Who should be allowed to have guns?

[Cthulhu]

This question is aimed at the bubbas who think that gun control is the only solution to the perceived gun problem in the USA.

So who should be allowed to have them and why?

What measure of gun control is acceptable?

I'd like to see the mental processes of those in favor of gun control. There must be a reason why people think this way, I'd like to understand why, or at least attempt to.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[zelmo1234]

This is simple, but it is too far away from a mass shooting for them to voice their real opinion.

They think that the government should be the only one with guns, but if the people must have them, it should only be the Criminal element.

It is the law abiding citizen that stops them from assuming complete power and control and that is the travesty that they just can't abide by

[Common]

Ive been practicing ALOT I fired 150rds from a new gun and had all 10s at 10yrds at 15 I missed one 10 and had a 9. I dont fire over 15 yrds, its ridiculous there is no circumstance indoors or out I would be firing further than that with a handgun.

[zelmo1234]

Ive been practicing ALOT I fired 150rds from a new gun and had all 10s at 10yrds at 15 I missed one 10 and had a 9. I dont fire over 15 yrds, its ridiculous there is no circumstance indoors or out I would be firing further than that with a handgun.

Remember that in most cases you will not be able to bring your gun to full draw and take a shooting stance. Practice those shoots too and don't worry about a 10 ring. Just make sure that you hit center mass. 7 yards is all you need for those shots it will be less that that and make sure you have GREAT hearing protection and Good eye protection

[Standing Wolf]

They think that the government should be the only one with guns, but if the people must have them, it should only be the Criminal element.

It is the law abiding citizen that stops them from assuming complete power and control and that is the travesty that they just can't abide by

From having listened to and analyzed what these people say for many years, I have to disagree. It isn't that they want criminals and nutcases to have guns - it's that they truly believe that any person, any one of us law-abiding citizens, is capable of becoming a criminal or a mass-murdering lunatic at any moment. That thought is firmly embedded in their words when they say things like, "Everyone is a law-abiding citizen until they aren't". They truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that taking guns away from everyone will result in criminals and nutcases not having access to them, too. The absolute practical impossibility of making 300 million firearms disappear doesn't faze them, because they're engaging in a form of magical thinking; they're mistaking their fantasy for an actual plan of action.

[Common Sense]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

[zelmo1234]

From having listened to and analyzed what these people say for many years, I have to disagree. It isn't that they want criminals and nutcases to have guns - it's that they truly believe that any person, any one of us law-abiding citizens, is capable of becoming a criminal or a mass-murdering lunatic at any moment. That thought is firmly embedded in their words when they say things like, "Everyone is a law-abiding citizen until they aren't". They truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that taking guns away from everyone will result in criminals and nutcases not having access to them, too. The absolute practical impossibility of making 300 million firearms disappear doesn't faze them, because they're engaging in a form of magical thinking; they're mistaking their fantasy for an actual plan of action.

I would agree with that IF, they actually went after Criminals.

But we know that gun crimes are on the increase and Obama's justice departments gun or felony firearms prosecutions are down over 45%

GOP Mayor's employed policies of Stop and frisk and the first thing Democrats do when elected is stop those policies.

If the left actually tried to keep the guns away from criminals I would agree with you, but the don't

[zelmo1234]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

All kinds of Guns? or just government approved ones

[Common Sense]

All kinds of Guns? or just government approved ones

Not full auto. No large magazines.

[Chris]

From having listened to and analyzed what these people say for many years, I have to disagree. It isn't that they want criminals and nutcases to have guns - it's that they truly believe that any person, any one of us law-abiding citizens, is capable of becoming a criminal or a mass-murdering lunatic at any moment. That thought is firmly embedded in their words when they say things like, "Everyone is a law-abiding citizen until they aren't". They truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that taking guns away from everyone will result in criminals and nutcases not having access to them, too. The absolute practical impossibility of making 300 million firearms disappear doesn't faze them, because they're engaging in a form of magical thinking; they're mistaking their fantasy for an actual plan of action.


Agree with this.

THe question I would have for those who argue that is this: If anyone is a potential criminal then don't you also then have to take away guns from the police, FBI, CIA, military?

[Chris]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.


Just because you don't doesn't mean no one does.

