If there was a referendum to ban AR-15’s, how would you vote?

@BlueVeins There won’t be a referendum but Andrew Yang and @BobsGotBalls have sparked a discussion. I understand that these weapons are the of choice for many hunters so I’m sure they’re safe and won’t be taken away.

@CountScrofula Our pillars of society the 9/11 terrorists,,,, went through the motions of getting properly trained on how to fly a jet.
Example if you had the criminal mind to rob a liquor store are you going to go to a gun shop pay a ridiculous price for a handgun wait 15 days to do a background check (That you might fail) or are you going to go pay some hood on the street $20 for a loaner...

@MarmeeMarch The general point of gun control schemes is to drive up the black market cost of weapons. The fact that it's $20 is the root of the problem.

@QuixoticSoul I suppose that goes for anything that is illegal or hard to get

@Dancingxghost Are you saying that if we had better healthcare, there would be less killings? I can see that.

@SimplyTracie yeah people with mental health issues owning a gun and not getting the help they need, it ain't a good a combination.

@QuixoticSoul Actually, they no longer have trhe sealed ammo. It's now stored only at supply depots.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/soldiers-can-keep-guns-at-home-but-not-ammo/970614

@KiwiBird Politicians here choose to be re-elected instead of doing what’s best for the majority. Not only when it comes to gun laws but almost everything else.

@Ryannnnnn How should I have posed my question?

@SimplyTracie ? no need to be sensitive, wasn't a jab at you o_o

@Ryannnnnn Okie 😊

@QuixoticSoul What the military version of the AR15 called? They have an automatic version. Correct?

@SimplyTracie M-4, which has largely replaced the M-16.

Comes in a three round burst and full auto variants. But soldiers are kind of encouraged to keep it in semi-auto mode most of the time.

@QuixoticSoul Ohhh Thank you 😊

@QuixoticSoul I saw an article and they reviewed shooters and it was something like 12/14 had been on drugs some time during their life and many were current users. Sometimes the drugs alter your thinking and actually become addictive.

@DallasCowboysFan The majority? Honestly I'm looking into this and it seems like a complete myth.

@DallasCowboysFan https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308220517_Psychiatric_Medications_and_School_Shootings

School shooters, at least, seem to be less likely to be on anti-depressant and anti-anxiety meds than the average person 🤷‍♂️

And the rise of such prescriptions also coincides with a historic drop in overall homocide rates, one would think you'd see the opposite if psych meds were to blame.

@sunrisehawk Only you would compare a truck or a book of matches to an AR-15. A baseball bat might have been used to kill too. It’s not a realistic argument.

@SimplyTracie I am quite sure that there is little difference to a victim in how they were murdered, and I believe this recent event was horrific

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/19/japan-arson-attack-on-anime-studio-is-worst-mass-killing-since-2001.html

But I can see you're locked into your view and are not interested in discussing this.

@Graylight When did I say I had the “authority” ?? I gave a general opinion that you felt the need to pick apart. I wasn’t offensive or mean..

I’m not sure why you’re taking this so seriously and personally. You seem to have more of an issue with me and if that’s the case come at me with the real issue instead of picking an argument over my opinion that I’m entitled to.

@MellyMel22 @MellyMel22 I'm simply continuing a debate. You made a point - I asked for more thought on it. That's how debate works.

No one is attacking you or what you're saying. I'm asking you to think the next step ahead. Follow a road, if you will.

@Graylight I wasn’t trying to debate. I was just saying it’s probably best that those who for example beat their spouse and/or child and have a record of doing so shouldn’t have easy access to firearms. Another example- a neighbor of mine who I’ve know for over 20 years isn’t a bad person, but he over the past few years became schizophrenic and tried to go after a person w/a knife who he felt was sent by the the government to kill him. The police came, he was taken away and sent home later where he did similar things. I feel allowing someone with that kind of history access to a gun would only make him more of a danger to anyone who comes his way.

Of course not all cases are as clear cut, but I just feel those that are should be taken more seriously than they are.

@pjeffries85
They are used for hunting frequently.
They are excellent for home defense.
They are not machine guns.

@KiwiBird It must be an America thing. In your investigations, did you learn how that saying came to be?

