Stephen King weighs in on gun control

[squealpiggy]

You just made the claim that "no one wants to outlaw/take (any of) your guns."

Your addition in the parentheses changes the meaning entirely of what I said.

Assuming that you watched the video, which is only 1 minute long, you know that the current leader of "gun control" does indeed desire to do so. If you didn't watch it, I have no idea why you're responding to me.

I don't watch youtube videos. Summarize them or don't mention them at all.

[2shameless]

Your addition in the parentheses changes the meaning entirely of what I said.

Then your statement was intentionally and deceptively ambiguous.

I don't watch youtube videos. Summarize them or don't mention them at all.

Senator Dianne Feinstein said "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up every one of them... Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in. I would have done it. The votes weren't here."

Here, this one is 44 seconds.



Or you could just continue to spout nonsense like "No one wants to take your guns." Your choice.

BTW New York's governor just outlawed anything with a magazine over 7 rounds, which is about 90% of all handguns. The legislation was pushed through so rapidly that they initially forgot to make exceptions for law enforcement.

[squealpiggy]

Then your statement was intentionally and deceptively ambiguous.



Senator Dianne Feinstein said "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up every one of them... Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in. I would have done it. The votes weren't here."

Here, this one is 44 seconds.



Or you could just continue to spout nonsense like "No one wants to take your guns." Your choice.

BTW New York's governor just outlawed anything with a magazine over 7 rounds, which is about 90% of all handguns. The legislation was pushed through so rapidly that they initially forgot to make exceptions for law enforcement.

I've repeated time and time again, what needs to be combated in America is gun culture. That is what is so damaging.

I don't know who the old lady is in your video though. How old is that? Twenty years?

[2shameless]

I've repeated time and time again, what needs to be combated in America is gun culture. That is what is so damaging.

Decent enough redirection, I suppose. From the article you posted:

King recalls that the fictional schoolboy killer in his 1977 novel Rage, which was published under a pen name, Richard Bachman, resonated with several boys who subsequently rampaged at their own schools. One, Barry Loukaitis, shot dead a teacher and two students in Moses Lake, Washington in 1996, then quoted a line from the novel: "This sure beats algebra, doesn't it?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013...say-amazon-nra

What concerns me is the anti-gun culture in this country, especially since it tends to come from those that are inherently anti-American. Present company excluded, of course.

I don't know who the old lady is in your video though. How old is that? Twenty years?

Once again she is California Senator Dianne Feinstein, who is currently proposing legislation to ban 150 models of rifles, pistols and shotguns. If you don't know who she is, you probably shouldn't be discussing U.S. gun control with any degree of credibility.

[A.K.A]

Then your statement was intentionally and deceptively ambiguous.



Senator Dianne Feinstein said "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up every one of them... Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in. I would have done it. The votes weren't here."

Here, this one is 44 seconds.



Or you could just continue to spout nonsense like "No one wants to take your guns." Your choice.

BTW New York's governor just outlawed anything with a magazine over 7 rounds, which is about 90% of all handguns. The legislation was pushed through so rapidly that they initially forgot to make exceptions for law enforcement.

Putting restrictions on gun ownership, is not outlawing guns. Nobody is attempting to take your guns, they're just not. Feinstein seems to be referring specifically to assault rifles in your video and what she would like to do and what she's attempting to do are completely different subjects. Nobody is calling for an outright ban of all guns and nobody is proposing legislation to come take all your guns from you.

[2shameless]

Putting restrictions on gun ownership, is not outlawing guns. Nobody is attempting to take your guns, they're just not. Feinstein seems to be referring specifically to assault rifles in your video and what she would like to do and what she's attempting to do are completely different subjects. Nobody is calling for an outright ban of all guns. and nobody is proposing legislation to come take all your guns from you.

Of course not, we have the 2nd Amendment. Not to mention the logistical impossibility and dire consequences of attempting to confiscate every gun in America. Doesn't change the fact that this senior Senator would have confiscated millions of legally purchased guns from Americans if she could have. Her current proposal outlaws the purchase and transfer of anything with a magazine. Existing owners get grandfathered in, but registration becomes as difficult as current ownership of a silencer and permission from local law enforcement is needed for each and every one. This also makes gun collections worthless.

