amendment it makes more sense as to why an individual right had never been recognised. I suspect a lot of pro gun people don’t actually read it though
the old west had more gun control than today. Blanket bans inside cities was common
an individual right to own a gun has been recognised for less time than a right to an abortion. Saying it’s set in stone or not open to revision isn’t true
That depends on how you define gun control. The gun laws back then more often applied to open or concealed carrying in public. But purchasing and tracking firearms was much more free. Today you don’t have to register a gun made before 1898, and pretty much any other laws that apply like a wait period. I always assumed that’s because that’s when they started keeping records, but I could be wrong.
A lot of those restrictions today, like waiting period, registration, background checks are bypassed by private sales or gun shows
so basically laws already in place that have pretty broad agreement have loopholes so large it renders the laws pointless
if I’m a crazy person who would get flagged in a background check, illl just go to a gun show instead
I didn’t even know that gunshow loophole was a thing because all the states I’ve lived in have the same requirements at a gunshow or private party saw as a gun store would. I think the number of states with that loophole is getting smaller.
I could go to a flea market this weekend and come back with an arsenal without ever even showing anyone my ID.
I did that in Florida when I lived there and thought that was nuts and I'm a 2A guy...
We are all "2A guys"....the problem is how we define the 2nd amendment. An amendment which was based on weapons that took a minute to load a single round.
Claiming the 2A keeps us safe from tyranny is just moronic.
Comments
https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used/
Handguns are the most common weapon type used in mass shootings in the United States, with a total of 146 different handguns being used in 98 incidents between 1982 and May 2022. These figures are calculated from a total of 128 reported cases over this period, meaning handguns are involved in about 77 percent of mass shootings.
The involvement of semi-automatic rifles in mass shootings
Owing to their use in several high-profile mass shootings, there has been much public discussion over suitability or necessity of assault weapons for the purpose of self-defense. While any definition of assault weapon is contentious, semi-automatic rifles are generally the main focus of debates around this issue. Since 1985 there has been a known total 50 mass shootings involving rifles, mostly semi-automatics. This figure is underreported though, as it excludes the multiple semi-automatic (and fully automatic) rifles used in the 2017 Las Vegas Strip massacre – the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, killing 58 and wounding 546. In fact, semi-automatic rifles were featured in four of the five deadliest mass shootings, being used in the Orlando nightclub massacre, Sandy Hook Elementary massacre and Texas First Baptist Church massacrethe problem with the above stat about handguns being the most used in mass shootings, is that "mass shooting" encompasses any shooting that involves 4 or 5 or more casualties, which, for the most part, unless it involves a wealthy white family, no one hears about those. we are obviously talking about "super mass shootings" (my term for purposes of this discussion), where a dozen or two dozens are killed. Often children. Church goers. Concert goers. Grocery shoppers.
CHILDREN. like, seriously. Freaking CHILDREN. 18 kids wouldn't have been killed if an AR15 didn't exist in its current capability. If you can get an AR15 that is CAPABLE of housing a cartridge with more than 5 rounds, you are still going to have these issues. people will still get their hands on the cartridge or modify it or whatever. you get rid of the delivery system; much more difficult to use it.
that's like making tanks legal but the ammunition illegal. someone will find a way to get that ammo for it. the tank? not so much.
www.headstonesband.com
Beto O'Rourke just lit into Abbot
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
www.headstonesband.com
So don’t ban a gun based on name or what it looks like. Ban the features you don’t like the gun.
If the result is you get a gun that looks like an AR15, but has a fixed magazine of 5 rounds and doesn’t have the capacity to kill dozens of people, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
Its like saying I want to ban menthol cigarettes when I really mean ban all tobacco products. There’s a big difference.
Oh, and please tell the criminals that they need to follow the laws too, and not use high capacity mags. And the government to not permit criminals to be released from jail 19-20 times and carry on the subways…
Fuck those people
Everyone wants to ban things. If you make it a little harder to get and maybe cost a little more then 99% of these mass shootings would stop.
If you want to stop gun deaths in general then you'd have to ban every firearm out there.
For civilian use....yes
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
And to have some states with no requirement for carry conceal is scary.
And semantics are important. If you want to ban assault rifles, then you need to be able to clearly define what an assault rifle is. But bringing up these questions usually just gets criticism. But yet only 1 side ever gets blamed for lack of change.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
If it’s not a specifics gun you’re trying to ban, then why are you against banning the features you don’t like? I brought that up and you said no. Which, again, leads me to believe you just don’t like a specific gun.
www.headstonesband.com
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
www.headstonesband.com
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
www.headstonesband.com
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana