do you want to take away the guns or allow people to own guns

[seabeyond]

i just had a two hour conversation with my husbands republican friend. talked about the torture bill and the corrupt republican, foley, lyin bush, the right deciding who the christians are, mess up in war out of greed and the cost thus far.... then how hubby is no longer republican, his bestest friend because hubby got informed. about the texas, republican, trust fund, never been married, slut, gun lovin, 54 year old neighbor that called hubby over to tell him i was right about bush. (i had to laugh at friend cause i say, hey.... this describes you except you arent 54 and you got married)

then he told me about his only daughter, a mary cheney. and finally i say..... jim... why are you voting republican.

he says second amendment. guns

that is it. i tell you, i hate guns but i will forever stand up to the right to own guns. and many on this board agree, check out du

so.... i am doing a poll. simple. do you want to take away the guns. do you want to allow people to own guns

[babylonsister]

1. If it's done logically, I'm all for it. That gun bought off the street

could kill his daughter as easily as a registered gun. Some controls would work.

[seabeyond]

2. both my husband and he are not opposed to laws and control

as a matter of fact a year or more ago a sunshine law expired? and husband didnt like that. both are very pro gun

[razors edge]

10. guns don't kill people

(like) bush republican policy kills people

[razors edge]

3. I am well endowed

and heavily invested in the finer arts of multiple caliber projectile placement.

[seabeyond]

6. i told my friend what is going on in this nation, dems now say load

up. we are pissed and we are armed. yawl should be afraid, very afraid, wink

and no.... was no threat. i own no guns. hubby owns lots, all kinds. i wont shoot any. not my thing

[razors edge]

8. wouldn't hurt to know how,

and as a wise man once told me "I would rather be judged by twelve than carried by six".

[seabeyond]

33. i know, i know. told hubby i need to get used to the feel

one time when he was cleaning one. he gave it to me to hold. held about ten seconds and turned to biggest eeeeeeew. lol lol. nad i am holding back to him for him to take saying eeeewww....

lol lol

we havent gotten beyond that

he does have a hidden loaded. sorry all that thinks that is unsafe. personally it makes no sense to me to have a gun unloaded in one place and bullets in another. and we have it in a combo locked case. he has shown me how to use it. point at body and unload. big bullets.

my boys are taught and do well with guns. it is a balance thing me so opposed to gun and unaccepting of a lot with gun, keeping them aware of demand. they dont mess at all or they lose privilige forever. and they are pretty responsible for such young age.

[raysr]

38. With what was displayed

recently by the Isrealis what good is gun going to do you? Microwave weapons against a pop gun?

[The Wielding Truth]

4. What a fool! We just want responsibility. We believe in the Bill of Rights

How can these people have any faith in the Government that GOP has made. They have stripped their other Constitutional rights. Geez, now I see how Hitler came into power.

[seabeyond]

7. i told him, never was true. was a wedge for the republicans, they lied

just another lie. he said, ya, we do that.

[LunaSea]

5. Only time I saw guns being confiscated...

was after Katrina.

I wondered where the the NRA was when I saw cops knocking that grandma down and snatching her shotgun.

[benEzra]

73. The NRA got a restraining order to stop the confiscations

and successfully sued to have the stolen guns returned.

[CarbonDate]

9. Now? When the very government that inspired the 2nd Amendment....

...is in place? You're asking this now?

I changed my position on gun control when Bush started proving Jefferson's point. We need an armed citizenry as the last defense against tyranny.

[boilerbabe]

13. They will probably only let registered Repubs have guns...

the Right Wing version of gun control!

[seabeyond]

34. i told the dude that. lol lol. was an eye opener for him. n/t

[LostInAnomie]

11. I am all for the right for people to own guns...

... but that being said some pro-gun people are absolutely unreasonable about public safety measures of any kind. No matter how well conceived or innocuous a proposed safety measure is it automatically becomes the first step to fascist storm troopers breaking down your doors to steal your guns. There's no use even arguing about it. Plus it doesn't help that the NRA is nothing but a GOP front group.

I think there should be a happy middle ground where people can have access to all the guns of whatever type they want, but still look out for public safety.

