Live feed on YouTube looks like shooter may have been arrested. Still an active scene.

That's just awful. Prayers for those affected.

Swat was just at another residence a couple miles away.

The video from ZFG videography at the beginning was unreal.
He was in the store at the front when he heard the shots. There were 2 people outside down and one in. When the guy taking the video walked in the store, someone was down inside-and then I heard at least 3 more shots-sadly he told the first officers on scene where the shots were coming from and they went in-and more shots rang out.

This dude had sacks the size of grapefruits to get this close and not leave

I was watching that stream live from ZFG. That video was crazy.

How about the old guy standing in the entrance calmly saying, "Yeah, the active shooter, he went right inside through here." Then three more shots ring out.

Horrible.

I hope the hardcore 2a guys understand that this is the reason why it’s so easy to get gun control policies passed. Most Americans understand this inherent ‘cost’ of having that right. There’s gonna be gangs and mafias and crimes of passion and all that other nonsense.

However, people are tired of this specific event: mass shootings. These losers just can’t take the gun and shoot them selves. Nah, they gotta go and take out a bunch of innocent people with them. And the vast majority of these mass shooters obtained their weapons legally. I dunno about this specific loser, but most other cases of mass shootings, they were law abiding citizens, until all of a sudden, they weren’t.

I don’t know how to stop psychos from shooting up the place. But guess what? YOUR solution of doing nothing and moving on...more and more people around the country ain’t rolling with it anymore.

So y’all can whine about rights and how these bills won’t stop anything all you want, and you might be right. But what we DO know is that your inaction definitely doesn’t work. So just want to remind you hardcore 2A guys that harsh reality: people are gonna do something if the other side’s solution is to do nothing.

I've said before, the thing that's going to take down 2A is the NRA and the "my cold, dead hands" crowd. Compared to them, politicians who don't even know how to define the guns their regulating sound like they're making sense.

The 2nd isn't going anywhere, at least until the Communists are in total control.

It’s weird you see communism in everything except those places it’s actually infested. Like the NRA and trump’s pockets.

j/c...

In the meanwhile they will just keep killing stray cats.

j/c:
.

Last I saw, there were 10 dead, one of them a cop with 7 kids. Yikes..

It's not the guns people. It's the people that we allow to own guns..

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...-10-people.html

yeah another victory for the nra.
some other deranged person got to have a product demo with a ar-15.

when there is nothing else-more thoughts and prayers-not that they do a damn thing

https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1371885468950917124

The article said he ranted about Trump.. In what way

That he hated him, essentially. There are some tweets and facebook posts that are surfacing but due to language, cannot post. I'm sure if you search around on the internet, someone/some entity has already provided them.

j/c

Names and ages of the victims.

Tralona Bartkowiak, 49

Suzanne Fountain, 59

Teri Leiker, 51

Kevin Mahoney, 61

Lynn Murray, 62

Rikki Olds, 25

Neven Stanisic, 23

Denny Strong, 20

Officer Eric Talley, 51

Jody Waters, 65

Complained about not having a girlfriend?

Man please don’t tell me it was another one of those Incel anti-feminist types.

His FB post said #NeedAGirlfriend. It was posted on September 5th, 2019.

Had posts about Islamaphobia.

Not sure how much stock is worth putting in all of it. Most of the posts circulating from his FB on the internet are from 2019, some from 2018.

I would imagine more will come out.

bang, bang
splish, splash
thoughts/prayers
rinse/repeat.

With all due respect, northlima- beyond "thoughts & prayers," there is nothing to be done about it. Each one of our so-called freedoms comes at a price. The price for nation wide universal gun ownership is Death. As a society, we've determined that wet red streets, cinemas, shopping centers, schools and places of worship is an acceptable price to pay for the right to keep and bear arms. If we were truly appalled by the senseless taking of lives, something would have been done long, long ago.

