agsalaska said:

---

Are we negotiating? I'll tell you what, you can have the change to 21 if we can de regulate suppressors. How about that? We good?


The problem is we can't negotiate with people who have the ultimate goal of repealing the 2nd amendment

---

I kinda want a suppressor so sure.

No. Raise the age. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good

Tumble Weed said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TxTarpon said:

---

Yeah, pray and spray only works for the movies and rap videos.

---

What you both fail to realize is that you are approaching this from a tactical standpoint of shooting at a single target. If you're shooting into a crowd, like the Las Vegas shooter, Pulse nightclub shooter, or Bataclan attackers, you don't really need to pray because all you need to do is spray. You're simply looking to fire as many rounds as possible in as short a time as possible because you can't miss. For that purpose, full auto is certainly practical.

---

The Las Vegas shooting was what changed my mind about high capacity magazines.

---

Why?
Was there a tactical reason where the mags made a difference?
Never followed that case - so unfamiliar with it.

But why does the capacity of the mags matter? It takes what 5 seconds to switch out a magazine? You are probably restricted by the weight of your ammo more than whether it's in a 1 60 round mag, or 2 30-round mags.

I know of some mass shootings where the gunman will have multiple weapons,(VTech) in case one of them jams, and so they don't have to switch out mags at all and capacity doesn't matter.

Especially if law enforcement take 30 minutes to get to you

Rifles of all types result in an annual number of deaths comparable to accidental falls from ladders. Not just accidental falls, but accidental falls from ladders.

Other than emotional overreaction and general media-driven hysteria, I'm not sure this issue warrants much national attention.


In terms of risk, we would be much wiser to direct resources at, say, distracted driving, which causes an order-of-magnitude more annual deaths.

Raising the age to buy is just an intellectually lazy, feel good , WeVeGotToDOSomEtHing reaction.

Makes no sense.

VTech is the main reason I'm against gun specific bans completely. Kid did all that with a 9mm and a .22

cmag said:

---

VTech is the main reason I'm against gun specific bans completely. Kid did all that with a 9mm and a .22

---

And there too law enforcement took forever.
And yet again, it was a mass shooting that was fairly meticulously planned.

BigRobSA said:

---

ChemEAg08 said:

---

Yes

---

This

"Shall not be infringed." Pretty clear

---

This is a policy discussion, not a legality discussion. If the people think it's good policy but the Constitution prohibits it, we can always amend the Constitution.

So I guess "should" versus "can" are two different questions in my mind.

RoadkillBBQ said:

---

Tumble Weed said:

---

WestTexasAg said:

---

I grew up around guns, and hunted as a kid. Mostly used shotguns. I now have a couple of semi-auto rifles and a couple of handguns as well. That being said, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing 21 being the required age to be able to purchase a semi-auto long gun. You can't buy a beer or cigarettes until you are 21.

This wouldn't solve everything, but it would keep the bullied 18 year old high schooler from making an impulse buy and then creating atrocities like we just saw in Uvalde.

Yes, I realize 18 year olds can fight for this country and carry a semi-auto weapon. However, that is after proper training in the military.

What are your thoughts? Would this be a reasonable change?

---

Same as you. Hunted all my life and enjoy shooting guns.

I think that it is reasonable, but there is no room for discussion about being in the middle. My opinions are unpopular on both sides.

Personally I think that high capacity magazines, (over six rounds), should be worth a closer look. Don't care if it is a handgun or a rifle.

"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun," Sturm Ruger & Company co-founder, the late William Ruger Sr., told Tom Brokaw in 1992.

It won't save everyone, but it might save a few.

---

5 or 10 round magazines wouldn't have saved a single one of those kids. Quit pushing an agenda of feel good legislation that won't make any difference. That's a major problem society and politicians have. Let's address the real issues which are culture and mental health.

---

I am afraid that you are right about Uvalde. If you wait 45 minutes to go in then my point is moot.

I believe that it would limit losses in other situations like Las Vegas and the nightclub in Florida.

The FBI agrees that more ammo capacity is better, and after a shootout they swapped from revolvers to guns with more capacity because reloading slows you down.

Men didn't come home from Germany or Japan in 1945 and regularly go on rampages at schools. Nor did this regularly occur post-Vietnam. What has truly broken in our society that it is happening now, in arguably the easiest time to exist, in American history?

Figure that out, and maybe I'll answer this.

deddog said:

---

geoag58 said:

---

Exempt those who have served in the military but otherwise make the age twenty five to buy semi automatic weapons

---

You still ain't gonna stop anything.

---

Eighteen, without direct supervision, aka military is too young to buy a semi-automatic weapon

Tumble Weed said:

---

I am afraid that you are right about Uvalde. If you wait 45 minutes to go in then my point is moot.

