Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2  
User currently offlineiowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4416 posts, RR: 6
Posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4136 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Since the last thread was over 300 replies, please continue the discussion here. Thank you to all who have followed forum rules and kept the first thread civil.

Previous thread:
Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree (by AR385 Dec 26 2012 in Non Aviation)

[Edited 2013-01-14 18:28:41]

235 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6609 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4121 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

SO i haven been reading the second amendment.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.[8]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_..._to_the_United_States_Constitution

And i have determined that Gun Manufactures infringe on MY right to keep a gun. How? I have to pay for it. Its my right to have a gun. Will Smith and Wesson give me one for free? Will the NRA give me a free gun?The entry point for arms should be $0. Tax who ever needs to be taxed. I want a free gun!



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineitsjustme From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2768 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4109 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 305):
Why is everyone up in arms over Obama doing things by executive order?

Because the blunt truth is this forum is comprised of mostly "right thinking" members. At least they seem to be the most verbal on issues like this.

Quoting cmf (Reply 308):
Mental history is just one pert of the problem. The other parts must be addressed too.

It's one very small part of the problem. In the majority of gun crimes, and I'm not just talking about mass shootings, but gun crimes in general, the shooter doesn't legally own or possess his/her weapon of choice. A fact that Messrs La Pierre and Keene and their membership keep failing to address. I've said it before but it bears repeating; The current gun laws in CT actually worked, with regard to the Newtown shooter. He tried to purchase a firearm and didn't want to comply with that state's background and waiting period laws and left the store empty handed. Instead, he used the weapons legally owned by a relative. All the mental background checks the NRA and some contributors to this thread are suggesting would not have had any impact on the outcome on most of the gun crimes in this country.

[Edited 2013-01-14 19:34:43]

User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4107 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
I want a free gun!

Sorry, mt99, the Founding Fathers were ahead of you right back in 1792. See my post 307 on the thread that the mods just closed. The Militia Act, passed in that year, required every able-bodied male not only to join the Militia, but to provide his weapon at his own expense.  


"That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, ... every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock...."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia#Nineteenth_Century_2



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently onlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6609 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4105 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
he Militia Act, passed in that year, required every able-bodied male not only to join the Militia, but to provide his weapon at his own expense.  

Awww Dang it. Damned those loopholes! So we are forced to Join the Milita then?



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8320 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4094 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
A well regulated militia

Well "regulated"? That must be a word the NRA hates. Pity the Founding Fathers added it in. Guess there were not lobbyists back then.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4095 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 4):
So we are forced to Join the Milita then?

Thankfully I don't think that bit is still in force!  

Point was, though, that the first duty of the Militia in those days was to 'keep the peace' and suppress any 'insurrections.'

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"

It has to be borne in mind that quite a high proportion of the colonists in those days would have had close links to Britain and would probably have preferred to stay part of the Empire.

[Edited 2013-01-14 19:27:08]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently onlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6609 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4084 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
The Militia Act, passed in that year

The same that says that Militia Members should be between 18 and 45.

So 46yo cannot have guns anymore?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1792



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21677 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4054 times:

From the previous thread:

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 297):
But, the data can't be discounted. Look at Washington D.C. and Chicago.

Violent crime has been going doen and we have not become the Old West, as many of the fear-mongering left claimed we would become when Florida started the shall issue concealed carry movement.

You can't discount DC or Chicago's data, but you can't discount New York's either.

Violent crime is going down (though not according to the NRA, perhaps because an increase in violent crime would compel more people to buy guns), but since there's nothing to prove that guns are the cause, it's just as likely that the effect of legal gun ownership on violent crime is negligible.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 309):
Can't, or don't wish to?

Can't. There's no data proving a solid causation between more legal guns and less crime, or between fewer legal guns and more crime, thus that conclusion can't logically be drawn.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5489 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4056 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
And i have determined that Gun Manufactures infringe on MY right to keep a gun. How? I have to pay for it. Its my right to have a gun. Will Smith and Wesson give me one for free? Will the NRA give me a free gun?The entry point for arms should be $0. Tax who ever needs to be taxed. I want a free gun!

Actually, I think the precedent has been set that you must buy your own gun, subject to the government telling you what the minimum caliber and capacity has to be. If you fail to buy your own gun, then you will be fined. If you can't afford a gun, then he government will subsidize your purchase of one.

I guess you guys have decided to take it to the ridiculous. When you can't adequately debate or defend your position, the time has come to ridicule.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4033 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
Can't. There's no data proving a solid causation between more legal guns and less crime, or between fewer legal guns and more crime, thus that conclusion can't logically be drawn.

I agree... both sides are guilty of it. There are a lot of variables that go into it, and in general, crime has been decreasing since 1990. I often see a side pick a point in time, let's say 1994 when the AWB went into effect then pick another point, let's say 2002 and claim that the AWB decreased crime. Well, um no you can't really say that. I can't think of an example from the other side, but I've seen claims like "in 200X this gun law went into effect making it easier to own guns and a few years later crime went down." Again, crime has been going down, not sure either law had anything to do with it



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5489 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4023 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
(though not according to the NRA, perhaps because an increase in violent crime would compel more people to buy guns

Actually, the NRA relies on the FBI data to bolster its position that guns in the hands of the law abiding reduces violent crime. They need only point to Washington D.C. and Chicago to show the opposite. I'm glad NY's crime rate has gone down. Statistical anomaly? I'm sure there may be one or two cities that swing the other way.

So, let's get it going. What executive orders (or regulations via tha BATFE) will President Obama issue? My guess:

-background check to purchase ammunition (by the way, some states already require a permit)
-ban on the import or manufacture of 10 round or greater magazines
-some attempt to limit transfers on currently owned high capacity magazines
-some attempt to have FFL's report multiple sales or large ammunition purchases
-adding some dubious BATFE regulation that attempts to limit the private citizen's rights under 18 USC 922(a)(3), (a)(5)(d)
-some feel good proclamation that urges The Congress to act on the proposed assault weapons ban that will be submitted by Senator Feinstein.
-and a demand, yes a demand, to The Congress to bring legislation that makes his decrees law.

