There's that word again, need. I've read the 2nd Amendment many times. As I recall, the word "need" does not appear in any way, shape, or form in there.
People want to ban "assault rifles" because they sound scary and dangerous. Couple of problems with that - one, defining just what makes a rifle an "assault" rifle. It is a relatively subjective term. Two, even with all the various tragedies brought to us by the evil and insane, your chances of getting killed by a rifle - any kind of rifle, are somewhat less than your chances of being bludgeoned to death by a hammer from the local big box home improvement store. So statistically speaking and for efficiency's sake we should focus our energy on the bigger threats first - assault hammers.
People want to ban AR-15s any time they are used to commit a crime. Guess what, the AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America. Of course they are going to wind up in criminal's hands. Even if you managed to ban them without starting a civil war, even if you managed to confiscate them from law abiding citizens without starting a civil war (and remember, there's a lot of them seeing as how they are the most popular)... Some other rile would then "move up" to being the most popular and guess what - they would end up being used in crimes.
People want to ban "high capacity" magazines. This is generally absurd. If you take a reasoned, dispassionate look at the timelines of virtually any/all mass shootings you find out the perpetrator had all kinds of time - minutes to tens of minutes - to commit his/her crimes. Magazine swaps take just a couple of seconds. The number of rounds in a magazine has virtually no impact on the outcome of the event.
People want to ban pistol grips. I really don't know why. I think it is because they believe such grips make the weapon somehow significantly more effective? Two thoughts here, sort of at opposite ends of the spectrum. One, at the ranges most of these shots are taken at, a rifle, any rifle, is going to be very effective regardless of any one feature. Two, if we're talking about my self defense firearm that I'm using to defend my family from a home invasion, h**l yeah I want the most effective weapon possible. Why would you want to deny me effective protection? What's "effective enough?" Hey, maybe airbags and seat belts for just 3 out of the 4 seats in my car are "safe enough" too. Or obeying the speed limit for 20 out of the 32 miles of my commute is good enough...
People want to ban bayonet lugs. This is ridiculous. Why is anyone wasting time/energy arguing this? When was the last time a bayonet on a rifle was used to kill someone???
People want to ban ... It doesn't matter because the one universal feature of every ban, every limit is that in order to be effective, criminals must obey the ban/law. This is patently absurd. By definition criminals break laws. Expecting a new law to deter someone already prepared to break a dozen or more other laws... You might as well expect that requiring everyone to floss and use mouthwash would stop crime. Yes, that level of absurdity.
Certain people want to ban guns in order to punish those who have guns because those who own them disagree with the gungrabbers who resent being disagreed with.
Nothing to do with preventing crime, everything to do with POWER.
“By definition criminals break laws.” Yes and Cruz did and was not punished. Surely the Parkland school wanted to discipline Cruz. However, their hands were tied by the district’s asinine policy.
Victims and their families should be outraged at their school’s discipline code and preparing to sue the BC School board and Sheriff’s office for this collaboration. Nikolas Cruz was never busted at school because of the 2013 NAACP collaborative discipline policy:
Broward County’s School Discipline ‘Agreement” signed by the Sheriff, State Atty and local judges. Its purpose is to keep minority juvenile delinquents out of prison by NOT enforcing Florida state laws in schools.
These various behaviors will NOT result in suspension or expulsion or notification to the police. Instead they receive warnings, lectures and possible stern scolding!
The infractions include -All student misbehavior and these non-violent infractions:
Disrupting or Interfering with class
Affray - fighting in a public place
Theft if less than $300
Vandalism damages < $1,000
Disorderly conduct
Trespassing, Loitering or Prowling
Criminal Mischief
Gambling
Harrassment or Threats
Alcohol -all related offenses
Possession of Cannabis
Drug Paraphernalia
Obstructing Justice w/out Violence
“Go ahead kids. Smoke pot, booze it up, fight, THREATEN a teacher and tear the bloody place up! The NAACP & Broward County got your back. Since your family has failed to discipline, a sanctuary law-breaking program shields you at your school.”
The attacker gets to choose what weapons he brings, and how much ammo, and what tactics he/she is going to employ.
Responding police to a significant extent will, when they arrive, generally have that option as well.
The defender has to grab what is at hand, and will want the most versatile weapon possible - which includes sufficient ammo to give him/her options.