Homeowners son defends himself against 3 intruders with "high capacity" AR-15

[Soul Crusher]

Straw avoiding further humiliation in this thread like the plague

[Twaddle]

Careful racking too fast.

What happens if you rack to fast?  Will it break?   

[tonymctones]

For a shotgun, yes!

Except this Kel-Tec has a 7+7+1 capacity that I am quite fond of:

UTAS has a 12 gauge based on the AR platform for about the same price as the kel tec. I was waiting for the price of the kel tec to come down and saw this.

http://www.utas-usa.com/semiautoshotgun/xtr-12-tungsten

I have yet to see one at a gun show. I have an issue with buying a gun I have never physically held or seen before but I have heard good things so far.

[HockeyFightFan]

Straw avoiding further humiliation in this thread like the plague

He has 33 reasons in his clip for avoiding it...

[Skeletor]

For a shotgun, yes!

Except this Kel-Tec has a 7+7+1 capacity that I am quite fond of:

Per snowflake standards, this must qualify as an assault weapon of mass destruction with high capacity 10 clip magazine filled with depleted uranium bullets and is used extensively for clubbing baby seals.

[Las Vegas]

people don't need guns. period. for every case like this where access to a gun possibly saved lives, there's 10+ cases where access to a gun led to loss of life. 

   Still can't stop lol'ing at this post.

[Dos Equis]

  Still can't stop lol'ing at this post.

And to think there are people with that mindset in our legislatures.   

[TuHolmes]

people don't need guns. period. for every case like this where access to a gun possibly saved lives, there's 10+ cases where access to a gun led to loss of life. 

Whenever I read this shit, I think about how the US was founded on individuals taking up arms against an oppressive government. The first thing despots do is take away the citizens ability to defend itself.

[chaos]

What happens if you rack to fast?  Will it break?   

No, I had just read a story awhile back about people slamming their hands forward too fast and slipping off the forward grip potentially putting that hand in front of the barrel.

[HockeyFightFan]

Whenever I read this shit, I think about how the US was founded on individuals taking up arms against an oppressive government. The first thing despots do is take away the citizens ability to defend itself.

Tu, on the front lines of getbiggers against oppressive governments, we take up arms using front double bi poses!

[Coach is Back!]

ROFLMAO

[Twaddle]

No, I had just read a story awhile back about people slamming their hands forward too fast and slipping off the forward grip potentially putting that hand in front of the barrel.

 

[Las Vegas]

And to think there are people with that mindset in our legislatures.   

Yeah, so it isn't "really" funny I know.  It's not at all funny, in fact.  It's a combination of tragic, stupid, frightful, and incredible.

Anti-Gun Argument = ALL Emotion, ZERO Logic.

Get your estrogen in check, Conker, and quit babbling.  Next thing you know, you'll be growing tits.

[Straw Man]

The point is your opinion doesn't matter.   You need as many rounds as you need.   Guns malfunction which may require to reload.   Magazines may malfunction or wear over time.   Your argument over 'need' does not trump someones ability to protect life and property.

hey looks like we have something in common
I couldn't get less of a shit about your opinion either

turns out the OK shooter only needed three shots to defend himself - one for each dead burglar

why don't cops use 33 round magazines in their guns

seems like a cop is much more likely to need to defend himself than anyone else

[Straw Man]

Guns are a protected constitutional right, and cars are not.

That's really all that matters in this instance.

and well regulated too

don't forget that part

btw - just so there is no confusion (I know people like to change me argument to whatever it is they want to defend - not saying you're doing that but just want to be clear)....I have no issue with guns, gun ownership, self defense, etc.

just pointing out the fact that large capacity magazines are used in many mass shooting events yet I don't see cops using them or any evidence that they are needed for home defense

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/high-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings

Now, if anyone wants to dispute that and show some proof that if fine with me

What should be done?

I assume the conclusion of this board is absolutely nothing

I'm fine with that.

That's settle the debate once and for all

Mass shootings will continue to happen in this country, they are a part of life and there is nothing we can do about it.

In fact, they are so common in this country that it's kind of our thing.  It's just part of life in this country kind of like obesity and diabetes

Anyone disagree with that

[Yamcha]

and well regulated too

don't forget that part

btw - just so there is no confusion (I know people like to change me argument to whatever it is they want to defend - not saying you're doing that but just want to be clear)....I have no issue with guns, gun ownership, self defense, etc.

just pointing out the fact that large capacity magazines are used in many mass shooting events yet I don't see cops using them or any evidence that they are needed for home defense

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/high-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings

Now, if anyone wants to dispute that and show some proof that if fine with me

What should be done?

I assume the conclusion of this board is absolutely nothing

I'm fine with that.

That's settle the debate once and for all

Mass shootings will continue to happen in this country, they are a part of life and there is nothing we can do about it.

In fact, they are so common in this country that it's kind of our thing.  It's just part of life in this country kind of like obesity and diabetes

Anyone disagree with that

[TuHolmes]

and well regulated too

don't forget that part

btw - just so there is no confusion (I know people like to change me argument to whatever it is they want to defend - not saying you're doing that but just want to be clear)....I have no issue with guns, gun ownership, self defense, etc.

just pointing out the fact that large capacity magazines are used in many mass shooting events yet I don't see cops using them or any evidence that they are needed for home defense

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/high-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings

Now, if anyone wants to dispute that and show some proof that if fine with me

What should be done?