I believe that it would limit losses in other situations like Las Vegas and the nightclub in Florida.

The FBI agrees that more ammo capacity is better, and after a shootout they swapped from revolvers to guns with more capacity because reloading slows you down.

---

Why would it limit losses in Las Vegas and Florida?

An 18 year old should be allowed to purchase an AR-15.

And the type of gun isn't relevant. At close range a .22 can be just as deadly. You might lower the damage caused by the bullet, but you'll sure as hell increase the accurace with the lower weight of the gun.

Also, even using the cherry picked data in https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3291353 nothing about the age of the mentally disturbed persons committing mass shootings indicates changing the purchase age of an AR15 will do anything.

This would be nothing more than changing a law to "feels good rubbed on my face" but accomplishes diddly squat.

Edit to add: the crazies doing this aren't going to stop by taking guns away or making it more difficult to obtain guns. I drive buy schools daily and were I crazy and chose to do so, could take out easily a dozen kids in a matter of seconds with my vehicle. Hell even easier with electric vehicles because there's less chance of the sound of an engine charging hard from a gas guzzler.

They have guns so they use guns. If they didn't they'd still have a crazy desire to inflict as much harm as possible and going about doing so. At least w/a shooter there's a chance someone else is armed that can take them out. A crazy guy hauling ass in a vehicle is going to be a tough shot for an armed citizen to nail w/out the vehicle still causing significant harm to others.

geoag58 said:

---

deddog said:

---

geoag58 said:

---

Exempt those who have served in the military but otherwise make the age twenty five to buy semi automatic weapons

---

You still ain't gonna stop anything.

---

Eighteen, without direct supervision, aka military is too young to buy a semi-automatic weapon

---

But what if you are a 19 year old, married living with your wife and 1 year old.
You don't get to defend them?

geoag58 said:

---

deddog said:

---

geoag58 said:

---

Exempt those who have served in the military but otherwise make the age twenty five to buy semi automatic weapons

---

You still ain't gonna stop anything.

---

Eighteen, without direct supervision, aka military is too young to buy a semi-automatic weapon

---

Also, why wouldn't you want an 18 year old to buy a semi-automatic weapon? I don't mean to be facetious. Is it because of the mass shooting?

Because the perp could easily have stolen it , like Adam Lanza did.

It's telling that instead of focusing on mental health, and defending our schools, politicians are focussing on increasing the age.
They are making it harder for law abiding folks to buy a gun, even though they have committed no crime.

deddog said:

---

Tumble Weed said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TxTarpon said:

---

Yeah, pray and spray only works for the movies and rap videos.

---

What you both fail to realize is that you are approaching this from a tactical standpoint of shooting at a single target. If you're shooting into a crowd, like the Las Vegas shooter, Pulse nightclub shooter, or Bataclan attackers, you don't really need to pray because all you need to do is spray. You're simply looking to fire as many rounds as possible in as short a time as possible because you can't miss. For that purpose, full auto is certainly practical.

---

The Las Vegas shooting was what changed my mind about high capacity magazines.

---

Why?
Was there a tactical reason where the mags made a difference?
Never followed that case - so unfamiliar with it.

But why does the capacity of the mags matter? It takes what 5 seconds to switch out a magazine? You are probably restricted by the weight of your ammo more than whether it's in a 1 60 round mag, or 2 30-round mags.

I know of some mass shootings where the gunman will have multiple weapons,(VTech) in case one of them jams, and so they don't have to switch out mags at all and capacity doesn't matter.

Especially if law enforcement take 30 minutes to get to you

---

This is the incident that I was referencing.

"On October 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old man from Mesquite, Nevada, opened fire on the crowd attending the Route 91 Harvest music festival on the Las Vegas Strip in Nevada. From his 32nd-floor suites in the Mandalay Bay hotel, he fired more than 1,000 bullets, killing 60 people[a] and wounding 411 with the ensuing panic bringing the number of injured to 867. About an hour later, he was found dead in his room from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. His motive is officially undetermined."

I don't think that he could have fired over 1000 bullets with 6 round mags. Maybe he could have but it would have given everyone more time to cover.

Mags are not mechanically complicated. If an individual with bad intent wants high-capacity magazines, that individual will get them. Or make them.

Tumble Weed said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TxTarpon said:

---

Yeah, pray and spray only works for the movies and rap videos.

---

What you both fail to realize is that you are approaching this from a tactical standpoint of shooting at a single target. If you're shooting into a crowd, like the Las Vegas shooter, Pulse nightclub shooter, or Bataclan attackers, you don't really need to pray because all you need to do is spray. You're simply looking to fire as many rounds as possible in as short a time as possible because you can't miss. For that purpose, full auto is certainly practical.

---

The Las Vegas shooting was what changed my mind about high capacity magazines.

