Responsible Firearms ownership

kensfishing · Post by **kensfishing** » Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:18 pm

Firearms are an object, not a thinking machine. It is designed to function not think. People have been killing people since the beginning of time and it will never stop. It's human nature. I once placed a handgun on the gun counter at our store to show a customer who said guns kill. I told the gun to go shoot everyone it saw outside. Told it again and again. Guess what it didn't do it. If these people really wanted to harm or kill someone there are alot of other ways to do it without guns and much more effective.

Dan Buchman · Post by **Dan Buchman** » Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:48 pm

I teach gun safety and don't see how gun safety courses or any gun course for that matter will stop the people who want to kill someone. We teach gun safety to help stop accidents not murders. Also I don't see how law abiding citizens giving up their guns will stop anything. If we all gave up our guns today only the criminals will have guns. Another interesting fact is that between 75 and 80 percent of all murders are gang related and I don’t think they will abide by any new regulation our government will come up with. The target on the so call assault weapons is for show and will not stop anyone from killing lots of people in a short period of time if they want to, just think how devastating a person with a shotgun and buckshot would be in close quarters. I think it’s time we start looking at the real cause of what’s happening, which is the drugs we are treating our kids with and the lack of respect for life in our country.

ckirsch · Post by **ckirsch** » Sat Jan 19, 2013 7:52 pm

Dan Buchman wrote:I teach gun safety and don't see how gun safety courses or any gun course for that matter will stop the people who want to kill someone. We teach gun safety to help stop accidents not murders. Also I don't see how law abiding citizens giving up their guns will stop anything. If we all gave up our guns today only the criminals will have guns. Another interesting fact is that between 75 and 80 percent of all murders are gang related and I don’t think they will abide by any new regulation our government will come up with. The target on the so call assault weapons is for show and will not stop anyone from killing lots of people in a short period of time if they want to, just think how devastating a person with a shotgun and buckshot would be in close quarters. I think it’s time we start looking at the real cause of what’s happening, which is the drugs we are treating our kids with and the lack of respect for life in our country.

+1

brad27 · Post by **brad27** » Sat Jan 19, 2013 8:04 pm

How many of you think that a Hunters Safety certificate or an educational gun course should be required to buy a firearm?

On Thursday Garrison and I headed to the local training ground to run some dogs. He got there a half hour before I did and had a story for me when I arrived. When he got there some guy showed up with what looked like a brand new shotgun. This guy proceeded to shoot every "bleep" bird he saw next to the road. He then shot across the road at a hawk and killed it. Do I think some kind of training should be required to purchase a firearm?..............
For idiots like this, yes.

Dan Buchman · Post by **Dan Buchman** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:07 am

brad27 wrote:
How many of you think that a Hunters Safety certificate or an educational gun course should be required to buy a firearm?
On Thursday Garrison and I headed to the local training ground to run some dogs. He got there a half hour before I did and had a story for me when I arrived. When he got there some guy showed up with what looked like a brand new shotgun. This guy proceeded to shoot every "bleep" bird he saw next to the road. He then shot across the road at a hawk and killed it. Do I think some kind of training should be required to purchase a firearm?..............
For idiots like this, yes.

That person gives us all a black eye and should have been turned into the Game Warden. Thats the only way we can stop people like that.

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:17 am

Wyndancer wrote:
Vman wrote:How many of you think that a Hunters Safety certificate or an educational gun course should be required to buy a firearm? ......
I'm late to the party it seems. Please don't take the following as an insult, not meant as one.

I'd like you to have a Freedom of Speech certificate before you're allowed to speak. Maybe pass a Freedom of Speech course.

Well some people need a voter ID for the right to vote. See I can bring up un-related topics too.

