Reply #298: The same as any other civilian gun, though. It was not some super-weapon, merely identical

[benEzra]

to what your local police officer carries on her hip.

Whatever Ferguson had gave him the ability to not have to reload and to create a great

deal of damage. That's clear.

Again, we constantly hear about the "sport" of shooting -- where is the sport?

If the animal had a gun, maybe it would be a sport?

There is no benefit to society in putting weapons like this on the market.

How do you propose to take them from 50 to 70 million people, many of whom would actively resist confiscation?

Instead of the Don Quixote routine, one could instead focus on the root causes of crime and violence. People who are socially connected and feel they have a stake in society don't do what Ferguson or the VT shooter did.

Just a thought on "sport" --- and "recreation" --

LBJ used to take male guests out on his Texas ranch to hunt --

But he took them out in the middle of the night -- up into a tower he had built --

and when everyone was ready, he would flip on floodlights -- and the deer caught in

those floodlights would be their "sport" for the day!

Again, I think we need more discussion here of sport and recreation with guns.

John F. Kennedy didn't, and JFK was far more of a gun enthusiast than LBJ was (Kennedy owned an AR-15, among other guns).

The majority of gun owners don't own guns primarily for sport or recreation. Those things are a side benefit.

And certainly the Ferguson type gun should be "controlled" unless someone has a specific

reason for owning one.

The "Ferguson type gun" is called an ordinary 9mm pistol. My wife has a specific reason for owning one, as do I and 40-50 million others.

BTW, a 12-gauge (.729) shotgun will fire eight 9mm projectiles, or a dozen .33 caliber projectiles, with every single pull of the trigger. What do you think about the legality of those?