Could there possibly BE a worse response???

Bill, your posts may (or may not) have some merit if the 2nd Amendment was there just for hunters and sport shooters, but its not. It's also there to give us an opportunity to protect ourselves from an over zealous government (please research what the framers of the 2nd Amendment wrote about it). You know a government that wants to take away all your individual freedoms, tax you into the poor house, and tell you at what age you will no longer be able to get medical care, etc. It concerns me that you are so quickly willing to give up other folks rights to own high capacity target rifles/pistols (you're obviously not a 3-gun participant) just so you can keep your hunting rifles, shotguns and bench rifles.

If the millions of dollars that will be spent to argue gun laws, develop gun laws, vote on gun laws, enact gun laws and enforce gun laws were spent on mental health research, add an armed trained resource at each school or train and arm teachers/school admin we would be much better off, IMHO.

You're right, changes are coming, how much are you (as a clear headed, reasonable person) going to swallow before you say 'enough?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
let get facts straight......ownership.....of current military style guns has been supported by recent supreme court decisions......the malitia part of the second ammendment.
sawed off shotguns, machine guns and supressors(silencers) are NOT ILLEGAL.


THERE ARE HOOPS TO JUMP THRU AND SOME STATES BAN THINGS( STATES ARE THE UNLTIMATE AUTHORITY).but all the above can still be owned and shot in the united states.

thats fine that you do not mind having your rights infringed, but i do.....

lets put it this way..if they start banning my guns..i will openly propose that single shot benchrest rifles are nothing more than sniper rifles and should have an outright ban placed on them !!!
now hows you infringement feeling ???
when you start thinking that there are good guns and bad guns you have lost.

mike in co



Bill Wynne said:
I believe that it is not an infringement on the rights protected by the second admenment for our government to establish limits and regulations on legal firearms. There was a day in this country when us citizens could not legally own a sawed off shotgun, a machigine gun, or a firearm with a silencer. These laws did not limit me or my law abiding friends.

There are laws on the books that set limits on how many bullets my rifle can hold and what caliber it can be to hunt various game. My shot gun that I use for dove hunting cannot hold more than three shells.

It would not bother me much if I could no longer use my 5" Cannon. It would make sense to me if some teachers in
schools were armed and bad guys did not know which teachers were packing heat. There are churches in my state where some of the worshipers are quietly armed.

Because I do not trust our administration on this, I would like to see the NRA and other gun people at the table rather than a bunch of pandering politicians. As I said earlier, "Changes are coming".
Click to expand...
 
Responding to each other's comments, in this forum, isn't going to make an impact on upcoming legislation. It may vent your spleen, but that's about it. Change IS coming. As the man in the commercial says, "I guarantee it!" The average citizen has had a enough. We're all outnumbered. Expect change. Nope ... no need for further comment. Call the NRA, call your congressman, call your senator. Let them know how you feel. Let's not continue to waste our time here.
 
Well let's look closely at the language. You have the right to keep and bear arms - because a militia is necessary for a free state.
So you have the right to keep (own) arms that are "of use to the militia" - this would include all of the current military arms excluding only those that are crew served. The Miller Court tried to address this, but there was no appearance by any defense (Miller was dead by the time it got to court) - so no evidence was presented - even though plenty of it existed then, as well as today. Had there been any defense at all - Miller would have had to have gone the other way. It might have anyway, had the Court not been under threat by FDR of being "packed" with so many judges that it would have been a useless appendage to the gov.

And you have the right to bear (as in to carry - loaded) those same arms freely.

What you do NOT have the right to do is to discharge those arms just whenever you please. This is where there is room for legislation - discharging a firearm in a heavily populated area for personal amusement is not going to be permitted. Self-defense is one thing, it's justifiable. Killing pop cans in an apartment building hallway is not.
 
not a waste of time if we can convince a few.....even just a few...

mike in co

abintx said:
Responding to each other's comments, in this forum, isn't going to make an impact on upcoming legislation. It may vent your spleen, but that's about it. Change IS coming. As the man in the commercial says, "I guarantee it!" The average citizen has had a enough. We're all outnumbered. Expect change. Nope ... no need for further comment. Call the NRA, call your congressman, call your senator. Let them know how you feel. Let's not continue to waste our time here.
Click to expand...
 
Mike in Co. Lets start by separating the good people from the bad, but were do we start. We can't even decide who are the good and who are the bad on this forum. God said the meek shall inherit the earth! Thats the none violent or none aggressive, do we turn the other cheek to the violence, I think not! Then thats all we will have is violence. I have one idea, First anyone just coming into this Country should not be allowed to own a gun for a period of 21 years. Thats the age I had to be, two owen a hand gun in New York State, in other words I had to keep my nose clean for that long. No arrests, DWI or what ever. That was in 1969, I still have a concealed carry permit, that they don't give to just anyone. And they also make you go though a back ground check every five years. And no I don't have a problem with that.

Joe Salt
 
A few ideas have been mentioned in this thread, such as writing letters to your Congress and Senate reps. Let them know how you feel on the matter & why. But try to be polite and professional, so it doesn't seem like a nut job wrote the letter.

Remind them that they have passed laws that prohibit drug use and sales, that do not stop niether. Prohibition did not do anything, but create an underground economy for criminals. The same would happen here if all the guns are taken away, which is the ultimate goal.

I, for one am for having school staff that prove that they know how to use a firearm, be armed for just this kind of occurance. If the principal had been armed, who knows, maybe nobody would have died except for the idiot that caused this terrible scene. We will never know.
But, if common sense does not come into play, it will happen again. Common sense should be suggested to our politicians by the electorate.

Do not forget that your state government reps are to be communicated with also. The states can ban anything they want and not worry about the Federal laws. Look at California & NY.

As far as the merchants who pulled their "assault weapons" off of the shelves, don't patronize them anymore & let them know why. Money speaks louder to these people than you think.

By the way, I have killed game animals with an AR, so it can be argued that they are used for hunting. And, no I didn't shoot any deer with it.

In closing, Merry Christmas to all.

Danny
 
I am absolutely sick about what happened at Newtown. I grew up in a time when a rifle or shotgun was a right of passage to responsibility. I have seen attitudes change toward guns from "that is a good gun to hunt with" to "what are you going to kill with that"? I own and like all kinds of guns, but I have no answer how we can prevent such tradgedies. I wish it had never happened and pray that it never does again but I feel powerless to stop the progression of anti gun sentiment sweeping the nation.
Children should not be afraid to be children and live a life of innocence.
 
Talk, talk, talk.

Research, research, research.

To those who feel this sort of discussion is not fruitful.

I DISAGREE! :)

I grew up in a home where we couldn't SAY "Merry Christmas" because it was "making light of the Blessed Jesus and the reason for the season"...... We said "Have a Blessed Christmas" instead, then someone RESEARCHED and found out that "Merry" means blessed.

Then it was "XMas"........ same thing. "It was disrespectful, irreverent, "taking the 'Christ' out of Christmas" etc etc...... then someone researched the subject. Man were we WRONG!

My point is simple, discussion is GOOD. As Charles E recently realized, this is a social meeting place, a place to air and compare views. I've learned a lot here, I've changed my views because of information discussed here...And in that light I re-list the following points.

This is not about regulating hunting. Limits on the type and amount of rounds a hunting weapon can fire is about ethics, safety and in some cases environmental concerns (lead shot) which comes back to safety. This gun-control argument is SPECIFICALLY about power of the people.

Silencer/suppressor legislation is the same, there is no/zero/nada conceivable reason we can't hunt with suppressed guns. I submit that it's STUPID to fire un-suppressed firearms in the field.

Regarding the term "assault rifle," again, inflammatory rhetoric designed specifically to vilify certain firearms, a "leg in the door" tactic. Provably, demonstrably and ADMITTEDLY a "leg-in-the-door" tactic.

Regarding separation of "the good people and the bad people." Get real! Every society has criminals. We can't "legislate away" criminal behavior any more than we can legislate away war. Who here WANTS WAR??? Anybody??? Does anybody, anywhere know anyone who wants war? Yet we're still sending our young off to gut each other....SOMEBODY wants war.... and criminals always have and always will have the drive to take what isn't rightfully theirs, by force. Our nation was formed with the idea that we could set up a free society based on certain "unalienable rights" and that it could be/would be the best place on earth in which to live.

It has been.

And now ALLA' YOU'SE who want to question the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, ALLA' YOU'SE who think "we're different now" and "change is inevitable" are buying into liberalism!

Solomon said "there is nothing new under the sun" quite some years ago now. Our Founders WERE DEALING WITH THESE SAME ISSUES and they dealt with them a certain way. And it worked. In fact it worked so well we've now got a whole nation of coddled and protected CHILDREN who can't make adult decisions because "their feelings" get in the way. We're coming around full-circle and allowing ourselves to be the sort of nation our forefathers DIED to escape from. Please people, READ some books and learn that we are not "different" nor are our societal problems "different" nor are we as a nation facing "different" issues than anyone before. We're PEOPLE, glorious and flawed PEOPLE. And we're throwing away many years of collective wisdom, wisdom bought with blood.

It's truly sad.....

al
 
Joe Salt said:
<snip>Lets start by separating the good people from the bad, but were do we start. </snip>
Click to expand...

Lets start with the US government. Are they more trustworthy now than when the amendments were written?

Off shore prison camps run outside of US law. (torture camps)
Mercenaries used instead of our troops. Think about it.
Biological and chemical plants even though they were banned world wide BY US!!!
I won’t even comment on the debt.

Hell, where do I turn in my guns?
 
alinwa said:
Solomon said "there is nothing new under the sun" quite some years ago now. Our Founders WERE DEALING WITH THESE SAME ISSUES...
Click to expand...
That sentence reminded me of something. We've been through this before, more than a hundred years ago when bolt action rifles began the migration from use by armies to use by the public. Some in the press raised a hue and cry along the lines of

"Single-shot rifles have always been good enough for hunting, haven't they? Why on earth would any law-abiding citizen want to own one of these evil, made-only-for-war, high-magazine-capacity killing machines known as "bolt action rifles"?"
Click to expand...

Yes, I realize the paraphrase above discounts the prior existence of multi-shot revolvers, the early auto pistols, and the lever-action rifles that had been in use for a half-century, already. However, I distinctly remember it. The attitude of the author was that anything used by the armed forces isn't suitable for civilians, that technology developed for armed forces should never migrate to the civilian sector. No, it didn't make sense to me back then, either.

Literally, the last time I looked this stuff up was back in high school, 35+ years ago, on microfiche, in preparation for a speech I was to give to the John Birch Society; I would have no idea where to look for it today. If someone with better research skills than me could find that stuff it might be a useful parallel to illustrate the rightness of our position as we begin writing letters to our legislators.

Just a thought...
 
research today is dead easy :) Just pick a subject, write it in the "subject line" (the box on your screen with the blinking line) and hit send.

Now, once you're brought up to speed with an overview you may have to find >>>a BOOK!<<< but every town in America has a library and everyone one posting here has Amazon....

RESEARCH and READ people! Find out that the only thing "new" is that we've become a nation of people who get our ideas from ONE source! "The News" (pick your poison)

Now, first quote of the day....

"The man who doesn't read (lissen to/watch) "the news" is uninformed. The man who DOES read (lissen to/watch) the news is misinformed"

Get it???

READ people!!!

These idiots in "the news" can send out a thought like "it takes a village to raise a child" and We The Sheeple just let it wash over our collective conscience like the Balm of Redemption...... it doesn't even raise a hair. SICKNESS!! I submit that the only thing "a village" has ever been able to raise is a street punk! It takes AN ADULT to raise a child.

And it takes a nation of children to set up and revere a street punk.

Next quote, a very recent one....... Winston Churchill wrote "if you're not a liberal when you're 20 you have ho heart. If you're not a conservative when you're 40 you have no head."

We, as a nation, currently "have no head" and I, as an adult, WILL FIGHT THIS! I fight it in the streets when interacting with my fellow man at the gas pump. I fight it in print and I'll keep fighting because it's MY JOB.

As an adult, MY JOB is to lead and guide the children. I take my job seriously, I made certain choices and I accept responsibility for them. And I've made these choices based on thousands of years of collective human knowledge.

NOTHING HAS CHANGED re the human condition. We ARE what we WERE......and what we always will be, people, the only difference is that the village has shrunk in recent years, we're BACK TO collective tribalism thanks to electronic media.

And we CHILDREN are having trouble dealing with our itty bitty FEELINGS.

We need to grow up.

