Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (706330)	3/28/2013 4:56:46 PM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576619

"Those are almost exclusively by rifles, lately almost exclusively by AR-15s. True, they don't happen often. But why make it easier for no real good reason?" they aren't that involved in the grand scheme of things. better to have 25-50 people killed than 350 million enslaved by the likes of obama and his ilk

To: combjelly who wrote (706330)	3/28/2013 8:50:11 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576619

Those are almost exclusively by rifles ......Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Sikh temple, Arizona.....all hand guns

To: combjelly who wrote (706330)	4/7/2013 11:07:24 AM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576619

Militia's have provided a fair amount of opposition to even modern world class military forces. You are ignoring the case of mass murder. Mass murders are a good practical argument against gun control, even if they might be a good political argument for it. Those are almost exclusively by rifles No they aren't. And if they where it wouldn't mean much. Both because rifles aren't going to be banned (and the ban would be hard to enforce if it happened) and because people can use pistols instead. lately almost exclusively by AR-15s Even less meaningful (if its even true). Any number of other weapons, rifles or pistols, or shotguns (or perhaps bombs or other weapons) could have been used instead. The whole argument about some weapon being the favorite weapon of some class of criminal, true or not, is meaningless. Even if criminals find weapon X to be cool, it doesn't mean weapon X made them a criminal. The fact that some criminal decides to use something doesn't mean non-criminals shouldn't be able to use it. (In some cases it might be something we want to keep away from non-criminals, like say biological weapons, but even then its not because criminals find it cool, its because of the nature of the item.)