smf85 Loc: Freeport, IL

I don’t personally own any guns; however, I will stand up for anyone’s right to purchase one easily. Including me, if I so decide at a future date.

Anyone who owns property should have the right to arms appropriate to the property. The only limitation I would put on this is a limitation that you don’t have the right to discharge the weapon within range of my property or me without good cause. No limitation on discharge where it cannot reach me or my property.

Further, one should be able to carry a weapon wherever they choose. With the following understanding - if its in your hand the assumption is that you intend to use it. Everyone around you should act with the understanding that’s your intent. It is suggested that you do not take your weapon out without good clear intent. If its not in your hand, especially if its in a closed holster or carrying device the assumption is that you do not intend to use it. People should also act appropriate to your lack of intent. Placing your hand on it should be universally recognized as an indication that you are afraid for you life right now. Additionally, the owner of private property should be able to determine if they allow weapons on their property. Without Limitation as its theirs.

Gun control is being able to correctly select your target and hitting it when you fire (preferably in the center of body mass). If you can’t do that you shouldn’t carry a gun away from your home. Defending your home is another story, still good gun control is suggested as a valuable skill.

Shooting someone in the back is a crime. Simple as that. Doesn’t matter who they are, how long their record is, how violent they’ve been, or how hostile they’ve just been, or how afraid you were. Only exception should be if they are running away from you to harm someone else, without a reasonable doubt in your mind that this is the intent. It should also be perfectly reasonable to have to explain such action to a grand jury of 12.

Yes I believe in strong property rights. I don’t even think real property should be taxed. Everything else, maybe - better if you can get me to directly vote for it; definitely as low as possible.

These are my opinions - perhaps they’re good, perhaps I’m an idiot and they’re awful. Maybe I’m just crazy. The 1st amendment protects my expression of them. Which is the other thing I’ll stand up for - even if its to protect {put someone you despise in here} who has the {put a political position you despise in here}. It’s easy to protect the opinion’s of those who you agree with; the real test is can you stand up for those whose opinions you disagree with? Equally so, words have consequences and I feel that everyone listening has the rights to act or react to what you say. To believe your words. Not what they think you said, what you actually said.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Your last paragraph is what must happen when we seek to compromise on the dimensions of solutions to issues

jcs Loc: USA

you actually make Biden sound intelligent . lol

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

I think there is one exception: If someone committed a crime and criminal sees that the cop has his gun out and the cop yells, STOP, STOP and the criminal keeps running, then it's justified.

mwalsh Loc: Houston

Its a matter of degree...

smf85 Loc: Freeport, IL

That poster made me think of something.

After the Cold War ended interesting information surfaced about Stalin and the U.S. West Coast - particularly Alaska. Stalin had war plans drawn up for an invasion. Officials quickly realized that not only would they have to defeat the U.S. Army, on its home ground, defending Americans on their soil from a foreign aggressor, they would be endlessly bled and ground down by the local population. A population that was more than capable of hitting then fading into the wilderness and living off the land indefinitely. A armed hostile population that would rapidly swell by virtual of the fact that those with guns and training would share both with other Americans. Someone realized the casualty rates that would follow from this. At which point Beria poisoned Stalin. He later claimed that it was to prevent that war from occurring. Do I know this to be a fact - no. The facts that I have are that war plans were drawn up and Beria did poison Stalin.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

As an ex cop I have to disagree. Unless the running man has already harmed someone AND may harm someone else imminently the cop may not shoot. The old Fleeing Felon rule is no more.

The fleeing man may not hear the cop yell to Stop. What if the crime is auto theft, drug use, shoplifting, something for which there is no death penalty? Things are not as they were in the 1950’s.

Dennis

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

This same thinking goes back to right after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and then did not strike the West Coast.

Dennis

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

I agree with you.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

I have done non law enforcement work between the DAYTON PD and the public ... and it always amazed me how many people believe ONE ADAM 12 is real.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Any crime?

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

Wake up Tom.

Reed and Malloy were TV characters.

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

As you travel Alaska, sport fishing as I have, you will notice bunkers along the shorelines of the islands. They are concrete block and there were large guns, like cannons mounted on the ground to defend against invaders. If you go in them, they are quite large and housed the look outs and kept supplies. It is common to see them.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

I know it's a tough issue but kind of a ramble.