Gun control - for or against ?

[SPOONMINNOW]

I own various guns for hunting and target shooting (no pistols) and would be the last person to say someone shouldn't own them. But I wonder why anyone would insist they have the right to own automatic weapons. What are some justifications? You can't hunt with them or carry them in public. Single shots are accurate - on automatic they're all over the place as I found out in 1970basic training shooting an M-16 both ways - even in short bursts.</p>

Have nothing against owning handguns but not for personal or home defense reasons. Even if there was a home invasion, I'd need an easy to reach weapon, locked and loaded - one thing I would never leave easy to find especially with grandkids running around. I don't know of anywhere that anyone can carry them in public even holstered. But even if you saw a crime in progress, I doubt anyone would shoot suspected armed robbers leaving the scene considering how the courts and police look down on vigilantism. Good luck claiming self defense !</p>

But one law I would always support is one prohibiting any individual from owning a gun that had a history of violence or a short fuse leading to violence.</p>

</p>

 

[churly]

Sounds like a democrat to me....

 

[FishingwithRusty]

"shall not be infringed!" the second amendment was written to protect and allow the people the means to counter and respond to the govt if their govt became tyrannical(like stealing their labor/property, infringing on their rights). the intent was to keep/allow the people to be equally armed as the govt.

beyond the 2nd amendment, EVERY person has the right to defend themselves, family and property by the means THEY see fit.

your second paragraph is a bit unclear and im not sure the points you were trying to make.

 

[Pop-R]

That second amendment is the only justification needed. There is a reason it was included by our fore fathers. They understood governmental power and how it could be abused.

 

[swamp]

https

 

[FishingwithRusty]

now that youve made your 2nd paragraph more coherent, i will reiterate my opening above.........."SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!" who are you to judge anyone else or dictate what another deems appropriate for themselves? this is one of the major problems of our current society that folks dont mind their own damn business. if i choose to carry EVERYWHERE i go thats my choice and its completely unacceptable for someone else to try and infringe on my right of self determination and defense. please take some time to think about the idea of someone else dictating to you how you live your life and what you do, thats what youre suggesting.

the whole democrat vs republican thing is EXACTLY what "they" want! keep us divided and fighting amongst ourselves so we never turn our attention to the real enemy!!

 

[Dropshot]

SPOONMINNOW - 3/17/2021 8:07 AM

I own various guns for hunting and target shooting (no pistols) and would be the last person to say someone shouldn't own them. But I wonder why anyone would insist they have the right to own automatic weapons. What are some justifications? You can't hunt with them or carry them in public. Single shots are accurate - on automatic they're all over the place as I found out in 1970basic training shooting an M-16 both ways - even in short bursts.</p>

Have nothing against owning handguns but not for personal or home defense reasons. Even if there was a home invasion, I'd need an easy to reach weapon, locked and loaded - one thing I would never leave easy to find especially with grandkids running around. I don't know of anywhere that anyone can carry them in public even holstered. But even if you saw a crime in progress, I doubt anyone would shoot suspected armed robbers leaving the scene considering how the courts and police look down on vigilantism. Good luck claiming self defense !</p>

But one law I would always support is one prohibiting any individual from owning a gun that had a history of violence or a short fuse leading to violence.</p>

</p>

</p>

Wow. A libidiot.</p>

 

[bluewingjb]

You know there is a huge difference between automatic weapon and semi automatic weapon. I would guess most people on this forum see no need for private citizens to have FULLY automatic weapons. I see some people have jumped to the conclusion you are a lib or democrat. I think you are a man with grand kids who sees there safety above all else.. That being said firearm education or lack thereof is one of the main reasons for kids getting hurt with them. I do agree with FishingWithRusty.. about people telling others how to live. He is 100% correct in that people need to mind their own business. Bottom line is guns are nothing to fear its the idiots that use them for the wrong reason. Like the old saying goes guns dont kill people, people kill people

 

[spnplgr]

When Hitler disarmed the Germans, look at what happened.

 

[Aries 181]

Since the OP lives in the cesspool that is called new york and indoctrinated in the ways of the left, he can have any views he wants, just keep them up there in never never land where the magic lemming dust has consumed the majority into believing cuomo the criminal is the second coming of Christ.

Too bad we don't hang traitors any longer.

Bill

 

[SPOONMINNOW]

But one law I would always support is one prohibiting any individual from owning a gun that had a history of violence or a short fuse leading to violence.

Strange no one commented on that statement. Example: should a husband who beats his wife own a gun?

