[quote]That's being a bit dishonest, land space itself is meaningless here. Population centres are much more important. If police take 30 minutes to reach you in a city or major town that isn't a problem caused by the entire country being fucking huge.[/quote]
Land space is one of the most important factors here.
The UK has 661 people per square mile. The United States has 90 people per square mile.
In order to serve the same number of people per officer, that officer needs to basically cover over seven times the space of a British officer.
In order to fund a law enforcement officer, you need a certain amount of tax payers. If those tax payers are spread out, then the officer's jurisdiction needs to also spread out. This leaves many many people with a very sparse amount of police coverage.
[QUOTE=Milkdairy;49250359]None of these features are illegal at all if a bullet button device is installed. My friend owns a fully outfitted CA legal AR-15.
...The only drawback is that you can remove the device in 5 minutes with minimal tools lol.. So it's not like it's gonna actually stop anyone.
Also according to CNN the weapons were modified to be fully automatic, so a bullet button getting removed was really the least of our worries.[/QUOTE]
The ATF is reporting that they removed the bullet buttons, and attempted to make the trigger groups fully automatic.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;49246509][IMG]http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/12/05/us/05weapons_hp/05weapons_hp-master675.jpg[/IMG]
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/us/tashfeen-malik-islamic-state.html?_r=0[/url]
The murder weapons[/QUOTE]
Great another wacko ruining the MP name, now i gotta paint mine.
[QUOTE=Matthew0505;49254086]Posessing a gun or a drug is a victimless crime, you can't really compare those to rape and murder.[/QUOTE]
It's not a crime at all.
What happened to the third shooter?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;49247074]Who said it has to be FBI? Just some group trustworthy enough to not fuck the job up when someone applies to buy a weapon. If they have a gun safe that is actually secure, awesome. That's one less thing to worry about and future purchases won't need that checking again unless they move or something.
It's not like it requires an in depth investigation into the very psyche of that person. Just asking a few trustworthy people they know "hey have they ever expressed anything like the urge to kill everyone?". The background checks combined with some kind of peer opinions shouldn't take excessive amounts of time to perform.[/QUOTE]
So, I need to invite a gov't employee or whoever they deem trustworthy in to my house to verify that I have a safe? and have them talk to my family/friends whose could make up anything they'd like to to prevent me from owning guns, if they're against gun ownership personally, but still my buds? Do I need to do this every time I'm interested in buying a gun? Sounds like it would get really old for all the people they need to pester to collect the information really quick. Have it only done annually or so? Basically a license, not interested.
All that for something that is literally my right? I'd really rather not.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;49254191]What happened to the third shooter?[/QUOTE]
Arrested
[QUOTE=Ridge;49254449]Arrested[/QUOTE]
What third shooter?
I thought there wasn't even a third suspect anymore? Just their connections and ties to follow up on?
They detained a third subject. Haven't heard anything else about them.
[editline]5th December 2015[/editline]
He/she was detained the same day.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