Dan Buchman wrote:I teach gun safety and don't see how gun safety courses or any gun course for that matter will stop the people who want to kill someone. We teach gun safety to help stop accidents not murders. Also I don't see how law abiding citizens giving up their guns will stop anything. If we all gave up our guns today only the criminals will have guns. Another interesting fact is that between 75 and 80 percent of all murders are gang related and I don’t think they will abide by any new regulation our government will come up with. The target on the so call assault weapons is for show and will not stop anyone from killing lots of people in a short period of time if they want to, just think how devastating a person with a shotgun and buckshot would be in close quarters. I think it’s time we start looking at the real cause of what’s happening, which is the drugs we are treating our kids with and the lack of respect for life in our country.

Maybe we should teach gun safety more broadly. All 5 of the accidental shootings in the story below probably could have been avoided if the people would have practiced the most basic rules of firearm safety; TAB-K.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... w/1847879/

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:28 am

Grange,

Show me where in the Constitution/Bill of Rights, the right to vote is located.

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:32 am

Gun safety courses will not save lives at threat from an evil or mentally ill individual.
They might make all safer around those who fall into the present popular choice of buying a gun of some sort....."while you can."
As there are folks who should not own a dog, so are there folks who should not own a weapon.
The inconvenient truth at odds with a constitutional right.

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:47 am

Wyndancer wrote:Grange,

Show me where in the Constitution/Bill of Rights, the right to vote is located.

The phrase "Right To Vote" is mentioned several times in the Constitution.

See Amendments 14, 15, 19, 24, and 26 for starters.

Brazosvalleyvizslas · Post by **Brazosvalleyvizslas** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:15 am

I just can't believe that there is anyone on a GUN dog forum wanting more GUN control. I could do more damage with a SXS shotgun and a revolver than any of these idiots ever have. Let's be thankful that NONE of these muderers had any real skill set and do things that would help protect people rather than punish law abiding citizens. We've already had an assault weapon ban and the numbers prove that it did NOTHING. The main thing that has helped reduce violent crimes is states passing concealed carry laws. Hmmm, let's see, crime goes down when people have guns so let's take guns away. We are becoming sheep and we keep feeding the wolves.

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:24 am

Most agree that banning magazines and "assault rifles" will have no affect on crime, since the Brady Bill has expired violent crime has continued to decline as it had started to decline in the 90's.

Unfortunately we as legal responsible gun owners are lumped into the same category as gun toting criminals. We must find a way to make it far more difficult than walking into a gun show or answering a classified add to purchasing a firearm.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:48 am

Grange wrote: See Amendments 14, 15, 19, 24, and 26 for starters.

From usconstitution.net

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:33 am

Wyndancer wrote:
Grange wrote: See Amendments 14, 15, 19, 24, and 26 for starters.
From usconstitution.net

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

Even your quote states "must be able to vote" and "requires" elections by the people. That quote says the right to vote can be qualified. There are qualifications for owning firearms that even most gun rights advocates support such as the mentally incompetent and felons so qualifications doesn't mean something can't be a right. So are you claiming that voting is a privilege not a right? If it's not right then why the the Constitution state "Right to vote"?

Dan Buchman · Post by **Dan Buchman** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:39 am

[/quote]Maybe we should teach gun safety more broadly. All 5 of the accidental shootings in the story below probably could have been avoided if the people would have practiced the most basic rules of firearm safety; TAB-K.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... w/1847879/[/quote]

I personaly would like to see gun safety taught in school so every kid has gone though it and I think it would help to decrease accidental shootings even more. But I don't see how it will ever stop people that want to kill other people.

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:22 pm

Dan Buchman wrote:

Maybe we should teach gun safety more broadly. All 5 of the accidental shootings in the story below probably could have been avoided if the people would have practiced the most basic rules of firearm safety; TAB-K.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... w/1847879/[/quote]

I personaly would like to see gun safety taught in school so every kid has gone though it and I think it would help to decrease accidental shootings even more. But I don't see how it will ever stop people that want to kill other people.

OK, we will include it. So now, who do you think should teach it? And who do you think will teach it?

Ezzy

Vman · Post by **Vman** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:26 pm

Was there a fight over 2nd Amendment rights when the law that states that we can only have three rounds in our shotgun for waterfowl hunting? Was there a fight when the Thompson machine gun was outlawed for unlicensed owners? I think not. But I can still own and shoot a Thompson if I have the proper Firearms license. I have to wonder if the same thing shouldn`t be for owning Military weapons. :roll:

Logic has too be applied by both sides in this issue and with our current gov. I don`t see that happening.
I just don`t see how anyone can look back at what has happened in Colorado, Arizona, Conn. in the last year and think there is not a problem. There are families in Conn. that had to bury 20 children and 6 adults. How can anyone tell those people that their loss is insignificant and we just have to learn too live with it and there is nothing we can do. That nutjob had the right too have those weapons.

I don`t believe the weapon itself is the problem. It is the Fascination that it inspires that is the problem, along with lack of respect for that weapon. I see nutjobs looking at glocks and M&Ps and Ar`s and I swear some of them get erections.{ no b.s.} Very scary.

Now I just read that Obama and the Gov. are buying up all the .223 ammo. so we can`t get it and we won`t have enough ammo when they come to take our guns. And the scary part of that is there are people that actually believe it!
One person came in and bought $3600 worth of ammunition and that is what he told me. :roll: I think he is still suffering from Y2K and the Mayan calender. I should have asked him if he had furniture in his bunker or if he sat on the ammo boxes.

dreamerofdreams · Post by **dreamerofdreams** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:36 pm

The firearms in question are not military weapons.

The solution to fascination is not making things more difficult to get but education.

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:44 pm

We obviously need a back ground check overhaul as well.

Vman · Post by **Vman** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:45 pm

The firearms in question are not military weapons.

FYI the M&P that Smith and Wesson stands for MILITARY & POLICE. They are produced in semi-auto handguns and on AR Platforms. The only difference is our civilian models are semi-auto and not fully auto, but can be converted if you put your mind too it.

The solution to fascination is not making things more difficult to get but education.

Agree, the main substance of my posts.

Dan Buchman · Post by **Dan Buchman** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:51 pm

ezzy333 wrote:
Dan Buchman wrote:
Maybe we should teach gun safety more broadly. All 5 of the accidental shootings in the story below probably could have been avoided if the people would have practiced the most basic rules of firearm safety; TAB-K.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... w/1847879/

I personaly would like to see gun safety taught in school so every kid has gone though it and I think it would help to decrease accidental shootings even more. But I don't see how it will ever stop people that want to kill other people.

OK, we will include it. So now, who do you think should teach it? And who do you think will teach it?

Ezzy[/quote]

Do I think it will happen no, is it a good idea in my opinion yes. One way I could see it working is one of the options in MN which is a one day 8 hour training course with volunteers doing the training.

Vman wrote:Was there a fight over 2nd Amendment rights when the law that states that we can only have three rounds in our shotgun for waterfowl hunting? Was there a fight when the Thompson machine gun was outlawed for unlicensed owners? I think not. But I can still own and shoot a Thompson if I have the proper Firearms license. I have to wonder if the same thing shouldn`t be for owning Military weapons. :roll:

Logic has too be applied by both sides in this issue and with our current gov. I don`t see that happening.
I just don`t see how anyone can look back at what has happened in Colorado, Arizona, Conn. in the last year and think there is not a problem. There are families in Conn. that had to bury 20 children and 6 adults. How can anyone tell those people that their loss is insignificant and we just have to learn too live with it and there is nothing we can do. That nutjob had the right too have those weapons.

I don`t believe the weapon itself is the problem. It is the Fascination that it inspires that is the problem, along with lack of respect for that weapon. I see nutjobs looking at glocks and M&Ps and Ar`s and I swear some of them get erections.{ no b.s.} Very scary.

Now I just read that Obama and the Gov. are buying up all the .223 ammo. so we can`t get it and we won`t have enough ammo when they come to take our guns. And the scary part of that is there are people that actually believe it!
One person came in and bought $3600 worth of ammunition and that is what he told me. :roll: I think he is still suffering from Y2K and the Mayan calender. I should have asked him if he had furniture in his bunker or if he sat on the ammo boxes.

As far as the 3 rounds for waterfowl hunting goes it just pretains in your gun when hunting waterfowl not the total capacity of the gun (if your gun can hold more than 3 shots you needed to have a plug in your gun).

I do and I think most people believe we have a problem but I don't see how more gun control is going to solve it. All gun control will do is change how crazy people do what they want to do such as a bomb like was used in the case in Michigan many years ago which I think is the largest school killing that has ever happened. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

Dan Buchman · Post by **Dan Buchman** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:01 pm

dreamerofdreams wrote:The firearms in question are not military weapons.

The solution to fascination is not making things more difficult to get but education.

+1

ACooper wrote:We obviously need a back ground check overhaul as well.

We have the system in place and we do a background check on all gun buyers of both pistols and long guns now. The NRA got that provision put into the Brady Bill. Our problem is in getting better data sharing between different goverment agencies.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics

Deets · Post by **Deets** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:16 pm

I think this water is getting a little muddy. We are talking about two different things. Gun safety, and mass murders. I don't think a safety class is going to keep mass murderers from killing people. Might actually make them more efficient. The fact is homicide is already illegal, and it has not stopped mass murderers. What makes anyone think they are going to obey gun laws. I agree with some of these other post. 2nd amendment is a right, not a privlage, and it has nothing to do with hunting.

dreamerofdreams · Post by **dreamerofdreams** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:26 pm

Vman wrote:
The firearms in question are not military weapons.
FYI the M&P that Smith and Wesson stands for MILITARY & POLICE. They are produced in semi-auto handguns and on AR Platforms. The only difference is our civilian models are semi-auto and not fully auto, but can be converted if you put your mind too it.

The solution to fascination is not making things more difficult to get but education.
Agree, the main substance of my posts.

I know very well what it stands for. What's in a name, though? ARs might look like military weapons but that does not make them so. Banning something based on looks is ridiculous. Converting it to full auto is already illegal.

Brazosvalleyvizslas · Post by **Brazosvalleyvizslas** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:36 pm

VMan, I was all set to have a civil discussion but when you start talking about Thompson's, 3 shot rule and erections, I have to highly doubt your experience with firearms. Your too emotional and irrational about the subject. You compared a Thompson MACHINE gun to a civilian AR. Both guns were offered in military and civilian versions. The difference is that military versions can shoot full auto while civilian versions are semi- auto. Your lack of knowledge pertaining to basic firearms has me questioning your comments about your experience in the industry. I've been excited to see puppies that I wanted to buy but I have yet to ever hear a breeder describe customers who came to see their puuies as "having an erection". WOW

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:36 pm

Dan Buchman wrote: We have the system in place and we do a background check on all gun buyers of both pistols and long guns now. The NRA got that provision put into the Brady Bill. Our problem is in getting better data sharing between different goverment agencies.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics

100% agreed we need open info between states and agency's, also access to mental health records should be part of the process.

I'm willing to be slightly inconvenienced for the greater good.

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:58 pm

ACooper wrote:
Dan Buchman wrote: We have the system in place and we do a background check on all gun buyers of both pistols and long guns now. The NRA got that provision put into the Brady Bill. Our problem is in getting better data sharing between different goverment agencies.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics
100% agreed we need open info between states and agency's, also access to mental health records should be part of the process.

I'm willing to be slightly inconvenienced for the greater good.

We have FOID Cards and background checks in IL and have had for years and as you can see it has had little effect on the streets of Chicago. WE don't have much problem in rural areas though just like the rest of the country. And the same guns are available. Wonder what the difference is since we know it isn't guns?

Ezzy

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:11 pm

Grange,

Just point out the language that is equal to this regarding voting rights.