I agree that anyone using a gun should be trained in basic safety etc.

[Mac-7]

From having listened to and analyzed what these people say for many years, I have to disagree. It isn't that they want criminals and nutcases to have guns - it's that they truly believe that any person, any one of us law-abiding citizens, is capable of becoming a criminal or a mass-murdering lunatic at any moment. That thought is firmly embedded in their words when they say things like, "Everyone is a law-abiding citizen until they aren't". They truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that taking guns away from everyone will result in criminals and nutcases not having access to them, too. The absolute practical impossibility of making 300 million firearms disappear doesn't faze them, because they're engaging in a form of magical thinking; they're mistaking their fantasy for an actual plan of action.

They have been raised to look down on America and admire the Europeans instead.

the euro's have gun control and liberals believe they must have it too.

[zelmo1234]

Not full auto. No large magazines.

Why, they took your class and passed? They are Safe? Why restrict them?

[Common Sense]

Why, they took your class and passed? They are Safe? Why restrict them?

The potential for mass shootings is a danger. They could also fall into the wrong hands.

[zelmo1234]

The potential for mass shootings is a danger. They could also fall into the wrong hands.

Could that not be said of all guns??

[Common Sense]

Could that not be said of all guns??

True, but there are certain restrictions that make sense. In the same way speed limits are a factor in reducing fatalities.

[zelmo1234]

True, but there are certain restrictions that make sense. In the same way speed limits are a factor in reducing fatalities.

So you are OK with the so called Assault rifle as long as it is Semi Automatic and has only a 10? round magazine instead of the 30 round that it normally comes with?

[Mac-7]

So you are OK with the so called Assault rifle as long as it is Semi Automatic and has only a 10? round magazine instead of the 30 round that it normally comes with?

The ink on that compromise would not dry before our Canadian denmother would be demanding new laws against American gun ownership

[Private Pickle]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

Want to go over this again?

[Truth Detector]

Ive been practicing ALOT I fired 150rds from a new gun and had all 10s at 10yrds at 15 I missed one 10 and had a 9. I dont fire over 15 yrds, its ridiculous there is no circumstance indoors or out I would be firing further than that with a handgun.

^Spot on.

[Private Pickle]

The potential for mass shootings is a danger. They could also fall into the wrong hands.

How many mass shootings have been carried out with a fully auto weapon?

[Truth Detector]

From having listened to and analyzed what these people say for many years, I have to disagree. It isn't that they want criminals and nutcases to have guns - it's that they truly believe that any person, any one of us law-abiding citizens, is capable of becoming a criminal or a mass-murdering lunatic at any moment. That thought is firmly embedded in their words when they say things like, "Everyone is a law-abiding citizen until they aren't". They truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that taking guns away from everyone will result in criminals and nutcases not having access to them, too. The absolute practical impossibility of making 300 million firearms disappear doesn't faze them, because they're engaging in a form of magical thinking; they're mistaking their fantasy for an actual plan of action.

^You hit the proverbial bull's-eye with this comment. Spot on!

[Truth Detector]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

It is being said because when Liberals find an honest and lucid moment, that is what they admit. It is the biggest false narrative on the planet that all they want to do is prevent criminals from getting weapons.

California just passed a new law requiring background checks for ammo. Twenty years ago they only wanted them for "Saturday Night Specials." One can see the trend and the end goal; but first they must open their tightly closed eyes, be honest and exercise a modicum of intelligence.

[Truth Detector]

Not full auto. No large magazines.

Haven't had full auto for decades; as for large magazines, it is incredibly stupid to suggest that this will stop lunatics from mass killings.

What LAWS would have prevented the last series of mass shootings?

[Truth Detector]

The potential for mass shootings is a danger. They could also fall into the wrong hands.

What laws would have prevented the most recent mass shootings??? I keep asking this and get nothing but "crickets" from the leftist dimwits.

[Truth Detector]

True, but there are certain restrictions that make sense. In the same way speed limits are a factor in reducing fatalities.

Speed limits haven't done anything to reduce fatalities. DERP

[Bo-4]

Everyone but you :D

[Mac-7]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

Why?

[Tahuyaman]

If the hard left can't ban the private ownership of firearms, they will try to impose so many requirements to own one that it's impossible to meet these requirements in ones lifetime.