[SheilaT]

32. Second this.

It's not, or shouldn't be, a choice between unrestricted gun ownership and confiscating all guns. Me, I don't own, don't want to own a gun. And I think there's probably some kind of realistic limits on how many guns any one individual truly needs. And I think those who own guns should be required to pass some kind of gun safety/responsibility benchmark. ESPECIALLY first time gun buyers.

The NRA and others who support unrestricted gun ownership like to claim that hundreds, maybe thousands of law-abiding gun-owning citizens protect themselves and their family from something horrible every year because they pull a gun on someone. In reality, the times that happens are sufficiently rare they tend to make the news. We hear far more stories about 10 year olds killing themselves or someone else because a gun wasn't locked up, or a someone shooting and killing his own kid, mistaken for an intruder.

Guns are dangerous weapons and there should be some kind of sensible controls on them. Which is a long, long way from saying no one should have them, or they should be taken away.

[seabeyond]

35. some are yes. the majority are not. neither hubby or friend

are unreasonable

[Warren DeMontague]

12. Memo to right wing loony-land: I'm not AT ALL interested in banning guns.

Now, if the fucking GOP and their various theocratic control freaks would stop trying to ban abortion, ban smut, ban the birth control pill, ban consensual adult gay and hetero sex, ban the sale of vibrators in Texas, ban the teaching of science in Kansas, ban stem cell research, ban adequate pain management for the ill and ban humane end-of-life choices for the terminal-- and if they would stop pissing away $40 Billion a year to keep dangerous criminals like Willie Nelson from smoking pot-- maybe we could start to be on the same page.

[Speck Tater]

14. I enjoy target shooting.

I don't hunt, but I would if I had to in order to feed myself. I also like the idea of being able to protect myself from a an enraged grizzly bear or a government gone out of control. The right to bear arms is as fundamental as the right to free speech. Besides, cars kill hundreds, if not thousands of times more people than guns, but you don't see any big rush to outlaw cars.

The import things are to teach gun safety so people will know how to handle them safgely, and to keep their guns locked up and out of the reach of kids, and to insure that the people who buy and use guns are mentally stable and not habitual felons.

[Oeditpus Rex]

15. If you support the Constitution

you support all of the Constitution. It doesn't exist for you to select the articles you agree with and fuck the rest.

I hate guns, but under the laws of our land, people have the right to own them, and I must support that.

I also support making them difficult to purchase.

And registration of all firearms.

And mandatory trigger locks or "smart guns."

In short, I'm anti-needless killing.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

39. Yes and no.

Wanting to ammend the constitution is perfectly acceptable.

For what it's worth, I'm English, not American, and I think that our levels of gun control are about right.

In America, they'd clearly be unconstitutional; while I think that you'd benefit a great deal from adopting them, I think you'd have to repeal the second ammendment to do so.

[Selatius]

16. If you want to own a gun, then feel free, but you must...

show that you can properly handle your firearm in a safe manner.

You must show that you have adequate facilities (such as a safe) to store your firearm(s). In addition, you must store your ammunition separately from your firearm(s).

You must show that you have completed a government-regulated, standardized gun safety education course. If you have other people in your household, you must take a yearly refresher course; otherwise, you must take one at least once every other year.

You must not have a criminal record or a record of mental instability.

If you cannot meet all of these requirements, you shouldn't have a firearm. Ideally, we would emulate Swiss laws governing private ownership of firearms; they KNOW how to regulate, and the per capita gun crime rate and the gun death rates in Switzerland put the US to absolute shame, but the Swiss love their guns, and they have a long tradition of marksmanship and gun sportsmanship.

[michreject]

19. That's insane

In addition, you must store your ammunition separately from your firearm(s).

Lot of good an unloaded gun will do you when you need it. I have a loaded gun in the office (bookcase), living room(mantle, next to front door) and family room(bookcase) downstairs. Upstairs in the master bedroom on my wife's and my nightstand. Not in a drawer, but on top. No one is allowed upstairs except me or my wife.

[bowens43]

23. What's insane is having a loaded gun around the house.

That should definitely be illegal.

"No one is allowed upstairs except me or my wife." does this mean you have children at home? If so , you should be arrested and your guns should be confiscated.

