| Name: |
MartiniMan
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Obama is coming for your guns
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 1:54:00 PM
|
I had not thought even he could be so reckless but apparently Biden claimed he is considering executive orders as a means to try to control guns. If he does this and Congress does not b i t c h slap him like he deserves this could start a revolution in this country. He would be just like Hitler and Stalin in trying to disarm the country.
What I find so outrageous is his claim that "its worth it if it saves one life". Apparently he is not paying attention to the carnage in Chicago since they foolishly passed stringent gun control laws because some black athlete got shot. Prior to their ban just over 40% of the murders in the city were from handguns. Now that criminals know they have free rein it has gone up to over 80%......more gun control, more murders with guns..... The carnage in Chicago will continue because the Democrats that run that city are too evil and stupid and care more about holding onto their failed ideology than they do about protecting their citizens.
Its amazing when you look at the data as to what happens when states implement concealed carry laws and when states or countries implement gun control. If they really cared about reducing crime they would do the opposite of what they propose. This is about disarming the country so there will be no legitimate way to prevent tyranny in this country.
If you don't belong to the NRA it is time to join. Now we know what Obama meant when he told Putin's lackey that he would have more flexibility after this election.
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Please define for me....
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 2:21:40 PM
|
... what exactly is a "non assault rifle". They all fire bullets, not daises. I think the iconic image from the 60's of the soldier with the daisy sticking out of the barrel confused some of today's liberals. I can think of no better way to start the second American Revolution than to try to take our guns. Notice I said 'try'. This ain't Germany circa 1930's.
Sadly over the holidays some of my own family is buying the BS that 'assault weapons' need to go. Normally fine conservatives, but have succumbed to the media hype.
|
| Name: |
Old Diver
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Revolution..
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 3:10:36 PM
|
Actually the attempt to seize our guns started the Revolution. The British marched to Lexington and Concord to seize the muskets and powder the Minute Men had there. The one thing modern hi teck weapons don't seem to work too well on is guerrilla warfare. If Lee had split up his army and taken to the hills we might be still fighting.
As our country has become more liberal, have things gotten better or worse? The answer is obvious. Now we are told we need more of what made our country sick to cure us. Duh...!! If a little of something makes one sick, more won't cure you. In fact it just might just kill you.
It is well known what policies will grow an economy, what increases freedom, what grantees property rights. We also know what destroys an economy or a people, high taxes, excessive regulation, handouts, debt etc. Now we punish success and rewards indolence. Madness!!! The only logical conclusion to the course our current government is that they are intentionally destroying this country.
If you are feeding a bear and the food runs out, what happens? He gets mean. What are the drones going to do when the money runs out as it inevitably will? Remember what happened in Libya? I fear for my country..
|
| Name: |
dobrew
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Revolution..
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 4:06:48 PM
|
Amen!!!
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Obama is coming for your guns
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 6:04:10 PM
|
Got to disagree with this. Gun control is an obvious place to start to reduce gun related violence, and we've lived comfortably with limits when we imposed them on ourselves. When I was a kid, shotguns were limited to 3 rounds. That never interfered with hunting, nor was such a gun useless for home defense.
You can't own a machine gun already. And no shoulder fired missiles. No bazookas. Not having these readily available on the streets has not been a problem, nor has it been considered a challenge to citizen's rights.. My 20 yr old nephew just showed me a picture of a rifle he was looking at with a friend. A 50cal Barrett sniper rifle, suitable for pin point accuracy at a mile or more distance. What civilian needs a firearm like that?
If someone wants to keep a gun for self-protection, that's going to always be OK in the US. We have too deep a tradition of gun ownership to abolish it completely. But there should be legal limits on firepower, and military-style weapons aren't needed unless you're in a war.
|
| Name: |
alahusker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Obama is coming for your guns
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 7:25:11 PM
|
Copperline, mea amigo.. need to define your argument.. Reasonable for you to disagree with my need to carry around a 50 caliber machine gun, don't have one, nor would spend the money on one.. (Might be chucks to shoot however.) Point is that our President has empowered the VP to define gun control policy and threatens to enact it by fiat, executive order.. That, my friend, I find very, very bothersome..
|
| Name: |
Mack
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Obama is coming for your guns
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 8:16:16 PM
|
"If someone wants to keep a gun for self-protection, that's going to always be OK in the US." Quoting you.