[Mac-7]

If the hard left can't ban the private ownership of firearms, they will try to impose so many requirements to own one that it's impossible to meet these requirements in ones lifetime.

And electing hillary will greatly speed up the process of gutting the 2nd Amendment

[Standing Wolf]

What laws would have prevented the most recent mass shootings??? I keep asking this and get nothing but "crickets" from the leftist dimwits.

The only response one normally gets to this question is that laws restricting magazine size would "reduce the number of casualties". Clearly, that would only be the case if there was some artificial time limit being imposed on a mass shooter - if he (or she) only had so many seconds or minutes to act before they were taken out by return fire. Mass shooters almost invariably select places where there will be no return fire; they can continue to shoot people pretty much at their leisure, and how many times and how often they have to reload is irrelevant.

[Bo-4]

And electing hillary will greatly speed up the process of gutting the 2nd Amendment

Yes, Hillary will personally come to your door and demand you turn over your Sig Sauer MCX with the 100 round mag Macky.

Resistance is FUTILE! :D

[Chloe]

My ideal world when it comes to guns:

- overturn the 2nd amendment
- develop trade in/buy back program for all privately owned guns
- pass a new law allowing only a single shot handgun or rifle to be manufactured
- pass a new law allowing one gun, either a handgun or rifle, as described above, per household and a specific amount of purchasable ammunition solely for home protection
- pass a new law making any crime committed with a gun a 25 year minimum sentence without opportunity for parole even if it's unloaded or just on your body
- pass a new law that makes an automatic minimum sentence for having a gun outside the home even if not being used in a crime
- for people currently with a variety of guns in their home they can keep them but the ammunition will no longer be produced and any usage of those guys outside the home would be punishable by fine or jail time
- any at home creation of ammunition or weapons would result in a fine or jail time
- exceptions for citizens or businesses would need to be reviewed and approved

Yes I know to many of you this would never happen and I know it would never happen but I'm just giving you my ideal vision for guns in this country. Take it for what it is.

[birddog]

My ideal world when it comes to guns:

- overturn the 2nd amendment
- develop trade in/buy back program for all privately owned guns
- pass a new law allowing only a single shot handgun or rifle to be manufactured
- pass a new law allowing one gun, either a handgun or rifle, as described above, per household and a specific amount of purchasable ammunition solely for home protection
- pass a new law making any crime committed with a gun a 25 year minimum sentence without opportunity for parole even if it's unloaded or just on your body
- pass a new law that makes an automatic minimum sentence for having a gun outside the home even if not being used in a crime
- for people currently with a variety of guns in their home they can keep them but the ammunition will no longer be produced and any usage of those guys outside the home would be punishable by fine or jail time
- any at home creation of ammunition or weapons would result in a fine or jail time
- exceptions for citizens or businesses would need to be reviewed and approved

Yes I know to many of you this would never happen and I know it would never happen but I'm just giving you my ideal vision for guns in this country. Take it for what it is.

What it is is total garbage! Your vision is Pollyanna and will not happen. Your gullibility of thinking criminals will not have guns and ammo is pathetic!

[Chloe]

What it is is total garbage! Your vision is Pollyanna and will not happen. Your gullibility of thinking criminals will not have guns and ammo is pathetic!

Eat glass

[birddog]

Eat glass

Can we not trust you with glassware? I thought you pretended to be non-violent. You want me to die? I'm shocked!

[Cletus]

My ideal world when it comes to guns:

- overturn the 2nd amendment
- develop trade in/buy back program for all privately owned guns
- pass a new law allowing only a single shot handgun or rifle to be manufactured
- pass a new law allowing one gun, either a handgun or rifle, as described above, per household and a specific amount of purchasable ammunition solely for home protection
- pass a new law making any crime committed with a gun a 25 year minimum sentence without opportunity for parole even if it's unloaded or just on your body
- pass a new law that makes an automatic minimum sentence for having a gun outside the home even if not being used in a crime
- for people currently with a variety of guns in their home they can keep them but the ammunition will no longer be produced and any usage of those guys outside the home would be punishable by fine or jail time
- any at home creation of ammunition or weapons would result in a fine or jail time
- exceptions for citizens or businesses would need to be reviewed and approved

Yes I know to many of you this would never happen and I know it would never happen but I'm just giving you my ideal vision for guns in this country. Take it for what it is.

