AB, are you speaking of the VA Tech guy? I thought I heard someone say
on the news that police found a receipt for one of his guns, at least. I
couldn't swear to it, but I think he just "went and bought it."

To AB and Jean, I heard on the news that the Va Tech guy passed the
background check. Not really sure of all the facts.

doesent matter to me if he passed some background check, he would have
bought a gun on the street, or stole one. the bottom line is still that
no one was abole to dfend themselves against him due to our existing
laws, which of course are unconstitutional on thier face, for reasons
that should be obvious now.

Rambill, if he could obtain one illegally to commit a crime, then a
person could also obtain one illegally in order to defend himself.

Moreover, in this and similar cases, hindsight is 20/20. There simply
wasn't time to react, really.

Also, since when is it illegal for a law-abiding citizen to own a gun?
Or are you saying that people (the average citizen) should have the
right to carry a concealed weapon?

If that's what you're saying, oh, BOY, do I EVER disagree! Most human
beings are far too emotional and react far too impulsively, IMO.

I believe the "average" John Q. citizen is far too irresponsible to own
a gun, much less "go armed."

its in our constitution jean........THE RIGHT TO BARE ARMS!

I have had a change of hears, yes lets outlaw guns. Completely restrict
their possession to the military and police. Turn honest citizens into
criminals for owning a weapon to protect themselves. Then when there
are turf wars and drive by shootings over who is going to sell guns as
well as drugs, which currently happen to be illegal and completely
restricted, in a particular neighborhood, we can all sit in a circle
behing sandbags and wring our hands and wonder why people are not
following the law. The point is as I have stated previousl PROHIBITION
DOES NOT WORK! It did not work with alcohol in the 1920. It has not
worked with drugs and it will not work with guns. Behavior Management
teaches us that it is foolish to do more of the same thing and expect
different results. An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a
subject!

what did you say?????

I believe the "average" John Q. citizen is far too irresponsible to own
a gun, much less "go armed."?

I consider myself one of those "John Q. citizens.

THANK YOU FORGE.......a little common sence gose along way my freind.

I'm not arguing the right to bare arms, as I often go sleeveless
myself... sorry..couldn't resist.

However, if you're speaking about our constitutional "right" to BEAR
arms, your point would be..what, exactly?

That has no bearing on my OPINION, which is, that the "average" citizen
should not HAVE that right, because they're not responsible enough to be
granted that "right."

Gun ownership should NOT be a constitutional RIGHT for "just anyone,"
IMO, and my reasoning behind that should be obvious. If you are deemed
responsible enough to own and use a firearm, then you should be granted
a license, i.e., the "privilege" of owning a firearm.

We can't even get a DRIVER'S license, as a "right." We have to PROVE
that we are RESPONSIBLE enough to drive a car, because a car, in the
wrong hands, can be a deadly weapon.

Well, if a car can be, we certainly KNOW a gun can be, right? I think
this is proven on a daily basis, several times a day.

And we all know that every person operating a motor vehilce has the
appropriate license and insurance. While we are on the subject of cars,
it is an irrefutable fact that a motor vehicle has been used in every
drive by shooting, if we outlaw cars we can eliminate drive by
shootings. then we can outlaw bicycles and eliminate pedal by
shootings, then shoes so there will be no jog by shootings. the point
is that the criminals are already breaking the law what on Gods Green
Earth makes you think they will obey a new law if you pass one.

speaking of cars_________
http://www.usbjd.org/projects/project_op.cfm?dirID=144
with a total of 42,643 deaths and 2.89 million injuries in 2003. In
2002, 43,005 people were killed on the highways and 2.93 million
__________________

2/3 as many killed in auto releated as in the entire vietnam conflict

and that is after proper testing and licinsing

interesting
with numbers like that private ownership of autos should be outlawed
--------i dont think so-----
_________________________________
previous post
I'm sorry, but could you show me where I said that, or even IMPLIED it?
I say what I mean and mean what I say.
-----
saying it

Freedom of speech IS a "right," because, last I checked, I've never
known anyone's mere words to directly cause the death or maiming of
another human being.
-----
my response
so you are saying that there was never a lynch mob

raised to anger by the rantings of someone screaming

that man did such and such to so and so

and someone yells string em up and they hang them from a tree
---
or there has never been a gay killing because of the antics

of homophopics preaching their hate for those that are not

of the same sexual orintation that they are
_______________________________________
another statement
What I AM saying is that if you point a gun at someone and pull the
trigger, they're very likely to be killed--or at least injured. If you
yell something at someone, even vicious, hateful words, the words are
not going to, in and of themselves, cause their death or even physical
injury.
--------
you make it sound like anytime a gun is raised someone gets shot that is
ludacris
just like saying words can not lead to the death or maiming of another
is ludacris
they have in the past and they will in the future

the word may not inflict the pain but they can cause the action that
does

Why do people think that if they do not have a gun, that they are
helpless? It's unfortunate that some think this way. I do not
personally own a gun, and I do not think of myself as helpless. There
are many other ways to protect yourself, including being street smart.