This is not a problem to be solved. It's a feature of the pact we've all agreed to. This is our nation paying the price tag that is attached to common folk possessing lethal weaponry. Nothing more, nothing less.

We, our friends and our families must accept that we might be gunned down in a Giant Eagle so that our neighbors can own tools meant for nothing but killing. I don't know what else can be said about a nation that has enough guns in circulation to arm every man, woman and child.

We get what we deserve.

There are two bills on the Senate floor now ready for a yay vote and ready for Biden to sign into law. But no the senate seems to enjoy watching the slaughter of American’s in one form or an other. I get it though they just need to make Biden the bad guy when he is called to action by most Americans to write an executive order. It’s all about optics to republican’s. Remember Jan 6th?

That's only true if your options are solely limited to "take my guns from my cold dead hands" and "all guns are scary". Common sense gun laws are a possibility, but it requires a collection of lawmakers that possess common sense.

The Democrats are coming to take our guns....again!!!

j/c...

Didn't think worth making a new thread, but worth posting.



Man with 5 firearms, body armor arrested at Publix in Atlantic Station, police say

ATLANTA — Days after 10 people were shot and killed at a grocery store in Boulder, Colorado, employees were alarmed when a man armed with multiple weapons entered the Publix in Atlantic Station on Wednesday.

Officers responded to the store at around 1:35 p.m. and met with management who said the armed man entered the store's restroom. Responding officers found the man and immediately detained him, they said.

Officers discovered he had five firearms and body armor in his possession, police said. Two were long guns and three were pistols.

Grady EMS was on the scene and conducted a mental health evaluation, police added.

Atlanta Police later said the 22-year-old man was taken into custody and charged with reckless conduct. The firearms, body armor and property were taken into evidence.

When asked by 11Alive if the man was licensed to carry, police said the case was still under investigation. While police have not said why the man may have entered the store, Georgia is an open-carry state.

At around 5:30 p.m., police said they were also investigating a suspicious package at that same location. They have not made a connection between the two incidents.

The grocery store, along with the interior of Atlantic Station shopping district streets and parking deck are closed during the investigation, a spokesperson for Publix and Atlantic Station said in different statements.

"At Publix, the safety of our associates and customers is our priority. We are cooperating with local law enforcement on an incident that occurred earlier today in our Atlantic Station store. We are thankful that there were no injuries, and all were able to exit the store safely," the statement from Publix read.

Atlantic Station said carrying firearms on the property is a direct violation of their policy.

"Atlantic Station Security and the Atlanta Police Department acted swiftly to manage both situations and secure the area to ensure the safety of our guests," a spokesperson said in the statement. "The safety of the Atlantic Station community is of utmost importance," they added.

https://www.11alive.com/article/news/loc...29-9456c1f68ae4

I don't disagree in any way.

To your first point: the absolutist postures that you described have actually been our reality since the last firearms legislation changes back in the 90's. It's been one of our longest-lasting, most politicized social issues for a generation and a half.

To your second point: I think there are legislators who possess common sense and have the ability to reach agreement on some basic measures. The problem I see isn't a lack of acumen/ability, it's a lack of political will... and the fortitude required to pass such measures in the face of the loudest detractors in the room. Most politicians will not risk losing a reëlection to take such a principled stand. They like their jobs more than they like their duties.

And so, here we are.
Until I see evidence of erect spinal columns in the well of Congress, I expect things to continue as they have.

As I've said many times before in this forum, I am not, nor have I ever been anti-gun. I'm super, super anti-killing spree with a gun.

So- if legislators want to try something, I'm all for seeing what happens. Maybe some things might improve. Maybe some things might get worse. Maybe the net result is no change at all. But at least trying something is a sea change from doing absolutely nothing... which is the only reality we have known for the last 30+ years. Toss the coin- how much worse can it be than the steady death toll we see year after year?

Democracy's an ongoing, evolving experiment. I'm OK with throwing a catalyst into the chemical soup and seeing what happens. After all- nothing ventured/nothing gained, right?