I did and immediately discarded same.

[Standing Wolf]

In a perfect world, all guns would be made out of black licorice, no one would ever need to defend themselves or others with one because crime and violence wouldn't exist, and I would be 22 years old and the starting right fielder for the Arizona Diamondbacks.

[Chloe]

Can we not trust you with glassware? I thought you pretended to be non-violent. You want me to die? I'm shocked!

I don't want you to die I just want you to read and not be a tool when you respond. I know that criminals won't turn in their guns but if you would have read you would have seen that by increasing the sentences for crimes committed with guns you'd have less criminals since they'd be spending more than a quarter to half their life behind bars for even just mugging someone with a gun. If you would have read you would have also seen that I said that this vision wouldn't happen. You just wanted to be a jerk.

[Standing Wolf]

I don't want you to die I just want you to read and not be a tool when you respond. I know that criminals won't turn in their guns but if you would have read you would have seen that by increasing the sentences for crimes committed with guns you'd have less criminals since they'd be spending more than a quarter to half their life behind bars for even just mugging someone with a gun. If you would have read you would have also seen that I said that this vision wouldn't happen. You just wanted to be a jerk.

That is, in so many word, one of the measures that I have been promoting for some time.

[birddog]

I don't want you to die I just want you to read and not be a tool when you respond. I know that criminals won't turn in their guns but if you would have read you would have seen that by increasing the sentences for crimes committed with guns you'd have less criminals since they'd be spending more than a quarter to half their life behind bars for even just mugging someone with a gun. If you would have read you would have also seen that I said that this vision wouldn't happen. You just wanted to be a jerk.

I just wanted to give you a wake-up call Miss Pollyanna! I read your whole post realizing it was merely a wish on your part, but my opinion is still valid.

[Adelaide]

I don't really support gun control in the United States, but I do support the measures taken in Canada. Apples and oranges.

I find that I agree with those who think people on the terrorist watch list or no fly list should not be allowed to have firearms until they are no longer on those lists. I also think that most people convicted of a crime should not be allowed to have firearms. To me, this seems like common sense more than gun control.

Ideally, everyone would take safety classes when they purchase their first firearm, but I don't think the US government can mandate it.

[Chloe]

I just wanted to give you a wake-up call Miss Pollyanna! I read your whole post realizing it was merely a wish on your part, but my opinion is still valid.

Fine, whatever

anyway im sorry for telling you to eat glass. Regardless of my opinion or frustration I shouldn't have said that.

[Tahuyaman]

And electing hillary will greatly speed up the process of gutting the 2nd Amendment


That's assuming that she can garner the required support. There have been many examples of Obama the messiah not being able to rally support for certain things. She's not going to be able to do the things he can't.

[nathanbforrest45]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

Perhaps people who wish to post gibberish on political forums should be required to do so as well.

[nathanbforrest45]

True, but there are certain restrictions that make sense. In the same way speed limits are a factor in reducing fatalities.

Eliminating drunk drivers would save a lot more lives than enforcing speed limits would. Speed limits have absolutely nothing to do with saving lives and everything to do with collecting revenue.

[nathanbforrest45]

My ideal world when it comes to guns:

- overturn the 2nd amendment
- develop trade in/buy back program for all privately owned guns
- pass a new law allowing only a single shot handgun or rifle to be manufactured
- pass a new law allowing one gun, either a handgun or rifle, as described above, per household and a specific amount of purchasable ammunition solely for home protection
- pass a new law making any crime committed with a gun a 25 year minimum sentence without opportunity for parole even if it's unloaded or just on your body
- pass a new law that makes an automatic minimum sentence for having a gun outside the home even if not being used in a crime
- for people currently with a variety of guns in their home they can keep them but the ammunition will no longer be produced and any usage of those guys outside the home would be punishable by fine or jail time
- any at home creation of ammunition or weapons would result in a fine or jail time
- exceptions for citizens or businesses would need to be reviewed and approved

Yes I know to many of you this would never happen and I know it would never happen but I'm just giving you my ideal vision for guns in this country. Take it for what it is.