It will evolve from a short magazine, to no magazine, to single shot in a heartbeat if allowed to get started at all. You trust the Federal Government. I DO NOT!!!!!!!!
|
| Name: |
h_hob
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Obama is coming for your guns
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 9:10:10 PM
|
Copperline,
If lobama knows so mucking fuch why hasn't he cleaned his own yard (Chicago)? They have had approx. 500 murders this year with guns and they have extreme gun prohibition laws there? What makes him think he is going to clean up our entire country? I don't have any answers but if lobama can't clean up his home city why should we trust him to clean up our area of the country. A personal defense weapon is much closer than a cop from 911. Just my humble insight into your hero.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You do understand gun control does not work
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 10:30:26 PM
|
I get the argument but it is misdirected as usual when sacred cows are the real issue. But the history of gun control is a sad story of opposite results. So if you really care about reducing gun violence you should be for the opposite of what you seem to want.
But here's some good questions for you to ponder.
How many mass murders have occurred in the U.S. with assault weapons? A. None
Of the six worst mass murders using guns how many occurred in the U.S. and how many in gun control crazy Europe? A. 3 of the 6 worst occurred in Europe
What weapon was used to commit the worst murder of school children in our history? A. A bomb
Professor John Lott's very fine book, "More Guns, Less Crime" debunks each and every one of the claims by gun control proponents and actually demonstrates that if you want to reduce gun crime promote concealed carry. You have a choice, argue from the perspective of irrational emotion or step back, look at the truth and if you do you will come to an entirely different conclusion. How many more people have to die as a result of gun control laws before folks like you come to your senses? Or do you just not care, or maybe you just feel helpless and want to do something....anything, even if it makes the problem worse?
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
My Take
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 10:36:15 PM
|
What we need is not a this or nothing, but rather, a reasonable approach to try and protect the 2nd Amendment and eliminate weapons used to fight wars and large magazines. Currently, someone who lies on a gun application is not prosecuted by the Justice Department and this needs to be enforced. ALL gun purchases should go through a background check. Anything beyond this would be an infringement on our 2nd Amendment rights.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
A more reasonable approach
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 11:04:18 PM
|
But explain how any of this would have prevented the Sandy Hook massacre? He stole guns from his Mom after killing her and she owned them legally. How will registration stop that? Why don't we instead talk about the real issue and ask why all of the sudden this is happening more frequently. What has changed in our society? To me that seems like the right area of inquiry and attention.
|
| Name: |
Old Diver
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Would this help?
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 11:08:08 PM
|
When I was in school they taught us the Pledge of Allegiance, Thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal...etc, you know: old things like that. It seemed to work fairly well back then. They sat you can't legislate morality but you sure can teach it! It certainly can't be any worse than what they are doing now.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
A more reasonable approach
|
|
Date:
|
1/9/2013 11:09:16 PM
|
Too much L&R for GF, copper, and the rest of the left wing loons.
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
A more reasonable approach
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 12:59:54 AM
|
All
of us know someone who is, or at some point in their lives has been too
unstable to responsibly handle a weapon.
The shooter in Aurora Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary, the kids
at Columbine High School…. All of them were very sick people who exploded into
a psychotic frenzy. Now, that’s rare…
but the details of all these cases are becoming more consistent… and worth
paying attention to. We need to learn
from events like this to try to keep them from happening in the future. Why it appears to be happening more often may have something to do with the sheer volume of guns in the community, plus the trend toward military style weaponry.
My
take is that each of these shooters had access to assault style weaponry that
was designed to inflict massive multiple wound injury, with a rapid & high
volume of fire. Consequently their acts were much more
destructive than they would have been otherwise.
