Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-19-2011, 10:34   #181
TheJ
Lifetime Membership
NRA Life Member
 
TheJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GA
Posts: 1,492
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
No I'm operating under the premise that 0.0017% is an acceptable number of people being inconvenienced. To make guns less accessable to people who shouldn't have them.
The less accessibility is not stopping any crime what so ever though... So the only significant thing accomplished is infringement on civil rights.

It seems obvious that at the core of this disagreement is that you simply do not consider the right to bear arms and of self defense to be an incredibly important human right.. You clearly see it as a "nice to have", no?

Knowing full well that the background checks can not stop a single murder/rape/etc., what would say if any of those people who were "inconvienenced" were murdered/raped/etc because their civil rights were violated by the government.. Is that acceptable to you?
__________________
Jay

The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. -F. Scott Fitzgerald
TheJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 10:46   #182
TheJ
Lifetime Membership
NRA Life Member
 
TheJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GA
Posts: 1,492
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
So you didn't answer my question. Should anyone allowed to walk the streets be allowed to buy a gun here?

When did I say that? You and Jerry seem to live in a dream world where criminals are either killed or locked up for life. I simply think there should be something in place to make it harder for them to get a gun. I would rather see them locked up, but they aren't. You've got to do the next best thing then...........try.
I didn't answer your question because it is based on the false premise that any of our gun control laws CAN prevent criminals from having weapons.. AND that even if it were possible to prevent them from having weapons (which we clearly can not) that it would stop a single one from committing murder/rape/harm/etc.

I understand that making laws makes some people feel better but feelings don't save anyone from bad guys and don't stop bad guys from commiting crimes. So practically speaking the only thing accomplished is humna rights are violated in the name of making some people feel better.
__________________
Jay

The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. -F. Scott Fitzgerald
TheJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 13:34   #183
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
Must have been someone elses brother.

By the way, you spell butt with two t's.
So you wonder why I think you’re a liberal. There’s another “liberal” ploy, attack the posters spelling, punctuation and or word usage to try to show you actually know what “you’re” talking about. If I had a total lack of spelling ability it wouldn’t make your opinions correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
So in 5 years you found 10 people who have problems bying a gun right? That's an acceptable risk to me. Did I ever say that it kept the guns out of criminals hands? Could you point that at to me if I did? Being uniformed doesn't make someone a liberal, as you point out every time you post. I know we have the right to life-but that doesn't make the death penalty unconstitutional. We have the right to liberty, but that doesn't mean prisons, quarenteens or mental institutions are unconstitutional. Or does it Jerry?
Again your head is so far up your “BUTT” you’re blind to the truth. I said I’ve had five people tell “ME” about their experiences. There have been more post about it here and it happens to thousands.

What you said was it stopped felons from buying guns legally. Again you show your ignorance. Even without NICS (at this time) it is still illegal for felons to purchase firearms.

I don’t care what sacrifice “you” are willing to make. You aren’t the one sacrificing others are. If you were denied a purchase I’ll guarantee you’ll start screaming from the roof tops.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
Your assertion that a criminal can buy other lethal objects is just a bad point Jerry. It really just makes you look like a raving idiot. Not that you are one, it just makes you look like one. In the right hands a q-tip could probably be lethal. Don't get me wrong, I think everyone has the right to buy a q-tip any time they want, even without a background check.
So you think everyone has a RIGHT to buy q-tips. Allllllllll right then. Explain to all of us the Constitutional “RIGHT” to buy a q-tip. You believe people have a “right” to buy q-tips but that our constitutional PROTECTED RIGHT to not have our firearms rights infringed upon is ok. Now I ask you who sounds like a raving idiot. Not that you are one. I believe you're just totally misguided and a liberal at heart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
You say the NICS is FUBAR, yet in 5 years you could only find 10 people who are having a problem with it? There are roughly 38,356 guns sold a day in the US and you know 5 whole people that are affected by NICS and it's not working? I think you're delusional man. According to the BATF there were 71,010 initial denial in 2009. That's only .5% or 1 in 200 checks. Of those, all but 4,681 had a 3 day or less wait. Of those who had to wait longer around 1/2 were not legally supposed to have a gun for whatever reason. So about 2,300 people had to wait more than 3 days to get then gun that they should have legally walked out the door with. Again, that's an acceptable risk to me. Of course I don't "need" anymore guns. There are guns I would like to have, but a 3 or even 7 day wait isn't going to kill me. Sure it would be a pain, but so are a lot of things. So of the 14,000,000 background checks .017% are false positives that have to wait more than 3 days. That's 17 people in every 100,000. I can accept that, and think most resonable people can too.
According the BATF? And where did they get those statistics? Keeping NISC records is ILLEGAL. It’s a FELONY.

