E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
As the White House considers proposals to curb gun violence, a potential re-upping of the 1990s ban on assault weapons has emerged as the most politically difficult measure for activists hoping to keep the most dangerous weapons out of criminal hands.
But, after pro-gun groups met with Vice President Joe Biden's task force on violence prevention yesterday, at least one participant came away believing that it's a fight that President Barack Obama is willing to try.
Richard Feldman, the president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association said that Biden left the group with the “clear implication” that the president would pursue an assault weapons ban in addition to other regulatory measures.
In naming possible new regulations this week, Biden mentioned universal background checks and restrictions on high-capacity magazines but did not refer specifically to an assault weapon moratorium. The president and his spokespeople have said repeatedly that the administration is in favor of an assault weapons ban.
White House officials say Vice President Joe Biden has offered to speak with families impacted by the Newtown tragedy for their input as he negotiates solutions to gun violence in the U.S. NBC's Kristen Welker reports.
Feldman told NBC News said the conversation in the closed-door meeting with gun rights groups was “wide ranging."
“We certainly talked rather extensively about civil commitment laws," he said. "The Attorney General was in the meeting. We talked about enforcement procedures against violations.”
Feldman’s take on the session seemed to be different than the National Rifle Association’s, which came out with a fairly combative statement late in the day indicating that the White House was not open to hearing the concerns of Second Amendment proponents.
“I think that it was a conversation and it wasn't a lecture,” Feldman countered.
When asked about the NRA’s characterization of the meeting, Feldman praised NRA advocate Jim Baker for forcefully voicing the concerns of the nation's most powerful gun group.
"I think the vice president, who knows Jim, listened to them," he added. "But you know, we come at this from different positions.”
The NRA has stated that they’re going to take their argument up to Capitol Hill, something that some experts say could be part of a two-path approach for the gun rights group.
“My guess is what we're going to see is a kind of two-layer game," said Don Kettl, dean of the Public Policy School at the University of Maryland. "For the NRA itself, they've made very clear so far that they're just not interested in anything that remotely involves any effort to try to reduce the availability of guns, or ammunition or any of the other pieces or anything that would restrict the ownership of guns. But behind the scenes I suspect they and some of their lobbyists are going to be working very carefully to try to find ways of at least minimizing, from their point of view, the damage.”
Kettl thinks this could be a defining moment for the group, “Deep down this is one of those line-in-the-sand kind of issues that will be the make or break for the NRA's power. And I suspect we are in the middle of a defining debate in the pubic right now about the role of guns in American society.”
Leave a Comment:
When it comes to "killing" the Means are many,yet the end is always the same. It is us that is guilty.
We live in a very violent world and I don't think changing any law is going to solve the problem any time soon. In fact the only thing changing the 2nd Amendment will do is make it tougher for law abiding gun owners to purchase firearms for protection. Criminals will still be able to get guns with or without a tougher law and a tougher may mean its easier for criminals to get the weapons.
If it's harder for you and I to get guns then it will be harder for criminals to get guns your logic is lacking. this talking point is false.
Right, Eric.... "harder for criminals to get", like in Chicago, or Newtown, or Columbine.
Look at the UK and Japan, they don't have guns, don't have mass shootings, and their murder rate is 4 times lower than the US.
In short, criminals aren't getting guns there either.
UK's violent crime rate 5 times higher than our violent crime rate, up since their gun ban.
Your facts are wrong. The UK counts any crime against a person as a violent crime where the US does not. Hence their rates look higher but they aren't.
The UK's homicide rate is much lower....AND we are talking about mass shootings not crime in general. Nice try at trying to change the subject.
Does UK have any place in it that equals Chicago,Detroit or Camden?
If you like the UK go there,take Chicago and Detroit with you and your crime rate will go up when you all arrive there.
You can't own guns in the UK or Japan. You can own guns in Chicago.......
I've lived overseas in the Netherlands and the UK, very safe places.
I'm not moving anywhere....you can go if you want.
Eric-913730
They still have guns illegally in the UK.
eric then stfu if you don't like it here just go away anyplace should be better than here according to you. I've been overseas also and there are weapons there just not in the wealthier parts just like here. their are people like you who want someone else to protect them since you can't or don't know how. I don't care about that but let me make the decision about my safty for myself.
.
The only way to completely stop these shootings is to completely go house to house, business to business and collect and melt down every gun they find.
There would be a lot of bloody doorsteps.
When you get here knock 4 times???
