komr98
 
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 11:50 am
I think I have my opinions about gun control set in stone. However I'm still interested in other people's views.
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 01:52 pm
@komr98,
Some views have been expressed here > http://able2know.org/topic/206324-1
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 02:20 pm
@komr98,
"Gun control" is O.S.H.A. (Occupational Safety & Health Administration)
for violent criminals, protecting them on-the-job from the defenses of their victims.
"Gun control" is in explicit & egregious violation of the Bill of Rights of the Supreme Law of the Land.

Jurisdiction for "gun control" has its foundation in hoax,
deception and naked USURPATION of power, no better than a schoolyard bully.



David
0 Replies
 
komr98
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 07:25 pm
@H2O MAN,
Thanks Smile
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 08:51 pm
@komr98,
komr98 wrote:

Thanks Smile


Rule number 1.

Assume all weapons are loaded.
roger
 
  3  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 09:49 pm
@H2O MAN,
Assume all weapons are loaded unless you see trouble coming. Then, check again.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 10:11 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
Rule number 1.

Assume all weapons are loaded.


Rule two keep your finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard until you are ready to fire the weapon.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 11:30 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:

Assume all weapons are loaded unless you see trouble coming. Then, check again.
THEN, stop assuming and make sure
that thay r well loaded.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 01:06 am

A thought on "gun control":
It's better to HAVE a gun and not need it
than it is to NEED a gun and not have it.





David
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  4  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 04:08 am
@komr98,
There are four basic reasons for the second ammendment in the United States.

Every one of the founding fathers is on record to the effect that private ownership of firearms, the 2'nd ammendment, is there as a final bulwark against the possibility of government going out of control. That is the most major reason for it.

At the time of the revolution and for years afterwards, there were private armies, private ownership of cannons and warships. . . The term "letters of marque, and reprisal" which you read in the constitution indicates the notion of the government issuing a sort of a hunting license to the owner of a private warship to take English or other foreign national ships on the high seas, i.e. to either capture or sink them. The idea of you or me owning a Vepr or FAL rifle with a 30-round magazine is not likely to have bothered any of those people.

The problem with drug-dealers owning AKs is a drug problem and not a gun problem. Fix the drug-problem, i.e. get rid of the insane war on drugs and pass a rational set of drug laws, and both problems will simply go away. A rational set of drug laws would:

1. Legalize marijuana and all its derivatives and anything else demonstrably no more harmful than booze on the same basis as booze.

2. Declare that heroine, crack cocaine, and other highly addictive substances would never be legally sold on the streets, but that those addicted could shoot up at government centers for the fifty-cent cost of producing the stuff, i.e. take every dime out of that business for criminals.

3. Clamp a permanent legal lid down on top of anybody peddling LSD, PCP, and/or other Jeckyl/Hyde formulas.

4. Same for anybody selling any kind of drugs to kids.

Do all of that, and the drug problem, the gun problem, and 70% of all urban crime will vanish within two years.

But I digress. The 2'nd ammendment is there as a final bulwark against our own government going out of control. It is also there as a bulwark against any foreign invasion which our own military might not be able to stop.

Admiral Yamamoto, when asked by the Japanese general staff about the possibility of invading the American homeland, replied that there were fifty million lunatics in this country who owned military style weaponry, and that there would be "a rifle behind every blade of grass". This apparently bothered him a great deal more than the 200,000 or so guys in uniform prior to the war.

A third obvious reason for private ownership of firearms is to protect yourself and your family from criminals and wild animals. In fact, the second amendment is basically an idea whose time has come all over the world. Why on Earth should people in India tolerate having 80,000 of their number killed every year by snakes? That could simply not happen in a nation whose people were armed.

And there's a fourth reason for the 2'nd ammendment, which is to provide the people with food during bad economic times. When you listen to people from New York and from Texas talk about the depression of the 30's, you hear two totally different stories. The people in New York will tell you about people starving and eating garbage, and running around naked. The Texans (and others from more rural areas and places in which laws and customs had remained closer to those which the founding fathers envisioned) will tell you that while money was scarce, they always had 22 and 30 calibre ammunition, and that they always had something to eat, even if it was just some jackrabbit.

Eating is habit forming. In any sort of a down economic situation, that fourth rationale for the second amendment quickly becomes the most important.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 08:27 am
@komr98,
Will u reveal WHICH opinions
u have "set in stone", 98 ?





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 09:19 am
@gungasnake,
Your points r superbly well taken, Gunga,
except that I can't figure out where government ACQUIRED jurisdiction
to interfere with the self-destructive conduct (ingestion of pernicious drugs)
of any citizen of ANY age. There has been NO consent of the governed.
In the absence of jurisdiction, any such law is void.
Have I missed something bearing upon jurisdiction ?

Additionally, I wonder how children will be convinced
to co-operate in their being raped out of their liberty, by government.





David
0 Replies
 
komr98
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 11:15 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Gun control should be, in some way, regulated by the government. How much it should be regulated, I'm not sure.
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 11:22 am
A2K BrainTrust wrote:


For what it's worth, the Obama Administration has just decreed that all 3-D printer patterns for printing guns, magazines, and gun parts are the property of the federal government, and can no longer be posted on the internet.

Interesting that Obama hates the First Amendment with as much passion as he hates the Second.

Hopefully someone will fight this in court. Not likely that Obama's efforts to overthrow our entire Constitution will be looked at favorably by many judges.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 12:03 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
Hopefully someone will fight this in court. Not likely that Obama's efforts to overthrow our entire Constitution will be looked at favorably by many judges.


A court challenge seems call for however with the internet you can not control information flow and not even the US government have the power to do so.

