Gun ownership rights are under attack.

[California Girl]

Isn't there a case awaiting SC judgement today from some old guy in Chicago (I think it's Chicago) challenging the city's ban on handguns? I'm sure that judgement is due today..... This will either be a very good day for Americans who want to protect themselves or a very good day for evil bastards who want to break into our homes.

 

[Gunny]

Isn't there a case awaiting SC judgement today from some old guy in Chicago (I think it's Chicago) challenging the city's ban on handguns? I'm sure that judgement is due today..... This will either be a very good day for Americans who want to protect themselves or a very good day for evil bastards who want to break into our homes.

Breaking into MY home would definitely result in the perpetration of violence ... just not the way the criminal has it planned.

 

[California Girl]

Isn't there a case awaiting SC judgement today from some old guy in Chicago (I think it's Chicago) challenging the city's ban on handguns? I'm sure that judgement is due today..... This will either be a very good day for Americans who want to protect themselves or a very good day for evil bastards who want to break into our homes.

Breaking into MY home would definitely result in the perpetration of violence ... just not the way the criminal has it planned.

I got broken into in the UK.... no guns in houses in the UK. He went out the back as I came in the front door. I grabbed my baseball bat and chased the bastard! He dropped my stuff and hightailed it. Police asked me what I would have done if I'd caught him. I said 'beat the crap outta him and called for an ambulance'. Apparently, I would have been arrested for that. Because he was leaving.... Fucking Nanny State.

 

[Gunny]

Isn't there a case awaiting SC judgement today from some old guy in Chicago (I think it's Chicago) challenging the city's ban on handguns? I'm sure that judgement is due today..... This will either be a very good day for Americans who want to protect themselves or a very good day for evil bastards who want to break into our homes.

Breaking into MY home would definitely result in the perpetration of violence ... just not the way the criminal has it planned.

I got broken into in the UK.... no guns in houses in the UK. He went out the back as I came in the front door. I grabbed my baseball bat and chased the bastard! He dropped my stuff and hightailed it. Police asked me what I would have done if I'd caught him. I said 'beat the crap outta him and called for an ambulance'. Apparently, I would have been arrested for that. Because he was leaving.... Fucking Nanny State.

I'd like to have seen THAT.

 

[California Girl]

Breaking into MY home would definitely result in the perpetration of violence ... just not the way the criminal has it planned.

I got broken into in the UK.... no guns in houses in the UK. He went out the back as I came in the front door. I grabbed my baseball bat and chased the bastard! He dropped my stuff and hightailed it. Police asked me what I would have done if I'd caught him. I said 'beat the crap outta him and called for an ambulance'. Apparently, I would have been arrested for that. Because he was leaving.... Fucking Nanny State.

I'd like to have seen THAT.

It was his lucky day.

 

[ACG22]

I think the sensible compromise would be to require education and demonstrated proficiency. Make all weapons subject to licensing which requires firearm safety and handling techniques. It is a right that should not be removed as it is a cornerstone of our society. But our short history also shows the impact it's had on our society in the time since, and there are many negatives. What is wrong with learning from our past behaviors and addressing them?

I don't think the illegal use of firearms is caused by a lack of either firearm education or a lack of proficiency...so what do you expect that to accomplish?

I wasn't speaking solely to the problem of illegal firearms, but the larger problem of gun-related deaths in America. What I expect to accomplish, though, is to have tighter control over how guns are legally obtained and used. I have no desire to keep law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns (though there is a whole other discussion needed to determine which guns are legally available).

 

[ACG22]

Isn't there a case awaiting SC judgement today from some old guy in Chicago (I think it's Chicago) challenging the city's ban on handguns? I'm sure that judgement is due today..... This will either be a very good day for Americans who want to protect themselves or a very good day for evil bastards who want to break into our homes.

Breaking into MY home would definitely result in the perpetration of violence ... just not the way the criminal has it planned.