That's okay children's lives are more important then your assault rifle or high capacity magazine.
@Eric
We have our rifles to protect our children and families. Murderers use guns to murder.
Your gun ban agenda is more important to you than protecting the children from a psycho with a gun.
Eric-913730
All your teaching your kid is that fighting violence with violence is okay and its not. I have a CCW but I live in the SE AZ desert with a different need for protection mainly from wildlife. What will the future be for the kids that they grow up believing the only way to solve violence is with stronger violence.
I'm not teaching my kid anything of the kind, champagnesabre probably is.
I'm a gun touting liberal, I believe in the 2nd amendment, but the NRA would have us believe that more guns and bigger magazines are the answer. Life is not a video game.
champagnesabre I didn't mean my statement literally but it could be that way. Like you said Chicago my home town has had one of the strictest firearm laws for decades and the criminals are the ones with the guns not law abiding people who want them for protection, they can't get them.
Tell your kids to just roll up in a fetal position while the bully pounds him into jelly.
If someone assaults your wife or children,what will be your response?Will you take violent action or stand around while they assault your family and be glad i its not you they are hurting?
You are pathetic.
Eric-913730
Then I misread your state and I apologize for that.
From the Chicago Police Department: https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/About%20CPD/Firearm%20Registration/Firearms%20News%20Release.pdf
Nothing here looks unreasonable at all. Looks to me like people in Chicago can get guns and register them.
@Fru
I know. ;)
johninpa To protect my property I wouldn't use my guns unless there was no other alternative and where I live it can sometimes take the Sherrif's office a couple of hours to get out here and if you need animal control they only show up for dogs and they can take a couple of weeks to show up. The 2nd Amendment gives us the right to bear arms for protection, not for assaulting someone. Life is worth protecting and not replacable but property is replacing and not worth protecting.
Fruveggie...I live in the boonies too,you can call 911,but nobodys coming.
Who said the Second was used to cover assaults?
Criminals dont care about your amendments or laws,and most only respond to violence,which I will give them in spades if they try to hurt me or my people.
As far as my money or property goes,I worked for that and I'm just not going to fork it over,you will have to work to get it from me,and pay a price.
Revelations 13:10.......................
Eric-913730
That explains your attitude
@Eric
Matthew 2:16
Psychos commit mass murder, gun or not.
sounds crazy but check out the u.n. agenda 21 aim and it will add some light on this debate.
There has been more than enough infringement on law-abiding citizens rights over the years. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books across the U.S. and we are still arguing about adding more because they "aren't doing enough". News flash, some people are just plain evil. People have been committing murder for ten-thousand years.
We already have laws banning the importation & manufacture of automatic weapons, prohibition of interstate transfers of guns except through a federally licensed dealer, waiting periods/background checks for purchase of a firearm, and a multitude of state-level laws that in some instances effectively prohibit gun ownership (New York, Chicago, Washington DC).
None of it has worked. It is past time to stop blaming the tool for the crime. The problem is the parentless, entitlement culture that children are growing up in. The indiscriminate use of psychological modifying drugs very likely plays a large part in the situation too. There is a growing lack of respect for human life and personal responsibility in the last couple of generations that must be addressed. Finding out what caused Adam Lanza, James Holmes, and Jared Loughner to go crazy, and then using that knowledge to identify and prevent others from committing similar atrocities will ultimately save more lives than any number of new gun laws.
I agree with increasing mental health treatment, and having all gun owners screened for mental health problems yearly.
The NRA won't stop until you can purchase RPG's.......it's insane (exaggeration for effect).
Eric-913730 Then who decides what would be considered the right type of mental health to have to own a weapon? What standards do they go by?
The people who want no firearms would do the deciding.
Very simple,if you want to legally possess a firearm ,you are crazy.
Next.
Liberals rioting while waiting for their government handout....
theblaze dot com/stories/2013/01/12/fighting-and-throwing-chairs-riot-explodes-as-thousands-seek-housing-vouchers-in-mi-town/comment-page-5/#comment-4742462
Hmmmmm, no rioting from the conservatives in line waiting to get in to the gun show...
wmur dot com/news/nh-news/Gun-control-fears-spur-long-lines-at-Manchester-gun-show/-/9857858/18108538/-/format/rsss_2.0/-/ggnv68z/-/index.html
What does this have to do with mass shootings or gun control?
"Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has used a six-month investigation to make his point that gun shows facilitate the sale of weapons without proper background checks.