What do you guys think?



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11718 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4022 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
There's no data proving a solid causation between more legal guns and less crime, or between fewer legal guns and more crime, thus that conclusion can't logically be drawn.

Because funding for that sort of research has been cut. By.. Guess who?

On an unrelated note (Stephanie Miller touched on it): Why are militias regulated in the Constitution and free to do what they will by SCOTUS but free speech and freedom of expression regulated by SCOTUS by Citizens United and Janet Jackson's nip slip?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5489 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4020 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 12):
On an unrelated note (Stephanie Miller touched on it): Why are militias regulated in the Constitution and free to do what they will by SCOTUS but free speech and freedom of expression regulated by SCOTUS by Citizens United and Janet Jackson's nip slip?

Not having read the Citizens United brief, I can't comment in a detailed way, but didn't that opinion lift restrictions?



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11718 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4012 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 13):
but didn't that opinion lift restrictions

Any person or corporation can give any amount of money to any political person or faction or cause they want. Money is the same as free speech. Unless boobies are involved. Then, we must think of the children and never ever show a bare breast ever.

Imagine: a world where a gay man sticks up for boobies.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineitsjustme From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2768 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4007 times:

Can someone please paint me a very simple picture (to quote attorney "Joe Miller" in Philadelphia, "Like I'm a six year old") of how more guns translates to a decrease in crime? Forget the data because both sides on the gun debate can play with those numbers. I am speaking from a literal sense. I own and either carry or have somewhat immediate access to a firearm 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And I am guessing several, if not most contributors to this thread can say the same. Great. So let's say I am approached by some sh*thead when getting out of my car at the local Shell station and he sticks a gun in my face in an attempted car jack. I get the drop on him and he finds himself chewing on the business end of my off duty piece. Even though my carrying a firearm has thwarted a successful car jack, a crime has still been committed. Here's another example- one that actually occurred: Two thugs entered an internet cafe' in, I believe it was FL. One was armed with a firearm, the other with a baseball bat. A 70 something gentlemen, who was legally licensed to carry a concealed weapon, drew his firearm and fired numerous shots at the robbers, wounding both of them in the process thus thwarting a successful robbery. However, a crime, well several crimes actually, were still committed. So, please tell me how more guns in homes or on the street literally equates to less crime.

[Edited 2013-01-14 22:31:38]

User currently offlineitsjustme From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2768 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4006 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 14):
Imagine: a world where a gay man sticks up for boobies.

If you're speaking in a literal sense seb, I'm impressed.  


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7212 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3996 times:

Quoting itsjustme (Reply 15):

It doesn't equate to less crime and when someone is put into a situation where a firearm might need to be used who in the world cares. What having people who are responsible and trained with firearms do is create less victims. The dirt bag might get shot but hopefully no one innocent. And it can creat less serious crimes or less loss in life or property.

Someone comes into,your home. You hold them up with your firearm it's still a bugarly but at least you didn't lose anything.

Someone goes on a shooting spree in a mall. You have your firearm and engage him. He doesn't shoot anyone else. Less victims.

This is why responble gun ownership is a good thing in this country: http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/colle...t-shoots-kills-home-invader/nD9XG/

A crime was still committed. But it would have been much much worse. I will also say keeping a gun in a bag is not a good idea. Should have been on the man but in this situation everyone is just happy there was a fun in the good guys hand.

I never have met a law enforcement officer who is against responsible gun ownership. But maybe that is just the mentality down here in Florida. Not saying you are against it, I'm not sure. Just the general feeling I get from officers I know down here. At the same time I can't say officers down here are the greatest bunch around sometimes.

[Edited 2013-01-14 22:58:22]


"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21677 posts, RR: 55
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3994 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 11):
Actually, the NRA relies on the FBI data to bolster its position that guns in the hands of the law abiding reduces violent crime.

I'm only going by what LaPierre said at the post-Sandy Hook press conference:

"So now, due to a declined willingness to prosecute dangerous criminals, violent crime is increasing again for the first time in 19 years."

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...-minimum-risk-nra-wayne-lapierre/2

So if you believe him, because violent crime is increasing we need more guns. That statement is entirely incompatible with the idea that we have less violent crime because we have more guns.

And, as I've mentioned, the FBI data can only be used to prove correlation, not causation.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10096 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3984 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
Will Smith and Wesson give me one for free?

I wish you all the luck in the world getting a free gun from Will Smith, but I'm not sure how it's relevant.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11718 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3981 times:

Quoting itsjustme (Reply 16):
If you're speaking in a literal sense seb, I'm impressed.

Boobies don't kill people unless the stupid cancer gets in the way. I don't care if someone is nekked in public. If they are touching themselves inappropriately, then, yeah... I care. Otherwise, not my (or anyone else) concern.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
It doesn't equate to less crime and when someone is put into a situation where a firearm might need to be used who in the world cares.

So, if a person is not holding a gun, there is no crime?

I want so badly to walk up to a person who has a concealed carry permit (I have seen a number of them here) and ask them if they know for sure 100% if they know that I or anyone else in that space is mentally stable enough to know the difference between right and smashing a chair over their head and taking out the place with their gun.

Guns don't kill people. People with mental deficiancy kill people. Don't bother with what the NRA says. NRA says everyone can handle guns just fine thankyouverymuch. Including those with mental deficiancy. Depression and PTSD and what have you. That's fine. That falls under Second Amendment. They can take out 20 students in a school. Because they have a Second Amendment right to guns.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3950 times:

Might be worth (as briefly as I can) describing one of the worst shooting massacres ever - at Port Arthur, a small town in Tasmania, Australia, which started life as a penal colony in the 18th. century and has now become a picturesque tourist attraction close to the state capital, Hobart.

