Guns And The Laws That Govern Them

"Y I Always Carry A Gun"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wm4cavEKsBk

11 Year Old Girl Saves Her 14 Year Old Brother With Her Gun.

New gun report: Criminals are bypassing background checks
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/new-gun-report-details-reality-criminals-bypassing-system

Once again, I am not and never have advocated banning all guns only certain kinds of guns and guns in the wrong hands.

Criminals are bypassing background checks...

OF COURSE! What did u expect ???

Mother who sued for right to carry a gun at kid's sporting events found murdered
http://www.examiner.com/article/mother-who-sued-for-right-to-carry-a-gun-at-kid-s-sporting-events-found-murdered

Guns versus the pursuit of happiness.

So vote for Republicans who are against background checks... (sarcasm)

I hope your party makes you feel safe, they would rather criminals have guns than gouge the profits of gun manufacturers.

Yes!
OBVIOUSLY, criminals will arm themselves
regardless of the state of the law, or the law of the State.

IF thay cared about the law,
then thay woud not be criminals. If thay r going to commit robberies
or commit murders, then thay will not be influenced by gun control laws,
but there is another consideration, Rex.
I once knew a guy who stole a car, when he was 14.
If he is walking along the street and he is attacked by a pack of dogs,
then he has as much right as I do to defend himself from the dogs.
His car theft of decades before is not relevant, because he and I and U have "EQUAL protection of the laws"

U said that u favor civil rights.

There is no room for government discrimination.
By the 2nd Amendment, possession of guns by the citizens
was put BEYOND the reach of any jurisdiction of government.



Thank u. That 's nice of u. I feel very safe.




Yes. I LOVE the gun manufacturers: thay take care of ME,
and I take care of THEM, blessings be upon them. Its symbiotic.
I want them around, the same as suppliers of any need: cars, food.





David

It seems you are on the side of the criminals. You want to remove guns from law biding citizens. You would leave the guns in the hands of those who would rob and kill you. Do you not realize that?

Why It's Getting Easier
to Carry Guns in the U.S.A.
By Paul Barrett

Guns-at-work laws are up for debate in Alabama, Tennessee,
South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.

In light of the recent shooting in an Oregon mall and Friday’s school
shooting in Connecticut, it’s worth it to look at the conditions that
have made it easier to manufacture and market firearms in the U.S.
Consider the following developments:

—Republican-dominated legislatures in at least four states are poised
to consider allowing employees to bring guns to work.

—Smith & Wesson (SWHC) reported record sales for its most recent quarter,
up 48 percent from a year earlier.

—Florida announced it will soon become the first state to have issued
1 million licenses allowing people to legally carry concealed guns.

—An influential federal appeals court struck down an Illinois law
prohibiting civilians from carrying a loaded handgun outside their home or business.

The American gun market, estimated at $2 billion to $3 billion a year,
has had its ups and downs over the decades. Since the 2008 election
of President Barack Obama, however, firearm manufacturers and
their vocal ally, the National Rifle Association, have enjoyed an
extraordinary boom, based heavily on fear marketing.

The industry pitch: Obama plans to restrict, if not confiscate, your guns.
This has sent hundreds of thousands of people to their Main Street gun shop
or firearm website, propelled by the notion that they better buy while
they can. The twist is that while Obama occasionally murmurs about
gun control, he has done nothing to make it more difficult to lawfully
acquire or carry firearms. The president and his advisers fear a
political backlash (and, on substance, may worry that tinkering with
gun laws will not actually affect crime rates in a substantial way).

The upshot: Gun sellers and promoters of gun rights are pushing
further and further in an environment of seemingly endless possibilities
for their side of the perennial debate over the wisdom and significance
of packing heat.

The guns-at-work laws are up for debate in Alabama, Tennessee,
South Carolina, and Pennsylvania—all states with strong gun cultures.
Seventeen states have approved similar measures since 2003,
according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in San
Francisco. The laws extend gun rights onto property controlled by
private employers. That’s provoked resistance from such companies
as FedEx (FDX) and Volkswagen (VOW:GR), which fear that
encouraging employees to bring their pieces to work may lead to
parking-lot skirmishes.

