Do you support gun control? [Archive] - Page 2 - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Do you support gun control?


Pages : 1 [2]

IhRedrider
02-25-2012, 12:56
This issue is much like the discussions I've heard on evolution

This issue is NOTHING like evolution. Neither evolution nor creation can be proven or dis-proven. The Right to own and bear arms is written in the Constitution of the United States. I don't believe that any fool would argue that the Constitution is only a theory and not really the highest Law of the Land.

Great now we've clouded the FACTS of the original issue with evolution and creation. Anybody got some other rabbits to throw in the mix? How about Islam, Catholics and SDA'ists, maybe we could get a good discussion about that here.

dalegates
02-25-2012, 15:09
I agree, the issues are completely different. My point was that the discussions take on a similar, and never-ending, format.

Vietboy1st
02-28-2012, 22:06
i will support gun control only if the government will hire two body guards to guard my house, myself, my parents 24/7.. Then yes. Other than that no thanks...

firerescue1231
04-03-2012, 16:27
I do not support gun control at all statistics show it doesn't work we still had violent crime during the asult weapons ban DC has one of the highest crime rates involving firearms in the country and it is illegal to own guns in DC all gun control dose is put restrictions on law abiding people

SCmasterblaster
05-10-2012, 11:36
What controls, if any do you think we should have legislated upon the citizens of this country?

Please include your rationale in your statement. Thanks.

I think that the amount of gun control we have right now is little too much, but I can live with it.

IhRedrider
05-10-2012, 19:08
Quote:
Originally Posted by IhRedrider
What controls, if any do you think we should have legislated upon the citizens of this country?

Please include your rationale in your statement. Thanks.


I think that the amount of gun control we have right now is little too much, but I can live with it.


Thanks for posting up, but you forgot your rationale. Maybe you could include it in a follow-up post?

Chris Brines
06-02-2012, 16:31
I support gun control. I feel that whoever is holding the gun, should be in control of it, and that is pretty much it. Wanna stop gangland crime? Stop making excuses and start punishing criminals. No matter what ridiculous law they make, there will still be gun violence, and a much more practical and OBVIOUS approach would be, rather than restricting gun rights, shielding society and our children from the fact that guns are everywhere, and demonizing the NRA just because they stand up for our rights, I'd say it is time for a "movement" (As Jesse Jackson would say) by the gun owning community.

I'd say that the more experienced shooters, as there are many, should do whatever they can to not only encourage people to take up arms if they feel comfortable doing so, but everyone should do their part to ensure that a culture of gun safety and accountability is clearly established. That way, it will eliminate about half of these anti's complaints about gun owners. Or the Brady Campaign. Know what I find ironic? They are the "Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence". Their main "culprit", is the NRA. According to them, the NRA is the devil, and they all but come out and say it, that the NRA fights to repeal these gun restrictions, only to get people killed. ON their website a few weeks ago, it said, "The Trayvon Martin shooting is the NRA's Vision for America".

What an insult and a slap in the face to all responsible gun owners. Compounded by the fact that the NRA STRONGLY advocates for safe gun handling, responsibility and accountability, and encourage family oriented shooting activities, in addition to self defensive skills. Oh yeah, so that makes them "murderers" huh. Well according to Rosie O' Donnell, yes.

Now check this out:

1. The NRA, along with many other pro 2nd Amendment organizations, sponsor COUNTLESS programs to teach people about guns, gun safety, gun awareness, and self defensive capabilities. They encourage lawful gun activity, and take no part in the glamorization of violence that has snaked its way into our culture.

2. The many "gangsta" rappers out there, although some of them fake, are the role models and idols of today's youth. (well a large chunk of them anyway, if I had kids there would be no "gangsta" rap in my house). One of them, his stage name was C-Murder. He had done time for 2nd Degree Murder in Louisiana, but somehow got out and became a rapper in New Orleans. So he's done time for murder, he calls himself "C-Murder", raps about literally nothing but shooting people with AK's, Glocks, pump shotguns, and a host of other weapons. Then a few years after he's reached millionaire status, and a large chunk of our nation's most ignorant have pretty much put him on a pedestal as a hero, like the most amazing and awesome guy ever. What happens? C-Murder goes into a club in Baton Rouge. A young buck teenager in the club, trying to be a little thug, starts running his mouth to C-Murder. What does C-Murder do? Pulls out a gun and shoots him dead, right there in the middle of the club. So now C-Murder, who was already a convicted murderer, rapped about nothing but murderer, hailing from the murder capital of the U.S.A., is back in Angola, for murder.