Undercover investigators developed 10 cases during a statewide sting where people allegedly sold guns without performing federally-mandated background checks on the buyers."
Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Gun-sale-sting-nets-10-arrests-2331709.php#ixzz2Hs4dcY3n
Why I asked yesterday what classifies as an assault weapon because I have a Taurus .45 with a 10 round magazine where I can stock up on mags and fire for hours on end and I have a .380 with a 6 round magazine where I can do the same thing. To save time loading revolvers you can get quick loaders for those. It would be expensive as hell but firing all day long but could be done.
"In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the chamber, without the manual operation of a bolt handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction with one, two, or more other features such as a pistol grip, a folding stock, a flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug.[1] Most assault weapons are rifles, but some are pistols or shotguns."
Wikipedia
Eric913730
A semi-automatic is not an assault weapon both my weapons are semi-automatic. Both my weapons fit nicely in my purse.
Eric,
You are citing the definition of an assault weapon that came from the first ban. It was incorrect then and it is incorrect now.
Even though these shootings have been happening more frequently they're still fairly rare. I am not a member of the NRA and I believe life is more precious than any type of property. The 2nd Amendment is there to protect us and it does not say that every psycho in the country is allowed to own a firearm. I do not think any changes should be made to the constitution and I believe the press should lay off the NRA it's not their fault people buy guns and go nuts later on and end on a shooting spree they didn't tell the people to go do this?
FBI reports that the number of deaths caused by a beating with a baseball bat far exceeds the number caused by guns. And if you factor out the gangbanger deaths in the major cities the difference is dramatic.
Watermoon
I wonder if the NRA can sue the press for defamation of character. These are the acts of individual nut cases and the press has been after the NRA anytime something with a gun happens. The NRA is just a union protecting the 2nd Amendment although as I said before they say some ridiculous things now and then but their not at fault here and the states are not either, Rush Limbaugh is not at fault here nor the republican or democratic party and its not society, its the individual.
They have tried to make the confrontation...
The President versus the NRA
no way do they want
The President versus the Bill of Rights and the good of the people and their children.
Thats why they always say the NRA represents the gun manufactures,it has over 4 million members.Are we all gun manufacturers?Its a "talking point" to screw with the publics head.
Could make for an interesting case in the SCOTUS. I have no doubt but that the state can make a ban on assault weapons and large magsazines stick, but the constitution specifically bars the federal government from such acts.
I lost confidence in the scotus when a corporation was said to be a person and able to have a voice in elections. why wasn't a tantrum thrown over that like this gun debate
No one ever mentions Switzerland where every adult is required to have an automatic rifle in their home for defense of the country, if needed. No one ever mentions the LACK of Sandy Hook type incidents in Switzerland. Why?
All they quote is crime figures from foreign countries that we dont live in,like Japan, which dont have Chicago,Detroit Philly or Camden.
If you put those cities in Japan,with those Japanese people ,they would have a real exciting time,and different crime levels,take that to the friggin bank.
The American romance with the gun is probably exceeded only in Afghanistan and a few other places. Volumes have been written about the twisted, sexually repressed mentality and the irrational world view of "gun nuts". Perhaps no other killing technology (rock, knife, club, sword, cross / long bow, light artillery ...) carries with it the unique personal sense of power and satisfaction and ready to hand safety as does the firearm. The medium is the message, safety arises only in confrontation, but that message is sadly mistaken. By the time an armed confrontation takes place, any number of truly rational alternatives to conflict have been either ignored or exhausted. Our problem with the gun is not the gun itself; rather it is that any number of poorly justified self defense fantasies rain down on the most weak minded of our citizens from a myriad of cultural sources. The net result seems to be an absurd tendency to ignore alternatives to deadly force — as dispensed at the barrel of one's favorite Freudian firearm. A result attested to time and again by the responses on this blog and by the feverish paranoia of the various gun rights groups.
Yes, the 2nd Amendment is important. Yes, the right to self-defense is fundamental, and no law should force any citizen to endanger themselves by removing that right. And, yes, in some rare instances the right of a free people to resist tyranny must be supported by force of arms. However, to flee to your right to bear arms as the first response to any challenge to your political world view is not the exercise of responsible citizenship. It is fundamentally an act of cowardice. This cowardice now seems to permeate the gun organizations, and the minority of members who agree with the leadership.