A young man called Martin Bryant went there with an AR15 one day in 1996. Without warning, he cut loose and blazed away at the tourists with an AR15, killing 35 people and wounding another 21.

http://www.abc.net.au/archives/80days/stories/2012/01/19/3412072.htm

As it happened, Bryant came from a wealthy family but had severe mental problems (including an IQ of only about 60). To its credit, the court decided that he was fit to stand trial, and he ended up being sentenced to serve 35 life sentences, and another 1,035 years for other related offences.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant

The important thing, though, is that both Government and the Opposition got together, and agreed on introducing a ban on private ownership of all semi-automatic (self-loading) weapons, and on pump-action shotguns. What's more (brilliantly, in my opinion), they applied the ban in the form of a 'buy-back' - existing owners were given time to 'surrender their weapons' at the nearest police station and be paid fair market value for them, before the ban came into force.

It cost an awful lot of money - I've seen $350 million dollars mentioned - but it had the desired effect. There have been no further mass shootings in Australia since that time (previously we averaged at least one a year). As a bonus, the annual number of gun killings and gun suicides have just about halved since that time. This article gives a pretty good summary of the whole exercise and its effects:-

"To understand the policy success of the National Firearms Agreement, it's important to recognise precisely what happened. Alongside the gun buyback, what had been a patchwork of state and territory regulations were strengthened and harmonised. Self-loading rifles, self-loading shotguns and pump-action shotguns were banned. Firearm owners were required to obtain licences and register their weapons.

"While the changes were backed by the then Labor opposition, political credit must go to then prime minister John Howard and National Party leader Tim Fischer for standing up to the hardliners in their own parties. While they may have paid a short-term electoral price, history will judge them well.

"In the 1990s, some argued that the gun buyback would make no difference to the firearms homicide and suicide rates. Yet a series of careful studies have shown otherwise. In the decade before Port Arthur, Australia experienced an average of one mass shooting (involving five or more deaths) every year. Since then, we have not had a mass shooting. The odds of this being a coincidence are less than one in 100.

"The gun buyback also had some unexpected pay-offs. As an ANU economics professor, I collaborated with Christine Neill at Canada's Wilfrid Laurier University to look at the effect of the Australian gun buyback on firearm suicide and homicide rates. Shocking as mass shootings are, they represent a tiny fraction of all gun deaths. If there's a gun in your home, the person most likely to kill you with it is yourself, followed by your spouse.

"Neill and I found that the firearm suicide and homicide rates more than halved after the Australian gun buyback. Although the gun death rate was falling before 1997, it accelerated downwards after the buyback. Looking across states, we also found jurisdictions where more guns were bought back experienced a greater reduction in firearms homicide and suicide.

"We estimate that the Australian gun buyback continues to save about 200 lives per year. That means thousands of people are walking the streets today who would not be alive without the National Firearms Agreement. Other work, including by public health researchers Simon Chapman, Philip Alpers, Kingsley Agho and Michael Jones, reaches a similar conclusion."


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...-20130114-2cpny.html#ixzz2I2aN6TWW

The cost was high in Australia in the 1990s, and it would be absolutely astronomically expensive to do anything like it in the USA. But at least there is no doubt at all that it worked.

I hope the United States sends some people to Australia to check this issue out and see whether adopting at least some aspects of the 'ban and buyback' approach could help to reduce gun killings (and gun suicides) in the USA.

[Edited 2013-01-15 03:18:43]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3941 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
Someone comes into,your home. You hold them up with your firearm it's still a bugarly but at least you didn't lose anything.

Or, someone comes in to your home. Seeing you holding a weapon they shoot you instead of just taking the TV.

Or you think someone is breaking in to your house. When someone tries to open your bedroom door you shoot. You just killed your six year old son.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
Someone goes on a shooting spree in a mall. You have your firearm and engage him. He doesn't shoot anyone else. Less victims.

Or, you miss him but hit 2 people behind him while he shoots you. More victims.

Or, someone else engages the shooter. You think that person is with the shooter and you shoot him. The shooter continues shooting. More victims.

It is very easy to make up scenarios but hypothetical scenarios prove nothing.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
This is why responble gun ownership is a good thing in this country:

You're making a lot of unsupported assumptions. Yes it is great when a crime is stopped but this doesn't prove the net balance is positive.

- How did the two guys get their weapons. The likely alternatives are a) Straw purchase b) legal purchase c) stolen. It is very likely that without "responsible" gun owners and industry those two guys would not have had weapons. Would two guys enter a place with 10 people if they were unarmed? It is very likely that without "responsible" gun owners there would not even have been a crime.

Then add all the cases where someone at a bar is carrying, or leave it in their car, get angry and shoot the person they are angry at. Murders that only happen because weapons were at the site. Without the weapons most of them would have been no more than black eyes.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
I never have met a law enforcement officer who is against responsible gun ownership.

No-one have problems with responsible owners. Problem is that too many of the responsible gun owners are not responsible, at least not all the time. They do not store their weapons properly, more than 500,000 stolen guns per year. Kids getting hold of them. Stupid accidents because they make mistakes. Exposure time is very important to number of mistakes. You want enough time to avoid the rookie mistakes but after that additional time increases the "responsible owner" mistakes.

Ask the question slightly different and the answer you get from LEO is very different. Ask them if people should have loaded weapons around them at all times, for "protection." At least the two LEO bringing their kids to the scouts I take my friends kids think we have a problem with too many people having guns in the wrong situations. As do the LEO at the soccer training. And the LEO at the mountain bike races. All of this in south Florida.

So while they don't have a problem with responsible gun owners, they do have a problem with the real life owners.


User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7555 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3936 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 21):
The cost was high in Australia in the 1990s, and it would be absolutely astronomically expensive to do anything like it in the USA. But at least there is no doubt at all that it worked.

I hope the United States sends some people to Australia to check this issue out and see whether adopting at least some aspects of the 'ban and buyback' approach could help to reduce gun killings (and gun suicides) in the USA.

Do you really expect to get an answer to this post from the gun happy crowd on this forum. Remember NAV20 the rest of the world has to follow the lead of the US, they're not very good at adopting ideas from elsewhere, the metric system is a good example.


