If everyone at the concert was armed this wouldnt of happened

[Lord Kanti]

The only thing that stops a bad guy on the 3 2nd floor with a gun are 22 000 concert goers with guns.

There isn't a damn thing anyone could have done to prevent this act of terror, I would suggest that from now on when there is a big event going on that Hotels put guns that guest's check in, into an safe and not let them get the weapons unless their leaving the hotel.
My Heart goes out to all those families and injured persons involved in this act of terror upon innocent Persons.
No Pistols in the world would reach the windows that man shot from, People carrying guns would have done nothing except cause more damage and maybe shot someone innocent in the lower windows that may have been watching what was going on there.
We don't need to argue here we need to stand together and stop this senseless crap from happening.

don't be surprised if you see a push for mandatory metal detectors.

 

[Lord Kanti]

This country could get serious about constraining gun sales. Tax the hell out of them. How about $100,000 sales tax on anything other than a single shot hunting rifle? Licenses for owning older guns that don't meet that requirement could go for a million. I'm not saying we should deny people the right to own a gun, just make them pay for the damage they caused and regulate the shit out of them going forward.

We have about 4 guns per person in the US and more are being bought each day. This while hunting is declining.

The image of what would have happened if a thousand or more civilians had opened fire on that asshole is something out of a blues brothers comedy. Of course in the movie, nobody would have been hurt. But the whole side of that building would have been shot out.

that makes it impossible for honest people to own weapons and doesn't affect criminals who can still manufacture or import any number of weapons in existence.

 

[Fogdog]

that makes it impossible for honest people to own weapons and doesn't affect criminals who can still manufacture or import any number of weapons in existence.

What honest person needs a gun other than for hunting? What hunter needs 30 round clips? We can talk about gun ownership for sport target shooting. I understand that in the UK, there are gun clubs where gun owners who participate in the sport of competitive marksmanship leave their weapon in a locker at the gun club.

In your statement you make my case that US gun owners who feel they need them for "protection" are cowardly and stupid.

 

[twostrokenut]

I'm surprised you all aren't pushing for tsa type "security" for hotels. job creation for Keynesians 101.

 

[twostrokenut]

nationalize the hotels, it's the only "way forward".

 

[chemphlegm]

Next time I go to a concert I'm going to get shaken down even harder even though the guy wasn't even at the concert.

you admitting your next concert is a country music event?

 

[chemphlegm]

nationalize the hotels, it's the only "way forward".

trumps son will buy them all he wins!!!

 

[UncleBuck]

that makes it impossible for honest people to own weapons and doesn't affect criminals who can still manufacture or import any number of weapons in existence.

Clinging to your guns and bible and antipathy to immigrants I see.

Obama was sooooooo right about you losers.

 

[Lord Kanti]

What honest person needs a gun other than for hunting? What hunter needs 30 round clips? We can talk about gun ownership for sport target shooting. I understand that in the UK, there are gun clubs where gun owners who participate in the sport of competitive marksmanship leave their weapon in a locker at the gun club.

In your statement you make my case that US gun owners who feel they need them for "protection" are cowardly and stupid.

Be subjective all you want, but the second amendment is not written for hunting or target shooting.

 

[Lord Kanti]

Clinging to your guns and bible and antipathy to immigrants I see.

Obama was sooooooo right about you losers.

Is that what the constitution is called?

 

[Fogdog]

Be subjective all you want, but the second amendment is not written for hunting or target shooting.

I'm OK with you owning the same types of weapons used when that amendment was written. Even then, well regulated militia hardly covers what's going on right now.

Just saying that justifying the ownership of guns by calling it "protection" is a badge of cowardice. You trade a false perception of protection for the very real deaths due to mass murder. That's cowardice pure and simple.

There is plenty that can be done to prevent the kind of shit that's becoming more and more common but gun owners are steadfastly resisting all of them. The tides are against you. Gun ownership is dropping from about 50% in 1970 to 32% of all households today. This means 68% of all households do not have a gun. Those households still favor your right to arm yourself to the teeth but that's dropping too. Eventually shit like this in combination with the pigheaded resistance to any form of regulation by the shrinking minority of gun owners will reach a tipping point. Start thinking about how to reduce these mass murders or people who don't own guns will make the decisions for you. The majority will then take action I guarantee you won't like.

 

[Lord Kanti]

I'm OK with you owning the same types of weapons used when that amendment was written. Even then, well regulated militia hardly covers what's going on right now.

