HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » You can own a 6 shot revo...

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:33 PM

You can own a 6 shot revolver, and a 2 shot, shot gun. Nothing else.

That's my solution. I don't think that infringes upon anyone's 2nd amendment rights.

However, it sure would cut down on all these mass murders.

44 replies, 1649 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 44 replies Author Time Post
Reply You can own a 6 shot revolver, and a 2 shot, shot gun. Nothing else. (Original post)
boston bean Jun 2016 OP
kentauros Jun 2016 #1
ileus Jun 2016 #15
kentauros Jun 2016 #17
Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #30
kentauros Jun 2016 #41
linuxman Jun 2016 #2
uponit7771 Jun 2016 #4
linuxman Jun 2016 #8
Dem2 Jun 2016 #5
Name removed Jun 2016 #7
Dem2 Jun 2016 #9
ileus Jun 2016 #12
tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #18
linuxman Jun 2016 #25
Logical Jun 2016 #3
linuxman Jun 2016 #14
roamer65 Jun 2016 #6
shadowrider Jun 2016 #33
Angel Martin Jun 2016 #44
Odin2005 Jun 2016 #10
ileus Jun 2016 #11
MadBadger Jun 2016 #13
linuxman Jun 2016 #16
Kang Colby Jun 2016 #19
liberalnarb Jun 2016 #22
jmg257 Jun 2016 #20
Spider Jerusalem Jun 2016 #40
jmg257 Jun 2016 #43
Takket Jun 2016 #21
beevul Jun 2016 #31
shadowrider Jun 2016 #34
Takket Jun 2016 #35
beevul Jun 2016 #38
Heeeeers Johnny Jun 2016 #23
One_Life_To_Give Jun 2016 #24
progressoid Jun 2016 #26
dawg Jun 2016 #27
boston bean Jun 2016 #28
dawg Jun 2016 #29
Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #36
dawg Jun 2016 #39
happynewyear Jun 2016 #32
Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #37
Vogon_Glory Jun 2016 #42

Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:41 PM

1. I don't normally reply to these kinds of threads,

but was thinking about solutions, too. I like yours, it could work

This one is a bit more absurd:

One person.
One gun.
One bullet.

The bullet would have a registration number on the casing. Every time you fire that one bullet, you have to keep the casing and return it to the store where you bought it as proof that you can buy another one. The registration number would also be proof that it was your bullet and not just one you found or made yourself.

If you lose your casing, well, I hadn't worked it out that far. Perhaps some lengthy time-period has to pass before you can buy another one.

No need for Chris Rock's solution of $5,000 per bullet, though this does limit the number of bullets as well.

Like I said, it's absurd, but maybe we could implement parts of it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #1)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:00 PM

15. What if you need two bullets to defend your life?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #15)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:01 PM

17. Like I said, I hadn't gotten that far.

However, the other person also would have only one bullet. Of course, if it's a group of people against you, then you're fucked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #1)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:21 PM

30. I can go take some lead weights off a car rim in a parking lot and make new bullets.

 

I could reload just about as many bullets as I want to. How are you going to stop that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Travis_0004 (Reply #30)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:40 PM

41. You did notice the part where I stated

"This is absurd" right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:49 PM

2. You can have 30 minutes in the approved free speech designated zone. Nothing else.

 

That's my solution. I don't think that infringes upon anyone's 1st amendment rights.

However, it sure would cut down on all these inflammatory ideas which cause mass murders.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to linuxman (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:51 PM

4. Apples and pot holes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #4)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:54 PM

8. Seems they are both right there in the bill of rights, but whatever.

 

I don't trust those who look to shred the BOR piecemeal. Time and again they've proven to me that it's really the whole shabang they don't care for.

I'll keep my guns, and all my other rights too, thanks.😃

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to linuxman (Reply #2)


Response to Dem2 (Reply #5)


Response to Name removed (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:56 PM

9. Post was kung-fu edited

I deleted my post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to linuxman (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:59 PM

12. 30 minutes....don't you mean 5 and 2?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to linuxman (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:02 PM

18. If the terrorist would have used his First Amendment as opposed to his Second

Amendment rights, 50 people would still be alive.

Nice try though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #18)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:16 PM

25. If free speech channels were used to radicalized or inspire killers like this fuck

 

Would you want them shut down?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:50 PM

3. Once again, name ONE democratic senator who would support this!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:59 PM

14. Senator Makebelievy from Indignantrageland.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:53 PM

6. I think we need to limit general gun purchases to those two items.

Semi-automatic and above weapons need to be subject to a much more rigorous background search and permitting process.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roamer65 (Reply #6)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:22 PM

33. Absolutely because you're deader if shot with a semi-auto

than you are dead if shot by revolver.