 

[FishingwithRusty]

Strange no one commented on that statement. Example: should a husband who beats his wife own a gun?

again.............shall not be infringed

 

[Gator]

I’m against gun control! If we give the left even an inch they’ll take miles. Everyone knows it. As far as automatic weapons, they’ve been illegal for years but an AR 15 is not automatic. If the government keeps having gun free zones then expect the criminals and lunatics to strike there Because they have no fear of anyone Without a gun.

 

[ChooChooSnakeMan]

I want to make a few points. First is the OP's use of "automatic", many people don't know the difference between full auto and semi auto. They see a machine gun in action and think that the typical AR style rifle in civilian hands is full auto. Of course this is far from the truth. We have laws in place that restrict private citizens ownership of true machine guns. Next is the idea that somehow the tool is evil and the evil person using the tool for evil is somehow not responsible. Firearms are tools, tools that can do great good or great harm depending on the user. That is no different than clubs, knives, or even cars. I don't understand why some people can't see that the problem with crime is with criminal behavior not firearm availability. I won't argue the point about should people judged mentally deficient be restricted. I have a family member who is paranoid schizophrenic who I promise you if that person had ever had access to a firearm many people would have been harmed, including myself. The problem comes into who gets to make the judgement about those people or anyone else for that matter. As long as the person or entity is judging wisely then all is good but power to restrict a constitutional right is great power that can be misused. Some of the so called red flag laws are a good example. If the local authorities are hostile to private gun ownership and want to control the population then all they have to do is make sure they have some unfounded report that an individual is unstable and boom, they can collect that person's means for self protection and to resist tyranny. We live in a time when traditional rules and absolutes have been cast aside. We allowed our government to kick God out of our public schools, we praise deviant behaviour, we are at a time when right is wrong and wrong is right. As a society we are now so low that there are countless genders that a person can identify with. How ridiculous. God made man: male and female and that's it folks. Sorry to run this rabbit trail but my point is that all the violence we now see is just the consequence of many actions, not the availability of firearms. Thanks for reading!

 

[SPOONMINNOW]

If the government keeps having gun free zones then expect the criminals and lunatics to strike there Because they have no fear of anyone Without a gun.

I have yet to see someone (other than a cop) that carries a pistol in the open much less, shoots someone that has shot others nearby. This is NOT about responsible gun ownership of any kind but is about loonies getting their hands on firearms leading to homicide. Could some of those homicides have been prevented?

Proponents of more gun control laws state that the Second Amendment was intended for militias; that gun violence would be reduced; that gun restrictions have always existed; and that a majority of Americans, including gun owners, support new gun restrictions.

If a gun owner locks his or her guns up, protection in or outside the house is non-existent if an armed trespasser stops by. I would bet few responsible gun owners would shoot someone in public regardless of the circumstances even if they did carry. Shooting a suspected gunman (like the 11 yr old going for help that was shot by a cop recently), gives you an idea of how difficult it can be to know who to shoot much less avoid shooting bystanders.

Macho statements aside, people kill people with guns, whether hand or semi- and for reasons that are incomprehensible. It's unavoidable, but how much so seeing as how many illegal guns are sold yearly?

 

[rayb]

As long as the almighty dollar exists, I don't care who you are or what laws are in place, if you have the money you can buy anything.

 

[FishingwithRusty]

I have yet to see someone (other than a cop) that carries a pistol in the open much less, shoots someone that has shot others nearby. This is NOT about responsible gun ownership of any kind but is about loonies getting their hands on firearms leading to homicide. Could some of those homicides have been prevented?


If a gun owner locks his or her guns up, protection in or outside the house is non-existent if an armed trespasser stops by. I would bet few responsible gun owners would shoot someone in public regardless of the circumstances even if they did carry. Shooting a suspected gunman (like the 11 yr old going for help that was shot by a cop recently), gives you an idea of how difficult it can be to know who to shoot much less avoid shooting bystanders.

Macho statements aside, people kill people with guns, whether hand or semi- and for reasons that are incomprehensible. It's unavoidable, but how much so seeing as how many illegal guns are sold yearly?

the texas church shooter was stopped by a church member with a gun, the mall shooter in ohio(i think thats where it was) was stopped by a person carrying in the mall.

just because you dont see the guns doesnt mean they are not there, MANY folks prefer to conceal carry. those of us that carry, train, practice and are thinking about these scenarios frequently (i do). i dont want to take a life but defend the lives of my loved ones or my property i would not hesitate.

an armed society is a polite society.

over 80% of mass shootings take place in gun free zones.

studies have shown that open carry and the prescence of guns actually reduces crime, criminals dont want to get shot.

and if youre a business owner in TN and make your business a gun free zone you are legally liable for the safety of your customers

 

[finbully]

Old troll thread.