I've got 30 or so magazines from different makers. Not once in thousands of rounds of shooting have I had a jam and I load all magazines to capacity.

All have magpul followers, and 12 or so are actual magpul pmags. The rest are the standard metal grey 30 round magazine.

Moron. Government military research invented the internet. BUT, the government does not provide or supply the internet, thus it's a crap comparison.

Nothing in the COTUS gives the government the power to the things listed by the AC.

Depends how you define machine shop. Not all are businesses that can be shut down. Also, once a business is shut down, where do you think the equipment goes?

The government was forced to change its tactics after Waco due to the massive outcry. I'd also say that 2 guys killing 169 in retaliation proved that it wasn't this decisive win some make it out to be.

You also didn't have many massacres before.

Australia was about the same, averaging something like 16 years between massacres. The massacre prior to the Port Arthur massacre was about 16 years before. It's been about 16.5, so we'll see if the sweeping gun ban in Australia did anything, Also worth pointing out that New Zealand which has far looser regulations on guns did not experience any massacres either in that time frame.

New York did not ban handguns.

It was DC and Chicago and we've seen what wonderful crime rates they have.

If the 2nd amendment hasn't been repealed, then guess what? IT STILL APPLIES, even if you think it's outdated.

40%?
Citation needed.

have there been any instance of average citizens carrying firearms and causing problems? I see you found 2 kinda sorta examples. There are states like Vermont that have not required a permit to carry concealed since the early 1900s, then there are states like WA which have been shall issue since 1960, then the slow change from no/may issue to shall issue starting with Florida in 1987 all the way to Wisconsin in 2011, with 40 or so states shall issue or no permit required.

Surely you have some evidence of a significant problem with people who carry firearms in public to justify your fears, right?

This is gun control for gun control's sake. If you're interested in saving lives, you actually try to do things that will save lives, not things that will only burden people who are not a threat.

They had guns, so they used them. They avoided any laws that got in their way, what makes you think that in the absence of one type of gun they won't pick another? What makes you think that in the absence of guns they won't use something else?

partial birth abortion

Time reloading is less than 2 seconds. The people usually stop when they fell like it (Aurora), or when they encounter resistance (everyone else).

2 second pause is not enough time to flee or take action against a shooter. If it was, the Virginia tech shooter should have been taken down during one of the many times he reloaded his handguns (he brought more than a dozen spare magazines with him.)

Pump action firearms have been used in mass shootings, as have bolt-action rifles, see the Cumbria shootings in England 2010; guy killed 12 with a bold action rifle and double barrel shotgun.

If you think the line in the Constitution is outdated and inapplicable, feel free to contact your elected officials and ask for a bill to be introduced to amend the Constitution to be more in line with what you think it should mean now.

This is how we know they never dig into the stats or facts surrounding an issue, but simply watch TV and decide that the more something covered, the more it must be happening.

We've seen this with school shootings, kidnapping by strangers, terrorism, plane crashes, etc.
Each garner an extreme amount of attention by the news, complete with them trying to tie the recent event to events years and hundreds/thousands of miles apart, yet the facts show that it's exceptionally rare and difficult to stop without spending an extreme amount of time and energy harming and burdening people who will never be a problem.

I don't see any proposals to amend the COTUS to change the 2nd amendment, just attempts to pretend the 2nd means something else and legislate it out of existence.

I can't help but wonder if the people doing this realize the impact such a precendent sets when it comes to other rights.

Mass shootings have been farirly steady in this country for decades. A handful of people kill about 120 or so. This is maybe 1% of the total homicide picture in tis country.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8