Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
My state, (voted for palin) still has no laws prohibiting insane people from posessing guns.
By the way, there is nothing in the constitution about owning ammunition is there?
Just saying....
There is nothing in the constitution about owning printing presses or media outlets either.
What is a "printing press"?
We have people on this board...that would ban private firearms or restrict their possession or storage in a home for this INSIGNIFICANT number of accidents.
Who?
Just in the last week we had a thread where the OP claimed we needed stricter laws on guns in homes and how they are stored. He brought up the a child killed every 9 hours by accident. Which is a bald faced lie. He was supported by a couple people in the thread.
Who?
Just in the last week we had a thread where the OP claimed we needed stricter laws on guns in homes and how they are stored. He brought up the a child killed every 9 hours by accident. Which is a bald faced lie. He was supported by a couple people in the thread.
Name those people.
Who?
Just in the last week we had a thread where the OP claimed we needed stricter laws on guns in homes and how they are stored. He brought up the a child killed every 9 hours by accident. Which is a bald faced lie. He was supported by a couple people in the thread.
Name those people.
With the computer power available today, a background check shouldn't take more than a few minutes...say while I pick out a nice holster and a few boxes of superVELs.I agree, but I do think if you have children in your home you should lock up your guns. I also think you should take classes, and belong to the NRA IMO. But it isn't the people who are responsible gun owners or even legal gun owners commiting most of the crimes, so I don't see the point of too much regulation these days. I do agree with a waiting period, and background check.
Background check is necessary. Studies conducted since the waiting periods have been introduced, including the annual ones conducted by the ATF and FBI prove waiting periods have had absolutely no effect on crime reduction. Just the opposite, incidences where people who were trying to purchase weapons for self defense were killed by ex boyfriends or husbands before they were able to make the purchase due to the waiting period. Granted these incidents are relatively rare and in some cases may have had little to no effect but the fact remains some would be alive today without the waiting period.
That is a good point, I was thinking for of a waiting period to make sure their record came back clean. But you made a good point, somewhat changes my mind.
I didn't say so.We have a constitutional right to bear arms. Liberals, socialists and Marxist will ignore the Constitution in their attempt to remove them from the hands of law abiding citizens.
Liberalism is a mental disorder...of the first degree.
Not all liberals do.
Ted Nugent thinks that the right to bear arms is your carry permit. I agree.Who?
Just in the last week we had a thread where the OP claimed we needed stricter laws on guns in homes and how they are stored. He brought up the a child killed every 9 hours by accident. Which is a bald faced lie. He was supported by a couple people in the thread.
I didn't see that.
However, laws on guns in home and how they are stored would not infringe on the right to own guns.
...nor about owning marijuana or explosives. We write laws against owning things as we so choose.By the way, there is nothing in the constitution about owning ammunition is there?
Just saying....
Membership in the health care insurance union will be mandatory...penalty for not joining the government union (run by union goons...with guns, no less...as always). What say thee? Shall we strike that down also?And I am not saying you should have to, I am just saying as a responsible gun owner you should. And I think nationally they are political, but locally not so much.
Very active locally too here.
I belong to a sporting/hunting club. Recently NRA members tried to make membership in the NRA mandatory. The leaders of this movement are also active tea baggers and extreme right wingers.
Had their motion succeded I was going to walk out.
I agree with you there. Membership is voluntary, period. Thankfully their motion was struck down, that's just wrong.
With the computer power available today, a background check shouldn't take more than a few minutes...say while I pick out a nice holster and a few boxes of superVELs.Background check is necessary. Studies conducted since the waiting periods have been introduced, including the annual ones conducted by the ATF and FBI prove waiting periods have had absolutely no effect on crime reduction. Just the opposite, incidences where people who were trying to purchase weapons for self defense were killed by ex boyfriends or husbands before they were able to make the purchase due to the waiting period. Granted these incidents are relatively rare and in some cases may have had little to no effect but the fact remains some would be alive today without the waiting period.
That is a good point, I was thinking for of a waiting period to make sure their record came back clean. But you made a good point, somewhat changes my mind.
I didn't say so.
Ted Nugent thinks that the right to bear arms is your carry permit. I agree.
...nor about owning marijuana or explosives. We write laws against owning things as we so choose.
Membership in the health care insurance union will be mandatory...penalty for not joining the government union (run by union goons...with guns, no less...as always). What say thee? Shall we strike that down also?Very active locally too here.
I belong to a sporting/hunting club. Recently NRA members tried to make membership in the NRA mandatory. The leaders of this movement are also active tea baggers and extreme right wingers.
Had their motion succeded I was going to walk out.
I agree with you there. Membership is voluntary, period. Thankfully their motion was struck down, that's just wrong.
The 1000 deaths are the price we pay for the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is here to stay, so we have to accept the accidental shootings and increased homicide rate.
Its the price of being an American
Less then 1000 people of all ages die each year due to accidents with firearms.
There are approximately 200,000,000 firearms in private hands. Ignoring Police and military firearms.
We will round up to 1000 deaths and we will use the 200 Million Firearms number.
The percentage of accidental firearms deaths to Firearms in use is .0005 Percent. Or with out the percent .000005. That is I believe 5 deaths per 100000.
We have people on this board and in this Country that would ban private firearms or restrict their possession or storage in a home for this INSIGNIFICANT number of accidents. They use tricks to try and make their point. For one they claim all 1000 deaths are children, they include 18 and 19 year olds as children. They add suicide rates in the number, a bald face misrepresentation, as suicide does not depend on a firearm to commit. The other trick is to claim one child every 9 hours dies due to accidental gun use.
While it is true that to the family of a dead loved one the death is not insignificant, that does not change the fact that statistically speaking this rate is meaningless.
Who believes that 5 deaths per 100000 people is a rate worth denying our Second Amendment rights? Or restricting gun owners in how they store and maintain their weapons?
Actually a National program of teaching our youth how to handle and use firearms, as was done up until the 60's would probably bring this number even lower. I would say that statistically speaking our firearms owners are a pretty responsible bunch.
The 1000 deaths are the price we pay for the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is here to stay, so we have to accept the accidental shootings and increased homicide rate.
Its the price of being an American
The 1000 deaths are the price we pay for the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is here to stay, so we have to accept the accidental shootings and increased homicide rate.
Its the price of being an American
Yes, I agree
Some may think it is crazy to have double the homicide rate of other industrialized non-gun toting nations. But we decided early in our existence that we were willing to live with increased gun deaths if we can feel safer
Less then 1000 people of all ages die each year due to accidents with firearms.
There are approximately 200,000,000 firearms in private hands. Ignoring Police and military firearms.
We will round up to 1000 deaths and we will use the 200 Million Firearms number.
The percentage of accidental firearms deaths to Firearms in use is .0005 Percent. Or with out the percent .000005. That is I believe 5 deaths per 100000.
We have people on this board and in this Country that would ban private firearms or restrict their possession or storage in a home for this INSIGNIFICANT number of accidents. They use tricks to try and make their point. For one they claim all 1000 deaths are children, they include 18 and 19 year olds as children. They add suicide rates in the number, a bald face misrepresentation, as suicide does not depend on a firearm to commit. The other trick is to claim one child every 9 hours dies due to accidental gun use.
While it is true that to the family of a dead loved one the death is not insignificant, that does not change the fact that statistically speaking this rate is meaningless.
Who believes that 5 deaths per 100000 people is a rate worth denying our Second Amendment rights? Or restricting gun owners in how they store and maintain their weapons?
Actually a National program of teaching our youth how to handle and use firearms, as was done up until the 60's would probably bring this number even lower. I would say that statistically speaking our firearms owners are a pretty responsible bunch.
Yes, I agree
Some may think it is crazy to have double the homicide rate of other industrialized non-gun toting nations. But we decided early in our existence that we were willing to live with increased gun deaths if we can feel safer
Look up. See the pretty contrails.
You really need to stop getting your disinformation from the Brady Campaign.
By the way, there is nothing in the constitution about owning ammunition is there?
Just saying....
as such it should include, as it did when Washington was president, military grade weapons
and as such it should include, as it did when Washington was president, military grade weapons.
That was George Washington's interpretation. Civilians were allowed cannon, a strictly military weapon.as such it should include, as it did when Washington was president, military grade weapons
The Hutaree would be thrilled with your Constitutional interpretations
