Redskins Diehard

It makes sense. With about 99k public schools we would only need 200k commandos if we wanted 2 at every school. We could use SOCOM to provide those forces. The use FORSCOM to provide forces for the perimeter. If we do it right America will look like Afghanistan in no time. Blast walls, serpentine entrances, concertina wire... now we're talking!

We aren't allowed to answer that first question. Would be embarrassing to get a ban But the second answer...I don't know if you're a racist or not. That is my answer for everyone on the board. I can only answer that one for myself. Not at you but I generally don't think highly of folks who go to terms like "leftist". And the same catchy terms to describe rightys. I find it to not be intelligent discourse. I don't have a lot of confidence that these hearings will accomplish anything. Because frankly I've seen trump supporters, including the ones who say they don't REALLY like him, support any behavior that supports him. To include assaulting police. I thought the Republicans supported military and police but that went away with "I like pilots who weren't captured". So nothing really surprises me anymore.

In WW2 they lost 29 million. Probably not as relevant to today but that is a staggering number. I forget the year, for some reason 1923 sticks out, but 95 percent of men born in that year were KIA by the end of WW2 Russian ability to mobilize and mobilize and mobilize some more is a major reason Barbarossa failed

I mean the thing is clearly mounted and locked in. So the target is probably destroyed. And pretty sure he was on trial for hitting something he shot at?

Lots of "points" in here. Yes, arresting gun violence committed by semi automatic pistols would not be accomplished by further regulation of semi automatic rifles. That is true. If you were able to answer I'd ask you which is more lethal. Lethal as defined by volume and accuracy of fire. If you've ever trained on these weapons you know the answer to that. There is a reason, seemingly obvious, that the military does not go to war with modified Glocks and drum magazines. Why do you suppose that is? I've never actually proposed "banning" anything. I have proposed regulating semi automatic rifles the same way we currently regulate automatic rifles. And you are making a good case to regulate semi automatic handguns the same way as well. Why do I not support turning into firebases and forward operating bases? Because this isn't ****ing Afghanistan or Iraq. That's why

The big bad semi auto rifle is exactly that. There is a reason it has been the weapon of choice for US Mil for decades. Why do you suppose that is? It is very effective at killing people very rapidly. There's a reason why the military doesn't go to war with pistols.... what do you suppose that reason is? For the record I've spent over 2 years in other countries toting around that big bad weapon system and used it to close with and destroy the enemy by means of fire and maneuver. It is well suited for that role. The ****ty thing is that big bad weapon doesn't know the difference between the enemy and a school kid, or doctor, or person in a night club. So it is actually pretty well suited for closing with and destroying whatever the trigger puller decides

Making semi automatic rifles more regulated and less easy to obtain wouldn't stop gun violence. You are correct. It would make it more difficult to pull off and less lethal when it happened. People who understand the weaponry understand that.

Just like what happened when we regulated automatic weapons in 1934. Deep state ploy to wait 88 more years and go after semi automatic. I bet the plan for year 2100 is to take shotguns. Then the coup de grace in year 2200 is to take all the guns!

It is fundamentally what the NFA of 1934 did. And you can get a tax stamp for 200 bucks even today. But it takes like 9 months to get it back. And you get extra background checks. And it's been the law of the land for almost 100 years.

Of course it does. Because there's no regulation that differentiates between revolvers and bolt action and semi automatic. Like there's a regulation that differentiates between automatic and the rest.

The National Firearms Act of 1934 has been the law of the land for almost a century now. It has not been found in violation of the 2A. It effectively ended the proliferation of automatic weapons without banning them. It seems putting similar "well regulated" policies in place for semi automatic weapons would be a good place to start.

No waiting period in Virginia. A way to accomplish the same thing as a waiting period is to require an NFA stamp. The same thing required for automatic weapons and silencers (among other things). I would add high velocity, semi automatic rifles with external magazines to the list of weapons requiring that. And probably increase the cost from what it was in the 30s!

Swedish are known for their fish

Cake rolls

Army knives!

Cheese? 🧀 Bank accounts?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/05/30/mass-shootings-memorial-day-weekend-taft-chattanooga-uvalde/ U.S. marks Memorial Day weekend with at least 12 mass shootings For those keeping track at home. Those 12 aren't the sensational kind that get much attention outside their local community.

Manufacturers figured out pretty quickly how to make ban compliant guns. "Pre ban" guns became more expensive because they were not produced anymore but you could buy a functionally equivalent weapon. Some models, like "AR-15" were banned by name. So things were called an "XM-15" and were legal again. The part of that bill that would have some impact was not actually related to the weapon itself but to the magazines that went into it. I don't know why that can't be changed by Executive Order now just like when Trump banned the bump stocks

I get the sentiment but ask you to reconsider. Manufacturers and buyers figured out very easy ways around the 94 ban. It took a little while last time but would be damn near immediate. I really think the 94 ban would amount to little more than legislative theater this go around. We need to address what makes things deadly and not what makes them look like an army gun.

Anyone else going that pcs post belongs in the grilling and cooking and not the mass shooting thread?

That's probably the best post that could be put in most every thread!

Bingo I posted a link to a Washington Post article that provides data suggesting raising the age would make a big difference

Your argument is not compelling and inaccurate. Do everyone a favor and educate yourself

You're using stupid model numbers to make your argument. It isn't strong. Talk about what makes the weapon lethal

Wtf are you talking about?