More ammo for those against metal phalli

Take the number of guns sold everyday in this country and see how many people go nuts and shoot someone. I'd say that number is very low. There are always going to be nuts that can pass a background check and do something stupid but even if they couldn't get that firearm legally they will either buy one illegally, steal one, or just use something else.

Somebody on the site had the recommendation of enforcing some kind of waiting period. It would give people like this time to cool down and think things through a little better. And really, what situation could there be where you absolutely need to have a gun this second?

Why should I have to wait?? I have no felonies and have been a law abiding citizen my whole life. People who wanna do harm to someone else will always find a way to do it with a firearm or not.

Lately I've noticed the state entrusts a lot of idiots with a 3,000lb + weapon.

I'm a law abiding citizen. Why should I have to wait?
Credit to lfrost2125, above.

The waiting period tends to prohibit trade. If I'm at a gun show buying a gun, I'm not going to want to wait three days and have the dealer ship it off to me. I want to buy my gun the same way I buy my groceries. Cash 'n Carry.

If you receive credible threats and don't own a gun, you can buy a gun and ammo and immediately be able to defend yourself. In my own case, Main Lady received a credible threat from an unknown source last week.

The single biggest mistake the Ohio legislature makes is writing law based on an isolated incident. That's not to say legislature doesn't do this; it's to say they shouldn't.

Finally, all the law in Ohio failed to stop the shooter. More law isn't going to help.

New headline!!! "Drunk driver drank beer right before he plowed into car killing entire family!"

That headline was about as useless as the one linked above. If we tried to legislate away every possible harm we would have a total loss of freedom.

The single biggest mistake ANY legislative body makes is writing laws based on an isolated incident. Except, perhaps, for certain isolated clusterfucks with wide-ranging consequences and long-lasting effects. Like maybe Love Canal, or thalidomide.

We do not harass a person exercising his/her right to vote (unless you consider asking for an ID harassment "which some do...")

Why should we harass citizens exercising their right to bear arms?

Well, this Democrat sees no issue with the right to own guns. I don't actually know left-leaning people that have issues with guns except for friends overseas. Europe handles the gun thing way differently.

However...
I don't see why we aren't checking for crazies. I don't see why regular citizens feel the need to own "rocket launchers" ie. military heavy-duty shit. And seriously, at the end of the day, I don't know why any reasonable American would think differently on the above.

I would never support the loss of gun ownership... by way of any candidate. And I don't know of any (American) progressive that would either.

That's a good point toledolen_ that few people recognize. "Forces" try to paint either party a 100% Pro or 100% Con on every issue. Not just political parties but religions as well. More often than not most people are sensible enough to have their own opinions on a variety of issues. I respect that.

As a shooting enthusiast, I appreciate your balance.

Regular citizens can't own rocket launchers, machine guns, or artillery. I know that some tactical style rifles available to the non-prohibited public do resemble the tactical style rifles used by the military. The color black does not make a rifle any more or less dangerous than RealTree hunting camo, or good old wooden brown.

For example, the weapon in question in this most recent shooting was a .22 handgun. As dangerous as any other firearm, a .22 round is probably the smallest and least destructive round available, (considering the speed at which a smaller hornaday .17 travels.) Yet, the mob used .22 handguns for executions for many years. Clearly, it is not how scary your gun looks that makes it lethal.

It is impossible to know when a person will snap. Gun sellers are trained to look for concerns and have the right to refuse a gun sale to anyone who presents themselves in a manner that suggests a "disability." (Legal term, not medical.) My guess is that this suspect presented himself in a manner that gave the staff at Bass Pro no reason for concern. Try buying a gun while freaking out, drunk or stoned on drugs and see how that goes.

At times like this, it often seems like the gun is the problem in the equation. But as we've seen over and over again, a psychotic break can occur without prior warning or indication. The purchase of a firearm is not the triggering event.

Once people have gone over the edge, they have historically acted out in a great variety of dangerous ways, and only sometimes with firearms. To me, the variable is the human brain, not the style, type or availability of firearms. How many times do we see that a waiting period would not have mattered, as the criminally insane plan and prepare for weeks or months just as often or more often than the occasions when they get it all accomplished in 45 minutes.
In fact, I argue that the craziest and most dangerous have no problem waiting. Like that guy with the orange hair in Colorado, or those Columbine whackos.