I got broken into in the UK.... no guns in houses in the UK. He went out the back as I came in the front door. I grabbed my baseball bat and chased the bastard! He dropped my stuff and hightailed it. Police asked me what I would have done if I'd caught him. I said 'beat the crap outta him and called for an ambulance'. Apparently, I would have been arrested for that. Because he was leaving.... Fucking Nanny State.

You'd likely be arrested here too, as well you should. Preventing a crime and/or defending yourself are fine; meting out your own justice is not.

 

[California Girl]

Breaking into MY home would definitely result in the perpetration of violence ... just not the way the criminal has it planned.

I got broken into in the UK.... no guns in houses in the UK. He went out the back as I came in the front door. I grabbed my baseball bat and chased the bastard! He dropped my stuff and hightailed it. Police asked me what I would have done if I'd caught him. I said 'beat the crap outta him and called for an ambulance'. Apparently, I would have been arrested for that. Because he was leaving.... Fucking Nanny State.

You'd likely be arrested here too, as well you should. Preventing a crime and/or defending yourself are fine; meting out your own justice is not.

He had my stuff. I wanted it back. I have every right to take back what has been stolen from me. It wasn't about meting out justice, you fucking idiot. It was about getting MY things that I WORKED FOR back from a scumbag junky. Fucking drug addicts. They should all be shot.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think the sensible compromise would be to require education and demonstrated proficiency. Make all weapons subject to licensing which requires firearm safety and handling techniques. It is a right that should not be removed as it is a cornerstone of our society. But our short history also shows the impact it's had on our society in the time since, and there are many negatives. What is wrong with learning from our past behaviors and addressing them?

I don't think the illegal use of firearms is caused by a lack of either firearm education or a lack of proficiency...so what do you expect that to accomplish?

I wasn't speaking solely to the problem of illegal firearms, but the larger problem of gun-related deaths in America. What I expect to accomplish, though, is to have tighter control over how guns are legally obtained and used. I have no desire to keep law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns (though there is a whole other discussion needed to determine which guns are legally available).

Accidental gun deaths have declined dramatically over the last 50 years to where it really isnt much of a problem. Deaths from falling off ladders are probably higher numbers. Deaths from automobiles are probably higher by a factor of 10.
Making people jump through hoops to exercise a right is never a good idea. It didnt fly with voting. I dont see why it should fly with firearms.

 

[ACG22]

>>He had my stuff. I wanted it back.

Stop right there. You said it yourself, he dropped it and high-tailed it. Had you caught up with him and inflicted punishment, you would have rightly been arrested for assault. Learn the law!

>>I have every right to take back what has been stolen from me. It wasn't about meting out justice, you fucking idiot.

Oh, so what was it? If you do anything more than detain, you are violating rights. Like I said, learn the law.

>>It was about getting MY things that I WORKED FOR back from a scumbag junky. Fucking drug addicts. They should all be shot.

Try to keep your story straight. Oh and you lose a lot of credibility when you immediately resort to name-calling when someone has been civil with you up to that point. But we learned that on our first day with you, didn't we.

 

[ACG22]

I don't think the illegal use of firearms is caused by a lack of either firearm education or a lack of proficiency...so what do you expect that to accomplish?

I wasn't speaking solely to the problem of illegal firearms, but the larger problem of gun-related deaths in America. What I expect to accomplish, though, is to have tighter control over how guns are legally obtained and used. I have no desire to keep law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns (though there is a whole other discussion needed to determine which guns are legally available).

Accidental gun deaths have declined dramatically over the last 50 years to where it really isnt much of a problem. Deaths from falling off ladders are probably higher numbers. Deaths from automobiles are probably higher by a factor of 10.
Making people jump through hoops to exercise a right is never a good idea. It didnt fly with voting. I dont see why it should fly with firearms.

I don't see that I'm asking for a lot of jumping through hoops. Why is it a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to own a gun as well as demonstrate proficiency for its use? Especially when the converse is having more guns in the hands of those who shouldn't have them, both for lack of checks or testing. I'm talking about strengthening ourselves, not weakening.

