stanc Wrote:Good points, all, but somewhat overstated.
If there were no restrictions on the right to keep and bear, many of those events would've undoubtedly had better outcomes.
However, it is a safe bet that no restrictions would almost certainly have undesirable outcomes which are conceivably worse.
As LR55 noted, imagine how much worse the carnage would've been in Las Vegas if the shooter had a belt-fed machine gun.
LOL. What moral and religious people?
The religious people of Massachusetts and Connecticut who jailed and executed people for witchcraft?
The religious people like Washington, Jefferson, Madison and others who enslaved black people?
The religious people who killed many of the indigenous people, then confined the survivors on reservations?
Our Constitution was written primarily for the white male population. They may have been religious, but they sure weren't moral.
Stan, I'm not saying bump stocks were not used in the Las Vegas shooting, but that the lawyer claims bump stocks were never officially purported to have been used in that shooting by any law enforcement. My main point for posting the video were the lawsuits pending and "her concern with the way this ban was enacted" which could have some very nasty consequences . I have my own personal opinion on required training for owning firearms that others would vehemently disagree with. I believe there needs to be restrictions or we would have nukes going off every 4th of July. Finding the balance we all can live with, "for true public safety rather than government power grabbing" is the real problem. Opinions are like certain body parts, we all have one. In the end it matters very little what we think, as it is much bigger than anyone on this forum lol. This has gone way farther than I intended, but it is interesting the different take people can have from one video.