User currently offlineRedd From Poland, joined Jan 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3926 times:

To add some humor to this conversation, gun owners should thank Obama !  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUwb3Z2Klrk

25 Post contains images NAV20 : I think myself that - as applauded by the mods in the first post on this thread - pretty well everyone has been very reasonable on this thread up to
26 Dreadnought : Oh, so we are the only ones being unreasonable? Let's take a step back a minute. Let's strip away all of the rhetoric and look at the fundamentals of
27 KiwiRob : Sure are, it's very easy to solve the problem, sure it will piss off a few people but it's been done in Australia, where it worked, South Africa has
28 Dreadnought : OK, let's assume the 2nd amendment is eliminated and we do a buyback. What was the average price that the aussie gov't paid for each gun? Let's assum
29 mt99 : So why it doesn't happen now? I dont think its ridiculous at all..That what the law says. Why is this ridiculous? Why isn't the word "infringed" as r
30 mt99 : That one fallacy. Crime does not necessarily equal murder, Is a stolen iphone the same as gun murder? In the pro-gun lobby they seem to think so..
31 cmf : Murder rates are pretty certain to be higher in the gun areas. As long as the gun side is responsible and don't provide criminals with guns, as they
32 Dreadnought : I'm talking about crimes committed with guns involved. There was a big stink in Britain a decade ago about gun related crimes exploding even though o
33 Dreadnought : Really? In US towns where they liberalized gun restrictions (using the true usage of the term liberal), I believe the results were that crime and mur
34 mt99 : Then separate them.. Give numbers of "crime with guns" vs "non-gun crimes".. Don't mix them up. You don't want to mislead do you? What % of "crime" i
35 DeltaMD90 : That's where proper training comes in. Part of that includes "just because you have a gun doesn't mean you have to use it." You gotta realize that it
36 Dreadnought : You tell me. I'm not looking for more gun laws or bans. You are. It is up to you to gather evidence and convince me.
37 vikkyvik : I really don't want to wade into this discussion, but: Come on dude. That is the most grossly over-simplified, generic, non-universal description of t
38 seb146 : Or, you could take off the FOX glasses and see what is really happening: right-wing extremists: give everyone a gun at all costs. right-wing moderate
39 mt99 : You should know already. Why else would you say this: How do "you believe" - based on fact? gut instinct? NRA pamphlet?
40 Post contains links cmf : Why isn't it affordable? You need to look at the cost we carry now for all those guns, estimated to be as high as 100 BUSD per year. If you can reduc
41 Post contains links Dreadnought : I live in one of those areas. Every household in my city are required to own a gun, and have it loaded and "at hand" in the home. The law has been in
42 mt99 : Ha again "gun crime" - what about "non-gun crime"?
43 Post contains links Dreadnought : You be the judge. Kennesaw's (pop 30K) crime stats : http://www.cityrating.com/crime-stat...georgia/kennesaw.html#.UPWGseTLTY8 Marietta's (pop 56K) c
44 mt99 : From your own links: Kennesaw Kennesaw crime statistics report an overall upward trend in crime based on data from 11 years with violent crime increa
45 flymia : What? We all do realize the shooting in Newtown the shooter was not eligible to get a gun. You realize he stoled the guns from his mother right? If h
46 Post contains images Dreadnought : Man, you are really insistent, arent you? Even if Marietta is coming down a bit and Kennesaw is going up (mainly because Kennesaw is rapidly growing
47 Post contains images mt99 : I try The graphs are from the PAST. The future is not looking good for Kennesaw.. More guns should solve it! Upward trend is upward trend. Fact from
48 cmf : A big assumption, and very selectively applied. We know that reality isn't as rosy. There are multiple accidental shootings each day. There are plent
49 Ken777 : Janet was performing over the airways where rights to broadcast include regulations related to the broadcast. That is far different than cable, or si
50 KiwiRob : They didn't take every gun just certain types, specifically assault weapons, automatic and pump action weapons. As NAV20 said they haven't had a mass
51 flymia : I agree this is a big assumption and that is why I am FOR much more stringent CCW laws. By more stringent I mean a more thorough background checks in
52 Post contains images Dreadnought : You do realize that no civilians have assault rifles, don't you? An assault rifle has a fully-automatic setting. The ones that look like assault rifl
53 mt99 : How many of these are needed to reverse the increasing crime rate of Kennesaw, GA?
54 cmf : Sadly, that scenario is a shortened version of a real event. But that is the part that is, mostly, working. What about bars? That is true for mass ki
55 Post contains images EA CO AS : The difference is that gun ownership has been codified in our Bill of Rights, and repeatedly upheld by the US Supreme Court. Try again; the "solution
56 L-188 : The only Assault weapon ever made was the WWII Stg.44. Neith the weapon nor the 8mm Kurtz round it fired has been manufactured since 1945. To call any
57 flymia : Alochol does not mix well with anything besides for sitting down and watching a sports game. That is a bad situation, that is the point of the medica
58 Post contains images Dreadnought : None, I'm sure. This is the kind of gun people show off at gun stores. It's like people who put big chrome alloys and hydraulic jumping shocks on the
59 mt99 : So,what kind of guns do people in Kennesaw have? They seem to be kind of infective as their crime rate is increasing. What kind would you recommend t
60 Ken777 : If you consider the reductions in health care costs for GSWs over a 10 year period then it might be. The reality is that the 2nd Amendment is not goi
61 Post contains links Dreadnought : Handguns mostly, I would expect. What does that have to do with anything? Not according to this study, which would seem to indicate that no such savi
62 mt99 : That they are infective at controlling crime - as per the data you provided. So the questions is: What guns would be more effective?
63 DeltaMD90 : Well it's a lot more complicated than that. I'm trying my best to allow most freedom but put in place some common sense controls Yeah I know, that's
64 Dreadnought : Depends on the situation. If you live on a large property outside of town, I'd want a carbine, like the mini-14. In a house at close quarters, a pist
65 fr8mech : Personally, I think there's a racial component. Assault rifles (and I assume assualt handguns, since they are included in Mrs. Feinstein's bill) tend
66 KiwiRob : Not but they can buy weapons like an AR-15 which can kill a whole bunch more people in a few second than a bolt action rifle. Pull the other one it's