I assume the conclusion of this board is absolutely nothing

I'm fine with that.

That's settle the debate once and for all

Mass shootings will continue to happen in this country, they are a part of life and there is nothing we can do about it.

In fact, they are so common in this country that it's kind of our thing.  It's just part of life in this country kind of like obesity and diabetes

Anyone disagree with that

Actually, it's the militia that is stated to be regulated, not the right to bear arms.

That right to keep and bear arms is to "not be infringed". You know what that means.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Grammar is important in this phrase.

[Coach is Back!]

and well regulated too

don't forget that part

btw - just so there is no confusion (I know people like to change me argument to whatever it is they want to defend - not saying you're doing that but just want to be clear)....I have no issue with guns, gun ownership, self defense, etc.

just pointing out the fact that large capacity magazines are used in many mass shooting events yet I don't see cops using them or any evidence that they are needed for home defense

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/high-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings

Now, if anyone wants to dispute that and show some proof that if fine with me

What should be done?

I assume the conclusion of this board is absolutely nothing

I'm fine with that.

That's settle the debate once and for all

Mass shootings will continue to happen in this country, they are a part of life and there is nothing we can do about it.

In fact, they are so common in this country that it's kind of our thing.  It's just part of life in this country kind of like obesity and diabetes

Anyone disagree with that

Dispute what? That we have some crazy people in the world? You listed 32 mass shootings within a 30 year span. As of today approximately 44-46% of households own a firearm. Out of that how many do you suspect will commit a mass murder? You want to take away the rights of the majority when only a few committed a mass murder. Your logic doesn't add up.

[Straw Man]

Actually, it's the militia that is stated to be regulated, not the right to bear arms.

That right to keep and bear arms is to "not be infringed". You know what that means.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Grammar is important in this phrase.

grammar is important and no one really knows for sure what the founders intended when the meant "arms" or even "well regulated".  We know what "arms" were at that time so for those strict strict constitutionalist types I'm fine with anyone owning any "arm" available at the time the constitution was written.

we'd also have to know the exact definition of a militia that that time

Also, a common definition of "well regulated" at that time was something that was in proper working order

Let's put that aside for the moment

I have a few questions

Do we regulate weapons in this country (or in some cases by state or local ordinance?)

Do we take away peoples  rights in this country (for example where does it say in the Constitution that felons should not be allowed to vote or own guns?).   I personally don't agree with this.  I'd like to see the NRA which cares about the Constitution add this to their cause.  

Finally, my original question (or rather statement) and you can even ignore the other questions....
- Can't we all just agree that there is NOTHING we can do about mass shootings or gun violence in this country.  It's just part of our heritage.   Let's just all admit that and stop being upset, alarmed or surprised when this happens.  

Can we agree on that?

I would be totally fine with that

[TuHolmes]

grammar is important and no one really knows for sure what the founders intended when the meant "arms" or even "well regulated".  We know what "arms" were at that time so for those strict strict constitutionalist types I'm fine with anyone owning any "arm" available at the time the constitution was written.

we'd also have to know the exact definition of a militia that that time

Also, a common definition of "well regulated" at that time was something that was in proper working order

Let's put that aside for the moment

I have a few questions

Do we regulate weapons in this country (or in some cases by state or local ordinance?)

We do. I don't agree with it, but yes.

Do we take away peoples  rights in this country (for example where does it say in the Constitution that felons should not be allowed to vote or own guns?).   I personally don't agree with this.  I'd like to see the NRA which cares about the Constitution add this to their cause.  

Yes, we do, and I'm also against that.

Finally, my original question (or rather statement) and you can even ignore the other questions....
- Can't we all just agree that there is NOTHING we can do about mass shootings or gun violence in this country.  It's just part of our heritage.   Let's just all admit that and stop being upset, alarmed or surprised when this happens.  

Can we agree on that?

I would be totally fine with that

Yes. I am not alarmed by it at all. It sucks, but the number of mass shootings is relatively small compared to a great many other things that hurt people in this country.

[Straw Man]

We do. I don't agree with it, but yes.

Yes, we do, and I'm also against that.

Yes. I am not alarmed by it at all. It sucks, but the number of mass shootings is relatively small compared to a great many other things that hurt people in this country.

you are I are in total agreement

[Soul Crusher]

Straw - go read Heller decision  and get back to us. 

[Straw Man]

Straw - go read Heller decision  and get back to us. 

summarize it for us

[Soul Crusher]

summarize it for us

Summary - 99% of the falsities and idiocy you spew on gun control issues is already decided and ruled on by the SC. 

Now go get your shine box.       

[Straw Man]

Summary - 99% of the falsities and idiocy you spew on gun control issues is already decided and ruled on by the SC. 

Now go get your shine box.       

so when I say that I'm fine with anyone having guns and that gun violence is just part of this country the Heller decision says that is false?