Skip to main content

View Diary: Sanity breaks out on Fox:  Megan Kelly holds NRA LaPierre to Account (98 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Should there be no limit? (0+ / 0-)

    Not necessarily, but would one even be effective?  How much harm would be caused by a limit versus preventing mass carnage?  Where would limits apply?

    As I mentioned above, most standard capacities for a handgun are between 11 and 19 rounds.  This is a number chosen by police.  Common rifles, like the AR have 30.  These are numbers chosen by police, presumably because they are affective for the use of defense of self and others.

    I would like to avoid taking this discussion down into the weeds so I will summarize instead.  There are several problems with the limit idea, including effectiveness, legality, the fact that it is preemptively punitive and may cause more harm than benefit.  

    No, it is not a measure that I support, at least when applied to standard capacities.  Do I think that someone needs to routinely carry something like a 100 round drum, no, but neither can I say that X rounds is sufficient,

    •  thanks for the answers, noway2 (3+ / 0-)


      I think potential victims deserve a increased chance to escape,

      even if that might inconvenience the vast majority of law-abiding gun-owners.


      Sometimes in a society, there needs to be a balancing of "competing rights."

      This is one of those times, imo.

      and in the opinion of around 60 to 70% of Americans,
      depending on the poll.

      •  about those "competing rights" (2+ / 0-)


        1) my right NOT to be shot by military-style assault weapons, when I'm a public place minding my own business.

        vs

        2) your right to own such military-style assault weapons, and potentially carry them into a public place to harm the public.


        Note:  I'm using the word "my" and "you" in the generic sense here, and do not mean to imply that you noway2, are "capable" of such acts;  Even though a small minority of disturbed & overly-armed individuals increasing are.

        Nor do not mean to imply that I jamess, spend a lot hanging around in public places, cowering in fear of my safety;  Even though we used to have an expectation of such public safety, instead of the ever increasing expectation of being victimized by random acts of violence.

        When the odds of gun victimization soar past the odds of "random" lightning strike victimization,
        one (me) has to wonder if the "balancing" of these "competing rights" is seriously out of kilter?

        It would seem so. That too many "irresponsible people*" are getting their hands on too may very dangerous weapons. The proof is seen in the ER rooms across the country, where they are increasingly prepared for another day's victimization toll.

        My money says, they're not "gearing up" for nature's lightning.  It's human-lightning that is giving them the daily grief.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site