So....with that being said, I must point out that the Brady Campaign to "prevent gun violence", has NEVER (to my knowledge), called these people out. They are advocating NOTHING good. Now it is a good thing to be a pimp. Now it is a good thing to be a "hustla", or a "gangbanger". And they claim this is all the NRA's fault? I mean, maybe I'm wrong, maybe I overlooked something, but I didn't see anything saying, "sag yo pants, grab yo gun and shoot up them fools neighborhood, kill everyone", at least not on the NRA website. It's just anti's taking cheap shots at the responsible gun owning community, because we can't call them mean names, but the others I mentioned, can. Sad part is, it does nothing to curb gun violence, and the restrictions they suggest actually, if nothing else, make it even MORE dangerous in this country.

Maybe I am wrong, but that's just how I see it. I'd say the ideal thing would be for anyone who is physically and mentally capable of using a gun, also comfortable with doing so, to arm themselves, get training (to some degree, everyone's comfort level is different, but everyone needs to ensure they know how to use their weapon), get a CHL, and practice practice practice! Also, as soon as your kids are ready, you know in your heart they are mature enough to learn about guns, I'd say get them at the range and get them shooting. That is CRUCIAL, and the only way to TRULY decrease their chances of dying in an accidental, tragic shooting from kids "playing" with guns. That's gun control in my opinion.

CanMan
07-05-2012, 22:37
No way will I support more 'gun control'. We already have enough laws on the books. Where I live it takes 5, count 'em, five incidents involving firearms for a juvenile to be considered a threat to society. I could go on and on & will with one more example. About five years ago a man robbed three banks here (locally) on the same day. He then jacked a car at gunpoint. Eventually he went to prison for bank robbery but was never charged for the gun crime. It's not the violin, it's the violinist! More importantly, it's my responsibility to protect myself & my family... I won't abdicate that responsibility.

oldjarhead
07-21-2012, 06:08
We have over twenty thousand Federal, State, and local gun control laws on the books already. So far the criminals have not paid them much attention. Only the law abiding public has. We don't need more gun control. We need more law abiding people to wise up and take control of their own safety by exercising their God given right to keep and bear arms, affirmed by the US Constitution. The recent murders in Colorado affirm that. The movie theater had "No guns allowed" signs. Didn't stop the killer did it? Only prevented the law abiding from carrying. The killer knew that and he had a target rich environment. An unmolested free fire zone. Go figure.

mytimeon69
07-22-2012, 15:11
What controls, if any do you think we should have legislated upon the citizens of this country?

Please include your rationale in your statement. Thanks.

Take it from me, you do not need anymore gun controls.
We suffer in the UK now because we were complacent in our opposition to the knee jerk reactions of the government.

Jerry
07-22-2012, 15:33
Personally, I'm not a Democrat and I am not a Republican. I am just an American who loves his country, the constitution, the flag, and the right to own/bear arms and ammo :)

And that changes my statement how? :upeyes:

CharlieDelta127
09-18-2012, 21:51
As long as your legal to own, with a clean record, your good to go in my book.

Brucev
09-18-2012, 22:03
Re: OP. Simple answer to the question is.... "No." Please note that "No" is a complete sentence. It does not require explanation and especially in reference to the OP, it is the only answer that in appropriate or necessary.

Thanis
12-19-2012, 16:34
If national recognition of concealed carry permits were to become law, I would understand if it included a clause that required the permit holder to concealed carry in a manner required in the state they were visiting while in that state.

nursetim
12-19-2012, 16:48
If national recognition of concealed carry permits were to become law, I would understand if it included a clause that required the permit holder to concealed carry in a manner required in the state they were visiting while in that state.

What you mean by the highlighted portion? You want national CCW? Then have all the states get together and agree to constitutional carry. Invite Illinois, NY, CA, MA, RI and then ignore them.

