What is the rationale, really?

...In 1994, when DEMOCRAT Bill Clinton was President, there was a federal assault weapons ban - the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act.  The ban had a sunset clause - it would expire in ten years if it was not renewed.

.....why are millions of Americans so deeply in love with guns?

The Texas killer was able to purchase his Assault Rifle because the Air Force failed to put the killer's name in a Federal database with his conviction and time in the brig, which would have prevented him from purchasing the weapon.  OK, so the Air Force fucked up.  But does anyone with a brain believe he wouldn't have gotten such a weapon illegally anyway?  After all he'd been prevented from purchasing a pistol in Texas but when he went on his murderous spree he had two handguns with him.  This country is awash in guns of all types. So I'd say blaming the Air Force for this is a red herring.

Why don't you morons focus on where the MOST folks are killed by handguns - Chicago for example!

If that is what you are saying, I have to agree with you completely.

And it has also long been my position that because of the huge number of firearms out there, the horse has left the barn on this debate.  That is why I became a legally-permitted handgun owner myself.
It's also worth noting that the "good guy" with the long gun did NOT need a permit to buy it, only to register with the state.  I thought (and had heard) it was a shotgun, too, but Timbow (below) says it was an AR.  That makes sense because it's pretty hard to do much damage with a shotgun unless you're up close.

-- Modified on 11/7/2017 10:59:45 AM

Had the Air Force submitted the information to the FBI then this loser would not have been able to purchase the 2 rifles he bought. I may be wrong but as a convicted domestic abuser his firearms he owned should have been confiscated.

Disagree.. "stand inconveniently in the way of your desire to disarm Americans"..

I have read several articles this morning looking for confirmation that he used an AR, but all I can find so far is that he used a rifle, and that he was once an NRA instructor.

...One reason among others is entertainment exposure namely old western TV & movies, people refuse to admit that seeing their cowboy hero's gunning down the bad guy's may have influenced their BANG BANG mentality. The idea that firearms are a wise tool to correct anything you don't agree with has been ingrained in a major part of each generation since the start of WW2. Of course GaG & others are correct about (the toothpaste is out of the tube) it would be nearly impossible to get firearms out of the hands of the people that want them so I believe the most logical answer is to increase the rules for buying guns, like more thorough back-round checks & waiting periods. It is inevitable that we will be living with these awful shooting occurrences for many years to come because we have no shortage of armed loonies who believe that firearms are a logical answer to what they don't agree with & it's not just Chicago nearly every major metropolitan area records several shootings every day. I don't expect talking about this problem will stop it anytime soon but it is better than ignoring it.

Yea lots of guns already exist, so regulating how they get into people's hands won't change anything at all.

The colonies were carved out of the wilderness against sometimes hostile Native Americans. The colonies became independent when an armed populace rose up against a tyrannical government.  The country was formed under a Constitution which codified a right to bear arms, and the history of the Second Amendment includes writings that believed in a need for an armed populace to defend their rights if their government again became tyrannical. The country expanded in part because settlers were armed.  Since the beginnings, those arms were also used to hunt.  That's rather over-simplified but this country has a long history of private gun ownership that explains why some people are "so deeply in love with guns."
NONE of this excuses a need for concealed weapons or semi-automatic rifles that were never intended for hunting.  But I think it does explain why some people love them.

Unfortunately, It's people, not guns, that cause problems. Beirut, Columbine and 9/11 started the insanity and I agree we will be talking, and attempting to deal with this problem for a very long time.

"It's people, not guns, that cause problems?"  Well riddle me this, if the nuts who did the last two mass killings didn't have semi- and fully-automatic weapons do you really think so many people would have been killed?  In the case of BOTH mass murders it was PRECISELY the guns that caused such massive loss of life.
"Beirut, Columbine and 9/11 started the insanity?" Laughable.  If by Beirut you're referring to the killings at the Marine barracks, that was a truck bomb.  And 9/11 was airplanes.  So what in the world does that have to do with the gun debate?  Answer: ZERO. Also, there have been mass shootings in this country long before that.  What about Charles Whitman, who shot 13 to death at the U. of Texas in 1966?  What about James Huberty, who shot 21 people to death in a San Ysidro McDonalds in 1984?  And back in 1949 a guy killed 13 people in Camden, NJ.
Maybe it's just that you express yourself so poorly and didn't mean to sound as dumb as you did.  But your post is wrong in every possible way.
Oh, and how in the WORLD is "awareness of your surroundings" going to help if you were in that church?  The gunman was firing through the walls before he entered.  So many of the people who were killed never even saw who fired the shots.
Go quote the Second Amendment somewhere else.  Dumb, dumb, dumb.

1) There a too many guns on the market, nothing we try to do can help the situation.

It's an extremely rare event that when a rogue shooter is killing dozens with a one or more assault weapons, a civilian nearby bearing a gun confronts or chases the shooter and succeeds in killing the bad man (I am not even sure if the current story of the two courageous protectors will hold good after a few days).

Beirut started the onslaught of MODERN terrorism, 911 gave the Islamist terrorist hope and Columbine introduced MODERN deaths by sociopaths in America. One can argue that the Oklahoma bombing started the deaths by modern american sociopaths.

