I've never gotten hate-mail, so here's my chance.

[Deanimator]

The KKK evolved because the south felt that they had to 'resist' this martial law, and terrorized the former slaves, Jews and Catholics. This is where the term WASP (White Anglo Saxon Protestant) came from.

Philosopher George Santayana said that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

My 30+ years of dealing with anti-gunners has shown me that indeed some of them WANT to repeat history, specifically the race riots and lynchings of the 19th to mid 20th centuries.

The reason why a lot of people want to limit gun ownership is that they don't like the idea of a lynching where they don't know ahead of time who's going to end up dead. They're the same sort of cowards who ran shrieking like schoolgirls from the Warsaw Ghetto because a few Jews had some old, rusty handguns.

 

[NavyLCDR]

nogods,

We do not disagree on what the current state of gun control laws are. We disagree on what the ideal state of gun control laws should be.

BTW.... someone mentioned a violent criminal on trial for committing a crime possessing a firearm in a courthouse.

No, the person on trial for a violent crime should not be allowed to possess a gun in the courthouse during the trial. But all of the citizens who are at the courthouse for routine business should be allowed to. It makes no sense to prohibit me from wearing my gun while filing my divorce decree with the clerk or applying for a concealed pistol license.

 

[S&WM&P40]

nogods,

We do not disagree on what the current state of gun control laws are. We disagree on what the ideal state of gun control laws should be.

BTW.... someone mentioned a violent criminal on trial for committing a crime possessing a firearm in a courthouse.

No, the person on trial for a violent crime should not be allowed to possess a gun in the courthouse during the trial. But all of the citizens who are at the courthouse for routine business should be allowed to. It makes no sense to prohibit me from wearing my gun while filing my divorce decree with the clerk or applying for a concealed pistol license.

But the violent criminals(Police) are allowed to carry in the court house everyday. So why should I be stopped from carrying my firearm? I don't spend my free time looking for people to taser,beat with a knightstick etc.. Nor do I have people sworn to up hold the law on my side. Ready to cover up my illegal acts and frame them on to a citizen.

 

[NavyLCDR]

But the violent criminals(Police) are allowed to carry in the court house everyday. So why should I be stopped from carrying my firearm? I don't spend my free time looking for people to taser,beat with a knightstick etc.. Nor do I have people sworn to up hold the law on my side. Ready to cover up my illegal acts and frame them on to a citizen.

I agree... unless you were the person on trial. During the trial, the defendent is in custody.

 

[Treo]

AM I the only one that notices that the OP dropped the one post and hasn't come back since?

 

[S&WM&P40]

AM I the only one that notices that the OP dropped the one post and hasn't come back since?

Am I the only one who has noticed a FLOOD of anti Everything trolls on the forums lately?

 

[S&WM&P40]

 

[nogods]

Am I the only one who has noticed a FLOOD of anti Everything trolls on the forums lately?

Calling people who don't agree with your views "trolls" and "anti" is highly ineffective.

The truth is that people who preach for extreme and unrealistic outcomes are submarining the efforts of those of us working to expand the ability of all law abiding citizens to own and posses firearms.

Think of it like PETA - their extreme views on animal rights actually hurts the advancement of better treatment of animals. The same is true of those who push for "everyone, everywhere, all the time" firearms possession. They are the real anti's because they are assuring that we will make no progress toward our ultimate goals. they are the ammunition for the idealogical anti-gun crowd. They play right into their hands and become poster children for the anti cause.

 

[NavyLCDR]

The truth is that people who preach for extreme and unrealistic outcomes are submarining the efforts of those of us working to expand the ability of all law abiding citizens to own and posses firearms.

Think of it like PETA - their extreme views on animal rights actually hurts the advancement of better treatment of animals. The same is true of those who push for "everyone, everywhere, all the time" firearms possession. They are the real anti's because they are assuring that we will make no progress toward our ultimate goals. they are the ammunition for the idealogical anti-gun crowd. They play right into their hands and become poster children for the anti cause.

Hmmmmm...... you mean like in Arizona last year and Wyoming this year? Probably soon to be Colorado? Yeah, we are really hurting the cause. If you guys had your way, three years ago you would have said Arizona and Wyoming were model states....leave them alone and hope that other states would become like them... and then that crazy, emotional and ignorant permit-less carry crowd had to step in and change everything.

 

[plainshunter]

well, i've been reading through this thread and tired of it around page 7. i don't really have much to add, but wanted to get into the fray.

i will admit, that after the AZ shooting, i was pretty torn up by the young girl's death and felt much like archangel did. I remember discussing with my copy buddy that something should be done, that maybe we have to make some changes and give up some stuff. i mean really, that young girl didn't deserve to die for anything. any right, any freedom.

and that's true, she didn't deserve that. no one does. not even the thousands of soldiers that have fought and died for that freedom (I know, I know, I'm getting sappy and throwing out platitudes - I blame it on the bourbon).

