Skip to content

Gun control

Political Discussion
29 9 1.7k
  • I'll be straight with you Heck.

    This is one of those uncomfortable situations when we need to admit to ourselves the constitution is no longer relevant.

    It was written in a time when 98 % of Americans were farmers and the government, newly snatched from the loyalists, was in constant peril of having that favor returned by any number of rivals.

    So farmer Brown was encouraged to keep a cannon or a rack of muskets in the barn.

    So these days, instead of being called heroes those who would wish to overthrow what they felt was political oppression are called terrorists.

    Today those in power need to make sure that anybody wanting to pull off the next revolution is completely outgunned.

    Hence the watered down second amendment is something of a joke.

    That said; hell no, I don't want the dregs of society carrying a LAWS rocket.

    Now if it were 1780 and there was a real chance the king might send more soldiers to take back his "piece of the action" I'd want my guys to have state of the art firepower.

    Now?

    I guess stricter lisencing, reggistration and stringent training for all gun owners is a good idea.

    Petty horseshit like a 10 vs an 11 round clip or an aluminum vs a wooden stock is widow dressing.

    WSS

  • There are already laws and restrictions that don't seem to do any good.

    The reason is criminals are going to break laws.

    We don't need any more laws or restrictions, we need fewer criminals.

  • Dont allow progressive liberals to have access to guns, or allow progressive liberal to make any laws on guns.

    I would also like to see some of the restrictions lifted, for one why in the hell are you only allowed 3 shots in any shotgun.

  • There are already laws and restrictions that don't seem to do any good.

    The reason is criminals are going to break laws.

    We don't need any more laws or restrictions, we need fewer criminals.

    @ballpeen said:

    There are already laws and restrictions that don't seem to do any good.

    The reason is criminals are going to break laws.

    We don't need any more laws or restrictions, we need fewer criminals.

    Oh I agree Peen.

    I'm not saying less guns I'm just saying more responsibility for those who want em.

    WSS

  • @ballpeen said:

    There are already laws and restrictions that don't seem to do any good.

    The reason is criminals are going to break laws.

    We don't need any more laws or restrictions, we need fewer criminals.

    Oh I agree Peen.

    I'm not saying less guns I'm just saying more responsibility for those who want em.

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    Oh I agree Peen.

    I'm not saying less guns I'm just saying more responsibility for those who want em.

    WSS

    Oh, I know....it was a general reply and not directed towards your reply.

    Sorry I didn't make that clear.

  • I'm for more criminals. And against working families.

  • I'm for more criminals. And against working families.

    @heckofajobbrownie said:

    I'm for more criminals. And against working families.

    No you're not.

    It's not my fault you want to rehash the same stuff, expecting a new angle is somehow going to get a different opinion.

  • At least he jokingly stated what he believes in.

    heh... maybe he is serious...

    "I'm for more criminals. And against working families. "

    LOL

  • Just not a big fan of meaningless platitudes like "I'm for fewer criminals." Or "I'm for working working families." Or "I support the troops."

    None of those statements is for anything, or against anything. They're just things people say because nobody disagrees with them.

  • If you aren't a convicted Felon, mentally disabled or sick, you should be able to own a normal weapon. (Rifle, shotgun or pistol). No restrictions period. I don't personally see the need for a civilian to own a 30 round clip so I can see limiting it to 10 rounds. I see no need for a civilian to own an automatic weapon.

  • You dont shoot much do you diehard?

    30 round mags and clips are great when your shooting, you dont have to reload as often.

    The 2nd amendment is a worthy of protecting.

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    keyword here is infringed, so all of the old ladies can silence themselves now.

  • And really who needs a 30 round magazine when you could own one of these.

    The gunshow in Raleigh was great this past weekend.

    post-70-1295391903_thumb.jpg

  • When I go to the driving range, I don't think they should give me those little baskets of balls. I should be able to take the whole pile of range balls with me. That way I don't have to go back to the clubhouse so often.

  • Our woods are pretty dense around the bog - I want one of these:

    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/11/24/...se-afghanistan/

  • When I go to the driving range, I don't think they should give me those little baskets of balls. I should be able to take the whole pile of range balls with me. That way I don't have to go back to the clubhouse so often. Heck

    ******************************

    BTW, you know those golf clubs kill people? They should all be banned. Those golf balls are a menace, too.

    That's why golfers can only have a basket at a time - to prevent mass murders.

    You golfers should just go find a stick, and use big bur oak acorns in place of those dangerous golf balls, from in the woods.

    That's all you need. We don't need those golf clubs - you never know when somebody might use one to kill somebody.

    Sure, "people kill people", but it is way too easy to use a golf club.

    That, and any leftwing hater's violent criticism of golf is going to cause certain people to go berserk and murder someone

    on the course... 😉

  • When I go to the driving range, I don't think they should give me those little baskets of balls. I should be able to take the whole pile of range balls with me. That way I don't have to go back to the clubhouse so often.

    @heckofajobbrownie said:

    When I go to the driving range, I don't think they should give me those little baskets of balls. I should be able to take the whole pile of range balls with me. That way I don't have to go back to the clubhouse so often.

    Oh no, you should have to get one ball at a time.

    plus fill out a seperate receipt every time. 😒

    WSS

  • I really don't see what can be improved upon, as it is now. I mean, more thorough background checks, and if there's any hint of mental instability, and I mean ANY, you shouldn't be allowed to own a gun.

    Granted, I have no idea what exactly I mean by that. I'd say anyone that has a history of depression, maybe, but isn't that like a fifth of the nation? Probably wouldn't fly. As long as it's legal to own a gun, and it always will be, if a depressed, but otherwise normal person snaps, there's nothing anyone can do about it. There's no way to catch them preemptively.

    As for fully automatic weapons... I mean. Hell yeah, I'd love to own a Glock 18, but if EVERYONE owned one of those, and was allowed to use them in self-defense, good Christ, that'd be scary. I think it should be limited to semi-auto, just for the fact that you can selectively kill people with it. If you hold the trigger like an idiot, which you know some people would do, you have no idea where the rest of the bullets are gonna go, and the ability to select a target with each bullet goes away.

  • So you have a take or not Heck ?

    WSS

  • Mine's not all that different than Cal's. I'm further to the right than you on this. The Constitution clearly says you can have a gun. As long as that essential right is protected, common sense restrictions are fine with me.

    It's a big country. Gun laws in Vermont or Montana can and should be different than they are in Los Angeles or Washington DC.

  • Mine's not all that different than Cal's. I'm further to the right than you on this. The Constitution clearly says you can have a gun. As long as that essential right is protected, common sense restrictions are fine with me.

    It's a big country. Gun laws in Vermont or Montana can and should be different than they are in Los Angeles or Washington DC.

    @heckofajobbrownie said:

    Mine's not all that different than Cal's. I'm further to the right than you on this. The Constitution clearly says you can have a gun. As long as that essential right is protected, common sense restrictions are fine with me.

    Fook that, T is going to buy a grenade launcher to hunt.

    Politics are so 80's. They are so predictable it's funny.