---

High capacity magazines aren't difficult to make if you know what you're doing.

Tumble Weed said:

---

deddog said:

---

Tumble Weed said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TxTarpon said:

---

Yeah, pray and spray only works for the movies and rap videos.

---

What you both fail to realize is that you are approaching this from a tactical standpoint of shooting at a single target. If you're shooting into a crowd, like the Las Vegas shooter, Pulse nightclub shooter, or Bataclan attackers, you don't really need to pray because all you need to do is spray. You're simply looking to fire as many rounds as possible in as short a time as possible because you can't miss. For that purpose, full auto is certainly practical.

---

The Las Vegas shooting was what changed my mind about high capacity magazines.

---

Why?
Was there a tactical reason where the mags made a difference?
Never followed that case - so unfamiliar with it.

But why does the capacity of the mags matter? It takes what 5 seconds to switch out a magazine? You are probably restricted by the weight of your ammo more than whether it's in a 1 60 round mag, or 2 30-round mags.

I know of some mass shootings where the gunman will have multiple weapons,(VTech) in case one of them jams, and so they don't have to switch out mags at all and capacity doesn't matter.

Especially if law enforcement take 30 minutes to get to you

---

This is the incident that I was referencing.

"On October 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old man from Mesquite, Nevada, opened fire on the crowd attending the Route 91 Harvest music festival on the Las Vegas Strip in Nevada. From his 32nd-floor suites in the Mandalay Bay hotel, he fired more than 1,000 bullets, killing 60 people[a] and wounding 411 with the ensuing panic bringing the number of injured to 867. About an hour later, he was found dead in his room from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. His motive is officially undetermined."

I don't think that he could have fired over 1000 bullets with 6 round mags. Maybe he could have but it would have given everyone more time to cover.

---

Yes, he used some high capacity mags (100 max). But like most mass shooters, he planned and had multiple rifles. (26 to be precise) and he was set up in a room. So he had ammo and transported them ahead of time.

Again, in Las Vegas, law enforcement took forever to get to him.

https://www.ktnv.com/news/las-vegas-shooting/list-guns-and-evidence-from-las-vegas-shooter-stephen-paddock

Mass shooters will always find ways around whatever rules the government comes up with. Limiting magazine capacity is another feel good measure that will only harm law abiding gun owners.

Also most common mag with ARs is 30 rounds. It's hard to carry more than 4-6 mags on person, though you could carry more in your backpack i guess

Keegan99 said:

---

Mags are not mechanically complicated. If an individual with bad intent wants high-capacity magazines, that individual will get them. Or make them.

---

Like fertilizer bombs. I understand that we can produce what we cannot buy.

I also believe in making it harder to obtain.

Tumble Weed said:

---

Keegan99 said:

---

Mags are not mechanically complicated. If an individual with bad intent wants high-capacity magazines, that individual will get them. Or make them.

---

Like fertilizer bombs. I understand that we can produce what we cannot buy.

I also believe in making it harder to obtain.

---

For law abiding citizens. That's the problem with most of these measures.

Criminals don't care about this, as has been evidenced in Las Vegas, and Virginia Tech where the gunman, again had multiple weapons to work around magazine restrictions and potential jams.

Finally, it took 2 freaking hours for law enforcement to get to the Vegas Shooter. He had stopped shooting for more than 45 minutes. So, he could have done it with 6 round mags too.

There is a very common thread to most mass shooters, they plan obsessively. If the FBI spend less time worrying about parents at school board meetings, they might even be able to stop some of these.

Tumble Weed said:

---

Keegan99 said:

---

Mags are not mechanically complicated. If an individual with bad intent wants high-capacity magazines, that individual will get them. Or make them.

---

Like fertilizer bombs. I understand that we can produce what we cannot buy.

I also believe in making it harder to obtain.

---

There are literally hundreds of millions of high-capacity mags already in circulation.

You're not going to make them appreciably harder to obtain.

They were banned from manufacture from 1994-2004. And anyone could still buy 'em without a problem.

No. An 18 yo shouldn't be able to buy such a weapon. I'm also of the opinion that an 18yo shouldn't be able to vote either.

You would have to un-invent some stuff to actually 'fix' this young person school shooter protocol:
1. Un-invent cell phones.
2. Un-invent wi-fi and the internet.
3. Un-invent social media.
4. Un-invent Baby Mommas.
5. Un-invent online games that glorify violence.

Put those genies back in their respective bottles and we can have a safer America. ~60 years ago most all of these factors did not exist save #4 which was then still a shameful activity for most folks. All these factors contribute to a loser like Mr. ________ killing teachers/students. We are creating lots of losers like this idiot. It will happen again and no laws can be passed that can make it go away. None of these factors can be un-invented. America is swirling down the potty.

The gun grabbers will push until they push to far and then it will be too late. I fear for my country.