 

[The Rabbi]

I wasn't speaking solely to the problem of illegal firearms, but the larger problem of gun-related deaths in America. What I expect to accomplish, though, is to have tighter control over how guns are legally obtained and used. I have no desire to keep law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns (though there is a whole other discussion needed to determine which guns are legally available).

Accidental gun deaths have declined dramatically over the last 50 years to where it really isnt much of a problem. Deaths from falling off ladders are probably higher numbers. Deaths from automobiles are probably higher by a factor of 10.
Making people jump through hoops to exercise a right is never a good idea. It didnt fly with voting. I dont see why it should fly with firearms.

I don't see that I'm asking for a lot of jumping through hoops. Why is it a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to own a gun as well as demonstrate proficiency for its use? Especially when the converse is having more guns in the hands of those who shouldn't have them, both for lack of checks or testing. I'm talking about strengthening ourselves, not weakening.

Why is it a bad thing to restrict people's right to own firearms? Is that your question? The answer should be self-explanatory.
In case it isnt, rights should not be conditional. Nor can you train people not to be idiots. The amount of training necessary to be safe with a gun is pretty minimal--two rules to be exact.

 

[Missourian]

I wasn't speaking solely to the problem of illegal firearms, but the larger problem of gun-related deaths in America. What I expect to accomplish, though, is to have tighter control over how guns are legally obtained and used. I have no desire to keep law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns (though there is a whole other discussion needed to determine which guns are legally available).

Accidental gun deaths have declined dramatically over the last 50 years to where it really isnt much of a problem. Deaths from falling off ladders are probably higher numbers. Deaths from automobiles are probably higher by a factor of 10.
Making people jump through hoops to exercise a right is never a good idea. It didnt fly with voting. I dont see why it should fly with firearms.

I don't see that I'm asking for a lot of jumping through hoops. Why is it a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to own a gun as well as demonstrate proficiency for its use? Especially when the converse is having more guns in the hands of those who shouldn't have them, both for lack of checks or testing. I'm talking about strengthening ourselves, not weakening.

Would it be a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to vote as well as demonstrate your understanding of the issues?

 

[logical4u]

Accidental gun deaths have declined dramatically over the last 50 years to where it really isnt much of a problem. Deaths from falling off ladders are probably higher numbers. Deaths from automobiles are probably higher by a factor of 10.
Making people jump through hoops to exercise a right is never a good idea. It didnt fly with voting. I dont see why it should fly with firearms.

I don't see that I'm asking for a lot of jumping through hoops. Why is it a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to own a gun as well as demonstrate proficiency for its use? Especially when the converse is having more guns in the hands of those who shouldn't have them, both for lack of checks or testing. I'm talking about strengthening ourselves, not weakening.

Would it be a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to vote as well as demonstrate your understanding of the issues?

Why should ANYONE have to demonstrate ANYTHING? We have a president that did not demonstrate his citizen status. Why should the rest of us have to do any more?

 

[ACG22]

I don't see that I'm asking for a lot of jumping through hoops. Why is it a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to own a gun as well as demonstrate proficiency for its use? Especially when the converse is having more guns in the hands of those who shouldn't have them, both for lack of checks or testing. I'm talking about strengthening ourselves, not weakening.

Would it be a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to vote as well as demonstrate your understanding of the issues?

Why should ANYONE have to demonstrate ANYTHING? We have a president that did not demonstrate his citizen status. Why should the rest of us have to do any more?

Actually, he has, and this issue is so past its sell by date it barely merits a response. Get over it.

The reason why people should have to demonstrate anything is as a guarantee of rights. Are you okay with having no checks? Allowing anyone to vote as often as they like? Yeah, let's make electing a POTUS just like crowning a new American Idol champ! Let's allow felons to buy guns. Let's allow perjury.

No thanks. I'm not for a lot of rules, but there are some that seem intuitive.

 

[Missourian]

Would it be a bad thing to have to demonstrate your legal right to vote as well as demonstrate your understanding of the issues?

