Cop-killer bullets are an invention of the media. Bullet proof vests are no match for most hunting rounds, I have more calibers that can penetrate a vest than won't. What's large? I consider 200 to be large but I don't have objections to having a larger capacity. Cam systems, delays, etc how do you legislate that? If you want laws you have to make them enforceable. With the proper knowledge and experience I am fully within my rights to make my own weapons.

an example of a build it yourself:
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbu...sunami-warning!

Just a thought on this, You don't trust our Government what makes you think we do?

How effective is your assault rifle going to be against a government that has laser guided nuclear missiles?

Hey, wait a second. Everyone should have the right to bear laser guided nuclear missiles. That'll fix that. You guys should amend your constitution again to include it.

Edit: From the link posted by Blinker_Fluid:

"God Bless America the only country on this sh_tty planet where you still have the freedom to build AKs in defense of Motherland! The only country where a sh_t shovel can become an awesome weapon of death and destruction."

That's the mentality we're dealing with here.

The world is currently watching America with bated breath, naively hoping that you guys will finally see reason. Hoping that we never have to witness another horror.

But, sadly, nothing will change. After the events of the past few decades, I guess we should know better than to expect a reasonable outcome.

Meanwhile, innocent people will continue to be shot. Armed or not.

Okay everybody, I'll not be posting in this thread again. I don't have the time to continue this debate due to the fact that I'm studying for Linux+, Bash scripting, and C++ programing, besides everything else going on in my life. I have laid out the evidence for my position in my preceding posts. I would merely like to say that I don't think that gun control will solve the problems of my time, place, and era of history. I extend my sympathy to those who have lost loved ones in these shootings.

1. Didn't say that bullet proof vests had to be a match for most hunting rounds, but there is a difference between big game hunting rounds and bullets deliberately designed to be armor piercing. God knows, I agree with you, having been hunting since I was six years old myself, but making more rounds than the legitimate market will support (How many people go moose or elk hunting in Virginia? Yes, I grew up in a state with a Moose season, and yes, you need a big round for that, but there's far more ammo out there than legitimate uses justify). We can cut down on both the availability of outlandish ammo and ammo designed for things a civilian doesn't have a legitimate need for.

AND YES, I agree, the Sandy Hook shooter didn't use outlandish ammo, but we can start with that.

2. I've hunted since I was six (going on 50 years now), and I did my military time as an 0311 in the US Marines. I cannot think of a situation where a hunter needs more than three rounds at a time (three rounds being the hunter's universal distress call). If a hunter needs more than two fast rounds, he's in a situation where he shouldn't be taking the shot. So I cannot see shotguns and civilian rifles needing more than 5 rounds at a time.

The perfect home defense weapon for me? A 20 gauge pump shotgun. Unique sound when you work the pump, which makes the crook run away without a shot, and if you do shoot, the pellets won't go through the walls, so you won't hurt your kid or neighbor.

3. As for handguns, I can see being in a close-danger situation (knifer within 21 feet and all that) and needing to get rounds off. Ten rounds is what you can get off realistically (and I know how to shoot), and fifteen by history (which is influenced by combat experience when the manufacturers made civilian models "just like you had in the Army"), so there's no need for more than fifteen round magazines in my book.

4.How do you legislate it? Set up a buy-back system and give everyone six months to sell the weapon to the government before possession becomes a crime.

5. Sure you can make your own weapons. Just make sure that they stay within the guidelines. Then register them.

For the last 250 or so years, firearms have been available to many people. Did we ever hear of such a heinous act prior to readily available violent media? No. In fact, kids used to take firearms to many schools to go hunting after school. When I was a kid we never had any issue with guns like we do now. Almost every kid in school could get their hands on weapons, many weapons were even displayed in the homes with ammo below. No locks, no controls other than a sense of right and wrong.


This kook and some next one out there got what they wanted. They felt that this act was the greatest thing they ever did or could do. It topped them all. The media made such a fuss over the last kook and he wanted to beat that amount of media. This has been played over and over in many countries. Kook after kook believes that they will fulfilled if they can just get the attention of the world that they deserve. Stop any mention of their names, photos or any clue about them. They wanted media attention.

http://news.discovery.com/history/ma...ry-121220.html

If you have any studies that are in favor of your opinion please be so kind to present them.

What? Grant murderers anonymity? That's a weird idea. How can they benefit from publicity if they're dead?

Stupid scientific people would screw up the study and try to make me believe it is some other issue and add fuel to the kooks internal fire.

I don't have any scientific proof poop stinks. I just believe it. Do I need to have proof that violent images destroy the moral fabric of society? I only have cause and effect and my belief that children need controlled upbringing. I believe that they are very impressionable and that it is the responsibility of the adult society to provide a sane and moral center at all times. (I have turned into my father)

Do you mean the same "stupid scientific people" that have invented the computer you are posting this with?

Sou you try to press you beliefs on other people, without any supporting facts that your position actually is true.
I also fail to see why video games should be banned, just because some parents are not able to control what their kids are playing.

I'd imagine with the right resolve we could do wonderful things. A bunch of farmers managed to do it over 200 years ago to one of the most powerful armies in the world.

You keep using that word... "Reasonable" Is it the gun that is scaring you? is it reasonable to fear an object? People die all the time what about those causes of death?
Here's some data from the CDC
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf
it includes intentional and unintentional deaths
some excerpts

I might ask if there is so much excitement over guns why are the other causes ignored? I could argue guns are needed for defense but what about the alcohol? I can't say alcohol has many other uses other than as beverage that would lead to death. Where is the cry to ban it? There are only 7000 deaths separating the two. A reasonable person would want to reduce all deaths. We could put in place an alcohol content level limit of 10 proof, limit anything that is a scary color, reduce bottle neck size to only allow a certain amount per period of time, ban any irregular shaped bottles, make people pass a background check and waiting period. It's reasonable to do.

With alcohol you kill yourself.
With guns you kill others.

If only that were true.
http://www.madd.org/statistics/

Drunk driving is already prohibited. So it is not the alcohol killing people in the statistic you linked to, it is drunk people breaking the law.
Alcohol in itself can only harm the person drinking the alcohol, while guns harm other living beings.

Nonetheless, the effects of alcohol are not the topic here and just saying: "Hey, there are other things that harm the society, so we can just dismiss critical thinking about guns and their effect." is IMHO somewhat weird.

"According to the World Health Organization, road traffic injuries caused an estimated 1.26 million deaths worldwide in the year 2000" from wikipedia.

We should ban cars.