-And since we're continually dealing with previously-created f-ups/near disasters anyway- if it doesn't work out, so what? It's just another f'd-up aspect of future daily life to fix down the road, knowhatimean?



.02

The most effective tool for anti killing sprees is to limit magazine size and require a double action for magazine removal. Time your friend under these circumstances.

See Gabby Giffords.

We will probably never eliminate the threat, but slowing things down is a worthy objective.

again, no disagreement.

There are no good answers. The prevailing thought is to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to protect us from the small percentage of "kooks" hell bent of doing things like this v doing little to nothing.

I am against both.

We already have laws designed to help prevent this and they don't seem to work, so the thought is to do more. When those prove to do little, the next move will be to seek further restrictions, and so on.

The bottom line for me is we will never be able to legislate a solution.

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, I can't believe this is even a debate.

It's more cumbersome to get and maintain a drivers license than it is to get a Carry permit.

The other thing is this, Rifles are for hunting and maybe sport shooting. But what are Assault rifles for? Killing people! That's the only value.

I have no problem with folks having hobbies, I like Horsepower and Cars. My choice I guess.

Guns are another persons thing.

I shoot a AK often. It is a sport gun. Assault gun is the propaganda media at work.

I'll bet cars kill more people, and are involved in nearly every gun crime. Most people drive a car to the shootout, and use one to get away. Maybe people should have to undergo background checks to buy a car.

Think about it...it would be much harder to get to a crime scene undetected without the use of a car, and getting away would be much harder if they had to run or walk away.

Hey, it would also be the "green" thing to do as a by-product!

Trust me my man, I am not proposing we do away with personal vehicles.

j/c...

Topical.

And there you have it.

As I said before, this is the stuff that will help anti-2nd folks have their way. Not requiring a license to carry concealed is ridiculous.

As a second amendment supporter I agree with you. I am certainly in favor of the right to bear arms. Yet at the same time, as a society I think we should insure it be done in a safe and responsible manner.

Legislation such as this appears more to me like throwing a temper tantrum than anything else. It gives those on the other extreme the ammunition to show just how far the other side will go in an attempt to give unqualified people permission to carry a gun in public.

Here is where I see the conundrum. Gun supporters try and use the constitution as an excuse that we should have no regulations. Or at least almost none. When you point out to them that when the constitution was written people had single shot rifles and pistols, they say that makes no difference because look at what it says in the constitution.

Then, when it comes to voting they fail to take into account that even when blacks and women were given the right to vote, people had no picture ID. So by their very own logic in terms of guns, nobody should have to show a picture ID to vote.

Why is it they want regulation and security in one case and almost none in the other? They should at least be consistent.

j/c...

The name Assault Rifle is NOT PROPAGANDA.. It's what they are called.. Because that's what they are

People can claim they use them for shooting. I do and have for decades. And I'm sure they do as well.

But they need to quit pretending that is the purpose they were created to accomplish. They were made to kill people. That was their intent. They were either created as weapons of war or very closely mirror rifles created as weapons of war.

That is what you call them. I have never gone in to a gun shop or sporting goods stores with signs pointing to the assault weapons.

What were these guns originally manufactured for? What was their initial purpose?

Initial purpose? I suppose it depends on where you looked. Probably a cannon type device to shoot fireworks.

After that, defense and food.

So many uneducated people here. no clue what you're talking about.

I blame the white supremacists for this.

Oh wait. It was an arab and a black man.

The first AR-15 weapons were sold by Colt to the Federation of Malaya (modern day Malaysia) in 1959. In 1961 the United States Airforce tests the AR-15, commissioning 8,500 for Air Force use.

The AR15 wasn't even manufactured for civilian use until 1989. That's the actual history of the weapon no matter where you look.

Why don't you just admit that a rifle designed for military use was put in the hands of the civilian population regardless of politics or race. Nah, that wouldn't be very "Eve like".

