Mass Shooting at DK premiere in CO!

[giovanni_hotel]

Fast and Furious didn't buy guns and sell them to Mexican drug cartels. AG Holder and ATF was only monitoring sales from gun dealers along the border. Yes there was an ATF agent who suggested they actually buy guns and track their movement, but that wasn't ATF policy.

It's ironic that in every case, (RR, Waco, FF), people who were expressly breaking the law have become cult icons on the right.

If the Feds say you illegally own firearms, fight them in COURT. That's how the system works.

You don't get in a shootout with ATF agents.

[bobvela]

Too many Americans nowadays are against reasonable restrictions on gun ownership.

Like what? in your ideal country... what kind of 'reasonable' restrictions would have prevented this or other mass shootings? Lord knows laws against murder, attempted murder, firing a firearm within city limits didn't stop this... what laws do you see that would?

It's easier to get a driver's license than it is to own a gun. That's really fucked up.

Sure, when getting a drivers license generally requires a test or two and a photo taken... buying a gun from a Federal Firearm Licensed dealer (ie every pawn shop or gun store) requires a federal background check.

The only people who should be allowed to own high caliber semiautomatic weapons are the military and police.

First up... define 'high caliber'... because I suspect you don't even understand what a 'semiautomatic weapon' is or just what portion of firearms would be covered by your desired ban.

The guns rights advocates have turned into another version of the religious moral majority.

Know the difference between the religious folks and the gun folks? While the religious folks generally bicker about which is the right faith or try to push their views into the schools or public square... we, the 'gun rights advocates' have already won... the majority of the US population is against increased firearm regulation... and keep winning in court (see DC v Heller & McDonald v Chicago for a start).

Gun ownership has become an article of faith instead of an issue of public safety.

Because it's not a major public safety issue... too often people point to the raw # of firearm deaths and ignore the shear number of firearms and owners in this country... the vast vast vast vast vast majority of which are owned and used in a legal manner.

[bobvela]

Fast and Furious didn't buy guns and sell them to Mexican drug cartels.

Yes... because doing so is the only way to arm them.

AG Holder and ATF was only monitoring sales from gun dealers along the border.

Um... it went a bit further than monitoring.

Go chat with an FFL some time... most firearm purchases are single buys, using a credit card... or cash (though if plastic is used, the chances of a multiple buy is higher).

A buyer coming in with a grocery bag full of cash... and buying a dozen firearms at a time tends to be suspicious... something that was happening at some gun stores in the south... being suspicious of these being straw purchases, the ATF was consulted... and told the FFL dealers to allow the sales to happen... assuring the FFLs that the purchases would be monitored after they left the store.

Guess what didn't happen?

Yes there was an ATF agent who suggested they actually buy guns and track their movement, but that wasn't ATF policy.

It's ironic that in every case, (RR, Waco, FF), people who were expressly breaking the law have become cult icons on the right.

You mean that Ruby Ridge & Waco are seen as cult icons to certain limited elements of the fringe right... and that Fast and Furious outrages any reasonably thinking person be they left or right.... right?

[quote=giovanni_hotel;1174364]If the Feds say you illegally own firearms, fight them in COURT. That's how the system works.

Going to court should not be required to guarantee your rights (yes it is a last step, it should not however be a require step if the system functions properly)... most people expect to be left alone and not have to expend the massive time and financial costs of going to court.

You don't get in a shootout with ATF agents.

I was unaware that anyone here was advocating that... in general it's a bad idea to shoot at any law enforcement officer (be they in the right or not) as they have the force of law and a badge on their side.

[yodajazz]

Eh, shit happens. With the state of the world and the dispositions of the majority of the people in it, I'm only shocked this type of thing doesn't occur more.

Here's where your/our thoughts go wrong. How many people commit crimes out of 6-7 billion people? How many people in the 300 million or so people in the US are mass murderers? Then look at other traits. How many people, consider themselves to have been in love? How many people are sexually attracted to someone else? When you look at the real truth, Love is the rule of human behavior. I would guess, that even this murderer loved things. He just loves the wrong things, things that were destructive, rather that things that lead to constructive ends. Lots of people think that things a destructive when they are not. Thus you get people saying we should kill 1.4 billion Muslims when at least 90% of them are peaceful. Coincidently, the vast majority of them are having a lot of sex, producing lots of children. Love, is the rule of human behavior. That is why these things dont happen more often. I must add, that Love is about anything a person loves to do, not just just sex.

