Gun Owners and Non-Gun Owners should come to a Meeting of the Minds

[redhen]

Back to the program....

 

[Reinbeau]

Quote:
I love FactCheck.org...

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_senate_bill_2099_put_a_yearly.html

How do you feel about real Gun Facts? Then again, anyone who thinks part of The Constitution is outdated probably isn't interested in real information.

From your link:

The bill would indeed have required a $50 tax on each handgun, but it would have been a one-time tax, not an annual tax

So yes, there is a tax on handguns, the e-mail has facts twisted but the core is true. What do they need all that money for? To make it easier to locate and remove those guns from their owners, eventually.

We don't need any more laws on guns. What we need is enforcement of the laws we already have. Which one of the 319 laws that were in effect stopped Columbine? By definition, criminals ignore laws. Round them up and put them in prison where they belong, don't plea deal them right out into the streets (there's a mandatory one year law here in Massachusetts if you get caught with an unregistered gun - guess what? There is not one single person in jail for breaking that law. They use it as a bargaining chip in plea deals

)

I realize you agree with the 'constitutional scholar' who's been elected President, that The Constitution is a fluid document (he also has said he 'chafes at the constraints of The Constitution' - that should strike fear into any freedom-loving American). I'm just praying that there are more who understand The Constitution was written by wise men who believed in freedom and protecting individual rights. From what I'm hearing of polling data, more people are starting to wake up to what's happening. I hope that continues.​

 

[Brindlebtch]

Quote:
underground chickenman is my hero!

even if he does have a goofy looking avatar

 

[Boyd]

Quote:
I love FactCheck.org...

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_senate_bill_2099_put_a_yearly.html

How do you feel about real Gun Facts? Then again, anyone who thinks part of The Constitution is outdated probably isn't interested in real information.

From your link:

The bill would indeed have required a $50 tax on each handgun, but it would have been a one-time tax, not an annual tax

So yes, there is a tax on handguns, the e-mail has facts twisted but the core is true. What do they need all that money for? To make it easier to locate and remove those guns from their owners, eventually.

We don't need any more laws on guns. What we need is enforcement of the laws we already have. Which one of the 319 laws that were in effect stopped Columbine? By definition, criminals ignore laws. Round them up and put them in prison where they belong, don't plea deal them right out into the streets (there's a mandatory one year law here in Massachusetts if you get caught with an unregistered gun - guess what? There is not one single person in jail for breaking that law. They use it as a bargaining chip in plea deals

)

I realize you agree with the 'constitutional scholar' who's been elected President, that The Constitution is a fluid document (he also has said he 'chafes at the constraints of The Constitution' - that should strike fear into any freedom-loving American). I'm just praying that there are more who understand The Constitution was written by wise men who believed in freedom and protecting individual rights. From what I'm hearing of polling data, more people are starting to wake up to what's happening. I hope that continues.​

And on that note I would love to have a truely political thread that could stay civil because I am in agreement but have so much more to add to that

 

[redhen]

Again..i'll say it. Criminals will have never have any trouble getting guns illegaly.
I wonder why it scares/bothers people that legal citizens can carry a conceled weapon on them? I have to ask myself this...why does it REALLY bother them?

 

[kagedgoddess]

Heelers&Chickens_OhMy :

Quote:
I would go 'Eeek!'....just like I just said to myself. I want to keep stating that I am pro responsible gun ownership, but I wasn't raised with them.

It makes me very nervous to think you carry a gun with you everywhere. Why do you need to do that? Out to lunch!? Really!? I feel like this takes 'better over prepared than under' to a new level.

Is the gun on you loaded? I would hope not....that I would find very stupid. I just feel like it's so easy for accidents to happen. Take cars for instance - we take them everywhere and they are generally deemed safe by the people who own them, but no one is perfect and even the best drivers end up in accidents (the one I was in was the fault of the tire, not the driver). Seeing as it's not essential to carry a gun everywhere, why do you risk such an accident? (Read: brainless football player Plaxico Burress).

I am NOT ok with the recent passing of concealed weapons allowed in bars (with permits). I do not think that EVERYONE with a CCW would not drink with their gun on them. Alcohol + anything that has high chance of hurting some one should NOT mix.

However, if you would like to carry your gun on you late at night, out hunting, while banking, or in the 'bad' part of town, I can understand that. Are my thoughts unreasonable? If we really want to come to 'a meeting of the minds' I really need to understand why you need to take your concealed weapon everywhere.

