Gun Control

[backhoeboogie]

This is not about knowing what's in your sights.

Please don't get this thread locked up.

I just read a long yarn by someone who wants to ban all guns. Period. She has a whole bunch of people on her band wagon too. Inner city types it seems. Any new rulings or control will not be enough. They want it all. They are going to take whatever they get, then keep going for more. They will not stop.

So if you think some new background ruling is reasonable, just remember there are people you cannot reason with out there. They have never faced off against grizzly bears or rabid animals or feral hogs. Not even a copper head.

 

[john250]

IndyStar cartoonist Gary Varvel (varvel.com) hit it on the head. 1st panel, we need gun control legislation (w/ pic of US capitol. 2nd pic, "we need guns" with ciizens lined up outside a gun store. Barry has sold more guns than Smith and Wesson.

 

[James T]

Nor have they ever faced off with someone intent on taking their life.

"It's funny that _____ and his deputies have been adamant that we must not sacrifice American values in the fight against mystery extremism when they're so willing to destroy the First and Second Amendment in the process."

It's sad that these anti-gun folks will place so much energy into that effort and very little effort in fixing our obviously broken immigration system.

I have friend that is adamant about taking in the refugees; 'the poor children' and the like. And yet, just this morning,I read a Syrian man's story of how he finally got himself, wife and children out and over to Turkey into safe haven. He said the Daesh had kids 10 years old with AK 47's patrolling the streets - 'the poor children'. How in the heck would we ever know if a refugee child has been influenced by the radicals? And the same folks that want these refugees also want to restrict my ability to purchase a defensive weapon? No.

And the no fly list? :lol: :help: At first glance. it's a no brainer right? " No one on the no fly list should have the right to purchase a weapon in the US." Sounds reasonable to me. So why isn't that happening? The anti gun people are all over this one too, failing to look any deeper than at a superficial level. So, without mentioning any politicians, parties etc the reasons that law was not passed are? (there are valid reasons!)

This is not about knowing what's in your sights.

Please don't get this thread locked up.

I just read a long yarn by someone who wants to ban all guns. Period. She has a whole bunch of people on her band wagon too. Inner city types it seems. Any new rulings or control will not be enough. They want it all. They are going to take whatever they get, then keep going for more. They will not stop.

So if you think some new background ruling is reasonable, just remember there are people you cannot reason with out there. They have never faced off against grizzly bears or rabid animals or feral hogs. Not even a copper head.

 

[ram]

Anyone on the no fly list needs to be sent packing, we don't need them here. We need the politicians "our leaders to lead by example" no guns for them or their bodyguards. Let's start there and see how they like it. Without guns our freedom is lost. And the government will have full and total control of our lives. I'm not going to compromise on the gun issue, I have been pushed around by the government enough already and I ain't taking it no more.

 

[backhoeboogie]

We need the politicians "our leaders to lead by example" no guns for them or their bodyguards. Let's start there and see how they like it.

Police forces too for the inner city people who are dead set against guns.

 

[ram]

I think we as a family could survive without a government, power, fuel or money. But there's no way my family can survive without guns. It wouldn't be easy or nice but for the most part you could do what needs done to survive. Maybe?

 

[TexasBred]

Do a search on what it takes to get an existing constitutional amendment removed from the constitution .

 

[ram]

The amendments won't be deleted, just restructured to prohibit the general public of their rights. It all depends on how the supreme court interprets the amendments to the Constitution. TB, you know way more about the Constitution and history than I ever will. What measures do you think they're going to take to ban or restrestrict gun ownership?

 

[Commercialfarmer]

You don't need an automatic weapon to hunt or for protection.

You don't need a semiautomatic weapon to hunt.

No gun needs to hold more than 30 rounds to hunt with or for self protection.

No gun needs more than 10 rounds to hunt with or for self protection.

No gun needs more than 5 rounds to hunt with.

Rifles in populated areas should be outlawed for deer hunting because the bullets travel too far and shotguns are safer.