There is nothing terrible about sensible limits on firearms and the associated technologies, we have had them for years. The questions that should be before US are those of what moderate changes to regulations can be helpful, and what level of funding is needed to pursue enforcement that is to date sadly ineffective. There are any number of rational options to explore, but you won't see them much discussed here!
reterry-
"to flee to your right to bear arms as the first response to any challenge to your political world view is not the exercise of responsible citizenship. It is fundamentally an act of cowardice. This cowardice now seems to permeate the gun organizations, and the minority of members who agree with the leadership"
What do you base this statement on substantiate it. Go
Also any responsible gun owner knows that you should only use the amount of force neccesary to stop the threat. In some cases that it talking in others its calling 911 and in the MOST extreme case its pulling your weapon and as a LAST RESORT its firing your weapon at the threat.
Your generalization of the thought process and applying it to everyone is flawed.
Yeah, all that is true with respect to action at the scene, but who's good at doing all that in 20 secs? Even the best training among military and police forces will only partially prepare you for that, and those who have to deal with a mix of innocents and unknown "bad guys" will tell you that it's among the most stressful duty scenarios out there.
My point is that too much sloppy thinking and cowboy fantasy has skewed the gun debate. What we should be rethinking are our layers of safety protocols and our rules of engagement and our intelligence/mental health needs to identify the deranged freaks who are the problem. Just standing on the 2nd and howling for more good guys with guns is futile and stupid.
@reterry...Only brilliant people like you can figure it out,what we should do and all,because you went to college and what not.
Buddy,all your fancy talking and planning dont mean doodly squat when the gunmans at the door,and its just you and him and your philosophy thesis.
Tell all the unarmed people getting shot down about your rules of engagement and safety protocols.
Come back when you actually know something about the real world,dude.
well thanks for the amigdala trip, john.
the point of "fancy talkin" is to produce reliable action, and reliable choices of who should be doing those actions with what technology.
and, after a few years in the martial arts, dude, I know a few things about the real world .. but not everything.
Well then use that real world experience to answer this ...will an assault weapon or magazine ban stop the killing of children in the gun free school zones?
If the answer is no,then why are they even considering it?
(
The ban of military type weapons like assault rifles (which are not supposed to have the machine gun/automatic fire mechanism as the military assault rifles do) only makes sense with the 2nd Amendment if the interpretation is that citizens do not have the right of having firearms with same level of rapid killing ability as military assault rifles used in sem-automatic mode. That appears to be the gun nuts arguement - the citizens deserve to be able to fight back against government with weapons similar to the soldier arms. That argument needs to be in public so we settle the interpretation of the amendment once and for all, maybe that is a Supreme Court call.
That obviously won't stop all future criminal uses of those rifles nor a ban on the rifle and handgun oversized magazines will stop all future criminal uses of those because many of those are already out in the public owned by who knows what. Even if the government tried to inventory who owns what is out there already, that would not be accurate because some probably large percent of owners would not report theirs. So all the bans will do is slow the use of criminal use of these down maybe over time. Therefore we need the other things like required background checks prior to purchase, mental health programs, education programs, criminal prosecution changes, etc. which may do more than even bans to stop these. Think about it if a crazed person is smart and determined enough and strong enough, they could carry multiple handguns on their body at one time and shoot dozens of rounds without reloading by just pulling out another gun - the only way you could see that person coming with intent to do that would be if they are not hiding those guns in their clothes or under a large coat.
The bans wont slow down jack $hit,the killings will continue,such is the nature of the society we live in.
But thank you very much for putting forth that after the assault rifles are gone,the pistols would be next.
Democrats will not tolerate this gun-grabbing nonsense any more than republicans will.
We lost both Houses of Congress in 1994, for 12 years, over this stupidity, aka, Brady Bill, "Assault" weapons ban, Crime Bill, etc...
Gore LOST WV and TN in 2000 over gun control.
Didn't anyone learn the lesson?
Evidently not. Andy Cuomo is going that route and it will keep him out of the White House.
I know. It's distressing. All these gun control laws do nothing to help; criminals by definition are those who do not obey the laws. I hate to see our momentum from 2012 destroyed by this issue in 2014.
Cuomo is smart,but he gets caught up in himself by trying to make an impression instead of just doing his job. Maybe a little like Teddy Roosevelt.
I hate to see our momentum from 2012 destroyed by this issue in 2014.
Bet that it will be,and me and 4 million other people will be there to make it stick.
IF you are a homicidal maniac, bent on killing a bunch of innocent people, where would you go?