Thanis
12-19-2012, 17:03
What you mean by the highlighted portion? You want national CCW? Then have all the states get together and agree to constitutional carry. Invite Illinois, NY, CA, MA, RI and then ignore them.

It is very simple. I can understand if there was a national recognition from state to state of each state's concealed carry permits, while you were in a state, you would have to follow the firearm laws of that state. This does not mean you would be required to follow NJ law if you were from TX. But if you were from TX, and visiting NJ, you could not carry hollow-point rounds while visiting NJ because NJ bans hollow-point rounds.

I would support gun control of this type. While I might find NJ bans on types rounds naive, you should respect the laws of the state (juridiction) you are visiting or just don't go there.

jdavionic
12-19-2012, 17:09
No restrictions on the guns that people can purchase...based on type. Rationale - the intent of the 2nd amendment was to prevent a tyrannical gov't from doing as it pleases to the people.

On those who can purchase - no convicted felons. Rationale - you forfeit your rights when you commit a felony. I'd like to see restrictions on those diagnosed with a mental disability...HOWEVER, this is a difficult one to determine a black & white test.

Lord
12-19-2012, 18:23
I support gun control that takes guns away from criminals...:whistling:

I support gun control that prevents them from getting them in the first place... and I support background checking, and I support proper training, and we the people, by the people, for the people.... not frankenfeinstein's "her way or the highway" approach.

Keeping and bearing arms is a right, but to do so also bears huge responsibility, self control, intelligence, and common sense. How many times have we gotten on the road behind someone that made you think "Damn, they gave that idiot a license to drive?" Now multiply that times 10 or 100 with a license to carry. It's not a question we would ever want to have to ask, even under our breath.

Take our guns away? He'll no. Make sure the wrong people don't have them? Well that kind of makes sense now, doesn't it?

Jerry
12-19-2012, 21:31
I support gun control that prevents them from getting them in the first place... and I support background checking, and I support proper training, and we the people, by the people, for the people.... not frankenfeinstein's "her way or the highway" approach.

Keeping and bearing arms is a right, but to do so also bears huge responsibility, self control, intelligence, and common sense. How many times have we gotten on the road behind someone that made you think "Damn, they gave that idiot a license to drive?" Now multiply that times 10 or 100 with a license to carry. It's not a question we would ever want to have to ask, even under our breath.

Take our guns away? He'll no. Make sure the wrong people don't have them? Well that kind of makes sense now, doesn't it?

Background check work really well. Oh sorry, you're a convicted felon we can't sell you a gun, but feel free go about your merry way you're free to go buy one on the street. Me on the other hand. Sorry there is a hold. Government drone... We can't tell you why every-time you purchase a firearm we put a hold on it. But feel free to spend your money on finger prints and passport pictures. Fill out a form and send it your prints and pictures to us. In a few months we'll get around to processing it and we'll give you your special number. Ve gave da Jews a special number too. Background checks... Allowing felons to walk away while making honorable citizens drive 200 miles round trip twice to purchase and come back for their firearm. I can get one on the street faster. Yep I love background checks. What is it exactly they do? Stop felons from getting guns? Yah right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Keep deluding yourself.

RangerGibson
12-20-2012, 01:05
Everyone in this thread is hitting the nail right on the head. Gun control has never, and will never solve a darn thing. Little fun fact, The day before the shooting last week a man in China (one of the strictest nations on gun laws in the world) attacked 23 people in an elementary school with a knife. When there's a will, there's a way...

cajun_chooter
12-20-2012, 06:46
Guns do not kill people... all this crap about gun control won't save one life.. if a deranged, doped up idiot wants to kill a bunch of people.. banning all guns won't stop him..
anyone remember the OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING ???
are diesel fuel & ammonia nitrate (fertilizer) going to be banned ?

why is it ... all the people that want to take OUR guns ... have 24/7 armed guards ???

