dljen wrote:
Sorry for all the vitriol here, Del. If you mention guns or god here, you're taking your life in your hands. There are many irresponsible gun owners in the US, though most of the others choose to ignore that fact. Daily, there are injuries and deaths when a child plays with a gun that a relative carelessly places out in the open. There are too many guns in America and it makes us look like stupid people to the rest of the world. jmnsho, of course.
Children who are ignorant and who have been deliberately kept ignorant about firearms will be injured if negligent adults allow. They can also be injured by power saws left around carelessly by adults, or open flame cooktops, so let's ban the too. Or, lets we adults teach the kids what they need to know, and supervise them appropriately.
timepass wrote:
Tennessee will be a modern day Deadwood,Tombstone or
Dodge City, if the put the law into effect.Glad I don't live there.
Guess you'd rather live in a city with strict gun laws that the law abiding folks obey but the criminals don't. You are so much safer there where the only armed people are the bad guys!
dljen wrote:
Did anyone ever notice that ppl who need guns don't feel the need to mention it, yet the ppl who are compensating, brag. Ironic!
LOL! You have never been to a local gun store in a small town! That's obvious. Bragging? I think NOT!
UXOEOD wrote:
Felons can not get CCW Permits, but that lack doesn't seem to keep them from carrying and using weapons. Please explain why, given that CCW Permits don't deter criminals, why an Open Carry Permit would?
The intent behind my question is either to become better informed, or to illustrate the falacy in you argument.
So taking away weapons from law abiding folks WOULD deter criminals? That makes a lot of sense. Everyone should be disarmed EXCEPT the felons, and let's be sure the felons all know this! You are misinformed - as the news outlets devoted to promoting the "progressive" agenda want you to be. The fact is that in ccw states, opportunistic crime is always curtailed to some extent. Only if you are sure your victim is helpless will you assault him without fear.
What about the kid that recently went on a stabbing rampage? I guess we have to ban "assault knives". Nobody NEEDS a long knife, or a sharp knife. Carve your turkey with a jigsaw, cut your steak with a box cutter. Oops, forgot about flight 93!
[i]quote: I firmly believe we have a right to bear arms but not one's produced expressly for the purpose of killing people. I believe our fore fathers never thought that AK47 or other high powered multi capacity magazine would be produced and sold for the purpose of killing innocent people
First of all, the Kalashnikov 47 is not the same as the popular US rifles, the AR15 and M4! What an incredibly ignorant statement: "produced and sold for the purpose of killing innocent people". These rifles shoot a missile similar to a 22 caliber. Yes with a bigger propulsive charge than a 22 long rifle, but a very small bullet. They are by no means "high powered". They are very good for home defense precisely because though they fire a very small bullet, they have magazines with multiple cartridges. Most home invasions involve multiple invaders. What does one do if one has a firearm with one load, when confronted by multiple assailants? Give up and die, I guess.
Thank you but I own a NICE LITTLE RIFLE which is small, light and maneuverable, with little or no recoil, and has a magazine with enough cartridges to repel multiple invaders should they come calling at my isolated property. It is an AR-15. It is NOT here for the purpose of killing innocent people, but for PROTECTING innocent people! It is also fun for target shooting, and my 10 and 12 year old grandsons enjoy shooting it too.
Oveis checked with web site for Jeffersons Monticello for help in authenticating the quote. The site says:
We currently have no evidence that Thomas Jefferson said or wrote The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it or any of its listed variations.
The absence of evidence is not proof of non - existence. So the quote's provenance is controversial. Jefferson had plenty to say on the subject suffice it to say!
[quote=FLHTED]Yoy being a Brit I can understand why you don't understand. We in the U.S. revolted against the U.K. in order to free ourselves from the shackles that King George bound us with.
The most fundamental right we have is that of LIFE. Who can guarantee that right? If someone wants to force entry to my house and kill me, who is there to protect my right to LIFE? Only me. As an old woman, how can i do that, being physically inferior to almost everyone else? Only by having a serious weapon at hand. My life is MY responsibility, and that being the case, I have the right to the means to fulfil that responsibility. Without a weapon, I have no way to secure my RIGHT.
chiya wrote:
Yeah and how about the warm backside you would have gotten for taking the gun out without permission?
LOL that too, but girls are not inclined to risk that kind of behavior like boys are. My dad had no boys, and I was the oldest girl, so I was his female "son". He taught me all the good "guy" stuff, - tools, guns, hiking, exploring. I guess that I why I ended up a doctor.
WereWolf1967 wrote:
That's very true but which weapon intimidates more when you're looking down the barrel of one pointed at you?
The .45 barrel looks like a field artillery piece.
If I need to point a pistol at someone, I am not going to give them time to LOOK at it. Intimidation is NOT the object.
WereWolf1967 wrote:
Even though I own a 9mm Berretta, I much prefer my Colt Model 1911A1. I used to carry one in the Marine Corps. I guess that it just feels better in my large hand. Besides, the 9mm is a relatively high velocity round that can exit a "Perp", whereas the .45cal, 230 grain, serrated hollow point ammo I regularly use is a much lower velocity round. The .45 round is devastating to anything it hits.
A couple of these and you "Strain the Remains".
True, but too heavy for me. I like my pair of 9mm Rugers. With the right load the 9 is a stopper!
Penny MG wrote:
Absolutely correct! I drove my first time when I was 7. Was taught to use a .22 rifle and pistol starting at age 5. We knew how dangerous a gun was because we watched our elders use them to kill unwanted varmits. (snakes, coyotes, etc) We were taught to handle them properly as well as to respect them.
Right! What is logical about protecting children by keeping them ignorant of potential danger. I knew all about firearms when I was tiny. My father wanted me to understand what they could do and how to properly use them. I went hunting with him. What is this pathological fear of a tool ?
[quote=Hunter Lou 1947]I guess all those who advocate the need for carrying guns and the need to preserve the right to bear arms for all citizens will have to experience for themselves what a society out of control will have on the impact of common sense.
The second amendment has been in force for over 200 years, so I guess our country has been a "society out of control" for at least that time. Funny how this out of control society has become the most powerful and successful on earth! Maybe "control" is not a good thing. As George Washington said, ""Government is not reason, it is not eloquence -- it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and fearful master."
-George Washington
sarge69 wrote:
Call it sarcastic or what-ever, I firmly believe in the right of any American to possess, carry and use a firearm. My skin is just about tough enough to withstand the recoil of a 12 gauge shotgun or an AR-15.
Sarge69
12 gauge kicks a lot harder than an AR!
More quotes from Thomas Jefferson. Remember that the real start of the Revolution was when the British decided to confiscate the Americans' firearms.
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. "
There is a reason why the second amendment is right after freedom of speech - it is second only to that freedom in ensuring Liberty!