I only speak for myself, but I'll admit to what you're saying so long as you admit that the actual rifle situation is nowhere near as unambiguous as you try to portray here. We're talking about a semi-auto rifle, not machine gun or like an Uzi or something.

Similarly, the 'assault weapon' definition is totally stupid. Maybe it's not propaganda, but it certainly isn't based in fact. Part of my move from Southern California back to OH involved transporting my rifle (yes, one of the scary ones). Technically, I had an "assault weapon" because it had a pistol grip... but the gun was inoperable. It didn't have a bolt assembly.

I actually own such weapons myself. I'm not a fan of the term "assault weapon".

While you are right that the ones sold to civilians are not "designed" to be automatic weapons, as we saw in the Las Vegas shooting it's not hard, nor is it hard to find out how to make them work almost as fast as an automatic weapon. You can even find Youtube videos on how to do it even though I won't post them. It's not information I wish to help share for obvious reasons.

I just think for us to hold an honest conversation we should at least be willing to come to some understanding of the facts.

Much like many people I target shoot with such weapons. But I could easily do that with a 30/30 carbine rifle. I don't need an AR15, AK47 or SKSAK with a 30 round clip or 100 round barrel to target shoot. While I do not use these weapons to kill people I'm not going to be dishonest and say I don't know the origin or original purpose for which they were designed.

Only a delusional or ignorant uneducated person thinks an AR-15 is designed for military use.

It's not fully automatic. Its a civilian single shot gun with scary looking plastic on it.

By all means shake in your boots about the scary looking plastic.

That's already been addressed. Try to keep up.

I have to continually correct you. Because you continue spreading lies.

While you continually troll just to try and stir things up while adding no real substance.

The first paragraph of my previous post is directly tied to my second paragraph. There's no such thing as an 'assault rifle', so what we're talking about is a semi-automatic rifle. The uses of a semi-auto rifle are varied from completely innocent to the most nefarious. Do you not like certain types/sizes of ammunition? Ok, IMO that's a conversation worth having. Do you want the legal system to have the ability to 'take someone to the woodshed' if they modify their weapon certain ways (ex. make it full auto or equivalent)? Ok, but current efforts to do this type of thing have been a fail, IMO.

As I stated, I actually own such weapons. So as far as having the desire to have them heavily regulated, that's not something I support. And yes, it is a semi automatic rifle. One that was designed very similarly to rifles produced as weapons of war which their designs simulate. Ones that can easily be transformed to be almost as fast firing as their fully automatic counterparts. We can break that down to the simple term of "semi automatic rifle" as you have done but I also have a Remington semi auto 22 rifle and let me tell you, there's not much similar about them.

What we do or don't do about them is up for discussion. I plan to keep mine. But when having a conversation about that I'm not going to try and compare or pretend that an AR14 or AK47 should be in the same category as my Remington 22 semi auto rifle. I would find comparing the two as rather foolish on my part.

Its nothing but scary looking plastic.

My fellow has a .22 rifle that looks like an "assault weapon" just because it has the scary looking plastic.

He also has a Bullpup which is nothing but a shotgun with scary looking plastic on it.


There is nothing that makes these military use guns. It is for appearances only as he likes "tactical style appearance" guns.

ummm... except they function just about the same. A .22 will generally use rimfire ammunition whereas larger caliber bullets have to be centerfire. I don't know as much about smaller caliber rifles as I have never owned one, but functionally the two firearms are the same piece of equipment that simply chamber different types of ammo. So that's why I roll my eyes when you say one was designed after an instrument of war and another wasn't... even though they both function exactly the same.

I don't really disagree with you in part. But there's really no getting around the fact that rifles such as the AR15, AK47 and the SKSAK are certainly designed from military grade weapons. In the case of the SKSAK they are produced on the very same presses as the original.

The problem is actually that they can be adapted to something that's almost fully automatic very easily and there are products on the market to make it even easier. There are Youtube videos showing you how to do it.