The
weapons may have also played a contributing role in each case because the guns
were within easy reach during the build up phase prior to their outburst. They probably rehearsed in their minds what
the effects of their chosen weapons would have been, further building their
confidence and sense of indestructibility.
in effect, access to highly
destructive weapons probably promoted their violent fantasy… convincing them that
they would become powerful and bring terrible revenge on whoever they were
angry at.
imagine
an angry drunk guy. Now imagine giving
the angry drunk guy a gun. Same idea, same risks.
is
it your (collective) opinions that there should be absolutely no restrictions
on the types of weapons that can be bought by someone over 21 without a felony
record? None?
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Hey Hodgieee
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 1:03:20 AM
|
"Too much L&R for GF, copper, and the rest of the left wing loons." What is your point?
|
| Name: |
buzzbuster
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Obama is coming for your guns
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 1:09:54 AM
|
I don't own any military style weapons but I may before it's to late to find them because we may be in a war before it's over with. I'm joining the NRA today! The Government may get my guns but they will have to because I will not give them up voluntarily. Thats what the 2nd amendment is all about. If people know you have a gun to protect yourself they will think twice before breaking in or attacking you.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Just a suggestion
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 8:29:08 AM (updated 1/10/2013 8:29:42 AM)
|
Please read the politifact.com analysis and rating of the current pro gun internet claim..."Switzerland issues each citizen a gun and has the lowest gun related crime rate of any civilized country".
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Obama is coming for your guns
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 9:03:10 AM
|
For anyone that's interested, here's a link to an interactive map detailing each of the mass killings in the US since 1982.. There have been 63 mass murders over that time span, and 25 of them since 2006. 7 occurred in 2012 alone. Note that the details contain descriptions of the weapons used, method of obtaining the guns, and whether there were indications of mental illness in the shooter prior to their acts.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You going to read Professor Lott's book?
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 11:42:15 AM
|
It puts the lie to the canard that gun control reduces gun-related crime as as we know the exact opposite happens. Read the book, it will change your view on the subject if you have an open mind.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You going to read Professor Lott's book?
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 11:49:37 AM
|
I haven't read his book but I have seen him interviewed several times on TV. If you had an open mind (or common sense for that matter) you would realize he is an idiot.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You going to read Professor Lott's book?
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 11:49:40 AM (updated 1/10/2013 11:50:47 AM)
|
I haven't read his book but I have seen him interviewed several times on TV. If you had an open mind (or common sense for that matter) you would realize he is an idiot.
Now I am going to pack the car!
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
A more reasonable approach
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 11:52:33 AM
|
Have you been using that copperline to make bad shine? I would suggest that you take a few minutes and read the Constitution and The Bill of Rights - there is NOTHING that states what you are allowed - it is WHY you are allowed to possess guns. And anyone who believes that this would be the last type firearm to be banned and confiscated has the aptitude of bovine feces.
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You going to read Professor Lott's book?
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 12:08:34 PM
|
Ok, i'll look into Professor Lott's opinions as you suggest...but the notion that more guns creates safer streets seems to me to be counter-intuitive... Australia's ban on assault weapons did have a positive impact on murder rates in their country beginning within a few years of putting it in place.
i’m not an expert on Constitutional Law, but
when we point to 2nd Amendment arguments in all this… there does
seem to be some dramatic gaps between the reality of life & legal theory.
Gun Rights advocates come at this from 2
primary POV’s. One is that homeowner’s
need adequate protection for their lives & property, the other is that
citizens may need to arm themselves in case there is a war with the government.
Both arguments seem over-wrought to
me. A typical hunting gun can provide all
the protection a homeowner would need, as well as a tool for dealing with varmints. Secondly, the idea that a citizen can arm
himself adequately to take on the US government seems foolish, irrational and
mostly inspired by Hollywood action films.
Really, this is real life… not Rambo, Red Dawn or a Die Hard flik. Arming yourself in preparation for firefights
with the most powerful military the world has ever seen is just non-sense.
if we are concerned about Big Brother, as i
think it is wise to be… then focusing attention on the arms needed to win a
gunfight with the local National Guard unit or a police Swat Team is a futile
waste of time & energy.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You going to read Professor Lott's book?
