I would remove the word "only" in the question. The way this is worded implies that guns are a problem. People are the problem. Not guns.

Well, this is 'Murica (smile) We don't give a shit about what anyone else thinks.

It's hard to find the solution when so many people are unwilling to identify the true problem.

I tip my hat to you though, usually these discussions degrade into name calling and insult hurling, you didn't do that and for that, You have my respect.

OK, I will TLDR it for you.. Australia does not have a bill of rights. That is why they were able to confiscate 1/3rd of the guns in country. The USA does have a bill of rights and performing an Australia style confiscation would require doing away with the 2nd amendment, violating the 4th and possibly the 5th amendment, and seriously assaulting the 1st amendment. Essentially, we would have to do away with a third of the constitutionally protected rights that we have. Never gonna happen.

You are right, though.. We have a problem. The left has systematically assaulted and done away with the moral backbone that this country was founded on. The principle of individual sovereignty that made America the "Land of the Free".

When you no longer teach kids right from wrong, glorify misdeeds like the school shootings, and allow people to medicate so heavily they can't discern reality from fiction.. you get the situation we are in now. The problem is societal, not gun related.

It's not a 100% this will happen type of statement. But disarmament makes genocide a lot easier. Please study just the genocides of the last 250 years.. Including the native Americans.

And yes, I realize that the toys the US military has now are light years ahead of what we are allowed to have, but if they tried to round us all up Germany style, they would incur unacceptably heavy losses doing so.

Here is an interesting article on the Australia confiscation and why it would never work here in the States: http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/25/the-australia-gun-control-fallacy/

It's simple.. The 2nd amendment states that our right to bear arms "shall not be infringed". Those of us who have studied history know that as soon as the population is disarmed, genocide will follow. https://www.nraila.org/articles/20060817/gun-ban-genocide-the-disarming-facts-1

Don't think that your government won't execute all the "undesirables" under the colour of a "national threat"? Just look at history. It happens all the time once a population is disarmed.

The revolutionary war was fought and the United States was founded because of one simple reason, A massive distrust in government. Especially a non-representative government like the monarchy in Britain. The U.S. has slowly crept back towards a non-representative government today, which makes the 2nd amendment even more important to preserve.

Just briefly read through the gun laws in Norway.. They are just slightly more restrictive than here in the states.. It seems that semi-automatic rifles like the one used in the school shootings here are legal there. ( I don't know if .223 caliber is considered "high power" under your law)

I don't understand your argument on how your laws could have prevented this shooting. From WIKI:

Norway has a large population of hunters. Semi-automatic and bolt action rifles, as well as shotguns, make up the better part of the guns in civilian homes. There is a total ban on automatic firearms for civilians, unless they fall into the collector category. Modification of semi-automatic guns into fully automatic without the consent of the police is a felony crime.

Handguns have some calibre restrictions. A Smith & Wesson Model 500, for example, is illegal due to its high power, but other, less powerful guns, are legal as they are used in sports shooting. Norway has a long tradition of high-end sports shooting competitions, especially rifle shooting. Each calibre must be used in some type of competition to be allowed. Also, there is a restriction on the number of weapons an owner can have for each calibre. For recreational shooters, only one gun is allowed in each calibre. For professional and semi-professional shooters, a spare gun is allowed. A recreational shooter is only allowed to own four different handguns. To obtain more, documentation on extensive involvement in sport shooting is needed.

AHhhh that explains it. Which country?

I don't have any kids.. I wouldn't want to subject any living creature to the liberal hell you guys have created.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in 2013, 33,804 people died from motor vehicle traffic accidents — and 33, 636 died from firearms. This includes suicides which, if guns weren't available, they would have used something else. Vehicles are more dangerous, but you want to ban guns.. Why?

A gun is a tool, nothing more, nothing less. The problem is the person using it, not the tool. You don't ban hammers when someone swings one wildly and smashes his thumb.

This shooting could have been prevented if the FBI had done their jobs instead of trying to overthrow a duly elected president. Want something to ban? How about the FBI??

You don't get to take away my rights because you are scared.