In the land of the blind the one eyed man would be king.

In the land of Chloe's no guns allowed the broadsword would be king.

[HoneyBadger]

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

Should you have to take a course and get a license to go to Church? Post on the internet? Write a letter to your Congressman?

[HoneyBadger]

My ideal world when it comes to guns:



My ideal world when it comes to voting:

You must fully understand our system of government. You must shown an understanding of the fact that the Constitution as it is written is the law of the land. You must pass a written exam. One question would be: Are our rights granted by government? If you answer in the affirmative, you are barred from voting.

[Cletus]

My ideal world when it comes to voting:

You must fully understand our system of government. You must show an understanding of the fact that the Constitution as it is written is the law of the land. You must pass a written exam. One question would be: Are our rights granted by government? If you answer in the affirmative, you are barred from voting.

I could go for that.

[Standing Wolf]

My ideal world when it comes to voting:

You must fully understand our system of government. You must shown an understanding of the fact that the Constitution as it is written is the law of the land. You must pass a written exam. One question would be: Are our rights granted by government? If you answer in the affirmative, you are barred from voting.

Making the passing of an "exam" a prerequisite for voting sets a very bad precedent. The next majority in Congress, the next Presidential administration, the next deciding vote in the Supreme Court (or all three working in concert) might very well add to the questions, or even change the answers to the ones already on the "exam". Never give the State a weapon you don't want turned against you.

[nathanbforrest45]

In a perfect world, all guns would be made out of black licorice, no one would ever need to defend themselves or others with one because crime and violence wouldn't exist, and I would be 22 years old and the starting right fielder for the Arizona Diamondbacks.

And I would be driving the latest Formula One car from Ferrari instead of a Nissan Versa.

[nathanbforrest45]

Anyone over the age of 18 should be allow to purchase a gun. The problem is not the gun or the magazine, its the current social mores that produce the nutwads that run off and gun down people. When I was a kid you could buy a 25 caliber automatic via mail order. All you had to do was swear you were over 18. There were no mass shootings in that period. It was only after liberalism became the prominent social system that we see these events.

[Cthulhu]

My ideal world when it comes to guns:

- overturn the 2nd amendment
- develop trade in/buy back program for all privately owned guns
- pass a new law allowing only a single shot handgun or rifle to be manufactured
- pass a new law allowing one gun, either a handgun or rifle, as described above, per household and a specific amount of purchasable ammunition solely for home protection
- pass a new law making any crime committed with a gun a 25 year minimum sentence without opportunity for parole even if it's unloaded or just on your body
- pass a new law that makes an automatic minimum sentence for having a gun outside the home even if not being used in a crime
- for people currently with a variety of guns in their home they can keep them but the ammunition will no longer be produced and any usage of those guys outside the home would be punishable by fine or jail time
- any at home creation of ammunition or weapons would result in a fine or jail time
- exceptions for citizens or businesses would need to be reviewed and approved

Yes I know to many of you this would never happen and I know it would never happen but I'm just giving you my ideal vision for guns in this country. Take it for what it is.
Thank you for your participation and not derailing the thread.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Cthulhu]

Eat glass
*high five*

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Crepitus]

Could that not be said of all guns??
So you think we should ban them all rather than just have a few common sense limits? That's rather extreme of you.

[Crepitus]

Why?
Common sense and safety, both public and individual.

[Crepitus]

What it is is total garbage! Your vision is Pollyanna and will not happen. Your gullibility of thinking criminals will not have guns and ammo is pathetic!
Didn't read the post to the end then?

[Crepitus]

I just wanted to give you a wake-up call Miss Pollyanna! I read your whole post realizing it was merely a wish on your part, but my opinion is still valid.
Not to anyone who knows you.

[Crepitus]

Perhaps people who wish to post gibberish on political forums should be required to do so as well.
This place would be empty.

[Crepitus]

Eliminating drunk drivers would save a lot more lives than enforcing speed limits would. Speed limits have absolutely nothing to do with saving lives and everything to do with collecting revenue.
Um, we are removing drunk drivers from the road as they are found.

[Crepitus]

Should you have to take a course and get a license to go to Church? Post on the internet? Write a letter to your Congressman?
There a chance you could accidentally kill yourself or someone else with your church?

