[Discussion] Mass Shooting at Uvalde Elementary School

[FartingMonk 3608]

30 round mags don't do anything for me.  I wouldn't care either way if they went away.  I have a bunch of them.  But if the govt wanted to buy it back from me I wouldn't care.  Bullets get fucking heavy.  I prefer my smaller magazines unless I'm at the range.  But limiting the capacity I don't think it will do anything.  But if that gets you to the table then sure.

[Eskimohorn 5645]

I’m for service in the police force or military service being a requisite for owning military weapons, as was the intention of the 2nd amendment (see Constitution and Federalist Papers). If you’re not willing to serve your community and make it safer, GTFO!

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Why are you opposed to age limits equal to the age to buy alcohol? Rent a car? What is the problem with that, especially since school shootings are pretty much done by young males and are exactly the people that shouldn't be able to buy guns?

then don't enter the military until age 21.

See how that works out on multiple levels...

[Dahobbs 17753]

42 minutes ago, slorch said:

then don't enter the military until age 21.

See how that works out on multiple levels...

No? You think I'm opposed to raising the age for military eligibility? At any rate, the military secures weapons. Soldiers don't have free rein with them. It is a much more regulated and structured environment, so I don't believe the comparison is valid. 

[Dahobbs 17753]

3 hours ago, FartingMonk said:

Renting a car isn't a government policy so that's moot.  I feel that voting is the most fundamental thing a person can do.  And if we entrust a person to vote then we need to entrust them to all other things.  If you want to make 21 the voting age.  Then make that with the guns and the draft.  

 Yes, voting is fundamental to a democracy. Buying a gun isn't. And only one of those things can be directly used to kills others. We don't need to treat them the same. There is ample evidence that 18-year old kids aren't responsible enough to be given an automatic right to purchase guns.  The primary issue, particularly with males, is impulse control. Voting isn't something one really does on impulse, and again, can't directly hurt others, so the same concerns don't apply. 

I'll reiterate one thing: my belief is that the purchase of firearms should be limited. Possession is a different issue. I don't have any issue with kids having guns while hunting/shooting with parents/guardians. But they shouldn't be able to buy them. 

Edited June 6, 2022 by Dahobbs

[tbone_ 14223]

Renting a car isn't a government policy so that's moot.  I feel that voting is the most fundamental thing a person can do.  And if we entrust a person to vote then we need to entrust them to all other things.  If you want to make 21 the voting age.  Then make that with the guns and the draft.  

Perfect. Let’s make the age 50.

[FartingMonk 3608]

23 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

 Yes, voting is fundamental to a democracy. Buying a gun isn't. And only one of those things can be directly used to kills others. We don't need to treat them the same. There is ample evidence that 18-year old kids aren't responsible enough to be given an automatic right to purchase guns.  The primary issue, particularly with males, is impulse control. Voting isn't something one really does on impulse, and again, can't directly hurt others, so the same concerns don't apply. 

I'll reiterate one thing: my belief is that the purchase of firearms should be limited. Possession is a different issue. I don't have any issue with kids having guns while hunting/shooting with parents/guardians. But they shouldn't be able to buy them. 

But that didn't solve ol fuck face from killing the kids in Sandy Hook.  

[Guest]

1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

But that didn't solve ol fuck face from killing the kids in Sandy Hook.  

We're not going to solve any of this with laws.

Refusal to acknowledge that is a fundamental problem in these discussions.

[Dahobbs 17753]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

But that didn't solve ol fuck face from killing the kids in Sandy Hook.  

I don't think a single law can do everything. We have to layer protections. Sandy Hook would have been helped more by banning high capacity magazines. 

[FartingMonk 3608]

Honestly you want to get rid of the mass shootings.  You execute that fucker and you shit on his remains and then dump his fucking body in the ocean.  Those dudes think they are going down in history.  You desecrate their bodies and they might think different.  We have a sick fetish over these guys.

[Dahobbs 17753]

1 minute ago, slorch said:

We're not going to solve any of this with laws.

Refusal to acknowledge that is a fundamental problem in these discussions.

