DC Tom Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 http://www.sun-sentinel.com/ Don't see the article. I also don't believe it, if only because bills don't materialize out of thin air. They have to be voted on in Congress...and a bill like this would get a LOT of attention. Unless it's buried in the stimulus bill...which I haven't heard, and doubt for the same reason - anything that even carries a scent of a federal gun ban wouldn't "sneak in" to another bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I respect the idea that people enjoy hunting or range shooting for recreation and they should be able to. Problem for me is that after that I get confused by the "need" for people to be armed to the teeth. You know what's really funny; liberals say the same thing about people who amass too much income. "I respect the idea, but I'm confused by the need for some people to make SO MUCH money." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I have always been baffled by the liberals aversion to people wishing to defend their lives, home and family with firearms. I think it has to do with the mindset that the government will take care of you. If you wish,fine,protect yourself with a cell phone and dial 911.I feel a lot better having the ways,means and ability to to handle a bad situation on my own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 You know what's really funny; liberals say the same thing about people who amass too much income. "I respect the idea, but I'm confused by the need for some people to make SO MUCH money." Interesting thought because the term liberal is not one that has ever been used to describe me. People that amass wealth do not threaten the safety of others. Money can also be put to good use. How many gins does one need? Do they really have to be nearly automatic? do people really need to carry them around with them all the time? Like I said I have no problem with people that use guns for recreational purposes. Where the line gets hazy for me is the allowance of weapons beyond this purpose. How about you use a weapon within city limits other than at an approved range leads to a very strong prison sentence? Why should 18+ year old gang bangers be able to get and carry weapons around with them? If they are under 18 hold the parents accountable. BTW - your response offered no explanation why it is so offensive to limit guns that are not legitimately used for recreation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I have always been baffled by the liberals aversion to people wishing to defend their lives, home and family with firearms. I think it has to do with the mindset that the government will take care of you. If you wish,fine,protect yourself with a cell phone and dial 911.I feel a lot better having the ways,means and ability to to handle a bad situation on my own. Jim - while on this particular issue perhaps I can be classified as a "liberal" it hardly applies to me overall. Take note on my stance around very severe penalties for the misuse of a gun or illegally posessing one. I'm happy that you feel safer because you have guns but when you look at the bigger picture the situation is much the opposite. I realize that many of the guns out there are carried illegally but one of the reasons why people carry them is that they feel no responsibility or accountability for having one. Again, my position is that guns should be available for people that want to appropriately use them for recreation. If this extends to protection of your household so be it. Where I may be different is that I believe penalties should be very severe for anyone improperly using or possessing a weapon. Penalties severe enough that people will really think about using or posessing an illegal weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 You know what's really funny; liberals say the same thing about people who amass too much income. "I respect the idea, but I'm confused by the need for some people to make SO MUCH money." Totally false. Nobody is confused, everybody gets the concept of the horde reflex. I don't mind anyone amassing money or ammo... Just share some with evryone! Got any bullets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Jim - while on this particular issue perhaps I can be classified as a "liberal" it hardly applies to me overall. Take note on my stance around very severe penalties for the misuse of a gun or illegally posessing one. I'm happy that you feel safer because you have guns but when you look at the bigger picture the situation is much the opposite. I realize that many of the guns out there are carried illegally but one of the reasons why people carry them is that they feel no responsibility or accountability for having one. Again, my position is that guns should be available for people that want to appropriately use them for recreation. If this extends to protection of your household so be it. Where I may be different is that I believe penalties should be very severe for anyone improperly using or possessing a weapon. Penalties severe enough that people will really think about using or posessing an illegal weapon. You use the word "illegally" several times. That is exactly the point gun owners have been making for years-enforce the laws on the books already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Interesting thought because the term liberal is not one that has ever been used to describe me. People that amass wealth do not threaten the safety of others. They don't? How many times in your life have you ever been threatened by a legally owned firearm? I'm going to be the answer is zero. Money can also be put to good use. How many gins does one need? Do they really have to be nearly automatic? do people really need to carry them around with them all the time? What exactly is "nearly automatic"? Is that