Forum Groups

 

Forums / Politics / Another Tragedy

Another Tragedy

127 posts
  1. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    12/20/2012 4:12 PM
    James Schmid said:
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said: Here's something I found from an old document. It's called the United States Declaration of Independence. It was primarily drafted by Thomas Jefferson, and was adopted by the Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776. In the text, it states,

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are [u">Life[/u">, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness"

    I high-lighted the "life" word. I interpret this sentence to mean that Americans have a right to life. This document precedes the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, and so legally supercedes it. Where the Second Amenment violates our rights guaranteed in the Decalration of Independence, that Amendment ceases to be valid.



    What's your deal man? This idiotic comment is pretty strange. You usually seem to be fairly thoughtful and logical when you post on these forums. This is something I would expect to see from a fringe nutball.

    Youre saying that we should be banning anything that can be responisible for taking more lives than it saves? How bout alcohol? How many dwi deaths are the result of that per year? Backyard swimming pools? How many kids drown accidentally each year? Somking/second hand smoke? Should we immediately ban all of these things due to the fact that none of them have ever saved a single life, but have resulted in countless tragedies?


    James, I'm typing this slowly, so it will be easy to understand.

    All those things you list are accidental or unintentional deaths. Nobody ever bought a swimming pool or a car in order to commit murder. Alcohol and tobacco are self-inflicted, nobody ever murdered someone else with cigarettes or whiskey. As far as alcohol goes, the case may be made that it creates more life than it destroys, it can be a contributing factor to unplanned pregnancies.

    There is no absolute guarantee of safety in life, but we should at least be protected to a reasonable degree from mass murder by total strangers.



  2. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    12/20/2012 4:12 PM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said: James, I'm typing this slowly, so it will be easy to understand.


    Thanks for typing it slowly. I even got it this time!



  3. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    12/20/2012 7:12 PM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said:

    James, I'm typing this slowly, so it will be easy to understand.

    All those things you list are accidental or unintentional deaths. Nobody ever bought a swimming pool or a car in order to commit murder. Alcohol and tobacco are self-inflicted, nobody ever murdered someone else with cigarettes or whiskey. As far as alcohol goes, the case may be made that it creates more life than it destroys, it can be a contributing factor to unplanned pregnancies.

    There is no absolute guarantee of safety in life, but we should at least be protected to a reasonable degree from mass murder by total strangers.


    I'm fairly sure that the grieving parents who have watched their children get splattered by a drunk driver will not be comforted by the fact that at least that driver had not intended to do so. I mean he hadn't intended to take anybody's life, he was just trying to have a good time, it was just an accident. Thats murder plain and simple dude, and the innocents whose lives are taken (roughly the same number as in gun murders each year) don't give a flying #&$^ that it was an accident or what the intended use of the vehicle was at the time of purchase.

    Step back from your emotions man, 26 people got killed at once and thats a terrible tragic thing that everyone wishes hadn't happened, but is it any more tragic than the thousands who are killed one by one each year by alcohol related deaths? Just because this a sensational event that is consuming every minute of news coverage does not make the lives of other vicitms any less valuable.

    We are protected to a reasonable degree from mass murders, it don't happen that often. make a list of how many have occurred in the last 20 years. Then make a list of all of the children who have been killed by drunk driving in the last month alone and tell me which is longer.

    I assume your remarks regarding alcohol creating more than it destroys were in jest so I will hold back on that for now. If I am mistaken and they are serious please advise, and I will respond.



  4. Lynch Sean
    Lynch Sean avatar
    12/20/2012 9:12 PM
    I'm a little dissappointed as to where this thread has gone. It's disintegrated into the whole "guns don't kill people, people do" argument. Some of the most intelligent people I know come from our specialized community. Given what we all do for a living, we have a vast knowledge of a very broad subject spectrum. Geology, chemistry, biology, etc...We, as a community of professionals, of parents, of sons and daughters, should be above arguing semantics. People like us should be working together to find solutions to this problem. Compromise is a fickle mistress. And there is a solution to this problem. Whether it be banning certain weapons, restrictions on weapons, restrictions on amounts or calibers, mental healthcare reform regarding diagnosis and medication, limits to firearms based on service or experience before one can own, more involvement by parents on their children's needs and development....We all want the same thing, don't we? I just hate to see intelligent people get into a pissing contest based on individual beliefs and opinions.