People like you are the reason we need stricter gun laws.

[spin]

25. A loaded gun saved my underage daughter

My daughter would probably have been raped and murdered if I would have followed your rules.

She was only 17 when an intruder managed to open the sliding glass door in the rear of our home. The fact that while fooling with the door he had set an alarm off and a sixty pound black lab was in the house failed to deter him.

He was halfway through the door when he found himself facing my 5 foot 2 inch 100 pound daughter. She pointed a S&W 25-2 revolver at him and calmly said "I would not come any further if I were you". He wisely decided to leave.

For those who are not gun enthusiasts, this revolver is the same size as Clint Eastwood’s “make my day, punk” weapon. It fires a .45 caliber projectile which has a well earned reputation as a man stopper.

My daughter was nine when I first taught her to shoot at the range. The big Smith became her favorite gun. She enjoyed the attention she got when she picked that weapon up, aimed it downrange and started shooting. The other shooters would stop and watch, amazed at the sight of such a small girl with such a big weapon.

She also had 10 years of judo training when the incident happened. Familiarity with the weapon and the ability to control emotion learned in combat in the dojo, enabled her to confidently confront the intruder.

When the police arrived a few minutes later and knocked on the door she had to warn them “I have a gun in my hand and I can’t let go”. One of the officers had to gently pry her fingers loose. Adrenalin can have that effect. It takes a while to come down from an adrenalin high.

In today’s world I would probably been in trouble with the police. I allowed her to keep the weapon loaded in a gun case under her bed and she was only 17. I was at work at the time the incident happened and she was alone as my wife had decided to seek greener pastures elsewhere.

But now I have two wonderful grandkids and a lot to be thankful for. Had she been raped or killed that night, I would have never forgiven myself.

For the curious, my daughter is not a conservative. She hates Bush with a passion and fears the draft will take her children to war. She also has a concealed carry permit and packs wherever she goes.

[seabeyond]

37. interesting story. left chills..... n/t

[michreject]

26. fortunately you don't make the laws

I have no children at home. Even if I did, and I did for many years, what law am I breaking?

[benEzra]

75. Hell no...

What's insane is having a loaded gun around the house. That should definitely be illegal.

Hell no. We keep our guns in a SAFE when not in use. The rifles are stored unloaded, except one carbine in the safe will generally have a loaded magazine inserted when either I or my wife am home. Her 9mm handgun is chamber empty, magazine loaded, for ready access; my 9mm has a round in the chamber, safety on. They are NOT accessible to the kids or to unauthorized individuals, but they are accessible to us in an emergency.

Our home, our choice. I respect your choices on the issue; please respect ours.

[seabeyond]

36. i posted above the same. i am so anti gun. so hate them. and that

makes no sense to me what so ever. leave bullets out of gun and in seperate place. lol lol. hello mr burglar. can you wait a minute while i load

i did tell hubby,.... he had better do right, cause if anything happens to kids, will be on his shoulder. but again, in our house, we have lots of appropriate safety measures and taught kids well (in all areas of life in responsibility) and are loaded

[michreject]

54. True story

Anybody remember Kojak on TV? The pilot for that series was based on a true murder. Marcus Nelson murder. Two females shared a apartment. They had a gun but were afraid of it, so one hid the gun and the other hid the bullets. One lady was at home when the assailant broke in. She had an unloaded gun. She died. The other one came home before the killer left. She died. A loaded gun could have stopped him before two women were killed.

No unloaded guns for me, thank you very much.

[TahitiNut]

50. It's just another reason I'm in favor of Universal National Service

I'm in favor of every citizen being trained in the use of firearms. Ubetcha.

[Stardust]

17. Am thinking about getting one myself. Just in case.

[me b zola]

18. What I did to dispell this myth (liberals want to take your guns)

Mr Zola has a ditto-head cousin who bought into all of the myths and lies that are being perpetuated by the rw noise machine about Liberals. A month or so ago there was a thread on guns here in GD. Over a hundred replys and prolly 90% of the people said that they were gun owners or supported gun ownership.