some new invention I've never heard of? Or is that some term you use because you don't actually know much about guns? Like I said I have no problem with people that use guns for recreational purposes. Where the line gets hazy for me is the allowance of weapons beyond this purpose. How about you use a weapon within city limits other than at an approved range leads to a very strong prison sentence? Why should 18+ year old gang bangers be able to get and carry weapons around with them? If they are under 18 hold the parents accountable. You mean because there aren't already 20,000 gun laws on the books to cover virtually every situation? How has the Prohibition of drugs worked out? Have you and the others been able to keep drugs out of the hands of children? Or will you simply continue to live in "Ideologyland" where you make everyone else less safe because you have an unreasonable fear of inanimate objects? BTW - your response offered no explanation why it is so offensive to limit guns that are not legitimately used for recreation. How about because it's a Constitutional right placed in the sacred document by men who used their own weapons to create this country? Or is the concept of protecting yourself/property really that difficult a concept? Are there any other rights in the Constitution that you'd like to give up because you're basically a "fraidy cat"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 They don't? How many times in your life have you ever been threatened by a legally owned firearm? I'm going to be the answer is zero. Correct never but I also do not put myself in situations where this is likely to occur. However, why don't you talk with the family of the man randomly shot in the mall here last week (in an otherwise "nice area") or how about families affected by illegal gang gunfire. Again my position goes to the illegal use and possession of firearms. I did not and do not support the notion that they should be banned from legitimate recreational use. What exactly is "nearly automatic"? Is that some new invention I've never heard of? Or is that some term you use because you don't actually know much about guns? You are correct I do not know much about guns ... so what is the correct term? Try to understand my point and educate me if you wish but why attack? How rapidly do you need to be able to discharge a gun to hunt? You mean because there aren't already 20,000 gun laws on the books to cover virtually every situation? Fine, are they enforced? as I said earlier I am happy to throw the book at people who do use or posess them illegally. How has the Prohibition of drugs worked out? Have you and the others been able to keep drugs out of the hands of children? We are talking about guns not drugs ... not sure how this plays in ... I doubt anyone in their right mind would support a child's access to drugs Or will you simply continue to live in "Ideologyland" where you make everyone else less safe because you have an unreasonable fear of inanimate objects? Do some research on murder rates and crime rates in other countries that better enforce or prohibit the illegal use or posession of firearms. How about because it's a Constitutional right placed in the sacred document by men who used their own weapons to create this country? Or is the concept of protecting yourself/property really that difficult a concept? Think about why the original right was added to the Constitution .... militia or the army was made up of citizens who also used guns to feed their families. Hardly the case today. Again I keep saying i have no issue with the proper use and possession of guns but let's get the illegal ones and thise who use them illegally off the street. Are there any other rights in the Constitution that you'd like to give up because you're basically a "fraidy cat"? Your comment is laughable and does nothing to add to your position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Correct never but I also do not put myself in situations where this is likely to occur. However, why don't you talk with the family of the man randomly shot in the mall here last week (in an otherwise "nice area") or how about families affected by illegal gang gunfire. Again my position goes to the illegal use and possession of firearms. I did not and do not support the notion that they should be banned from legitimate recreational use. So your solution to some jackass committing a crime is to penalize everyone else in society? Do you smack your kids when the neighbor kids do something wrong? You are correct I do not know much about guns ... so what is the correct term? Try to understand my point and educate me if you wish but why attack? How rapidly do you need to be able to discharge a gun to hunt? You have the misguided idea that I give a crap about why you think I should be allowed to own a gun. You continue to use the "why do you need...to hunt". Hunting is ONE purpose for owning a gun (or actually many guns, depending on where/when/what you actually hunt). Fine, are they enforced? as I said earlier I am happy to throw the book at people who do use or posess them illegally. Make sure you let your elected officials know how disappointed you are that they aren't using the tools at their disposal to keep scum and vermin off the streets as long as possible - because that's probably the biggest problem. We are talking about guns not drugs ... not sure how this plays in ... I doubt anyone in their right mind would support a child's access to drugs So you're not able to see the connection between complete prohibition and criminal's ability to exploit same for ridiculous profit? Really? You don't actually understand the idea that making guns illegal will make violent criminals even more violent as there will literally be zero resistance because law abiding citizens will be completely unable to defend themselves? Really? Do some research on murder rates and crime rates in other countries that better enforce or prohibit the illegal use or posession of firearms. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. England and Australia's gun violence has risen since they banned everything and they have a much easier time keeping weapons out BECAUSE THEY ARE ISLANDS. You honestly believe that the Latin Kings or MS13 are going to have a problem getting guns into America? I love how people like to pretend that gun violence actually touches their lives because they hear about it in the media all the time. The vast majority of people in this country who are "victims" of gun violence are usually involved in drugs or gang activity. But we can pretend there's really a problem because it makes you feel better. We'll also ignore the Justice Department's own statistics that law-abiding Americans prevent between 1 and 3 times as many crimes with their firearms as are committed in total. Think about why the original right was added to the Constitution .... militia or the army was made up of citizens who also used guns to feed their families. Hardly the case today. I see you know as little about the evolution of the Constitution as you do about guns. But you're on a roll. Again I keep saying i have no issue with the proper use and possession of guns but let's get the illegal ones and thise who use them illegally off the street. So you have a problem with law enforcement, prosecution, and the court system? That's not what it sounds like to me. Your comment is laughable and does nothing to add to your position I'll let you know the very second I care about your incredibly uninformed opinion on my "position". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I'll let you know the very second I care about your incredibly uninformed opinion on my "position". You're entitled to your thougts. I doubt either of us will change our positions so no point in continuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 You're entitled to your thougts. I doubt either of us will change our positions so no point in continuing. You don't have "thoughts". You have emotion, ignorance, and sound bytes. You're right that there's little point in continuing - but it has nothing to do with your reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 You're entitled to your thougts. I doubt either of us will change our positions so no point in continuing. You don't have "thoughts". You have emotion, ignorance, and sound bytes. You're right that there's little point in continuing - but it has nothing to do with your reasoning. Oh, don't stop now. I just made popcorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HereComesTheReignAgain Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Oh, don't stop now. I just made popcorn. I'm sitting this one gun argument out. It is interesting to relax and watch the action from the sideline sometimes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Oh, don't stop now. I just made popcorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 You don't have "thoughts". You have emotion, ignorance, and sound bytes. You're right that there's little point in continuing - but it has nothing to do with your reasoning. I assume your NRA dues are paid up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Be glad. I was looking forward to watching you get gutted like a fish. "Nearly" automatic weapons? Have you even seen a gun before? Darin may as well have been arguing with crayonz... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Be glad. I was looking forward to watching you get gutted like a fish. "Nearly" automatic weapons? Have you even seen a gun before? Darin may as well have been arguing with crayonz... I thought that there would be common ground for the removal of or severe punishment of people who illegally use or posess guns. I've said all along I have no issue with thise who legally posess and use them. Where I perhaps hit a nerve was by extending the issue to question the need to use guns for purposes other than recreation or protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I thought that there would be common ground for the removal of or severe punishment of people who illegally use or posess guns. I've said all along I have no issue with thise who legally posess and use them. To me that's the sensible thing to do - within reason. For example, a buddy of mine had a brother who got 7 years for shooting a guy who was beating the sh-- out of him. The reason? An unregistered firearm. So it's perfectly acceptable to for someone to beat you within an inch of your life because you didn't cross every bureaucratic "T" and dot every "I". That's the stuff I have problem with. Idiots who shoot innocent people standing around in a mall? Death by bunga-bunga. Where I perhaps hit a nerve was by extending the issue to question the need to use guns for purposes other than recreation or protection. Yepper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 To me that's the sensible thing to do - within reason. For example, a buddy of mine had a brother who got 7 years for shooting a guy who was beating the sh-- out of him. The reason? An unregistered firearm. So it's perfectly acceptable to for someone to beat you within an inch of your life because you didn't cross every bureaucratic "T" and dot every "I". That's the stuff I have problem with. Idiots who shoot innocent people standing around in a mall? Death by bunga-bunga. enough said ... I agree with you on all points. It is the latter situation that gets to me ... just happened here in Dallas last week. BTW - I mean this with all seriousness .. not trying to provoke... but outside of recreation and protection what other legitimate uses (or reasons to posess) of guns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts