Now that an AR-15 has been used in a terra attack, can we ban them as part of the War On Terra?

[KamaAina]

[Bonx]

1. No. But we can start an endless number of threads suggesting this.

[Agnosticsherbet]

2. Not without legislation.

[aikoaiko]

3. No. It wouldn't help anyway.

[villager]

5. Except for, you know, those situations where they would otherwise have been used to mow down dozens

nt

[aikoaiko]

6. If we implement the 2013 AWB which 'banned AR15s', one could change the grip to be compliant

Will a massacre like the one in Orlando be less tragic if a different grip was used on the AR rifle?

Was Sandy Hook less tragic because that AR15 was compliant with the Connecticut Assault Weapons Ban which was modeled after the expired 1994 Federal Assault Weapons ban?

[villager]

7. I suspect the OP is suggesting more than just a grip change. nt

[aikoaiko]

8. Maybe, but I haven't seen any proposed legislation that would accomplish more.

What would need to be done is ban on all semi-auto rifles and handguns with detachable magazines. Then you would be doing something, but that will never happen in the US. Semiautos are much desired guns in this country.

[villager]

9. Noting the psychopathology of the political climate is different than saying a ban "wouldn't help,"

though.

You might ask the grieving, shattered families if they think an AR-15 ban might possibly "help."

[aikoaiko]

10. Well the OP said it wanted to ban AR15s and by that I'll stick with saying that it wouldn't help

because there are many other firearms that would do just as well at such a horrible thing.

[villager]

11. And I'll stick by saying you can convey your feelings to all the surviving family members...

...than an AR 15 ban "wouldn't help."

[aikoaiko]

12. Right becasue I'm sure the grieving family members are wishing their kin had been injured or killed

with a handgun instead. I don't think so, villager. Let's let grieving folks grieve without dragging them into our conversations.

This massacre is horrible and yes there are things we can do to reduce such massacres, but saying we should ban AR15s is probably one of the more useless suggestions except to make anti-gun folks feel better about themselves.

[villager]

13. Ah, so the phrase "anti-gun folks" explains more fully where you're really coming from. nt

[Dem2]

17. Playing stupid

It seems you don't want anything to be accomplished and are here to just look the other way so that your little toys can't be insulted.

I'm done with yet another passive supporter of terrorism.

[aikoaiko]

18. Keep pluggin away.

[aikoaiko]

20. Passive supporter of terrorism, eh? A Rovian term if I ever heard of one.

That is exactly the tact Bush and company took whenever someone wanted to talk about civil liberties in the context of responding to terrorism.

[niyad]

4. wouldn't hold my breath.

[eppur_se_muova]

14. Now is not the time for consistency.

Wait until the heated arguments die down, then our "leaders" can proceed to do nothing like they always do.

[Amishman]

15. Since we have had terrorist mass shooters from the following groups can they be banned too?

republicans
democrats
atheists
christians
muslims
law enforcement
...

The point is that using a small number data points to try and sledgehammer some broad ban into place is not going to go anywhere, and it squanders an opportunity to actually accomplish something.

A reasonable reaction to this would be to reform the terror watch lists (add sorely needed due process and oversight) and link the background check system to it. This is a really reasonable request, and would be very hard for the republicans to block. Part of the reason that we could not get enhanced background checks passed after sandy hook is mostly because of some politicians/groups tried to add less popular bans/restrictions as amendments and muddied up the waters.

[KamaAina]

16. Apples to oranges.

republicans
democrats
atheists
christians
muslims
law enforcement

are not weapons.

[Amishman]

19. you miss the point

It's dangerous people that are the problem, not specific weapon or group.

Remove a certain group/organization and unstable hateful people will flock to others and continue to cause problems.

Ban a certain weapon, and they will use something else. Some of the worst attacks in our history were accomplished with simpler means than an assault rifle.

If we genuinely want to make our world safer, we need to address both the causes and also improve are system to better identify those who wish to do use harm. We were very close to catching this guy before he acted, the system correctly identified him as a threat but the followup investigation stumbled. If the FBI was alerted when this guy bought his guns, they could have pulled him in for questioning and further investigation. We can improve the system, and we need to not squander this opportunity to do it.