Yes, let's solve the fundamental problem of human violence. That is definitely the more workable solution, not enforcing gun safety. 

[FartingMonk 3608]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't think a single law can do everything. We have to layer protections. Sandy Hook would have been helped more by banning high capacity magazines. 

And how will banning high capacity magazines have done anything different?  What's the difference between 6 5 round magazines or 1 30 round magazine?  He shot a bunch of kids in a classroom.  It wouldn't have mattered. 

 

Edited June 6, 2022 by FartingMonk

[Dahobbs 17753]

3 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Honestly you want to get rid of the mass shootings.  You execute that fucker and you shit on his remains and then dump his fucking body in the ocean.  Those dudes think they are going down in history.  You desecrate their bodies and they might think different.  We have a sick fetish over these guys.

Most of them end up dead during the event. You're not going to discourage these events by increasing punishment for the shooters. You may get some work done by punishing people that contribute (e.g., sellers, manufacturers, incompetent cops, owners who fail to secure guns, etc.). 

[Dahobbs 17753]

Just now, FartingMonk said:

And how will banning high capacity magazines have done anything different?  What's the difference between 6 5 round magazines or 1 30 round magazine?  He shot a bunch of kids in a classroom.  It wouldn't have mattered. 

 

You don't think have 10 30 round magazines was a factor in the damage he did? That's a unique take. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

37 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Voting isn't something one really does on impulse, and again, can't directly hurt others, so the same concerns don't apply. 

 

This does not fall inline with the talking points. 

[Dahobbs 17753]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

This does not fall inline with the talking points. 

What? 

[FartingMonk 3608]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Most of them end up dead during the event. You're not going to discourage these events by increasing punishment for the shooters. You may get some work done by punishing people that contribute (e.g., sellers, manufacturers, incompetent cops, owners who fail to secure guns, etc.). 

Some end up dead.  Some don't but there is a whole underground worship of them.  Take away that worship by doing fucked up things to them.  Maybe that stops them.  Hey you know what?  Let's raze their parents house and confiscate their land.  Maybe that will teach people to lock up their guns.  

 

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

You don't think have 10 30 round magazines was a factor in the damage he did? That's a unique take. 

15 of the kids were from the same classroom.  He had them pinned.  You think the kids were going to bum rush him?  Reloading a gun takes a couple of seconds.  He probably could have done more damage with 2 handguns

[Jkwellborn 6792]

I’m for service in the police force or military service being a requisite for owning military weapons, as was the intention of the 2nd amendment (see Constitution and Federalist Papers). If you’re not willing to serve your community and make it safer, GTFO!

So, I need to be ex mil to own a Remington 870, an M1 Garand, a bolt action Remington 700 .308, or a Glock?

Or do you mean an M4, SAW, M203, Javelin or MP5?

Because militaries use all of the above. They don’t use semi-auto only AR-15s though.

[Captainant 27889]

13 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

And how will banning high capacity magazines have done anything different?  What's the difference between 6 5 round magazines or 1 30 round magazine?  He shot a bunch of kids in a classroom.  It wouldn't have mattered. 

 

Well presuming the cops don't take their anger issues out on parents trying to protect to their kids and give the shooter an hour to go hunting, making an 18yo do more mag changes and generally making it even incrementally more difficult and cumbersome to do a horrible thing seems like a good policy move to me.

[FartingMonk 3608]

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Well presuming the cops don't take their anger issues out on parents trying to protect to their kids and give the shooter an hour to go hunting, making an 18yo do more mag changes and generally making it even incrementally more difficult and cumbersome to do a horrible thing seems like a good policy move to me.

Like I said I'm not against banning high capacity mags.  I just think it's the scapegoat.  It would have made no difference in those shootings. 

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

High capacity magazine bans reduce mass shooting by roughy 50% 

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/policies-that-reduce-gun-violence-restricting-large-capacity-magazines

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305311
 

[FartingMonk 3608]

6 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

High capacity magazine bans reduce mass shooting by roughy 50% 

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/policies-that-reduce-gun-violence-restricting-large-capacity-magazines

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305311
 

See but thats where assault rifles and LCM become intertwined but it shouldn't.  Their definition of large capacity magazines is 10 or more.  That's 95 percent of the handguns out there.  

