The Gun Control Debate Thread

[jsmith6919]

there are currently 15 MILLION AR type guns in civilian hands right now.

I'd bet the real number is at least twice that, I've been seeing that 15mil estimate thrown around for quite a few years now.

 

[UncleMilti]

I'd bet the real number is at least twice that, I've been seeing that 15mil estimate thrown around for quite a few years now.

I’d bet you are right. I have 6-8 friends who are avid hunters, and all of them have at least 2 ARs and a couple have 4-5.

 

[1bigfan13]

Since we're dealing with a rash of shootings by white nationalists you can't expect them to use the old "blame it on rap music" excuse. That wouldn't exactly fit.

So blaming video games seems like the next logical excuse given the circumstances.

 

[boozeman]

Since we're dealing with a rash of shootings by white nationalists you can't expect them to use the old "blame it on rap music" excuse. That wouldn't exactly fit.

So blaming video games seems like the next logical excuse given the circumstances.

It is just fuckin' stupid. Plain and simple.

 

[Cotton]

Since we're dealing with a rash of shootings by white nationalists you can't expect them to use the old "blame it on rap music" excuse. That wouldn't exactly fit.

So blaming video games seems like the next logical excuse given the circumstances.

Well, the Dayton shooter was a lefty. I've not seen many white nationalists that lean left.

 

[jsmith6919]

Here they go with more outright lies

 

[UncleMilti]

Here they go with more outright lies

Good news is 95% of those responding to his bullshit tweet are calling him out for the bold faced lie, and basically calling him a dumbass.

 

[Smitty]

I post a well-written opinion by a Judge from the 9th circuit in California and there are crickets.

I see that Texas Ace's "questions" were more rhetorical devices that honest questions.

Easy to say "I think xyz should be banned..... but I'm not an expert on any of the important details, I'm not willing to read anything longer than a few sentences, and I'm not otherwise going to engage in any long-form debates on a complex subject so that I can actually speak on the subject without ignorance."

 

[Rev]

I post a well-written opinion by a Judge from the 9th circuit in California and there are crickets.

I see that Texas Ace's "questions" were more rhetorical devices that honest questions.

Easy to say "I think xyz should be banned..... but I'm not an expert on any of the important details, I'm not willing to read anything longer than a few sentences, and I'm not otherwise going to engage in any long-form debates on a complex subject so that I can actually speak on the subject without ignorance."

I did download that file but geez that was long and in a language that's not easy to interpret. It really wasnt aimed at me as we are on the same side of the debate anyways. I'm not in the ban camp but in the I wish there was an easy solution camp. I'm also realistic in the fact that if it's not one type of gun used it will just be another. Even a different weapon altogether. It's just a difficult situation that is easy to overreact to as far as jumping to the wrong conclusions.

 

[jsmith6919]

 

[jsmith6919]

 

[jsmith6919]

Yet another public servant blatantly lying unchallenged by our media the gatekeepers of truth

 

[bbgun]

 

[jsmith6919]

Notice they say semi-auto firearms, they absolutely will try and ban semi-auto handguns as well and make us take to scotus

 

[jsmith6919]

 

[Smitty]

Notice they say semi-auto firearms, they absolutely will try and ban semi-auto handguns as well and make us take to scotus

Yeah, but they can’t ban semi auto handguns because Heller strictly forbids it.

 

[jsmith6919]

Yeah, but they can’t ban semi auto handguns because Heller strictly forbids it.

As a lawyer can you clarify this for me then- Would someone(NRA, GOA, etc) have to sue to take it to scotus to stop them then if they passed this? Also isn't there a chance scotus wouldn't take the case?

 

[Smitty]

Well I don’t know what the house bill says. Maybe it only targets rifles, in which case lower circuits would have some room to interpret.

But yes, if the Congress did not do its job and ignored a recent Supreme Court decision, someone would have to sue, and literally every court under neath the Supreme Court (that is to say, all of them) would be bound by Supreme Court precedent to overturn the ban as far as it related to handguns at least.

i mean, in theory, I suppose every single judge including all the judges now on the Supreme Court could just ignore the Heller decision, but that’s not very likely.... you would be talking about the complete breakdown of the rule of law, a crisis on par with Marbury vs Madison.

Heller left no room for interpretation. Handguns, semi automatic or otherwise, are protected in this country, period. And it strongly implied other semi automatic weapons are too, without explicitly saying it.

 

[jsmith6919]

Well I don’t know what the house bill says.

From what I've seen they left it broad and just state semi-auto firearms.

Another legal question, if an agency did sue if this was passed and one of Obamas activist judges on the minor courts ruled against us would it temporarily go into effect until it hit scotus?

 

[jsmith6919]