Lord
12-20-2012, 08:23
Background check work really well. Oh sorry, you're a convicted felon we can't sell you a gun, but feel free go about your merry way you're free to go buy one on the street. Me on the other hand. Sorry there is a hold. Government drone... We can't tell you why every-time you purchase a firearm we put a hold on it. But feel free to spend your money on finger prints and passport pictures. Fill out a form and send it your prints and pictures to us. In a few months we'll get around to processing it and we'll give you your special number. Ve gave da Jews a special number too. Background checks... Allowing felons to walk away while making honorable citizens drive 200 miles round trip twice to purchase and come back for their firearm. I can get one on the street faster. Yep I love background checks. What is it exactly they do? Stop felons from getting guns? Yah right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Keep deluding yourself.

Bitter much? Bitter, line three... Bitter, please pick up line three... intelligence is holding for you...

I never said a background check was a cover all... but seriously man, just because there is some sort of glitch with YOU, doesn't mean it's not a good idea to check. You carry on like you're one of the convicted felons that's not supposed to have access to a firearm. Ease up. My main point is that there needs to be SOME form of control, not just the gut reaction of "hey someone got killed so let's take EVERYONE's guns away".

Sheesh. and YOU"RE a moderator?

Lord
12-20-2012, 08:24
why is it ... all the people that want to take OUR guns ... have 24/7 armed guards ???

:perfect10:

If you don't mind, I'd like to use a version of that statement as my tag line for a while?

BobbyS
12-20-2012, 17:17
[QUOTE=bandmasterjf;18289690]But they can't stick thier car in their pocket and walk into a 7-11.:tongueout:

I can just see some idiot trying to rob a liquer store with a gas can. Uh, hey dude. If you light that match your going up too. Oh crap............never mind.

................................................................................................

What happened here, where I live, is a guy got pissed cause they wouldn't sell him beer.

He didn't pull out a gun and shoot everyone. Instead, he got in his car, drove about 2 blocks away, turned around, then accelerated to a fairly high speed driving his car through the store front into the busy 7-11.

No gun needed.

Edit: sorry it didn't do the quote right.

Gee21
12-20-2012, 17:39
On those who can purchase - no convicted felons. Rationale - you forfeit your rights when you commit a felony. I'd like to see restrictions on those diagnosed with a mental disability...HOWEVER, this is a difficult one to determine a black & white test.

A felony used to be a serious crime, now they can amount to nothing more than a technicality, see the book Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent.

Sensai
12-20-2012, 19:26
What controls, if any do you think we should have legislated upon the citizens of this country?

Please include your rationale in your statement. Thanks. President Obama (gag) put Joe Biden in charge of the task force to reduce gun violence. I have never seen a violent gun, but let's not split hairs.I am all for reducing criminal violence of any kind. And if confronted by someone wishing to inflict violence on me, I agree with Joe, I'll reduce it. In fact I'll stop it dead in its tracks. Looks like we agree on this one Joe.

Jerry
12-20-2012, 19:37
Bitter much? Bitter, line three... Bitter, please pick up line three... intelligence is holding for you...

I never said a background check was a cover all... but seriously man, just because there is some sort of glitch with YOU, doesn't mean it's not a good idea to check. You carry on like you're one of the convicted felons that's not supposed to have access to a firearm. Ease up. My main point is that there needs to be SOME form of control, not just the gut reaction of "hey someone got killed so let's take EVERYONE's guns away".

Sheesh. and YOU"RE a moderator?

Talk about intelligence... MAN? Really? How old are you 12? You have no idea how many people have the same problem. Cops, lawyers especially ex military. Fellow that I shoot with worked the gun counter at Cabela's and had/has a hold every time he purchases. Was talking to someone in a restaurant about holds and a fellow at the next table said, "you to"? They do that to me and two guys I know and I'm a government contractor. I work security and carry a AR daily. So no it's not just me whining. It's me showing how stupid it is.

So there has to be some form of control? OK tell me what form has worked so far. If it worked they wouldn't be screaming for more. Gun control DOES NOT WORK. It has been proven over and over and over again but MORONS want more and more gun control. MORONS keep saying we have to have some form of CONTROL. Exactly who is being CONTROLLED?

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." William Pitt, 1783

"If you protect a man from folly, you will soon have a nation of fools." [William Penn] We're pretty damn close.