  5. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    12/21/2012 12:12 AM
    James Schmid said: I'm fairly sure that the grieving parents who have watched their children get splattered by a drunk driver will not be comforted by the fact that at least that driver had not intended to do so. I mean he hadn't intended to take anybody's life, he was just trying to have a good time, it was just an accident. Thats murder plain and simple dude, and the innocents whose lives are taken (roughly the same number as in gun murders each year) don't give a flying #&$^ that it was an accident or what the intended use of the vehicle was at the time of purchase.

    Step back from your emotions man, 26 people got killed at once and thats a terrible tragic thing that everyone wishes hadn't happened, but is it any more tragic than the thousands who are killed one by one each year by alcohol related deaths? Just because this a sensational event that is consuming every minute of news coverage does not make the lives of other vicitms any less valuable.

    We are protected to a reasonable degree from mass murders, it don't happen that often. make a list of how many have occurred in the last 20 years. Then make a list of all of the children who have been killed by drunk driving in the last month alone and tell me which is longer.

    I assume your remarks regarding alcohol creating more than it destroys were in jest so I will hold back on that for now. If I am mistaken and they are serious please advise, and I will respond.


    James,

    I see an enormous difference between guns and cars and their roles in our society and economy. People need cars, trucks, and buses to work, go to school, and move stuff around. There are required training and licensing programs before anyone is allowed to drive a car. Without motor vehicles, our society and our economy would collapse. The same is not true for guns.

    Thirty years ago drunk driving was tolerated much more than it is today. People saw how dangerous it was and began a grass roots program, MADD, to curb it. This has proved very effective and I wish the same sort of thing would happen for gun control. Driving under the influence is against the law everywhere - guns aren't against the law anywhere. There is no way to know when someone gets their drivers license who will abuse the privilege and who will not. That's another difference, driving is a privilege, not a right, as gun owners claim for themselves.

    Drunk driving is not the only type of dangerous behaviour behind the wheel. Speeding, running stop signs, tailgating, falling asleep, defective vehicles, etc. also kill children every day. I'm equally sure that those grieving parents are not at all consoled by the fact that, well, at least the driver wasn't drunk.

    We as a society don't allow drunk driving. We allow guns.

    The point is that just because there are certain necessary risks in our daily lives that doesn't mean we should have to accept all risks and dangers.

    Sean,

    The very purpose of this forum is for people to express their views and opinions.



  6. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    12/21/2012 7:12 AM
    I am pretty darn liberal on most issues, but not guns and abortions. A big storm can turn a civil society into the wild west and, unless the mother is in danger, how do you justify killing a baby?



  7. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/21/2012 8:12 AM
    As an avid hunter, shooter and firearms owner, I think that we would do ourselves a big favor if we banned large capacity magazines and weapons that are incorrectly called assault rifles, but are modeled after military rifles.

    Though I deplore the rhetoric and basic misunderstandings that gun haters have, I am willing to sacrifice these items in order to calm the waters knowing that it will make little difference as long as we allow the mentally ill to have access to weapons of any kind.

    I have no doubt that many people would like to ban all guns, but that is simply not going to happen, so focus on the things you can actually achieve and leave the pie in the sky stuff to the tinfoil hat crowd.

    We need to have a national dialogue on how we handle the deadly mix of firearms and the mentally ill. Since the Reagan years, we have steadily cut funding for mental health and have also made it harder to take people who are a threat unwillingly off the streets.

    We should also be talking about the glorification of violence in popular culture. I can't tell you how many commercials I have seen over the course of the last few years for ultra violent, first person shooter video games, bloody vampire movies and zombie apocalypse films. Even though I am a huge fan of Tarantino's, it difficult to dismiss the fact that his films are incredibly violent, have we spawned a couple of generations of kids that are numb to it?