...And of course the second amendment to the constitution makes that abundantly clear, or does it ? Don't you believe the authors of the second amendment would have been a bit more specific if they had the benefit of the information we have today. When the second amendment was composed the firearms that were available were single shot flintlock rifles or ball & powder pistols, hardly the semi-automatic weapons capable of firing hundreds of rounds a minute that are popular today, & if the authors had the death & injury statics that we see today don't you think they may have altered the wording in an attempt to slow the carnage that we see so often now. My apologies for a purely speculative post but if we didn't have all this hardware so readily available might there be many more Americans alive today.

I just returned from spending 4 months in the Netherlands. Very liberal and highly developed country where people come across as happy and content with life. Gun ownership and homicide rates are low.

No, I don't advocate revoking the Second Amendment.  I guess you missed it when I wrote earlier on this board that I am a legally-licensed pistol owner.  But it doesn't infringe on any legitimate right to ban high-capacity magazines, bump-stocks, unrecorded gun show sales, etc.  Not to mention that you really don't have to worry about it since no new laws will get passed the way things are now.
PS: The Second Amendment does NOT give people the right to bear arms "for defense of life and liberty." Maybe you should read it.

and now has a MUCH lower level of gun violence than we do.  And it hasn't devolved into a dictatorship.  And then there's Switzerland, where there are guns in many homes and almost no violence.

you're not for revoking the Second Amendment. Most folks aren't.  

What do you think is the reason the Swiss behave so responsibly?

"the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views"

I asked you to read the Second Amendment and obviously you failed.  NOWHERE in that text does it mention "for defense of life and liberty!!!!!"
Here's what is says, and all that it says: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
So, Chimpy, if you want a gun, go join the National Guard.
Dope.

were best described by the black power leader H. Rap Brown: "Violence is as American as cherry pie."

-- Modified on 11/7/2017 3:34:40 PM

in defense of life and liberty. You said it yourself in one way or another when you felt threatened. You have every right to defend yourself.

Think about it, they're over compensating for their "short" comings.....duhhhh.

Don't you agree that the Swiss case is an exception? Among the other countries, the more guns people own, the higher gun-related deaths.

That's 40k more deaths than gun homicides BTW. 20k of the 30k killed by guns every year are suicide .  

They always want to point fingers and never look at the larger issues.

Chicago gangsters  killing each other and  people taking drugs DOES NOT justify the mass shooting of innocent Civilian .There is no Justification.,so keep trying.

Yes,  doesn't take much.Tired of people  having  the "RIGHT  TO LIFE and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS " going about their daily lives and getting slaughtered by these "WACOS".Then to make matters worse ,the  ignorant ass people running this country (who suppose to know better) try  to justify it by talking about gangsters kill each other in Chicago. Motha$%&#@rs.

How you mean there is no solution ?,what the heck  you talking about.Taking those kind of weapons from WACOS like you is the solution to the problem.Australia did it and save their people.The only people you are killing is civilians .Look at tyour history wit those guns.

Do we have a tyrannical government? Have we had one in the past century?  You are not equating tyranny with high taxes; are you?

Common sense is missing among those fighting for the right to own assault weapons.

You friend is evading the high capacity magazine issue.People don' t have a problem with hand gun  and hunting ,we all should have them.

"It's people not guns that kills people".  Heard it a few times ; most ignorant  words that can come from someones mouth. Lacking the ability to think logically and critically.

Bull shit.All you do is kill civilians.

Good luck trying to school the Chimp.

You all know that I'm a pretty left leaning guy around here.  I also fully support the right to bear arms.  I'm pretty well versed in the law, at least I know how to read it and often do so.  I believe that the Preamble and the Bill of Rights need to be strictly adhered to if we are to remain and retain the ideals of America.  

Love of guns, even starting at an early age, does not equate to high murder rates, nor many mass shootings. Nor, does strict regulation and accountability necessarily lead to the elimination of gun ownership. Socioeconomic factors (poverty, lack of opportunities for improving one's socioeconomic situation), and a culture of individualism can be negative factors in increasing crimes committed with guns.

Give respect to individuals with mental illness. They are no more likely to commit violent acts than others.

All I say Is ,take those machine  guns away from you WACOS/GUN HAWKS,  just like  Australia did and fix their mass shoot problem. So any of you who decide you  want to carry out a mass shooting of innocent Civilians gonna have to use your dicks.

...Let's hear ALL of the reasoning against more stringent federally required back-round checks & waiting periods, and don't give us this bullshit about states rights, different rules in different states would only confuse the issue. What is wrong with waiting a few days to pick-up your semi-automatic firearm?

if one can bring class action suit on the basis of right to life? Every time, someone kills another, they are taking away their right to life and happiness! Sue the NRA for being complicit and throw in gun manufacturers too.

...AFRAID to answer ? or you have no answer, or is it just because you believe the exalted N.R.A. would just threaten enough legislators so laws like these could not get passed, let's hear it !

I suppose gun fanatics will argue that people who have heart attacks and stroke receive urgent care. Why have us wait for a few days and not let us kill people as soon as we have the urge?

I don't expect Rupublicans  to  do shit about these guns.Because as most of know, it's  all about the money,and they are way up the NRA and gun maufacturers ass as far as that is concern.

that every single Isreali household is armed with some very powerful weapons.
So why don't they have a problem?

The Middle East is exactly where we need to send  these  American WACOS .

We also have right to life, liberty and happiness.

Because Israel is not America