A grip and a sight. And it doesn’t even require that both be attached, just that both are able to be attached. Let me ask you, seriously, how many mass shootings do you actually think involve a grip and/or sight? How many of these murderers paid for those accessories? How many do you think walk in and use them? We…

Don’t you think having a grip on a weapon and calling it an assault rifle is just as flimsy? It’s nothing more than stabilizing it for distance shooting and what kind of idiot who wants to kill everyone is trying to be stable?

Yeah, most of that bill is pretty stupid given that:

All valid, but you specifically suggested the banning of certain firearms and I specifically asked which ones.

Very well. Define what you want banned entirely and what licenses you would recommend for other firearms?

I’m cool with keeping guns away from people with certain problems, but I am not sure about models of gun because the guns you are probably talking about are the only guns someone can use to hunt. Are you fine with now taking away someone’s right for self-sufficiency? Might as well make home gardens illegal.

I will echo a couple others before making my own statements:

Yes, it lowers the total number... but we are talking less than 100 per year that it would lower, since the VAST majority come from gang violence and good luck getting those turned in.

I’ve done some extensive research and have used facts (such as how many people exist in a nation, how many guns are owned, and how many guns are owned by a single individual—generally speaking) and it’s kinda funny that the actual turnout is that the US and the UK are pretty even on per gun owner gun violence, while…

How about this, then? Stop bitching about Trump politicizing the event and pushing for something he believes would make the country safe unless you and every F*cking one else stops politicizing every f*CKING attack on home soil where the individual used a gun.

Wow, you’re pretty quick, aren’t you?

While I am not the individual responsible for the quote above, I am the individual responsible for opening this particular comment thread. I certainly do not mean to suggest that the Japanese strictly are against Americans for some reason, as you have pointed out it is just a general concept. I do, however, think it…

I have to agree. Despite their nationalism and xenophobia, they are absolutely friendly because by golly, they want to show us how great they are at being Japanese.

Okay let’s be real, the Japanese (not everyone, of course) may love the ‘good old US of A’ but they sure as heck want the ‘good old US of A’ as far away from Japan as possible, unless they are in Japan, being in awe of how #1 Japan is at everything.

Last night I watched an episode of Fresh Off the Boat, I know it was a couple of weeks old but holy shiz people...

So where were the angry mobs when the IRL separated from CART 100% to race on ovals and 150% to have American drivers only?

Regardless, there is an irony in a Japanese driver winning during America’s #1 auto sport, on a day remembering people who were slaughtered by Japanese. Takuma Sato was not there killing Americans (just like this guy wasn’t there killing the Japanese), but there is, no matter how you slice it, an irony.

I have heard lots of different things, actually... one was that he was dead set on open wheel until he took up an offer to test a stock car (which he begrudgingly accepted at the time). Another story says he had a deal in place to put him in a competitive car in one of the better teams and the split had caused him to…

I think there were powerhouse drivers in both series after a few years. The US 500 proved that no matter who you are, you can mess up in the grandest possible way, as well. But man... if the split never happened, we might have had Jeff Gordon and kept Tony Stewart.

I was struggling in the closing laps trying to decide who to root for.