What regultions/controls do you Gun Grabbers want

Of all the shootings in the last 2 years how many of those guns were bought at a gun show with no background check?

 

I doubt that there is a more fearful segment of the population than the rabidly pro gun crowd.

After the mass shootings in Newtown, they all went out and bought new and expensive guns.

The spread false rumours about how the Obama adminstration was buying up all the ammunition, and they produced rheems of mostly made up paranoid nonsense about "gun grabbers"/

Of course, after the manufactured hysteria faded, gun sales plumetted, and several gun manufacturers who had profited mightily during the scare campaign, nearly collapsed.

http://www.courant.com/business/hc-ptr-south-carolina-20150622-story.html

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, they do, and they have.

 

Which assumed that the militia would furnish it's own uniforms and weapons and ammunition and consisted of every male between 14 and 60. It was not the national guard which is a term that doesn't show up in this country until late in the nineteenth century.

 

None of which would stop someone from committing a mass murder. Therefore there is no reason to proceed with such proposals, when the stated purpose is to prevent mass murders from occurring. So ultimately what purpose has been served if thirty people are murdered with a firearm that has been licensed and registered to someone that managed to pass whatever mandated background check is proposed?

 

Then obviously this was not directed towards me but the commentor who actually made the tank analogy. Glad we cleared that up.

 

Well, the Australian intervention seems to have worked - as did the English intervention and the Finnish one

All had some regulation of guns

 

your relationship with reality is tenuous at best, an armed society is a homicidal society....if you go by facts.

 

Didn't hold true in Rwanda did it?

 

I always go with what works, australia works lets go with that.

- - - Updated - - -

your willingness to avoid facts doesnt change them.

 

I just gave you one and a big one. Rwanda was a largely unarmed society, yet managed a huge genocide committed largely with edged weapons.

 

not relevant

 

How so? How would you like to be White living in B-more when the cops are finally acquitted? It's totally relevant.

 

I completely agree that in this age of cell phones, background checks should be mandatory at gunshows.

That said, here in Ohio at least, it has been several years since I have purchased or traded a firearm at a gunshow without going through a background check. I can't speak for other states.

 

nope, you are just bloviating.

 

Then why can anyone buy a car or motorcycle that is capable of speeds over 200 MPH?
To paraphrase the anti gun crowd.
"Nobody needs a 200MPH vehicle to go to the supermarket" "The only place for a 200MPH vehicle is on the racetrack" "Common sense legislation would physically limit the top speed of all vehicles" and the ever present "If it saves the life of one child, it's worth it"

 

You can buy a car that goes as fast as you want bound only by technology. Where are you getting your info from?

 

Hardly. Did I mention the knockout game? And BTW maybe you've noticed who seems to be attacked and robbed during riots.

 

So they stopped using guns and moved to knives

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/19/us-australia-crime-murder-idUSKBN0JX09620141219

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/30/brixton-streatham-stabbing-woman-killed_n_3675090.html

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/gun-...in-chinese-train-station-mass-stabbing_032014

 

Of course you can, but it's unsafe to use the power on a public road and endanger everyone else. How can anyone argue that physically limiting the top speed of all vehicles is a bad idea.
As for my info
Google McClaren, Porsche, Lamborghini etc. Most are capable of around 217MPH, the Koenigsegg Agera R on the other hand can hit 273MPH
Much the same story with motorcycles with the Suzuki Hayabusa capable of 248MPH
While researching the subject I found this article, so it may be just around the corner anyway

http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/national/2014/05/01/248279.htm

 

Generally in Kentucky it is so lax as to be non existent.Two years ago I walked in and had my wifes Glock in about 20 minutes.

Could have got the ammo as well (freakin' rip off)...walked a couple blocks and shot up a school.

 

Actually it wasn't me asking, I was just pointing that out.

And the federal government continues to illegally regulate firearms, they've been doing it for a while even without authorization.

 

Right, because obviously people can't be slaughtered with something besides guns. YOURE the one bloviating.

 

20 some odd people...probably not, someone would likely stop it before you got to 20. But, when you can do it in less than a minute, your chances increase dramatically...especially when you can do it from across the room.

A bomb would be easier...but those are illegal and relatively hard to get.

Maybe poison gas?

 

That's because there is no "gun show loophole", it's just something those who have never touched a weapon read somewhere and now parrot it as the truth.

 

never said that did I. your demonizing trick just doesnt work. they dont make a big ass magazine for pocket knives do they?