A Pump Shotgun and a Revolver?

[chancemccall]

The recent Texas school shooting was accomplished with a pump shotgun and a revolver. The well-paid anti gun entity leaders have been strangely quite. I would suggest that maybe the reason is that an active shooter using guns not normally classified as "assault weapons" impugns their case against the guns they have been targeting. A few of them have become more honest in their real goals of banning and confiscating all firearms, which I see as progress. I call it progress because it is harder to productively discuss anything whey the other side is lying about their goals and expectations.

Most gun owners know many other gun owners who do not own, and don't want to own, many of the guns broadly classified as "assault weapons". The reasons for not owning them vary with the individual, but the fact they don't own them often makes them feel safe from the anti gun movement. I know at least 20 gun owners for every gun owner that belongs to even one pro gun organization, and I would bet that is actually a very low estimate. Many of these people own only one gun and that is often a gun passed down from family. They may, or may not, shoot them for fun or practice. That does not mean that they do not value those guns and that they wouldn't be upset or even angry if they thought they would lose the right to own the gun they do own.

If a serious movement to ban all firearms started to emerge, I would suspect that a couple of things might happen:

Even some non-gun owners would object to the idea of a total gun ban especially if it involved criminalizing gun owners and forced confiscation;

Many now passive gun owners would suddenly wake up to the danger and actively join and support pro gun organizations;

The courts might suddenly realize the potential constitutional crisis and despite their liberal bents would feel compelled to rule against anti-gun legislation.

Do you agree with this? If you do, shouldn't we push the narrative in order to force the anti-gun forces to admit their real goals? If you think that is a good idea, how would you suggest we and the organizations we support go about doing that?

If you do not agree, why? What dangers do you see that I and perhaps others aren't seeing in this idea?

[Archondan]

I believe there they are also investigating if some of students were killed in the 25 minutes of cross fire between the shooter and the police. So if it does turn out that some were killed by police bullets then it moves further from the anti-gun agenda.

[cybermgk]

The FUDDs, I hope would wake up if sweeping bans were proposed.

 

I do think SCOTUS is waiting until 1 of 2 things happens, 1of the 2 very far left Justices that could retire or croak at any moment are replaced OR a very serious attack on the 2A type case comes.

 

Santa Fe is not being talked about, because there are none of the 'common sense' gun laws that have been talked about recently by the antis that would have stopped this. So, since it doesn't support the dialog that we need more gun laws, but DOES support what our side has said, that Evil/Criminals will find away, regardless of laws, it is not being spoken about.

[soundguy]

 

Santa Fe is not being talked about, because there are none of the 'common sense' gun laws that have been talked about recently by the antis that would have stopped this. So, since it doesn't support the dialog that we need more gun laws, but DOES support what our side has said, that Evil/Criminals will find away, regardless of laws, it is not being spoken about.

 

That's part of it...

 

All TV networks and news orgs made gigantic staffing and coverage commitments for the Royal Wedding. "Prince Makes American Gal Princess" trumps all regular news coverage. Plus, it was the weekend. Had there been no wedding coverage, there would have been more standard shooting coverage which without the local anti narrative, might have been good for us.

[gangrel]

The FUDDs, I hope would wake up if sweeping bans were proposed.

 

I do think SCOTUS is waiting until 1 of 2 things happens, 1of the 2 very far left Justices that could retire or croak at any moment are replaced OR a very serious attack on the 2A type case comes.

 

Santa Fe is not being talked about, because there are none of the 'common sense' gun laws that have been talked about recently by the antis that would have stopped this. So, since it doesn't support the dialog that we need more gun laws, but DOES support what our side has said, that Evil/Criminals will find away, regardless of laws, it is not being spoken about.

Since when do the proposed laws need to have anything to do with stopping the attack that spurred the conversation? After McVeigh and Nichols blew up the OKC Murrah Federal Building with fertilizer and a truck, the conversation almost immediately turned to gun control. Rational thought and logic need not apply.

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

 

[Glock23]

Santa Fe is not being talked about, because there are none of the 'common sense' gun laws that have been talked about recently by the antis that would have stopped this.

 

I disagree. The ONLY shooting in recent history after which the cries for new laws would've done anything is the ban on those under 21 buying ARs.

 

Every other shooting it was always more background checks, gun show loophole, online loophole, etc., but in every case the firearms used were either bought legally or stolen from someone else who bought them legally.

[chicagoresident]

I believe there they are also investigating if some of students were killed in the 25 minutes of cross fire between the shooter and the police. So if it does turn out that some were killed by police bullets then it moves further from the anti-gun agenda.

This. They are crossing their fingers on the autopsies and investigation to run around saying "see, armed security kills kids! The NRA is advocating for the killing of kids!"

 

Yet a massacre in a gun free zone that prevented adults from legally defending themselves is still under a sealed investigation almost 2 years later because everyone suspects there may of been some crossfire victims (Pulse Nightclub).

 

It's amazing how these dialogs play off.

[JTHunter]

Santa Fe doesn't fit the anti's lexicon as there was no "evil black rifle" used.

[speedbump]

 

I believe there they are also investigating if some of students were killed in the 25 minutes of cross fire between the shooter and the police. So if it does turn out that some were killed by police bullets then it moves further from the anti-gun agenda.

This. They are crossing their fingers on the autopsies and investigation to run around saying "see, armed security kills kids! The NRA is advocating for the killing of kids!"

Yet a massacre in a gun free zone that prevented adults from legally defending themselves is still under a sealed investigation almost 2 years later because everyone suspects there may of been some crossfire victims (Pulse Nightclub).

It's amazing how these dialogs play off.

Very likely, as Orlando SWAT was armed with .40 MP5s, which are big penetrators.