Sneakylong However, you're leaving out one glaring thing. Knives, like automobiles, like hammers, like baseball bats, like any other household items were not designed with the intention of killing someone. Whereas guns were designed with one intention. To kill someone.
Again, the first murder was recorded as being committed with a rock. Should we ban those, too?
Sneakylong reasonable people could agree on how many etc.
Reasonable people already agreed that the government has no right to infringe on a U.S. citizen's right to bear arms yet unreasonable people continue to try more and more to infringe on that very right.
Weirfan Who ,when and where did anybody say there should be an across the board ban on firearms? We don't have up here only that it's prohibited to carry a concealed firearm or any firearm.
Yeah, @PA-PLAYA, no one said anything about an across the board ban. They still wanna let us own them (gee, thanks for your permission), but we have to keep them locked away where they're no good for their intended purpose.
Sneakylong Oh I forgot. The NRA represents the Hot Dog manufacturing industry.
I just looked at nra.org and while the site lists 4 areas under the "Shopping" heading (NRA Carry Guard, NRA Store, NRA Country Gear, and NRA Program Materials Center) none of them list any guns for sale. Trust me, I looked for them hoping to find a deal.
So, your idea that the NRA wants to sell guns is inaccurate to put it kindly.
Sneakylong the fighting tyranny argument became a moot point years ago
Tyranny in the U.S. was never higher during our lifetimes than from Jan 19, 2009 to Jan 20, 2017.
He apparently has never read what those pesky founding fathers said about the issue surrounding tyranny and our own government............
There are over 2 times more guns in rural areas than urban, yet murder rates by gun are substantially higher in urban areas. Who commits more crime by gun, republicans or democrats?
JeffTilley
Ooh, ooh, pick me, pick me!!
Democrats?
Had a reply typed up to rebut all your idiocy, but then reality set in. 
Some interesting commentary in this 'gun control' redux. LOL (As if everyone of these arguments hasn't been put forth previously.)
Nonetheless, it seems there's a modicum of extremism on display and it seems misguided.
One, of the more recent mass shootings, how many of those perpetrators were "criminals"? I'm thinking most recently Sandy Hook and Las Vegas. Oh, very few? So, we need to protect ourselves from the unknown and unpredictable?
Two, I don't believe anyone here has mentioned gun control being exemplified by confiscating all firearms. So, what's the fuss? Because it seem everyone posting 'pro-gun' continually responds to something that's not been mentioned, addressed, or threatened.
Lastly, do we "know" - do we truly know what the intention of the Second Amendment WAS (that's past tense)? Somewhat an aside but, I believe the purpose of our revolution was related to "taxation without representation". I believe the same issue sparked The Civil War, with slavery being piggy-backed as an issue (read some transcripts of Honest Abe's level of racism, oops... sorry). And, I believe WE currently receive little representation by our elected officials. Yes, I stated, "we".
Carry on...
kudos Prof.
Amazing how some people keep arguing against things that haven't been said 
a common deflection response used by those who can't muster an acceptable or reasonable reply or who intentionally ignore the points being made in an attempt to trumpet their personal agendas.
Sneakylong I'll take it that's just another way for you to say I was right. Which I already knew, but thanks anyway.
professor Sandy Hook and Las Vegas
Sandy Hook and Las Vegas shooters were both criminals prior to pulling the trigger on their first victim. So, I ask, what is your point? Criminals will be criminals. Rules and laws matter not to them.
professor do we truly know what the intention of the Second Amendment WAS
Yes, "shall not be infringed" is fairly cut and dry. That's what it meant, what it means, and what it shall mean. The founding fathers did not set an expiration date therefore, it's a safe assumption, they meant it to be enduring.
puttnfool
That's the point really. But with anybody able to just go and buy a gun without the background checks and safety courses that should be mandatory, this will continue to happen. I am not saying to confiscate everybody's guns but just be damn sure that the right people get them with proper checks and balances. Why is the gun lobby so against that simple request? Up here to get s gun we need to go through all of that.
candukid We go through background checks to purchase guns, too.
puttnfool Well now, I'm sure you did, and maybe your neighbors and relatives, but I seriously doubt these mass killers have all been through the system!
per your post above, where you state the Sandy Hook and Vegas shooters were criminals beforehand. I'd have to check the states where they lived, but in my state a criminal cannot purchase guns. And if you commit certain 'crimes' after being licensed/purchasing, they'll come after them. After all, you are a criminal and cannot own guns.
puttnfool professor do we truly know what the intention of the Second Amendment WAS
Yes, "shall not be infringed" is fairly cut and dry. That's what it meant, what it means, and what it shall mean. The founding fathers did not set an expiration date therefore, it's a safe assumption, they meant it to be enduring.
I have a fairly sound education, but I'm thinking you skipped the days they taught reading comprehension!
btw, 1 more(what I consider to be a) dumbass statement from you and I'm asking @jrock to kill us all!!!! Either debate properly of leave. Or we all will.
I think everyone has had more than their say. If anyone wants to continue this discussion, feel free to start a private discussion and tag members you'd like to continue to chat with.
