Quote from dcraig:
Yes.
And here's another one, possibly the worst killing spree in modern times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)
Gun laws were tightened substantially in the aftermath and semi-automatic weapons are now very restricted. Gun crime has certainly not gone up as a consequence of the tighter laws. US gun laws are widely regarded as idiotic in Australia.
Quote from rew:
And Australians are now slaves to their government overlords.
Quote from killthesunshine:
I am NOT anti-gun but I think we need to take a hard look at phasing some of this liberalism crap out that serves no use but may be excessively deadly in the wrong hands. that's all I'm saying, and liberalism past age of 11 falls into this category. (as do adult politicians)
Quote from killthesunshine:
That's interesting that you WEIGHT all criminal activity the same...but what evidence (as you asked of me) do you have to show that those convicted of minor infractions (that involve NO violence, eg local firecracker law)) should have their rights stripped for life from owning anything that shoots, as you put it? Where do YOU get this right?
Quote from killthesunshine:
Why do you NEED a semi-auto rifle for protection?
Quote from Mom0/pH0x:
ive told your learning impaired ass at least two other times in this thread. one homogeneous gun policy for a country as large and diverse as the united states doesn't make sense.
different weapon policies should be implemented to suit the needs of each different state, county, or in some cases, city. manahattan's gun policy shouldn't be the same as rural wyoming. different societies within america should be free to determine their own firearm standards.
Quote from killthesunshine:
Should NO weapons be banned? Certainly no one is suggesting this, and I am not suggesting banning all weapons. Just those that "overcompensate" as a defensive weapon.