I e-mailed him a link to the thread so that he could read for himself :) I also told him that gun ownership has less of a corelation to political party than it does to where one lives. People in urban areas are less likely to own guns than people who live in rural areas. It opened up some good dialogue between us. I want him to question those pompous lying bastards (Limpballs, O'Liely et al) who are defining to their audience who Liberals are and what we believe.

Good on you for taking the time to do this. Here is a link to that other thread that was excellent for making the point that you are trying to make to your husband's friend:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1689245

[Donald Ian Rankin]

42. Many of us do.

That all liberals want to take away guns is a myth.

That the Democratic party wants to take away guns is certainly a myth.

That many liberals, including a) me and b) many Americans, think that America would benefit from adopting gun control on roughly the level we have here in the UK (i.e. taking away guns, in many cases) is not a myth.

That said, I don't want to see the Democratic party adopt that as a plank of their platform - it would cost them too much political capital that could be better spent elsewhere, and it would need a constitutional ammendment repealing the 2nd, which there is no chance of getting. But if it were to happen somehow, I and a lot of American liberals think it would benefit America.

[and-justice-for-all]

20. I do not want to take Guns away...

...But I think we need much more restrictive access to them. Because some people should never beable to get their hands on a gun and if they did, then it should be an instant 5 years in prison. Our 'right to bare arms' needs some heavier restrictions.

The US is #1 in Gun fatalities, even third world countries have lower gun fatality rates. The US has had over 3K Gun related deaths if not more this year...I actually think that 'the right to bare arms' has exceeded its purpose, that was put in because of the threat of England and/or France invading and trying to take control over the New Country when it was founded. Also they felt that Indians were a threat to them, which they were not until the colonist turned on them.

[sweetheart]

21. Let them keep the guns

regulate gunpowder, bulletts and ignitors. A gun without explosives is a rather heavy walking stick.

[insanerepubs]

52. Never

Gonna happen.....I reload all my own ammo, and so do many others.

[sweetheart]

62. Reload all you want

They merely need to regulate the powder, you can't make that yourself
unless you've a bat farm or a chemical factory, something that
is eminently more traceable than even the drugs war.

Reload ammo all you want, you need powder.

[bowens43]

22. Silly poll, not enough choices.

THeir is a whole range of options between those two and you can bet that nearly everyone falls somewhere in between.

[Junkdrawer]

27. If you stop people from buying 10 guns a week, you might as well ban...

guns outright!!!!

:sarcasm:

[seabeyond]

40. i specifically did not want choices. i wanted it simple for my reason

you may feel it is silly cause you dont have enough choices, and seeing how i am a gray thinker i can generally agree. but i am talking to a black and white republican, so i have to talk his language

[fasttense]

24. Until the bushes took office, I was against guns.

My hubby and I use to argue about it. Now I understand why we have to have an armed populace. It is hard to round up insurgents when the populace is armed. For the first time in my life, I'm glad for the NRA (but they should have been there when they disarmed Katrina victims).

All liberals need to be prepared to defend themselves when the Gestapo comes.

[calico1]

28. I am not going to answer either one, but I will say that

I know a number of people who vote Republican based on ONE SINGLE ISSUE. It's frustrating as hell. Their whole world could be falling apart because of what the Republicans have done but if they are anti abortion or anti gay and the Republican candidate is, then they vote for them!

[Mountainman]

29. If people on this board were as smarts as many of them think they are

why is it they don't understand that criminals will not obey gun laws? We reduce saturday night specials, we reduce automatic weapons, we put waiting periods in place, we have training requirements in place yet people still get guns and kill other people. What is the next law you want in place? No anti gun law will stop people from killing each other. To think otherwise is to throw your brain out the window I think.

I own a pistol that I use for target practice and for protection against rattle snakes (I have never shot one though) What good could come from taking my pistol away from me? All people where I live own guns. They give guns to their kids to go hunting with. If you are for taking away guns you help keep this folks voting for repukes. You help keep repukes in power because the anti gun laws are an albatross around our necks.

[seabeyond]

41. i agree. i will always stand for the right to own, and i will never own

as i stand for the right of kkk to march, though i dispise.....just like

[goodhue]

30. honestly

I want to take them away.

Sorry, I just don't like tools that kill, and I think the world would be a better place without them.

