The same is true of the popular Ruger 10/22. It’s a starter rifle with a 10 shot magazine, pretty harmless. I bought my son one when he turned 18, like the one on the top in the following image. A plinking gun for shooting targets, cans, whatever.
The black gun at the bottom of the picture is the same gun.
You guys have definitely convinced me that assault weapons are not the problem to solve. At least not now. I never liked Feinstein as the SF mayor and I don’t like her now. Her efforts are not a practical way to gain anything expend precious political capital. The problem to solve is mandatory registrations and eliminating the gun show/straw buyer option. Chhhhhrist, if you have to register a vehicle, pass a test every few years and have insurance, you’d think we could do something similar for firearms.
The better course would be to fix the social problems in this country that lead to violence. And to increase spending on mental health (which, ironically, Republicans now seem to support).
Please explain, in vast detail, how this will curtail any gun related crimes? The majority of people committing crimes with guns already can’t legally own one, so how is something like registration going to do anything. (Hint: it won’t.)
That’s rather the point. Passing laws that do nothing is easy. Fixing a problem is hard.
EDIT: Gah! I am not going to get myself sucked into this thread!
This all over again. If you don’t register, then you’re neither a responsible gun owner nor law abiding citizen. Penalties will apply. Over time it will reduce illegal guns.
Or We can just say that it’s too big a problem so let’s do nothing.
Kinda like either drunk driving or uninsured motorists. The problem isn’t fixed 100% but the situation has improved over the past few decades.
ME Buckner - I advocate make some real changes first to registration and straw buyers. The auusault weapons aren’t a priority and may never be a problem big enough to require special laws if We fix the registration, gun show loopholes, straw buyers issue.
Continuing to leave “assault weapons” on the table makes it that much harder to enact universal background checks or anything else:
“The pro-gun control crowd keep talking about wanting to ban some arbitrary set of guns. That’s always their go-to answer–make up a completely bogus category of guns, and then ban it! No way am I gonna be on board with them having a list of the guns I own!”
You’re really ignorant about street crime and how thugs are getting guns and such, aren’t you?
Are you at least aware that what happened in Conn. is an extreme exception and not what the majority of gun related crimes are in this country? You don’t really think the scumbags in the inner cities are going into federally licensed gun stores, filling out paper work, going through background checks, etc. to legally obtain a firearm, and then taking that gun to rob a liquor store, do you?
Not really. Most guns started out as legal. Then “legal” gun owners sell them on without any registration or background checks. Ditto with the gun show loophole. Ditto with the straw buyers.
For American purposes, that would be a gun illegal smuggled into the country from overseas, which I suspect is an extremely small percentage of all guns.
Using any form of logic I can imagine, please explain to me how criminals get guns, and explain how the chain of possession for most of those guns does not go back to someone who had a legal right to own the gun and who purchased it legally.