Again you read yet you don’t comprehend. I said in the last five years I had five people tell me. I don’t go seeking these people out. The way I cam upon them, or they me, is I was having conversations with other people and those gentlemen heard us an joined in our conversation. The two most resent. Sitting in a restraint with my wife, grandson, the gentleman that had just installed a muzsle brake on my 06 and his son. We were talking about how FUBAR NICS is. Gentleman at the next table says yah I have the same problem. I'm a retired military officer and I'm in security at “the oil refinery”. I have a hold every time I try to purchase. “It’s a pain in the A-word. The last was just last month. I was picking up my latest purchase and was complain to the FFL about the bull dung hold all the time. Fellow that I see at the range almost ever time I’m there says, “you to?” “I work at the gun counter at Cabela’s. I sell them all day long but have a hold put on me every time I buy one.” I’m more that sure if I started poling everyone I come in contact with that number would go from 5 to several hundred.

Another problem you have is you believe what is acceptable to “you” should be acceptable to all. And that sir is a “LIBERAL” trait. Imposing your will or others no matter who it hurts or what it cost is to others so you can have a false sense of security. What is acceptable to me is the following of the Constitution. No more no less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
So the guy at Cabelas has a hold every time he buys a gun, right? So he has more than one gun then, right? He eventually get's the gun he's trying to buy, right? So if a zombie appocolips happens he can just run to the closet or gun cabinet/safe and get one, right?
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” I would think someone that likes to give spelling lessons would have noticed that there is an “S” at the end of “ARMS”. It doesn’t say ARM. If one owns 1,000 arms their right to procure another “shall not be infringed”. Or perhaps you’d like it better that if someone owns a knife than their RIGHT to own and bear arms has been fulfilled?

Little history for you, Tomas Jefferson owned a LARGE collections of firearmS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
So if you are driving down the interstate and have to stop at a sobriety check point or pay money at a toll booth is your right to travel being infringed? What about a stop light? Does that infringe on your persuit of happieness? What about if your trying to catch up to a really hot chick? Is your persuit of happieness infringed by the speed limit?
Here you go comparing “privilege” with RIGHT. Liberals love doing that because they don’t comprehend the difference. But hey, this time I’ll play your silly game. You have to stop for traffic signals right? You get held up in traffic when there is an accident right? It’s all part of what is expected when partaking in the PRIVILEGE of “traveling” in your automobile. You are perfectly “free” to get out and walk without your right(?) to travel being impeded. Please quote the part of the Constitution that protects “freedom to travel”.

o Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Speach
o Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms
o Amendment 3 - Quartering of Soldiers
o Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure
o Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings
o Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses
o Amendment 7 - Trial by Jury in Civil Cases
o Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment
o Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution
o Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People
o Amendment 11 - Judicial Limits
o Amendment 12 - Choosing the President, Vice President
o Amendment 13 - Slavery Abolished
o Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights
o Amendment 15 - Race No Bar to Vote
o Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified
o Amendment 17 - Senators Elected by Popular Vote
o Amendment 18 - Liquor Abolished
o Amendment 19 - Women's Suffrage
o Amendment 20 - Presidential, Congressional Terms
o Amendment 21 - Amendment 18 Repealed
o Amendment 22 - Presidential Term Limits
o Amendment 23 - Presidential Vote for District of Columbia
o Amendment 24 - Poll Taxes Barred
o Amendment 25 - Presidential Disability and Succession
o Amendment 26 - Voting Age Set to 18 Years
o Amendment 27 - Limiting Changes to Congressional Pay