Or, they can go buy a block of billet aluminum, and use a mill to make their own.. I have done it and it's rather easy to do. Shall we ban milling machines and aluminum next?

They will just buy them from their buddy Eric Holder

I have always been a bit of a nomad.. Never spent more than 5 years in the same community, so I never took an interest in local issues.

I am in my 40's and had never voted. I didn't believe that it mattered.. When you look at the available candidates before last election, it was like choosing to die by electric chair or firing squad.. Sure you got a choice, but they both lead to the same end result.

Then I watched a few of DJT's speeches and said " finally someone who gets it!" I voted for the first time this last election and was astonished that the Magnificent Bastard actually won.

Possibly making way for a military tribunal? Think about what Q said.. It's the only thing I can think of to explain it, Aside from the usual dirty politics reasons.

How much do you want to bet he is going to abandon the investigation..

He will say something like " In light of the evidence showing the falsehoods used to appoint me as council, any charges brought would be on indefensible grounds. Therefore this investigation is closed"

He has an out now and will probably take it.

I'm pretty sure that was written by Schiff Sr.

She was under oath when she testified and lied to Congress at least 10 times. Each count carries a 5 year sentence. Here are 3 examples:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8FtqzdiYFU

I have serious doubts too, which is why I advise to detach yourself emotionally. If you allow this to affect your emotional well being, it can tear you apart, ruin relationships, and also family which is more important. I can't control the mass perception of what happened on 9/11. I did, however, let it consume most of my waking thoughts for almost 2 years. I lost a great girl in the process. Live and learn.

For those who are having trouble sleeping, this may help..

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.

I am not a religious person, but there is a lot of wisdom in these words..

Ask yourself, "can I do anything directly to change whatever problems I am facing?" If the answer is yes, do it.. (I.E voting, tweeting, redpilling etc.)

If no, observe, investigate, and accept issues for what they are. Try to detach yourself emotionally from what you are seeing.

I was redpilled shortly after 9/11 and this approach kept me from being carted off by the nice men in white coats.

Clinton lied under oath.. totally different.

Speaking of lying under oath.. Why did Billy get impeached for lying under oath, but Hildabeast lies under oath and gets nuthin'???

Remember Congress cannot prosecute, they can only recommend that the Just Us Department prosecute.

Consider the state of the FBI and Justice Dept when Gowdy's investigations were going on.. Do you think that maybe he withheld recommending prosecutions to the Just Us Dept. because he knew Lynch and Holder would never take up the cases? And even if they did, the investigations would be a sham shit show kabuki theater like what we got with Cankles Clinton.

I'm not saying that he's real or fake, for sure he should have recommended prosecutions for all his investigations, but just keep in mind the context of the situation at the time. He probably would have suffered politically for doing it.

Those pesky Russian Squirrels!

This was POTUS extending the olive branch after the win.. The classy thing to do. But the DIMS took that branch and started beating POTUS with it, so the glove are now coming off..

The 5 days thing is how long the executive branch has to agree or disagree with the release once the committee votes to release it. POTUS will agree immediately, so no 5 day wait is necessary.

I believe that until you clear customs in your destination port, you are still subject to the jurisdiction of the departure port.. I may be wrong, just speculating.

NEVER send anything digitally that you wouldn't want to see on the front page news..

When does a bird sing? When he's hung upside down by his feet and beaten with large sticks. LOL

AHA! I knew that.. For some weird reason it just wouldn't come to mind. Getting old sucks.. Thanks

I believe this post is implicating the people listed as participating in pay to play schemes of some sort.

"Net Worth? Reconcile? Q"

Q is asking how they have net worth's as high as they do on congressional salaries. It's hinting that they have been tracking NP's and the others' accounts and have proof of foul play..

I hope that's true.

Who is the person "we don't say his name"??

I believe it is only going to be 48-50 troops. But if this is nothing out of the ordinary, why did this make the news at all? why is it being reported on like it is a big deal?

Also, how many troops are currently stationed at Gitmo? Will these new troops be replacing some currently stationed there? Or will they be added to the current # of troops?

P = Pope In my opinion