Gun Ban List

[Sandhusker]

Reader, "What are you people crazy thinking that owning guns is a RIGHT? "

Ummmm, the Constitution of the United States says so? The Second Amendment is about the RIGHT to keep and bear arms.

Reader, "It's a privilege that most of the world thankfully does not have or else there would be more murder and crime than there is. "

How then do you explain the higher crime rate in cities with the toughest gun laws?

I'm proud to be opposed to widespread gun ownership.

And widespread gun ownership fixes what problem?

Certain guns are not necessary for anyone except the military or SWAT.

You having internet in your home is not necessary. Are you in favor of banning everything that is not necessary?

The military and SWAT don't use AR-15s, why then are you in favor of banning them?

 

[CattleArmy]

I choose my battles and this is not one I choose to take up. In fact in my opinion there's no need (except for the policemen protecting the laws of this country and then men and women who serve in the various millitary positions) for handguns and anything automatic.

two things here CattleArmy, if you don't choose this battle what are you going to fight you're next battle with??

second thing, please think about this, if in your perfect world only "authorities" having guns and an unarmed population makes us safe,
then a prison, with armed guards and an unarmed population ought to be the safest place to be then right??

Back to the fact I don't oppose all guns.

 

[CattleArmy]

You having internet in your home is not necessary. Are you in favor of banning everything that is not necessary?

I'd get a lot more done at home. Some would get a lot more done at the ranch and think of the stuff that would get done at the bank. Mayor you might be on to something.

 

[Larrry]

I'm giving up my right as I'm giving yours away if you want to look at it like that.

You do not have the right to give my rights away. PERIOD

 

[Sandhusker]

Here's where I am with you CRM 100%. The right is arguing the wrong things -- sex, abortion, stem cell research, guns.

There are MAJOR things that affect everyone of us in terms of health, standard of living, our children's future.

And these ain't them.

You guys on the right are weakening your position and sidelining yourselves imho.

Getting into people's bedrooms, telling people that their teenagers have to practice abstinence instead of using condoms, yelling loudly for the "right" to have an automated weapon... You are detracting from your ability to be heard on the economy.

Haven't you been the one starting most of the threads on stem cells?

Fine, lets talk the economy. What did FDR's Treasury Secretary have to say about those very same policies that Obama is following now? What do the Japanese call the 90s, where they tried the very same thing Obama is doing now? What effect on the economy is Obama's cap and trade on carbon going to have? What has happend to revenues every time capital gains taxes have been raised? What effect on job creation will you have when you raise the taxes of those that create the most jobs? Sure, let's talk about the economy, Reader.

 

[CattleArmy]

I'm giving up my right as I'm giving yours away if you want to look at it like that.

You do not have the right to give my rights away. PERIOD

Oh Larry.......................you just told me if i'm giving up mine I"m giving up yours. So bye bye. :wave:

 

[Larrry]

It's sad that narrow minded people do not cherish and stand by their rights. I can not do anything about narrow mionded people like that. I can have say so about you or anyone trying to take or give my rights away. It's not going to happen

 

[Sandhusker]

You having internet in your home is not necessary. Are you in favor of banning everything that is not necessary?

I'd get a lot more done at home. Some would get a lot more done at the ranch and think of the stuff that would get done at the bank. Mayor you might be on to something.

My point is that whether something is necessary or not has nothing to do with whether it should be allowed or not, and if you're going to be fine with other people's unnecessary things being taken away, you ought to try that shoe on for size first.

 

[kolanuraven]

You having internet in your home is not necessary. Are you in favor of banning everything that is not necessary?

I'd get a lot more done at home. Some would get a lot more done at the ranch and think of the stuff that would get done at the bank. Mayor you might be on to something.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[CattleArmy]

You having internet in your home is not necessary. Are you in favor of banning everything that is not necessary?

I'd get a lot more done at home. Some would get a lot more done at the ranch and think of the stuff that would get done at the bank. Mayor you might be on to something.

My point is that whether something is necessary or not has nothing to do with whether it should be allowed or not, and if you're going to be fine with other people's unnecessary things being taken away, you ought to try that shoe on for size first.

Wouldn't that be placing needs before wants. Sometimes especially in the financial world it's smarter to go with needs then wants. Mayor I think you are on to something.

 

[Sandhusker]

In your world, there is no place for wants. If Big Brother says it's unneccessary, it simply isn't availiable. That would be a great place to live, don't you think? I'm sure that's what Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson, et al envisioned.

 

[CattleArmy]

It's not that there is no place for wants in this world we live in. It's just that the point I have been trying to make is myself I would rather fight the fight that will ensure that the needs of my family, such as utilities, are met over everyone having automatic and hand guns. It's making priorities.

 

[Lonecowboy]

Well since we obviously cannot change the Constitution or any Amendment because they are tablets brought down from Mt Sinai, we'll have to rescind the vote for women and slaves...

What are you people crazy thinking that owning guns is a RIGHT?

It's a privilege that most of the world thankfully does not have or else there would be more murder and crime than there is.

I'm proud to be opposed to widespread gun ownership.

You can have the privilege of owning a gun if you are mentally stable, keep it locked up, register it, and have never committed a crime.

Certain guns are not necessary for anyone except the military or SWAT.

