0
   

SC rulings may lead to a Republican Administration

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 10:15 am
So, they didn't rule against the DC case; I suppose we can expect President Obama to come from this?

After all, it isn't as if the Republican base is going to be fired up now.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 10:16 am
New favorite term: "castle."

Yeah, it won't happen though. As for the south coming out en masse and voting red, that's not atpical, but I will agree it's needed in order to win. My prediction is for many red states to go violet and dare I say blue.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 11:29 am
Diest TKO wrote:
My prediction is for many red states to go violet and dare I say blue.


Laughing That's not going to happen!


The vast majority of liberals that I have met over the past 25/30 years are indeed ignorant about guns, gun ownership,
gun rights and they are scared to death of the sight of any firearm. Many high profile liberals that I have had the chance
to know speak out against firearms for personal protection, but the hire armed guards to protect them.
Typical do as I say - not as I do liberalism.

Today's ruling by the USSC clarifies the basic intent of the 2nd Amendment by stating all law abiding
US citizens have the right to own and bear arms and this right is in no way connected to a militia Cool

Many gun ownership restrictions remain in place and these will be sorted out and updated in due time.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 12:32 pm
H2O_MAN wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
My prediction is for many red states to go violet and dare I say blue.


Laughing That's not going to happen!


The vast majority of liberals that I have met over the past 25/30 years are indeed ignorant about guns, gun ownership,
gun rights and they are scared to death of the sight of any firearm. Many high profile liberals that I have had the chance
to know speak out against firearms for personal protection, but the hire armed guards to protect them.
Typical do as I say - not as I do liberalism.

Today's ruling by the USSC clarifies the basic intent of the 2nd Amendment by stating all law abiding
US citizens have the right to own and bear arms and this right is in no way connected to a militia Cool

Many gun ownership restrictions remain in place and these will be sorted out and updated in due time.

What is wrong with gaurds having guns? If it's their job, then we can make sure that they are trained. I'd rather the only people with guns are people who know what they are doing. A politician should not have a gun on his belt, that is not what we hire them for.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 12:50 pm
Diest TKO wrote:
H2O_MAN wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
My prediction is for many red states to go violet and dare I say blue.


Laughing That's not going to happen!


The vast majority of liberals that I have met over the past 25/30 years are indeed ignorant about guns, gun ownership,
gun rights and they are scared to death of the sight of any firearm. Many high profile liberals that I have had the chance
to know speak out against firearms for personal protection, but the hire armed guards to protect them.
Typical do as I say - not as I do liberalism.

Today's ruling by the USSC clarifies the basic intent of the 2nd Amendment by stating all law abiding
US citizens have the right to own and bear arms and this right is in no way connected to a militia Cool

Many gun ownership restrictions remain in place and these will be sorted out and updated in due time.

What is wrong with gaurds having guns? If it's their job, then we can make sure that they are trained. I'd rather the only people with guns are people who know what they are doing. A politician should not have a gun on his belt, that is not what we hire them for.



Rolling Eyes

Yeah, gun owners have the responsibility to learn and practice safe firearm use. They take this responsibility seriously.

I have no problem with any politician strapping a hand gun to his or her belt as long as it's legal and they are responsible.
Why should they not carry when I can?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 12:54 pm
God forbid people actually teach their kids how to shoot and be responsible...nooooooo , you should only learn that from your gang banger buddy....
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 12:56 pm
cjhsa wrote:
God forbid people actually teach their kids how to shoot and be responsible...nooooooo , you should only learn that from your gang banger buddy....


Or from a licensed instructor.

You can't count on independent individuals teaching children the right rules with no real oversight, and let's face it - this is a life and death issue.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:00 pm
H2O_MAN wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
H2O_MAN wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
My prediction is for many red states to go violet and dare I say blue.


Laughing That's not going to happen!


The vast majority of liberals that I have met over the past 25/30 years are indeed ignorant about guns, gun ownership,
gun rights and they are scared to death of the sight of any firearm. Many high profile liberals that I have had the chance
to know speak out against firearms for personal protection, but the hire armed guards to protect them.
Typical do as I say - not as I do liberalism.

Today's ruling by the USSC clarifies the basic intent of the 2nd Amendment by stating all law abiding
US citizens have the right to own and bear arms and this right is in no way connected to a militia Cool

Many gun ownership restrictions remain in place and these will be sorted out and updated in due time.