However, I realize that is an unrealistic policy position in the USA, so I don't suggest our candidates advance it.

[StellaBlue]

61. I used to be a pacifist

and still am at heart like any reasonable person with a conscience ought to be.

But I have recently come to realize something very important.

Human nature doesn't change. The world will forever exist (until we destroy it or the sun explodes, whichever is first) in a state of revolving oligarchies. There will be blips of freedom and enlightenment and individual rights in between. Until recently, we were fortunate enough to have lived in one of these small spotlights on the dark line of history (as Dawkins would put it).

Nonviolence is the ideal. Gandhi was right. King was right.

But, the fact is, there will ALWAYS be SOMEONE who IS willing to use violence to get their way. And then we must either fight back or perish for the sake of nonviolence.

Personally, I would rather perish for the ideal of freedom. Live free or die.

[goodhue]

31. Principal fatally shot at Wisconsin school

Principal fatally shot at Wisconsin school

By Todd Richmond

Associated Press

Published September 30, 2006

CAZENOVIA, Wis. -- A teenager brought two guns to his rural school and shot the principal to death Friday after a struggle with adults and other students, authorities said.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0609300094sep30,1,2571955.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

[rug]

The Second Amendment increases in importance

in direct proportion to the lessening of the Fourth Amendment.

[knitter4democracy]

43. People need to be able to hunt.

Around here, many hunt to help feed their families. It's about survival, what with food prices going up. If we take away all guns, people here would revolt and it would be pretty bad.

I'm all for responsible gun ownership (while not owning guns myself), but I do think we can start doing more to keep human-hunting guns off the streets. There's ammo out there that's only for killing humans. Hunters don't use it and don't want it. There are guns, mostly handguns, that hunters don't use and only keep for protection. We can do more to control who owns guns and to keep them responsible.

[benEzra]

76. Only 1 in 5 gun owners is a hunter, nationwide...

I'm all for responsible gun ownership (while not owning guns myself), but I do think we can start doing more to keep human-hunting guns off the streets. There's ammo out there that's only for killing humans. Hunters don't use it and don't want it. There are guns, mostly handguns, that hunters don't use and only keep for protection. We can do more to control who owns guns and to keep them responsible.

Only 1 in 5 gun owners is a hunter, nationwide. My wife and I, like most gun owners, are in the nonhunting group. Like most gun owners, we own guns for defensive purposes and recreational target shooting.

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What?

If you want to ban handguns and small-caliber nonhunting-style rifles, then you want to take OUR guns. We don't own any purely "hunting" weapons, and have little interest in doing so. But the guns we have, we wish to keep.

[cynatnite]

44. People should be licensed to own guns...

If they have to be licensed and insured to own cars, it should be the same with guns in addition to a criminal and psych background check.

We own a gun and do our best to act responsibly since we have children in the house. If the govt. said we had to register, be licensed and insured in order to own a gun, I wouldn't have a problem with it at all.

[insanerepubs]

53. I don't agree

cynatnite (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-30-06 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
44. People should be licensed to own guns...
If they have to be licensed and insured to own cars, it should be the same with guns in addition to a criminal and psych background check.

We own a gun and do our best to act responsibly since we have children in the house. If the govt. said we had to register, be licensed and insured in order to own a gun, I wouldn't have a problem with it at all.


Jumping on bandwagons are easy...Not getting on them in the first place is what's hard
http://smalleruptions.blogspot.com/

Driving a car is not covered under the 2nd Amendment.There is already a criminal background check required, it's called NICS. Do you really want the government to have access to your medical records in order to conduct a "psych background check" I don't....and who is going to evaluate those records?

[cynatnite]

59. So since guns are in the constitution, they don't need restrictions?

Cars, since they're not in the constitution, have restrictions? :shrug: Trying to understand the logic here.

About the psych background...I was under the impression that was one of the things they checked for when doing background checks upon buying a gun. If I'm wrong about this, I do apologize.

[benEzra]

81. They are subject to restrictions, actually...

and are very tightly regulated under current law.

The way things now stand, law-abiding adults who are not substance abusers, who have clean criminal records and can pass a Federal background check, and who have not been adjudicated mentally incompetent, and who have no restraining orders against them, can lawfully own non-automatic, non-sound-suppressed, non-disguised, non-X-ray-transparent firearms under .51 caliber that meet the minimum length, barrel length, and other criteria of the National Firearms Act.

