Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumsamsingh
(17,590 posts)Grassy Knoll
(10,118 posts)Projectiles and bullets are not mentioned.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)The amendment merely says "arms."
It'd be perfectly constitutional to levy a full-scale ban on guns... and instead of drive-by shootings, we could go back to jousting.
Warpy
(111,140 posts)I think we have to concede that this week's mass murder would likely have taken place without guns, given the explosives he had booby trapping his apartment. The death toll might have been far higher had he used explosives combined with an accelerant.
But I've said they need to license the sale of ammo for years.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)We can speculate, but that doesn't actually accomplish a damn thing.
This dude mowed down over 70 people with a gun. "he could have done it with an explosive!" is just as meaningless as "he could have killed more if the clip hadn't jammed!" - all that matters is what actually happened, why it happened, and possible ways to prevent it from happening again.
In a way - I'm sure it's unintentional - what you're saying is that because you think he might have killed those people some other way anyway, we shouldn't bother looking at obvious ways to make it less easy to mow down over seventy people with a gun.
Warpy
(111,140 posts)on things like the appalling lack of access to mental health care, the stigma that prevents people who are starting to slip off the rails from seeking it, and the incompetence of a TSA that fails to track things like large ammo, explosive and SWAT gear purchases by a single civilian.
All these factors combined to produce that slaughter. The gun didn't walk in there by itself.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)ill agree with that notion..
but that doesnt mean you make it easier for someone