My only real proposal is that we take all products that make these rifles easily modified to be closer to automatic than semi automatic off the market and make sharing how to accomplish this have some consequences.

I'm not anti gun. As I've mentioned I actually own some of these weapons myself. As I've stated I plan to keep them. But if you look at what happened in the Las Vegas shooting, some of the very rifles we are speaking of were used. They were adapted to work much closer to automatic rifles than semi automatic.

What I am proposing is that we make every effort to prevent them from operating in that manner by any reasonable means possible.

My issue is with products designed to make them fully auto to a great degree. I will once again reference what happened in the Las Vegas shooting.

I haven't seen such products designed for my Remington 22.

And you can roll your eyes, but the only difference in an AK47 designed for war is it was fully automatic. And it's not hard to make the civilian model work in a very similar fashion. That's my issue.

I'm aware of what an SKS is, but honest question - what is an SKSAK? Is it some variant of the sks?

I'm ok with that proposal.

Yes. It's an SKS that has a slightly different design and holds an AK style magazine that is much quicker and easier to interchange.

Ah. I think I understand. An SKS was clip fed, from the top. Generally, I think, 7 rounds. An SKSAK is one that has been altered a bit to accept magazines? From the bottom - is that right? If so, I've never heard of it being called an SKSAK.

Actually even the sks's I bought in the 90's had magazines that loaded from the bottom. Maybe some older models loaded from the top. I have no idea. 30 round mags were very easy to find for them.

Here are images of the sks bottom feed mag style I bought. They weren't all customized when I bought them.

https://www.gamesatlas.com/cod-modern-warfare/weapons/sks

https://ctfirearmsauction.com/auction_item/norinco-sks-7-62x39mm-semi-auto-rifle/

While looking I did find one just as you described.

https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/sks-review/

I can't say that SKS-AK is the standard term used for them. What I can say is that the AK style clip was used and we bought them set up that way.

We Democrats say guns should be taken from the mentally ill and Republicans say we’re coming for their guns. I can do that math. Need any help?

LOL....my bad. I read your comment as asking why were guns first made. Not specifically this gun.

No, the AK wasn't made to shoot fireworks...lol


Cool. It was a military weapon. The only thing with the weapon we can buy and a military issue is it fires a NATO round.

This is what I was trying to get at. A rifle is a rifle. Whether it has a wood overlay or the scary black plastic is really immaterial.

IMO, I could see regulations around the caliber for which a rifle is chambered. That makes some sense to me.

IMO (blunt but sincere)... Pit knows what he's talking about, but is getting hung up on people's ability and the frequency of modifying. Laws aimed at regulating per the features of a firearm have been tried, and I'll just say I'm not impressed at all. That was why I brought up my specific example ('assault weapon' that can't fire... my 'assault paper weight'). I think it makes sense to have certain features that significantly change the function of the gun (ex. bump stock) on a 'No-no' list. In CA, a rifle can be fine up until you add a pistol grip or many types of forward grips. This is stupid.

I agree. I don't see any real use for a bump stock other than it might be cool.

But people look at some firearms and see the boogie man because they look threatening. OOOOOOH

Most of it comes from people who know little or nothing about firearms. The problem becomes, when you look at it, that when the AR-15 and AK-47 rifles become the weapon of choice for most of these mass shootings, many in the public will turn against them.

We can debate the facts about these weapons all day and as people who either own or have fired such weapons we know and understand them. But that isn't really the point. Facts in our society have been dismissed and minimized. It's all about perception. If it weren't you wouldn't have millions of people buying into some of the whackamole conspiracy theories like we see these days.

Like one of our newest employees who says he will not get the vaccine because he is sure that the government is injecting micro-scoptic trackers with it.

I bet you haven't. And I doubt anyone would. They'd come out and ask for what it is... Meaning the title of the rifle..

But don't be obtuse. There is virtually nobody that doesn't know them as Assault Rifles.. NOBODY

Again, because of the propaganda put forward by the liberal media.