[aggie08 21572]

53 minutes ago, slorch said:

We're not going to solve any of this with laws.

Refusal to acknowledge that is a fundamental problem in these discussions.

Why is it, do you think, that other countries don't reap the same consequences from their societal failings and human weaknesses?

[hornian 5230]

2 hours ago, FartingMonk said:

Some end up dead.  Some don't but there is a whole underground worship of them.  Take away that worship by doing fucked up things to them.  Maybe that stops them.  Hey you know what?  Let's raze their parents house and confiscate their land.  Maybe that will teach people to lock up their guns.  

That’s some real “Rains of Castamere” shit there. 

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4979]

4 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

You don't think have 10 30 round magazines was a factor in the damage he did? That's a unique take. 

Not really. He could have killed the same amount of kids with a muzzleloader given the response of the local cops. That's a slight exaggeration, but he had all the time in the world to methodically kill as many kids as possible. Mag size limits would certainly help in most cases, but not much in this one.

I bet if a magazine size limit law of 10  rounds for centerline rifles or pistols based on centerline rifle designs (to cover the many AR pattern pistols in circulation) was combined with a program for which you could swap round for round your higher capacity magazines for lower capacity magazines and the government reimbursed the manufacturers for doing the swap you would see a lot of hunters swapping out each of their 30 round mags for three 10 round mags. Of course, the Democrats would have a hard time accepting the fact that they are giving magazine manufacturers a source of revenue, so they (the elected ones, not necessarily the voters) would never support it.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4979]

11 hours ago, deadshank said:

My neighbor across the street recently died from a heart attack.  His widow contacted me about 2 pistols, a 20-ga pump and a .243 bolt action.   She has no use for them.  One pistol is a junker .22 revolver, the other is a Dan Wesson .357 / 8” barrel which is actually worth something to a DW cult member.   The 20-ga pump is a meh oddity that could find a home and I’ll take the .243 for donor action and have it rebuilt into a .308 bench rifle.  
 

All that said and Surly wiseacre jokes aside yet forthcoming, should she be responsible for running a background check on me?  She wants me to have them or sell what I can.  Of course, I will give her the sale proceeds.  (BTW, Collectors Firearms has suspended trades and purchasing used firearms for a period until July-ish so that’s out the window and now Gunbroker.com is looming in the horizon).
 

I’m not against background checks.  I don’t like lunatics, criminals or ax grinders to begin with; much less armed.  
 

How far down do we drill in the name of “sensible” gun control measures?  

I actually read the Democrats version of their "common sense" universal background check bill that was passed in the house a couple of years ago. I'm assuming they haven't made any changes to it. Under that bill, had she asked you to take the guns to your house to clean and check them for proper function, you would both have had to travel to the nearest FFL dealer and fill out a 4473 to legally transfer them to you in order to do that. Then you would have had to travel back to an FFL dealer to repeat the process to transfer them back to her. Around here, the going rate for a transfer is about $35 or more. But luckily for your FFL dealer, the bill specifically mentioned that there was no maximum amount that they could charge for transfers. So if they are the only shop around, they can jack up the price as high as they want. It makes no difference if you are a LTC holder and therefore exempt from background check requirements. You still have to pay twice to do something like that. Same story if your buddy who you've known all your life and has a LTC wants to borrow your expensive over under shotgun for a weekend dove hunt to see if it fits him and shoots well for him before spending a bunch of money on his own. Pay twice. This is "common sense gun control" that is only really common sense if you know nothing about guns or have no connection to any sort of shooting sports and is why nothing keeps happening.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19182]

9 hours ago, slorch said:

We're not going to solve any of this with laws.

Refusal to acknowledge that is a fundamental problem in these discussions.

Bullshit.  

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19182]

11 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

This does not fall inline with the talking points. 

 

11 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

What? 

Fatty is trying to be clever, but he isn't.  

