Discussion in 'The Howard Stern Show' started by dawg, Dec 7, 2015.
Long after The Daily News goes bankrupt (which will be less than 10 years), the NRA will be thriving.
I could care less about assault rifles, but does anyone honestly think that will help prevent Islamic terror? They obtained the guns legally, but they did the most illegal thing you could possibly do with a gun-- go on a killing spree.
These same people had 19 pipe bombs. Would banning ARs stop that? Islamic Extremists/ISIS supporters are capable of committing terror acts with box cutters and explosive soda cans
True. Killing is their business, and business is good!
broccoli rob says:
They obtained the guns legally, but they did the most illegal thing you could possibly do with a gun-- go on a killing spree.
Yes, legally. Thanks to the NRA it's perfectly legal for people to buy military style assault rifles. The NRA sure loves to make it easy for preventable mass killings to take place.
Because: big profit for weapons manufacturers is more important than public safety.
ISIS says: thanks NRA!
We are in some seriously dark fucking times. There's so many problems, and even more reasons for them, that it's insane! I think all of us can feel it, but I don't think any of us truly know how bad it's going to get. I know, it's been said so many times before, but these times are different. You can just feel it in your heart.
So I can no longer buy a gun that fires once when I pull the trigger? Shit...how am I going to "assault" anyone. Another example of the problem with these discussions. Those looking for "common sense" gun laws have no clue what laws are currently in place. They also don't know much about guns. I swear these people think you can buy an automatic weapon at Walmart.
Hey stupid. It's not the NRA that wrote our constitution.
I have no idea how laws vary from state to state but i can buy a AR15 at Walmart along with my orange juice and eggs.
What kind of guns do you think are ok to own? What do you think makes an "assault rifle" more effective than a semi automatic pistol? How about we make homicide illegal.
But that is not an automatic weapon, and requires a background check...and is not more effective than a Glock 19 at the business of killing.
If you are unaware of how much easier it has gotten over the decades to obtain military-grade equipment, thanks to the lobbying power of the NRA, I don't know what to tell you.
There's nothing unconstitutional, of course, about mandatory waiting periods, or mandatory mental health checks, or closing the gun show loophole. All of which are supported by the vast majority of NRA members. But they won't happen. Because of the NRA, which exists not to support gun owners, but to support the profits of the weapons manufacturing industry.
You've heard of magazine capacity?
The last few grown-ups have left the building. Sept. 16...
The Daily News Layoffs and Digital Shift May Signal the Tabloid Era’s End
For weeks the staff had known that layoffs might be coming, and when they did come, on Sept. 16, it was with the swiftness of a Soviet-era purge. Newsroom veterans were summoned into an office and told about a digitally driven corporate restructuring. Those outside the building were told their fates by phone — some while on vacation. One reporter was so left in the dark that when she got to work that day, there was already an intern in her seat.
“It was not the normal thing with a few cuts here and there,” said one employee who was fired and who, like many, spoke on the condition of anonymity because his severance package had not yet been delivered. “This was a total repositioning of the product.”
From The New York Herald to The New York Tribune (to say nothing of The New York Herald Tribune), newspapers have been dying in New York for nearly as long as they have been born. But to some journalists who have watched their share of these deaths, this month’s disembowelment of The Daily News seemed like something new.
Ronald Reagan banned automatic weapons from being owned by a private citizen a long time ago. another selective memory loss from many.
In 1986 Reagan signed the Firearm Owners Protection Act. The bill provided a number of protections for gun owners. But it also barred the private sale and ownership of any fully automatic rifles -- machine guns -- that were not already registered with the federal government on the day Reagan signed the law.
If Reagan were around today, he'd be considered a RINO by the wingnut purists. He raised taxes eleven times while president, too.
So you can't carry more than one? Is that your only distinction because California has bans on all high capacity magazines. Its a worthless distinction. I could carry 20, 10 round magazines or 1 200 round.
Yep. The gun control side are unaware of the basics of firearms which makes the discussions difficult. The only law that I think would make sense that is not in place is requiring a background check on private sales. But its tough to discuss with people who don't understand the issue and won't investigate the process. Once they start talking about "military style assault rifles" the discussion is pointless as you know they are not swayed by logic.
Ultimately the only thing these people really want is no guns, which would require a repeal of the 2nd amendment. That would never pass the vote. No other law will stop evil people from doing evil things. We are a country of 100+ millions gun owners....our number of gun killings is minuscule with that scope.
True, they should be banned, like in France, that will keep those mass killings from happening...