What gun control do you want?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Again, show me where I quoted that? You are good at debate as long as you can debate
the things said you make up, how about actually addressing things said instead of making
them up and then denouncing them?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

No it does not, the topic is what type of gun control I'd support, you brought that up which
has nothing to do with the topic. The only obsessive concern I see from anyone is yours
when you make up comments and denounce them, reality does not seem to be part of
your world view. You are a strong voice against the make believe statements but not what
is actually being said, why?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

From the viewpoint of a Muslim fundamentalist. 😏

The post that was quoted here has been removed

With all the straw you throw out there, you could feed a herd of horses.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

It also addresses the concerns of gun control advocates.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
It also addresses the concerns of gun control advocates.

From the viewpoint of a left-wing liberal socialist hippie nutjob.

Just kidding. 😏

The post that was quoted here has been removed

So you consider that the opinions of "diverse writers" ought to be of concern to someone participating in a discussion on an Internet discussion board?

The SCOTUS has refused to hear the appeal of a lower court ruling upholding a local ordinance banning various semi-automatic rifles (mostly civilian versions of military assault rifles) and a magazine capacity limit:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a challenge by gun rights activists to a Chicago suburb's ordinance banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, handing a victory to gun control advocates amid a fierce debate over the nation's firearms laws.

The 2013 ordinance passed by the city of Highland Park, Illinois will remain in place. By opting not to hear an appeal of a lower-court ruling that upheld the measure, the justices declined to take up what would have been a high-profile gun rights case following a succession of mass shootings including the one last week in San Bernardino, California.

The Highland Park measure bans various semi-automatic weapons, including well-known guns such as the AR-15 and AK-47, in addition to magazines holding more than 10 rounds of bullets.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-guns-idUSKBN0TQ1SU20151207#XV3X6gj2bb0OVGxs.97

The full text of the ordinance is here: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/HP_Firearms-Ordinance.pdf

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
It also addresses the concerns of gun control advocates.

All bombers aren't suicide bombers.

Originally posted by whodey
https://gma.yahoo.com/young-couple-blamed-massacre-san-bernardino-131010439--abc-news-topstories.html#

The gunman in California did not purchase the assault weapons.

So what gun control laws would have stopped this?

Today police in San Bernardino said that Farook did not appear to have a criminal record prior to the attack. The four weapons used in t ...[text shortened]... What more do they need, espeically since the gunman had no record and no mental health issues.

The problem has obviously nothing to do with this case (as in this being a planned attack by religious fanatics out for revenge).

And I've already stated the problem many times here: guns aren't the problem, fear is.

America is a country full of scared and paranoid people (made so, obviously not inherently so) and most people are fed buckets full of our country is right, true patriotism and God is on our side from the day they were born.

It's not a healthy environment. Add to that the whole individualism which gets stuffed doen their throats and your looking at, probably, the group of people who would be voted: most unsuitable to carry fire arms in the world.

Originally posted by no1marauder
The SCOTUS has refused to hear the appeal of a lower court ruling upholding a local ordinance banning various semi-automatic rifles (mostly civilian versions of military assault rifles) and a magazine capacity limit:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a challenge by gun rights activists to a Chicago suburb's ordinance banning assault weapons an ...[text shortened]... e is here: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/HP_Firearms-Ordinance.pdf

Interesting! Your link provided goes to a Reuters page, and then to a page not found message before you can read the content.

Thing is that any magazine fed rifle can usually accommodate a larger or smaller magazine. My 5.56 rifle has a 5 round magazine used for rodent or small game hunting, but will easily take a 20, 30, or even 50 round magazine.

What you must remember about magazines is that the larger their capacity, the more they depend on the spring tension to remain constant to feed the ammo. Generally, the military doesn't use larger than 30 round mags, for reasons of unreliability. That becomes even greater if the mag is loaded and left for a long time with the spring compressed for long periods.

If you have a cheap large capacity magazine, load it just before you intend your mayhem, or it will likely jam.