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 12:28:48 PM
|
I disagree with your last statement. While the Government could eventually disarm its armed citizenry by force, the fact that it might have to do so by force is a powerful deterrent from attempting it in the first place. The military in this country has always honored civilian control, but this is not Syria and I honestly don't believe our military would kill US citizens at the behest of Government orders. God only knows I hope they aren't forced to make that decision.
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Go ahead
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 3:14:37 PM
|
Surrender your arms and the rest of your rights and board the train heading to the camps - those of us who still believe in our country will not just roll over.
|
| Name: |
wix
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 6:41:19 PM
|
If you remember, which no one probably does, I posted immediately after the Connecticut killings that mental illness is the root cause of the mass killings in the US, not guns. Liberals will claim guns are the cause since guns are a common thread, but so is untreated, unidentified mental illness. Guns simply provide a convenient vehicle. If you take a look at the video games, movies, etc., that our young are raised with today, there is no wonder that some unstable individuals try to transfer that game or movie into reality to suit some abnormality in their brain. The pattern of behavior is clear. Unfortunately, our liberal idiots in charge refuse to admit the facts and continue to blame the wrong party. Are there gun nuts that should be put away before they too cause harm, you betcha: all you have to do is look at some of the You Tube videos of young guys and their impressive home built "assault weapons" and you will see the effects of the video games and movies on these young folks. It ain't the guns folks, it's the culture.
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 6:57:01 PM
|
They can't give up on the culture though - the culture is now their religion. The devil has to be outside, not within
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 7:55:59 PM
|
I definitely think that the culture is part of the problem... perhaps the greatest part. However, changing culture is much more difficult... even if we could agree on what part of the culture is the problem. The most expedient way to lower (not eliminate) the effects of guns-in-the-wrong-hands is to put limits on the lethality of weaponry.
And you're certainly right about the role of mental illness in all this. I expect changes in the way we enforce laws around 'mental health hold orders' are already moving forward. These, too, will be discussed by people with concerns about citizen' rights. Handling the mental health issues is almost as complicated as addressing the "culture problem".
Kids who make threats to harm schoolmates are routinely dismissed from school in what some people consider an over-reaction. On the adult side, is the Tactical Arms CEO who has posted a YouTube video about killing people if gun control is enacted making a rhetorical statement or a threat to harm innocent people?
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 8:09:31 PM
|
Please post the link to the tactical arms ceo statement. I'd like to read it for myself.
|
| Name: |
wix
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 8:19:10 PM
|
Personally, I don't see a need for many of the products available in the gun industry today, but I do feel these manufacturers are simply responding to a demand created by the video game and movie industry. Take a look at the paint gun industry. Where else is the affect of the game and movie influence more evident. The paint guns used there mimic assault weapons seen in games and movies.
A real issue that needs to be investigated in the Connecticut incident is why the mother of the killer bought all the weapons she had acquired. It has been reported that she was a survivalist who had stored food, guns, and ammo, and was waiting for the balloon to go up. I submit that she was as sick as her son and probably sicker. We gotta deal with the insane.
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 8:24:30 PM
|
This (mental health competence, or incomptence) will become the new HIV - and the tar-baby of HIPAA wll be the insurmountable obstacle - at least a generation away for those measures to take effect (if that soon.) In the meantime, the master needs to control the servant, (parent/child) so we get bans........too bad we cant think for ourselves, but at least we have a smiling government to herd us into the barn.
I can see a time when you will need a mental evaluation before a licensed pregnancy will be allowed to end in birth, (and not abortion,) all for our own good.
|
| Name: |
wix
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Abortion
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 9:26:02 PM
|
For certain segments of our society might be a viable solution...
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
[Message deleted by author]
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 9:31:33 PM (updated 1/11/2013 9:23:13 AM)
|
|
| Name: |
buzzbuster
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 9:31:43 PM
|
If you think the Government will do that for our own good you have much more confidence than I do in them. I think they have already took more from the American people Than should have been. I don't trust them and especially the current administration with much of anything their pushing to do or stop for our own good. Leave me alone and I will be just fine. Maybe you need someone to hold your hand and lead you for your own good but I do not.
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Common thread
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 9:47:52 PM
|
That kind of thinking will get your phone bugged, your computer scanned, and your 1040 audited. Giving in is much easier and more patriotic.
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
link
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 11:01:09 PM
|
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/10/unhinged-tactical-response-ceo-threatens-to-start-killing-people-over-obamas-gun-control/
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
link
|
|
Date:
|
1/10/2013 11:13:38 PM
|
Free speech
Right?
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
link
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 12:18:39 AM
|
Yep, free speech.
Also very loose talk.
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
link
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 8:52:10 AM
|
Well, I'm relieved to discern the scorn in your assessment. Not only is what he believes wrong, but to give a loon like this the freedom to say anything he wants is just not American.
Hopefully, this kind of lunacy will come under more scrutiny, and maybe we can be given guidelines as to more appropriate things to say, and the appropriate people to say them (Piers Morgan maybe?) I really hope they slam that little schoolboy who pointed his finger like a gun and got sent home - zero tolerance is the answer to any and all of our ills, because everything is either black or white.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
link
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 9:24:39 AM (updated 1/11/2013 9:26:39 AM)
|
There is a subtle message that the gun control folks either aren't getting or just choose to ignore. That message is that there are a lot of Americans who are fed up with the constant attcaks on individual freedoms - especially those guaranteed by the Constitution. That guy just popped off, probably because he was frustrated and angry, and then removed the original video with that statement and modified and toned down his rhetoric in subsequent videos.
The gun control folks keep saying things like "you don't need 30 rounds to kill a deer", but they are missing, some out of ignorance, some purposefully, the real point of the second amendment. On that same link is a link to a statement by Judge Andrew Napolitano. I'll quote it here because it explicitly states the real reason for the second amendment.
“You know with all the debate about guns, I’ve been doing some writing and doing a lot of thinking, and Greta and the rest of us at Fox want to know what you think about it,” the former New Jersey Superior Court Judge said. “The Constitution specifically and directly insulates the right to keep and bear arms from interference from the government. It could not be more clear: ‘…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’” “So since the Congress can’t change the Constitution, how could they possibly take away your right to keep and bear arms?” Napolitano continued. “Here’s the dirty little secret about the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment was not written in order to protect your right to shoot deer, it was written to protect your right to shoot tyrants if they take over the government. How about chewing on that one.”
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Just heard him interviewed this morning
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 9:28:44 AM
|
He sounded very reasonable, lucid and his theses about gun control and crime are fully supported by the data and his analysis. With all due respect Archie, I will take the peer reviewed work of a tenured professor from a prestigious public university that is well published and has done a tremendous amount of research over a left wing nut any day.
But your response is totally representative of the left today. Don't like what you hear, can't refute it with facts, logic and reason, resort to ad hominum attacks. Reminds me of the child that sticks their fingers in their ears and makes noise and says "I can't hear you".
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thank you
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 9:39:46 AM
|
As I heard from him in an interview today what is being proposed right now by the political left is not only wrong headed but simply doesn't make sense. And ignore Archie, Professor Lott is not some wild eyed demagogue. He is very calm, analytical and is making his case based on the data and his reasoned evaluation of the data and does not seem agenda driven.
A point he made was that the term "assault weapon" isn't even well defined. They are focusing on guns like the AR-15 but the fact is that other than its look and style, it is no more capable than a hunting rifle or a handgun with a clip. Made me think of my own 45. I have two clips, each of which hold 15 rounds of 45 ACP and can be fired just exactly like an AR-15 but with a bigger, more dangerous hollow stem bullet. So why the focus on an AR-15? He thinks because it looks like an M4 or M16 and not due to any significant functionality advantage over hunting rifles or handguns.
He also pointed out that the data is conclusive that violent gun-related crimes go up in cities, states and countries that implement gun control measures. I have seen the data and it is compelling. Read the book or at least some of his articles (recognizing it is only a snapshot of the whole picture). If you have an open mind it will change your view of the responses currently being proposed because they truly make no sense.
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thank you
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 1:08:16 PM
|
I couldn't testify to the veracity of the claim, but I heard/read that before imposing the previous 'ban on assault weapons' that a group headed by piglosi went through a gun catalog and chose the weapons to be banned by looking at photos and determining which ones should be included. If I recall, piglosi was Democratic Whip or head of some committee at the time that put her in the decision making position. Some rifles were originally included simply because they had a thumb hole through the stock and that made them look more dangerous. I am sure that the same logic and reason will come to fore in the ensuing 'debates'......;<)
As I said before, please show me a weapon that is NOT an 'assault' weapon. They all fire bullets, not Daisys!!
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thank you
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 8:52:08 PM
|
Well, my .22 isn't the same as a 50cal sniper rifle beyond the fact that they both fire a bullet. One has a limited, special design use & capable of doing things well beyond the range of the self-defense needs for a civilian. The other is less deadly, but still has to be handled with care. I think we probably can classify them in different categories that describe their uses & differences pretty clearly. One of them should be highly restricted from public access, the other you should have to be an adult with a felony-free record record to purchase. Somebody out there is smart enough to come up with rules that would make sense without making it into a constitutional crisis.
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thank you
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 9:12:45 PM
|
Both will kill if the intent is to kill.
Do you really think that anyone actually enjoys shooting a .50cal anything? it's big advantage is putting distance between the murderer and his target, and that has not been a real issue with the current obsession.
if you think a .22 is inherently safer, then you would be fine with letting them stay in circulation? They got rid of knives of all description on commercial airlines - was that overkill? (pardon) Or do you think everything needs to go: ropes, matches, safety pins,, etc...much less a firearm. Are fireworks reasonable? What is your mentally stable comfort level, and how would you discriminate the mentally unfit? (remember, you will have to concede judgement to psychiatrists and beaurocrats)
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thank you
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 9:32:34 PM
|
Copper, a .50 cal sniper-type rifle could well be intended for hunting big game out west - where a mountain goat or other hunting prey might well be across a gorge and yes, a mile away.
I suspect a lot of people who buy that type of rifle do so "just because", and use it at the range or for hunting as above. Does one NEED such an instrument for personal defense, no. But then the second amendment was not meant for self defense or hunting. It was meant to ensure an armed populace would provide a real deterrent to tyrants in government.who might try to impose their will on an unwilling populace.
I personally have no desire to own a .50 caliber rifle, but if I did and bought one it would be solely to save my ssa and yours too if you needed my help, just like the weapons I do own (which, BTW, would most likely be banned if the current regime has its way.)
The other day Matt Lauer tried his best - obnoxiously so - to get Chris Christie to cowtow to the gun control agenda. To his credit Chris kept pointing out the societal things that lead to the misuse of guns...violent video games and movies, mental health issues, and the like. Lauer was obviously frustrated (much to my delight) that he couldn't get the answer he wanted. That's not journalism, that's using a position to advance an agenda.
Send me an email and I'll be happy to open an off-line conversation on this topic.
|
| Name: |
h_hob
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thank you
|
|
Date:
|
1/11/2013 10:16:59 PM
|
Copper,
Heroin and cocaine are absolutely illegal. What good has making a law against them done. Many places have gun crimes committed because of these drugs. How are you going to make a law governing morality?
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thank you
|
|
Date:
|
1/12/2013 12:33:04 AM
|
While we are at it: what degree of hypocrisy is involved in a presidential vow to "do something about the gun problem," while changing the laws to give the president lifelong protection by the CIA? Is this an admission of the futility of his proclamation? Paranoia? Cowardice? Realization of the resolve of those he would choose to subjugate?
Or maybe he understands that there are bad people out there all the time, no matter what we do, or who we try to blame.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
We know the answer to this
|
|
Date:
|
1/14/2013 9:18:05 AM
|
Obama is your typical liberal hypocrite like all those Hollywood leftists (but I repeat myself) clamoring for gun control while they make indescribably violent movies and have their own armed guards for protection. Being a classic narcissist, I can assure you like our entertainment elites they are incapable of even seeing their hypocrisy. I will at least give John Travolta credit for refusing to jump on the AGW bandwagon given all the jets he owns and flies.
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Texas Lakes
»
Lake Pat Cleburne
Login
|
Home
