Niagara Bill

Someone stole all my credit cards. I won't be reporting it. The thief spends less than my wife! Buda bing The doctor phoned Mrs. COHEN. and said "Mrs Cohen, your check came back" Mrs. Cohen replied, "so did my arthritis"

I have no problem with more if that is the solution. No guns is great. More guns is good if it is more acceptable. Balance the scales. Carry where ever you want. Open carry to. Malls, cars, theaters, games, church. The status quo is not working.

What I want is no auto or semi guns in the country, if you want to hunt great but large mags not needed...2 shots only before reload, hand guns in house for defence with limited power. Stop manufacturing for the public of powerful guns, stop import, guns for target shooting stored at range only. That is my starting point for a guy who has not got a lot of knowledge of all the guns out there. If not, stop all restrictions and lets have a go at it. Either the guy who entered the store to randomly kill has to be concerned about anyone with the ability to shoot back or stop the gun production. Sitting still and doing nothing will only allow it to get worse.

Was with ya that day. Brought Jack D and Cognac to tailgate because beer froze within a minute. Had a great barrel fire that day....

I DID NOT LEAVE THE COMEBACK GAME AT HALF TIME LIKE 40,000 OTHERS DID.

Defence for the army as they were designed. However, as I said, the opposite to a ban is to allow everyone to carry any gun they want. Then Marshall Dillon would have an issue. If you can't the gangs and nuts from carrying, join em. You don't need 1 more gun, just an AK vs hand gun..sorry, border is closed.

Trying to justify walking the streets or fields with assault weapons based on 250 year old writings in too much to accept when citizens are bringing killed far too often. IMHO no need for auto or semi auto for sport or target. They are name fir killing and destruction.

You are right, not a gun owner but my thoughts are based on the present situation as being unacceptable and getting worse. I understand hunting, targets shooting, property and family defense. What I believe must happen in end the possibility of military powerful weapons in the assault range, overpowering the population. Hand gun to hand gun these mass shooting end...even a nut hasn't got the guts to face mobs when he doesn't gave a decided advantage in weapons. IMHO I am not trying yk force anything, just trying to have a debate that doesn't start and end with either full gun ban, or It is my right by the constitution.

Thank Goodness. Get your defence built around your house and family. Make sure you can defend against the invasion. Ps the peppercorn sauce was great. I think there certainly is a threat to your family...I get it, but if it doesn't get rolled back, then everyone must be armed at all times. This is the choice. Hope you and the family never have to face the decision. Stay safe.

Stupidity is thinking that a man 250 years ago could think that an AK 47 would be necessary for personal safety and be used against fellow peaceful citizens. Stupidity is thinking assault rifles and 100 rounds is required to hunt a 160 lb. deer when a bow was used in Franklin's day. Davey Crocket would be appalled. Stupidity is defending the indefensible. The safety and death of 10 citizens in Boulder this week is not temporary, nor do they have liberty. But the people who made the gun got rich, the guy who sold the gun is having his long neck tonight before dancing to Boot Scootin boogie. So 2 have liberty. 10 have death, the funeral guys are happy.

Ok then Chef...let's continue on this path. More death, rich gun producers, let's make gun ownership mandatory and cheap, put one or two in every house, apartment, condo, small business, let school teachers wear sidearms, let all university student carry guns into class, let every factory worker bring one to the job, how about mailman. You cannot restrict me from carrying gun to school or work if they are so available. That to me is the alternative. I am not being flippant, but if stopping production and availability of weapons of war us not possible then the alternative must be acceptable. Being partially into accepting a culture of guns is impossible.IMHO. Gang members need the right to be killed on their street vifnrr as much as anyone. So tonight it is steak and peppercorn sauce (not kidding). Bbq is hot gotta go for now.

If you think mass killing of citizens is a joke...thats on you. 🙃 Not arguing with you...just saying producers must be controlled and you can stop imports when you want. That is a dumb statement. Ps I would not insult a chef, but your skin is very thin. Congress has tried to make it more difficult and failed....outright.

Ok, let me ask you. Did Franklin produce nuclear weapons or fly a kite to find electricity. Did Franklin conceive anything like weapons of today? And the USA is being invaded by us Canadians again. The day of protecting property against invasion is over. Called nuclear bombs. No more danger from Indian uprising when out skinning their buffaloes. Seriously. 2021. AK Not needed for covid 19.