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win
without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will
be sure and too costly, you may come to the moment you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." Winston Churchill

SteelCurtain
12-22-2012, 23:18
The problem isn't with legal gun ownership, and the only people who follow gun laws and gun restrictions are normal, law abiding citizens.
A gun didn't kill those kids in Connecticut, Adam Lanza killed those babies.
No guns were involved on 9-11, box cutters and jets killed over 2,000 innocent people.
No guns were involved in the federal building destruction. Fertilizer was used.
Do we ban box cutters, jets, and fertilizer? No. Does any sane rational person honestly believe a ban on guns will stop criminals and psycopaths from killing the innocents?
Look how well stringent drug laws and border agents have slowed down the import of illegal drugs across the border.
The only thing restriction does (as is evidenced in the 1920's) is empower criminals, giving them an avenue for greater revenue and control.
Even a simple thing like the wearing of seatbelts can't be controlled by law enforcement personnel. The only thing another law does is allow for prosecution of a criminal AFTER the crime has been committed. It does not slow down the psycopath.
Let's not knee jerk a reaction and loose another right to the government by placing an unenforceable law on the books. They prevent nothing.

oldman11
12-22-2012, 23:25
The only gun control I want to see is the placement of the second shot. :2gun:
+1 on that.

bushhogg
12-22-2012, 23:54
Gun control is not about guns; its about control....

timbgtm
12-24-2012, 05:38
I firmly believe in the 2nd amendment.I also believe something needs to be done about the mental health system or lack of.
Gun control isn't the answer IMO but keeping weapons away from these deranged individuals is paramount.

TheJ
12-24-2012, 06:28
I firmly believe in the 2nd amendment.I also believe something needs to be done about the mental health system or lack of.
Gun control isn't the answer IMO but keeping weapons away from these deranged individuals is paramount.

Not to be overly picky but I believe it's important to draw a distinction here.. Whats paramount is the focus on keeping deranged individuals away from society (and by extension guns) rather than trying to focus on keeping guns (which are only one of an infinite number of tools with which to commit murder with) away from some people (which we already do ineffectively).

Sensai
12-24-2012, 18:16
What controls, if any do you think we should have legislated upon the citizens of this country?

Please include your rationale in your statement. Thanks.
How do you include rational to explain laws that make no sense. All the damn laws they have now don't do squat. You can pass as many laws as you want and the criminals will just laugh in your face. As long as we keep looking for solutions through the eyes and minds of the already law abiding, we will never find it. If you want solutions, ask the criminal what would have prevented them from carrying out their crimes. These interviews have been done, look into it, see what they say. These criminal types don't think like like the average Mr & Mrs. America, who get all their information from the view or pmsnbc or cnn or the Huffington Puffington Post.Just listen to the way these DC idiots talk about this gun or that, they don't know what the hell they're talking about. The entire anti gun effort is built on lies and being able to fool the ignorant public and to take advantage of their emotions that are at a fever pitch right now. Same way osama got re-elected, fool the stupid. Their motto should be, if you can't dazzle em with brilliance, baffle em with bull ****, they'll buy it.

leVieux
12-25-2012, 05:12
"Gun Control" should be limited to violent criminals and the mentally incompetent; not the citizens.

I would support stiff mandatory sentencing for stealing a firearm or using a gun in a violent crime.

I grew up in a time & place when/where it was perfectly OK to carry, even to take a gun to school. We never had any problems BECAUSE we had been taught self-control and respect for others !

Just look what the idiots' "Zero Tolerance" policies have brought us: MASS MURDERS OF CHILDREN !

leVieux

bushhogg
12-25-2012, 21:22
ieVieux your post is in my TOP 10 of the best statements in Glock Talk this year.............

NEVRL8T
12-25-2012, 21:46
I am just curious about something that has been mentioned in this thread several times. The mention of criminals. When you all are speaking of criminals not having the right to own firearms. Do you mean active criminals or anyone that is a convicted felon?

Sensai
12-26-2012, 03:32
I am just curious about something that has been mentioned in this thread several times. The mention of criminals. When you all are speaking of criminals not having the right to own firearms. Do you mean active criminals or anyone that is a convicted felon?
All of the above.Past ,present, and future. Anyone that cannot purchase, own, be around , the dangerously mentally ill,drug dealers just to name a few. Making a complete list of everyone that would fit into this category for the purposes of this venue would be a time consuming collective effort that only people that want to split hairs would need. Most know what is meant by criminals. When some say they would favor legislation that would prevent firearms from being in the hands of criminals, I think we all know that no legislation would do this,but we get that point. Criminals will always have access to guns through a black market if our government is so stupid as to create one. Like has been said many times, it's not the tool, it' the person that uses it.:faint:

NEOH212
12-26-2012, 04:17
None.