Why should ANYONE have to demonstrate ANYTHING? We have a president that did not demonstrate his citizen status. Why should the rest of us have to do any more?

Actually, he has, and this issue is so past its sell by date it barely merits a response. Get over it.

The reason why people should have to demonstrate anything is as a guarantee of rights. Are you okay with having no checks? Allowing anyone to vote as often as they like? Yeah, let's make electing a POTUS just like crowning a new American Idol champ! Let's allow felons to buy guns. Let's allow perjury.

No thanks. I'm not for a lot of rules, but there are some that seem intuitive.

You are in favor of a test to prove you understand the issues before you are allowed to vote?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

52nd street -

And yet we can look at any of a hundred acts of genocide that have taken place in extremely highly armed societies - Cambodia, Rwanda, even the Cultural Revolution all took place in societies where people had a lot of weapons in their homes. Massacres were conducted by Rios Montte, Cristiani, Pinochet...and yet all countries were well armed.

In no case that I am aware of has gun ownership prevented the use of force by a government against its own people.

By all means prove me wrong - name one.

Irregardless of the global atrocities you mention, you should not, and can not ban specific
weapons from the American citizenry.Its unconstitutional.
"A well armed millitia rights must not be infringed upon" this is in the Constitution of the United States sir, stop trying to change Americas Constitution.!!

"Can not ban specific weapons"?


Hmmm anti tank weapons? Anti personelle mines? 50 cal machine guns? Anti-aircraft missiles? Morters? Tanks? Military aircraft and their armaments? Cruise missiles?


We should have NO bans what-so-ever on ANY weaponry? OR should some weapons be banned? I don't know that I am comfortable with people owning FULLY AUTOMATIC weapons, though I DO support concealed carry of hand guns. I just don't see the NEED for a machine gun, it's HARDLY a home defense weapon unless you are being attacked by the MOB, the CRIPS, or the BLOODS.

 

[The Rabbi]

52nd street -

And yet we can look at any of a hundred acts of genocide that have taken place in extremely highly armed societies - Cambodia, Rwanda, even the Cultural Revolution all took place in societies where people had a lot of weapons in their homes. Massacres were conducted by Rios Montte, Cristiani, Pinochet...and yet all countries were well armed.

In no case that I am aware of has gun ownership prevented the use of force by a government against its own people.

By all means prove me wrong - name one.

Irregardless of the global atrocities you mention, you should not, and can not ban specific
weapons from the American citizenry.Its unconstitutional.
"A well armed millitia rights must not be infringed upon" this is in the Constitution of the United States sir, stop trying to change Americas Constitution.!!

"Can not ban specific weapons"?


Hmmm anti tank weapons? Anti personelle mines? 50 cal machine guns? Anti-aircraft missiles? Morters? Tanks? Military aircraft and their armaments? Cruise missiles?


We should have NO bans what-so-ever on ANY weaponry? OR should some weapons be banned? I don't know that I am comfortable with people owning FULLY AUTOMATIC weapons, though I DO support concealed carry of hand guns. I just don't see the NEED for a machine gun, it's HARDLY a home defense weapon unless you are being attacked by the MOB, the CRIPS, or the BLOODS.

Plenty of private citizens own fully automatic weapons. I myself am in the process of buying one. Since 1936 there has been exactly one crime committed with an NFA weapon, by a policeman btw. Owners of NFA weapons have the most law abiding track record of anyone.

 

[ACG22]

You are in favor of a test to prove you understand the issues before you are allowed to vote?[/QUOTE]

Nope, didn't say that at all. But proving you are a US citizen and, therefore, eligible to vote doesn't seem like an intrusion. Do you?

 

[The Rabbi]

You are in favor of a test to prove you understand the issues before you are allowed to vote?

Nope, didn't say that at all. But proving you are a US citizen and, therefore, eligible to vote doesn't seem like an intrusion. Do you?[/QUOTE]

Nope.
And before you buy a gun you have to prove your identity and that you are not prohibited. But nothing about demonstrating any competence.