I knew there was a reason I'm an atheist.

[Crepitus]

My ideal world when it comes to voting:

You must fully understand our system of government. You must shown an understanding of the fact that the Constitution as it is written is the law of the land. You must pass a written exam. One question would be: Are our rights granted by government? If you answer in the affirmative, you are barred from voting.


I could go for that.
Oh, you want people to be instructed on the basics of government to vote but not on basic gun safety to own a firearm?

Gee, that makes a lotta sense.

[Cletus]

Oh, you want people to be instructed on the basics of government to vote but not on basic gun safety to own a firearm?

Gee, that makes a lotta sense.

The vote is a lot more dangerous and powerful than a firearm. You missed the entire point of HB's post. You also missed the point of the one before it. The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally protected right, just like the right to attend the church of your choice or to speak out against the government or to vote. If you are going to require training before someone can exercise the right to keep and bear arms, it is reasonable to require training before someone can exercise any of his other constitutionally protected rights.

[Crepitus]

The vote is a lot more dangerous and powerful than a firearm. You missed the entire point of HB's post. You also missed the point of the one before it. The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally protected right, just like the right to attend the church of your choice or to speak out against the government or to vote. If you are going to require training before someone can exercise the right to keep and bear arms, it is reasonable to require training before someone can exercise any of his other constitutionally protected rights.
Votes are dangerous in an abstract impersonal kinda way. Not directly dangerous to individuals like a firearm.

A church or religion is not something you can carry in your pocket, although every religion I am aware of has indeed been used to harm people at some point so maybe some training isn't a bad idea now that I think about it.

[nathanbforrest45]

Um, we are removing drunk drivers from the road as they are found.


Sorry, but wish that were true. A very small percentage of drunks are removed from the highways. I can show you police reports where the same person has been picked up for DUI 5 or more times. Even when they lose their driver's licenses they continue to drive. We are doing little to end the scourge of drunk drivers.

Besides, that has nothing what so ever to do with speeding tickets. Speeding tickets are nothing more than another tax levied against the citizens. The various State Highway Patrol Officers are little more than uniformed tax collectors.

[nathanbforrest45]

Votes are dangerous in an abstract impersonal kinda way. Not directly dangerous to individuals like a firearm.

A church or religion is not something you can carry in your pocket, although every religion I am aware of has indeed been used to harm people at some point so maybe some training isn't a bad idea now that I think about it.


Some people are just too frigging dense to understand the real argument I suppose. Do you need a government agent to tell you when to brush your teeth in the morning? Sounds like it.

[Standing Wolf]

Anyone over the age of 18 should be allow to purchase a gun. The problem is not the gun or the magazine, its the current social mores that produce the nutwads that run off and gun down people. When I was a kid you could buy a 25 caliber automatic via mail order. All you had to do was swear you were over 18. There were no mass shootings in that period. It was only after liberalism became the prominent social system that we see these events.

There have always been "mass shootings". What has changed is the 24-hour news cycle, and the national media's obsession with certain types of mass shootings, i.e., one that occurs anywhere near a school. Between the lengthy, wall-to-wall coverage of these events inciting other unbalanced individuals to follow suit and be the next media star, and the advent and proliferation of popular first-party shooter games, I believe there are plenty of good candidates for the blame game without dragging "liberalism" into it.

[Mac-7]

The gun control debate is pointless.

as soon as the liberals have 5 votes on the supreme court they will begin taking all the guns very quickly

nothing conservatives and libertarians say will change that

[Standing Wolf]

The gun control debate is pointless.

as soon as the liberals have 5 votes on the supreme court they will begin taking all the guns very quickly

nothing conservatives and libertarians say will change that

Impossible. It will never happen.

[Oboe]

No one wants to take guns away from everyone. Why do people keep repeating that?

In my opinion, people who want to posses guns should take a course and get a licence. That's all.

I will have to disagree with this. Anyone who is paying attention can see that the government wants to ban guns. The problem lies in the fact that nothing they ever do affects criminals because they do not obey laws. As far as who should have a gun? I guess who ever wants one and can legally buy one.

[nathanbforrest45]

Impossible. It will never happen.


If God wanted man to fly He would have given us wings. Anything is possible and if you have the SC stacked in your favor likely.