Gun Control

Help Support CattleToday:

Beef11

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,139
Reaction score
0
Location
Idahome
These two statements from you are inane and absurd.

First, of course there are laws against outlaw criminals having guns. Duh!

Second, there is a law about "outlawing" guns from the law abiding...the constitutional right stating the right to bear arms. Again, Duh!

You make absolutely no point here.

Alice

You must not follow what has been going on for the past couple decades. First off there are MANY people who want your guns and my guns taken away from us. That is what the thread originally refered to. DUH! Secondly All of the legislation about gun control in recent years blankets all gun owners together, Criminal and non criminal they want to make guns illegal. OK understand? Yes the constitution does guarantee the right to bear arms again the same group wants that changed. DUH! do you live in a cave? Next time you want to be condescending try and know something about what you are talking about.
 

Alice

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
6,662
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Beef11":2nbyjzyx said:
These two statements from you are inane and absurd.

First, of course there are laws against outlaw criminals having guns. Duh!

Second, there is a law about "outlawing" guns from the law abiding...the constitutional right stating the right to bear arms. Again, Duh!

You make absolutely no point here.

Alice

You must not follow what has been going on for the past couple decades. First off there are MANY people who want your guns and my guns taken away from us. That is what the thread originally refered to. DUH! Secondly All of the legislation about gun control in recent years blankets all gun owners together, Criminal and non criminal they want to make guns illegal. OK understand? Yes the constitution does guarantee the right to bear arms again the same group wants that changed. DUH! do you live in a cave? Next time you want to be condescending try and know something about what you are talking about.

I know what I am talking about. There are laws against criminals owning guns. Period. The constitution provides a United States citizen that is not a criminal the right to bear arms, meaning guns...period. You are a crackpot. Period.

Alice
 

Beef11

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,139
Reaction score
0
Location
Idahome
Who wants to make guns illegal?

I know what I am talking about. There are laws against criminals owning guns. Period. The constitution provides a United States citizen the right to bear arms, meaning guns...period. You are a crackpot. Period.

Alice

Who wants to make guns illegal? How about John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. They both have strong anti gun stances trying to take your second ammendmant rights away. I thought everyone knew that. Yes criminals are regulated against owning guns, my prior statemant was hinting at the idea of banning guns only takes the guns from everyone but the people using them for criminal activity. I'm sorry you have no idea what is happening around you. Period
 

marimus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2006
Messages
90
Reaction score
0
Location
Toogoolawah, Queensland, Australia
The stuff regarding Australia is just plain Bull.

Its not as though we don't have guns now, we just can't buy automatic (full or semi) rifles, or pump action shotguns (unless you have a disability that makes reloading difficult).

And you can't just go and buy a gun any time you want. You need to have a genuine need for it. That means you have to be a member of a club, or go hunting or have a farm etc.
 

chrisy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
11,543
Reaction score
2
Location
England United Kingdom
marimus":1n2p7zdi said:
The stuff regarding Australia is just plain Bull.

Its not as though we don't have guns now, we just can't buy automatic (full or semi) rifles, or pump action shotguns (unless you have a disability that makes reloading difficult).

And you can't just go and buy a gun any time you want. You need to have a genuine need for it. That means you have to be a member of a club, or go hunting or have a farm etc.

It sounds very much like our rules here in England, and if you read the Statistics they have been exagirated by a certain group of people, by going around and asking individuals on the street not getting the facts from the Authorities. of cause peole will say I know someone who knows someone who.....etc, it is human nature, and a lot of people exagerate. so how can this be fact.
 

msscamp

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
10,701
Reaction score
0
Location
Wyoming
Alice":17cs6pgc said:
Beef11":17cs6pgc said:
These two statements from you are inane and absurd.

First, of course there are laws against outlaw criminals having guns. Duh!

Second, there is a law about "outlawing" guns from the law abiding...the constitutional right stating the right to bear arms. Again, Duh!

You make absolutely no point here.

Alice

You must not follow what has been going on for the past couple decades. First off there are MANY people who want your guns and my guns taken away from us. That is what the thread originally refered to. DUH! Secondly All of the legislation about gun control in recent years blankets all gun owners together, Criminal and non criminal they want to make guns illegal. OK understand? Yes the constitution does guarantee the right to bear arms again the same group wants that changed. DUH! do you live in a cave? Next time you want to be condescending try and know something about what you are talking about.

I know what I am talking about. There are laws against criminals owning guns. Period. The constitution provides a United States citizen that is not a criminal the right to bear arms, meaning guns...period. You are a crackpot. Period.