Just saying that justifying the ownership of guns by calling it "protection" is a badge of cowardice. You trade a false perception of protection for the very real deaths due to mass murder. That's cowardice pure and simple.

There is plenty that can be done to prevent the kind of shit that's becoming more and more common but gun owners are steadfastly resisting all of them. The tides are against you. Gun ownership is dropping from about 50% in 1970 to 32% of all households today. This means 68% of all households do not have a gun. Those households still favor your right to arm yourself to the teeth but that's dropping too. Eventually shit like this in combination with the pigheaded resistance to any form of regulation by the shrinking minority of gun owners will reach a tipping point. Start thinking about how to reduce these mass murders or people who don't own guns will make the decisions for you. The majority will then take action I guarantee you won't like.

You'd have to repeal the second amendment and that would mean civil war. Instead liberals are forced to whittle away at it bit by bit until we're looking at regulating trucks of peace, butter knives and drain cleaner.

Remove problem individuals from society if you want to prevent acts of terror.

 

[Enigma]

They could of shot the perpetrator dead

 

[Unclebaldrick]

You'd have to repeal the second amendment and that would mean civil war. Instead liberals are forced to whittle away at it bit by bit until we're looking at regulating trucks of peace, butter knives and drain cleaner.

Remove problem individuals from society if you want to prevent acts of terror.

Uh huh. That's the same lame and incorrect arguement you used to keep your confederat heroes up. "next they will take away our statues of George Washington... Waaaaaaah!"

If you are in favor of removing undesirables, please self emigrate now.

 

[Fogdog]

You'd have to repeal the second amendment and that would mean civil war. Instead liberals are forced to whittle away at it bit by bit until we're looking at regulating trucks of peace, butter knives and drain cleaner.

Remove problem individuals from society if you want to prevent acts of terror.

No, I don't have to repeal the second amendment. There are plenty of ways to regulate without repealing it. Gun nuts and the NRA obstruct any regulation. They even enable people who are completely bonkers to own them. For example, the largest population of gun owners are 50+ years of age. They aren't getting any younger. A person with full on dementia is legally entitled to carry a side arm. That's nuts. The second amendment calls for a well regulated militia, not arming drooling 95 year old men who don't know where they are. This isn't a constitutional issue, it's a regulatory one. Tell me where in the second amendment people with mental disability have the right to carry?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Where does it say there can be no restrictions on clip size and firing rate? Or safety requirements? You can keep your second amendment and still regulate gun ownership. It says so in the wording of the second amendment.

 

[UncleBuck]

Is that what the constitution is called?

That what your insecurity and cowardice boils down to.

You're a pussy.

 

[chemphlegm]

A person with full on dementia is legally entitled to carry a side arm. That's nuts

it is nuts and false too. I dont see one state that would legally allow a person with full on dementia, a mental illness, to carry a side arm.
there could be one of course, please share.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

 

[Unclebaldrick]

No, I don't have to repeal the second amendment. There are plenty of ways to regulate without repealing it. Gun nuts and the NRA obstruct any regulation. They even enable people who are completely bonkers to own them. For example, the largest population of gun owners are 50+ years of age. They aren't getting any younger. A person with full on dementia is legally entitled to carry a side arm. That's nuts. The second amendment calls for a well regulated militia, not arming drooling 95 year old men who don't know where they are. This isn't a constitutional issue, it's a regulatory one. Tell me where in the second amendment people with mental disability have the right to carry?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Where does it say there can be no restrictions on clip size and firing rate? Or safety requirements? You can keep your second amendment and still regulate gun ownership. It says so in the wording of the second amendment.

Not only that, but people die. Guns do not, they get "handed down". I am aware of at least one (undiagnosed and untreated - has not been to a doctor since he was 20) full-blown schizophrenic with demonstrated violent tendencies with access to a cache of .223 weapons, large magazines and a thousand rounds or more of ammunition. No law against it. It terrifies me. If I am ever interviewed after some terrible event occurs I will say, "yeah, I predicted this would happen"

 

[PCXV]

I'm surprised you all aren't pushing for tsa type "security" for hotels. job creation for Keynesians 101.

I'm surprised your brain hasn't stroked out completely. Fingers crossed.

 

[PCXV]

Is that what the constitution is called?

I doubt you've even read it. If you are a true originalist then you would restrict gun ownership to the technology of 1776.