Federal law places VERY strict controls on all automatic weapons, weapons easily convertible to automatic fire, sound suppressed firearms, weapons over .50 caliber (except shotguns), disguised firearms, smoothbore handguns, shotguns with barrel length under 18", rifles with barrel length under 16", rifles or shotguns with overall length under 26", destructive devices, armor-piercing ammunition for handguns and intermediate-caliber rifles, guns not detectable by X-ray, etc. etc. etc. Violation of many of these laws is a 10-year Federal felony. And then there's the whole host of Federal and state laws relating to how and where guns may be carried, how they may be used, self-defense law, etc.

You probably have absolutely no idea how tightly guns are regulated in the United States. Even changing the stock on some imported rifles can get you a 5-year Federal prison sentence.

Just because law-abiding adults with clean records can own SOME guns, doesn't mean that guns aren't regulated. But since gun ownership is a right, such regulations must pass a strict-scrutiny test, shouldn't be arbitrary, and must not restrict the right of the law-abiding to own a gun.

[Retired AF Dem]

57. "If the govt. said we had to register"

Does this include the present Govt?

[cynatnite]

60. Do you think guns should be bought and sold freely with no limitations?

especially under this government?

[Retired AF Dem]

65. Let me try this again

If Bush appeared on TV tomorrow and said that all registered Democrats had to register their firearms would you do it?

[cynatnite]

66. Well, if it was only registered democrats...

no more than you would. :hi:

[Imagevision]

45. Buying guns at gun shows with no background check is bogus

[insanerepubs]

55. Why?

Thousands of papers all over the country carry gun ads....There are even online gun auction sites..

[benEzra]

77. Gun auction sites require the gun to be shipped through a licensed FFL

Thousands of papers all over the country carry gun ads....There are even online gun auction sites..

Gun auction sites require the gun to be shipped through a licensed FFL (Federal Firearms Licensee, a.k.a. a licensed gun dealer) who conducts the Federally required NICS background check. The buyer fills out a BATFE Form 4473 just like they were buying an in-stock gun from a gun store.

Here in NC, a background check is run on all private handgun sales. Rifles and shotguns are exempt since long guns are rarely used criminally.

[StellaBlue]

46. The unthinkable has come to pass - we now need the 2nd Amendment

for precisely the reason the founders included it.

All previous leftwing anti-gun rhetoric (of which I have sometimes been a part - and I am non-gun owner), has been rendered moot.

[leesa]

47. This is a stupid poll. It's a local issue. Gun control in Vermont is

different than the need for gun control in Manhattan.

The point that people need to get across is that it is the groups who are into authoritarianism and control...i.e. Republican at this point and time, who are likely to take their guns.

Liberals aare the ones who were the Freedom Fighters against King George who drafted the Constitution and the gun rights came through the idea of NOT wanting a standing military in peace time.

[seabeyond]

48. the point of this "stupid" poll has nothing to do with what you wrote

you have totally valid points that have nothing to do with the subject i am discussing. which is fine, i dont feel the need to call you your post stupid

[insanerepubs]

56. It's not

a local issue because of the 2nd Amendment.

[Opusnone]

49. Gays, guns and God!

The cornerstones of any successful repuke campaign.

[Subdivisions]

51. I used to be steadfastly opposed to gun ownership due to an

accidental death in my youth. My uncle and his best friend (both young adults at the time) were "playing with guns" one day and one of them when off and killed my uncle's friend. Kenny was my "honorary" uncle. From that point on I was opposed to gun ownership, except where a situation should arise that would need to invoke our Second Amendment right to bear arms.

But I did a one-eighty several years ago when Texas passed the concealed handgun law. This allowed Texans to carry a concealed weapon as long as they had no criminal or mental illness record, completed a concealed hand gun training course and provided for penalties for unlawful use of the firearm. It has shown me that law-abiding citizens can indeed arm themselves, if they want to, and not have a negative impact on crime. In fact, though I'm not an expert, I would venture to say that the result has been a positive one with regard to crime.