67 DeltaMD90 : If I were you I'd add that you weren't gonna shoot him unless you truly felt threatened or you'll have a million people here jump on you That's cool,
68 cmf : Yet plenty of CCW holders bring guns to bars, or at least to their cars park next to it. Like driving and alcohol is a good combination. Based on new
69 fr8mech : You know this, how? Source? That is exactly what the media and the politicians are doing, isn't it? Ok, how about smokers have a greater chance of dy
70 AR385 : From what I just heard on the news, Action 4 News, the local CBS station for the Rio Grande Valley in South Texas, the executive order may come tomorr
71 cmf : I read. Any paper. Do a search for "shooting bar" in google news and you will get plenty of examples. As stated before, not just them. None of them a
72 Dreadnought : And I heard that he's going to propose them surrounded by a bunch of little children as a backdrop. I find this to be a new low.
73 fr8mech : That's why I disagree with the NRA on this. If a school or school district wants to hire guards that's fine. It's their and the tax-payers' or tuitio
74 rfields5421 : What I've hearing from several sources is there will be no new action from the President. He will only require that the current laws be enforced to t
75 Post contains links NAV20 : That looks the most likely scenario. Just a bit of fiddling about, supervision of dealers etc., which is within the president's existing powers - and
76 itsjustme : And no one, that I've read or heard anyway is trying to take that right away from them. It's the type of tool they want to use to protect themselves,
77 DeltaMD90 : I know I know. The problem with the range argument is a ton of shooting isn't done on ranges, it's done on private land. That's where I enjoy most my
78 NAV20 : Yes, self-loaders (semi-automatic) plus pump-action shotguns. As to cost, about $A400M. They paid market value plus 10 per cent. They found the money
79 Dreadnought : The only guns out there that are not self-loading/semi-automatic are revolvers - not that many around these days - bolt-action rifles, and double-bar
80 Post contains links itsjustme : And there's a very good reason for that. The hiring processes the vast majority of U.S. law enforcement agencies use is grueling and time consuming a
81 Post contains images NAV20 : The buyback only applied to 'longarms,' Dreadnought, not pistols. Even so, looks like any such venture in the USA would be a ready-made 'second fisca
82 seb146 : Many of us are trying to figure out: if there is no money to hire teachers or upgrade equipment or anything like that, why is there suddenly and magi
83 DeltaMD90 : I did wonder this. I don't think security guards everywhere is a good idea, but arming all teachers is a bad idea. I wouldn't be opposed to some prio
84 fr8mech : So, I guess that begs the question: WHY ISN'T THIS HAPPENING NOW? Of course, I'm kidding...a little levity every now and then is a good thing. Much l
85 DeltaMD90 : Yeah, that's pretty bad My bad, I kinda derived too much from what the NRA said. I should know better
86 Post contains images cmf : No rule without exemptions Pretty fortunate to she was at the right place at the right time. But I think it would be different if he knew to look for
87 seb146 : Another thing I find fascinating is: Sandy Hook took place in Connecticut. White bread, relativley low crime. Columbine. White bread, low crime. Spri
88 itsjustme : I have no doubt there are teachers and administrators who are carrying on the qt. And if they thwart another Columbine or Sandy Hook, they'll happily
89 itsjustme : If you can see the gun, then they haven't concealed it properly. And as I mentioned in an earlier post, over the past several months, I've noticed a
90 StarAC17 : I saw on TV today between $700 and $2000. If a buy back of assault weapons was implemented it would be a minority of the total guns. Arming teachers
91 fr8mech : I have to go to a range anytime I shoot. The run out to my father-in-law's place is to far. I don't want to store my guns at the range. And, I don't
92 Post contains images Flighty : Just to jump in here, I think we should have an AR15 buyback program. If you turn in your AR15, your reward is that you can continue living in the USA
93 Post contains links KiwiRob : Looks like you can get one in Canada. http://www.marstar.ca/dynamic/category.jsp?catid=74985 they make a range of WW2 German firearms http://www.ssd-
94 mt99 : To me it seems that the most sensible solution is LOCK YOUR DOOR.
95 seb146 : That's another thing: Republicans in the Senate have refused to confirm anyone Obama puts forth to head ATF. That speaks volumes.
96 L-188 : Yup, Obummer has failed to provide any acceptable candidate. That is something he does a lot, see Elizabeth Warren. The lack of a BATF head us his own
97 Post contains links tugger : Here are the executive orders: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16...ntrol-proposals-shortly/?hpt=hp_c1 I very much agree with the closing of the "pr
98 windy95 : Actually prices have sky rocketed the last month. A bas one will be at least a grand and some will run $3000 plus. with suppressor and top scopes. It
99 mt99 : That awesome.., Who would pay for the AR15?
100 tugger : You know you keep doing this, and it keeps being silly and childish and just making you look a bit foolish. But if that is what you want.... On the o
101 windy95 : The rich. Is that not who pays for every "free" item we get?.
102 mt99 : So now you are OK for the "rich" to pay for more stuff? Wow - you positions changes really quickly,.
103 fr8mech : That's because he has failed to put a candidate that is acceptable to the Senate. I whole-heardtly agree with 1 through 5. 6 presupposes that the cur
104 tugger : I too tend to agree after reviewing the list. Yes we'll have to see the actual "orders", and yes some are "feel goods" and things that already should
105 KaiGywer : I haven't read the full text, but I don't mind any of these. I especially like these: 12. "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school offi
106 MSPNWA : Looks to me like 23 ways to increase bureaucracy with minute to no effect on school shootings. That right there is called using Newtown for your own p
107 mt99 : An agenda - that got him re-elected..
108 tugger : It is impossible to stop Sandyhook-type tragedies. There is no way to fully arm everyone or protect everyone or restrict everyone in a way that stops
109 itsjustme : Really? THAT'S what disgusts you? And the NRA attack ad about the protection two innocent 11 and 14 year old children must receive does what - makes
110 fr8mech : Well, let's see what the text and implementation are. The devil is in the details and some of this will require legislation. Reviewing the list, I don
111 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : And how would you address every other gun? More importantly, for me as a collector of older guns that aren't being produced anymore? I like this idea
