[quote]KyleT wrote:
Yea, that’s true. You used to be able to go down and buy a pistol at the hardware store along with other tools you might need. I sure don’t want people walking around with shotguns on my school campus, but where do you draw the line?[/quote]
Like trash bags, a shovel and a bag of lime. Ahh, the good ole days.
DB
Ronsauce wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.
And I’m sure he doesn’t care whether you care or not… good point though…
Then he can come to my house unarmed to enforce it.
But wouldn’t a shotgun be just as effective, if not more effective, than a handgun for home defense? This is why I am guessing a ban on easily concealable weapons but not on traditional hunting/home defense ones.
wow bad copy and paste job, sorry about that
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
Ronsauce wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.
And I’m sure he doesn’t care whether you care or not… good point though…
Then he can come to my house unarmed to enforce it.
But wouldn’t a shotgun be just as effective, if not more effective, than a handgun for home defense? This is why I am guessing a ban on easily concealable weapons but not on traditional hunting/home defense ones.[/quote]
Handguns have the advantages of holding more rounds, less recoil, can be operated with one hand, and you can hold them closer to your body, making retention easier.
[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
I have a feeling that eventually HAND guns will be outlawed as they are so easy to conceal but LONG guns (rifles, shotguns) will be allowed. I would say that assault rifles will be outlawed before hand guns though. I personally own a glock (mostly target pracitce, not a cop or anything) but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily basis. Maybe it will come down to hand guns will not be outlawed but require extensive background checks as some states already do.
But I think it would be a cold day in hell before any president/congress/supreme court allowed long guns to be outlawed as so many from both sides would argue the 2nd amendment right. Just a theory and I have no proof but seems like a logical agreement to appease both the anti-gun and pro-gun followers. [/quote]
Assault rifles (weapons that fire more than 1 round with each trigger pull) made after 1986 are already restricted from civilians except those who posses a Class 3 federal firearms license. The pre-86 models require a $200 tax stamp approved from the ATF, and on the low end sell for $15,000, when you can find one. Modifying a new production semi auto rifle to fire full auto will earn you 10 years in prison and prohibit you from any future gun ownership.
U.S. Congress passed more broad reaching “assault weapons” ban in 1994 (which ceased to be a law in 2004), and many of the representatives lost their seats in the election that fall. The current reps know this, and out of self preservation it’s doubtful they’ll try again.
Lastly, the majority of pro-gun individuals would not be appeased by your comprimise. I know I wouldn’t be.
[/quote]
Yea I know many of my friends wouldn’t be happy with this compromise either and I have no proof that it is coming to that, just a prediction on my part…
I can see that point, with 9 MMs being a 17+1 or 16+1 there is definitely more ammo. Perhaps part of the benefits of the handgun that you mentioned are why I foresee it being harder to obtain in the future.
[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
Ronsauce wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.
And I’m sure he doesn’t care whether you care or not… good point though…
Then he can come to my house unarmed to enforce it.
But wouldn’t a shotgun be just as effective, if not more effective, than a handgun for home defense? This is why I am guessing a ban on easily concealable weapons but not on traditional hunting/home defense ones.[/quote]
Handguns have the advantages of holding more rounds, less recoil, can be operated with one hand, and you can hold them closer to your body, making retention easier. [/quote]
No no no, he has a point. When he shows up I’ll grab my 12-gauge.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily [/quote]
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.[/quote]
And thats what the anti-gun lobby doesnt get. The way i see it, if you are opposed to gun ownership or carrying a gun, YOU don’t do it!!! Dont try to get everyone else to do what you think they should do. After all, who are you???
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
Ronsauce wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.
And I’m sure he doesn’t care whether you care or not… good point though…
Then he can come to my house unarmed to enforce it.
But wouldn’t a shotgun be just as effective, if not more effective, than a handgun for home defense? This is why I am guessing a ban on easily concealable weapons but not on traditional hunting/home defense ones.[/quote]
The 2nd amendment gives the right to bear ARMS111 Its pretty hard to go to the store bearing a M16 or 20 gauge shotgun.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]clip11 wrote:
The 2nd amendment gives the right to bear ARMS…
[/quote]
No, it doesn’t. Try a different verb.[/quote]
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]clip11 wrote:
The 2nd amendment gives the right to bear ARMS…
[/quote]
No, it doesn’t. Try a different verb.[/quote]
…protects.
Had a local “Open Carry Event” today in Maine’s largest city, Portland (a very small city, but little Boston nevertheless).
All the local commie rags predicted shootings, violence, “right-wing extremests”, etc etc ad nauseam. I wasn’t there but a friend and photographer documented it. Turns out it was a very nice, peaceful day. Beautiful day to carry in the city.
More:
I find it funny when people say that they don’t want to take guns away from “hunters and such” when they slightly miss the point of the second amendment. It wasn’t so much to allow people to hunt or even to protect their homes it was about protecting their liberties. Allowing the public to bear arms was their way of keeping power with the people.
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
I have a feeling that eventually HAND guns will be outlawed as they are so easy to conceal but LONG guns (rifles, shotguns) will be allowed. I would say that assault rifles will be outlawed before hand guns though. I personally own a glock (mostly target pracitce, not a cop or anything) but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily basis. Maybe it will come down to hand guns will not be outlawed but require extensive background checks as some states already do.
But I think it would be a cold day in hell before any president/congress/supreme court allowed long guns to be outlawed as so many from both sides would argue the 2nd amendment right. Just a theory and I have no proof but seems like a logical agreement to appease both the anti-gun and pro-gun followers. [/quote]
Shit, I hope not! Many people used concealed carry for personal defense, and take their weapons with them. I would hate to have to walk down the street with an SKS in hand rather than a pistol!
I don’t give a shit what you do but to get rid of all restrictions just so you can FEEL free? Fuck you. Fact is some people that make up the country don’t want that kinda shit where anyone can get shit whenever they want.
Some people are maniacs. The anti-gun theory is strict gun laws = harder to get gun- might prevent something. Pro-gun - people are carrying- maniac: will die if I shoot, shouldnt do it.
I wish we didnt need guns but alas we live on this planet. I try to get my Buddha on and stay away from that stuff.
[quote]clip11 wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily [/quote]
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.[/quote]
And thats what the anti-gun lobby doesnt get. The way i see it, if you are opposed to gun ownership or carrying a gun, YOU don’t do it!!! Dont try to get everyone else to do what you think they should do. After all, who are you???[/quote]
Who am I? A guy that doesn’t want to get caught in the crossfire. Your argument works for abortion, in that I am not in danger of getting aborted if someone else decides to get one. I am in danger of getting shot by some knucklehead with road rage.
BTW personal experience: Exited a strip club as two retards got in a fight over a pool game. Got caught up in the crowd as the fight spilled outside and guns were drawn and shots fired. Did not enjoy that much.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]clip11 wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily [/quote]
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.[/quote]
And thats what the anti-gun lobby doesnt get. The way i see it, if you are opposed to gun ownership or carrying a gun, YOU don’t do it!!! Dont try to get everyone else to do what you think they should do. After all, who are you???[/quote]
Who am I? A guy that doesn’t want to get caught in the crossfire. Your argument works for abortion, in that I am not in danger of getting aborted if someone else decides to get one. I am in danger of getting shot by some knucklehead with road rage.
BTW personal experience: Exited a strip club as two retards got in a fight over a pool game. Got caught up in the crowd as the fight spilled outside and guns were drawn and shots fired. Did not enjoy that much.
[/quote]
There are personal stories on both sides.
I personally have had to scare off packs of coyotes from attacking livestock and my dog. I’m glad I could do more than shake my fist at them.
You going to take personal responsibility if you take my guns? Cause you could get me killed by taking my ability to defend myself. In my opinion the right to life guarantees the right to arms. What exactly is the right to life without the ability to defend it?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]clip11 wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily [/quote]
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.[/quote]
And thats what the anti-gun lobby doesnt get. The way i see it, if you are opposed to gun ownership or carrying a gun, YOU don’t do it!!! Dont try to get everyone else to do what you think they should do. After all, who are you???[/quote]
Who am I? A guy that doesn’t want to get caught in the crossfire. Your argument works for abortion, in that I am not in danger of getting aborted if someone else decides to get one. I am in danger of getting shot by some knucklehead with road rage.
BTW personal experience: Exited a strip club as two retards got in a fight over a pool game. Got caught up in the crowd as the fight spilled outside and guns were drawn and shots fired. Did not enjoy that much.
[/quote]
There are personal stories on both sides.
I personally have had to scare off packs of coyotes from attacking livestock and my dog. I’m glad I could do more than shake my fist at them.
You going to take personal responsibility if you take my guns? Cause you could get me killed by taking my ability to defend myself. In my opinion the right to life guarantees the right to arms. What exactly is the right to life without the ability to defend it?[/quote]
A rifle or some variety of long gun would suit your coyote scaring needs I imagine.
Im not crazy anti-gun I just think hand-gun restrictions should be pretty tight. My faith in the good judgement of the general public is at an all time low and sinking fast. I know im not winning any argument here just my opinion for what its worth two cents and all that.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]clip11 wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]mazzic1083 wrote:
but don’t see the need for our general public to carry hand guns on a daily [/quote]
I don’t care if you think I need to carry or not.[/quote]
And thats what the anti-gun lobby doesnt get. The way i see it, if you are opposed to gun ownership or carrying a gun, YOU don’t do it!!! Dont try to get everyone else to do what you think they should do. After all, who are you???[/quote]
Who am I? A guy that doesn’t want to get caught in the crossfire. Your argument works for abortion, in that I am not in danger of getting aborted if someone else decides to get one. I am in danger of getting shot by some knucklehead with road rage.
BTW personal experience: Exited a strip club as two retards got in a fight over a pool game. Got caught up in the crowd as the fight spilled outside and guns were drawn and shots fired. Did not enjoy that much.
[/quote]
There are personal stories on both sides.
I personally have had to scare off packs of coyotes from attacking livestock and my dog. I’m glad I could do more than shake my fist at them.
You going to take personal responsibility if you take my guns? Cause you could get me killed by taking my ability to defend myself. In my opinion the right to life guarantees the right to arms. What exactly is the right to life without the ability to defend it?[/quote]
A rifle or some variety of long gun would suit your coyote scaring needs I imagine.
Im not crazy anti-gun I just think hand-gun restrictions should be pretty tight. My faith in the good judgement of the general public is at an all time low and sinking fast. I know im not winning any argument here just my opinion for what its worth two cents and all that.[/quote]
Couldn’t be more perfect. A rifle would be hard to take on a jog.