Big shooting at Mandalay Bay casino in Las Vegas.

Discussion in 'The Duck Hunters Forum' started by Bear, Oct 2, 2017.

  1. buck_master_2001

    buck_master_2001 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,914
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Location:
    Southern Mitten
    Of course we there would still be killings. Would there be less or more? Have the laws on the books had zero impact on the amount of killings?
     
  2. H20DAD

    H20DAD Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,306
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    I am, by price, as you are limited in your weapons by purchasing power and yet, the founding fathers wrote the 2nd saying the "right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". They didn't say only guns. They didn't say no cannons. They said "the right to bear arms, shall not be infringed."

    Sorry that doesn't fit your narrative.
     
  3. buck_master_2001

    buck_master_2001 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,914
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Location:
    Southern Mitten
    So everyone should own anything they want? There should be no laws? There would be more or less crime if so?
     
  4. H20DAD

    H20DAD Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,306
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    There would be less crime. Plenty of data to back that up.

    I posted this earlier in the thread but tons of posts occurred and many people missed it. So I'll add it here again.

    Here is what compromise looks like.

    Bump stocks go bye bye.

    All other state and city level gun control also goes bye bye. Included no concealed weapon permit for anyone anywhere. So all citizens can carry and defend themselves in any state at any time if they can legally own a firearm. No felons owning fire arms, mental cases, etc.

    And tons of lives would be saved, imo. Even gang bangers in Chicago.

    That guy in the hotel room would have stopped shooting the second anyone shot back at him. Heck, it is likely he stopped shooting because of an unarmed security guard.

    Another thing we can all agree on the loser shooter was a coward.
     
  5. buck_master_2001

    buck_master_2001 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,914
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Location:
    Southern Mitten
    So in your opinion there would be less crime with zero gun laws and we allowed every violent criminal to legally walk in and buy any gun they want and carry them around wherever they want? Machine guns, doesn’t matter. Less crime, eh?
     
  6. H20DAD

    H20DAD Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,306
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Reread what I posted.
     
  7. stevena198301

    stevena198301 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,281
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2015
    Location:
    HSV, Alabama
    I'd say it wouldn't change (especially for an event like we just saw). Not until you get rid of the real problem: People willing to commit acts of violence to make a name for themselves, or settle their agenda.
     
    tcc and OneShotBandit like this.
  8. widgeon

    widgeon Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,833
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Location:
    Ga
    Hey, you obviously have no idea what either one of us is talking about.
     
  9. buck_master_2001

    buck_master_2001 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,914
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Location:
    Southern Mitten
    That will never change. Do you think ANYONE. Should be able to own ANY awesome they want? Without restrictions of any sort? Children, felons, anyone? No laws just the wild Wild West? We would be safer as a country?
     
  10. seiowa

    seiowa Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    889
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Location:
    Iowa
    Haha i was kidding man. That seems to be the battle cry of quite a few on here, gun control laws will never be worth 2 shiz because killers gonna kill no matter what.

    I understand and even agree with most other reasonings behind gun liberty. The inclusion of 2a in the constitution, the wording of 2a, self defense, the stats in "gun free zones". (again I am not lobbying for more gun control. I'm not even lobbying for giving up bumpstocks. My stance is to merely point out that once in a while it may benefit us in the long run and politically to compromise when the situation warrants it).

    But the "doesn't mater what the laws are, killers gonna kill" thing has got to be one of the dumbest arguments that advocates doing nothing at all. I get everyone has a boner for 2a because CONSTITUTION and MURICA but come on, you can't view it THAT differently from other things when you start taking the angle of "law breaking is inevitable anyway..."

    Its stupid too because while its bordering on a logical fallacy, you can't get through to people with analogies about driving, texting, drugs, because "hur de dur durr not in the CONSTITUTION THO"
     
    buck_master_2001 likes this.

Share This Page