[A.K.A]

Of course not, we have the 2nd Amendment. Not to mention the logistical impossibility and dire consequences of attempting to confiscate every gun in America. Doesn't change the fact that this senior Senator would have confiscated millions of legally purchased guns from Americans if she could have. Her current proposal outlaws the purchase and transfer of anything with a magazine. Existing owners get grandfathered in, but registration becomes as difficult as current ownership of a silencer and permission from local law enforcement is needed for each and every one. This also makes gun collections worthless.

So what's the problem? I honestly don't understand, there have been restrictions on what weapons were legally available forever. Why the outrage from everyone now? She said she would have but didn't even attempt it, forgive me for not taking what politicians say at face value. Shouldn't gun ownership be difficult? These are weapons designed for killing, they're not harmless they should only be in the hands of responsible adults. I also seriously doubt any dire consequences would arise, people would give up there guns peacefully and then go to facebook with their feelings.

[2shameless]

So what's the problem? I honestly don't understand, there have been restrictions on what weapons were legally available forever. Why the outrage from everyone now? She said she would have but didn't even attempt it, forgive me for not taking what politicians say at face value. Shouldn't gun ownership be difficult? These are weapons designed for killing, they're not harmless they should only be in the hands of responsible adults.

The problem comes when people like New York governor Cuomo sign into law legislation that outlaws weapons that are over a century old like this one



because, as he says "no one needs 10 bullets to shoot a deer!" (most M1911s have 8 round clips.)

I also seriously doubt any dire consequences would arise, people would give up there guns peacefully

I don't think you seriously believe that 70 odd million Americans would willingly give up firearms, that they paid good money for and rely on to protect themselves and their families, without consequences.

and then go to facebook with their feelings.

Only children, pedophiles and social illiterates still use Facebook, though I'm guessing you'll get a good laugh out of that line.

[A.K.A]

The problem comes when people like New York governor Cuomo sign into law legislation that outlaws weapons that are over a century old like this one



because, as he says "no one needs 10 bullets to shoot a deer!"



I don't think you seriously believe that 70 odd million Americans would willingly give up firearms, that they paid good money for and rely on to protect themselves and their families, without consequences.



Only children and clowns still use Facebook.

What purpose does a large capacity magazine provide? Unless you're Tony Montana I don't see what the outrage is over exactly. 7 bullets can take out seven targets, if you can't hit your attackers with 7 bullets that's your own fault and if there are more than 7 armed intruders you're fcked anyway. I just don't see what the outrage is over. What would you do if a police officer showed up right now and demanded your guns? You'd run to your safe and initiate a shootout? Not a chance, maybe a minute fraction would but they're the ones who wouldn't pass the mental qualifications for gun ownership anyway. I've never used facebook, I used it to symbolize all people who remain silent and then get tough once their computer boots.

[2shameless]

What purpose does a large capacity magazine provide? Unless you're Tony Montana I don't see what the outrage is over exactly. 7 bullets can take out seven targets, if you can't hit your attackers with 7 bullets that's your own fault and if there are more than 7 armed intruders you're fcked anyway. I just don't see what the outrage is over. What would you do if a police officer showed up right now and demanded your guns? You'd run to your safe and initiate a shootout? Not a chance, maybe a minute fraction would but they're the ones who wouldn't pass the mental qualifications for gun ownership anyway. I've never used facebook, I used it to symbolize all people who remain silent and then get tough once their computer boots.

That's a pretty decent argument, I suppose. Anyone who wouldn't willingly spread their cheeks and give up their constitutional rights, personal property and ability to defend themselves, their family and their property while they wait patiently for 911 to respond, doesn't deserve to have a firearm. Of course right now the federal gov doesn't have a complete list of everyone's firearms, so they would either have to do an illegal search and seizure or take my word for it. I'm hoping for the latter if they ever decided to get that oppressive.

Forgive me if I don't address the absurdity of the average person disabling 7 attackers with 7 bullets in the middle of the night, especially say a small woman who can't handle the recoil of more than a .22 or .25.