Rifles are dangerous and should be outlawed in populated areas.

Calibers capable of penetrating police body armor should be illegal.

A background check should be required to purchase a gun.

It should be illegal to purchase a gun as a gift.

It should be illegal to hand down a gun to a family member.

There should a long gun registry.

There should a hand gun registry.

Hand guns are not used for hunting and should be outlawed so that criminals will not have access to them.

Physicians should be required by law to inquire about mental status of each patient with each visit and record their response in the electronic medical chart of the searchable national database.

Physicians should be required by law to ask if an individual owns firearms with each visit.

People should have to obtain a federal license and prove mental stability to purchase a gun for hunting.

People should have to prove profiency with handling a gun before they can get a federal license to buy one.

People should have to take lessons provided by the government at the cost of the individual of at least 10 hours before being allowed to sit for a proficiency exam.

Anyone that has been depressed should not be awarded a license to purchase a gun.

Any veteran should be deemed too dangerous and unstable to be issued a license to purchase a gun.

Anyone that has seen a counselor should be considered unstable for gun ownership.

It should be illegal to store more than 50 rounds of ammunition.

Not bad for 5 minutes of thought for "common sense" regulations. I could probably have 95% of all guns or gun owners considered criminal.

For some reason, people don't recognize any of these as the equivalents of free speech zones that they are.

No where does the second amendment say anything about personal protection or hunting but to those that aren't paying attention, the arguments start to sound almost logical and sincere.

 

[Kingfisher]

Is her name Billary?

 

[dun]

to those that aren't paying attention, the arguments start to sound almost logical and sincere.

And that's the problem. A lie told often enough gets to be believed as the truth. Too many of those making laws are not really knowledgable about the subject. Kind of like "We'll have to pass it to know what's in it"

 

[greybeard]

Do a search on what it takes to get an existing constitutional amendment removed from the constitution .

It's not, and never has been about deleting it--but as in all rights, has always been all about eroding it or weakening it to the point it is just a shadow of it's original image and nothing like what the wise founding fathers intended.
My life, is almost run so it matters little what an adverse govt or weak kneed group may chose to do, but I've always taken a very long view of things and events--those things that may affect my grandchildren, great grandchildren and the distant future of the country. Beware of those who always nod their heads approvingly at little changes.

beware indeed

 

[greybeard]

to those that aren't paying attention, the arguments start to sound almost logical and sincere.

And that's the problem. A lie told often enough gets to be believed as the truth. Too many of those making laws are not really knowledgable about the subject. Kind of like "We'll have to pass it to know what's in it"

There was a govt guy a couple years ago that said go ahead and pass it like it is "the American people are too stupid to understand the difference".
He was 1/2 right. He could have went ahead and added, "and some just won't care anyway."

 

[backhoeboogie]

Not bad for 5 minutes of thought for "common sense" regulations. I could probably have 95% of all guns or gun owners considered criminal.

For some reason, people don't recognize any of these as the equivalents of free speech zones that they are.

No where does the second amendment say anything about personal protection or hunting but to those that aren't paying attention, the arguments start to sound almost logical and sincere.

Take all those points, make them law, and add it to all the existing laws, and many people are still not satisfied. That is not enough for them. It won't stop. Ever.

 

[lavacarancher]

I assume this post is in connection to the San Bernardino event? How in Gods name did the dumocrats make the leap to gun control from the action that took place in Ca? If there is a connection then why not ban box cutters (911 weapon of choice), pressure cookers (weapon container for the Boston bombing) or a machete (weapon of choice for the terrorist in london a couple of years ago). By the way, the soldiers he killed did not have guns. This is like putting Daniel (us) in the ring with lions (them) without any means of defense.

I've said this before but it's worth saying again. If the end goal is to save human life (banning weapons) then why not go for the big ticket item like automobiles. Tens of thousands die in wrecks while only a few hundred die from guns. And most of the ones who get killed have or had no means of self defense. This is absolutely insane.