I've continued to wrestle with the issue, I've looked at it from many different angles. But I can only come up with 1 result. We're either free or we aren't. I can't find any middle ground. I can't see how "mostly free" is better. I can't come up with anything other than Liberty can be messy.

I'll take the mess over the other options available out there.

There you go, my bourbon soaked, uneducated, un-statistic backed response. I have a feeling it's probably close to what the founders felt.

 

[S&WM&P40]

Calling people who don't agree with your views "trolls" and "anti" is highly ineffective.

The truth is that people who preach for extreme and unrealistic outcomes are submarining the efforts of those of us working to expand the ability of all law abiding citizens to own and posses firearms.

Think of it like PETA - their extreme views on animal rights actually hurts the advancement of better treatment of animals. The same is true of those who push for "everyone, everywhere, all the time" firearms possession. They are the real anti's because they are assuring that we will make no progress toward our ultimate goals. they are the ammunition for the idealogical anti-gun crowd. They play right into their hands and become poster children for the anti cause.

WOW,now you wish to try and restrict my 1st amendment rights! Were do you people stop?

 

[NavyLCDR]

If it makes you feel better, plainshunter, the strictest gun control laws on earth would not have stopped Tuscon. Evidence:

BBC News - Girl shot in the neck at takeaway in east London dies
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/30/mother-maisie-copland-aldershot

 

[plainshunter]

If it makes you feel better, plainshunter, the strictest gun control laws on earth would not have stopped Tuscon.

I know that, which is how I came to the conclusion I did.

 

[nogods]

WOW,now you wish to try and restrict my 1st amendment rights! Were do you people stop?

Not at all. Go ahead and waste space and time making inane assertions. I'll defend your right to do so. I'm just pointing out that it is inane.

When someone holds up a sign saying "Techar's gets payed to much" it is not a denial of that person's 1st amendment rights to point out the irony of their sign.

 

[S&WM&P40]

well, i've been reading through this thread and tired of it around page 7. i don't really have much to add, but wanted to get into the fray.

i will admit, that after the AZ shooting, i was pretty torn up by the young girl's death and felt much like archangel did. I remember discussing with my copy buddy that something should be done, that maybe we have to make some changes and give up some stuff. i mean really, that young girl didn't deserve to die for anything. any right, any freedom.

and that's true, she didn't deserve that. no one does. not even the thousands of soldiers that have fought and died for that freedom (I know, I know, I'm getting sappy and throwing out platitudes - I blame it on the bourbon).

I've continued to wrestle with the issue, I've looked at it from many different angles. But I can only come up with 1 result. We're either free or we aren't. I can't find any middle ground. I can't see how "mostly free" is better. I can't come up with anything other than Liberty can be messy.

I'll take the mess over the other options available out there.

There you go, my bourbon soaked, uneducated, un-statistic backed response. I have a feeling it's probably close to what the founders felt.

Lost his little girl to a mad man with a firearm. Yet he does not want more restrictions on people. What strength that takes to really stand up for your values. He could have easily did a 180 and gone over to the Brady side. It's one thing to say your pro rights, it's another to walk and walk when the time comes. Would any of us done the same? Or would be be calling for more restrictions?

 

[plainshunter]

Lost his little girl to a mad man with a firearm. Yet he does not want more restrictions on people. What strength that takes to really stand up for your values. He could have easily did a 180 and gone over to the Brady side. It's one thing to say your pro rights, it's another to walk and walk when the time comes. Would any of us done the same? Or would be be calling for more restrictions?

absolutely!

 

[nogods]

absolutely!

Maybe the real question to ask is what his "little girl" would say about the issue?

 

[Treo]

Maybe the real question to ask is what his "little girl" would say about the issue?

So, tell us nogods what law would you pass to ensure Tucson never happens again?

 

[S&WM&P40]

Maybe the real question to ask is what his "little girl" would say about the issue?

Do tell what will happen when yet another so called "Common sense" gun law is passed? You get the gun laws passed you want, yet people are still being killed by mad men/women with firearms. What then? You get guns banned and make them all illegal, yet some how the mad people still get them and are able to kill people. What then? No firearms left in the USA, they are all melted down for scrap. Now the mad men start using knifes or tractor trailers,airplanes,cars,hammers,swords etc.. to kill large amounts of people. What then? Do we ban every item that could be used as a weapon? Back ground checks to own and drive a car? Back ground check to own a butter knife? Do tell just where we should stop with the passing of so called "Common sense" laws, that sound and look good on paper but do nothing in the REAL world to protect people?

 

[Edsworld]

Everyone has the right to defend them selves.