Right to travil is another made up, by liberals, interpretation of something that isn’t there.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-19-2011 at 21:23..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 13:37   #184
expatman
Senior Member
 
expatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cape Coral, Fl. & Kampala, Uganda
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandmasterjf View Post
Do you pay sales tax when you buy a gun? If so you are paying more than the manufacturer or shop intended. Wouldn't a sales tax be an infringement?
Yes you are required to pay sales tax. I have always considered this acceptable because it is a commercialy produced retail product. Also the govt. has a constitutional authority to levy taxes. However, the way you putting it I am also willing to go with it being unconstitutional due to it being an infringement. I never said I had to like it or even disagree with it. If it effects my ability to keep it or bear it then it is unconstitutional.

In this instance though it may be OK since as I have stated the govt. has the right to levy taxes. It is a point worth discussing.
__________________
Formerly SW.Fla.Glocker and.... EVIL, CRIMINAL, VERY BAD AND SCARY SECURITY CONTRACTOR....(insert evil, sinister laugh here)
expatman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 19:55   #185
IhRedrider
Not a walker
 
IhRedrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 524
Hello, I was hoping eracer would answer my questions. If you've been busy I understand, but I would like to hear how you would answer what I asked.

Thanks.
IhRedrider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 20:07   #186
TheJ
Lifetime Membership
NRA Life Member
 
TheJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GA
Posts: 1,492
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by IhRedrider View Post
Hello, I was hoping eracer would answer my questions. If you've been busy I understand, but I would like to hear how you would answer what I asked.

Thanks.
I don't think he has just been busy but it appears he has chosen not to continue particating in this thread further.


Quote:
Originally Posted by eracer View Post
.....
And with that, I bid this thread adieu.... Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah.
__________________
Jay

The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. -F. Scott Fitzgerald
TheJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 20:10   #187
IhRedrider
Not a walker
 
IhRedrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 524
bandmaster,

Quote:
No I'm operating under the premise that 0.0017% is an acceptable number of people being inconvenienced to make guns less accessable to people who shouldn't have them.
Please don't interchange inconvenienced with denied. Beyond that, both inconvenienced AND denied have infringed upon the RIGHTS of a 'free man' as documented in the Constitution. Thus it is a violation of Federal law as laid out by the Constitution.

Now, for discussion's sake, at what percentage do YOU think it is an infringement upon 'free mens' RIGHTS? Where do YOU draw the line? By the way these questions, in NO way actually validate the information YOU have presented as FACT. Because I think, like Jerry pointed out, these statements you have asserted as fact are indeed, your suppositions and NOT based in fact. Before anyone deflects these questions by calling into MY opinion as to what is acceptable "inconvenience", I will tell you. 0.00%.

As a last note, who or what gives you the right to determine who should or should not have arms?

Thanks, in advance, for the reply.

Last edited by IhRedrider; 12-19-2011 at 20:11..
IhRedrider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 10:14   #188
1gewehr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mid TN
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
Please quote the part of the Constitution that protects “freedom to travel”.

Right to travil is another made up, by liberals, interpretation of something that isn’t there.
Actually, it IS in the Bill of Rights. Would you argue that it is NOT included in the 9th & 10th amendments?

[Amendment IX]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

[Amendment X]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are those which our Founders believed to be so important that they expressly forbade the Federal government from making laws, infringing, or interfering.These are the rights that they felt a people HAD to retain above all others in order to remain a free society.
1gewehr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 13:00   #189
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1gewehr View Post
Actually, it IS in the Bill of Rights. Would you argue that it is NOT included in the 9th & 10th amendments?