112 mt99 : Seem like self inflected problem. with a very simple solution. Everyone knows that Obama has never been pro-gun.Was that a secret until now?
113 DeltaMD90 : Never forget anything ever? Um a few months ago I merely said I wouldn't be surprised if Obama took on the gun issue this turn and I got basically fl
114 KiwiRob : A lot of countries have specific licenses for collectors, can't see any reason why it should be any different in the US. One of my relatives has a la
115 mt99 : Not locking my door - that's just plain silly.. Again a post it note on the wall "LOCK DOOR" -would have been just as useful as a gun in this situati
116 DeltaMD90 : I would hope so, but part of that includes going from the old Soviet stuff (Mosin Nagants) to the newer Soviet stuff (AKMs and AK-74s) which are seen
117 Mir : Because the NRA has, via Congress, been neutering the enforcement mechanism. BATFE is underfunded, handcuffed by other laws, and hasn't had a directo
118 Maverick623 : Already done. There's not a single police department in this country that hasn't gone through active shooter training. And in Newtown, the teachers a
119 fr8mech : Probably too late. I would have like to have seen the response. A friend of mine started this: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/create-feder
120 casinterest : Yeah, but the NRA created it's advanced campaign of attacing any new anything, that now has a lot of really unintelligent people agitated. The NRA it
121 Post contains links Dreadnought : Well come on - it's not like anyone here has suggested anything that would actually reduce gun violence. Who are the biggest perpetrators of gun viol
122 fr8mech : Bull. The NRA's stance has always been to enforce the laws on the books before you make new laws. Let's see...my last reading of the US Constitution
123 tugger : Then you should attend some gun shows! The few I have attended here have had groups of 5-10 "youths" let's call them, going around purchasing 5-10 gu
124 tugger : Actually that is not true. I was listening today to a discussion on the EO's and one "gun rights" advocate expressly pointed out how EO 14 (from the
125 KaiGywer : True, but more funding is always appreciated so we can get even more training.
126 roswell41 : I know that is your chosen profession and perhaps the standards are high in California, but I would say law enforcement officers run the gamut of com
127 fr8mech : Amd. I'll ask again...exactly what does this mean? Are we going to classify firearms as a disease. Are we going to classify those that want to exerci
128 MSPNWA : Not impossible, but it is difficult, and it's not something that is likely to be stopped or slowed through gun control of law-abiding citizens. The i
129 Post contains links STT757 : In 1994 former President Reagan personally helped convince at least two GOP Represenatives to vote FOR the 1994 assault weapons ban. He also co-signed
130 DeltaMD90 : Honestly I wonder why this isn't being talked about. I mean I can totally see why people are concerned about mass shootings but this is only a drop i
131 tugger : Where do these guns come from? Who makes them and how are they obtained by the "gangs" or criminals? And how supportive would the most vocal be of st
132 Post contains images TheCol : Since I'm not an American citizen, I usually refrain from participating in debates about domestic issues in the United States out of respect for my so
133 DeltaMD90 : Well straw purchasing (which can easily be curtailed IMO using a registry system, one that isn't available to Joe Blow Public or even worse, the medi
134 roswell41 : I would add that we should support mandatory minimum sentences for people convicted of committing a violent felony involving a firearm. Too many bad p
135 fr8mech : That's the problem. Let's say that "magically", all the assault weapons disappear because of the ban. What happens when the next shooter enters a (in
136 DeltaMD90 : Some people will always fight to ban every gun. But as you can see on this forum, hardly a right leaning one, many people are happy with only a few c
137 fr8mech : I've said this before. I admire the Left, because they take the long view on things. Again, look at Feinstein: she is more than willing to wait until
138 seb146 : Not like anything like that had ever happened before ever in the whole history of the USofA. *cough*mypetgoat*cough* It is actually very easy to see
139 Mir : Then why has the NRA pushed for tighter restrictions on what BATFE can do? There's what the NRA says their position is, and then there's what their a
140 Post contains links NAV20 : Article published yesterday by John Howard, who was the (conservative) Australian prime minister who, back in 1996, got the Australian 'ban and buybac
141 fr8mech : The only bi-partisanship on the ACA was in opposition. The ACA was written in its current form to bring more Democrats on board. Of course they do...
142 Post contains links STT757 : Here's former President George H.W. Bush's resignation letter to the NRA, he specifically cites the comments of a certain NRA executive who's still ma
143 KiwiRob : John Howard I'm pretty sure the lessons learnt and the laws applied in Australia should be able to work just as well in the US.
144 seb146 : Then the right-wing needs to stop this idea that this is the first time. We get that they hate Obama to the point they will grasp at straws to get hi
145 flipdewaf : So judging by this there is a list upon which the NRA have your name already (and I assume other details) and unless this information is stored on a
146 Post contains images cmf : I think few people understand what self-defense means. The idea that if you have a gun you will be the hero that save your family and yourself is not
147 itsjustme : You took my comment out of context. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it wasn't done purposely. I'm not ignoring the fact that some b
148 cmf : Florida has 10-20-life. I have not seen any report stating it has affected the willingness to use weapons during crimes.
149 Post contains images Dreadnought : How about reading what I said - "STARTING" with gangs. Obviously they are not the only ones but they are the biggest single source of violence. Natur
150 itsjustme : FL's 10-20-Life addresses only the commission of certain violent crimes while in possession of a firearm. To me, it's just another feel good law. As
151 DeltaMD90 : I'd be careful with that. I support "sensible legislation of assault weapons." What does that mean? Does that mean ban them? Not in my book. That mea
152 cmf : The single mindedness of the tea party, Can't do multiple things at the same time. How can you have missed that police is trying to address gangs. Bu
153 Dreadnought : I think it's obvious. I support public flogging of anyone found waving gang signs, walks around with his pants around his ankles, or wears a baseball
154 flipdewaf : lol, as long as you accept that the NRA is a gang? Fred
