Gun Control

[SirStev0]

im kinda upset that this really hasnt been touched... especially since the automatic weapon ban was lifted this year.... what is everyones feelings on this little matter


personally, im parting from my usually hippie commie liberal bastard ideals and siding with the righties... im not a supporter of gun control... i was raised in a community where almost everyone hunted and fished and i was raised with a proper respect for handling guns... and personally i feel that the reason guns are a problem is because this is lacking in many areas of the united states... i also feel taking away a persons way of protection is not going to make anyone safer... violent crimes with hand guns in great britian went up after they made them illegal to use... whats everyone elses opinion ...

btw as a supporter of kerry im also upset with the nra backing bush... and im not planing to change my vote...

 

[Grunt03]

" Gun Control "

Is when your finger is off of the trigger.....

 

[Tab]

You can have a pistol, you can have you're hunting shot gun and hunting rifle. Beyond that you're pushing it.

 

[glenn1]

Gun control is a stupid idea by naïve urbanites who have never even seen a firearm in real life, yet think they are experts on them and that the only solution to their drug dealer/gang problems is to take away a gun from Joe Deer Hunter in Idaho.

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: Tabb
You can have a pistol, you can have you're hunting shot gun and hunting rifle. Beyond that you're pushing it.

i agree... there really is no need for ak-47's for hunting ... except that the idea of the second amendment was that if this government that we set in place became tyrannical like that of england... the people have the right to form miltia and overthrow that government...

 

[Infohawk]

Gun owners and manufacturers should share the burden that guns put on society via taxes or licenses. Be responsible for yourself and stop trying to push costs on those of us that don't share your paranoid fascination... Thanks.

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Gun owners and manufacturers should share the burden that guns put on society via taxes or licenses. Be responsible for yourself and stop trying to push costs on those of us that don't share your paranoid fascination... Thanks.

what burdens do you speak of ...

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Gun owners and manufacturers should share the burden that guns put on society via taxes or licenses. Be responsible for yourself and stop trying to push costs on those of us that don't share your paranoid fascination... Thanks.

So, when someone is murder or like Columbine for example the Gun Manafacture has to pay outt XXX dollars? No, thats fvcking retarded. I don't care about money, I want my damn family member who was killed.

You don't need a fricken M-16!!!

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Gun owners and manufacturers should share the burden that guns put on society via taxes or licenses. Be responsible for yourself and stop trying to push costs on those of us that don't share your paranoid fascination... Thanks.

So, when someone is murder or like Columbine for example the Gun Manafacture has to pay outt XXX dollars? No, thats fvcking retarded. I don't care about money, I want my damn family member who was killed.

You don't need a fricken M-16!!!

the kids from columbine didnt get their weapons legally anyway... ban m-16's isnt gunna stop them from showing up in our schools

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

The Assault Weapons Ban was a stupid piece of legislation IMO, and did little if anything to protect the public. I will say, in all fairness, that President Bush and Sen Kerry both supported it, though President Bush is definitely the NRA's pick.

 

[Pliablemoose]

IMHO:

Kerry-100% compliance with Handgun Control Inc's legislative agenda=anti gun, although his staffers are trying to put a gun in his hands @ every photo op so he doesn't look like an Eastern liberal lawyer/congressman who doesn't really like private gun ownership.

Bush-has the nod from the pro gun lobby.

I'm the first one to admit I don't know if Kerry has any agendas about guns, but his comments about "Now terrorists can buy Uzi's and AK47's." after the AWB was pure crap, they were always available & are still not importable because of obtuse Dept of the Treasury rules invoked some years ago. (the AK's & Uzi's that have been & are available have a certain percentage of domestic parts and are assembled in the US) Seems as if his staffers would @ least care enough to look up the laws & not make him appear that stupid to us gun nuts....

BTW, the reason Kerry has been relatively quiet is because Clinton commented in his recent book that he feels specifically that the political capital spent passing the useless AWB cost Democrats the majority in congress, and that viewpoint is widely held by other Democrats.

Some of the posters in P&N don't yet shave, please be careful about who you listen to, i can back up my statements with links, but am just too lazy right now.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: SirStev0
im kinda upset that this really hasnt been touched... especially since the automatic weapon ban was lifted this year....

Shows how much you know about this issue. The automatic weapons ban was not lifted this year. The assault weapons ban was, however.

 

[ajf3]

So...

- Car manufacturers should be held liable and sued when someone kills a persion via a hit & run or an accident?
- Knife manufacturers should be held liable and sued when someone is stabbed with a knife they made?
- The company who built the planes that flew into the towers should be sued since their plane was used as a weapon?
- The baseball bat company should be sued when someone is hit over the head with one of their bats?
- The extension cord company should be sued when someone is stranged with one of their cords?
- The lamp company should be sued when someone is hit over the head with one of their lamps?
- The gas grill tank manufactuer should be sued when someone makes a bomb out of it?
- The gasoline company should be sued when someone uses their gasoline for arson?
- The toaster company should be sued when someone tosses it into a bathtub to kill a person?
- The pencil company should be sued when someone uses their pencil as a shank to kill another person?
- The pillow company should be sued when someone smothers a person with one of their pillows?
- The machete company is liable and should be sued when someone lops anothers head off with one of their machetes?
- The televison company should be liable when someone tosses a tv out a window and it lands on someones head?
- The boxcutter company should be liable and sued when someone cuts anothers throat with one of their blades?
- The iron pipe company should be liable when someone hits another person in the head with one of their pipes?
- The water company should be held liable and sued when someone drowns another in the water they supplied?