[Amendment IX]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

[Amendment X]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are those which our Founders believed to be so important that they expressly forbade the Federal government from making laws, infringing, or interfering.These are the rights that they felt a people HAD to retain above all others in order to remain a free society.
Good point!

It’s arguable that that could be used to acknowledge travel as a “RIGHT”. However it does not overshadow the fact that traveling “by automobile”, trains, plains etc. are privileges.

The reason I won’t give you argument is I really don’t want to. I’d like to think that I could go from point A to point B without arbitrarily being stopped. Truth be told, with reasonable suspicion we can, which leads me to the conclusion that it is not a “right”. But then again, it wouldn’t be the only right we are fighting to keep from being infringed.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-20-2011 at 13:18..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 19:44   #190
Dukedomone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 108
I'm still waiting for my Constitutional reference in regards to the Supreme Court......
Dukedomone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 21:14   #191
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dukedomone View Post
I'm still waiting for my Constitutional reference in regards to the Supreme Court......


Not sure what your referenc was but this is what the Constitutions says..

Edited to add: I found your reference and it doesn't appear to be in there. Perhaps one of the liberals could give us and ”interpretation”.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article III - The Judicial Branch Note
Section 1 - Judicial powers

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section 2 - Trial by Jury, Original Jurisdiction, Jury Trials

(The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.) (This section in parentheses is modified by the 11th Amendment.)

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section 3 - Treason Note

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-20-2011 at 21:24..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 17:27   #192
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Funny we should be discussing this as today I saw something I haven’t see in a very long time. Coming home from the range I saw a State Trooper with his lights on in the emergency lane on I-10. He had three young people sitting on the ground. I’m under the impression they were hitchhiking since there was no vehicle to be seen and they all had backpacks.

Seems there either is no “right” to travel or walking along side of I-10 gives reasonable cause to detain. Or perhaps as my wife believes hitchhiking is now illegal. Don’t know if it is or isn’t but would think it should not be since no one is forced to either get into a vehicle or to stop and give someone a ride. But then, prostitution, an act between to consenting adults is. Seem to me seeking sex should be covered by the 9th. And no I’m not being sarcastic. No I have not been arrested for soliciting and no I’ve never used the services of a prostitute. I just don’t understand an act between two consenting adults being illegal. But that’s a discussion for another time.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-21-2011 at 17:29..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 18:32   #193
IhRedrider
Not a walker
 
IhRedrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 524
eracer, and bandmaster

I have questions for you that you have not addressed. I hope I have not offended you. If I have, I do apologize. And if there is something I else I need to do to correct the issue, please let me know. I genuinely wish to know what you guys have to say about what I have asked. The only way for me to understand where people with differing views are coming from is to listen to what they have to say.

Thanks again , in advance.
IhRedrider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2011, 09:44   #194
1gewehr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mid TN
Posts: 1,374
Jerry, the problem comes when you utilize either a government-owned method of transportation, or privately-owned means. In the case of the interstate, the Feds have rules for how the highway may be utilized, including speed limits, what kind of traffic may use it, and the ability to control access when they want to (during emergencies or war). Of course, the owners of property have the legal right to control or forbid access. This has nothing to do with a right to travel.
In the case of air travel, the Feds believe that they have a right to regulate commercial flights that cross a state line. Notice you do not have TSA checking owners of private aircraft. When I was younger, I caught many a ride on private planes by 'hitch-hiking' and offering to share fuel costs. This is much harder due to the increased security caused by the many aircraft thefts in the '80's by drug smugglers. But there are still ride-share boards where you can hop a ride on a private plane. No TSA groping required!
1gewehr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2011, 13:42   #195
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1gewehr View Post
Jerry, the problem comes when you utilize either a government-owned method of transportation, or privately-owned means. In the case of the interstate, the Feds have rules for how the highway may be utilized, including speed limits, what kind of traffic may use it, and the ability to control access when they want to (during emergencies or war). Of course, the owners of property have the legal right to control or forbid access. This has nothing to do with a right to travel.
In the case of air travel, the Feds believe that they have a right to regulate commercial flights that cross a state line. Notice you do not have TSA checking owners of private aircraft. When I was younger, I caught many a ride on private planes by 'hitch-hiking' and offering to share fuel costs. This is much harder due to the increased security caused by the many aircraft thefts in the '80's by drug smugglers. But there are still ride-share boards where you can hop a ride on a private plane. No TSA groping required!
Thanks of that explanation it explains a lot. “The Feds believe”. This seems to be the root of all our problems. Even when a “right” is CLEARLY defined and the Feds are CLEARLY forbidden from interfere the Feds, some in congress and far too many in the judicial branch “believe” they have the “right”, notice I didn’t say power, but the “right” to make laws that infringe on the RIGHTS of The People and the vocal ‘minority’ agree with them.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-22-2011 at 14:03..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2011, 13:43   #196
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
I mentioned the Fed. tax on firearms and that I didn’t know exactly what it was. Well here’s one of them.

Quote:
Due to Federal law, if you order an AR15 lower and AR15 parts, we will have to add an additional 11% Federal Excise Tax to the purchase price of the AR15 lower and AR15 parts.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-24-2011 at 13:49..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2011, 00:12   #197
Sbh87
Handgunner
 
Sbh87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near the Smith and Wesson Factory
Posts: 254
I love gun control...I always make sure to have a good grip, I line up my sites, exhale, and squeeze (not pull) the trigger and bullseye!!!


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
Scott
Sbh87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2012, 00:19   #198
bandmasterjf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJ View Post
The less accessibility is not stopping any crime what so ever though... So the only significant thing accomplished is infringement on civil rights.

It seems obvious that at the core of this disagreement is that you simply do not consider the right to bear arms and of self defense to be an incredibly important human right.. You clearly see it as a "nice to have", no?

Knowing full well that the background checks can not stop a single murder/rape/etc., what would say if any of those people who were "inconvienenced" were murdered/raped/etc because their civil rights were violated by the government.. Is that acceptable to you?
You are putting words in my mouth, and don't have a clue what I believe or don't believe. You don't seem to have a grasp on reality. So do you think criminals should legally be allowed to have guns?
People lose rights all the time for thier actions or their state of mind.
__________________
Was Jesus really a pacifist?
LUKE 22:36
bandmasterjf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2012, 00:23   #199
bandmasterjf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJ View Post
I didn't answer your question because it is based on the false premise that any of our gun control laws CAN prevent criminals from having weapons.. AND that even if it were possible to prevent them from having weapons (which we clearly can not) that it would stop a single one from committing murder/rape/harm/etc.

I understand that making laws makes some people feel better but feelings don't save anyone from bad guys and don't stop bad guys from commiting crimes. So practically speaking the only thing accomplished is humna rights are violated in the name of making some people feel better.

It does two things. One if they do have a weapon, they can be prosicuted further for that which will get them off the strets longer. Someone with a a lawless attitude and propensity for violence should be off the streets for as long as possible. I think we can all agree to that. Sure in your and Jerry's perfect little dream world dangerous people would be locked up forever, but that's not going to happen.
__________________
Was Jesus really a pacifist?
LUKE 22:36
bandmasterjf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2012, 02:17   #200
SK2344
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by IhRedrider View Post
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 say Absolutely NO! I do not believe that my Government should have control over my guns in any way shape or manner! A responsible adult who has no criminal background should be able to own a firearm without the Government having some sort of control of your personal property! The only control the Government should have, is the sale and control over mass supplies of guns and weapons to any individual and Class 3 automatic weapons and other types of very dangerous weapons that can be used by Terrorists! The Feds should concentrate their efforts on keeping us safe from harm instead of trying to control our guns we use for hunting and personal protection!
SK2344 is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:00.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 959
287 Members
672 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31