The best defense against a firearm is a firearm. Not more laws, waiting periods or extra hoops to jump.

Besides, the fastest way for a person who has gone mental to get a gun is to steal one from a friend, family member or neighbor. I'd support mandatory gun safes for any weapon that is not in your custody and control.

Instances in which a person shows up at a Bass Pro less than an hour before killing people with the weapon that they just bought is probably the statistically LEAST likely chain of events.

I am reminded of the case locally in which a man went to a shooting range, rented a gun, walked into the range, and killed himself. They never saw it coming either.

I am reminded of years ago, when Ted Bundy was on death row. James Dobson went into prison to interview him, and Bundy gave some sob story about how his brain was perverted by pornography when he was very young. It warped him and compelled him to rape and murder all those women.

Dobson, of course, looking for any reason to justify his tireless crusade to control everyone's lives and minds, swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. "There you go, more proof that porn is everything that is wrong with America." The way I saw it, though, was that Bundy was trying to turn himself into the victim in order to deflect blame for his horrible acts. Furthermore, anyone with some common sense knows that [probably] MILLIONS of men and women view pornography at some point in their lives, be it isolated or habitual. Most of those people do not rape or kill anyone.

I see guns the same way. A person with psychotic tendencies is going to find an outlet one way or the other.

Or look at the Dukes of Hazzard: they could not have guns because of their probabtion for moonshining; so they made their way the only way they knew how: they used bows and arrows. Only on the side of good, of course. Never meanin' no harm.

I am not opposed to some forms of gun regulation. But the problem of gun violence is bigger than can be fixed by just passing some laws.

"Bundy gave some sob story about how his brain was perverted by pornography when he was very young. It warped him and compelled him to rape and murder all those women."

Ha! If that were true, the human race would have been completely wiped out by now!

Or look at the Dukes of Hazzard: they could not have guns because of their probation for moonshining; so they made their way the only way they knew how: they used bows and arrows. Only on the side of good, of course. Never meanin' no harm.

OK--slightly off topic here, but I've always wondered...

How is it two guys who can't get a gun because of "probation" can run around an entire county with, occasionally, dynamite-tipped arrows--and use them!!! In full view of the sheriff!!!

These are the thoughts that didn't occur to me when I was 8 years old and loved the show...

I just assumed that a gun would have scratched the paint on the hood of the General Lee.

hell of a hijack... btw. LOL.

"The waiting period tends to prohibit trade. ... I want to buy my gun the same way I buy my groceries."

Guns aren't Groceries.

"Guns aren't Groceries"

As a gray haired grandmother I am just horrified at the violence we accept today as normal. Till the people get fed up and rebel, all kinds of violence will continue.

hell of a hijack... btw. LOL.

Eh....I knew it wasn't going to knock this off the rails.

Who hijacked? Moi?

Didn't intend to...

Here's a link to the interview:

http://www.pureintimacy.org/piArticles/A000000433.cfm

Don't mean to get OT. Just trying to show how some people will blame anything they can get their hands on for their own lack of self-control. Or, in Bundy's case, batsh#@t insanity.

No gun in the world would ever hurt anyone if no person ever picked it up and used it. So who is really to blame? What is the real root of the problem?

I don't see why regular citizens feel the need to own "rocket launchers" ie. military heavy-duty shit.

Honestly, in my opinion, because some people just like them. I love my guns. Personally i would LOVE to own a Barret 50.

To be fair, legal concealed carry didn't stop the shooter either.

I'm NOT against conceaned carry. Just looking at all sides here. Beats all ya ever saw.

I don't think that he was going to eat the guns or shoot the vegetables. I think that it was a colorful way to say "cash and carry."

I shot a potato gun once, and I have seen videos of watermelon catapults. It seems that dangerous produce is everywhere these days. Oh, the humanity!

It's the season for Punkin Chunkin.

I don't think that he was going to eat the guns or shoot the vegetables. I think that it was a colorful way to say "cash and carry."