Personally, I won't own a gun. I still don't like them. But if an honest, law-abiding citizen that has completed the requirements wants to carry a weapon, then it's ok with me. After all, I don't plan to ever be on the business end of a concealed weapon carrying citizen who's having to defend him/herself.

[hootinholler]

58. I think it should be compulsory, but I'm a little out there in my views NT

[cobalt1999]

63. I find it funny that the same people that...

scream about the republicans tramping all over the constitution, are also willing to tramp all over the 2nd amendment.

How about we leave the poor old constitution alone for a little while and maybe just accept the personal liberties included in it, whether you like them or not?

[seabeyond]

68. we leave the poor old constitution alone for a little while

oh, i love your post. isnt this just it. lol. cute. yes

[DTinAZ]

64. Poll is obviously flawed

"take away the guns"..."allow people to own guns" -- which guns? Automatic and assault weapons? OF COURSE! Hunting rifles, target pistols, etc.? Probably not. Start over with a better poll...this is totally meaningless.

DT

[seabeyond]

69. not for what i want. and no it isnt. the point i am making is not

the issue you have at hand. two different things

[benEzra]

72. Target pistols ARE "assault weapons"...

"take away the guns"..."allow people to own guns" -- which guns? Automatic and assault weapons? OF COURSE! Hunting rifles, target pistols, etc.? Probably not.

Here's a Hammerli international target competition pistol, .22 caliber:



That's an "assault weapon" according to the ban-more-guns lobby and most proposed "assault weapons" bans, due to the nontraditional styling; a target pistol with the magazine attaching in front of the trigger guard is an "assault weapon" by definition.

If the target pistol in question had a 12-round magazine, it'd run afoul of the "assault weapon" bait-and-switch even if it were traditionally styled.


Hunting rifles can also be "assault weapons." Here's a preban Marlin Model 60 squirrel hunting rifle, .22 caliber:



Possession of that "assault weapon" is a 5-year felony in New Jersey.


All automatic weapons, including military assault rifles, have been tightly controlled for 72 years now, under the strict Title 2/Class III provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934. The "assault weapon" bait-and-switch is about small-caliber, non-automatic CIVILIAN guns, not military weapons. According to the ban-more-guns lobby, about half the guns in our family's gun safe are "assault weapons."

[misternormal]

67. I have no problem with those that...

... desire to own legal firearms, as long as they are responsible gun owners. i.e.. trigger locks and gun safes.

[seabeyond]

70. kick for more votes n/t

[seabeyond]

71. any mroe votes for night crowd? n/t

[InvisibleTouch]

74. I have a friend like that.

He's not a bigot, he's not a homophobe, he's not a misogynist, he's not a fundie, he's not indifferent to the plight of animals and the environment, but his one and only issue is gun-ownership rights. He's convinced the Democrats will take his guns, given half a chance. I've found that simply not to be true - most Dems of my acquaintance, myself included, are pro-gun-ownership rights with reasonable background checks and the like. So how did we ever get a reputation as gun-grabbers?

[benEzra]

78. You can largely thank the DLC for that...

most Dems of my acquaintance, myself included, are pro-gun-ownership rights with reasonable background checks and the like. So how did we ever get a reputation as gun-grabbers?

Primarily because in the late 1980's/early 1990's, a few gun-hating DLC types managed to hijack the national party and make expanded gun prohibition de facto the most important issue in the whole platform. They pushed a vigorous "support hunting but ban nonhunting guns" agenda that culminated in the 1994 Feinstein ban. They attempted to take it further (e.g., S.1431, 2004 legislative session, which would have banned half the guns in our family's gun safe) but thankfully have now fallen out of favor.

Some perspective on the issue, from this gun owner: Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What?

[seabeyond]

80. nra was pretty good pushing the hysteria n/t

[seabeyond]

79. zip this thread to your friend to take a lookie

kerry was very much pro gun. no one was going to take away his.

i told friend this is a very left leaning board, and he would not find a high percentage wanting guns taken away. i was right. with middle dems, the number would be even higher for the keep gun issue

[derby378]

82. Kerry was pro-hunting, not so much pro-gun

He supported the semi-auto ban. Big, big mistake.