Alice

Alice, Beef11 is not a crackpot - the Constitution can always be amended (it wouldn't be the first, nor will it be the last) to wipe out the rights provided by the 2nd Amendment - and that is what the gun control enthusiasts (for lack of a better word) are trying to do. So far, those amendments haven't passed - but that doesn't mean they won't in the future. Look at the Brady Bill - it requires a 10 day (I think) waiting period. When you consider that a person used to be able to walk into a gun shop, purchase a firearm, and take it home that day - isn't that a form of gun control? I agree that guns need to be kept out of the hands of criminals, but the fact of the matter (as far as I can tell, anyway) is that new laws on this matter are only going to affect law-abiding citizens and not the criminal element, because the criminal element purchase their guns through illegal channels, usually. I may be wrong on that, but I don't think so.
 

Beef11

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,139
Reaction score
0
Location
Idahome
Guest25- Why do you get on every post i am on and just try and insult me? It seems this thread is about gun control. I don't see what you coming on hear looking for a chance at cheap shotting me has to do with firearms. Maybe you should make an attempt at pretending to care about the thread instead of trying to annoy.
 

Beef11

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,139
Reaction score
0
Location
Idahome
Read your first post again you never mentioned guns
and this guy gives out information about cattle. he makes statements about piedmontese just as crazy. he must be living in a bubble or nursing one of two bottles.

go figure.

mss camp i would not call him a crack pot simply one who shoots from the hip.

it would be belittleing to the crack pots to put him in the same category with them.

Never mentioned policy either, it seems like you jumped in and made some "crazy" "statements". For the record aren't you the guy who can't send PM's because you just harass people with them? How long till they ban you?

Beef11 said
my prior statemant was hinting at the idea of banning guns only takes the guns from everyone but the people using them for criminal activity

Guest25 then said
there ought to be a law against criminals having guns,

i mean thats only been a law for how many years.

Back to gun control, bring up the issue.
 

Alice

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
6,662
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
msscamp":3retub5m said:
Alice":3retub5m said:
Beef11":3retub5m said:
These two statements from you are inane and absurd.

First, of course there are laws against outlaw criminals having guns. Duh!

Second, there is a law about "outlawing" guns from the law abiding...the constitutional right stating the right to bear arms. Again, Duh!

You make absolutely no point here.

Alice

You must not follow what has been going on for the past couple decades. First off there are MANY people who want your guns and my guns taken away from us. That is what the thread originally refered to. DUH! Secondly All of the legislation about gun control in recent years blankets all gun owners together, Criminal and non criminal they want to make guns illegal. OK understand? Yes the constitution does guarantee the right to bear arms again the same group wants that changed. DUH! do you live in a cave? Next time you want to be condescending try and know something about what you are talking about.

I know what I am talking about. There are laws against criminals owning guns. Period. The constitution provides a United States citizen that is not a criminal the right to bear arms, meaning guns...period. You are a crackpot. Period.

Alice

Alice, Beef11 is not a crackpot - the Constitution can always be amended (it wouldn't be the first, nor will it be the last) to wipe out the rights provided by the 2nd Amendment - and that is what the gun control enthusiasts (for lack of a better word) are trying to do. So far, those amendments haven't passed - but that doesn't mean they won't in the future. Look at the Brady Bill - it requires a 10 day (I think) waiting period. When you consider that a person used to be able to walk into a gun shop, purchase a firearm, and take it home that day - isn't that a form of gun control? I agree that guns need to be kept out of the hands of criminals, but the fact of the matter (as far as I can tell, anyway) is that new laws on this matter are only going to affect law-abiding citizens and not the criminal element, because the criminal element purchase their guns through illegal channels, usually. I may be wrong on that, but I don't think so.

I know what you are saying, msscamp, and I agree with that. It's just that the statements made by Beef11 were made as absolutes. Of course amendments can be made to any of the rights in the bill of rights, but as of yet the right to bear arms is still with us. The Brady Bill targeted handguns, not long arms. Personally, I will never believe that the United States will "outlaw" guns; the law abiding citizens won't stand for it, and rightfully so. I also believe that absolute, crackpot statments such as Beef11 seems so intent on making cause more harm than good to the law abiding gun owner in keeping that right.

Alice
 
OP
I

icandoit

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
496
Reaction score
1
Location
Tx
Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.


Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.


Amendment XI
The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.




Dick (NO GUN CONTROL) Austin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

mtncows

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Messages
394
Reaction score
0
Location
virginia mountains
Here is a novel thought.Let's stop trying to take away rights of law-abiding citizens of one of the greatest nations on earth and,instead,punish severely those who choose to misuse their rights and infringe upon the rights of others to life and liberty.
 

