Gun Ownership / Laws Discussion & Debate

[sparky]

I don't subscribe to the worship of the Founders a lot on the right do. They were a bunch of rich slaveholders who didn't want to pay for a war (The French and Indian War) that they provoked and they benefited from.

I credit them with establishing a good enough system that allowed something good to come about. Usually revolutions lead to things being a lot worse for everyone when all is said and done.

We won our war against Britian because France and Spain (no lovers of democracy there) decided they were going to get some payback on England for screwing them over in the last couple of wars. Not because there were a bunch of plucky guys with squirrel guns. We won because guys from Europe like Pulaski, Lafayette, Von Stueben (who was as ka-weer as a square donut) came over and showed our guys how to fight a war.

So, oddly, my fellow right wingers, we owe our freedom today to a Gay Prussian officer who showed the hillbillies how to march and stand in formation.

5 star post Joe, sadly lost on the 2nd Amd nutters who equate freedom to firearm ownership.

Sader still to think we'd really be something if we had such attention paid to the other 26

~S~

LOL Thank you Mr lap dog.

To which you're expecting the usual puffed chest response i'll assume

ok, i'll play

i have MORE guns that you, and MINE are BIGGER!

how'd ya like me now ?

~S~

 

[Full-Auto]

5 star post Joe, sadly lost on the 2nd Amd nutters who equate freedom to firearm ownership.

Sader still to think we'd really be something if we had such attention paid to the other 26

~S~

LOL Thank you Mr lap dog.

To which you're expecting the usual puffed chest response i'll assume

ok, i'll play

i have MORE guns that you, and MINE are BIGGER!

how'd ya like me now ?

~S~

Red, I see red. Is that red? Youre a joke if thats what your asking.

 

[old navy]

 

[Missourian]

Actually, it was called the Kellerman Study, and it found that in Seattle Washington, for every case of an intruder being killed by a homeowner, there were 39 suicides, 3 accidents and 1 domestic murder. Kellerman moved his study to other cities and got similar results.

Even if we take the conclusions at face value...adding suicides is a glaring error.

How can we protect you from you?

The evidence concludes that countries without guns have the same or higher suicide rates and countries that had gun restrictions enacted like England and Canada didn't reduce the suicide rate, it only transferred the firearm suicides to other methods, like leaping and poison.

Remove the suicide statistics and you are safer as a gun owner.

 

[Missourian]

At the invitation of a poster whom I respect, I'm starting this thread as an off-shoot from another (Things I Disagree with Tea Party / Liberals...).

"When you are done with this topic, we can discuss this one in more detail.

* I own a gun. If anyone breaks into my home and holds perfectly still while I move to within three feet of them, they're dead meat. Or their leg will hurt. Maybe a toe. In any case, you guys are all over the danm place on this issue. Some of you have told me I should be able to own a machine gun or even an RPG. Others have told me I should be able to take these fine weapons anywhere I want. I disagree with those of you who have that view.
On the other side, Libs if I have a gun in my home, I am not a "NeoCon" or "Out to prove my manhood".

Good post otherwise."

So apparently my new found friend thinks this part of my post was bad. I'm betting it's not because he thinks all guns should be banned...

What's funny is, in the same thread, for the paragraph above, I was called a Conservative who puts human life before property and a Liberal who wants to take away our protection from that tyrannical government that we all know is going to invade ou homes any day now.

So there it is.
If you don't think we need gun ownership at all and can state your reasons why, guess what? I can respect those views. I'm not going to call you names or sling petty insults like some arrogant moron who thinks I know all.
If you think we should have more gun rights and can state your reasons why, guess what? Same thing. Intelligent people can appreciate differing views.

Hey Indy, sorry I'm late to the party, thanks for starting the thread.

This was really the only statement I needed clarification on, because mostly we are on the same page.

"Others have told me I should be able to take these fine weapons anywhere I want."
​

Does this mean you are opposed to conceal carry, or are you referring to RPG's and machine guns.

As I communicated in another post, grenades are explosives, I don't thing they should be considered "arms".

Machine guns are legal under the National Firearms Act of 1934.

 

[sparky]

Remove the suicide statistics and you are safer as a gun owner.

one small part of the equation southpaw, you're leaving out the 'idiots with guns' part

~S~

 

[cutter]

Here's my underlying take.

