Mass Shooting in Las Vegas leaves 58 dead, hundreds injured

[1bad65]

There is nothing to try again. There is no reason for these weapons to be sold to the public. The NRA has simply leveraged Republicans in Congress its a shame. You can be pro 2nd amendment and not want military grade weapons in public.

Matter of fact, if enough white men keep using military grade weapons to murder guests at country music shows like this, then things will change.

Then maybe Congress would get the courage to stand up to the NRA.

Just address my argument.

Since the 1st Amendment covers new technology not around in the Founders' days, why doesn't that also apply to the 2nd Amendment?

And if you can somehow leave race out of it, that would be a plus.

Even better, the whole crowd should've been armed like you and others want.

For the 1,435th time, please dont go trying to speak for me.

I said nothing of the sort, so cut your usual nonsense.

[The Big Dunn]

Our Founders didn't envision TV, motion pictures, cell phones, and the Internet.

By your logic the 1st Amendment doesn't cover those.

Care to try a different talking point?

The 1st amendment doesn't cover those. Each of these mediums you mentioned have restrictions on them that make the 1st amendment essentially moot.

You are not free to put **** on TV. There are restrictions at almost every level. Then internet has restrictions and policing as well such that you can't post whatever you want and not be subjected to a response. Same with cell phones, you can't text or say what you want and not be subject to penalty.

That is the same thing with guns. No one is suggesting doing away with guns. Just restrictions of military grade weapons to the public.

[1bad65]

Isn't the 2nd amendment for reasons of self-defence?

The word 'self-defense' isn't mentioned in the Amendment.

Surely as a law abiding citizen you will think that there is a middle ground between respecting the 2nd amendment and preventing these incidents?

And if we can't prevent them, then what?

We can't prevent all deaths by vehicles, so do we start banning cars?

Why should handguns and machine guns be treated the same?

They are all firearms. Simple.

[BattlingNelson]

None of them do. Its a safe space for them to hide. The NRA has made them all believe if you take the military grade weapons that means they will take the hunting rifles.

Don't worry though. Another few of these and things will change.

You think more killings will make a change? I doubt it, but in a weird way hope you are right. However all the islamic terrorist killings hasn't made any mainstream call for a possible interpretation of the quran for the hardliners, so there's not any consolation to from that side.

[MDPopescu]

someone just posted this on Twitter:

#stephenpaddock #LasVegasShooting #vegas pic.twitter.com/1YWNXRK0Nd

— J Reed (@jreed913) October 2, 2017

[1bad65]

The 1st amendment doesn't cover those. Each of these mediums you mentioned have restrictions on them that make the 1st amendment essentially moot.

Whoa!!!! WTF???

The 1st Amendment doesn't apply to TV, the Internet, movies?????

I'm going to have to ask you to source that whopper.....

You are not free to put **** on TV.

Yes, you are.

You can buy it in hotels, or buy it on PPV in your own home. Is this news to you???

You're entering outright falsehoods now Dunn.

Going to have to ask you to stick to facts and reality, please.

[The Big Dunn]

Just address my argument.

Since the 1st Amendment covers new technology not around in the Founders' days, why doesn't that also apply to the 2nd Amendment?

And if you can somehow leave race out of it, that would be a plus.



For the 1,435th time, please dont go trying to speak for me.

I said nothing of the sort, so cut your usual nonsense.

I did address it in post#174.

Why? race is relevant. for example, Instead of terrorist, this guy is called a shooter. Remember, you are a staunch supporter of the 1st amendment, please do not try and restrict what I say.

IMO, if white men continue to murder innocent white people with military grade weapons, that will be the catalyst for change when it comes to gun control given the politics and demographics of the NRA. If you see another way, please let me know.

[Sane Man]

The word 'self-defense' isn't mentioned in the Amendment.

I didn't say that it was. I said that self-defense was one of the purposes.

"The Second Amendment was based partially on the right to keep and bear arms in English common law and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Sir William Blackstone described this right as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state."



And if we can't prevent them, then what?

We can't prevent all deaths by vehicles, so do we start banning cars?

The car comparison is ludicrous quite frankly. We can't prevent all car deaths. But we of course we don't ban cars.

That is why safety measures are taken. You have speed limits, seat belts, and airbags. To reduce the death rate.


Do you think restricting access to automatic weapons would lead to more of less deaths at the hands of guns? And why?

They are all firearms. Simple.

Of course they are. But you must agree that not all guns are equal? Rates of fire. Capacity etc.

............................

[The Big Dunn]

You think more killings will make a change? I doubt it, but in a weird way hope you are right. However all the islamic terrorist killings hasn't made any mainstream call for a possible interpretation of the quran for the hardliners, so there's not any consolation to from that side.

That imo is a completely different situation. I don't know how to change one's interpretation of their holy book.

I do know how to vote to restrict access of military grade weapons to the public.

As for more deaths, I wish there was a another way but from where I sit I don't see any.

[COVID-19]

ISIS are claiming responsibility for this guy shooting up the place!