Someplace where nobody can shoot back?
A "Gun Free" zone, perhaps, that disarms the law abiding, but enables the killers?
@OldTimeDemocrat
It dont seem like they ever learn...
BOB Casey from PA,pro gun,wins 6 years,jumps in bed with Charlie Schumer.
OK you won your election....but well be waiting,and we never forget.
A topic I would like to address,and I am going to stir the pot. For those of you that are against Police/Guards in the schools. How many of you are going to go to school board meetings and voice your displeasure. And are you going to be surprised when a Football Dad/Soccer Mom punches you in the head?
Real people know the score,if you want to survive,if you want your children to survive,you got to defend yourself and your kids.The suit and tie characters will show up at the funeral,cry,get the photo-op,and go to Hawaii.
You are left with the grief and the sorrow,but,hey,the waves were great in Hawaii.They dont give a dam about us ,its all about the guns.
A ban isn't going to do squat for keeping guns out of the wrong hands. And a national mental illness data base isn't going to happen either, due to privacy laws. Although a full FBI background check for the purchase of any weapon makes sense, that's still not going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Lets face it, laws are redundant in the eyes of these mentally f**ked up few. So lets just go ahead and punish the masses that didn't do anything wrong, isn't that the politically correct way of doing things? What a joke.
Strict gun laws are the sure answer.
Chicago Sun Times
: January 12, 2013 6:21AM
A boy just days away from his 15th birthday was among two young teens killed in gun violence in Chicago since Friday afternoon, authorities said. Separate shootings wounded four other people, most of whom are also in their teens.
The boy was standing on a porch in the 2400 block of West Augusta Boulevard in the West Town neighborhood about 11:50 p.m. when two shooters walked up and opened fire, authorities said.
How are those strict gun laws working for you folks?
The good news is, the majority support reasonable gun law reforms. There are massive holes in the law, and its causing havoc on US streets. And everyone knows it. So even if they don't get a lot of progress this time around, those who vote against common sense reforms will be exposed, and they will pay at the ballot box in the future. So we will get the progress the majority want eventually anyway. Hopefully it doesn't cost too many lives in the mean time.
The NRA and gun enthusiasts should embrace common sense stuff, before they get something drastic stuffed down their throat. Meeting in the middle is always a better deal. Like it or not, change IS coming. Its always better to negotiate a reasonable deal, than get pushed out and have no say at all. And end up letting the opposition have everything.
Gun violence is at epidemic levels. Something has to be done. Something will be done.
There are massive holes in a system that creates a killing zone for its children,then refuses to acknowledge the mistake.
Call your first reasonable meeting on gun violence with the Crips,the Bloods and the Mexican cartels,tell them to cut down on the gunfire.
Let me know what they say.
"Gun violence is at epidemic levels. Something has to be done. Something will be done"
Really not according to the FBI and the CDC sound like a talking point to me. Do you actually realize that gun violence in the US has been going DOWN since 2004.
Intersting that no one seems to point a finger of blame at the media. The media over exposes and, to a misguided way, can make them into some sick level of a high profile indivdiual, a "star" in a very sick way.
I guess I don't know why Biden didnt' cover this segment in his discussions. Where were the CEOs of the major media networks and print. They make it easy for a copy cat to see what went right and what went wrong. I am not for restricitng the press, but good judgment would dictate that overcovering a story can have significant downsides on weak minded people who look for their moment of fame.
The media needs to answer to their part of these heinous tragedies.
SICK WORLD!!
FAMILY IS THE PROBLEM!! NO MOTHER!! AND FATHER!! CHILDREN ARE TREATED LIKE ADULTS!!
STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!!!!!!
THE FAMILY IS GONE!! CHILDREN ARE LEFT TO THERE OWN DOINGS!!!
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE!!!! PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!!
STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!!!!!! MOTHER, FATHER, CHILDREN!!!
Today's mother and father are too busy working!!! NO TIME FOR CHILDREN!!!
Violence is more prevalent today than 30 years ago. Our children come home from school to a house!!! mom and dad are still at work!!! the child goes to a computer and can view anything he wants!!! From porn to violent games where they practice killing PEOPLE!!! for FUN!!!
BUT I KNOW ONE THING!!!! GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE!!!! PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!!
I have been on earth for 69 years, and when I was going to school no one came to our school to kill!!!
There were more guns in America in the 50's & 60's THAN THERE ARE TODAY!!