You look at the changes in society. As many have noted here that fundamentally similarly functioning weapons were available to citizens since at lease immediately after WWII, though today they are lighter weight and easier to customize.

What else has happened?

1.) We stopped institutionalizing dangerously mentally impaired individuals.
2.) In schools we tolerate bad behavior by taking out all forms of discipline until it reaches the level of involving the police.
3.) Explosion of single parent homes - dads not raising their sons, kids being raised by family and not their parents.
4.) In the last decade and accelerated in the last 2 years we have stopped prosecuting a lot of felonies and are turning convicted felons on the street with little or no time served. In other words, we let the bad guys out of prison or never sent them in the first place.

The liberals ignore the massive failure of progressive goals and blame it on the weapon, not the core issues in society, many of which are caused by THEIR own policy preferences.

I would only support this if we agreed that 21 is the new official age of adulthood and if you are not 21 then you also cannot

-vote
-take out a student loan
-be drafted

If we were actually consistent across the board that 21 is the age of adulthood I'd be okay with it

Not this hodge lodge of "you're mature enough for this but not that"

Quote:

---

What you both fail to realize is that you are approaching this from a tactical standpoint of shooting at a single target. If you're shooting into a crowd, like the Las Vegas shooter, Pulse nightclub shooter, or Bataclan attackers, you don't really need to pray because all you need to do is spray.

---

You are correct, in limited one target situations auto is very effective.
Three round bursts are very effective.
As a general rule you are not holding the trigger down and sweeping.
See also 1990s LA drive bys with 100 bullet holes hitting two dudes in the buttocks.

Team "Pray and Spray"

Quote:

---

You're simply looking to fire as many rounds as possible in as short a time as possible because you can't miss. For that purpose, full auto is certainly practical.

---

There are guns made for that. Not all guns are made for that.

Maroon Dawn said:

---

I would only support this if we agreed that 21 is the new official age of adulthood and if you are not 21 then you also cannot

-vote
-take out a student loan
-be drafted

If we were actually consistent across the board that 21 is the age of adulthood I'd be okay with it

Not this hodge lodge of "you're mature enough for this but not that"

---

I can get behind this, it just makes sense.

A couple of years ago the California legislature passed legislation raising the age to buy a gun in California to 21. Can't remember if the legislation was any gun or just semi-automatic weapons, A person under 21 years of age contested the constitutionality of this legislation.

Earlier this month the 9th Circuit, which covers California and is, without a doubt, the most liberal federal appellate court in America, ruled that the California legislation was unconstitutional. I just read the opinion earlier tonight and wish I had copied a sentence out of the opinion. But the tenor of this important sentence, and of the entire opinion, was that it would be a stain on the memory of young 17-18 year old boys who took up arms, and gave their lives, in the fight for the creation of and freedom of our country.

Because, in spite of what many say, the Second Amendment was created, not for hunting, but to allow the citizenry to take up arms against an oppressive government. Our founding fathers had just done that and that is why, in their great wisdom, they knew the possibility of having citizens do it again could happen.

I own guns but am not a gun enthusiast. But I am a believer in our Constitution. The entire Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, give we, the citizens more power and lessens the power of the government. I cannot think of a more important Amendment that, if changed, would take power away from we, the citizens, and give that power back to the government.

Yes.

WestTexasAg said:

---

I grew up around guns, and hunted as a kid. Mostly used shotguns. I now have a couple of semi-auto rifles and a couple of handguns as well. That being said, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing 21 being the required age to be able to purchase a semi-auto long gun. You can't buy a beer or cigarettes until you are 21.

This wouldn't solve everything, but it would keep the bullied 18 year old high schooler from making an impulse buy and then creating atrocities like we just saw in Uvalde.

Yes, I realize 18 year olds can fight for this country and carry a semi-auto weapon. However, that is after proper training in the military.

What are your thoughts? Would this be a reasonable change?

---

There is a report out there that this kid got physical with his Mom over ****ing wifi. Neighbor said at least 8 cop calls called and not the first time. Why was he never charged with domestic violence? If he had. a history with law enforcement and violence then he shiukd have never passed a back ground check and should not have a gun to begin with. The age is not relevant

Southern buy a pump shotgun instead, and kill just as many people with what is arguably the superior weapon in the scenarion.

Or they build pipe bombs

Or.....

They are driving cars at 16…

two-ton teen-guided missiles.

WestTexasAg said:

---

This wouldn't solve everything, but it would keep the bullied 18 year old high schooler from making an impulse buy and then creating atrocities like we just saw in Uvalde.

---

He took a job at Wendy's and worked and saved up money for this day, this was far from a spur-of-the-moment decision. Think he spent at least two years planning this, if not longer.

Moving the legal age wouldn't stop what happened there, he just makes a different plan.