@SimplyTracie
Just be aware this camefrom Wikipedia

@KiwiBird Gotcha. Thank you. I’m glad they don’t use gallant anymore. Gallant sounds too phony in today’s political arena. Can you name a Republican politician that could be considered noble-minded or chivalrous?

@quitwhendone Me too.

@RemovedUsername329422: First of all, let’s look at what happens with the screenings. Some people may get diagnosed with with depression. Just your “garden variety depression”. Maybe due to the loss of a loved one or divorce or whatever. Would it be a “bad thing” to get these people help? I’d say probably NOT. I’m NOT suggesting that we go out & have psychological screenings & then put people on some “blacklist” for public persecution. But some people just might need a little help. Perhaps it would save some people from committing suicide. Give people avenues to combat addictions, and steer them to self help groups & whatever. I’m NOT suggesting that we mark people with a “Scarlet I” & label as Insane. But the people who need help for WHATEVER can be pointed in the direction of the resources that might do them some good. But, YES, I believe that the majority of the people who are psychologically impaired & “bat shit crazy” can be identified. The ones who pose an IMMINENT danger to society can be identified. And swift & intense treatment can save them from picking up dangerous instruments (whether that be guns or fertilizer & diesel) to go carry out mass killings. It’s not guns that kill people; it’s crazy people who kill people.

@RemovedUsername329422. Sounds far fetched to screen everyone but I understand your point. Someone suggested a better healthcare system so that people who need help can get it. Maybe those who want help cannot afford the care they require.

@SimplyTracie: I understand that it’s far fetched. And I realize that it’s never going to happen. However, in this age of the Affordable Health Care Act, I do believe that the concept has SOME merit. I think that using that frame of reference, nearly everyone has SOME access to health care providers. Perhaps it should be expanded to include some sort of psychological counseling. But my premise remains. It’s not the ARs that are killing people, but the crazy people that WANT to kill people.

@OwnerOfMany I don't mean to imply the AR-15 is the problem. It's just the darling of the anti-gun lobby.

Gun confiscation - and to be clear, that's not what I support - does work. It has worked in other countries. Societal bans on firearms work. They work very well in other countries.

I think the US is unique in its gun culture, and that's an issue that has to be addressed if people are to stop dying, but in the meantime, it's the guns doing the shooting. Lose them and you lower deaths.

@Graylight You and I strongly disagree. Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, and the list goes on. Those are only cases of mass murder of unarmed populations and please don't be foolish enough to think it can't happen again.
Also, if you find accurate statistics, which is difficult, confiscation has not worked in other countries as well as advertised. To coin a phrase, been there, seen that.
Again, it is the people, not the guns, and if they can't get a gun they will only resort to something else be it bombing, incinerating, or stabbing.
Gun confiscation, banning, buy backs, won't work in the US. You will only leave innocent people unable to defend themselves.
I truly wish you could see what I have seen and look at what is currently happening through my eyes.

@OwnerOfMany And I, you. What we've seen and lived through helps shape what we are and what we believe. So I defer to the SCOTUS and good judgment. That's all we can do.

@SimplyTracie He is from New Zealand. Why did you put fetish on your reply?

@DallasCowboysFan It wasn’t intentional. 😂😂😂. It’s my finger on some drugs maybe.

@vetguy1991 That is your right. Do you own an AR-15 or AK-47?

@SimplyTracie no I don't

@SimplyTracie it is an M60 machine gun

@vetguy1991 Okay. That is definitely not legal to own.

@SimplyTracie no it's not

@DallasCowboysFan

@DallasCowboysFan Not the same thing. You can have all the guns as you want but ya can’t own an AR-15 or an AK-47. Okay?

And you can still “stand your ground”. Imagine, I could shoot that guy who told me I’m gonna pay dearly for trash talking Trump. That sounded like a threat huh?

@SimplyTracie I'm curious why you think it's ok to have all the guns you want, but not AR-15s and semi-auto AK-47s. What makes those particular firearms so much more dangerous than others?

@OwnerOfMany It’s because of personal reasons. I know someone close to my family who was shot and killed.
Also I know that people hunt as hobby and I’m kinda against that too. No offense if you like hunting giraffes and elephants or whatever. I’m just against that.

@SimplyTracie I only hunt things that are dangerous, killing, or destroying. I think it is a sin to kill anything for no reason or just in fun.

@OwnerOfMany We agree on something. 😊