    Below is a link to a statement by Judge Larry Burns, a conservative gun owner who also sentenced Jarrod Laughner to 7 consecutive life sentences for his rampage in Tucson. I hope that more gun owners will come to the realization that we need to lead the gun control debate instead of just be against everything.


    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/com ... 4314.story

    Regards,

    Steve



  8. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    12/21/2012 11:12 AM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said:

    James,

    I see an enormous difference between guns and cars and their roles in our society and economy. People need cars, trucks, and buses to work, go to school, and move stuff around. There are required training and licensing programs before anyone is allowed to drive a car. Without motor vehicles, our society and our economy would collapse. The same is not true for guns. I'm not talking about cars, I'm talking about alcohol

    Thirty years ago drunk driving was tolerated much more than it is today. People saw how dangerous it was and began a grass roots program, MADD, to curb it. This has proved very effective and I wish the same sort of thing would happen for gun control. Driving under the influence is against the law everywhere - guns aren't against the law anywhere. There is no way to know when someone gets their drivers license who will abuse the privilege and who will not. That's another difference, driving is a privilege, not a right, as gun owners claim for themselves.

    Drunk driving is not the only type of dangerous behaviour behind the wheel. Speeding, running stop signs, tailgating, falling asleep, defective vehicles, etc. also kill children every day. I'm equally sure that those grieving parents are not at all consoled by the fact that, well, at least the driver wasn't drunk.

    We as a society don't allow drunk driving. We allow guns. We as a society don't allow gun crimes - assault, murder, battery - all illegal

    The point is that just because there are certain necessary risks in our daily lives that doesn't mean we should have to accept all risks and dangers. I understood the point the first time you made it. My point is that you are not being consistent with your application of the principle. Alcohol is not a certain, necessary risk in our daily lives - alcohol contributes to risks and dangers of the same or greater magnitude than do guns. If you want to ban "unnecessary risks" in society it should be applied uniformly

    Sean,

    The very purpose of this forum is for people to express their views and opinions.



  9. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    12/21/2012 2:12 PM
    James Schmid"] We as a society don't allow drunk driving. We allow guns. We as a society don't allow gun crimes - assault, murder, battery - all illegal

    The point is that just because there are certain necessary risks in our daily lives that doesn't mean we should have to accept all risks and dangers. I understood the point the first time you made it. My point is that you are not being consistent with your application of the principle. Alcohol is not a certain, necessary risk in our daily lives - alcohol contributes to risks and dangers of the same or greater magnitude than do guns. If you want to ban "unnecessary risks" in society it should be applied uniformly

    What's your point? We shouldn't do anything about gun violence because then there will still be drunk drivers?

    You're attempting to draw a false analogy. The sale and consumption of alcohol is taxed and regulated. With age restrictions, driver's education, license testing, there are all possible controls in place to reduce the risk of cars, whether the driver is drunk or sober. The only other thing that could be done would be another Prohibition, that's been tried and proven not to work.

    Even a drunk homicidal maniac in a car is going to have a hard time to take out 26 people in two minutes.

    There needs to be some effort to control the range of deadly firearms available to the general public. I understand there are people in America today who don't agree with that, but could we stay on topic?



  10. Niemier Rick A
    Niemier Rick A avatar
    12/21/2012 5:12 PM
    OK James, lets talk about alcohol and drunk driving. If the NRA thinks a cop in every school will stop the school shootings than lets use that line of reasoning for drunk driving and say why can't we put a cop in every bar to stop drunk driving. Every cop could be equipped with a breathalyzer, just like every cop in the schools would have to be equipped with an assault rifle, otherwise he is going to be outgunned.

    The town I live in has 31 officers. Hiring another 15 officers, plus vehicles and assault type guns is going to increase the police department budget considerably. Who is going to pay for that? Maybe there could be a gun or ammo tax?