155 Post contains links fr8mech : I also resigned my memebership to the NRA after that comment. Didn't renew until about 15 years later. I wrote letters expressing my displeasure at t
156 fr8mech : Only if the Cripps and Bloods can be called lobbying groups and entertain Congress.
157 itsjustme : You should have waited. Today you could have renewed your life time membership for less than half of what you paid a year ago. And some, well, more t
158 flipdewaf : Don't see why not, they are a group of like minded folk who express their fear of the way the world changes in the form of violent and/or aggressive
159 DeltaMD90 : Lol we shifted subjects. I'm still talking about modifying guns to take no external mags. But I wouldn't be opposed to what you are saying, fulfill c
160 Post contains links Dreadnought : Now that's just silly. The NRA is one of the oldest civil rights groups in the country. Gun control laws were originally promulgated by racists to ke
161 fr8mech : Actually, I did receive the discount. Right before last year's annual meeting a mailing was sent out that, not only reduced the price of Life Members
162 Post contains links NAV20 : The thing that surprised me in that article about the Aussie buyback was that, besides reducing gun deaths in general, it appears to have had its shar
163 seb146 : I find it interesting that these same people who scream about arming themselves to the teeth to keep big gub'mint out of our lives are the very same p
164 fr8mech : And, I find it interesting that the very same people that want to allow a woman the right to kill an innocent unborn child are the same folks that wo
165 DeltaMD90 : Agreed Well if you saw the fetus as human and abortions as killing, I'm sure you'd think different. Agree or disagree, but I don't see that as a doub
166 cmf : One set of rules for you, another for everyone else, TP mantra. If only. Reality is that the net effect is increased amount of violence used. Time to
167 Dreadnought : Pot Kettle Black dude. What makes you connect my attitude with the TP? They have nothing to do with each other.
168 DeltaMD90 : Maybe 100% is a little extreme, but if everyone exercised good training (aka common sense with guns) there would only be a handful of accidents yearl
169 cmf : Just using your lefty argument... don't like it in reverse I see.
170 Dreadnought : What are you talking about?
171 Post contains links fr8mech : You'd be surprised to see the lengths I've gone through to secure my guns. And I don't understand the last part: Why should the system I use be desig
172 itsjustme : Apparently not.
173 Post contains images cmf : Knowing you have weapons really start to scare me. Of course it is not to prevent you from accessing them. It is to prevent everyone else. Same reaso
174 fr8mech : I just can't resist. Now, I'm just having fun. Really? You think it's outliers that people succesfully defend themselves and their loved ones or even
175 seb146 : You broad brush everyone who goes against TP "values" as "liberals who hate America." He was simply doing your thing but in reverse.
176 cmf : You present extreme examples as they represent the full picture. No matter how you try to twist it reality is that people with guns are more often vi
177 Dreadnought : I have never done any such thing. First of all, I have been adamant on this forum for years that the only thing the TP stands for, and the reason why
178 seb146 : So, the president whos name shall not be spoken signed 350+ executive orders, doing an end run around the Constitution INCLUDING raising the debt ceil
179 NAV20 : Just as a matter of interest, how many contributors on here have actually been attacked by, or threatened by, someone with a gun? I never have - unles
180 rfields5421 : I've been shot once - a very minor wound in the leg - in Beirut while I was in the Navy in the fall of 1983. I've been present at one shooting in the
181 Post contains links Dreadnought : I'm sorry, but did someone bring in balanced budgets and rational taxation into this discussion? Because that is the only "basic TP values" I know of
182 rfields5421 : He didn't have to - because the Republicans in Congress said that deficit budgets were acceptable and trying to balance the budget was unreasonable a
183 Dreadnought : Deficits of 1-2% on average, and up to 4% or so in a crunch (such as a recession), are acceptable (even for this TP member). But deficits of 10-15% o
184 seb146 : It only matters when the actual cost of war is actually put on the books for all the world to see. No member of TP wants to see how much we are throw
185 Post contains links mt99 : And where was your precious gun? did it protect you? Meanwhile, the "professionals": 5 injured after firearms go off at Ohio, N.C., Indiana gun shows
186 Post contains links and images itsjustme : Congratulations. You're finally catching on. Just as: Criticize the Republican President and/or his Administration while our country is at war = Bad
187 Post contains links itsjustme : Let me clarify something. Simply attending a gun show in no way, shape, or form qualifies a person as a "professional" with regard to firearm possess
188 NAV20 : Thanks, guys. Helps to explain the US pre-occupation with 'the right to bear arms.' Have (gladly) to admit that, in my entire life so far, no-one has
189 Post contains links seb146 : But those two scenarios don't say anything about semi-automatic and assault style weapons and how they are necessary to the security of a free state,
190 mt99 : True - Just like owning a gun does not either.. Which i think any gun legislation should consider - proper licensing and proper training.
191 Ken777 : Haven't bothered trying to keep up this week as I had surgery on Wednesday - basically a Urologist making a Di Vince Dance. Do, really, did I miss any
192 cws818 : Insist all you want. It doesn't make it true. Your version of the "TP" and the "TP" writ large may very well be different things.
193 fr8mech : You realize the only reasson my firearm ever has to stay in my car is because of federal or state gun free zones, right? So, once again, it is govern
194 cmf : Perfect example of not taking responsibility for your own actions. You're not required to be armed when you go out, it is your decision. You are not
195 mt99 : Where was you gun? Where where their guns? Seem like you guns have not helped you at all in the "personal defense" department.
196 itsjustme : So instead of just leaving your non-required-to-carry firearm safely secured at home, you leave it unsafely secured in an automobile. An automobile p
197 seb146 : So, when you drive onto a school campus (gun free zone) with your unlocked gun concealed in your car, you are breaking the law. That shows real respo
198 Ken777 : So don't drive onto a school campus (gun free zone) with your unlocked gun concealed in your car. That solves the problem right there. Since the vast
199 Post contains links fr8mech : I was 16 and lived in NYC. Not allowed and not allowed. Living in NY, not allowed. And, my dad, at the time, believed only the police should have gun
