This is the gun control legislation Mitch McConnell won't allow senators to vote on

No, they don’t

 

Which is exactly what I said.

And using mother joned as a reference means you dont have a valid reference.

 

Even if you look at 2018 totals there were 27 incidents
https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-incidents-in-the-us-2018-041019.pdf/view

Comparing that to the FBI data the highest record of incidents was 26 so Trumps record STILL beats out Obama’s

 

MJ may be left wing but it has done good research here

There are other sites saying the same thing

Now where is your link?

 

55 people were shot in Chicago last weekend. Baltimore just went over 200 homicides for the year. ~ 60,000 people are dying from opiod overdoses every year.

 

How many mass shooters in Chicago last weekend used legally purchased guns ??

 

Why would I need a link saying the exact same thing you said? The vast majority of weapons are purchased from an ffl or obtained illegally, I cant think of one where the firearm was purchased from an individual.

 

Can you proved that information?

 

I said the same thing as you?
I suggest wiping your glasses and reading again

 

Source of guns used in mass shootings

https://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/

 

Ah! Here it is statistica

https://www.statista.com/statistics/476461/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-legality-of-shooters-weapons/
MAJORITY MASS SHOOTING THE WEAPON WAS LEGALLY PURCHASED

 

Only nitwits think that a background check will prevent a mass shooter or any other murderer.

 

Zero.

 

Some folks think that 980,000 more guns laws will do the trick.

 

IMO the last thing a person should do in such a situation is to start shooting at the original shooter. That is because he might miss and hit someone else then the cops will think that there are multiple shooters and kill everyone who has a gun. That is especially true if the good guy isn't a white guy.

 

Have you ever read your State Constitution Bill of Rights?

 

It sure would nice if people knew that they have State Constitutions as well as the crappy-written federal Constitution. Read your Bill of Rights in your State Constitution.

edit typo

 

I don't have an answer to this dilemma. I wish I did. I am caught in the middle as a gun owning progressive. On the one hand I adhere to, and seek to uphold, the 2nd amendment. OTOH, I can admit that it was all too easy for me to obtain the firearms I do own, and I live in California. There is a lot of rhetoric about "rights". Fair enough. But, I would be ready to give up my unabridged "right" to own what I own if it meant I had to answer a few questions every year as to my mental status. Is that too much to ask? Shouldn't we, as a society, be able to ask a couple of questions before bestowing on someone a weapon that can kill multiples very quickly? Again, I don't have the answers. I own the same firearms that can kill hundreds of people very quickly. I kill paper targets. That's all I would ever kill unless my life, or the lives of my family, were threatened. Tragic, that all this $hit is. And I don't have an answer as to why we can't come together to stop it, or even what "stopping it" looks like.

 

Chances are your specific State Constitution Bill of Rights doesn't say anything about a well-regulated militia. Read it.

edit typo

 

And another useless propaganda site.

Even taking your source as honest, it's not saying anything I havent already said.

Half of mass shootings were someone not legally allowed to own a firearm. I can think of several off the top of my head. Most of them still purchased from an ffl though because govt didnt do its job.

1/3 had red flags. I'm surprised this wasnt much higher. But it also leads to the question of which mass shootings a propaganda site uses and how they define it.

 

What does the New Hampshire State Constitution say about this?

“Text of Article 10:
Right of Revolution

Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.”
https://ballotpedia.org/Part_First,_New_Hampshire_Constitution

 

And where is your link? If you are disputing my sources, of which I have found three independent sources then you need to Do better than “I Don fink so”

 

I don’t want to hear about some ancient legislation

The question is “if guns are essential to maintain freedom then how and when are they to be deployed?

I am sure the El Paso shooter thought he was doing what he did for the good of the country

 

- "gun free Zones", huhh.. ~ equates in my mind to 'targets of opportunity for sick f-cks to operate indiscriminately - An EVIL unmitigated Satanic Scourge! (innatimate object confiscation / political strategery leveraging isn't the issue if U think about it)

- Open & / or concealed carry states (such as mine - while on the (north) E-coast ) don't seem to have a problem with the wanton gun violence.

- If more "law abiding individuals" like U & I ARE or have even the mere "potentiality" of being armed does this incentivise or disinctivise a 'would be armed criminal'????

- if there is a rather assuredness of encountering a likely unarmed & law-abiding populace (in a criminal's minds eye) - does this 1.) incentivize or 2.) disincentivise an (obviously & illicitly) armed criminal element to be more or less active in their illegality?

Hey... I'm not exactly preaching to to you... Just asking some VERY germain questions that our state legislators seem rather flummoxed / disingenuously & 'pantomomingly' vague A-booot - A?

We all cringe at this subject, I know this is Very 'raw' for all of us - however, I make no apologies for broaching the subject! Please opine PF...

 

You DO know don’t you that there is little evidence supported the contention that shooter choose targets based on whether or not they are gun free zones