Murky question and it may end up being a SCOTUS question ... 2nd Amendment vs 14th Amendment (if it's state(s) action(s) vs a "health safety and welfare" argument) ...
Yes, of course others will have differing interpretations, but a ban on any weapon imo violates the 2nd amendment. But why the AR? Because it looks "military", has been the unfortunate weapon of choice in the high profile mass shootings? Fact is a person with a couple of 9mm could cause mass carnage, this weapon next? An AR ban does nothing to stop the street carnage in Chicago, they aren't using them of course you could ban all weapons and won't stop that. Wait weapons are banned in Chicago, so..... anyway not arguing with you, hope you know that. Banning AR's (which I'm assuming you know does not mean assault rifle) opens the door to more bans later, eventually attempting to render me defenseless.
Usually, these mass shooters are killed.
There is a distinction ... "any" ... sawed off shotguns and machine guns, for example, are outlawed for private use, and that has stood the test ... has to do with bearing arms and what a "normal" arm is for a "well regulated militia" ... not arguing here, just pointing out some very subtle distinctions from the past that may well come into the discussion ... so be ready for them ...
Not true at all. I'm disgusted by it and carry every day for protection from deranged white guys, black guys, Muslims, males, females, anybody and everybody whose heart is full of hate with a desire to inflict harm. Not sure what your getting at, what solution has been offered when muslims attacked that isn't being offered now?
Do you not remember all the laws that were made in response to 9-11? I don't know maybe actually doing anything besides praying. One guy with a pathetic shoe bomb changed air travel for everyone but dozens of mass shootings gets no action
Wait are you saying 9/11 was the shoe bomber??? You do remember 9/11 right? Airplanes crashed into the world trade centers, the Pentagon and of course the one heroically brought down in Pennsylvania, killing nearly 3000 people. And the shoe bomber, pathetic? If he had been successful he brings down an entire plane and the last time I checked it's not just Muslims being scanned/checked/searched/etc that's entering airports.
White nationalist are domestic terrorist, you'll get no argument from me on that. But again it's two different situations and @pcbjr might have more insight, but one is a domestic terrorist group and one more international and I think that certainly has some influence as to how it can be handled or what steps can be taken. But I'm not sure how it's "looked at differently", I see people that are appalled by the actions of these 2 on all sides of the issue.
I'm only saying that if all the shootings after 9-11 were done buy Muslims we would have action taken
Not sure about that, the Orlando shooting that killed 49 was carried out by an individual who identified as Muslim and pledged allegiance to ISIS. How was it treated differently?
Agreed...I was just talking a out the response to these things.