Beef11

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,139
Reaction score
0
Location
Idahome
The Brady Bill targeted handguns, not long arms. Personally, I will never believe that the United States will "outlaw" guns; the law abiding citizens won't stand for it, and rightfully so

They won't come out and take them all at once, it will be alittle at a time. The brady bill made it so you couldn't buy anything more than a ten round clip for your .22 made the rabbit hunters upset. Both handguns and rifles were affected by the Brady bill.


but as of yet the right to bear arms is still with us.

In most places it is. Try having a gun in your car in LA.

They are taking our 2nd amendmant rights away one piece at a time.
 

perda04

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
467
Reaction score
0
Location
DFW / Texas
We have 1000s of gun laws on the books that aren't enforced now. If a criminal is in court for armed bank robery, no one cares that he should not have had the assualt rifle.

The only ones affected by laws are law abiding citizens.

Dealing in cocaine is illegal but the law does not stop the traffic, only law abiding people.

An armed population are citizen while unarmed are 'subjects'.

Ask the displaced white farmers of South Africa their views on fire arm registration.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
3,977
Reaction score
0
Location
Southeast Kansas
chrisy":xjfvcq6u said:
This old chestnut keeps coming up, most of these Countries were in a state of unrest when these laws were made, and no matter if they were allowed to carry arms they still would have been rounded up. as you can't take on your countries army.

Soviet Union was just getting over the Revolution,

Turkey it was the First World War period

Germany was leading upto the Second World War

China was using it's little red book with Chairman Moil

Guatemala, Uganda and Cambodia were under Dictatorship.

it was not through gun control it was through the acts of war and Dictatorship in those cases.

Yes there was dictator and unrest but when they disarmed the people this is when they killings began.

You say you can not take on your countries Army? Well is not not what we did back a few hundred years ago when we individuals fought our Country's Army from England to gain our independence.

People all over the world for centuries have rose up to take on the controlling army and have been successful at it.

You look at it as One individual can not fight a whole army. But if you look at those numbers above they were not just one person killed it was thousands and millions, those kind of numbers can take a stand against their countries army. Not to mention once one group takes a stand like say those at the Alamo did then others will join in and come to the aid of righteousness, at least that is the way it is in the U.S.

We are not France, we will fight even if it seems we can not win. We do not give up our guns because of some bla bla bla well we can not win anyway so we might as well give up. Not in America! That is not the way we are made!

That is why we won back in 1700's against the strongest army of that time, we do not give up just because it is an up hill battle.

There is a reason we are the greatest and most powerful nation to ever walk the face of the earth. And we will stay that way as long as we can keep the Liberal views such as gun control out that have brought down so many countries around the world.
 

Horticattleman

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
0
Location
Beautiful Cajun Country
Here is a novel thought.Let's stop trying to take away rights of law-abiding citizens of one of the greatest nations on earth and,instead,punish severely those who choose to misuse their rights and infringe upon the rights of others to life and liberty.

That would make too much sense, not to mention it may offend somebody. Not like it bothers me, I like offending people especially criminals.
 

memanpa

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
771
Reaction score
0
Location
arizona/ok
guest25":3a62r24h said:
Beef11":3a62r24h said:
Read your first post again you never mentioned guns
and this guy gives out information about cattle. he makes statements about piedmontese just as crazy. he must be living in a bubble or nursing one of two bottles.

go figure.

mss camp i would not call him a crack pot simply one who shoots from the hip.

it would be belittleing to the crack pots to put him in the same category with them.

Never mentioned policy either, it seems like you jumped in and made some "crazy" "statements". For the record aren't you the guy who can't send PM's because you just harass people with them? How long till they ban you?

Beef11 said
my prior statemant was hinting at the idea of banning guns only takes the guns from everyone but the people using them for criminal activity

Guest25 then said
there ought to be a law against criminals having guns,

i mean thats only been a law for how many years.

Back to gun control, bring up the issue.

you really do have a problem disecting what you read or see its in black and white right above my quote your satement about criminals needing to be outlawed from having guns.


remember you started the smart mouth i simply choose to
address the ridiculous statements of a babbler.

you might want to go back and read real carefull how the gun issue was addressed i addressed it and you.

for the record if you own a gun get someone to put a lock on it for you and let them keep the key.

because you allready have a problem with self inflicted wounds when you babble.

so you for sure dont need to have an unlocked gun and shoot yourself or someone else by accident.

it is obvious that guest25 has a personal issue with beef11 and uses any excuse to insult him.
personally i took the criminal own guns statement as a rather tounge in cheek approach, to dispel more laws!!
alice took it another way and and made comments, then guest25 decided to jump in the fray and both of them proceeded to whip a dead horse!
either you are for or against gun control, no middle ground!

move on
 

Latest posts

Top