The way your silly logic works, no matter what crazy weapon they invent, you are claiming that you have a RIGHT to own and use it because some dude in 1780 or so centuries before that type of weapon was invented asserted your right to bear arms in a particular social context.

And I am not arguing with you on my opinion. It's my OPINION and by the way there are entire countries who agree with me.

The American Revolution refers to the political upheaval during the last half of the 18th century in which the Thirteen Colonies of North America overthrew the governance of the British Empire and then rejected the British monarchy to become the sovereign United States of America. In this period the colonies first rejected the authority of the Parliament of Great Britain to govern them without representation, and formed self-governing independent states. These states then joined against the British to defend that self-governance in the armed conflict from 1775 to 1783 known as the American Revolutionary War. This resulted in the independent states uniting to form one nation, breaking away from the empire in 1776 with the Declaration of Independence.

In the United States, the Bill of Rights is the name by which the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution are known. They were introduced by James Madison to the First United States Congress in 1789 as a series of constitutional amendments, and came into effect on December 15, 1791, when they had been ratified by three-fourths of the States. Thomas Jefferson was the main proponent of the Bill of Rights.
The Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion, forbids infringement of the right to keep and bear arms, by Congress or citizens in a federal territory and prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

Since the Bill of Rights was written just six years after America's fierce battle for independence, the intent was for the citizens to be fully as well armed as any standing army, either foreign or domestic.

Gun laws are for each independant state to choose, not the Federal Government which is prohibited from doing so.

 

[Mike]

Good post Yanuck. :wink:

 

[Steve]

Here's where I am with you CRM 100%. The right is arguing the wrong things -- sex, abortion, stem cell research, guns.

There are MAJOR things that affect everyone of us in terms of health, standard of living, our children's future.

And these ain't them.

You guys on the right are weakening your position and sidelining yourselves imho.

Getting into people's bedrooms, telling people that their teenagers have to practice abstinence instead of using condoms, yelling loudly for the "right" to have an automated weapon... You are detracting from your ability to be heard on the economy.

then why is Obama spending time supporting and signing bills, writing and signing executive orders, holding press conferences, and spending money on those same issues?

Either is he stupid, out of touch and wasting time, or do they matter?

 

[Steve]

It's not that there is no place for wants in this world we live in. It's just that the point I have been trying to make is myself I would rather fight the fight that will ensure that the needs of my family, such as utilities, are met over everyone having automatic and hand guns. It's making priorities.

and if Obama and the liberal congress/senate would stick to that they might just get some support..

so in the mean time we also have to waste time defending our rights.. sad isn't it.. cause and effect...

 

[Steve]

Well since we obviously cannot change the Constitution or any Amendment because they are tablets brought down from Mt Sinai, we'll have to rescind the vote for women and slaves...

What are you people crazy thinking that owning guns is a RIGHT?

It's a privilege that most of the world thankfully does not have or else there would be more murder and crime than there is.

I'm proud to be opposed to widespread gun ownership.

You can have the privilege of owning a gun if you are mentally stable, keep it locked up, register it, and have never committed a crime.

Certain guns are not necessary for anyone except the military or SWAT.

The way your silly logic works, no matter what crazy weapon they invent, you are claiming that you have a RIGHT to own and use it because some dude in 1780 or so centuries before that type of weapon was invented asserted your right to bear arms in a particular social context.

And I am not arguing with you on my opinion. It's my OPINION and by the way there are entire countries who agree with me.

maybe we should just give our sovereignty to the UN while we're at it?

care to give up a few more rights.. such as freedom of speech? alot of countries think it's bad.. same with free press.. and freedom of religion...

sometimes you have to go against the world view and fight for everyone's rights even if you disagree with them..

I think everyone should have the right to free speech, even if I wished a bunch of them would shut up..

 

[Sandhusker]

A person could make the statement, "I think that women should have less rights than men" and your statement of, "It's my OPINION and by the way there are entire countries who agree with me." is just as true. How much do you want to follow other countries?

 

[Ben H]

I"d like to here some comments on the point I made about the anti-gunners wanting us to be divided. Standing together and not compromising on gun rights is what is needed. If we allow them to ban the so called "assault" rifles, then handguns, they will be able to go after hunters. "A real hunter hunts with a bow", "you don't need to shoot an animal from so far away, that's not hunting". I could see them going after scoped rifles labeling them "sniper" rifles. They won't stop until we look like England and Australia. If those countries are so great, why are they here and not there?

 

[hypocritexposer]

Ben, what is needed is to get back to basics. You either believe in the rights and freedoms that the Constitution outlines or you don't.

If a further definition of "gun" is needed, then amend the Constitution first.

This goes for all Constitutional issues. I don't see this as a "gun" issue, but as a Constitutional issue. If the 2nd amendment rights can be taken away without debate, or under false intentions, then the whole of the Constitution may as well go also.

I believe Sandhusker's question is a valid one, "What issues/problems would restricting gun ownership accomplish?"

Canada has experimented with a "Gun Registry", which is now under review. It was "sold" to the people as legislation that would reduce gun related crimes. It has been proven to be a waste of money, with no benefit of reducing gun related crime. The only criminals that were charged, were those 'criminals" that it created, by having them not register their "long rifles"