|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 24, 2012, 10:46 AM | #201 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
Quote:
I can yell "fire" in my living room all day long and the police can not come and arrest me. I can even yell it at the beach and the shooting range. Words are not banned. It is the inappropriate and dangerous use of them that can be illegal. Inappropriate and dangerous use of a firearm is already illegal, or is made illegal when possible. Simply owning a gun won't hurt a soul. This goes back to one of the "big lies" that gun control groups spread.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. |
||
December 24, 2012, 02:55 PM | #202 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 19, 2012
Location: NOVA aka Northern VA
Posts: 123
|
Yes, there possibly are some regulations I could live with though I'm hard pressed to tell you what they are right now.
I'm guessing that some sort of reasonable expanded background check, which we already do anyway, would be alright if it helps to keep a firearm out of the wrong hands. It's an inconvenience to be sure but it's only an inconvenience and it's something I can live with for the greater good. It seems to work in some situations.
__________________
I didn't know you could bend it like that? |
December 24, 2012, 03:32 PM | #203 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
|
Would that be cavity check and blood type? If you don't think what the FBI may have on file isn't comprehensive you'd likely be wrong. In recent weeks a Agent quit the National Security Agency over data collection on US citizens and the Justice Department was lightly scolded over authorizing dossiers on any citizen with a 5 year life span to the documentation even if no criminal wrong doing was involved.
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Trailblazer_Project http://www.ask.com/wiki/NSA_warrantl...ce_controversy http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2965947/posts http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...n-us-citizens/ Some of this is legislated, under the Patriot Act and some is well maybe questionable... But without a tin hat my point is there is plenty of information gathered, have no doubt they know who you are and what your about with the click of a few keys..
__________________
Molon Labe |
December 24, 2012, 07:06 PM | #204 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
I'm fairly certain I've pointed this out before, but possibly not on this site and almost certainly not in this thread: Let us remember -- and be sure to point out to other people -- that Connecticut still has in effect an "assault weapon" ban that very closely mirrors the now-expired Federal AWB. All reports to date indicate that all Nancy Lanza's firearms were purchased legally. Ergo -- whatever the rifle used was, it was NOT (by definition) an "assault weapon."
It couldn't have been, because Nancy Lanza could not have legally purchased an assault weapon in Connecticut. |
December 24, 2012, 07:10 PM | #205 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
|
So ...if it was not by definition, an "Assault Weapon" why all the fuss about them?
|
December 24, 2012, 07:30 PM | #206 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
|
|
December 24, 2012, 07:45 PM | #207 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
Divide and conquer worked for Caesar, and it has worked in the past for the antis.
|
December 24, 2012, 08:05 PM | #208 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,231
|
I see gun owner posting about their hunting firearms and that we don't need evil assault rifles. I take a minute to remind them that The Second Amendment is not about hunting. It is about your right to defend yourself. That citizens do not own assault rifles as those are only in the military. I do own a semi-auto version of it.
__________________
Have a nice day at the range NRA Life Member |
December 25, 2012, 12:00 AM | #209 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
Another one is the ubiquitous "high powered" rifle. I can't recall ever reading a story that in any way involved rifle fire without its having been described as "high powered." Really? If the .223 Remington/5.56x45 round is so powerful, why do so many states prohibit using it for hunting deer on the grounds that it ISN'T powerful enough? Toss that at them and watch their heads explode. |
|
December 26, 2012, 10:05 AM | #210 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 301
|
Because the media never let's facts get in the way of their reporting. They loved to report about the Assault Weapon in the Aurora CO shooting even though the 100 round mag jammed rendering it useless.
