I have repeatedly demonstrated my ability to admit when I am wrong. You have not.Huey » 04 Jun 2022, 6:05 pm » wrote: ↑ I’m not trolling. pointing out the problems with you post.
Now as far as your post, ****. Most mass shooters use a handgun. Federal law already states you have to be 21 to buy one. Here is the link
Does a customer have to be a certain age to buy firearms or ammunition from a licensee?
Yes. Under the Gun Control Act (GCA), shotguns and rifles, and ammunition for shotguns or rifles may be sold only to individuals 18 years of age or older. All firearms other than shotguns and rifles, and all ammunition other than ammunition for shotguns or rifles may be sold only to individuals 21 years of age or older. Licensees are bound by the minimum age requirements established by the GCA regardless of state or local law. However, if state law or local ordinances establish a higher minimum age for the purchase or disposition of firearms, the licensee must observe the higher age requirement.
[18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1) and (b)(2); 27 CFR 478.99(b)]
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/does-cu ... n-licensee
I suggest before you make stupid **** comments you get some eduction on what the **** you are talking about.
The Va tech shooter killed 32 and wounded 17 with two handguns, *******. Here is the link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_shooting
****, the next time you come at me you come with facts and links. Calliscé?
I have and do. Tell me why I, and the ATF are wrong. This should be good. Mass shootings are defined as 4 or more shot. Here is another link.ScottMon » 04 Jun 2022, 6:08 pm » wrote: ↑ I have repeatedly demonstrated my ability to admit when I am wrong. You have not.
What you posted is true. What is also true is that this Texas shootout will change nothing.Huey » 04 Jun 2022, 6:13 pm » wrote: ↑ I have and do. Tell me why I, and the ATF are wrong. This should be good. Mass shootings are defined as 4 or more shot. Here is another link.
In the United States, there are several different, but common, definitions of mass shootings. The Congressional Research Service defines mass shootings, as multiple, firearm, homicide incidents, involving 4 or more victims at one or more locations close to one another. The FBI definition is essentially the same. Often there is a distinction made between private and public mass shootings (e.g., a school, place of worship, or a business establishment). Mass shootings undertaken by foreign terrorists are not included, no matter how many people die or where the shooting occurs.
https://crim.sas.upenn.edu/fact-check/w ... an-be-done
Come on. What am it wrong about. Again, I post links. You? Not so much.
So will the reasons, fruity - and your anti-human **** is right there at the top of the list of reasons.ScottMon » 03 Jun 2022, 7:14 am » wrote: ↑ And school shootings will continue. And so will the excuses.
CLEARLY not to you, penis cheeks.
Fact: I saw a black cat and then sprained my ankle - moron.ScottMon » 04 Jun 2022, 5:20 pm » wrote: ↑ Fact: Countries with strict gun control laws have considerably less mass shooters.
America's Gun Laws: How the Rest of the World Compares - The Atlantic
Fact.
Instead of trolling, why not address the problem - fruitcake.
you are always incorrect, and one of the BIGGEST CRYBABY'S on hereScottMon » 04 Jun 2022, 5:44 pm » wrote: ↑ I am incorrect. Studies have not been conclusive.
Do Studies Show Gun Control Works? No. (reason.com)
No, "studies' have been MANIPULATED to keep you gun grabbers pacified and demanding that you give up your God given rights so that GOVERNMENT can further control you to the point on enslavement!!!ScottMon » 04 Jun 2022, 5:44 pm » wrote: ↑ I am incorrect. Studies have not been conclusive.
Do Studies Show Gun Control Works? No. (reason.com)
Tellingly, the studies that have gotten the most media or legislative attention aren't among the 123 that met RAND's approval. The best studies made claims that were too mild, tenuous, and qualified to satisfy partisans and sensationalist media outlets. It was the worst studies, with the most outrageous claims, that made headlines.
One prominent study, which was touted from the debate stage by Sen. Cory Booker (D–N.J.) when he was running for president in the 2016 election, made the astounding claim that a permit requirement for handgun purchases in Connecticut reduced their gun murder rate by 40 percent. It is true that the state's gun murder rate fell rapidly after that law was passed in 1995, but so did gun murder rates throughout the country. The study's 40 percent claim is the actual murder rate in Connecticut compared to something the researchers call "synthetic Connecticut," which they constructed for the purpose of their study—a combination of mostly Rhode Island, but also Maryland, California, Nevada, and New Hampshire.
As it turns out, the authors' entire claimed effect (the 40 percent reduction they reported) was due to the fact that Rhode Island experienced a temporary spate of about 20 extra murders between 1999 and 2003, and synthetic Connecticut was more than 72 percent Rhode Island.
Even compared to synthetic Connecticut, the decline the authors found didn't last. Although the law remained on the books, by 2006, the gun murder rate in real Connecticut had surpassed synthetic Connecticut, and then continued to increase to the point where it was 46 percent higher. The authors, despite publishing in 2015, elected to ignore data from 2006 and afterwards.
Situational ehtic scenarios statistically averaged facts really don't explain the kinetic actions by individuals doing the deeds defending their biological time from mob rule semantics surround them 24/7.ScottMon » 04 Jun 2022, 5:20 pm » wrote: ↑ Fact: Countries with strict gun control laws have considerably less mass shooters.
America's Gun Laws: How the Rest of the World Compares - The Atlantic
That's because they CAN'T refute my list. Not here nor in my other threads. All they CAN do is resort to personal attacks, drive by **** posting, and labeling all of it a "lie"
why? your life won't go on until you do? Do you understand kinetic evolving completely? Obviously never learned serving humanities.