Makes perfect sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shadowrider (Reply #33)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 04:02 PM

44. absolutely !

"deadly" 380 auto and "much safer" 44 magnum 6 shot revolver

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:56 PM

10. Authoritarian horseshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:58 PM

11. No thanks...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:59 PM

13. You can have a musket

Like the founders intended

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadBadger (Reply #13)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:00 PM

16. How did you hook your printing press to the phone lines?

 

I'm assuming that's how your wrote that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:02 PM

19. No, thanks.

Florida bans guns in clubs/bars. I hope they reconsider soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kang Colby (Reply #19)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:04 PM

22. What?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:02 PM

20. These days revolvers and double barrels arent typical weapons

Related to the efficiency of a militia...not really in tune with that whole "militia purpose" of the 2nd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmg257 (Reply #20)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:38 PM

40. The "militia" purpose of the 2nd Amendment is an irrelevant anachronism; we have the National Guard

and a standing army.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #40)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 03:27 PM

43. That is true. Obsolete yet still laws of the land.

We The people know where to start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:03 PM

21. i sure as hell wouldn't call one person

having enough firepower to take out a crowd of 50 people a "well regulated militia". It is time to stop the perversion of the 2nd amendment, which was granted to the people because of the continuing threat of British attack, that leads to the modern day interpretation that any person should be allowed to own any amount of weaponry and ammunition that they desire. That was never the intent or the goal of the 2nd amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Takket (Reply #21)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:22 PM

31. Do people actually believe this crap?

 

It is time to stop the perversion of the 2nd amendment, which was granted to the people because of the continuing threat of British attack...


NOTHING was granted to the people. Amendment 2 restricts government, it doesn't grant anything.

...that leads to the modern day interpretation that any person should be allowed to own any amount of weaponry and ammunition that they desire.


Hyperbole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #31)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:23 PM

34. Do people actually believe this crap?

Sadly, yes. Yes they do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #31)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:30 PM

35. yeah, people actually believe this "crap".

1. There is no fundamental difference between a right granted to the people and a restriction on government. I can call it a right, you can call it a government restriction, it is the same thing. Fill in the blank: The first 10 amendments to the Constitution are referred to as the Bill of _______.

I'm not sure what point you are even trying to prove by making this distinction.

2. Hyperbole? No its not. And don't come back with "people aren't allowed to own nuclear weapons". You know exactly what I mean. I can legally buy and own as many firearms and ammo as I want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Takket (Reply #35)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:36 PM

38. Uh yes there is.

 

1. There is no fundamental difference between a right granted to the people and a restriction on government.


Uh yes there is. In one example the right is granted by government. Government is the source.

In the other, government is not only not the source of the right, they're generally forbidden from interfering with it.


So yes, huge difference.


I'm not sure what point you are even trying to prove by making this distinction.


That accuracy matters and hyperbole serves no purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:06 PM

23. I'll pass on that

My response to your suggestion is that I would/will oppose, and work against any efforts that would impose
those limitations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:08 PM

24. Hunters going to get hungry

Dropping a Deer with a 6 shooter will be a bit more difficult than with a long gun. And the Cops may not care for having to go back to the revolver.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:16 PM

26. Nope.

I don't own a gun but know many people who do. They run the gamut from the occasional hunter (like my Dad, a lifetime member of the Democratic party) to the loony NRA guy (like my former boss who owns an arsenal). And none of them would find your solution reasonable. 2nd amendment notwithstanding.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:17 PM

27. You need to add some rifles to that list. Just limit magazine capacities to a few rounds.

There are still places in this country where rifles are necessary for hunting and wildlife control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #27)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:18 PM

28. I can go along with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #28)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:20 PM

29. We really need to make it hard for one person to do that much damage.

High capacity magazines, owning multiple magazines that can be rapidly exchanged, multiple weapons owned by a single individual - all of these things need to be looked at.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #27)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:34 PM

36. 3d print magazines

 

That is not really a viable option

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #36)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:37 PM

39. Takes a bit of work. Multiple parts. Spring. Different materials required.

It'd be easier to buy one on black market.

No precautions are foolproof. But the more steps you make people take, the more chances there are for them to arouse suspicion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:22 PM

32. a 6 shot revolver, and a 2 shot, shot gun

and you feel the need to have these it seems. Why?

We now have over 50 people dead because of guns, yes guns guns guns.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happynewyear (Reply #32)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:35 PM

37. Or the person

 

That will be hailed as a hero

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 02:08 PM

42. I'd allow muzzle-loaders and possibly cap-and-ball revolvers

Muzzle loaders take a LONG time to reload (see the scene in the movie "Glory" ), cap-and-ball pistols reload faster, but slower than a conventional revolver, and WAY slower than automatic pistols and magazine rifles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread