100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Guns Guns Guns | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
i have lived in 2 states, both southern where guns are a way of life for most true born southerners. i grew up hunting and feeding myself with fresh meat and fresh homegrown veggies. to me gun control is hitting what the hell you aim at. as far as home defense, there aint too many crooks that will stay in a home when they here a shotgun jack a round into the chamber. i have had sheriffs deputies tell me if someone was trying to break into my home unload on them and if they fall out of the door to drag them in. but both states i live in have self defense laws. when guns get banned honest law abiding citizens abide by the rules and the crooks, ie the drug dealers, gang bangers, and all around bad boys get their hands on them with ease. 
I think ammo should be a tax write off... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is why i go to gun shows, ammo is really cheap for the guns i like to shoot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone tell me when you would need a semiautomatic gun for hunting? It's like everything else, cars - everything improves, technology advances: guns revolvers semi automatic automatic why not use it if available? (opposing view) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone tell me when you would need a semiautomatic gun for hunting? It's like everything else, cars - everything improves, technology advances: guns revolvers semi automatic automatic why not use it if available? (opposing view)
seems simple enough to me 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My opinion is that the "bad guys" and government are always gonna have guns. Why take away the right for the good guys to protect themselves????? The only issue I have with this is I hope that the "good" guy who is not mentally well but well enough to have a gun and decides to play target practice at the mall because he is pissed off, that he only hits the other "good" guys with guns and none of the innocent bystanders like a kid or an adult who does not think guns are good in any sense. You can always tell the guys who have guns, they act just a bit more cocky. Walking or driving around waiting impatiently for someone to let them use the gun. I believe every smart, level headed, even tempered, psychologically well, respectful person should be able to own a gun if they so please. The problem is that the majority of who I listed above find absolutely no reason to own a gun because of the reasons I listed above and that IS A BIG PROBLEM. Here's a solution... Course manditory in highschool - firearms safety, handling, caring, and carrying... Upon highschool graduation every citizen, unless given a violent history of constant arrest, or sever mental disorder, is issued a military grade firearm and 500 bullets to go with it. Not to mention permission to carry it anywhere... except bars. Me thinks that would drastically reduce our crime rate... Actually it would not as is proven by the states who allow guns more freely. There is more "accidental" shootings, more rage shootings, more domestic violence shootings, etc.... Here is the logic that goes behind what I said. Gun ownership is an emmense, EMMENSE RESPONSIBILITY. The operative word here is responsibility. It is a gun owners responsibility to insure that the weapon never, NEVER gets into the wrong hands, children, theifs, etc... Most gun owners cannot insure this responsibility. It is a gun owners RESPONSIBILITY TO NEVER BRANDISH THE WEAPON FOR INTIMIDATION OR EFFECT. Most gun owners do not do this one either. It is the gun owners responsibility to never, NEVER BE OUT OF THEIR MINDS AT ANY INSTANCE, so drinking is not being responsible when you have a gun, being hatefilled to others is not responsible when you have a gun, having disputes with your neighbors is not responsible when you have a gun, having road rage is not responsible when you have a gun, having a domestic dispute with your family is not responsible when you have a gun, going through a divorce may not be a responsible thing to do when you have a gun, etc.... So if and only if the gun owner can be fully responsible ie the above and more and if they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt their mental capacity is beyond question and promise to NEVER, EVER drink or do any drugs including prescription that may take them out of their minds and pass a test showing markmanship, gun cleanliness and correct storage, then and ONLY THEN may they possibly be RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH to own a weapon. LOGIC BEHIND THIS IS HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART AN ATTACK OR A ROBBERY? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART A RUNAWAY GOVERNMENT? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A GUN BEING USED FOR A GOOD PURPOSE IN THIS COUNTRY? Like I said before as long as the gun owners are the only ones hit when a maniac goes to shootin' then I am okay with it. If innocent bystanders get hit with these bullets that have no names on them then I have a problem with it. It is fair warfare if only the gun owners get hit because both parties have guns. It is unfair warfare if any one gets hit or killed who doesn't have a gun. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone tell me when you would need a semiautomatic gun for hunting? When your in bear country. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone tell me when you would need a semiautomatic gun for hunting? and reason number 1. Why should I own more than one... With that one I can hunt as I need... And also be able to be part of that american tradition... the right to bear arms. Mass homicide don't happen in a country where the citizens are armed. (and have the guts to use it) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My opinion is that the "bad guys" and government are always gonna have guns. Why take away the right for the good guys to protect themselves????? The only issue I have with this is I hope that the "good" guy who is not mentally well but well enough to have a gun and decides to play target practice at the mall because he is pissed off, that he only hits the other "good" guys with guns and none of the innocent bystanders like a kid or an adult who does not think guns are good in any sense. You can always tell the guys who have guns, they act just a bit more cocky. Walking or driving around waiting impatiently for someone to let them use the gun. I believe every smart, level headed, even tempered, psychologically well, respectful person should be able to own a gun if they so please. The problem is that the majority of who I listed above find absolutely no reason to own a gun because of the reasons I listed above and that IS A BIG PROBLEM.   i am joost dummer now affter reeding this
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My opinion is that the "bad guys" and government are always gonna have guns. Why take away the right for the good guys to protect themselves????? The only issue I have with this is I hope that the "good" guy who is not mentally well but well enough to have a gun and decides to play target practice at the mall because he is pissed off, that he only hits the other "good" guys with guns and none of the innocent bystanders like a kid or an adult who does not think guns are good in any sense. You can always tell the guys who have guns, they act just a bit more cocky. Walking or driving around waiting impatiently for someone to let them use the gun. I believe every smart, level headed, even tempered, psychologically well, respectful person should be able to own a gun if they so please. The problem is that the majority of who I listed above find absolutely no reason to own a gun because of the reasons I listed above and that IS A BIG PROBLEM. i am joost dummer now affter reeding this
You must not have read it right then
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Its not the guns that kill people, there just a tool. If guns kill people, u can blame misspelled words on your pencil! (Quote, LCG) Natural Selection would end that controversy 
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Mon 10/20/08 09:38 AM
|
|
Actually it would not as is proven by the states who allow guns more freely. There is more "accidental" shootings, more rage shootings, more domestic violence shootings, etc.... Actually, im pretty sure that its been proven the the more strict places are with gun control, the higher the crime rate. Makes sense to me. When in doubt, revert back to our constitution... There is a reason we are given this right. The governmen should not dictate who can own and use firearms. Every law abiding citizen should be given the right to use any weapon that does not propose a "clear and present danger" to the general population. Things like granade launchers and explosives can be dangerous as hell for one person to go rampaging. But even with a full auto, how far do you think a shooter would get if every citizen were armed? Fully automatic weapons, and semiautomatic weapons should be allowed, just like we allow free speech, we allow law abiding citizens to carry firearms. This was the intent. If at any time martial law is declared and us citizens are forced to give up their constitutional rights, it would be nice to have as many well armed citizens as possible now wouldn't it? In the old west, the only thing they noticed that increased, is that people in bars would get drunk, fight, and shoot eachother at times. All other violent crimes were at 5% of what they are in modern cities with increased gun control. More guns = reduction in violence. here is an interesting quote: "25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy. However, 4 out of 5 US murders are committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?" -- Andrew Ford |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D.C. had the highest gun restrictions in the U.S. until recently, now why did they have one of the highest murder rates?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My opinion is that the "bad guys" and government are always gonna have guns. Why take away the right for the good guys to protect themselves????? The only issue I have with this is I hope that the "good" guy who is not mentally well but well enough to have a gun and decides to play target practice at the mall because he is pissed off, that he only hits the other "good" guys with guns and none of the innocent bystanders like a kid or an adult who does not think guns are good in any sense. You can always tell the guys who have guns, they act just a bit more cocky. Walking or driving around waiting impatiently for someone to let them use the gun. I believe every smart, level headed, even tempered, psychologically well, respectful person should be able to own a gun if they so please. The problem is that the majority of who I listed above find absolutely no reason to own a gun because of the reasons I listed above and that IS A BIG PROBLEM. Here's a solution... Course manditory in highschool - firearms safety, handling, caring, and carrying... Upon highschool graduation every citizen, unless given a violent history of constant arrest, or sever mental disorder, is issued a military grade firearm and 500 bullets to go with it. Not to mention permission to carry it anywhere... except bars. Me thinks that would drastically reduce our crime rate... Actually it would not as is proven by the states who allow guns more freely. There is more "accidental" shootings, more rage shootings, more domestic violence shootings, etc.... Here is the logic that goes behind what I said. Gun ownership is an emmense, EMMENSE RESPONSIBILITY. The operative word here is responsibility. It is a gun owners responsibility to insure that the weapon never, NEVER gets into the wrong hands, children, theifs, etc... Most gun owners cannot insure this responsibility. It is a gun owners RESPONSIBILITY TO NEVER BRANDISH THE WEAPON FOR INTIMIDATION OR EFFECT. Most gun owners do not do this one either. It is the gun owners responsibility to never, NEVER BE OUT OF THEIR MINDS AT ANY INSTANCE, so drinking is not being responsible when you have a gun, being hatefilled to others is not responsible when you have a gun, having disputes with your neighbors is not responsible when you have a gun, having road rage is not responsible when you have a gun, having a domestic dispute with your family is not responsible when you have a gun, going through a divorce may not be a responsible thing to do when you have a gun, etc.... So if and only if the gun owner can be fully responsible ie the above and more and if they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt their mental capacity is beyond question and promise to NEVER, EVER drink or do any drugs including prescription that may take them out of their minds and pass a test showing markmanship, gun cleanliness and correct storage, then and ONLY THEN may they possibly be RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH to own a weapon. LOGIC BEHIND THIS IS HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART AN ATTACK OR A ROBBERY? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART A RUNAWAY GOVERNMENT? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A GUN BEING USED FOR A GOOD PURPOSE IN THIS COUNTRY? Like I said before as long as the gun owners are the only ones hit when a maniac goes to shootin' then I am okay with it. If innocent bystanders get hit with these bullets that have no names on them then I have a problem with it. It is fair warfare if only the gun owners get hit because both parties have guns. It is unfair warfare if any one gets hit or killed who doesn't have a gun. When you use a gun for a so called 'good' purpose you are instantly arrested, sued, reviled by the media, and generally made out to be a bad guy. example... Man in my home town was hired to guard a warehouse. One day two young thugs (criminal history's of several pages) decided to climb an 8' fence. They entered the warehouse and SHOT the man. He returned fire, killing one of them and wounding the other. The police came, arrested the GUARD. He was later released but the family of the criminal that died SUED him and won... He lost most of what he owned paying off the suit. THIS IS JUSTICE? It is one of the reasons that some gun owners don't take action more often in circumstances. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My opinion is that the "bad guys" and government are always gonna have guns. Why take away the right for the good guys to protect themselves????? The only issue I have with this is I hope that the "good" guy who is not mentally well but well enough to have a gun and decides to play target practice at the mall because he is pissed off, that he only hits the other "good" guys with guns and none of the innocent bystanders like a kid or an adult who does not think guns are good in any sense. You can always tell the guys who have guns, they act just a bit more cocky. Walking or driving around waiting impatiently for someone to let them use the gun. I believe every smart, level headed, even tempered, psychologically well, respectful person should be able to own a gun if they so please. The problem is that the majority of who I listed above find absolutely no reason to own a gun because of the reasons I listed above and that IS A BIG PROBLEM. Here's a solution... Course manditory in highschool - firearms safety, handling, caring, and carrying... Upon highschool graduation every citizen, unless given a violent history of constant arrest, or sever mental disorder, is issued a military grade firearm and 500 bullets to go with it. Not to mention permission to carry it anywhere... except bars. Me thinks that would drastically reduce our crime rate... Actually it would not as is proven by the states who allow guns more freely. There is more "accidental" shootings, more rage shootings, more domestic violence shootings, etc.... Here is the logic that goes behind what I said. Gun ownership is an emmense, EMMENSE RESPONSIBILITY. The operative word here is responsibility. It is a gun owners responsibility to insure that the weapon never, NEVER gets into the wrong hands, children, theifs, etc... Most gun owners cannot insure this responsibility. It is a gun owners RESPONSIBILITY TO NEVER BRANDISH THE WEAPON FOR INTIMIDATION OR EFFECT. Most gun owners do not do this one either. It is the gun owners responsibility to never, NEVER BE OUT OF THEIR MINDS AT ANY INSTANCE, so drinking is not being responsible when you have a gun, being hatefilled to others is not responsible when you have a gun, having disputes with your neighbors is not responsible when you have a gun, having road rage is not responsible when you have a gun, having a domestic dispute with your family is not responsible when you have a gun, going through a divorce may not be a responsible thing to do when you have a gun, etc.... So if and only if the gun owner can be fully responsible ie the above and more and if they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt their mental capacity is beyond question and promise to NEVER, EVER drink or do any drugs including prescription that may take them out of their minds and pass a test showing markmanship, gun cleanliness and correct storage, then and ONLY THEN may they possibly be RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH to own a weapon. LOGIC BEHIND THIS IS HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART AN ATTACK OR A ROBBERY? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART A RUNAWAY GOVERNMENT? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A GUN BEING USED FOR A GOOD PURPOSE IN THIS COUNTRY? Like I said before as long as the gun owners are the only ones hit when a maniac goes to shootin' then I am okay with it. If innocent bystanders get hit with these bullets that have no names on them then I have a problem with it. It is fair warfare if only the gun owners get hit because both parties have guns. It is unfair warfare if any one gets hit or killed who doesn't have a gun. People need to be taught to behave responsibly with their responsibilities. Education is key. Inform the masses. We have all failed at freedom when we just say, "if people can't act responsibly, we must take that responsibility away." This is our contry's original philosophy. Don't like it, deal, or move to a country you agree with... Check this out. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion. -Thomas Jefferson They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty. - Benjamin Franklin We cannot give up this essential liberty to obtain temporary safety for a few... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My opinion is that the "bad guys" and government are always gonna have guns. Why take away the right for the good guys to protect themselves????? The only issue I have with this is I hope that the "good" guy who is not mentally well but well enough to have a gun and decides to play target practice at the mall because he is pissed off, that he only hits the other "good" guys with guns and none of the innocent bystanders like a kid or an adult who does not think guns are good in any sense. You can always tell the guys who have guns, they act just a bit more cocky. Walking or driving around waiting impatiently for someone to let them use the gun. I believe every smart, level headed, even tempered, psychologically well, respectful person should be able to own a gun if they so please. The problem is that the majority of who I listed above find absolutely no reason to own a gun because of the reasons I listed above and that IS A BIG PROBLEM. Here's a solution... Course manditory in highschool - firearms safety, handling, caring, and carrying... Upon highschool graduation every citizen, unless given a violent history of constant arrest, or sever mental disorder, is issued a military grade firearm and 500 bullets to go with it. Not to mention permission to carry it anywhere... except bars. Me thinks that would drastically reduce our crime rate... Actually it would not as is proven by the states who allow guns more freely. There is more "accidental" shootings, more rage shootings, more domestic violence shootings, etc.... Here is the logic that goes behind what I said. Gun ownership is an emmense, EMMENSE RESPONSIBILITY. The operative word here is responsibility. It is a gun owners responsibility to insure that the weapon never, NEVER gets into the wrong hands, children, theifs, etc... Most gun owners cannot insure this responsibility. It is a gun owners RESPONSIBILITY TO NEVER BRANDISH THE WEAPON FOR INTIMIDATION OR EFFECT. Most gun owners do not do this one either. It is the gun owners responsibility to never, NEVER BE OUT OF THEIR MINDS AT ANY INSTANCE, so drinking is not being responsible when you have a gun, being hatefilled to others is not responsible when you have a gun, having disputes with your neighbors is not responsible when you have a gun, having road rage is not responsible when you have a gun, having a domestic dispute with your family is not responsible when you have a gun, going through a divorce may not be a responsible thing to do when you have a gun, etc.... So if and only if the gun owner can be fully responsible ie the above and more and if they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt their mental capacity is beyond question and promise to NEVER, EVER drink or do any drugs including prescription that may take them out of their minds and pass a test showing markmanship, gun cleanliness and correct storage, then and ONLY THEN may they possibly be RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH to own a weapon. LOGIC BEHIND THIS IS HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART AN ATTACK OR A ROBBERY? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A WEAPON BEING USED TO THWART A RUNAWAY GOVERNMENT? HOW OFTEN DO YOU HEAR OF A GUN BEING USED FOR A GOOD PURPOSE IN THIS COUNTRY? Like I said before as long as the gun owners are the only ones hit when a maniac goes to shootin' then I am okay with it. If innocent bystanders get hit with these bullets that have no names on them then I have a problem with it. It is fair warfare if only the gun owners get hit because both parties have guns. It is unfair warfare if any one gets hit or killed who doesn't have a gun. When you use a gun for a so called 'good' purpose you are instantly arrested, sued, reviled by the media, and generally made out to be a bad guy. example... Man in my home town was hired to guard a warehouse. One day two young thugs (criminal history's of several pages) decided to climb an 8' fence. They entered the warehouse and SHOT the man. He returned fire, killing one of them and wounding the other. The police came, arrested the GUARD. He was later released but the family of the criminal that died SUED him and won... He lost most of what he owned paying off the suit. THIS IS JUSTICE? It is one of the reasons that some gun owners don't take action more often in circumstances.  That just makes me ill. But it is the truth nevertheless.
Stuff like that happens all the time. If i were rich i swear i would dedicate my life to paying for representation for people like that.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh people, bad stuff happens all the time
I think it's everyone choice whether or not to bear arms; mine is for bearing arms, automatic/semi automatic/revolvers/pistols hell bee bee guns. It is my right and I so chose to bear arms. Does not make me a murderer. Does not mean I must explain why (if I do/dont) hunt. Does not mean I should satisfy anyone's curiosity as to why I own (or dont own) x amt of guns. People who are out to do harm, will do just that harm others. People who are out to kill will do just that kill. Guns dont kill people. They are an inanimate object. Because one (or many) decided to use guns for wrong doesnt not mean I should put mine down because of their actions. sorry just my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh people, bad stuff happens all the time I think it's everyone choice whether or not to bear arms; mine is for bearing arms, automatic/semi automatic/revolvers/pistols hell bee bee guns. It is my right and I so chose to bear arms. Does not make me a murderer. Does not mean I must explain why (if I do/dont) hunt. Does not mean I should satisfy anyone's curiosity as to why I own (or dont own) x amt of guns. People who are out to do harm, will do just that harm others. People who are out to kill will do just that kill. Guns dont kill people. They are an inanimate object. Because one (or many) decided to use guns for wrong doesnt not mean I should put mine down because of their actions. sorry just my opinion. That sounds like a very well thought out, educated opinion...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh people, bad stuff happens all the time I think it's everyone choice whether or not to bear arms; mine is for bearing arms, automatic/semi automatic/revolvers/pistols hell bee bee guns. It is my right and I so chose to bear arms. Does not make me a murderer. Does not mean I must explain why (if I do/dont) hunt. Does not mean I should satisfy anyone's curiosity as to why I own (or dont own) x amt of guns. People who are out to do harm, will do just that harm others. People who are out to kill will do just that kill. Guns dont kill people. They are an inanimate object. Because one (or many) decided to use guns for wrong doesnt not mean I should put mine down because of their actions. sorry just my opinion. That sounds like a very well thought out, educated opinion...
I say live and let live, if you want regulate the economy/congress/govt stay out of my home. just my opinion |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I don't have a problem with semi-auto rifles....they are extemely fun for shooting small moving targets (gophers and critters).....it is also very hard to commit crime with a rifle......I believe the problem here is how easy it is for the high population of un-educated dumba$$es we have in this country to get their hands on all kinds of guns....especially concielable handguns....now the crime problem has gotten so bad and all the dumba$$ criminals have handguns and are usually too stupid to think about the consiquences of thier actions.....so that leaves the rest of the responsible and smart citizens feeling afriad, and wanting to protect themselves and thier families....it a viscious cycle....but responsible(legal) gun owners are NOT the problem.....I do believe there could be more legislation on guns though....to make it not so easy for gangsta's to get thier hands on them......but in order for that to be successful the gov't would have to claim an all out war on the black-market gun trade that they themselves have created....
and one criminal was quoted as saying" its getting bad around here, you cant mug anyone without them pulling a gun on you" maybe its less restrictions that are needed NOT more!!! JMO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California and DC Have the Highest Crime Rates in the Country. they Also Have some of the Strictest Gun Laws. Unfortunately for those who Make the Laws Criminals don't Abide by them. the Midwest which has the Highest Rate of Gun Ownership has the lowest Crime Rates, Hmmm Wonder Why?
|
|
|
|
|