The issue is kind of moot in any case.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 12:08 pm
@komr98,
komr98 wrote:

Gun control should be, in some way, regulated by the government.
How much it should be regulated, I'm not sure.
With all respect, I have a hunch
that u r confused qua whether government is the servant or the master.

We citizens r the gods of the Creation of government.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 May, 2013 12:19 pm
@BillRM,
Information posted on this thread indicates that the author
VOLUNTARILY took down the blueprints when merely ASKED
by the Defense Dept. If so, then litigation may not be ripe.

Factually, the issue is indeed moot,
if the information is freely available elsewhere.

Let obama try to un-ring the bell.
0 Replies
 
JoeBert2003
 
  3  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 05:22 pm
@komr98,
My reasons why we need more gun control are first, more gun control will help decrease the rate of suicide in teens and young adults. Second, better gun control will help bring down the crime rate in the country. Third, different laws on guns will help lower the rate of people killed each day. America needs to be a safe place, a place where people can live and not need to worry about their next door neighbor shooting them, or their children being shot while they are at school. The answer is not necessarily getting rid of guns, but rather controlling the sale of guns, and educating people from an early age about guns, much like the D.A.R.E. program with drugs.
The first reason we need gun control is to help lower suicide levels, especially in teens and young adults. Martha Brock said, “More than 60% of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides” (New York Times 2013). If there was more control on the weapons in this country it would be harder for these people to access the guns they need, and in turn it would be much harder for them to kill themselves. A simple way to provide more control in the home would be to require every gun to be locked when not being used. It is hard to monitor how many people are locking their guns, but if stores were required to sell a lock with every gun bought, more people would thing about locking their guns since they already have the lock to do so. This would help everyone, sports stores and also the companies that make the gun locks would make more money, and households would be more safe because all the guns would be locked and need a key to use.
The second reason gun control is need in this country is better gun control will help reduce the crime and homicide rates in our country. It is said that most of the people in this country that buy guns buy them for hunting reasons. It is a law in this country that in order to hunt the person hunting has to have a hunting license. A hunting license requires that the person takes a hunter’s safety class to learn how to safely and efficiently use guns. This hunter’s safety class teaches gun users the proper care and use of guns. It teaches how to be safe when using guns so that accidents don’t happen. If the government required a citizen to have a hunting license (which means they have taken hunter’s safety) before being able to purchase a gun, we would at least know that all the people that owned guns knew how to stay safe with them and would probably only use them for hunting reasons. If people knew this fact they would feel much safer and actually like living in the US. Also, because the government has required that a person has a hunting license in order to possess a gun, the homicide and crime rates would lessen because only people with hunting licenses could buy guns. Adam Liptak said, “A 1991 study in ‘The New England Journal of Medicine’ compared Washington to its suburbs before and after the gun law took effect. It found that the law was linked to a 25 percent drop in homicides involving firearms and a 23 percent drop in such suicides.” (New York Times, 2008)
My third and final reason for more gun control is that having gun control will help stop accidents from happening at home or other common places that they happen. Many children do not know how dangerous guns really are. David Frum said, “American children under age 15 are nine times more likely to die of a gun accident than other countries” (www.thedailybeast.com 2013). Because many kids don’t know the serious effects of guns they aren’t as careful as they should be with them. Many kids think guns are a toy because they have toy guns to play with all the time. If schools would institute a program that taught students from a younger age and parents would teach their kids the dangers of guns there would be less accidents happening. Elementary schools teach the D.A.R.E. program during fifth grade which teaches elementary kids the dangers in using drugs. If schools also adopted weapon/gun education into their D.A.R.E. program adding another week onto it kids might be a little more careful when guns are around. Parents often are not careful enough with the guns they own and keep in their house. Guns should always be locked up or hidden carefully so small children cannot get to them. Because of this, our country has seen many accidents happening with kids between three and six years old.
Although it is true that guns don’t kill peoples, and it is the people that pull the trigger. Gun control will not completely get rid of killing; there will always be a few people in this world that decide to kill others. But if this country issued more control on our weapons our crime levels would decrease and America would be a safer place much like it is supposed to be. People would not have to live in fear everyday of guns. They would know that there is less risk because there is more control on the weapons of this country. If we used gun control that worked America would be a better place.
In conclusion, I believe gun control will first, bring down the rates of suicide in the U.S., because it will be harder for teens and young adults to get the guns they want to kill themselves. Second, more gun control will bring down the rate of homicide in the country by requiring a hunting license to purchase a gun. Third, better gun control will keep accidents from happening be requiring every gun in a household to be locked when not being used. Please remember what truly matters and help make America a better place by letting our government know we want better gun control. We want “Gun Control That Works”.




H2O MAN
 
  2  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 05:28 pm
@JoeBert2003,
JoeBert2003 wrote:


I believe gun control will first, bring down the rates of suicide in the U.S., because it will be harder for teens and young adults to get the guns they want to kill themselves.

Second, more gun control will bring down the rate of homicide in the country by requiring a hunting license to purchase a gun.

Third, better gun control will keep accidents from happening be requiring every gun in a household to be locked when not being used.



Well isn't that special
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  4  
Reply Tue 14 May, 2013 06:56 pm
@JoeBert2003,
Quote:
is to help lower suicide levels, especially in teens and young adults


Odd is it not that some nations with few if almost no firearms in private hands have higher suicide rates then the US is it not?

The two nations that come to mind is France and Japan. Take note with almost zero firearms Japan have almost double our suicide rate.

But what the hell it not logical it just emotions that is driving your anti gun position is it not?

As I had yet to see anyone show a relationship between the numbers of firearms in a society to the suicide rate in that society but what the hell.......it sound good at least to anti guns nuts.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Thoughts on gun control..?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/23/2019 at 12:15:15