I am not even sure I can call them liberal anymore.

There is no need to own a passenger vehicle with more than 200 horsepower. What's it for? Getting from stop light to stop light 4 seconds faster? Going 100 on the interstate? That's the only value... one is just reckless and the other is illegal.

I am going to go out on a limb and say that we almost had another bad shooting in a market except for one guy saving the day. Dude was loading up big time in the bathroom. The picture of the firearms are in the link below.

An Instacart shopper believed he heard someone loading guns in a bathroom stall. Police arrested a man with 6 guns
Dakin Andone byline
By Dakin Andone, CNN

Updated 4:26 PM ET, Fri March 26, 2021
Atlanta guns supermarket witness vpx_00000112
NOW PLAYING
Man who alerted police about armed man speaks out
WSB




00:23
/
01:37




(CNN)An Instacart shopper who entered an Atlanta supermarket bathroom this week told police he saw an AR-15 style rifle and heard what he believed was the sound of someone loading guns in a bathroom stall.

The witness rushed out of the bathroom and notified staff at the Publix Supermarket. When police arrived soon after, they arrested a suspect as he was exiting the bathroom -- with six loaded guns in his possession.
The suspect, identified as 22-year-old Rico Marley, now faces a slew of charges related to the incident, which came just days after 10 people were killed in a mass shooting at a supermarket in Boulder, Colorado.
It was that tragedy that was fresh in the mind of the Instacart shopper, Charles Russell, he told CNN affiliate WSB.

"I saw an AR-15," he said. "And I was like, you know, this kind of startled me just again with events that recently happened in the grocery store up in Colorado."
Authorities have not said what they believed Marley intended to do with the weapons.
According to the police incident report, Russell was entering the men's restroom when he "heard clicking sounds from the bathroom stall."
"It sounded to him like someone was loading firearms," an Atlanta officer wrote. "He also told me that he saw an AR-15 style rifle leaned against the wall."
By the time the officer arrived at Atlantic Station -- a commercial and residential complex in Atlanta just north of downtown -- the supermarket appeared to have been evacuated, the report says.
The officer wrote that he donned a ballistic helmet and took his city-issued rifle into the store, where he immediately saw the suspect coming around the corner from the restroom, just feet away. The officer ordered the suspect to put his hands up and not move, the incident report says.
"The accused appeared to be surprised when he saw us that close to him," the officer wrote. Marley was detained without incident, the report says.
Suspect denied bond
After arresting Marley, police recovered six firearms: a DPMS AR-15-style rifle, a 12-gauge Maverick Arms Modell 88 shotgun, three semi-automatic 9 mm pistols and a .38-caliber revolver. All of the weapons were loaded and the rifle, shotgun and three 9 pm pistols all had a round in the chamber, according to the police report.
The suspect, who was wearing body armor when he was arrested, had the four handguns in his clothing while the rifle and shotgun were being carried inside a bag, the report says.

Marley has been charged with six counts of possession of a firearm or knife during commission of or attempt to commit certain felonies and five counts of criminal attempt to commit a felony.
Marley, who's being represented by a Fulton County public defender, waived his first court appearance Thursday, where Judge Rashida Oliver ordered him to be held without bond due to the "danger risk to the community at large." He's being held in the Fulton County Jail.
The Fulton County Public Defender's Office did not respond to CNN's request for comment Thursday.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Publix said the company was cooperating with investigators and that "the safety of our associates and our customers is our priority."
"We are thankful that there were no injuries, and all were able to exit the store safely."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/26/us/atlanta-guns-supermarket-witness/index.html

jc

While everyone is focused on guns, I think the bigger picture needs to be looked at. Why do these people snap and commit mass murder? If we succeed with gun control measures that keep them from getting guns, what is to stop them from using something else? We've already seen incidents where someone drives a car into a crowd of people. Humans killed each other long before guns were invented. If someone wants to kill a bunch of people, they will find a way. How do we stop these people before they do?