What is wrong with gaurds having guns? If it's their job, then we can make sure that they are trained. I'd rather the only people with guns are people who know what they are doing. A politician should not have a gun on his belt, that is not what we hire them for.



Rolling Eyes

Yeah, gun owners have the responsibility to learn and practice safe firearm use. They take this responsibility seriously.

I have no problem with any politician strapping a hand gun to his or her belt as long as it's legal and they are responsible.
Why should they not carry when I can?

It's a bad image that's all. That gun on the belt doesn't make them any more effective at their job. We need politicians who have leadership and charisma, not politicians with irrelevant accesories.

I'm not saying it should be illegal, but I think it would be dumb.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:00 pm
Really?

For several generations, this is how kids learn to shoot - from their parents.

Ain't it funny as well that you're much more likely to die from falling down your stairs than getting shot - accidentally or otherwise?

Your argument is full of holes.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:05 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Really?

For several generations, this is how kids learn to shoot - from their parents.

Ain't it funny as well that you're much more likely to die from falling down your stairs than getting shot - accidentally or otherwise?

Your argument is full of holes.


No, it isn't. You see, assertions do not point out 'holes' in an argument.

We have specific regulations for allowing those under the age of 18 to drive; those same regulations should apply for gun usage. Either the child can take a state-ran and mandated class, or they cannot legally use a deadly weapon. This ensures that the basic safety requirements have been met in all legal cases of firearm usage.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:12 pm
cjhsa wrote:
God forbid people actually teach their kids how to shoot and be responsible...nooooooo , you should only learn that from your gang banger buddy....


Who should teach people about guns?

a) Parents
b) Gangbangers
c) Licencd Professionals who are up to date on state and federal laws.

T
K
O

the answer is c.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:23 pm
There are several qualified entities and individuals available.
Licensed Professionals who are up to date on state and federal laws are helpful, but not mandatory.
Responsible gun owners seek out any needed training and support.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:36 pm
H2O_MAN wrote:
There are several qualified entities and individuals available.
Licensed Professionals who are up to date on state and federal laws are helpful, but not mandatory.
Responsible gun owners seek out any needed training and support.


And where they should end up everytime is answer C.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:39 pm
Diest TKO wrote:
H2O_MAN wrote:
There are several qualified entities and individuals available.
Licensed Professionals who are up to date on state and federal laws are helpful, but not mandatory.
Responsible gun owners seek out any needed training and support.


And where they should end up everytime is answer C.



No, just undereducated folks like you and 1-eye.

The rest of us will help you along as needed.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:42 pm
H2O_MAN wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
H2O_MAN wrote:
There are several qualified entities and individuals available.
Licensed Professionals who are up to date on state and federal laws are helpful, but not mandatory.
Responsible gun owners seek out any needed training and support.


And where they should end up everytime is answer C.



No, just undereducated folks like you and 1-eye.

The rest of us will help you along as needed.

I'm sure you like to think of yourself as a good source, but it's obvious that you aren't as educated as you think you are.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:43 pm
Blindingly.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:47 pm
Maybe Kevin is the authority on squirtguns?

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 01:49 pm
Diest TKO wrote:
Maybe Kevin is the authority on squirtguns?

T
K
O


Let's leave his manhood out of this.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 02:10 pm
The answer MOST of the time is A.

If you want to carry concealed, then C.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2008 02:11 pm
cjhsa wrote:
The answer MOST of the time is A.

If you want to carry concealed, then C.


But how can you tell if someone is teaching the actual correct way to use a firearm, or not?

How can you support stricter restrictions on automobiles then firearms? Both are deadly weapons in the wrong hands.

We're talking about educating children, who are not eligible for a CCW anyways.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Guns And The Laws That Govern Them - Discussion by RexRed
NRA: Arm the Blind! - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Thoughts on gun control..? - Discussion by komr98
The Gun Fight in Washington. Your opinons? - Question by Lustig Andrei
Gun control... - Question by Cyracuz
Does gun control help? - Discussion by Fatal Freedoms
Why Every Woman Should Carry a Gun - Discussion by cjhsa
Congress Acts to Defend Gun Rights - Discussion by oralloy
Texas follows NY Newspaper's lead - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 02:07:03