Almost 20,000 gun control laws on the books already and none of them have accomplished their intended purpose.


Second of all, the part of the Second Amendment that states, "Shall not be infringed."

Despite what many say, it is absolute. Why? It says, "Shall not be infringed."

Come to think of it, it's the only Place in the Bill of Rights where that phrase is used. I believe or Forefathers were very specific as to their intent in using that language. (It was important enough to them to specify it specifically. That says something in itself.)

There again, the Commies will say it doesn't mean what it says. Those are the same people that will tell you a cat is a dog and 2+2=5 because some big Liberal University Professor says so. (Even though everyone else knows he's wrong.:upeyes:)

:rofl:

NEVRL8T
12-26-2012, 09:30
All of the above.Past ,present, and future. Anyone that cannot purchase, own, be around , the dangerously mentally ill,drug dealers just to name a few. Making a complete list of everyone that would fit into this category for the purposes of this venue would be a time consuming collective effort that only people that want to split hairs would need. Most know what is meant by criminals. When some say they would favor legislation that would prevent firearms from being in the hands of criminals, I think we all know that no legislation would do this,but we get that point. Criminals will always have access to guns through a black market if our government is so stupid as to create one. Like has been said many times, it's not the tool, it' the person that uses it.:faint:
The reason I asked, is because I am a convicted felon. I can legally own firearms and have done so for a while. I made a mistake 20 years ago, worked hard to straighten out my life and received a pardon from the governor in 2010. People can reform their lives including one time felons. It's a huge misconception that people have that one time felons cannot own firearms. We can. It takes demonstrating the reformation of your life, becoming a productive citizen and staying out of trouble. I have not had so much as a traffic ticket in twenty years.

Sensai
12-26-2012, 10:17
The reason I asked, is because I am a convicted felon. I can legally own firearms and have done so for a while. I made a mistake 20 years ago, worked hard to straighten out my life and received a pardon from the governor in 2010. People can reform their lives including one time felons. It's a huge misconception that people have that one time felons cannot own firearms. We can. It takes demonstrating the reformation of your life, becoming a productive citizen and staying out of trouble. I have not had so much as a traffic ticket in twenty years.
If you have received a pardon from the Governor and are legally permitted to own a firearm, then what I said would not apply to you. Your rights have been restored. I'm glad you pointed that out, everything is not as black and white as we sometimes think.:wavey:

bushhogg
12-26-2012, 17:22
NCVRL8T Congrats on the pardon and your 100% correct. Its hard to turn your life around after a mistake that makes you a felon...

paulky_2000
01-08-2013, 19:42
No...

gls_1911
01-11-2013, 22:36
There are basic laws that can be added that would actually help the lawabiding gun owner, and hurt the criminal. One for example would be a mandatory20 year sentence with no possibility of parole for being caught either stealingsomeone's gun or knowingly having a stolen gun. It would not matter if the criminal had beenusing the gun in a crime or not. For the crimonal just to have stolen it, or have takenpossession of it would get him the sentence. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

Artable
01-12-2013, 07:24
The politicians along with the media and a host of liberal useless idiots are MORE than serious about limiting or eliminating our rights. This isn’t about tragedy, mass murder, magazines or bullets for them, although they utilize the tragedy well. This is completely ideological, and they are bound and determined to decimate rights of gun owners and have no remorse if they have to decimate gun owners themselves. Their ideology is not just opposition to what constitutionalists believe. Their ideology causes them to despise anyone in their way. People in their way are not even people to them. That’s one of their flaws. They have no respect for gun owners as human beings. They think gun owners, or anyone with an opposing view, should be eliminated…especially constitutionalists.
The politicians, media and liberal useless idiots believe they have NEVER had a better time to gain gun control. They believe this point in time is their defining moment. They will get loud and angry. Some will play peacemaker. And some will say they are for gun rights, only in a whisper. They will use every tactic possible, legal or illegal, fair or unfair, to win their battle against our rights. To liberals, this is many times more important than health care was and that was crammed down our throats. They are determined to control guns and CONTROL PEOPLE! There will be no retreat.

cajun_chooter
01-12-2013, 07:45
None.

