did anyone say anything about preventing "law abiding citizens" from owning a firearm? (what does law abiding mean anyways? does someone with a speeding ticket get prohibited from buying a gun? how about a child molestor? a person who used a knife in an attack? what about an ex soldier who killed hundreds of people on the battle field but never broke a law in his life?)
because criminals wont follow a law the law shouldnt be in place ? people still commit murder despite it being illegal, so murder should be legal to prevent murder from happening? that way if someones about to murder someone else they will be dettered from doing so knowing that they may be murdered for having murderous intent?
did anyone say anything about preventing "law abiding citizens" from owning a firearm? (what does law abiding mean anyways? does someone with a speeding ticket get prohibited from buying a gun? how about a child molestor? a person who used a knife in an attack? what about an ex soldier who killed hundreds of people on the battle field but never broke a law in his life?)
Actually yea, people since the shooting have been screaming for more gun control and banning certain types of firearms.
because criminals wont follow a law the law shouldnt be in place ? people still commit murder despite it being illegal, so murder should be legal to prevent murder from happening? that way if someones about to murder someone else they will be dettered from doing so knowing that they may be murdered for having murderous intent?
As usual you don't get it.
Who said there shouldn't be laws in place?
There are roughly 20,000 gun laws already on the books we don't need any new laws that A) only punish people who follow the laws and B) that criminals aren't going to follow
Tragedies like this evoke a lot of emotion in people with good reason but it's misdirected. People realize they are helpless because they have no control over the lunatics who commit these crimes so they look at the the objects he used and then focus their attention on them
Would any new laws have prevented this? NO he actually attained all of his weapons legally. He passed the background checks , had no criminal record. You can't guess who is mentally ill and when they will go off
Would a reinstatement of the failed ' Assault weapons ban ' have prevented this? NO because there never was a ban on these weapons , only on certain cosmetic features like a retractable butt-stock , a flash suppressor and a bayonet lug as well as magazines that held more than 10 rounds at a time.
None of the banned features would have prevented this because one you could always buy a ' preban ' rifle and ' preban ' 30 or even 100 round magazines. Seeing the AR15 platform was developed in the late 1950s there are MILLIONS of these 30 round magazines floating around all made before the ' ban ' in 1994 which ended in 2004 when they resumed making brand new 30 round magazines. The 100 round magazines to my knowledge they didn't make in the millions , the military tested and found they weren't very reliable and to heavy for use so scrapped them. but they can be had ' preban '
Nothing would have prevented this lunatic from doing what he intended. People just can't accept that and think by passing these ' feel good ' measures that this will in the future some how prevent people from being able to carry out these acts. NOT going to happen. If every gun in the United States magically disappeared we would be reading about a lunatic that went into a movie theater with a sword and killed 12 people , or a flame thrower or whatever other means was available
You can't legislate sanity to the insane.
