http://www.topgunsupply.com/rifles/

Now that I've answered your question, I'm entitled to actual honest answers to the questions posed of you on the last page or two of this thread.

GOGOGOGOGOGOGO

Trolly, I hope you're aware the military employs ALOT of bolt action rifles.

Is this gonna be kind of like that Obama "Bayonets" faux pas?

So you give them your CC # they mail it to your house AMIRITE?

And yet the guys guarding the gate at work all carry M4s! I should really tell them how inefficient their gun selection is.

DblBarrellJ argument 1: an "assault weapons" ban or ammo/capacity/etc restrictions are pointless and would have little or no impact on mass shootings because people can build their own guns and ammo, modify existing weapons to load much faster, and can carry out magazine changes smoothly and efficiently in high stress situations regardless of the types of weapons you allow to be sold in retail environments.

DblBarrellJ argument 2: These mass shooters obviously don't know much about guns or assault tactics or they would use totally different weapons and tactics then they actually use. Lol gun newbs.

Well, the larger argument is that prohibition in general doesn't work.

For anything.

Yet people intelligent enough to realize its not working for drugs, didnt work out all that well for alcohol, will magically work magnificently for guns.

What's that old saying? "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?"

Man, after all the willful ignorance DBJ has displayed ITT today ("Lanza was a noob, real pros use bolt action LOLZ") posts like these where he continues to assert the position of "guy who knows lots of valuable information on this issue" are POTY candidates

goofy, do you feel guns like these are too easy to legally purchase in your area?

But it is working fairly well in Britain, Japan, and China.

DblJ,
why do you want to be able to buy 30 round magazines? What situation are you contemplating that you'd need 30 rounds before reloading?

Australia too. But dbl won't let evidence get in his way.

Listen Fly gimmick, I saw your post the first time through.

Hold on, I'm getting a list of "US drug prohibition is working" types.

My aunt is going on a vacation to the USA in a few weeks (from canada) and is trying to figure out if she can rent a gun for 3 weeks and get a concealed weapon permit. This is someone with absolutely 0 gun knowledge. Now obviously this is never going to happen for multiple reasons, but its scary to think that this would even cross her mind.

DBL, why do you feel that your choice of weapon in a certain situation should matter more than what a newb would choose? You seem to know a lot about guns, but people carrying out mass murder may not. You've said it yourself that they likely were gun novices. Yet these novices were able to carry out these mass murders, and they did it with what you seem to say was an inefficient choice of tactics and firearms. Shouldn't that lead you to conclude that, if even these very inefficient choices have shown such devastating results, that maybe the guns available to public are too powerful?

This is equally applicable to expecting DBJ to answer specific questions with objective, non-trolling answers.

lol canada is really the only response

Oh man, this thread has been so full of lulz today. Thank you all for making the workday fly by!

DBL, comparing gun prohibition to alcohol and drug prohibition is apples to oranges. It's true that it hasn't worked with drugs an alcohol. But we do know that gun prohibition has worked in many countries. Also, we're not talking about taking away all the guns. If you want to hunt, or have a weapon in your home for self defense, you'll likely be able to. We're talking about getting rid of the guns that have only one purpose, to kill as many humans as possible, as quickly as possible.

Well, if she's including Arizona in her itinerary, it appears she doesn't even need a permit in order to CCW. I might be wrong. But if that's what she really wants, Tucson may be her best bet. But she should probably get a bolt-action rifle anyway, since they're apparentely much more lethal and effective than a Bushmaster .223.

We also know that, unlike alcohol or drugs, no one is actually seriously proposing ZOMG BANNING ALL EVERYONEZ GUNZ.

The drug war has reduced the availability of drugs. It would be pretty absurd to argue otherwise. Sacrificing the availability of toys to help save the lives of innocent people is well worth the trade off.

that would in fact be the ideal outcome, but obviously unrealistic politically right now

Agreed, I edited my post to reflect this.

There are many, many, many, points on the spectrum between (a) total prohibition and (z) no restrictions at all.

- Just because I can go to the corner store and pick up a six pack doesn't mean that I can brew up moonshine in my basement and sell it to ten year olds.

- Just because I have a drivers license doesn't mean that I can drive 200 miles an hour down a crowded city street or drive on the opposite side of the road just because I feel like it.

- And just because the laws on the books don't stop every incident of underage drinking, or bootlegging, or speeding doesn't mean that they aren't generally effective and aren't worth having.

So maybe, just maybe there are some reasonable rules that could strike a balance between the costs and benefits of enforcement?