So Homes used an assualt rifle? Really?

What is a sniper rifle?

Please define it.

 

Please read the entire Bill of Rights and you will maybe understand the premise of my argument.

You are the one wishing to change the status quot based on one instance. I for one have not said that my shooting experience would change without drums being that I do not use them. You are making a strawman and being habitually intellectually bankrupt throughout the thread. Choosing to drop comments here and there without ever once substantiating your argument.

Yet despite being asked no fewer than five times you are yet to give me a specific needs test.

Please try again and I will give you a nice warm cookie. Fresh out of the oven too.

 

I promise I won't go back and read any of your posts. I've gotten the gist anyway. Now, explain to me why you feel that nukes are covered under the 2nd amendment?

 

he did state that he wanted one in his front yard........ICBM, if I recall rightly.......now,why would he want such a thing?

 

What difference does it make? A lot of people wan things that I see no reason for them to have and would never want myself. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to get them.

As long as he doesn't use the thing, who cares if he gets one?

 

That's been pretty much what I've been saying all along. What does it really matter if someone has a 100 rd clip as long as they don't use it for evil intent. His side is, "what do you want such a thing for?" or "Why don't you ban them?"
That is the sum of his contribution to this thread.
Personally, I really don't care if he owns a dozen of them, missles or 100 rd clips. To me, it's a personal choice, all the way around.

 

You have a Holmes moment every few weeks.

Which town/city will we be hearing about next month?

And does it really matter? In your military, you call it "collateral damage".

Unfortunate but bearable.

 

What a clearly biased, inaccurate and unfounded post. But nothing different than what I expect.

The previous mass shooting in the US was over a year ago. The one prior to that was about a year earlier.

 

Why are people with zero knowledge of firearms writing firearms legislation? You have to know something about something to have an opinion.

That's like Congress writing a law about healthcare. Not one of em are doctors, involved in running a hospital, or working in the insurance field. Mostly just former lawyers and businessmen.

Now, I'll give up my weapons when everyone else does and they disband every street gang in Illinois. Not gonna happen, and I don't want some tiny brained thug stealing my (*)(*)(*)(*).

 

Well, to be fair an intercontinental ballistic missile is not a "nuke".

But it is one way to make a rapid, delivery, guaranteed to almost always arrive on time and at the right address.

 

Why should we listen to you? You don't even live here.
Why not put some effort into ending war and strife in the mid-east where 1000's die every month. Hardly comparable to the mayhem of the US....

 

Really? If that were true would this event even be news? Let us compare Chicago, for example. Aren't several people murdered there every day? Even though the cumulative result is similar it is not news like this was. Why?

What did George Patton say? You..."don't know anything more about real battle than [you] do about fornicating."

Collateral damage is what happens when a legitimate military target is hit appropriately and unfortunate people who were not targets are struck and hurt or killed.

We do what we can to prevent non-combatants from being harmed. Given where the enemy operates it is not always possible.

 

We do not have a Holmes every few weeks we have about one a year or less and generally the body count is much lower.

 

So are the gun control proponents done attempting to make arguments using blatantly false terminology and fallacious arguments?

 

No. They never stop.

 

..and if you wait, there'll be more. Just one more reason for me to carry or even someone in that crowd. One can make a difference.