You are indeed correct,sir.You could get on the train with your shotgun to go hunting,or bring your deer rifle to school to refinish the stock.
The guns are no different than 50 years ago....so what happened?
We sure have plenty of laws,that dont stop anything.
What we need is more laws,right?
It's not a shot gun, rifle or gun for sport or even a hand gun we don't want -- it's the big magazine, assault weapons that have absolutely no use except to kill people (i.e., military use or gang use).
Give us a break! The 2nd Amendment was written with muskets in mind not AK-47s!
This is the first thing you want,when that don't work,you'll want some other stuff,thats how it works,thats how it always works.
With that in mind,we'll give nothing,you can fight and take what you can.You may win,but you will get a bloody nose in the process.
Politics are nothing more than a vehicle to protect the criminal and not the victim. In this case, it will be the law abiding folks that will take the blunt of the punishment for the mentally ill folks that feel compelled to destroy life. And given the laws to come, will only increase the violence. I sure hope these dumb politicians are happy about that. I sure wish I had all that edumacation to make me dumber than a box of rocks, as these so called "leaders" we elect, yr., after yr. What a joke!! America, face it.... your dumb!!!
America may be dumb, but you can't spell well. You're obviously part of the problem!
Oh, sorry, oh great spelling authority! Must be your only goal in life. What a joke, I rest my case as far as dumb Americans. No wonder Ameicans are in the situation their in. Duh!!
Cyph -
Perhaps when you live in this country you can criticize it! Until then, take care of your own and we'll do the same, eh?
Who the hell said I don't live here. That's the problem with this country, we don't take care of our own, nor do we have the capacity to do so.
Obamao will speak tuesday night; the opening night of the annual SHOT convention in Las Vegas. They will have him on the big screen, something special has been planned in his dishonor.
Urban -
That figures doesn't it? Anything to disrespect the POTUS.
You guys and your guns are priceless. I just wonder how you all would feel if your children, mother, father or wife were shot and killed by some guy with an AK47.
Anything to disrespect the POTUS.
Respect is earned,you dont get it from honest people just by showing up in an expensive suit
some people can make a rational case for having assault rifles to defend their homes. there are places along our Mexican border where an isolated homestead might need that firepower to thwart an incursion. yet assault rifles could be sensibly restricted to your home and not allowed on the street assembled and ready to load, particularly with high capacity magazines.
all that is needed is to insist upon an RFID tag on each such registered weapon. viewed on the grid, if that weapon leaves your home or other location where you claim to need it for defense, then whoever carries that weapon is subject to criminal penalties.
this protects the gun owner from criminal liability after theft of the weapon and protects the soft targets the weapon might be used against — the fact that it is outside its licensed domain is sufficient evidence for prosecution and is immediately known to law enforcement.
You got lots of stuff for the law abiding...what are you going to make the criminals do?
Oh ,thats right,once you show up with all your high tech bull$hit the bad men will all repent and become model citizens.
Go away.
the law abiding would be protected, the criminals, deterred in some measure.
why don't you go away? you want to own a functional military weapon, then you should bear a heavier burden of responsibility to safeguard that weapon from theft and criminal use ... just like the national guard and the regular military forces must do.
The whole point of the second amendment was to insure that guns would be available to the people to conduct a revolution if necessary. If the government can track all of the guns, then the purpose of the amendment has been abridged. Hide your guns and ammo folks, the tyrants are trying to seize control.
Ok, folks here is the reason that the far left Collectivist people in the Democrat party, mostly of which are the self aggrandized firearm haters. (don't really like the word "gun") so?
Anyway, these a fore mentioned Collectivists Have engrained themselves in the Education system and are playing the long game. The progressive wing has been playing the long game since before the turn into the 20th century, and has hijacked the DNC and Democrats many years ago. The main reason they do not want Armed guards in elementary schools is, the physical presence of armed guards with firearms does not bode well with their indoctrination agenda. They want children to believe firearms are evil and are not tools used for protection and safety from crazy criminals. So in turn lefties would rather demonize law abiding citizens as lunatics. To push an agenda driven by the long game far left prog trolls.
Really, now that stateists are in extreme positions of power elected & appointed. They seem to be slathering and drooling all over themselves to get their ideology of Utopianisim installed before they are pushed back again. Challenging the Second Amendment in a attempt to circumvent the right to Self preservation, will prove to be a catalyst of detriment for their cause.
Keep it up progies, your foul breath gives you away...