JoeWeber

Well son, out here you hunt hogs with a knife.

Basically, the more mass shootings there are the better assault weapons look. Maybe it's just me being pollyannish, but I just can not imagine explaining to a room full of grieving parents that the increased number of first graders killed because the murderer used an assault weapon is statistically insignificant. What is insignificant, to my mind, is the cultural loss we'll incur if assault weapons are no longer sold. I'm a gun person and I believe in defending my home with firearms. Before skydiving I hunted constantly for Deer, Elk, Pheasants, Duck etc. etc. I get that part of it. But through any or all of it I could never see the use of an AR-15 for hunting or for home defense. It is simply an almost worse choice for either. Same with hand guns, in most hands. So yes, for me they are low hanging fruit and quite possibly the best place to start if we are ever going to say enough.

Pictures would work. You know, like the chart at the airport when they lose you luggage. Or simple explanations. Bolt action, good. No clip and 5 round capacity, good. Has an acronym for a name, maybe not good. I see it as easily done.

I guess I just don’t get the good news of assault weapons.

Derek, You reduced the problem to a simple question that no one is asking. But as long as that's where you went I'll ask you: what would be a ratio that would cause you to support a ban on assault weapons? 1 in a 1000? 1 in a 100? Or is it no number because its a constitutional right and thus immune? Joe

I know! Ron is Q! That's it, right? Did I win? What's my prize?

No, you should not have said that either. I absolutely feel, and believe, that our nations laws should be followed. But for certain you are referencing immigration and that gets us into confusing territory. Not so much about the mechanics of it but rather about how we citizens see it. I'm chill about immigration because I see huge upside to it. Mostly what I see are super hard working family people who not only work in Tysons awful chicken factories but also tend the local farms and operate the freakin' awesome food trucks here and there. I do not see them taking jobs from anyone, far from it. I see them taking jobs that are not getting filled otherwise. To my eye, that's a win for all of us. I do think we need to control our borders in a serious way. But we do and have been doing so for a long time. The thing is that last week and this week and next week are not evidence of how we handled the thing. Nothing going on in a year will make or break our nation. So I think we can stay chill, stay humane, keep tight to what makes Americans loved around the world and stop being assholes just because some fuck nut who crawled under the baseboards into the White House has so inspired us.

Sorry for the delay, I was absorbed by my favorite restaurants wine list. To be honest most of my thinking about assault type weapons has always been a bit emotional. As in what the fuck do you say to a room full of mothers of dead children if your true belief is that you, and the fuck who killed their kids, shouldn't be hindered in any way if your hearts desire is to purchase another such ridiculous gun because: second amendment. Nonetheless, there is data. To my eye what stands out is the numbers of victims per massacre. When it's assault weapons or high capacity pistols the numbers are usually high. Hence my view that banning those tools of massacre are low hanging fruit. I'll look at it more diligently tomorrow. Mother Jones - Mass Shootings Database, 1982 - 2019.htm

Nonsense. Las Vegas wasn't a white on brown attack and neither was Dayton, Parkland, Pittsburgh, Aurora etc. etc. etc.

Then are you now supportive of banning assault style weapons and high capacity magazines or is it still an it sucks to be them sort of thing?

Meanwhile, over in the Garlic patch, Brent shoots right past the need for any supporting narrative and simply makes an all about him joke about his love of assault rifles. Apparently, it does not matter to him at all that because of assault rifles dozens of people woke up today to their fresh, new hell that will never go away. The truth is their actual narrative is far simpler: we have the second amendment so go fuck yourselves.

I absolutely advocate for a ban on AR-15 and other military style assault rifles as well as high capacity magazines. I get it that a lot of people get hard just playing with their weapon but beyond that benefit assault type weapons have zero value in a civilized society. I also think hand guns for the majority of people are a stupid solution. Now if you are highly trained and current law enforcement or military and a teetotaller I can believe you might be able to use one effectively in the middle of the night or when someone smashes your car window with a ball bat. But for all the rest of us who insist on the privilege of defending our homes with a firearm then the only smart solution is a shotgun. I prefer a Berretta Tactical but to each his own. I personally believe that with hand guns education is key. When people are taught upfront that they are far more likely to shoot their nuts or neighbors than a bad guy with their nice new Glock then they might make a wiser choice.

Das ist eine schwer zu beantwortende Frage. Wichtiger als die Zeit für die Überholung des Triebwerks ist die verbleibende Zeit für die Komponenten der Flugzeugzelle. Außerdem gibt es in einigen Flugzeugen bessere Triebwerke. Achtung. Okay. Ich habe zwischen 2016 und 2018 Verträge für gute Flugzeugzellen mit Low-Time-Triebwerken zu Preisen von 750.000 USD bis 1.2000.000 USD abgeschlossen. Heute gibt es keine SC-7 Flugzeuge auf dem Markt, daher wird der Preis hoch sein.

Did I poo-poo it? Or am I just a damn liberal poseur.

Next up. Damn Dayton Ohio Gangbangers: "Carper said the shooter fired multiple rounds from a “long gun” and was wearing body armor. Since then, Mayor Nan Whaley, a Democrat, has given more detail, noting that the shooter used a “.233 high-capacity” gun. She also said the suspect had additional magazines on him." It's likely the Mayor was mistaken about the caliber and it's actually .223 (or 5.56 if it's military). For a bonus, guess which sorts of guns typically chamber .223 caliber. Of course, once you've settled on the proper weapon to defend yourself against people who are running away you still need to choose the right ammo.

Guns don't kill people, ear protection kills people. That's it.

Knowing that not a single right wing gun adulator on SC will see how wrong they are no matter how many innocents are killed or ripped apart by assault weapon attacks makes me want to take another six months away. Seriously, you are on the wrong side of history. What will it take to convince you?

My bad. Looks to me like an AK-47 knock off with a banana clip. In the words of Samual Jackson, " AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in the room..." Well he did have the good sense to wear ear protection so at least his NRA training wasn't a complete waste.

While we're trying to adopt programs that reduce all gun homicides, can we not start by banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines? I don't know if the El Paso shooter used an AR-15 style weapon but in the video I just listened to I heard at least 11 shots fired in quick succession. Except for indiscriminately killing humans what purpose do assault weapons and high capacity magazines serve? I have several guns and oppose a general ban but some weapons just make no sense to me.

Holy Freakin' Ga-Moly! Are you sure it's not Kim Baby's hair do? Maybe it's detachable and Trump wants it. Seems plausible to me.

When you go, I'm going to have you bronzed.

Read it twice Trump supporters: these are your peeps.

I did not ask which translation you might select to inform me or any other infidel in the audience. I asked : "how dependent is your certainty on a specific translation of the text?" Why did you choose the NKJV to inform us this time? Truth is independent of what others also believe. I know you don't get that but it is true.

Okay, I get that. I also get that your technique is to avoid answering certain uncomfortable questions and then just soldier on. This should be easy for you. You said this: So what I find interesting is that you reference a certain translation of the text. Specifically the New King James Version (translation) of the bible. As you know there are many translations of the bible in many different languages. My question for you is: how dependent is your certainty on a specific translation of the text?

So then you are not making a truth claim about religion? Or, is it only situationally true?