 

Edited June 6, 2022 by PenelopeWitherspoon

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19182]

5 hours ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

I actually read the Democrats version of their "common sense" universal background check bill that was passed in the house a couple of years ago. I'm assuming they haven't made any changes to it. Under that bill, had she asked you to take the guns to your house to clean and check them for proper function, you would both have had to travel to the nearest FFL dealer and fill out a 4473 to legally transfer them to you in order to do that. Then you would have had to travel back to an FFL dealer to repeat the process to transfer them back to her. Around here, the going rate for a transfer is about $35 or more. But luckily for your FFL dealer, the bill specifically mentioned that there was no maximum amount that they could charge for transfers. So if they are the only shop around, they can jack up the price as high as they want. It makes no difference if you are a LTC holder and therefore exempt from background check requirements. You still have to pay twice to do something like that. Same story if your buddy who you've known all your life and has a LTC wants to borrow your expensive over under shotgun for a weekend dove hunt to see if it fits him and shoots well for him before spending a bunch of money on his own. Pay twice. This is "common sense gun control" that is only really common sense if you know nothing about guns or have no connection to any sort of shooting sports and is why nothing keeps happening.

Oh no, think of the incovenience.  

[Neonmoon 38130]

9 hours ago, FartingMonk said:

See but thats where assault rifles and LCM become intertwined but it shouldn't.  Their definition of large capacity magazines is 10 or more.  That's 95 percent of the handguns out there.  

They don’t make handgun magazines that hold less than 10 rounds?

 

 

[FartingMonk 3608]

15 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

They don’t make handgun magazines that hold less than 10 rounds?

 

 

They do.  I have one for my compact Smith and Wesson.  I think it's 9.  I ended up buying the extended which holds 12.  I'm not saying they aren't out there but for the larger handguns I would think they weren't as common.  There wasn't a market for it.  Even my everyday carry is a compact but they double stacked it to 15.  Im just saying that's why that report can be a bit skewed because someone says large capacity and they automatically think AR and rifles.  The two shootings this weekend in Tennessee and Philadelphia will definitely be considered mass shootings with large capacity magazines but it was all done with hand guns.

[FartingMonk 3608]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

 

Fatty is trying to be clever, but he isn't.  

The act of voting itself does not do harm.  However, if you pull the level for the GQP, then I think it is very fucking clear that you are doing harm.  

To quote you take that shit to cloak room.  

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19182]

13 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

To quote you take that shit to cloak room.  

Apologies.  I thought I was in the Cloak Room thread, since this has decided gotten very political.  

I have fixed my post.

Edited June 6, 2022 by PenelopeWitherspoon

[BabaYaga 15332]

21 hours ago, Chopper said:

It's not like "gun shows" are a giant racket designed to take advantage of the private sale loophole. Oh wait.

When was the last gun show you've been to?

[BabaYaga 15332]

51 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

They do.  I have one for my compact Smith and Wesson.  I think it's 9.  I ended up buying the extended which holds 12.  I'm not saying they aren't out there but for the larger handguns I would think they weren't as common.  There wasn't a market for it.  Even my everyday carry is a compact but they double stacked it to 15.  Im just saying that's why that report can be a bit skewed because someone says large capacity and they automatically think AR and rifles.  The two shootings this weekend in Tennessee and Philadelphia will definitely be considered mass shootings with large capacity magazines but it was all done with hand guns.

Yep.  generally only compact and subcompact pistols.  even my 365 carries 12 and I have a backup that carries 15

[BabaYaga 15332]

7 hours ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Not really. He could have killed the same amount of kids with a muzzleloader given the response of the local cops. That's a slight exaggeration, but he had all the time in the world to methodically kill as many kids as possible. Mag size limits would certainly help in most cases, but not much in this one.

I bet if a magazine size limit law of 10  rounds for centerline rifles or pistols based on centerline rifle designs (to cover the many AR pattern pistols in circulation) was combined with a program for which you could swap round for round your higher capacity magazines for lower capacity magazines and the government reimbursed the manufacturers for doing the swap you would see a lot of hunters swapping out each of their 30 round mags for three 10 round mags. Of course, the Democrats would have a hard time accepting the fact that they are giving magazine manufacturers a source of revenue, so they (the elected ones, not necessarily the voters) would never support it.