  11. Keith Lamb
    Keith Lamb avatar
    3 posts
    12/21/2012 6:12 PM
    A national arms race....ya, that should solve it. The American mentality is warped when it comes to guns. More fodder for the show Doomsday Preppers. We should all be ashamed of the murder rates in the USA. Appalling for a supposedly educated and modern society. Keep wasting your time trying to find worthless analogies and witty quips to bolster an otherwise deflective discourse. The real answer is a much more complicated issue involving mental health treatment, personal responsibility, theist propaganda, moral obligation, etc....not more guns, and certainly not 30+ round clips and assault/military style guns.



  12. Steven Kurta
    Steven Kurta avatar
    2 posts
    12/21/2012 9:12 PM
    Columbine had an armed sheriff on duty..

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... ogram.html



  13. Steven Kurta
    Steven Kurta avatar
    2 posts
    12/21/2012 9:12 PM
    http://ideas.time.com/2012/12/19/viewpointwe-need-a-moderate-pro-gun-alternative-to-the-nra/

    I like this and would totally get behind it. A politically neutral version of the NRA. No agenda. No obsessive patriotism. No scapegoating. A REAL sportsmans club that is about the enjoyment of using guns. No defending a 30 round magazine because of some imagined slippery slope that is told will play you right into the evil governments hands to control your freedom and liberty. No politics, no agendas, no lobbying, just gun safety and responsible gun use - probably the way the NRA used to be before it became a political tool.

    This could take off as demographics change and gun enthusiasts become a little wiser and better equipped to deal, realistically, with the world around them.

    The days of the NRA, as it is, seem numbered. Time for new thinking, or more correctly, rebuilding.

    [quote">[size=150">Before the nineteen-seventies, the N.R.A. had been devoted mostly to non-political issues, like gun safety. But a coup d'état at the group's annual convention in 1977 brought a group of committed political conservatives to power—as part of the leading edge of the new, more rightward-leaning Republican Party. (Jill Lepore recounted this history in a recent piece for The New Yorker.) The new group pushed for a novel interpretation of the Second Amendment, one that gave individuals, not just militias, the right to bear arms. It was an uphill struggle. At first, their views were widely scorned. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, who was no liberal, mocked the individual-rights theory of the amendment as "a fraud."[/size">


    Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html#ixzz2FkNx5jxx

    [quote">[size=150">Conservatives often embrace "originalism," the idea that the meaning of the Constitution was fixed when it was ratified, in 1787. They mock the so-called liberal idea of a "living" constitution, whose meaning changes with the values of the country at large. But there is no better example of the living Constitution than the conservative re-casting of the Second Amendment in the last few decades of the twentieth century.[/size">

    ...enter the eighties, Reagan, Orrin Hatch and Antonin Scalia and suddenly it's a god given right to arm yourself with semi-auto handguns and rifles. Baloney. And everyone knows it's baloney.



  14. Steven Kurta
    Steven Kurta avatar
    2 posts
    12/22/2012 5:12 AM
    Unfortunately, you can't make this stuff up:

    During Wayne Lapierre's statement yesterday, and amid calls for more *God in school*, there was a guy shooting up a church in rural PA, killing a woman and then walked up his neighbors driveways and shot two of them.


    First reports are that neighbors were "uneasy around him"

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/21/4-dead-including-gunman-in-rural-pennsylvania-shooting/

    Arming pastors, why not?
    Kevlar vestments. I could make a killing.



  15. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    12/22/2012 12:12 PM
    Steven Kurta said: Unfortunately, you can't make this stuff up:

    During Wayne Lapierre's statement yesterday, and amid calls for more *God in school*, there was a guy shooting up a church in rural PA, killing a woman and then walked up his neighbors driveways and shot two of them.


    First reports are that neighbors were "uneasy around him"

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/21/4-dead-including-gunman-in-rural-pennsylvania-shooting/

    Arming pastors, why not?
    Kevlar vestments. I could make a killing.