I don't know how we would predetermine who is about to snap without a full Big Brother state monitoring our every move.

Well, I do know the answer. The answer is God, and family.

Without those, we have a lost generation.
Note, I am not seeking to turn this is to a religious debate.

God can mean many different things and comes in many different religious views, even non-believers have a sense of moral guide, so we can leave it at that.

Just so we are clear - morals don't come from Religion ... and religion is responsible for 100+ million deaths from wars, persecution etc and then there's the protecting and hiding of pedophiles etc . . . Not sure "even" is an appropriate context here.

Just to be clear, you are comparing a car with an assault Rifle? Do you have any idea how crazy that sounds.

They have been known as assault rifles since they were first invented for military use.. Geez,, It's not propaganda, it's a frickin fact

So than you should know the exact definition of an assault rifle

Known by you and yours maybe. Not by me and mine.

DC is right about cars. I'd even say more than 130 HP isn't necessary except maybe trucks that haul things.

To me, who cares how fast your car goes and you like to go to some drag strip for sport. It's stupid to me just like you think it stupid for people who like to shoot at bottles and or targets. I am just not telling you that you can't do it or do in in some bossed up car. Do cars kill people or do people driving cars kill people?

You can't kill 59 people from your hotel room window at a concert across the street and have 489 injured with your car. That's just nonsense trying to compare the two.

Crimes are a different issue. As I asked Daman, do cars kill people or people driving cars kill people.

If we banned cars, auto deaths would drop in dramatic fashion. I know you agree with that, even though we both know we won't do that.

Read my words and you will understand my meaning.

When you drive a car you know you are taking a risk. You understand the possible consequences. That is not something children should have to consider when they go to school or when either of us decide to go to a concert.

2016 Nice truck attack. 86 dead, 458 injured.

Yeah, it happens all the time just like mass shootings.

Let me ask you this. Since it seems some of you are trying to compare guns to cars, do you propose they be treated the same?

To drive a car you must pass drivers training. Both as a driver and to know the laws and regulations.

Every year you car undergoes an inspection and you must renew and pay a fee to extend your right to drive.

You must carry insurance on your car in order to protect anyone who may suffer damage or injury due to an accident.

So since it seems you are trying to compare the two do you agree that the requirements to own and operate both should be the same?

You don't understand the comparison being made.

Some people argue that we don't need a rifle that looks like a military gun.

Well, people don't need cars that can run 140MPH or more.

Of course I am not advocating the elimination of peoples muscle cars and bring it up to illustrate how lame their argument is against a common sized rifle.

Now if some want to rail against bump stocks or means to turn a simple single shot semi automatic gun in to a automatic, I would be willing to listen.

Understand?

I can't believe people are having a "guns or cars" debate. Seriously.

Guns don't serve any other purpose other than to shoot people or animals. Even if you argue that they are a deterrent or protection - they are those things because they offer the threat of shooting something. I mean - sure there are target pistols and various clay shooting and other long range competitions etc ... but when you get down to it guns are designed to kill.

Cars, and 19 tonne trucks and buses and vans and other modes of transport have other intended purposes other than trying to harm other living things.

Yes - in the absence of guns very seriously messed up people hell bent on mass slaughter can and do choose other means to kill people. The truck is ONE example - explosives is another. Whooop Whooop. It's simply deflection to try and talk about that. What that doesn't address or deal with is the availability of guns in the USA. How easy they are to obtain and stock pile. It ignores the fact that guns are OVERWHELMINGLY the preferred method for mass killings in the USA. And guess what - where guns are not so prevalent in the world... shocking no-one. Less gun deaths and mass shootings.