200 cmf : Honestly, anyone reasoning like this is not qualified to carry. It is your responsibility to make sure your weapons do not fall in the hands of crimi
201 seb146 : So no one ever would break into your car and steal the stereo or steal the car? That thought never crossed your mind? That has been on my mind since
202 Post contains images TheCommodore : Even more reason why a vehicle IS NOT A SAFE AND PROPER PLACE to keep/store a gun then is it ? Honestly, I don't believe you guys sometimes.
203 itsjustme : Well, with regard to the post office, unless you're going there to hunt, as soon as you drive onto the property with your gun, you've broken the law
204 NAV20 : Maybe there's a point worth making there. Almost by definition, muggers are likely to produce their weapons first; positioning themselves perfectly a
205 itsjustme : True. In the vast majority of crimes against persons, the element of surprise is a tool the perpetrator uses. Either they'll suddenly appear from out
206 Darksnowynight : Yes, you need to do that. Alternatively, you may just leave your gun at home. Is there some need for your gun on a regular basis throughout the cours
207 Post contains images NAV20 : Thanks for the professional view, itsjustme. Glad I got it right. But I'm hoping against hope that my comment, and your reply, hasn't convinced a few
208 bueb0g : Probably a bit late to this but yes, after the handgun clampdown following Dunblane, gun crime rose slightly, but has been falling ever since. It's a
209 windy95 : I have a friend who was riding his bike and was "mugged" by two youth's on a bike path. They had the jump on him and had aimed a weapon at him but wh
210 mt99 : So technically - these "muggers" could have shot him first... he was lucky that they did not. IT was pure luck that his gun saved his wallet. It was
211 Post contains links windy95 : Here are some more "lucky" citizens. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...e-Home-Invasions-And-Store-Robbery
212 Post contains links mt99 : Here are some lucky ones too: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...idental-shooting-gun-show/1847879/ and this one too http://www.kwtx.com/home/hea
213 windy95 : Accidental shootings have nothing to do with self defense. But nice try.
214 seb146 : So "responsible" gun owners carrying around weapons and when they go off, the "responsible" gun owner says "I thought the safety was on" or "I didn't
215 Post contains links mt99 : Yes they do.. the reason the people have guns in the first place is to claim "self defense".. This one does... "TEMPLE (January 15, 2013) --- A 26-ye
216 tugger : Windy, should anyone have access to buy a gun at any time for any reason with no regulation or review or other requirement? Just curious. Tugg
217 Post contains images itsjustme : Surely an incident of this magnitude was reported in the media. Please provide a link so I can read about it. Yeah, I especially like the story about
218 windy95 : No if we are talking Federally. Rights "shall not be infringed"..Leave it to the individual States. Have never said every one should have one. Just l
219 itsjustme : Your analogy is nonsense. For starters, driving is a privilege, not a right. And there are times when a car owner has to surrender his vehicle to law
220 tugger : OK then, two things: First, as I understand it a state may not impose a law that violates/conflicts with a federal law. The Constitution states (Arti
221 propilot83 : You know I gotta say, since 1776 whoever said "right to bear arms" in the 2nd amendment of the constitution, then Americas gotta pay the severe sad co
222 flipdewaf : Just change the constitution so that it represents living in the 21st century Its been amended before so do it again, calm down, grow up and get on wi
223 Post contains links KiwiRob : In the reports I could find about this incident none mentioned the assailants carrying a weapon, it was three youths, not two, one was killed, one in
224 Darksnowynight : Right now, there's still time for compromise. It could wind up being that ultimately for gun people, it gets no worse than smoking is for smokers now
225 Post contains links Ken777 : Texas was shining at the forefront on the right to carry on school campuses - at least today. http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/22/justic...lege-shooting/in
226 itsjustme : Which is why, in Reply 217 I asked Windy95 to provide a link so I could read about his "friend" first hand. Not only didn't he acknowledge my request
227 seb146 : But, when the individual states pass legislation, everyone all across this land start screaming "X state hates the Constitution! X state will force a
228 KiwiRob : I think the story is beyond doubt, but the fact that he cocked up the facts so badly indicates to me that he only knew about this story rather than a
229 windy95 : It was. Your opinion.. That does not stop them from buying another one and still driving. Nice try though. Or is there a federal do not sell a car to
230 Post contains images KiwiRob : Unbelievable that you are unable to find the report, also unbelievable that an almost identical incident did occur yet it's not your incident, the ch
231 Post contains images windy95 : Did not say that I could not find it... Wow... So what you are saying is that all personal stories on this web site need proof and confirmation with
232 TheCommodore : You have NOT provided a link to this "unreliable" story, despite being asked too numerous times ! Yet you say you have provided a link ? Well where i
233 windy95 : That conflicts with a federal law that is enforcing the consitution or enumerated power. There are many federal laws that have no basis in the Consti
234 Post contains links and images Dreadnought : Didn't have one. Duh. I just wanted to add this. How do you know when you are shopping in Texas? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt7FDTpzGvo
235 KiwiRob : I thought my link might have been the true story, turns out I might ave been wrong, but windy still hasn't provided a link so we don't know. Then fin
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Gun Control Is Needed - Great, What Is It? posted Fri Dec 14 2012 14:46:31 by tugger
Why Not Gun Control posted Sat Aug 11 2012 00:24:10 by GEEZER
Should The U.S. Start A Gun Control Policy? posted Sun Jan 9 2011 17:59:35 by flyorski
Obama To Latinos: Republicans Are Our Enemy posted Thu Oct 28 2010 08:43:25 by windy95
President Obama To Supporters, "Buck Up". posted Tue Sep 28 2010 06:55:18 by dxing
Moscow To Nice In 4 Days By Train - New Service posted Wed Sep 15 2010 09:37:29 by oly720man
Obama To Visit Asia-Australia June 2010 posted Tue Jun 1 2010 23:44:51 by propilot83
Obama To Nominate Kagan To Supreme Court. posted Sun May 9 2010 19:22:29 by fxramper
Obama To Ban Recreational Fishing! posted Wed Mar 10 2010 14:28:50 by planespotting
Obama To Announce Nuke Plant Loan posted Sat Feb 13 2010 02:35:52 by flanker