|
December 26, 2012, 11:55 AM | #211 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
Quote:
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. |
|
December 26, 2012, 03:08 PM | #212 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,424
|
Quote:
Quote:
I agree with your statement of what is reasonable. I don't think that the OP gaseousclay framed his questions as you characterize. gaseousclay asked three questions beginning with "Is it unreasonable to . . ." Some have address those questions in detail. Rather than just doing "something" perhaps we should seek to do only things which are constructive to achieve the goal of actually making the students safer. If we focus on the motive for change: to institute policies/actions which will make school children safer in their school; what can be done? 1) Design changes to schools to make access by unauthorized person much more difficult if not impossible. Have "safe rooms" for students to retreat to in the event of a shooter (could also be used in the event of a tornado). 2) Increase remote surveillance to provide time to react to someone seeking unauthorized access and to determine the level of threat. 3) Place trained armed guards in schools, like the president's children's school has. (Qualified volunteers could reduce the expense) 4) Have school drills on actions that teachers and students should take in the event of an active shooter. Something like tornado and fire drills.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." Frederic Bastiat |
||
December 26, 2012, 04:16 PM | #213 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
Mello2u, while youre heart is in the right place, that would cost WAY too much money for an already bankrupt state.
How about we just have ccw's for teachers? this just seems so easy and simple to me its mind boggling.
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
December 26, 2012, 04:47 PM | #214 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
You don't need new volunteers. The states already have quite a few. One weekend a month, and two weeks a year. Instead of a weekend, they'd just have to report Monday, Tuesday, or Wed-Thu, Fri-Mon etc etc.
|
December 26, 2012, 06:03 PM | #215 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
|
I finally found one!!! We need a law passed saying that prior to any Senator or Congressman being qualified to vote on any law that pertains to firearms or firearm accessories they have to undergo a mandatory 80 hours of gun familiarization and training. Training should include a wide selection of arms...
At least for once they could have at least some small idea of what they are even legislating about.
__________________
Molon Labe Last edited by BGutzman; December 26, 2012 at 06:13 PM. |
December 26, 2012, 06:05 PM | #216 |
Member
Join Date: February 12, 2011
Posts: 67
|
No.
|
December 26, 2012, 09:09 PM | #217 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
The only thing you'll see is a surge in straw sales, which are almost impossible to prevent, unless the buyer/seller is just really stupid about it. |
|
December 26, 2012, 09:14 PM | #218 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
BTW, to answer the question, "Are there any sensible gun regulations you would support?"
Yes. I support a prohibition on sales to minors under 18. They should have parental permission. Prisons and jails ought to be able to keep their occupants from owning firearms. I might support a requirement for the general militia or organized to own firearms and train with them. Other than that, I really don't see a need for regulations. |
December 26, 2012, 09:56 PM | #219 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2010
Location: Communist State of IL.
Posts: 1,562
|
Quote:
They were not caught.
__________________
NRA Life Member, SAF Member |
|
December 26, 2012, 10:25 PM | #220 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
In any case, even if you have a real safe, I'm sure you travel with your guns from time to time. I'd be willing to bet most firearms are stolen in transit from people who CCW or hunt than from a home. |
|
December 27, 2012, 04:20 AM | #221 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 3, 2007
Location: spring tx
Posts: 1,037
|
Yes, all that keeps them out of the hands of criminals and unstable people.
__________________
chambered and unlocked |
December 27, 2012, 11:40 AM | #222 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Quote:
Even after prison, I'm ok with convicted felons, especially the violent ones still being denied firearm ownership. |
|
December 27, 2012, 12:10 PM | #223 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
|
I do think felony restriction on arms must be tied to violence... Tons of people have felony's for check writing and all kinds of very minor offenses...
__________________
Molon Labe |
December 27, 2012, 01:11 PM | #224 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Quote:
|
|
December 27, 2012, 01:17 PM | #225 |
Junior Member
Join Date: December 16, 2012
Posts: 7
|
No and here's why.The second amendment gives me the right to own what the military or the police have.If I can afford it I should be able to own it with the exception of full auto unless one is licensed.This is not about trap or skeet or rabbits.It is about not living in tyranny,ever.Enforce current laws and get a mental health program.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|