You can afford the handgun with tax if necessary. Yes, job change us necessary. Many people liked training horses, building buggy whips, building gas engines for cars, steam engines fir trains etc etc. Finding and controlling every person with the desire to kill is impossible. History is proof. What should we do with them, institutionalize? You already have the most people in the world imprisoned. So to hunt you need a magazine with 15/50/100/200 shots?. I am not making fun of your name. If you think I am I apologize. Guns my good man. Guns. Don't produce them....

Don't produce them in the first place. Destroy what you can. Obviously there are huge issues, but producing more and more powerful weapons does nothing except increase slaughter of innocent citizens.

You have valid thoughts. The demilitarizing of police must occur. Today police forces have become military forces both in defending and assault. They do not protect citizens. They often do not de-escalated. Imagine we now have police forces with tanks. Ridiculous. Control of high powered weapons can only be a step in reducing violence in society, allow pleasure for hunting, targets etc, and control of gangs and criminal access. A ban is impossible and illogical. The constitution allows it, honor that, protect citizens.

You have no ideas except constitution. That us a true joke. Military guns are obvious. Whether I can define that is not necessary in concept. But easy to say a gun with a primary use to kill multiple people in a short time. I am not into animal cruelty. You are obviously just an as?! It only takes a short period of time for a skilled hunter to reload. But I am into stopping human cruelty with the killing of people and multiple people with the use of non essential guns. Ok 400% tax. Slow down the purchase of guns. There are enough guns on the market now. Training for people who work in the gun industry to assist us them transferring to new employment. There are 1000s who would be put out of work producing and selling people killing weapons. Do something useful Chef and add the peppercorn sauce. At this point it appears you Chef skills are only producing Big Macs.

Idea #1. Ban all military style guns for sale. Personal protection does not need assault weapons. Ban all long guns that are not obvious hunting guns (definition to be determined). And have more than 2 bullets capacity. Rabbits, deer, bear, wolves, Elk, rodents, birds, do not need more than 2 shots. Increase fines for possession or ownership as said guns. Place federal sales tax of 500% on purchase of a gun. Offer retraining for all employees who work in this industry. Your turn Chef J. (It can include a peppercorn sauce if you wish)

Ah Jim you have such logic🤣. The only thing that is irrelevant today is you. Squirrel rifles vs AK47??? Unless the hidden message you give is to encourage violence and class warfare based a 250 year old document which never foresaw or could forsee mini nuclear weapons. Now, go find some road kill. Wow! Chef Jim is right. The founding fathers wanted citizens to kill each other not the British.

I don't see the process as the issue. The process has become unusable because of extremists on both sides. The logic that the right to bear arms includes military weapons is extreme. Why not flame throwers, small bombs, the next mini nuclear weapon, etc. By the way...37 years I spent working and living in both sides of the border. I chose not to remain and live because of the extremes we discuss here.

It matters to see your neighbour's have a daily civil war over killing each other over what a few folks said 245 years ago. It is a good thing that they did not specifically mention the right to allow your horse to poop and not scoop. The founding fathers never mentioned the right to ride your horse as fast as you wanted. If they did there would be no speed limits on our highways, either 80km or 50 mph.

The names of the victims do not matter. The family of the victims do not matter. They are all of little consequence. The only thing that matters is the constitution was built on a basis of squirrel guns and long knives and somehow that got translated to ARs, AKs etc. For all those that support that premise and hide behind this position, I hope you never sleep without thinking of the 1000s of victims.

Every team needs a guy named Kwity. KWITY! KWITY!!!!

Very surprised that there are few mentions of the affect on the American Way of Life if the military. Vertually every person born pre 55 was in the forces except a few, and even today the forces support a huge part if the population. The effect on availability of weapons, the love of guns, PTSD, employment with contractors, employment on bases, etc etc. Has any other organization had bigger effect?

Not Italian American, Italian SoCal , big difference. Real Italians don't eat avocado salad. Real Italian Americans "hey Fredo, I said I was hungry and they offered me a can of peas, what happened to the cannoli" (not quite the quote but you get the idea)😄