Arguing mag capacity is akin to the bill propose in NY to limit the size of cups to help fat people be less fat.

Even the base novice can swap out mags in a little under 2 seconds.  Maybe 3-4 if you have an adrenaline spike.  If you have 40+ minutes, you can accomplish what was done with a hammer.  This also ignores the hundreds of millions of mags already in circulation that have a capacity over 10rds.  

[FartingMonk 3608]

6 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

When was the last gun show you've been to?

Yeah.  Most of the gun show guys are FFLs.  They aren't risking their FFLs.  You might have a few dudes who say come out to my car and look at stuff but I think those dudes are long gone.  It's an old bogeyman tactic.

[BurntOrange&White 40077]

Has it come out where the guns and ammo were actually purchased?

[BabaYaga 15332]

Just now, FartingMonk said:

Yeah.  Most of the gun show guys are FFLs.  They aren't risking their FFLs.  You might have a few dudes who say come out to my car and look at stuff but I think those dudes are long gone.  It's an old bogeyman tactic.

I've been to hundreds over the years.  Not ONE time have I had someone solicit me in the parking lot, seen activity in a paring lot, or even seen people milling around that MIGHT be suspicious.  There are LEO's everywhere.  

The ONLY guns I've seen that fit that description are guys inside, usually with a sign or designation, trying to offload a unique item - usually a very old rifle or pistol.  I've seen one guy approach a person like that, and he asked one of the FFL guys at a booth if they could run a background for a nominal fee.  It was an old Sharp's rifle in a unique caliber (50-90, something like that.  Bore was massive)

[Captainant 27889]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

When was the last gun show you've been to?

I know you aren't asking me, but last one I went to was like back in 2017 at George R Brown because I needed to burn a few hours and wanted to grab a couple AR lowers (which I did, real nice stainless .223Wylde barrel on it now). Even back in 2017 it was full of conspiracy and "the government is coming for your guns!" type shit, and the guy at the table I bought the lower from offered to meet me after the show in a parking lot if I didn't want to go through the NICS check. 

It was that and a shitload of nazi memorabilia and overpriced jerky. 

Just now, BabaYaga said:

Even the base novice can swap out mags in a little under 2 seconds.  Maybe 3-4 if you have an adrenaline spike.  If you have 40+ minutes, you can accomplish what was done with a hammer.  This also ignores the hundreds of millions of mags already in circulation that have a capacity over 10rds.  

Yeah in a tense situation where an 18 year old punk ass murderer is being apprehended by cops you're damn right I'd want those first responders to have an extra three or four seconds. What the fuck kind of argument is that?

Yeah no shit there's going to continue to be easy access to >10rnd mags, 3d printers exist lol. It's not that hard to fabricobble a working mag if you have a ton of spare time and you only need it to work once or twice. 

But. It would have made a difference in Uvalde if that 18 year old buying two high end rifles and mags and ammo had to fumble around some more. Well, it would have if the Uvalde cops weren't all fucking cowards cosplaying as tough sheepdogs 

[BabaYaga 15332]

5 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Yeah.  Most of the gun show guys are FFLs.  They aren't risking their FFLs.  You might have a few dudes who say come out to my car and look at stuff but I think those dudes are long gone.  It's an old bogeyman tactic.

Sites like Gunbroker put an end to that years ago.  Why mill around wasting your time when you can post it and go about your day.  You also have the peace of mind knowing it has to be shipped to a licensed FFL dealer to handle the paperwork for you.  

[Dahobbs 17753]

16 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Arguing mag capacity is akin to the bill propose in NY to limit the size of cups to help fat people be less fat.

Even the base novice can swap out mags in a little under 2 seconds.  Maybe 3-4 if you have an adrenaline spike.  If you have 40+ minutes, you can accomplish what was done with a hammer.  This also ignores the hundreds of millions of mags already in circulation that have a capacity over 10rds.  