The concealed-carry license news from Florida illustrates that a lot
of Americans like to have a gun on their belt or in their purse—for
self-defense or just as a statement that they take seriously their
Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Florida has issued
more than 993,000 active licenses, representing 4.6 percent of the
state’s population of 19.1 million. Florida was among the first states
in 1987 to require approval of conceal-carry license applications
for any applicant who meets certain criteria (such as a clean felony-
conviction record), as opposed to giving local police discretion over
who may carry a gun. Today 38 states have “shall-issue” laws similar to Florida’s.

Illinois is the only state that outright bans carrying a loaded gun
outside the home, but not for long. In a 2-1 ruling, a panel of the
U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled on Dec. 11 that the state’s
prohibition violated the Second Amendment. “One doesn’t have to be
a historian to realize that a right to keep and bear arms for personal
self-defense in the 18th century could not rationally have been
limited to the home,” U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Posner wrote,
referring to the ratification of the amendment in 1791. The Second Amendment
states: “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.”
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the Second Amendment
protects an individual right to possess a handgun in the home.
Posner’s ruling is the most important extension of the 2008 high court ruling, and
it will carry extra weight because Posner enjoys a national reputation for legal erudition.
Depending on how Illinois state politicians respond to the Seventh Circuit ruling,
it’s possible the case could end up in the Supreme Court.

Richard Feldman, a former NRA organizer and gun industry trade
association executive, noted that the firearm debate has swung
sharply toward expanded gun rights. In 2008, he observed, the
Supreme Court “broadly defined the right to have a handgun in the
home for self-defense. In my days at the NRA, that was the Holy Grail!”
The Seventh Circuit expands the gun-rights frontier.
Feldman, who heads an advocacy group called the Independent
Firearm Owners Association, predicts that in the near future
New York City’s tough municipal rules on who may own and
carry a handgun will come under legal attack.

[All emfasis has been added by David.]

It seems you are so stupid you can't read...

I am not against guns for a law abiding citizens... For the umteenth time.

Where did I ever in this thread endorse giving guns to criminals?

Gun-makers and their lobbies are criminals, they care only about the sale of guns enriching their pockets and not the consequences of who they sell their guns to.

And then there are just plain stupid people like you and David who can't see that correctly placed regulations (a "well regulated" militia) would hamper the attempts of criminals to access guns while protecting law abiding citizens for purchasing and owning guns.

If you have no criminal record, are of sound mind and live in a dangerous part of the country I say, by all means protect your life and family with a gun or two.

But I am intelligent enough to also know that well placed regulations can prevent any known criminal from obtaining guns. Regulation is not perfect and this is why law abiding citizens should in some cases own guns.

It is all or nothing to you gun freaks and therein reveals your complete and reprehensible idiocy.

Stupid and can't read? WTG Mr. Tolerant.

Gun manufactures are criminals? You are one twisted puppy aren't you. What laws have been broken by gun makers? If you are refering to some BS "moral" law, then you have no standing. You are just like CI in that you insult those you disagree with and wish some sort of harm on them.

Have a good day Rex.

I am VERY proud to be like CI, the greatest compliment you could have paid me.

Yea morality and loving thy neighbor is BS huh? (cynical)

You have no credibility...

No only YOUR version of morality in the law is BS. When you think gun manufactures are criminals because they have a business that is legal, that is why your thought process is whacked.

It wasn't a compliment. It wasn't an insult either, it was a point of fact. You "tolerance" people don't know what tolerance is. You my friend are the opposite of tolerant.

Oh I should also throw CJ in with your group.

I perhaps have a version of morality (moderation) while you disregard morality altogether when it suits your warped purposes.

I am not completely liberal, I am moderate. It may not seem that way but you would be surprised on how may issues I disagree with concerning the far left of my party.

Strippers, legalized prostitution, gambling and promiscuous sex for starters...

I disregard morality? Because I think citizens should have access to guns? Please tell me what my warped purpose is. This should be good.

Funny, I think citizens should have access to guns too. This is not enough to turn me into a racist though...

I would not for one minute want to step inside your warped and juvenile mentality or motives.

Figure your own darned self out. This should be good.

Banks and dirty energy have legal businesses too but we regulate them.

The auto industry is a legal business too but we require licenses, a long vetting education process before one can drive on the road and we limit juveniles from driving.

I refuse to tolerate pure idiocy driven by racism. Do I wear a sign on my back that says fool?

Racism? WTF?

My thoughts exactly...