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.

Now some can, and have, argued about the use of commas.

Fester · Post by **Fester** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:52 pm

Here is a problem some look over, you God given right to bear arms and defend yourself has absolutely nothing to do with hunting, period, we are hunters so sometimes we confuse the 2, you have a right to own and have guns for protection in this country, that is why we don't get invaded by the countries that hate us, if you want an AR by all means go and get yourself one, please don't get caught up in the talk about how guns kill ppl Diane Fienstien which I can't stand has the right to bear arms, I guess this is why she has a concealed carry permit, it is not in the least bit your rights as a hunter being infringed upon it;s your rights as an American, they tell us our forefathers had no way of knowing there would be semi automatic rifles, I agree but they also had no way of knowing there would be a group of ppl that would fly airplanes into our cities buildings and want all christians to die, wake up America don't be duped from within your own Government, who you have a right as a citizen to rise against if need be, don't put up with it.
Fester

ThreeWires · Post by **ThreeWires** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:04 pm

This is a good video on the topic:
► 10:46► 10:46
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1ERODZ7eac

These guys are hilarious and to the point.

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:13 pm

ezzy333 wrote: We have FOID Cards and background checks in IL and have had for years and as you can see it has had little effect on the streets of Chicago. WE don't have much problem in rural areas though just like the rest of the country. And the same guns are available. Wonder what the difference is since we know it isn't guns?

Unfortunately we as legal responsible gun owners are lumped into the same category as gun toting criminals. We must find a way to make it far more difficult than walking into a gun show or answering a classified add to purchase a firearm.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:17 pm

I am very concern about the anti-gun comments from sportsman, I can only hope you young and inexperienced.

The 2nd ammendend is clear, "- shall not be infinged". The true anti-gun zealots want total removal of all civilian owned guns - TOTAL, one "commonsense" gun control measure at a time until they reach that goal.

Our rights have been infringed upon since the 30's with the first gun ban, and continues. Even the concealed carry permit in an infringement.

Bankground checks on all gun sales sounds reasonable, but it would eliminate most private sales and even gifts to fa mily members. Think about it, how would you sell a gun to a known and trusted neighbor? How would you even do the check? At what cost?

Same with registration, sounds good, I am even for it were it done properly. But we are dealing with people that want no guns, so even now in some cities you have to pay a fee every year, have to wait hours in line for each gun. They deliberately do not hire enough staff, do not train them, so many that should be registered are not.

Please clearly think through these things befor you support

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:51 pm

Neil wrote:I am very concern about the anti-gun comments from sportsman, I can only hope you young and inexperienced.

The 2nd ammendend is clear, "- shall not be infinged". The true anti-gun zealots want total removal of all civilian owned guns - TOTAL, one "commonsense" gun control measure at a time until they reach that goal.

Our rights have been infringed upon since the 30's with the first gun ban, and continues. Even the concealed carry permit in an infringement.

Bankground checks on all gun sales sounds reasonable, but it would eliminate most private sales and even gifts to fa mily members. Think about it, how would you sell a gun to a known and trusted neighbor? How would you even do the check? At what cost?

Same with registration, sounds good, I am even for it were it done properly. But we are dealing with people that want no guns, so even now in some cities you have to pay a fee every year, have to wait hours in line for each gun. They deliberately do not hire enough staff, do not train them, so many that should be registered are not.

Please clearly think through these things befor you support

Spot on Neil.

Look at the restrictions that have been placed on the 2nd over the years. Then compare the restrictions to the 2nd to any other amendment. Voting rights are not even specifically referenced anywhere yet the "right to vote" has been expanded. Limits on the 1st? Oh, you can't yell fire in a theater....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... exceptions

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:15 pm

Thanks for the info Wyndancer.

Kindle is not letting me scroll, so excuse the typos.

I was going to add, if you have not fully studied the history of gun control, join the NRA, they have. And you don't have to agree with them on every issue. One thing they are right about is that we need more good guys with guns.