Haven't handled a firearm since I parted with the military in 1992, and frankly, I'm totally good with that. Don't need one, and don't feel I'm missing anything.

But I think that anyone who wants to own a gun, and isn't a criminal or has a mental illness, and can show he can handle the thing responsibly should be allowed to own one if that is what he enjoys.

Now, all of that said, this issue is dominated by two irrational, loud groups, the NRA Gun Nuts and the Sarah Brady Gun Grabbers.

For the Sarah Brady types, you are irrational. YOu can't ban something after people have enjoyed the right for decades. The horse got out of that barn a long time ago, and every jurisdiction that has tried to ban guns has seen the effort fail miserably. Guns are completely illegal in Chicago, but the city still averages a few hundred handgun deaths, every year.

For the gun nuts, the two reasons you give for wanting a gun are also irrational. The first is to protect yourself from an evil government that wants to do bad things to you. The fact is, if the government ever thinks you are someone they need to take out, probably so do most of your neighbors. And no matter how many guns you've stockpiled, they have more, bigger ones and they are better with them. Ask the Branch Davidians how well that worked out.

The other reason given is that you want to be able to protect your family. BUt statistics have shown a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy - suicides, arguments and accidents.

Ask the viet cong .We didn't exactly walk over the taliban either.A well armed guerrilla force can do wonders

 

[Missourian]

Remove the suicide statistics and you are safer as a gun owner.

one small part of the equation southpaw, you're leaving out the 'idiots with guns' part

~S~

That doesn't mean anything to me Sparky...Show Me.

 

[AmericanFirst]

The right to bear arms is protected by the 2nd amendment. The reason it was written was to protect the people from a tyrannical gov't. The left would love to take our gun rights away. Now I am talking about the socialist backed leftwing politicians not every left leaning American citizen.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Here's my underlying take.

Haven't handled a firearm since I parted with the military in 1992, and frankly, I'm totally good with that. Don't need one, and don't feel I'm missing anything.

But I think that anyone who wants to own a gun, and isn't a criminal or has a mental illness, and can show he can handle the thing responsibly should be allowed to own one if that is what he enjoys.

Now, all of that said, this issue is dominated by two irrational, loud groups, the NRA Gun Nuts and the Sarah Brady Gun Grabbers.

For the Sarah Brady types, you are irrational. YOu can't ban something after people have enjoyed the right for decades. The horse got out of that barn a long time ago, and every jurisdiction that has tried to ban guns has seen the effort fail miserably. Guns are completely illegal in Chicago, but the city still averages a few hundred handgun deaths, every year.

For the gun nuts, the two reasons you give for wanting a gun are also irrational. The first is to protect yourself from an evil government that wants to do bad things to you. The fact is, if the government ever thinks you are someone they need to take out, probably so do most of your neighbors. And no matter how many guns you've stockpiled, they have more, bigger ones and they are better with them. Ask the Branch Davidians how well that worked out.

The other reason given is that you want to be able to protect your family. BUt statistics have shown a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy - suicides, arguments and accidents.

The first reason, to protect us against a tyrannical gov't. is the reason the 2nd amendment was written.

 

[The Rabbi]

The other reason given is that you want to be able to protect your family. BUt statistics have shown a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy - suicides, arguments and accidents.

This is utter bullshit.

 

[AmericanFirst]

At the invitation of a poster whom I respect, I'm starting this thread as an off-shoot from another (Things I Disagree with Tea Party / Liberals...).

"When you are done with this topic, we can discuss this one in more detail.

* I own a gun. If anyone breaks into my home and holds perfectly still while I move to within three feet of them, they're dead meat. Or their leg will hurt. Maybe a toe. In any case, you guys are all over the danm place on this issue. Some of you have told me I should be able to own a machine gun or even an RPG. Others have told me I should be able to take these fine weapons anywhere I want. I disagree with those of you who have that view.
On the other side, Libs if I have a gun in my home, I am not a "NeoCon" or "Out to prove my manhood".

Good post otherwise."

So apparently my new found friend thinks this part of my post was bad. I'm betting it's not because he thinks all guns should be banned...

What's funny is, in the same thread, for the paragraph above, I was called a Conservative who puts human life before property and a Liberal who wants to take away our protection from that tyrannical government that we all know is going to invade ou homes any day now.