Maybe you're right - it probably would be a better, safer world without cars, knives, planes, baseball bats, extension cords, lamps, gas grills, gasoline, toasters, pencils, pillows, machetes, tvs, boxcutters, pipes, or water.

Face it - our guns are never going away. Guns don't commit crimes - criminals do.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: SirStev0
im kinda upset that this really hasnt been touched... especially since the automatic weapon ban was lifted this year.... what is everyones feelings on this little matter

This comment frustrates the hell out of me! Why can't people understand the difference between an "assualt" weapon and an "automatic" weapon. Its not that fvcking difficult to grasp.

The assualt weapon ban made [some] semi-automatic weapons illegal. It had absolutely nothing to do with full auto guns. Automatic weapons like ak-47's have been banned since the 1930's.

When Kerry started talking about ak-47's in the last debate he was exploiting this ignorance people have about this issue. When you think of an ak-47 you think full auto. There are semi-auto ak's too and they are really no more dangerous that any other semi-auto rifle.

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: hscorpio

Originally posted by: SirStev0
im kinda upset that this really hasnt been touched... especially since the automatic weapon ban was lifted this year.... what is everyones feelings on this little matter

This comment frustrates the hell out of me! Why can't people understand the difference between an "assualt" weapon and an "automatic" weapon. Its not that fvcking difficult to grasp.

The assualt weapon ban made [some] semi-automatic weapons illegal. It had absolutely nothing to do with full auto guns. Automatic weapons like ak-47's have been banned since the 1930's.

When Kerry started talking about ak-47's in the last debate he was exploiting this ignorance people have about this issue. When you think of an ak-47 you think full auto. There are semi-auto ak's too and they are really no more dangerous that any other semi-auto rifle.

im sorry... i was mistaken... however... semi-auto means the shoot in spurts of 3 in most cases ... more in some ... so really i dont know if you could say that auto ak's are worse then semi auto ak's ... id agree if you say something like an ar which is auto for a reason but ak's are usually used in semiauto mode...

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Semi-auto means 1 shot each time you pull the trigger. 3 shot bursts with one trigger pull is still considered auto and is illegal.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: SirStev0

im sorry... i was mistaken...

Don't worry about it, reporters can't keep it straight nowdays, @ least you're asking the right questions



:thumbsup:

 

[Todd33]

Guns? If hicks want to shoot targets or deer, make them use bolt action or pump action, make pistols and rifles for law enforcment only. It's too bad the NRA bullies the politicians despite the general publics stances.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

The general public wants to ban guns?

 

[FelixDeCat]

Feel free to disarm youreself, but stay the hell away from my weapon and my right to purchase whatever, whenever, however I damn well please!

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
The general public wants to ban guns?

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Originally posted by: ajf3
So...

- Car manufacturers should be held liable and sued when someone kills a persion via a hit & run or an accident?
.
.
.
- The water company should be held liable and sued when someone drowns another in the water they supplied?

Maybe you're right - it probably would be a better, safer world without cars, knives, planes, baseball bats, extension cords, lamps, gas grills, gasoline, toasters, pencils, pillows, machetes, tvs, boxcutters, pipes, or water.

Face it - our guns are never going away. Guns don't commit crimes - criminals do.

I'm gonna go drive to work on my gun.
I'm gonna go clean a fish with my gun.
I'm gonna go take a ride on my gun.
I'm gonna go hit some balls with my gun.
I'm gonna go plug my christmas lights into my gun.
I'm gonna go fire up my gun and grill some steaks.
I'm gonna go fill my car up with my gun.
I'm gonna go make toast with my gun.
I'm gonna go take a test with my gun.
I'm gonna go lay down on my gun for a rest.
I'm gonna go clear the underbrush with my gun.
I'm gonna go watch my gun for an hour or two.
I'm gonna go open some boxes with my gun.
I'm gonna go build a gun scaffolding.
I'm gonna go drink a tall glass of gun.

Sorry, there is a fundamental difference between guns and the items you listed, namely primary uses. I won't sit and defence every gun control measure, but many don't seem too out of the question as far as reason goes. I don't "like" guns but I also don't see them going away and that's just fine by me.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
The general public wants to ban guns?

Did I say that? I said the NRA puts pressure on politicians. The pressure makes them vote against guns laws that a majority want. Pick just about any gun legislation, Brady Bill, Assault rifle ban, etc.

If anyone thinks the typical US citizen thinks anyway like the NRA you need to join the real world.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: ajf3

Maybe you're right - it probably would be a better, safer world without cars, knives, planes, baseball bats, extension cords, lamps, gas grills, gasoline, toasters, pencils, pillows, machetes, tvs, boxcutters, pipes, or water.

Face it - our guns are never going away. Guns don't commit crimes - criminals do.

Nice try. Nobody is saying you get rid of cars, planes, baseball bats. The point is that their price will include their external costs to society. It's putting the cost of the burden of such objects on the people who choose to use them. There's a difference between taxing something and not having it.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: hscorpio
The general public wants to ban guns?

Did I say that? I said the NRA puts pressure on politicians. The pressure makes them vote against guns laws that a majority want. Pick just about any gun legislation, Brady Bill, Assault rifle ban, etc.

If anyone thinks the typical US citizen thinks anyway like the NRA you need to join the real world.

Who puts pressure on the NRA? Who do you think the NRA is, a couple hundred hicks? Wake-up. There is a reason they are one of the most powerful groups in the US.