Does making gun registration stricter take the guns out of the hands of the criminals? No. Would a ban on AR-15's and other semi-automatics take them out of the hands out of the criminals? No. . . . but there is history and statistical data that shows that during the ban from 1994-2004 - gun massacres decreased.
That's FACT:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/d...fter-expiration

As is the 26%+ of AR-15 and it's use in these massacres.
https://www.newsweek.com/ar-15-rifles-were-used-26-percent-last-80-mass-shootings-america-1578107

I don't know what the answer is - maybe there isn't one. But people and the NRA digging in and not willing to look at ANYTHING that might make a difference is literally the definition of insanity ... that is unless you think kids being shot at schools REGULARLY and shoppers being slaughtered while grocery shopping is acceptable.

You like statistics than look at how many homicides occur with rifles vs knives, blunt objects, fists, etc. Than come and tell me those evil black rifles should be banned

No idea what you just said. But Suicide is one more good reason to try to look at how to reduce the negative impact of fire arms.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

They account for 14,414 out of 19,141 homicides - 73%. Based on 2018 data.

Coincidently, I heard someone reference an sks multiple times, a couple weeks ago, on an, (ametuer broadcast episode over the internet) talking about 'bear' attacks, (AND AFTER WHAT I LEARNED BEARS CAN DO TO PEOPLE, I'M SUPPORTING BIGGER GUNS)

And looked up a bunch of info about the SKS, (they just seemed so stylish)

There was a big emphasis on that these are an often modified gun, (the ole, 1999 hond civic, of the gun world), one modification of which,
was an added pistol grip.
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the sks with a pistol grip modification weren't what is being referenced by the term SKS-AK but in truth, I'm guessing.

https://petpedia.co/bear-attack-statistics/

40 bear attacks a year ... GLOBALLY.

Makes perfect sense to advocate for bigger legal munitions on the back of that.

I'm absolutely sick of people comparing Guns and Cars..

With a car, you gotta first take Drivers Education.. Then you have to get a Temp permit, then you take a drivers test adminstered by a state employee. You are required to renew your license roughly every 5 years where you are questioned about any health issues and if you would be willing to be a organ donor and you take an eye test.

Further, at least in certain Ohio counties, your car gets an E-check. You also must carry insurance on your vehicle.

It doesn't matter if the car is new or used, it goes thorough the same process. If you buy it off a private party or buy it at a used car dealer..

You go to buy a gun and they do a background check on you. there are no other requirements. I'm not certain if you buy a gun off your neighbor if it even gets reported or if there is a background check.

Comparing what we go though to buy a car and get a license, buying a gun is a piece of cake

What I understand is that in this very thread it has been pointed out that vehicles can be used to amass mass casualties just as a gun can.



I should have used j/c.

Weapons lead to destruction, we have centuries of data to back this up.

Human disagreements lead to destruction. Weapons are just a tool.

I bet that Minnesota woman who got raped wished she had a weapon.

Yes. And while we're at it, let's make licensing for both less of a joke. And maybe even add some sort of push to keep your car in good working order.

Just want to point out that this is not necessarily true. To LEGALLY drive a car you must do those things.

Good point, legally drive..

The NRA has stoked the fires.. Pushing the thought that if you are a liberal, you want to take everyones guns away... I admit, there are some that feel that way.. Very Very Far left...

But that's not me.. I don't wanna take a gun away from anyone that is responsible.

This kid that shot up the grocery store in Boulder had issues.. I'm not 100% sure what can be done about making sure someone like him never gets his hands on a gun.

This is where the NRA could help if they didn't have their heads so far up their asses.

They could, if they had a mind to, work with authorities to close loop holes in purchasing. they could be involved with gun shows to stop things from happening there.

Maybe someday they'll figure out that the pressure to get the guns stems from all the crazy shootings that take place.. Like Boulder or Las Vegas or Sandy Hook and the like.

Instead of jumping into the fray to help, they defend those jackasses that do the shooting.. Or they make excuses for them or why stopping them from getting guns would be against the 2nd amendment.

Someday maybe they'll figure out that if you aren't part of the solution, you ARE the problem..

These people that shoot up stores and schools give the rest of the responsible gun owners a bad rap... You'd think they'd want to do something about it. Something more than Lip Service.