Every school should have armed security -EVERY.

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:47 pm

If you are a gun owner you should be a member of the NRA.

Nothing about registration sounds good, nothing at all.

I do think there needs to be some kind of solution to making it more difficult for criminals to get guns, granted I realize that they will find a way to get them no matter what we do. I do not have a problem with making it more difficult for them even if it is slightly more inconvenient for me.

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:14 pm

Wyndancer wrote:Grange,

Just point out the language that is equal to this regarding voting rights.

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.
Now some can, and have, argued about the use of commas.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

...But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

How many times does it need to say right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be abridged before people accept that US citizens have the right to vote? I ask basically the same question when it comes to the right to bear arms.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:23 pm

Well good Grange...I can pencil you down as a strident 2A supporter then....as it stands, no more concessions.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:31 pm

ACooper wrote:If you are a gun owner you should be a member of the NRA.

Nothing about registration sounds good, nothing at all.

I do think there needs to be some kind of solution to making it more difficult for criminals to get guns, granted I realize that they will find a way to get them no matter what we do. I do not have a problem with making it more difficult for them even if it is slightly more inconvenient for me.

The problem is that none of these murderous crazies have a criminal record, and I know a lot of mental health professionals, and all will be reluctant to deny a mentally disturbed person any of their rights, most give little sign of how crazy they are until they go off. And most have never been treated.

I cannot think of anything other than armed security that will even help.

Even if you got rid of every privately owned gun in the US. Please do not fall for "commonsense" gun control it is a ruse that will never end.

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:24 pm

We are all looking in the wrong place. Responsibility is taught in the home and then the school. When we decided God didn't need to be in either place and parents became more concerned with what someone owed them than earning what they want and need it changes the whole way of life that most of us grew up with. We are now reaping the benefits of our live style and don't seem to have a clue what has happened and how to get back to reasonable style of living. We will never solve all of the problems but when we have grown to 300,000,000 people and a thousand news outlets that are looking to make news rather than report it we hear so much more than we did in days past even if things get better.

There is a price to pay for freedom.

Ezzy

Brazosvalleyvizslas · Post by **Brazosvalleyvizslas** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:42 pm

Maybe the Gov should make u's take a class and get licensed for our freedom.

Sorry but I flew 10,000 miles, sweated , froze, bled and watched friends die for ANOTHER country. Why? Because my country asked me too. Now I'm supposed to let some non- American strip me of my 2nd Amendment American right? These people have an agenda and it doesn't involve the safety of kids. Look at the timing. New term. 4 years to get crap crammed down our throats with little recourse. I'm not an extremist but I did stay at a Holiday inn Express.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:17 pm

Whatever your position, please let your representative and senators know.

millerms06 · Post by **millerms06** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:09 pm

Does anyone have a thoughtful opinion about what is happening out east with the Eastern Sports and Outdoors show? Cabela's dropped its sponsorship of the event, and many hunting celebs and companies are dropping the event too.

Post by **ezzy333** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:13 pm

millerms06 wrote:Does anyone have a thoughtful opinion about what is happening out east with the Eastern Sports and Outdoors show? Cabela's dropped its sponsorship of the event, and many hunting celebs and companies are dropping the event too.

This comes on the heels of smaller retailers boycotting because of the decision by event organizer Reed Exhibitions to ban the display and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. The ban was imposed following the deadly school shooting in Newtown, Conn., that claimed the lives of 20 children and six women and reignited the gun-control debate.

Read more: http://lancasteronline.com/article/loca ... z2IdQwC4rC

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:48 pm

Did you notice the headlines from the same newspaper. Cj

millerms06 · Post by **millerms06** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:25 pm

No I didn't get to read that exact article. I just noticed all the banter on facebook with people posting official statements from Larry Weishun and Cabela's. Thanks for the read.

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:47 pm

Brazosvalleyvizslas wrote:Maybe the Gov should make u's take a class and get licensed for our freedom.

