Wiredog
US Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2012
- Messages
- 127
- Reaction score
- 37
That's France and France is ......well....France, really friendly people there....
We have a choice to make if we want to keep our guns
- Thread starter Gunzilla
- Start date
- Status
That's France and France is ......well....France, really friendly people there....
"Need to concede"? You're kidding me, right?
I am not against securing firearms. I guess that is about all of your premise that I agree with, but I know your heart is in the right place - at least I think it is.
Compromise assumes both sides are willing to give up something. What are the anti's giving up?
I'd like a link to the 400,000 figure.
I'd like a link to the 400,000 figure.
Last edited:
mg357
Absent Comrade
What those of us who can't afford a gun safe or don't have a place to put a gunsafe in our home. What will we do?
Safes are good however---
A friend of mine had his entire 1600lb safe stolen from his home by guys using a U-Haul van and a push-type forklift they stole form a rental company. The safe cost him $6500.
Also, many older homes, mobile homes, condos and apartments have floors or stairways that cannot possibly support the weight of a decent size actual gun safe. Security cabinets sure, but the average gun safe weighs over 800lbs. Is everyone with a home with a floor load limit now supposed to get rid of all their guns?
When laws allow piece of garbage criminals to sue homeowners if they are attacked by the family pet while committing a burglary and fault the homeowner for not making their property into a veritable Fort Knox there is something terribly wrong.
PS in a home that has any minor children or visits from minor children all weapons of any type need to be secured! People don't teach their children correct firearm responsibility like they did thirty years ago.
A friend of mine had his entire 1600lb safe stolen from his home by guys using a U-Haul van and a push-type forklift they stole form a rental company. The safe cost him $6500.
Also, many older homes, mobile homes, condos and apartments have floors or stairways that cannot possibly support the weight of a decent size actual gun safe. Security cabinets sure, but the average gun safe weighs over 800lbs. Is everyone with a home with a floor load limit now supposed to get rid of all their guns?
When laws allow piece of garbage criminals to sue homeowners if they are attacked by the family pet while committing a burglary and fault the homeowner for not making their property into a veritable Fort Knox there is something terribly wrong.
PS in a home that has any minor children or visits from minor children all weapons of any type need to be secured! People don't teach their children correct firearm responsibility like they did thirty years ago.
stumper
US Veteran
I have a gun safe, two of them in fact. I strongly encourage those who have valueable guns to buy one if you can. BUT, I sure has hell do not and will not ,store my home defense guns under a lock. That is purely idiotic. How do I protect myself and my family if all my guns are locked in a safe????
We need, this country needs, to have some serious discussion on violent crime alright but it needs to start with some facts. FACT - 40-60 years ago we hard far less restrictions on firearms than we do today and we did not have this kind of evil occur. WHY????? Maybe we should start here with this question....
We need, this country needs, to have some serious discussion on violent crime alright but it needs to start with some facts. FACT - 40-60 years ago we hard far less restrictions on firearms than we do today and we did not have this kind of evil occur. WHY????? Maybe we should start here with this question....
Sebago Son
Member
Yup... This. Exactly.
I think we can guess at the answer to this... Not one damn thing.
The only reasonable compromise is no compromise at all.
I think we can guess at the answer to this... Not one damn thing.
The only reasonable compromise is no compromise at all.
andrewb70
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2012
- Messages
- 433
- Reaction score
- 211
Please do not take anything that I am about to say to imply that my heart does not ache over this tragedy. I have two kids and I cannot fathom what the parents are going through. However, this does not mean that all of a sudden my rational ability is going out the window and my emotions will guide my decision making. This should apply to all of us and to all policy makers.
Let us take a deep breath and remember that the Constitution does not grant us any rights. End of story, period. The Bill of Right should more aptly be called the Bill of Limiting Federal Government powers. The ten amendments that comprise the bill of rights enumerate 10 specific rights that the federal government will not have any power over. End of story, period. The fact that the federal government regulates anything related to guns is a complete abomination of the Constitution. The frames of the constitution were very clear as to the meaning and the intent of the 2nd amendment. It has zero to do with crime and 100% to do with the fear of the federal government becoming tyrannical. This is very well documented in the Federalist and the anti-federalist papers. Why in the world does the federal government want to ban rifles when they only account for about 3% of all murders? The ultimate goal of the federal government is the complete disarmament of the citizenry. End of story, period.
Andrew
Let us take a deep breath and remember that the Constitution does not grant us any rights. End of story, period. The Bill of Right should more aptly be called the Bill of Limiting Federal Government powers. The ten amendments that comprise the bill of rights enumerate 10 specific rights that the federal government will not have any power over. End of story, period. The fact that the federal government regulates anything related to guns is a complete abomination of the Constitution. The frames of the constitution were very clear as to the meaning and the intent of the 2nd amendment. It has zero to do with crime and 100% to do with the fear of the federal government becoming tyrannical. This is very well documented in the Federalist and the anti-federalist papers. Why in the world does the federal government want to ban rifles when they only account for about 3% of all murders? The ultimate goal of the federal government is the complete disarmament of the citizenry. End of story, period.