A'gain
al
 
No - the worst response possible. A K-mart like response.

We quit buying from them too - remember?
 
This problem is too complex for this White house and congress to fix. The best outcome may be that they can't come to any agreement. These people are not efficient. On the other hand, the worst outcome may be that they get a bill passed that we will have to read so we understand it.
 
Wilbur said:
No - the worst response possible. A K-mart like response.

We quit buying from them too - remember?
Click to expand...

Yeahh, I remember :)

And back when we quit buying there were 5 Kmarts near me.

Now there are none.

I have to drive almost 100mi north to Seattle area or south into Oregon to find one! I drove by three empty K-marts today......... two are churches now. Out here they're considered to be on the way out.


.
 
Since I don't live in the US I have often wondered why these shootings happen, is it the media attention given to these senseless crimes or ??? Laws are only there for the law abiding to follow, criminals or people with criminal intention never will follow the existing law and certainly won't follow any extra laws written to combat these things.

To me to prevent these things happening is impossible but keeping the results of these mindless acts to a minimum would need some thought. Guarded screening points entering these public places, training given to responsible people to confront and neutralise the perpertrator??


Perhaps minimising or preventing these tragic, senseless events is to identify the causes and work to remedy them.

I think the youth of today (and not only the youth but adults from what I observe in NZ) lack discipline, respect and some of the social skills I was taught as a kid. I don't know how many times I've seen the parent back the kid even when the kid was in the wrong, or where parents think it is OK for their kids to treat others disrespectfully. Here in NZ some adults seem to think it's acceptable to use swear words in every sentence......just look at some of the NZ hunting forums, so future generations will find these action more acceptable and push the boundaries even further.

Society needs to change and kids need to be taught boundaries and also taught that there are consequences for their action..........here in NZ teachers can't discipline kids and the government has made it illegal to smack children.........no real consequence to your actions.......that's what people are taught now.

I was amazed recently when the NZ press published a list of NZ youngest killers (following the sentincing of a 13yr old kid to 18yrs for murder), between 1991 and 2000 there was 1 13 year old convicted of murder and a 14 year old convicted of manslaughter, then from 2001 to 2012 there have been 11 kids between the age of 13 & 17 convicted of murder and 5 between the age of 12 and 16 convicted of manslaughter.

The politicians will make law changes as allowed to try and stop the mass killings, the laws won't achieve what they intend, but it is a lot easier to pass these laws and show society "look we have passed laws to stop this happening again".........instead of addressing the issues that are causing these events...............sadly to say the US isn't the only country experiencing these problems..............Ian
 
Bill Wynne said:
Let us not fight but rather let us reason together to fix what is wrong. If we had to pick up and clean the blood off the little bodies of those children and their devoted teachers I believe we would both see this problem in a different light.

The constitution was never meant to be a suicide pact.
Click to expand...

This has to be one of the saddest, most pathetic things I've ever read by somebody ostensibly in favor of the 2nd Amendment. It's so intellectually dishonest, and so sickeningly emotionally overwrought, that it boggles my mind. The US Constitution is meant to CONTROL the government, to limit the power of the government, to ensure that the PEOPLE are in charge -- and not the government. The 2nd Amendment isn't about deer hunting or target shooting. The criminal and crazy act of one individual is a reflection on that individual. Whether he or she used a match to start a fire, a car to run through a playground, a sword to lop off heads like a samurai fantasy, or firearms taken from his own mother after he murdered her.

More than 150 people were burned to death after fireworks were set off in a crowded nightclub. All of them innocent. Victims. Tragic. And it had no more to do with the 2nd Amendment than the murder at the school. For anybody to associate any of us with such an act is emotional hysteria and weakness to a degree that is outrageous. What that lunatic did no more impugns you than what Scott Peterson did impugns fishermen. (He murdered his pregnant wife, decapitated her, and threw her in San Francisco bay, claiming she was at home and disappeared while he was fishing...) Yet the media is painting you that way, and some of you are painting yourselves that way. Divide and conquer. Are you all going to let this insanity break you? Are you going to let your media and your representatives (sick joke, I know) color you this way?

Lastly, a bit of perspective. Obama has authorized drone strikes in the middle east which have killed more innocent children than the murdering psychopath in CT. Do you think those parents loved their kids any less?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top