    I always hate (that might be a bad word to use in a comment about god, yikes!), when a comment is made that we need more god in school, my question is whose god? And what about those that don't believe? There was that nice service that the president spoke at last Sunday with the different faiths represented, while I might not believe in Judaism or the Muslim religion, I do respect them, and they showed their faiths goodness, it's all about a supreme being, and isn't that what all religions are about (or maybe not, as I think of it,)? Anyway, I got off topic, if more god is needed, let it start at home and in the Churches of those faiths out in the community.

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  16. McCallum David K
    McCallum David K avatar
    12/22/2012 7:12 PM
    Rick,
    Speaking for myself my one son is sitting of a sofa next to me watching an ON DEMEMAND movie on cable and my two granddaughters are with their mother in Houston. My son drove in the check on his sick dad prior to Christmas. While managing a doctors appt this am and few errands the subject of Sandy Hook had come up more than once I had asked if he had ever had any intentions of possible buying himself a semi automatic assault style rifle. He told that he had but with a third child due Jan. 3rd it had dropped down his priority list. Just a few short months ago I was planning on a purchase myself but with a change in health Issie's it ranks much further down my list as well, But if my son says he wants one then I will buy for him for Christmas and him being one of those rich republicans makings in excess off $ 2000,000 a year. Hope its a gun we shoot occasionally while visiting Houston or it remains firmly locked in his gun safe forever.



  17. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/24/2012 8:12 AM
    I know how hard it is to click on a link and actually read something, but this is an article that everyone should read.

    Regards,

    Steve



    http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/201 ... -tell-you/



  18. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    12/24/2012 11:12 AM
    David McCallum said: Rick,
    Speaking for myself my one son is sitting of a sofa next to me watching an ON DEMEMAND movie on cable and my two granddaughters are with their mother in Houston. My son drove in the check on his sick dad prior to Christmas. While managing a doctors appt this am and few errands the subject of Sandy Hook had come up more than once I had asked if he had ever had any intentions of possible buying himself a semi automatic assault style rifle. He told that he had but with a third child due Jan. 3rd it had dropped down his priority list. Just a few short months ago I was planning on a purchase myself but with a change in health Issie's it ranks much further down my list as well, But if my son says he wants one then I will buy for him for Christmas and him being one of those rich republicans makings in excess off $ 2000,000 a year. Hope its a gun we shoot occasionally while visiting Houston or it remains firmly locked in his gun safe forever.


    I just figured out why I don't make $2million per year like David's son. I would quit after one year!

    Get well David. Prayers and Merry Christmas to you!



  19. Wally Dowe
    Wally Dowe avatar
    0 posts
    12/24/2012 11:12 AM
    Thanks for sharing the article Steve.

    Have a great Christmas.

    Wally Dowe
    Ventana Canyon
    Tucson, AZ



  20. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    12/24/2012 2:12 PM
    Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: I know how hard it is to click on a link and actually read something, but this is an article that everyone should read.

    Regards,

    Steve



    http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/201 ... -tell-you/

    Good article Steve. It's hard to argue common sense although it is something I love to do. I guess like I said earlier, there is no reason and there is no solution.
    I will always find it difficult to understand how two countries physically and culturally so close can have such completely divergent views on guns



  21. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    12/24/2012 3:12 PM
    Larry Allan said:
    Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: I know how hard it is to click on a link and actually read something, but this is an article that everyone should read.

    Regards,

    Steve



    http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/201 ... -tell-you/

    Good article Steve. It's hard to argue common sense although it is something I love to do. I guess like I said earlier, there is no reason and there is no solution.
    I will always find it difficult to understand how two countries physically and culturally so close can have such completely divergent views on guns


    Thanks for the article Steve, as much as I would love to disagree, when put into well thought out and fact based data, I seem to can't, even though I tend to use my emotions when arguing. It also gives those that don't want school campuses turned into prisons with to many armed personnel or wanting to arm school administrators.

