How many more massacres do you need before you give up your guns America?

@BrklnBlue will your common sense gun laws prevent people from killing other people?

They will prevent one person from indiscriminately killing many people at the same time.

The shooters have increasingly been using guns with high-capacity magazines, allowing them to fire off dozens of rounds without having to reload.

When the founding fathers crafted the second amendment, the guns they had in mind were single shot muskets. Not AR15 converted to automatic with high capacity magazines.

The founding fathers could never have foreseen the world wide web, and all our forms of communication, when they gave us freedom of speech either. Perhaps we should look at giving up that right as well? @BrklnBlue

@BrklnBlue are you sure the criminals will give up their guns? Seems to me that they'd be hesitant.

Your common sense in my opinion is lacking sense.

@SW-User i believe if the founding father's could see the munitions that oit federal army has the capabilities to deploy....they'd more than encourage the average American to get a tank

@Notanymore Agreed. They wanted us to have equal to or above the capabilities that our government has, because that's a deterrent to tyranny.

@SW-User that's the way that I interpret it....just seems like a shame to have an all powerful big brother....

huh? Two very different amendments. While the right to free speech has hurt some feelings,the right to own militarily style assault rifles has murdered scores of innocents

@BrklnBlue ? That to me is non-sequitur.....how does a right kill?

@BrklnBlue First, the average citizen doesn't have the right (even though they should according to the Constitution) to own "military style assault rifles."

Second, my point is, if we're going to start rewriting the Constitution, based on the argument that the founding fathers couldn't have foreseen where technology would have led us today, then NONE of our rights are protected.

Who said anything about rewriting Constitution? Then NRA has convinced gun owners that liberals want to repeal the second ammendment and take away their guns. It’s a scare tactic. It’s a lie. The second ammendment and background checks can exist side by side. And it’s never been about taking away anyone’s guns. It’s alwsys been about preventing guns getting into the hands of people who will use them to kill the innocent @SW-User

@BrklnBlue Do you understand what the phrase "shall not be infringed" means?

Also, don't tell me they are lies. A simple look at history, and listening to what these politicians are saying, will absolutely assure any person that can understand English that they ARE looking to take away guns.

Come on. What would that look like? Do you have any idea how many guns and gun owners there are in US? Who’s gonna go around to a hundred million homes and forcefuly take away millions of guns from well-armed gun owners? @SW-User

@BrklnBlue Perhaps you should do a bit of looking back in history to see how and where it's been done before. It could be very enlightening.

Let's also consider the fact that law - abiding citizens are exactly that... law - abiding. So, if guns are outlawed, they turn them over willingly, in order to obey the law.

@SW-User You’re right, the Founding Fathers couldn’t have conceived of the internet—just like they wouldn’t have [b]ever[/b] imagined a black president or women in government. But updating the Constitution when the old tenets were out of date made all [b]that[/b] happen, too. If we can somehow use legislation to stop us from [b]killing[/b] each other, isn’t that worth investigating ?