[Prospero]

So much bullshit after the slaughter of innocent people. May they rest in peace.

Even the candidates while offering platitudes about the tragedy refuse to even discuss the issue of gun control.

it was noted by - I think Atlantic monthly - that in the 48 hours since the slaughter 100 other people died as a result of guns in the US. In that same period NOT ONE person in the UK died through guns. The reason. We have very rigorous and tough control of guns.

How long will it take for the US to face up to the fact that it is the use of and ownership of guns that permits such mass killings to take place.

[giovanni_hotel]

The Assault Weapons Ban Act,(The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act), signed into law under Clinton in 1994 with bipartisan congressional support, expired in 2004 and most political wonks don't think there's a chance in hell that bill would be signed into law today, all thanks to the NRA.

The AR-15, a civilian version of the M-16, would have been covered under the Assault Weapons Ban Act, and would have been banned as an 'semiautomatic assault weapon', so yes this particular attack could have been prevented with more effective laws in place.

80-90 million Americans own roughly 270 million firearms, and we Americans buy over half of all the firearms sold worldwide(2007).

The sheer number of firearms circulating through this country is mind boggling.
Why??

[Prospero]

NRA responsible for more deaths than al-Queda IMHO

[bobvela]

The Assault Weapons Ban Act,(The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act), signed into law under Clinton in 1994 with bipartisan congressional support, expired in 2004 and most political wonks don't think there's a chance in hell that bill would be signed into law today, all thanks to the NRA.

Really? You think so? Get ready to be proven wrong!

The AR-15, a civilian version of the M-16, would have been covered under the Assault Weapons Ban Act, and would have been banned as an 'semiautomatic assault weapon', so yes this particular attack could have been prevented with more effective laws in place.

In the form that I expect the AR-15 in question was in... maybe... however the actual aspects of the law... what actually makes something an 'assault weapon' are relatively easy to get around.

Case in point... one area that was regulated was a 'pistol grip’ on a rifle (Oooo, scary! Someone might swing the rifle and take an eye out!)

With a little work (or aftermarket part (readily available)) an AR-15 receiver (the part with the serial number and the only part considered a 'firearm') can utilize a 'thumbhole stock'... which suddenly removes the 'pistol grip' definition from applying to a given rifle... never mind the fact that it shoots and handles exactly the same.

Hell... a few years ago a friend and I each purchased a Romanian version of the AK-47 (WASR-10)... while both legal at the time as is... he modified his to have a thumbhole stock (which would make it fully legal under the assault weapon ban)... while I modified mine with a telescoping stock (which in addition to the existing pistol grip, would have made it extra illegal/regulated under the assault weapons ban).

Let's go back... did the AWB prevent what you would call an 'assault rifle’ from being sold? Not really. The firearm makers slimily looked at the law, and made sure that what they built and sold was legal under it. The law (thankfully) was poorly written... and was about as effective as a law which required that all cars sold in the US have at least 20% of it’s parts manufactured in the US... the result... non-compliant cars are quickly upgraded by those with money to a compliant status!

80-90 million Americans own roughly 270 million firearms, and we Americans buy over half of all the firearms sold worldwide(2007).

The sheer number of firearms circulating through this country is mind boggling.
Why??

Thanks! You are helping to prove my point... despite (based on your numbers(from a source I'd be interested to see)) 270 million guns… in a nation of what? 310 million people... and we have how few mass shootings? When you compare the #’s in this country against those in other countries with tight gun control (or much smaller populations)... we are doing quite well... even if such one of shootings are a tragic event.

[GroobySteven]

I just still can't believe you invoke a 250 year old law as your RIGHT - clearly out of date and open to interpretation. It's no different to the Christians using the Bible as justification to bash gays or ban abortions or Muslim's using their version of the Koran to stone a woman to death or walk into a crowd with bombs strapped to them.

[Prospero]

I just still can't believe you invoke a 250 year old law as your RIGHT - clearly out of date and open to interpretation. It's no different to the Christians using the Bible as justification to bash gays or ban abortions or Muslim's using their version of the Koran to stone a woman to death or walk into a crowd with bombs strapped to them.