Gun Nuts

Comments

1
It's why I continue to question why we won't utilize technology we've already developed. For example, gunfire sensors in place right now in many federal and state buildings, and some schools. Early versions of this date to the 90's in communities in California and Chicago that utilized auditory sensors to detect gunfire. We literally have the technology and it could be implemented in public places, both outdoors and indoors. Does it prevent a shooting or killing? nope. Would it drastically increase response time? Yup. I don't claim its the answer, but it seems pretty silly to me that when this happens everyone scratches their heads, people engage in rhetorical battles, and we have something that could AT THE VERY LEAST help society move in the right direction. Even better, NRA wouldn't even have a strong argument because it's literally just increasing response time and location accuracy for first responders for illegal gunshots in public places. It does't modify the 2nd amendment, it doesn't remove weapon access, it's just a useful tool. Again, not the solution, but why aren't we willing to do even this?
3
Forresthump, you missed the part where the NRA already said they'd support limiting access to bumpstocks, and you probably missed the part where they banned them from NRA ranges.
5
You're welcome, and your sarcasm isn't needed. I'm sure you've seen the same reports and read the same statements. Obviously they could turn cheek if/when actual legislation is introduced. But still, sort of makes your statement contradictory does't it? You literally said progress won't happen because the NRA will make the ultimate decision, yet the NRA is the only organization as of now that has actually implemented any policy against them (banning at ranges). If you want to bash something at least make it clever
7
We simply need to make guns so they can only be shot by the person who owns them (fingerprint technology people). It's the only way to ensure the actual gun owner is held responsible when someone gets murdered with their gun. AmeriKKKa is wants its freeDUMB, no matter how many bodies are piled up in mounds or how much blood we are drowning in > so make every gun owner responsible in the only way possible > only they can shoot their gun. This would prevent kids from shooting themselves and other and trafficking weapons impossible. Yeah there are a sh** ton of guns out there and we've have to figure out how to get them and destroy them, but moving forward, you want own a murder weapon? Your finger is the only one that can pull the trigger, so when bad things happen, you and only you can and will be held 100% responsible.

And while we're at it, every time a police officer shoots and kills someone they need to lose their job. Period. I guarantee this will decrease police homicides by 1,000,000% None of this is rocket science. AmeriKKKans are just so dumb and hateful and violent they want to live in this sh**show.
8
Forrest, we're off on the wrong foot here partner. You must have missed my first post. I'm actually very pro-control - personally I think utilization of technology we already have is the answer. You'll get nowhere by being pissed off at everything. It's why pro-gun people will never listen to you, and why you'll never listen to pro-gun people.

I understand fully the history of the NRA and I'm not speaking on their behalf, at least I'm not trying to overtly. But I call it like I see it, all of a sudden everyone's talking about bumpstocks yet they're flying off the shelves in gun stores. Nothings been drafted, no changes at all, just politicians saying "hey we should look at that." The NRA is the only active participant thus far to make any decisions about the matter - whether it's too little too late is immaterial to the topic. Your post was about bumpstocks, not the list you gave me. You said the NRA would reverse that. Evidence shows otherwise. And you're right, the NRA does own the politicians - so maybe, just maybe, if the NRA has come out and said "wait a second, wtf" then possibly politicians will do something about it because usually they don't do shit out of fear of reprisal.

I ain't the enemy forrest
9
Christina I agree. We have fingerprint technology for weapons, we have gunfire sensors in public places, we have microchipped weapons, we have less-than-lethal and non-lethal alternatives for law enforcement, and between all other technologies we've developed and continue to develop I can't for the life of me believe we're still having these problems. We can shoot missiles out of the air, we can listen to people from space, we can use finger and hand-print technology to control access to buildings and bank accounts but we can't stop a person from committing a mass shooting. Seems unreal to me.
11
The bump stock move by the NRA is simply a way to avoid prolonged debate about gun laws in this country. This is why they're pushing to have the ATF, not congress, address the bump stock issue.

The last time that happened was in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings in late 2012. The NRA helped defeat the two major gun control proposals offered up in the wake of those murders.