Almost 20,000 gun control laws on the books already and none of them have accomplished their intended purpose.


Second of all, the part of the Second Amendment that states, "Shall not be infringed."

Despite what many say, it is absolute. Why? It says, "Shall not be infringed."

Come to think of it, it's the only Place in the Bill of Rights where that phrase is used. I believe or Forefathers were very specific as to their intent in using that language. (It was important enough to them to specify it specifically. That says something in itself.)

There again, the Commies will say it doesn't mean what it says. Those are the same people that will tell you a cat is a dog and 2+2=5 because some big Liberal University Professor says so. (Even though everyone else knows he's wrong.:upeyes:)

:rofl:''

Do you really think b.o. cares what is in the Constitution ?
he loathes the constitution... it contents affords Americans freedoms.. he is 100% against any freedoms our fore fathers intended.. he is setting the state to become a "king" and reign as long as he lives..

FREE AMERICA IS UNDER SEIGE !!!!!!!!!

Artable
01-12-2013, 08:36
"Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed." Sara Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum. The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.

Artable
01-12-2013, 08:39
“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly…. [However, now] there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” Bill Clinton 1994

Artable
01-12-2013, 08:39
What will happen to "Assault Style" guns, which are designated Class III, licensed by the ATF and in the hands of a responsible owner, if "Assault Weapons" are banned?

dling
01-12-2013, 09:12
....shall not be infringed. It's not the firearm that need to be controlled it's the bad actors.

cajun_chooter
01-12-2013, 09:20
"Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed." Sara Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum. The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.

America is under SEIGE... by those who want to undermine the constitution.. our freedoms are at stake.. if we give up our guns... we are D.O.A.

bushhogg
01-12-2013, 14:21
There are enought laws on the books already. They (Government) wont even enforce them. Law enforcment will lock them up and a few days later the criminal is back on the street. If the sentence is manditory 10 years they are out in 2. My friends it not about GUN CONTROL its about CONTROL over us. WE THE PEOPLE.

damnyankee20
01-12-2013, 15:24
I think training is great and everyone should be trained but I don't beleive it should be legally required to exercise a fundamental right.

However, they should teach firearm safety in schools like we do fire safety, etc.

That is correct. the 2nd Amendment (as in the first 10 Amendments) are considered natural rights endowed to us by our Creator. A firearm is not rocket science:

1. load projectile into chamber.
2. aim at/look beyond target and cock it.
3. squeeze the trigger and rock it.

barth
01-14-2013, 14:58
I support criminal control.
And law abiding citizens right to protect themselves with guns.
Guns may be used as an offensive or defensive tool.
Don't disarm me.
And leave me a helpless victim to criminals that will always be armed.

Sensai
01-15-2013, 14:15
Yes I do, I want to hit what I shoot at.

rockhard441
01-15-2013, 21:27
How many legal, safe gun owners have committed crimes of the caliber that have prompted all of this hysteria? Those of us who are responsible gun owners are appalled by the tragedies that continue happening and many would probably willingly put themselves in harms way to prevent it if given the opportunity.

Nonetheless, there are nut jobs out there that have access to guns and shouldn't. Just as with airline security, leave it up to the government and it turns into a complete cluster-****. They keep trying to force the law abiding people to submit to stricter laws because they are the only ones who will ultimately comply with them. The criminals on the streets aren't going to pay any attention to any legislation they pass. They are going to continue to obtain illegal weapons and use them.

As an earlier poster said, they need to start focusing on the criminals. The mentally ill might also be a good place to start. Mentally ill people should not own or handle guns nor should criminals. Once someone has crossed the line and committed crime, that should end their opportunity to ever possess one. Figuring out how to make certain that doesn't happen is going to take more time than 30 days. Whatever Obama is going to announce tomorrow is going to make about as much difference as banning all apples from America.

Gr8Shooter
01-16-2013, 17:42
No I do not.
They will lie and maybe worse.
Answer will always be no.