 

[greybeard]

Terrorists overseas shoot people in some of the most gun restricted cities on earth and they blame the terrorist.
Terrorists here shoot someone and they automatically blame the gun.
Will always be plenty of bloodshed even without guns.
Current intifada carried out by Palestinians against Israelis involves mostly knives.

Rwanda genocide, over a period of approximately 100 days, between 500,000 and 1,000,000 Tutsi and politically moderate Hutu were killed, almost exclusively with machetes and farm tools. When the Army ran the radical Hutus out, they abandoned their weapons at the border before crossing in to Tanzania.

 

[backhoeboogie]

I assume this post is in connection to the San Bernardino event? How in Gods name did the dumocrats make the leap to gun control from the action that took place in Ca? If there is a connection then why not ban box cutters (911 weapon of choice), pressure cookers (weapon container for the Boston bombing) or a machete (weapon of choice for the terrorist in london a couple of years ago). By the way, the soldiers he killed did not have guns. This is like putting Daniel (us) in the ring with lions (them) without any means of defense.

I've said this before but it's worth saying again. If the end goal is to save human life (banning weapons) then why not go for the big ticket item like automobiles. Tens of thousands die in wrecks while only a few hundred die from guns. And most of the ones who get killed have or had no means of self defense. This is absolutely insane.

Actually I started this post based on reading a yarn from someone who is dead set on taking up all fire arms. Guns are only good for killing. The same thing can be said for a fly swatter.

Edit: But people are free to discuss whatever. Guns affect each and everyone of us differently. I use them simply as tools on the day to day farm activities. I hope I never have to use one to defend myself against humans, but it could happen.

 

[TexasBred]

Terrorists overseas shoot people in some of the most gun restricted cities on earth and they blame the terrorist.
Terrorists here shoot someone and they automatically blame the gun.
Will always be plenty of bloodshed even without guns.
Current intifada carried out by Palestinians against Israelis involves mostly knives.

Rwanda genocide, over a period of approximately 100 days, between 500,000 and 1,000,000 Tutsi and politically moderate Hutu were killed, almost exclusively with machetes and farm tools. When the Army ran the radical Hutus out, they abandoned their weapons at the border before crossing in to Tanzania.

Politicians and libs fail to understand that anything can be a deadly weapon so they concentrate on and sensationalize the one that gets them the most attention. People intent on killing simply use whatever is most convenient many times with the same result of using a sophisticated weapon.

 

[hurleyjd]

I assume this post is in connection to the San Bernardino event? How in Gods name did the dumocrats make the leap to gun control from the action that took place in Ca? If there is a connection then why not ban box cutters (911 weapon of choice), pressure cookers (weapon container for the Boston bombing) or a machete (weapon of choice for the terrorist in london a couple of years ago). By the way, the soldiers he killed did not have guns. This is like putting Daniel (us) in the ring with lions (them) without any means of defense.

I've said this before but it's worth saying again. If the end goal is to save human life (banning weapons) then why not go for the big ticket item like automobiles. Tens of thousands die in wrecks while only a few hundred die from guns. And most of the ones who get killed have or had no means of self defense. This is absolutely insane.

Actually I started this post based on reading a yarn from someone who is dead set on taking up all fire arms. Guns are only good for killing. The same thing can be said for a fly swatter.

Edit: But people are free to discuss whatever. Guns affect each and everyone of us differently. I use them simply as tools on the day to day farm activities. I hope I never have to use one to defend myself against humans, but it could happen.[/quot

I use the 12 guage to shoot holes in the ground to set t-post. Have been doing it since home depot ran out of post holes.

 

[1wlimo]

I think that asking for gun control because 2 out of 352 mass shootings this year is dumb,

asking for at least some training due to the 52 shooting by toddlers is much more appropriate.

May be I am just cheap but I see no reason for 30 rounds in a magazine, I kind of want to hit what I am shooting at. Would have to say that it may worry me that if I was in a place where there was trouble and "joe blogs" was armed and going to intercede that they knew what they were doing, and not make things worse.