Andrew
andrewb70
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2012
- Messages
- 433
- Reaction score
- 211
GF
Member
cowboy85306
Member
The idea is to go through the motions so they can draw conclusions that bring us to a "national crisis" and something resembling martial law.
James&theGiant1911
Member
These meltdowns come so fast it just messes you up, no one is going to outlaw guns, no one is even going to say you can not own a gun but you can not own a gun with a large cap magazine. Kind of like Tombstone.
What did you all do when the ban was on in the 90s, if it comes back then you all will be safe and grandfathered in, do not understand the fascination with this particular gun but I can see the reasons for its ban and understand/ emphasize with responsible gun supporting politicians wanting to limit its access.
What did you all do when the ban was on in the 90s, if it comes back then you all will be safe and grandfathered in, do not understand the fascination with this particular gun but I can see the reasons for its ban and understand/ emphasize with responsible gun supporting politicians wanting to limit its access.
Andrews quote was right on. When it comes to gun control with Obama it is not about guns it is about control. Obama wants a big government model like the European model where people are wards of the big government and government is in total control. I spent many years working with many politicians so I know how they think.
The one area we have not discussed, regardless of what firearms regulation congress agrees to, is the courts role in interpretation of what congress passes. I believe that is why Obama appointed Biden to form a group to study this issue and demanded it be ready in January. That tells me they are planning a big change because they want to strike while the iron is hot. Also they are getting as much talent together to craft this Gun law so it meets any set of court challenges.
The three types of challenges the new gun law may face are those about the second amendment interpretation, those from states with conflicting laws and those from individuals. Most individual challenges will be laid aside. But based on uniformity of interpretation states rights may present the biggest legal challenge to federal gun control because of their current roles in gun registration and title grants.
And based on what we have seen from Obama in first term here is what I expect: We will all be regulated by home land security and expected to meet strict Federal and State gun ownership guide lines and regulations meant to discourage gun ownership. And yes we will all have to have a psychological profile and evaluation done on each of us so they can do CYA if anything goes wrong.
The one area we have not discussed, regardless of what firearms regulation congress agrees to, is the courts role in interpretation of what congress passes. I believe that is why Obama appointed Biden to form a group to study this issue and demanded it be ready in January. That tells me they are planning a big change because they want to strike while the iron is hot. Also they are getting as much talent together to craft this Gun law so it meets any set of court challenges.
The three types of challenges the new gun law may face are those about the second amendment interpretation, those from states with conflicting laws and those from individuals. Most individual challenges will be laid aside. But based on uniformity of interpretation states rights may present the biggest legal challenge to federal gun control because of their current roles in gun registration and title grants.
And based on what we have seen from Obama in first term here is what I expect: We will all be regulated by home land security and expected to meet strict Federal and State gun ownership guide lines and regulations meant to discourage gun ownership. And yes we will all have to have a psychological profile and evaluation done on each of us so they can do CYA if anything goes wrong.
jlrhiner
US Veteran
What part of it's not the tool it's the operator don't you get?
An AR-15 is the same action as a 10-22, a Benelli shotgun, an M1 Garand or any of about 100 other firearms in manufacture today and enjoyed by millions of folks whose guns have never fired a shot in anger!
Did you by any chance check out the FBI website and see how many homicides were committed by nuts with rifles? The tool is not the problem. Should we outlaw cars that go faster than the speed limit?
Please, use your head. Even the President in his address admitted that this proposed ban will not stop this type of crime. So then what?
James, I have been in many meetings with government. Government is trying to do what they call Damage Control or what the military calls Limited Collateral Damage. By limiting the number of bullets in use at any one time with a gun they believe the incidental destruction is limited in future incidents (like Connecticut). This means less press, less related civilian relationships and a more manageable damage scene when guns are used the wrong way.
Sebago Son
Member
Just like that, buy a safe(because Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein say that'll be good enough) and they'll be gracious and ALLOW us to keep our Constitutionally protected firearms? Yeah, sure
Oh,don't forget the psych eval......anything else?
Joe Biden has been put in charge with developing gun policy, I don't think a safe is going to stop his agenda, look at his history towards gun owners.
I think that a mandatory psych eval should be required to head up this commission...
Last edited by a moderator:
Sebago Son
Member
Concessions? Really? We have been giving ground since 1968. I think it's time for THEM to make some concessions.
The solutions to the problem of school shootings is simple. Harden the target. What do you think of that?
The only "RESONABLE COMPROMISE IS NO COMPROMISE AT ALL".
Me thinks we have smoked out another mole...
Sebago Son
Member
Not YOU Again...
BULLSHIRT.
If they see weakness in our ranks they will come by with box trailer and pick them all up.
You can see reasons for this ban? Really, REALLY? I think you really need to flush out your headgear or go on back to Huffington Post or Daily Cos and report back that we aren't taking subversion very well...
BULLSHIRT.
If they see weakness in our ranks they will come by with box trailer and pick them all up.
You can see reasons for this ban? Really, REALLY? I think you really need to flush out your headgear or go on back to Huffington Post or Daily Cos and report back that we aren't taking subversion very well...
- Status
Similar threads
