Saw Stop would have prevented this

There are more privately owned firearms in the USA than there are registered vehicles, but fewer firearm deaths than vehicular deaths. It is impossible to say how much ammunition is sold to those private firearm owners, but it is "many" billions of rounds a year. The actual risk of harm from firearm use by law-abiding citizens is miniscule. Most gun-control proposals target those law-abiding citizens, not the criminal use of firearms.

To actually qualify as an assault weapon, the firearm must be capable of firing multiple rounds with a single trigger pull. Most so-called "assault" weapons are only semiautomatics and are not really assault weapons at all. How does that affect your .6%?

automobiles

"undetermined

Because requiring a government license would mean the use of a gun is a privilege (it is not), rather than a constitutional right (which it is). If it was a privilege, the government would have the power to prevent gun ownership altogether, which would be unconstitutional. This is a MAJOR distinction from cars - operating a car is a privilege, not a right.

Or quietly go about their business and not call attention to themselves.

Convicted felons

prohibiting the

posssession of illegal

I would be willing to bet good money than most legal gun owners would become illegal gun owners before they would surrender their guns.

Just Wondering wrote in news:5171bd6d$0$11409$862e30e2 @ngroups.net:

felons

prohibiting the

posssession of illegal

Not taking that bet.

That's a fallacy. It is true that one utilitarian purpose of a firearm is to propel a projectile at high speed. It is not true that the single purpose of propelling that projectile is to cause the death of a living thing, which is what must "single use" arguments claim. Defensive weapons have another purpose, which is to prevent violence by their mere presence. And firearms have other uses besides the utilitarian ones. Many of them are works of art and excellence in craftsmanship to be admired in their own right. And owning one can in and of itself be a political statement and a form of free speech. There, I've already listed at least four uses right off the top of my head. I'm sure there are others. =============================================================================== Trap shooting. Beats video games by far. Pest control. When I was growing up, pest control was my job. Guns were a big part of that.

I'm sure it doesn't. That's why I always put "assault' in quotation marks whenever I debate this topic. Because there are no legal assault weapons readily, legally, available to the public in the US.

I'm quite certain that statistic includes only weapon that are cosmetically "military-style" or come with a swappable magazine.

"Mike Marlow" wrote in news:kksp9p$t1g$1@dont- email.me:

That's easily explained. See, for example, my earlier post describing my experience with last summer's gun buy-back in Indianapolis -- the buy-backs provide a convenient way for law-abiding citizens such as myself to get some money for junk guns that no rational person would ever buy. My only regret at participating in that charade is that the Indy buy-back offered only fifty bucks per gun, instead of the $100 typical in Chicago. :-( That, and the 2.5 hours (!) spent waiting in line. At least it was a nice day.

-------------------------------------------------------- BullShit.

The arms and ammunition manufacturers are simply collecting on the monies spent to buy their politions.

------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------- You're being manipulating the facts.

Nobody wants your damn guns unless they are military assualt weapons or high capacity clips.

What they do want is a way to keep firearms out of the hands of convicted felons or the mentally challenged.

Lew

---------------------------------------------------------------

"Doug Miller" wrote:

---------------------------------------------------------------- Lew Hodgett wrote:

So your suggest> Proponents of gun control, such as yourself, insist that if we pass

---------------------------------------------------------------- Lew Hodgett wrote:

Rubbish.

I'm not interested in "gun control" other than to get military assault weapons and large capacity clips off the domestic market.

I am interested in strengthening a universal background check.

Ultimately, establishing a gun registration program similar to those in place for motor vehicles should be the ultimate goal.

Nobody is trying to restrict your use of a motor vehicle, and people don't complain about the registration process other than maybe the cost.

Why should firearms be any different?

Lew

Nobody wants your adult Binky".

---------------------------------------------------------- Think it comes under the "hot pursuit" option.

Lew

----------------------------------------------------------

Not likely applicable as visual contact with the suspect must be maintained throughout the chase for that to apply in the use of force... Since they had no idea where the suspect was it would be hard to argue that it was a legal search without the consent of the residents. That said, apparently most of the people were grateful to be searched... I guess fear of the suspects and the intimidation of having heavily armed police at your door has an influence on ones decisions!

---------------------------------------------------------- "John Grossbohl> Not likely applicable as visual contact with the suspect must be

---------------------------------------------------------- "Lew Hodgett" wrote:

Since it turns out they had him surrounded from the gitgo, could probably make a very good "hot pursuit" case with a judge.

What ever way you want to cut it, a lot of folks in greater Boston are relived tonight.

Lew

experience with

convenient way for

rational person

Indy buy-back

That, and the 2.5

These posts had a plus for me I went looking at some rifles that were my grandfathers. I've never done anything with them just kept them stored in the house. Turns out one of them is a Colt Lightening made in 1888. Seems to be in good working order and has some value. Guess I'll have it looked at by an expert and decide what to do with it. Even have ammunition for it assuming properly stored ammunition is usable after 30-40 years. Not being a gun expert I'll be consulting one.

Mike M

That is for sure! A better outcome than anticipated... especially considering that between the two shooting sessions apparently 300+ rounds were discharged. Reports claimed 200 in the first one and another estimated

Or, as Boudreaux sez: "Lead in the air, meat in the pot."

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in news:517200cc$0$7155$c3e8da3 $ snipped-for-privacy@news.astraweb.com:

I obviously did not say that. Nice straw man there, but, sorry, no, I'm not taking the bait.

There are no military assault weapons on the domestic market now. Military weapons are automatic weapons. The so-called "assault weapons" available on the market are semi- automatic -- a distinction which is lost on television news broadcasters, and, apparently, on you also.

And what's so important about large capacity magazines? If large capacity magazines are banned, the bad guys will use more small ones. Tell me, Lew, which holds more ammunition, two 30-round magazines, or six 10-round magazines? Do you have any idea how little time it takes to eject a spent magazine and insert another? What will banning 30- round magazines do, except make people feel good because we've "done something"? Be specific.

One of the unintended consequences of banning large capacity magazines that those ignorant of firearms never imagine is that 7-round and 10-round magazines are a lot easier to conceal than 30-round magazines. (Woodworking analogy here: which is easier to fit in the trunk of your car, four 2-foot 2x4s or one 8-footer?)

So if I decide to sell one of my shotguns to my brother, I need to run a background check on him?

I'm sure every criminal in the country would rush to comply with the registration requirements.

Ownership of firearms is a right protected by the Constitution of the United States. Ownership of automobiles is not.

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 06:10:25 -0600, Leon wrote (in article ):

Joy Luck nightclub in the '90s. Largest mass murder in US history.

Can of gasoline.

-BR