oh and by the way jeanc

although i beleive your thoughts on this subjuct are mostly
wrong and will lead to the down fall of freedoms in this country
because if the people have no way to revolt (bear arms) then soon after
the freedoms we enjoy will be taken away as well

i do respect you for your fortatude to stick to (your guns)so
to speak

sorry could not resist

Yep, opinions & azzholes, some are just bigger & stinkyer than others.

Palhaco:

i don't know that they have said that but read
my previous post

there is more to this than just protection

and i to used to be able to protct myself without
a gun and still can to apoint

but sense i have many health problem would be the
consaquenses if i try to

and tell that to those killed at the many mass murders
that their family was just not smart enough to protect themselves (that
is a pretty lame thing to insinuate)
------
your statement
There are many other ways to protect yourself, including being street
smart.
--------

be well

and may much good come to you and yours

2/3 as many killed in auto releated as in the entire vietnam conflict
and that is after proper testing and licinsing...

Umm, and this is relevant to the discussion of gun control ...how,
exactly?

"you make it sound like anytime a gun is raised someone gets shot that
is ludacris.."

No, I did NOT say that...but since YOU did, are you stating that a
person should have the right to use a gun as a means of merely
THREATENING someone?

"just like saying words can not lead to the death or maiming of another
is ludacris they have in the past and they will in the future."

Who said that? Not I. I did NOT say that words could LEAD to the death
or maiming of someone, I said the words THEMSELVES could not kill or
maim someone. I was making a point about how ludicrous that statement
is, compared to how equally ludicrous the statement "Guns don't kill
people, people kill people" is.

"The word may not inflict the pain but they can cause the action that
does.

Never said they couldn't. The gun can't inflict the pain, either, it has
to have someone behind it to do the "inflicting."

"although i beleive your thoughts on this subjuct are mostly
wrong and will lead to the down fall of freedoms in this country
because if the people have no way to revolt (bear arms) then soon after
the freedoms we enjoy will be taken away as well"


I believe you don't have a clue what my thoughts are on this subject,
because you've misconstrued and misquoted me more than once.

And what's more, I think it's ridiculous to assume that just because I
believe there should be restrictions on WHO gets to own firearms, that
that will automatically lead to other freedoms being taken away.

That's an argument that has no real basis in fact, from what I can tell.

your statment


What I AM saying is that if you point a gun at someone and pull the
trigger, they're very likely to be killed--or at least injured. If you
yell something at someone, even vicious, hateful words, the words are
not going to, in and of themselves, cause their death or even physical
injury.
------
you did say pull the trigger
but the thought is implanted

-------------

you brought the auto in to this discusion

your statement

We can't even get a DRIVER'S license, as a "right." We have to PROVE
that we are RESPONSIBLE enough to drive a car, because a car, in the
wrong hands, can be a deadly weapon.

-------
another of your statements

Who said that? Not I. I did NOT say that words could LEAD to the death
or maiming of someone, I said the words THEMSELVES could not kill or
maim someone. I was making a point about how ludicrous that statement
is, compared to how equally ludicrous the statement "Guns don't kill
people, people kill people" is.
---
guns themselves don't kill neither bullets do

but the results the same

whether it is the bullet that kills them
or the response to the words that enraged the mob

I never said that anyone who was killed during a mass murder incident
was not smart enough to protect themselves.. I think it's pretty
obvious I didn't say that....

I'm not here to argue with anyone, not placing blame on liberals or
republicans who cares? I personally don't... I'm just stating the
simple fact that there are other ways to protect yourself... My
personal opinion.. I like guns, shot alot of them, grew up with them,
don't own one though. Would probably never carry one with me.

To really protect yourself you need to be doing more than just carrying
a firearm.
If you don't agree, then you don't... It's all good

your statement
I believe you don't have a clue what my thoughts are on this subject,
because you've misconstrued and misquoted me more than once.

------
if copy and paste misquotes you then i am sorry

_________________
another statement
And what's more, I think it's ridiculous to assume that just because I
believe there should be restrictions on WHO gets to own firearms, that
that will automatically lead to other freedoms being taken away.

read your history books