What Is An Assault Weapon?

So we should have no laws. Got it.

 

We don't need the 2nd to defend against tyranny.

 

"I" am not Biden. I've already said, IN this thread, that I think President Biden is misspending political capitol on an issue that is going no where.

Well, there you go again ... "you"??? WE, U.S. very definately need research to know why we are failing, where we are succeeding (all gun law hasn't failed, as I've demonstrated with links above) and how. WE, U.S. needs research into all of that to better understand how to MOVE forward.

But, why, how have we succeeded, where have we failed. There has been NO research to build on.

No, BUT we have examined those failures and are, in spite of heavy head winds, learning from them and better prepared to meet the future.

Yet you've offered NOTHING but opinion in that regard.

Interesting.

"I" already pointed some of that out. Let me point out that the 30's were a long time ago and the NRA was a very different NRA then.

Again, defending the Second Amendment isn't mutually exclusive to helping find a solution to OUR gun violence epidemic.

Or make it correct.

That's just silly, if laws didn't help we wouldn't have them. You keep harping on that point but, again, provide NOTHING but opinion.

 

It could be much better worded, but yeah, we do need something like it; the brevity of OUR Constitution proves the Founders didn't waste words, trying not to step on the Constitution they were attempting to create led to some difficult wording, but at it's core OUR Constitution IS the GREATEST Document EVER created by man FOR mankind ... all of it.

 

why do you think that gun control as a proposed solution to violent crime-is almost exclusively a "solution" that is almost only supported by the left?

 

Because the "right" is wrapped around the axle ... notion ..., and without and real research to support or negate it, that ANY gun legislation is bad legislation.

 

1. You have stated

And I have shown you that is not true. They are for reasonable gun legislation. They will not promote anti 2nd amendment legislation.

2. I have shown you that over 600 new gun laws have been instituted since Sandy Hook. Most of which were supported by the NRA. Coupled with the 20K other gun laws on the books prior
Yet gun violence is still on the rise.

3. You can't name a single law that has stopped any crime it was written for as laws don't stop crime. They only hold those accountable.

So heres you chance to prove me wrong. What new gun law, that falls within the 2nd amendment, will stop gun violence or severally deter gunman from shooting up a school.
Since the death penalty doesn't work, what law do you think resolves the problem?

 

I don't remember the revolutionary war being fought with a 2nd.

 

Nor should they. Yes I over stated that, what I meant by, "the modern NRA has demonstrated the are against any and ALL gun regulation", is that they consistently oppose legislation for political apperance and have lobbied to curtail any research on the subject.

You have SHOWN ... ****. You have repeated your unsubstantiated opinion every chance you get.

Another opinion, that is false:
Report: States With Strong Laws See Less Gun Violence
States with stronger firearms legislation have fewer gun deaths, according to a study published this week by Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonprofit that advocates for stronger gun laws.

The study ranked the 50 states based on the overall strength of their gun laws. The state that performed best on Everytown’s assessment was California, scoring 84.5 out of 100 on gun safety regulations. The second highest-scoring state was Hawaii, with a total of 79.5 points for its gun safety measures. The Aloha State had the lowest overall rate of gun violence in the country with just 3.4 gun deaths per 100,000 residents.
The study focused on 50 policies, encompassing a wide range of gun violence-related issues to determine the rankings. Of these policies there are five which Everytown considers to be “foundational.” These laws are:

• requiring background checks and permits to purchase handguns
  
• requiring a permit to carry concealed guns in public
• so-called extreme risk laws, which allow for court orders removing guns from those who pose a serious threat to themselves or others
• requiring secure storage of firearms
  
• rejecting stand your ground laws.

Following California and Hawaii, the other states which Everytown recognized as national leaders in preventing gun violence are New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland and New Jersey.

In spite of scoring highly on preventative measures, two states – Maryland and Illinois – still had gun deaths that are near the national average. The report attributed these higher rates of gun death to illegal firearms being trafficked into major cities from states with more lenient laws.
The state that performed the worst in the rankings was Mississippi. The southern state has the weakest gun laws in the country, scoring just three points out of 100. It also has the highest rate of gun fatalities, with 28.6 deaths per 100,000 residents. Following Mississippi were Idaho, Montana, Arkansas, and South Dakota. None of the bottom five states scored above 5.5 points for their safety measures and they were all at or above the national average for gun deaths.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...states-with-strong-laws-see-less-gun-violence

That article shows that gun legislation and the lack there of is affecting the amount of gun crime experienced.

The FBI and CDC Datasets Agree: Who Has Guns—Not Which Guns—Linked to Murder Rates

Two BU studies, one shared finding: State gun laws restricting who has access to guns significantly reduces rates of firearm-related homicide
As the United States reels from three back-to-back mass shootings—which occurred within the span of eight days in Gilroy, Calif., El Paso, Tex., and Dayton, Ohio—Boston University School of Public Health researcher Michael Siegel says that mirrored analyses of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) homicide data serve to double down on evidence that controlling who has access to guns has much more impact on reducing gun-related homicides than controlling what guns people have.

“Using completely different datasets, we’ve confirmed the same thing,” says Siegel, an SPH professor of community health sciences. “The main lesson that comes out of this research is that we know which laws work. Despite the fact that opponents of gun regulation are saying, ‘We don’t know what’s going on, it’s mental health issues, it’s these crazy people,’ which doesn’t lend itself to a solution—the truth is that we have a pretty good grasp at what’s going on. People who shouldn’t have access to guns are getting access.
”https://www.bu.edu/articles/2019/state-gun-laws-that-reduce-gun-deaths/

And here is where the NRA fails because they resist legislation directed at gun ownership.

The point I'm trying to make, even when I word it poorly, is; IF U.S. would get on the same team and work together to study what is effectual and what isn't and follow that research, within the constraints of OUR Constitution, we can beat this thing. But we need to work together not against each other. And it doesn't matter if every suggestion isn't adopted, because of OUR Constitution or because it just wouldn't work or whatever. What matters is we, U.S. make solving gun violence a goal and not stop, no matter how many failures we have, until WE/U.S. succeed.

 

OUR Constitution was THE product of the Revolutionary War.

 

Which we managed to fight and win without the 2nd even existing.

 

OK, that has nothing to do with the need for a right of the populous to keep and bear arms. WHICH BTW, was what started the war, what caused "The shot heard round the world" to be discharged. The British had marched to Lexington and Concord to confiscate or destroy reported arms caches of the colonists.

The problem is the Founders would NOT support they way we have so strictly interpreted their Second Amendment. If they were here to see the mayhem being caused by the advanced firearms we now have AND how we've constrained ourselves with their words in every effort to deal with them ... they would be very busy slapping each of us upside the head trying to knock some sense into us. IMHO.

 

Yet I did provide you with the information that includes what I posted.
Obviously you elected not to even click on it
NRA has backed most state gun laws passed since Sandy Hook
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/nra-has-backed-most-state-gun-laws-passed-since-sandy-hook

If you're going to falsify my claims, this isn't going anywhere

I didn't give you an opinion, I stated YOU can't name a single law that has stopped any crime it was written for as laws don't stop crime.
Which you still haven't done

How does California rank so high when they have the second largest amount of gun deaths per state (3499) and a gun death rate of 8.5 per
All 2020 data are final. 2020 birth data come from the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) via CDC WONDER; 2020 death data, including leading causes of death, firearm mortality, homicide, drug overdose mortality, and infant mortality, come from the NVSS via CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm

Had you even bothered to read your own link you would have found they claimed
State gun laws requiring universal background checks for all gun sales resulted in homicide rates 15 percent lower than states without such laws.
False claim #1
There are no states without universal background checks. Its a federal law.

Laws prohibiting the possession of firearms by people who have been convicted of a violent crime were associated with an 18 percent reduction in homicide rates.
False claim #2
Federal law already prohibits gun ownership to violent misdemeanor convictions

So even if your claims were true by state (which they are not) you only have a 3% difference. And that only includes if you add in misdemeanor convictions

So I will ask the question again since you seem to run from it every time I ask it
What new gun law, that falls within the 2nd amendment, will stop gun violence or severally deter gunman from shooting up a school.

 

It is a waste of time trying to convince anti gunners that their schemes don't decrease crime because that is only a facade they put up-in reality, their desires for gun control is political weaponry directed at people and groups that usually vote against their beloved Democrats. Since controlling crime is not what truly motivates them, well crafted arguments destroying the validity of gun control as crime control matters not to them

 

The only way to deal with situation is to repeal all gun laws/regs.

 

I would repeal "gun laws" while leaving laws that punish those who use firearms to harm others or use firearms in a reckless manner that is likely to harm others. and of course leave laws that prevent children, violent criminals and the mentally incompetent etc from obtaining firearms

 

The British tried to seize the colonists firearms. that started the revolution

 

Again, we managed to fight and win without the 2nd even existing.

 

Nope, "shall not infringe".

 

to keep and bear, and I agree, the federal government has no valid gun control powers. however, at the state level, state police powers are fine as long as they don't interfere with keeping and bearing which does not include discharging and rights can be lost through due process of law. But let's not kid ourself, you believe in all sorts of infringements. It is a standard and lame debating tactic of anti gunners to say-well if you pro gun people agree that armed robbery should be a crime or that 12 year old kids shouldn't be able to buy M16 rifles than you really don't support the second amendment.

 

I have changed my mind, like I said repeal all gun laws/regs.

 

Dishonest arguments are easy to spot, especially since I have been dealing with the anti gun movement since I was in high school (Carter administration). You don't believe that so why fib? You are anti gun and we both know it

 

And I still want to repeal all gun laws/regs based on the principle, be careful what you wish for because you may get it.

 

They dropped the full auto and went to the three round burst in the mid to late 80's for the M-16. Around the same time they adopted the M-249 SAW. SAW, so the anti gun zealots don't get confused, is a military acronym for Squad Automatic Weapon.

 

what I wish for is that the tenth and second amendments be seriously enforced and politicians who violate either be charged thrown out of office. I want state legislators who violate the incorporation of the second to be amenable to being sued under 42 USC 1983 (deprivation of a constitutional right under the color of state law) and that they be liable in their INDIVIDUAL capacity as well as their official capacity