Go on record: YOUR gun control position.

[MoFinz]

Sorry, but no. Read District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).

And if you think the "militia" can take on the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, with their equipment, tactics and centralized command and control, I don't think you're being realistic. Just my opinion.

Are you assuming they will be given different ROE here as opposed to Iraq, Aghanistan, Libya et.al?

[ohall]

I believe that we should be allowed to own guns. But I do think that there needs to be a way to track private sales. I think there should be a title that changes hands, just like a car. That way if that gun is used in a crime, you have a record that it was sold and you no longer own it. I also think that we need more education on the subject. Just locking everything down isn't right. I mean look how well that has worked with sex ed in schools. You limit what you can teach, kids are going to try it just because they haven't been given the proper education on it. This might be a uneducated opinion, but that is what I believe.

I agree with the education, but in no way do I agree with the tracking of individual private weapons. I was 7 years old when I shot my 1st handgun. After that point, guns weren't a mystery or something as a child I felt the need to sneak a peak at. It was something I used on a regular basis after that point.

IMO the issue we are not dealing with and we haven't for many years now, is mental health issues. If ppl really are concerned about stopping these awful incidents, they should look into how we as a society deal with the mentally unstable these days. I also feel if more ppl carried guns, less of these incidents would occur, and they wouldn't be as large/tragic as they turn out to be.

[MoFinz]

Ive always wondered why nobody wants to talk about whatever psychtropic drugs the killers may have been on. We wildly over diagnose disorders in this country, and we definitely overmedicate. How come this isnt being brought up as an issue?

[PhinzN703]

My position is as such...get your liberal, tree-hugging, whale-saving, no job having, welfare riding, drug taking, goofy dick beaters off of the constitution and my rights. The Founding Fathers knew a bunch of *******s would try to disarm us and subjugate us so they did everything possible to ensure our right to bear arms would never be infringed upon. I don't have to justify nor show any reason or need for whatever gun, ammo, accessories, magazine, or apparatus that I choose to purchase. Yes, guns are used for hunting, shooting sports, and protection but we are specifically guaranteed our right to bear arms to provide a militia that can oppose a tyrannical government. This right is about to seriously challenged by a bunch of idiots who have created much of the disaster that we are faced with each day. All I can assure you about the outcome is that the first dozen or so that come through my door to collect my guns will be very unhappy.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

---------- Post added at 11:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 PM ----------



I have a couple and an 11-87, they are good guns.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Since when has the government ever tried to disarm "us"?

[MadDog 88]

People that continually fall back on theconstitution use that as a nothing more then "it's my right." You can't tell me the forefathers had the foresight to see the kinds of weapons manufactured today. Then there is the argument about defending yourself from a tyrannical government. Thats a hoot. Hunting or protecting your home is about the limit a private gun owner should be granted which is why I chose no semi automatic weapons.

In all fairness though to gun enthusiasts, if someone wants to shoot up a mall or a school, pistols, rifles and shotguns can do the job. The real problem is the people that arm themselves and committ mayhem and that, is never going to be resolved.

[Bumpus]

Since when has the government ever tried to disarm "us"?

We all need to pay attention ... it's starting now. This is the new gun control bill led by California Senator Dianne Feinstein:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


This is nothing more than an attempted "1st step"

The Senator has been very forthcoming on her designs:

Senator Dianne Feinstein’s interview on 60 minutes back in 1995 reveals exactly what her agenda is: disarming the American people. Feinstein is heard to say, ““If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up everyone of them (every gun) Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in. I would have done it.” So what kept her from doing it? She didn’t have the votes...

Read more:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Bumpus]

People that continually fall back on theconstitution use that as a nothing more then "it's my right." You can't tell me the forefathers had the foresight to see the kinds of weapons manufactured today. Then there is the argument about defending yourself from a tyrannical government. Thats a hoot. Hunting or protecting your home is about the limit a private gun owner should be granted which is why I chose no semi automatic weapons.

In all fairness though to gun enthusiasts, if someone wants to shoot up a mall or a school, pistols, rifles and shotguns can do the job. The real problem is the people that arm themselves and committ mayhem and that, is never going to be resolved.

I choose to not let others piss on the Bill of Rights. (It's not called the Bill of needs)

I don't own an AR, but I'll be damned if I'm going to stand by while *******s try to stomp on our 2nd Amendment rights.

[Buddy]

Since when has the government ever tried to disarm "us"?

There are a great number of politicians, pundits, and voters who have made no secret of their desire to disarm every American. Their desire is no secret or conspiracy, however the lengths they are willing to go to achieve this conceal a great number of secrets and conspiracies.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[MoFinz]

Why do people want to change the Bill of Rights to the Bill of Government Enabled Priveledges?

[Tunaphish429]

regular citizens dont need guns to survive. There is almost no use for them in our society. All they do is cause havoc. The government tells you that you cant do drugs. It maybe your natural right to do what you want but when others are put at risk the government must act. And its about time. The government cant watch every person and prevent any persons from committing crimes. The only thing law enforcement can do is enforce consequences for ones actions and as we have seen these ppl have disregard for everyones lifes even their own.. so i support gun laws. Make them extreme. Make it hard for anyone to get one and make the consequences harsh for someone who uses one in a crime or obtains one illegally ..

Sent from my DROID Pro using Tapatalk 2