    Real interesting information on magazine sizes (I've learned during the past week's debate, they are not clips). I guess my question is this, in order to look like caring smart people, why doesn't the NRA just provide those facts of different sized magazines, and say in a compromise, (even though statistics point out it is not a factor), we are willing to back legislation that will ban (maybe there needs to be a different word then ban) magazine clips larger then say "x" each gun as it currently is manufactured and sold, such as the Glock as referenced that holds 17 rounds is legal, a magazine that holds 18 or 30 or 100 is illegal for that same gun would be illegal, of course before it would be enacted, manufacturers would rush production of guns with larger magazines. I know the argument, why do we need to ban those magazines, when a well trained gun owner can switch in a second or less? Then why does one need the bigger magazine if they are that good at it? I think that would be a good concession, one that doesn't infringe on the second amendment (of course that's my opinion and I know many that would say the infringes) but I tell you a compromise is really what most people would really like to see. Even if it's just a feel good for some, and that's what most legislation is about, look at the tax codes, some group will say if we allow this deduction it will increase home sales, it will allow more people to save, whatever reason, most numbers aren't always factual because it's something new or there are other outside factors. Just my opinion.

    Thanks again Steve.

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  22. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/24/2012 4:12 PM
    I cannot answer questions regarding the NRA, i have not been a member since they became a branch of the Republican party.



  23. Robert Crockett
    Robert Crockett avatar
    4 posts
    12/25/2012 12:12 PM
    Steven Huffstutler, CGCS said: I cannot answer questions regarding the NRA, i have not been a member since they became a branch of the Republican party.

    Good



  24. Steven Kurta
    Steven Kurta avatar
    2 posts
    12/26/2012 10:12 AM
    .



  25. Hulteen Mike
    Hulteen Mike avatar
    12/27/2012 11:12 AM
    Seems a few facts are still being made public...

    Reports state that there were NO "assualt weapons" recovered from the school


    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495



  26. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    12/27/2012 1:12 PM
    Mike Hulteen, CGCS said: Seems a few facts are still being made public...

    Reports state that there were NO "assualt weapons" recovered from the school


    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495


    The original report was the the AR-15 was left in the car. Handguns are going to have horrific results. If they made me king, I think I would take all of the guns. Short of that, I think we are stuck with them.



  27. Robert Crockett
    Robert Crockett avatar
    4 posts
    12/28/2012 3:12 PM
    Scott Wahlin, CGCS said:
    Mike Hulteen, CGCS said: Seems a few facts are still being made public...

    Reports state that there were NO "assault weapons" recovered from the school


    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495


    The original report was the the AR-15 was left in the car. Handguns are going to have horrific results. If they made me king, I think I would take all of the guns. Short of that, I think we are stuck with them.

    I thought that you personally own guns and shoot them also....previous thread..Do you want them taken away from you?..Glad you had a good time playing golf Christmas too!



  28. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    12/28/2012 4:12 PM
    Robert Crockett said:
    Scott Wahlin, CGCS said:
    Mike Hulteen, CGCS said: Seems a few facts are still being made public...

    Reports state that there were NO "assault weapons" recovered from the school


    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495


    The original report was the the AR-15 was left in the car. Handguns are going to have horrific results. If they made me king, I think I would take all of the guns. Short of that, I think we are stuck with them.

    I thought that you personally own guns and shoot them also....previous thread..Do you want them taken away from you?..Glad you had a good time playing golf Christmas too!


    I would be happy to give up assault rifles and handguns. I think guns used for hunting should be allowed. Hunting rifles and shotguns are adequate for home protection.



  29. Larry Stowell
    Larry Stowell avatar
    0 posts
    12/29/2012 11:12 AM
    Why would someone need more firepower and more rounds for home protection than is provided by a gun like the 0.410 ga revolver linked below? A standard shotgun is more reasonable and the shotgun can be used for hunting. There are plenty of guns available without the need for assault weapons.

    Assault rifles and high capacity magazines are unnecessary for home safety or hunting. Sure, it may be fun in the desert shooting cans or varmints, but is that suffucuent justification for the manufacture and sales of such a risky machine for public consumption.

    The gun buy-back in LA yielded a rocket launcher...

    http://www.taurususa.com/gun-selector-r ... &toggle=tr



  30. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
View or change your forums profile here.