Layered regulations. You don't do one size fits all. You can't look at any one law in isolation and say, see, that wouldn't have worked in this particular situation. And we aren't aiming for perfect (we would need to actually ban guns). Just a shit ton better than we currently are. I don't know why this is so hard for some of you to understand. 

[FartingMonk 3608]

11 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I know you aren't asking me, but last one I went to was like back in 2017 at George R Brown because I needed to burn a few hours and wanted to grab a couple AR lowers (which I did, real nice stainless .223Wylde barrel on it now). Even back in 2017 it was full of conspiracy and "the government is coming for your guns!" type shit, and the guy at the table I bought the lower from offered to meet me after the show in a parking lot if I didn't want to go through the NICS check. 

It was that and a shitload of nazi memorabilia and overpriced jerky. 

Yeah in a tense situation where an 18 year old punk ass murderer is being apprehended by cops you're damn right I'd want those first responders to have an extra three or four seconds. What the fuck kind of argument is that?

Yeah no shit there's going to continue to be easy access to >10rnd mags, 3d printers exist lol. It's not that hard to fabricobble a working mag if you have a ton of spare time and you only need it to work once or twice. 

But. It would have made a difference in Uvalde if that 18 year old buying two high end rifles and mags and ammo had to fumble around some more. Well, it would have if the Uvalde cops weren't all fucking cowards cosplaying as tough sheepdogs 

But it didn't. Unless response time already has people ready to respond in a few minutes.  The capacity of the magazines don't play a major role.  We aren't ready to talk about having armed security at schools though.  I'm not talking teachers.  That's not their job.  Trained and armed security at every school..

 

[BabaYaga 15332]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Layered regulations. You don't do one size fits all. You can't look at any one law in isolation and say, see, that wouldn't have worked in this particular situation. And we aren't aiming for perfect (we would need to actually ban guns). Just a shit ton better than we currently are. I don't know why this is so hard for some of you to understand. 

All these laws that make you feel good that you did "something" impact law abiding citizens and do next to nothing to address the problem you claim you are trying to solve for.  I don't know why this is so hard for some of you to understand.  

[cmontexas 3298]

22 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Has it come out where the guns and ammo were actually purchased?

A local BBQ restaurant acted as the transfer place for the rifles he purchased online. I believe he bought the ammo there too

[deadshank 24653]

1 minute ago, cmontexas said:

A local BBQ restaurant acted as the transfer place for the rifles he purchased online. I believe he bought the ammo there too

Local BBQ restaurant as transfer site that also sells ammo?   Must be Oasis Outback.   Possibly the greatest store in America.  

[Dahobbs 17753]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

All these laws that make you feel good that you did "something" impact law abiding citizens and do next to nothing to address the problem you claim you are trying to solve for.  I don't know why this is so hard for some of you to understand.  

No, next to nothing would be actually doing nothing, which is what we have been doing. Making guns more difficult to buy will definitely reduce these incidents. A waiting period and or age limits would have prevented Uvalde. A mag size limitation would have impacted multiple shootings and likely lowered death counts. Safe storage laws would help prevent both accidental shootings and events like these. And these aren't just theoretical, but actually proven. States that enact gun reform see reduced gun violence. States like Texas that make guns easier to get see increases gun violence (and mass shootings). The numbers are plain as day..

[CooterBrown 18040]

7 hours ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Not really. He could have killed the same amount of kids with a muzzleloader given the response of the local cops. That's a slight exaggeration, but he had all the time in the world to methodically kill as many kids as possible. Mag size limits would certainly help in most cases, but not much in this one.

Banning large capacity magazines would help.  These dudes don't have a kill rate of 1 hit for 1 bullet, it's more like 1 for 10.  Slow them down, don't have pussy cops, and you drop the causalities significantly. 

[BabaYaga 15332]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

A waiting period and or age limits would have prevented Uvalde.

You have absolutely no way to know if this is true.  

[DigglerontheHoof 21263]

Gun nuts can feel secure that their little penis extensions will remain legal and in their hands.  Get used to dead kids in bushels, b/c it's here to stay.

Congrats on that 2nd Amendment.  Hope it lets you tiny dicked pussies sleep well at night, on a mountain of dead kids.