Sorry but I flew 10,000 miles, sweated , froze, bled and watched friends die for ANOTHER country. Why? Because my country asked me too. Now I'm supposed to let some non- American strip me of my 2nd Amendment American right? These people have an agenda and it doesn't involve the safety of kids. Look at the timing. New term. 4 years to get crap crammed down our throats with little recourse. I'm not an extremist but I did stay at a Holiday inn Express.

Who's the non-American?

MillerClemsonHD · Post by **MillerClemsonHD** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:01 pm

topher40 wrote: Miller Clemson-
Amen, but your preaching to the chior! I told my wife a couple days ago that if they outlaw guns only outlaws will have them. She stated that she understood, until.............. Then I told her that I am about to become an outlaw.

Sadly it doesn't look like I'm preaching to the choir.

They can outlaw any and all guns they want and the black market that already exist will only grow exponentially to fulfill demand. I'd love for someone who wants to ban certain guns to give 1 example of 1 thing that our government has outlawed and it prevented that thing from every happening again!!

cohanzick creek · Post by **cohanzick creek** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:46 pm

Good for Cabela's, I'm not going either.
cc

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:58 pm

cohanzick creek wrote:Good for Cabela's, I'm not going either.
cc

I 'm surprised and glad they pulled the backing along with the long list of other sponsors of the event, that should hurt the organizers, hopefully get them to realize who really is supporting the event.

Ruffshooter · Post by **Ruffshooter** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:14 pm

ACooper wrote:If you are a gun owner you should be a member of the NRA.

Nothing about registration sounds good, nothing at all.

I do think there needs to be some kind of solution to making it more difficult for criminals to get guns, granted I realize that they will find a way to get them no matter what we do. I do not have a problem with making it more difficult for them even if it is slightly more inconvenient for me.

What about something in this direction affecting private sales and gun shows/
Please be nice. I am very sensitive.
I am an NRA memeber have a dozen or so weapons etc.
What do you see that is inherantly wrong with this approach? Seriously.
Private Fire Arms Purchase Bill;
1) Premise of this Bill:
a. To reduce the incidents of illegal fire arms sales to criminals from private citizens.
b. To protect the seller of another’s illegal attempts to acquire legal weapons from legal citizens.
c. Right up front this will keep most intelligent criminals from trying to purchase firearms from private citizens thus protecting the public and the private citizen from being in contact with the alleged criminal.
Body of Bill:

1) Provide Law enforcement with the ability to institute a Federal and State Background check on the potential purchaser at the local governing law enforcement office.
2) The citizen would go to the local law enforcement agency and submit information for a back ground check.
3) Upon successfully passing the back ground check, the law enforcement agency would, hand the citizen, a certificate stating that the citizen that passed the back ground check.
4) The Certificate would be good for 21 days. This allows the citizen to find the weapon and make his or her deal to purchase the weapon.
5) When a legal citizen finds their desired weapons, The citizen must provide the seller with proper positive back ground certificate and two forms of ID one of which must be a State photo ID. The other a federal ID or Birth certificate.
6) Once the transaction is complete a copy of the Bill of Sale, certificate and the ID information will be submitted to the local law enforcement agency that will keep on hand for 90 days then will be destroyed.
7) The owner will keep their same records on hand for 90 days then destroyed.

A Fee of $10 dollars will be charged. $3.00 for Fed. $7.00 for the local law enforcement agency that instituted the Back Ground Check.
9) Gun shows should have Back ground checks or the purchaser could have this back ground check done in advance of a show.

Submitted by:

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:23 pm

There were two or three negligent weapon discharges in Ohio at gun shows lately...perhaps, responsibility best begins at home.
And, perhaps, that carries a realization that not everyone constitutionally and legally entitled should own a firearm.
Lot of nuts out and about and these left-field preppers and right-field tyranny-at-home Walter Mitty-type fighters are not helping the 2nd amendment stay intact.