Ban hands and feet

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Because they're legal.

We don't have to have them in circulation because they are legal. True, we do have them in circulation because they are legal but we do not have to have them in circulation because they are legal. That's a choice we make and I'd rather we make the choice to get them out of circulation. They do no good at all but they do a lot of damage. I really wonder why assault rifles are seemingly more important to this nation than our children? That's a sick state of affairs, isn't it?

Edited December 28, 2012 by Mr. Big Dog

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Sure but the fact remains that assault rifles are the weapon of choice in just about all the mass murders that are committed. They serve no good. Why do we have to have them in circulation?

They seem to be the weapon of choice in the mass shootings. Maybe these psychos envision themselves as Rambo wannabes. I also think it very safe to say that most of the firearms deaths in the US are not from assault weapons. Just plain old everyday handguns. I'm sure someone could provide some statistics on this.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

They seem to be the weapon of choice in the mass shootings. Maybe these psychos envision themselves as Rambo wannabes. I also think it very safe to say that most of the firearms deaths in the US are not from assault weapons. Just plain old everyday handguns. I'm sure someone could provide some statistics on this.

I nominate mr. big dog. I say we send him to Chicago's south side, Compton CA, Oakland CA, DC, Detroit, and East St. Louis to do a survey.

[himher 634]

I prefer registration of (and published lists available on public record of) non-gun owners as well as an annual fee that can be used, along with the taxes on firearms and ammunition that are already in place, to pay for police officers in schools.

Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax (FAET) is a tax imposed by Chapter 32 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 4181) on the sale of firearms and ammunition by manufacturers, producers, and importers.

Read more: Ammunition Tax Law | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/facts_6088490_ammunition-tax-law.html#ixzz2GJuG6jRw

http://www.ttb.gov/firearms/faet-faqs.shtml

Gun owners are otherwise and therefore already paying taxes on both guns and ammunition as well as paying a significant amount of money . Non-gun owners who choose to sit by and do nothing (like the british or ther germans overseas choose to do while we routinely bail their a$$es out) and who wish to enjoy the protection for their families and children that a police officer armed with a gun gives them should pony up to the community and pay up.

Given a list we can also make informed choices as to whether to provide or not provide the personal protection of property that states such as Texas allow us to provide for our neighbors as well.

The $2.4 billion in annual federal income-tax money generated by hunters’

spending could cover the annual paychecks of 100,000 troops. That’s 8 divisions,

143 battalions, 3,300 platoons and some major money.

Source: Congressional Sportsman's Foundation

We would be quite happy to see those divisions, battallions, platoons stationed at our schools instead of squandered on other Washington programs. We would also be quite happy to see non-gun owners march right up with their contribution and if they choose not to then have an (armed)IRS agent go collect it from them. LOL

Are you against police officers in schools paid for by gun purchasers? Why?

Edited December 28, 2012 by himher

[himher 634]

I saw a lot of assault rifles carried by the agents who responded to the scene. It must be because they do no good at all huh

We don't have to have them in circulation because they are legal. True, we do have them in circulation because they are legal but we do not have to have them in circulation because they are legal. That's a choice we make and I'd rather we make the choice to get them out of circulation. They do no good at all but they do a lot of damage. I really wonder why assault rifles are seemingly more important to this nation than our children? That's a sick state of affairs, isn't it?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I saw a lot of assault rifles carried by the agents who responded to the scene. It must be because they do no good at all huh

No problem with law enforcement being better equipped than perps. What I am saying and what remains a fact is that tn private, civilian hands they have done no good at all. Ever.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

No problem at all!

You are comparing apples and oranges here. Each proposal can stand or fall on its own. I would like to see 'assault' rifles banned AND perhaps have sheriff deputies assigned to schools for children's safety, paid for by the same people that now fund the NRA, the gun enthusiasts and the manufacturers that have got us to this sad state of affairs!

Once again you have regressed to calling for a ban on assault weapons., can you you give one credible shred of evidence that this would make us safer. A ban on assault weapons is a politically motivated exercise in grandstanding to whip ignorant people into a state of frenzy and make them think someone is making them safer. As i showed more people die from hands and feet than from assault weapons every years. Why do you people keep screaming ban "assault Hollywood looking scary guns"

I just don't understand how you people think going after a weapon because of the way it looks or magazine capacity is going to change anything. Go back and look at the FBI numbers. It just does not add up.

P,>S So I can only have a 10 round mag for my AR-15. I can tell you as an ex-infantryman, I can change that mag and be back firing before you count to 3, which is about the same amount of time it takes someone to acquire and shoot at a target that is not concealed.

So tell me how a ban on assault weapons is going to bring down the firearm murder rate when the vast majority are committed by easily concealed handguns. You can't becuse it makes no sense what so ever. Rememeber where this started. More people die of assault with feet and hands than by assault weapons ever year.

So if the recent massacre had been carried out by a guy with a shotgun and 2 glocks with 10 round mags would you feel better. I can promise the results would have been the same

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

They seem to be the weapon of choice in the mass shootings. Maybe these psychos envision themselves as Rambo wannabes. I also think it very safe to say that most of the firearms deaths in the US are not from assault weapons. Just plain old everyday handguns. I'm sure someone could provide some statistics on this.

This thread was started with those statistics that clearly point out hand guns kill way way more than assault weapons. So do hands and feet.

We are trying to do something in the name of fixing gun violence that is not the problem. Just the hand gun murders in one city "Chicago" account for more murders than all assault weapons in the whole of the U.S.

Yet the liberal politicians spend so much time to ban something that anyone with any common sense knows is not the problem. It's a joke. Anyone that supprots this ban, does not understand, 1. Statistics 2. Math 3. Tactics 4. Weapons.

[Boggy1974 124]

Standing with Mr. BigDog!

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I nominate mr. big dog. I say we send him to Chicago's south side, Compton CA, Oakland CA, DC, Detroit, and East St. Louis to do a survey.

No need, people are only concerned when it's their back yard. Gun violence has been a problem in the black/brown community for decades, but only until a suburbs gets hit then people start to take notice.

Edited December 28, 2012 by Su and Marvin

[Karee 4,190]

No need, people are only concerned when it's their back yard. Gun violence has been a problem in the black brown community for decades, but only until a suburbs gets hit then people start to take notice.

Bingo! You can thank the media for alot of that as well.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Standing with Mr. BigDog!

Please do!

Please feel free to add something to the conversation while you are at it.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

No problem at all!

You are comparing apples and oranges here. Each proposal can stand or fall on its own. I would like to see 'assault' rifles banned AND perhaps have sheriff deputies assigned to schools for children's safety, paid for by the same people that now fund the NRA, the gun enthusiasts and the manufacturers that have got us to this sad state of affairs!

So you want to take away our rights and make us pay for it? No thanks. I'll stand by the Supreme Court decisions then.

So if assault weapons were banned and the assault weapon vacuum cleaner had sicked them all up and the perp used a lever action rifle, plus 2, 10 round handguns to kill 20 children....you would be happy?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Bingo! You can thank the media for alot of that as well.

I do, we are all equal, but it's sad when it takes a school full of non minority children to get killed before the powers that be start taking a look at solutions. There were quite a few black children killed by drive by shooting over the last month and those got little to no coverage.

[Teddy B 17,252]

This thread was started with those statistics that clearly point out hand guns kill way way more than assault weapons. So do hands and feet.

This thread was started by you making the claim that hands and feet kill more people than assault rifles, you provided a link that does not back up your claim. There is no data for assault rifles on that FBI chart, there is no data for assault weapons period. There is however a column titled "firearms (type unknown)", that column has the majority of firearms used except for handguns, in almost every state. Those numbers far exceed "rifles" or hands and feet. I asked you to explain how you came to your conclusion that hands and feet killed more people than assault rifles, I'm still waiting for your answer.

Edited December 28, 2012 by Teddy B