My point with "guns aren't groceries" was that it is ludicrous to expect the sale of dangerous weapons to be as easy or convenient and the purchase of a bag of apples.

Nope. It's ludicrous to think that it isn't.

When I was a mere blip on the Sylvania Township Police RADAR, you could purchase any firearm you liked via mail order. You'd see something you liked in the Sears catalog, fill out the order form and in 30 days you'd have your rifle, pistol or shotgun. You could go down to Janney's Hardware and buy guns and ammo, as you could most other places. Army surplus was a big deal back then, and you could get a nice .45 1911 via mail order.

The outrage is that we have the technology to do the same thing today and incorporate background checks at the same time, but due to the Brady Bunch (spit spit) and a fascist government we, the law abiding public, are prohibited.

The dichotomy between mental illness, the right to privacy and a background check is a Gordian knot that I don't see unraveling anytime soon. People have a right to privacy, and that right should not be subject to coercion or the whims of government at it's worst. At the same time, allowing someone access to a firearm (or any other similar weapon) while they are experiencing a psychotic episode due to their right to bear arms isn't too appealing to me either, nor is giving a psychologist or psychiatrist the authority to forbid someone from possessing a weapon a great solution. I don't have a good solution for this one.

How about a bag of caster beans, how about rat poison, how about diesel fuel, lots of dangerous things are easy to buy.

How about a bag of caster beans, how about rat poison, how about diesel fuel, lots of dangerous things are easy to buy.

How about a fifth of whiskey, an SUV, an acetylene torch, a can of starter fluid, a gallon of nitromethane, a knife, a baseball bat, a potato gun, a chain saw...

You guys been watching the Friday the 13th marathon?

Listening to Mack the Knife.

Have you ever tried to hold up a convenience store with a handful of castor beans? Can't you at least admit the bald difference and between household items and those used to commit crimes (about 10,000 murders in 2011), because it's hard to take you seriously if you aren't willing to acknowledge the obvious.

If you notice all of the things you have listed were invented and designed for some constructive purpose, driving, cutting down trees, playing baseball. Guns were designed for one reason; to kill living things, and they are very well designed.

http://www.federalnewsradio.com/615/3087262/Police-Spa-shooting-suspect-slashed-wifes-tires-

Another lunatic who has added credence to anti metal phalli laws.

Speaking of technology, why not just 3D print your own firearms?

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/133514-the-worlds-first-3d-printed-gun

CNC machines are also dropping in price, maybe you can get one of them.

There's also laser sintering additive processes...

I'm a fairly liberal person but being from WV I'm a hard 2nd amendment follower.

But my friends and family don't deer hunt with assault rifles.

My $0.02

But my friends and family don't deer hunt with assault rifles.

I don't face Bambi with anything less than a Howitzer...it's just common sense.

"Radcliffe Franklin Haughton damaged his wife's tires on Oct. 4, Brookfield police said. She sought court protection four days later, and a judge granted a four-year restraining order on Thursday. As part of the order, Haughton was prohibited from owning a firearm."

So... this guy didn't just have a waiting period.... he was specifically identified as a person prohibited, specifically... not by class, and that didn't stop him.

Meanwhile... the gun had no prior history of abuse.

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/officials-1-dead-seminole-home-3-shot-death-other-/nSgg3/

After these recent rampages, working at a salon should be considered a dangerous occupation.

What the hell is wrong with people?

IT'S COMING RIGHT FOR US!

Holy hand grenade of Antioch.

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting rights. Nothing in the Constitution or history says that the 2nd amendment is about hunting animals.

It is about resisting tyranny.

Oh...and yes "regular citizens" can own fully automatic "machine guns". It does require a more thorough investigation by the BATF and a much longer waiting period but there are many people in the local area who legally own full auto weapons.

Are those select-fire weapons made post-1986?

Mine are pre-1986. My primary is an authentic Israeli made Uzi. I paid $750 in the late 70's. Today in good condition, it sells for $20,000+.

The knock-offs are cheap...particularly the semi-auto knock offs. same with an AK variant. Years ago there was a guy who would park his van on River Rd and sell cheap fully-auto fake Uzi's out of the back.

Dam. That's a good investment.
I hope that you sent a thank you card to Metzenbaum and Schumer.