DH carrys his gun everywhere, he s a cop. if i was a certain kind of lawyer or judge, or tow truck driver i would probably also ALWAYS have my gun with me.

for those of you who think the cops will protect you... they will TRY, but dh is sometimes the ONLY deputy in our county on duty at night. what if you call 911 for a break in and he is 30 min away on the other side of the county?

i dont like guns, i wish we didnt have any, But if our house gets broke into and dh is on the other side of the county, i feel better knowing i can pull out the shot gun and chkchk it and scare the poo out of someone thinking about coming inside.... so therefore dh and i have a meeting of the minds on our personal gun control. we have them, i know how to use them, but have no intention of doing so. i dont evenlike to go out with him for target practice anymore

another point i want to make, is there are 1oo million ways to hurt someone, taking away guns doesnt mean people will be any safer. say somehow we got all the guns everywhere melted down, criminals would just use knives or something, then what?

and for those saying its "liberals" well conservatives have rights they wish to take away from people too.​

 

[Alicia]

Quote:

It's going to help the situation.

Please elaborate.

If you pull your gun out in an attempt to intimidate the guy, are you going to make him stop, or are you going to make yourself target?

I wouldn't pull my gun out to intimidate. That's a good way to get shot. If my gun comes out, it's going to be promptly fired. Again, evidence of a lack of education on your part. You've watched too much TV.

Pardon me, but you seem to have just agreed with me then contradicted yourself. If you attempt to intimidate, you will make yourself a target. If you shoot, you risk adding to the innocent casualties. Please explain how this reasoning is "lack of education" on my part. I was raised in a household with guns. I was taught how to be a responsible gun owner yet I see gun owners make stupid mistakes (with my own eyes, not on TV) on a regular basis. For this reason, I choose not to own a gun, yet I do not begrudge you your right to own a gun.

Plus, if you do shoot him, you are more than likely going to be spending some time in jail and later court facing criminal charges and possibly jail time whether you believe it was justified or not.

Where do you get your information? Self-defense is still allowed in every state in the country.

Yes, self defense is allowed, but when guns are fired, in private homes or in a public places, the police are trained to detain everyone until facts are sorted out. A concealed weapons permit alone does not give you a free get out of jail card should you fire your gun in public, no matter the justification. If you were to accidentally injure a bystander, you will be held responsible, likely both criminally and civilly.

Please, please, educate yourselves about guns. Most of you are spouting off about something you know little if anything about. Your contempt for lawful gun ownership and concealed carry is fueled by fear that is fostered by ignorance. If you had not grown up with cars being common place, you would be deathly afraid to drive. Knowledge is a wonderful and powerful thing. Getcha some!

Please, educate me, the poor, uneducated.

UGCM​

 

[horsejody]

Quote:
The 2nd ammendment was written because there was an army - the British army. The British government was our government before the Revolution. They were an oppressive government. The 2nd ammendment was written so that the people could defend themselves from that ever happening again. The people shouldn't fear the government or be overly controlled by it. However, the government should fear the people and be totally controlled by them. The 2nd is not outdated thinking. It's timeless.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Troll is actually a reference to sport fishing for large game fish. The idea is to bait a hook with food the sport fish cannot resist and drag across open waters hoping for a strike. When a strike happens the ensuing fight can go on for hours until the line breaks, the fish wears out and gives in, or the fisherman is forced to stop due to exhaustion, fatigue, or the elements.

Though we think of a troll as a monster and a internet troll can get close to that. The reference is a bait(comment) is thrown in hopes of hooking opponents and starting a flame war, which the ensuing fight can go on for hours or days, and on some sites months.

The troll never looks for a fair exchange of intellect only a fight. And will keep upping the anty until they get it or move to another thread. Many of the trolls in the P and P section do not even appear to own chickens. Others look for or instigate political threads to attempt to achieve their jollies. The arguments from the left are usually based more on political ideals than of any real understanding of gun ownership. The more reason is thrown at these individuals the more bait for a argument to close threads is thrown back.

I hope this helps.

 

[Buster52]

Quote:
I love FactCheck.org...

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_senate_bill_2099_put_a_yearly.html

How do you feel about real Gun Facts? Then again, anyone who thinks part of The Constitution is outdated probably isn't interested in real information.

From your link:

The bill would indeed have required a $50 tax on each handgun, but it would have been a one-time tax, not an annual tax

So yes, there is a tax on handguns, the e-mail has facts twisted but the core is true. What do they need all that money for? To make it easier to locate and remove those guns from their owners, eventually.​

Read the entire link. One, the tax would have been on manufacturers who make the guns, which would have nothing to do with the future gun owner except increase the price of the gun, and two, the bill was introduced in the year 2000 and died. It is not a current bill as you are implying.

Oh, and I don't think the Constitution is outdated. Just the Second Amendment.