So there it is.
If you don't think we need gun ownership at all and can state your reasons why, guess what? I can respect those views. I'm not going to call you names or sling petty insults like some arrogant moron who thinks I know all.
If you think we should have more gun rights and can state your reasons why, guess what? Same thing. Intelligent people can appreciate differing views.

I have read this post and your last that you posted this.. As you can tell from my avatar, It is something I enjoy immensely. We should be allowed the same access to weapons as the government. No I am not talking about nukes, there is no place on the planet to enjoy shooting those off without irreparable harm. I get a damn kick at blowing stuff up. Some of my most enjoyable moments in my life have been on a firing range. My passion is military firearms, I love exotic ammo.

But to put it in a different perspective. I am posting an email I received form a friend.
Enjoy it, cuss it swear by it. All of them is an individual choice.



PEOPLE ASK WHY?
Why Carry a Gun?

My old grandpa said to me 'Son, there comes a time in every man's life when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps and
Usually it's when he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin.'

I don't carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don't carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don't carry a gun because I'm evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

I don't carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don't carry a gun because I'm angry.
I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don't carry a gun because I'm a cowboy.
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.

I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don't carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police protection is an oxymoron.
Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take an ass whoopin'.....author unknown (but obviously brilliant)

Fully agree.

 

[Bigfoot]

If a Conservative doesn't like gun ownership then he/she will not own one. If a Liberal doesn't like gun ownership then they do not want anyone to own one.

 

[The Rabbi]

If a Conservative doesn't like gun ownership then he/she will not own one. If a Liberal doesn't like gun ownership then they do not want anyone to own one.

It's a control thing. The liberal mind is uncomfortable with large numbers of people who cannot be controlled and/or taxed. Thus liberals oppose homeschooling. The oppose ending regulations about engaging in business. They oppose gun ownership and when they support it they make it conditional on everything under the sun.

 

[Full-Auto]

If a Conservative doesn't like gun ownership then he/she will not own one. If a Liberal doesn't like gun ownership then they do not want anyone to own one.

It's a control thing. The liberal mind is uncomfortable with large numbers of people who cannot be controlled and/or taxed. Thus liberals oppose homeschooling. The oppose ending regulations about engaging in business. They oppose gun ownership and when they support it they make it conditional on everything under the sun.

Guns? What guns?

You can not un-invent them.

 

[hjmick]

Holding perfectly still and three feet away? There's someone who doesn't need a gun...

 

[IndependntLogic]

The other reason given is that you want to be able to protect your family. BUt statistics have shown a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy - suicides, arguments and accidents.

This is utter bullshit.

I was wondering what the source of that little tidbit was, myself.

 

[IndependntLogic]

If a Conservative doesn't like gun ownership then he/she will not own one. If a Liberal doesn't like gun ownership then they do not want anyone to own one.

It's a control thing. The liberal mind is uncomfortable with large numbers of people who cannot be controlled and/or taxed. Thus liberals oppose homeschooling. The oppose ending regulations about engaging in business. They oppose gun ownership and when they support it they make it conditional on everything under the sun.

Now see. We agree about the right to own guns but there ya go just being a plain ol' whackjob. You're like the Liberals who say the exact same things in reverse - that Conservs only care about children until they're born, or that Conservs need guns because they're cowardly and have inadequate manhood , and other nonsense.

Cmon now. Don't be such a butthead. Make intelligent arguments and you'll make the Libs look less intelligent when they do this sort of thing.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Holding perfectly still and three feet away? There's someone who doesn't need a gun...

HEY! Don't be makin' fun of my marksmanship now! I have been known to hit a target on the first shot! Assuming that target was the ocean and I was in a boat, that is...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The courts have ruled that gun bans are constitutional... Look up US v. Miller. And I would argue that the 2nd Amendment is about militias, not private gun ownerships. - a WELL REGULATED militia.

The ‘collective right’ argument was made in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), and rejected by the Court:

The right to bear arms is ‘clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia.’

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

As the Court noted in Heller, Miller is not on point with the issue because the latter didn’t address the meaning of the Amendment, rather the type of firearms subject to its protection. In Heller the Court did not rule out gun regulation altogether, stating ownership was an individual right, along with the right to self defense. And because Americans overwhelming defend themselves with handguns, it was un-Constitutional to ban their possession.

The issue isn’t gun regulation per se, but what type of regulation is excessive and what passes Constitutional muster.