Another nut with a gun.

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
point taken tho SK, :)
 
That's part of the problem....what I don't need is someone telling me or trying to dictate to me what I need or dont need just because they do not like them...as a law abiding citizen,that is an insult.
 
I think that it's important to note that the second amendment was made when there were fewer types of "arms" available. I don't think anyone is going to try to take away single-shot rifles in America. Ever.

But supreme court rulings have historically adapted this right to relate to the times. Not all arms should be available to citizens. Those that have the ability to shoot many bullets in a short amount of time are more of a risk to the population, and up to a certain point you really don't need that many bullets for practical applications such as hunting or self defense. Sure I have heard the excuse "well it's a pain to have to reload every 16 shots at the gun range", but it's a really small price to pay.

So do people actually think we should be able to own any arms we want? Should I be allowed to have a missile? I'm sure we can all agree that there is a point where something is too destructive to give to the average Joe. Where that line is is what we disagree on.
 
agreed
 
for the sake of self protection, concealment is everything., there is just no way I could conceal a large mag weapon, a 22 round stick mag be sticking out the back of my shirt. and if you are going to carry you do not want any one to know you are carrying, other wise you make yourself the target, you going first, and it makes folks uncomfortable.
 
I think that it's important to note that the second amendment was made when there were fewer types of "arms" available. I don't think anyone is going to try to take away single-shot rifles in America. Ever.

But supreme court rulings have historically adapted this right to relate to the times. Not all arms should be available to citizens. Those that have the ability to shoot many bullets in a short amount of time are more of a risk to the population, and up to a certain point you really don't need that many bullets for practical applications such as hunting or self defense. Sure I have heard the excuse "well it's a pain to have to reload every 16 shots at the gun range", but it's a really small price to pay.

So do people actually think we should be able to own any arms we want? Should I be allowed to have a missile? I'm sure we can all agree that there is a point where something is too destructive to give to the average Joe. Where that line is is what we disagree on.

for the sake of self protection, concealment is everything., there is just no way I could conceal a large mag weapon, a 22 round stick mag be sticking out the back of my shirt. and if you are going to carry you do not want any one to know you are carrying, other wise you make yourself the target, you going first, and it makes folks uncomfortable.

All valid points but take a look at the statistics on inner city shootings. The vast majority are hand guns. Chicago/ny are out of control. No more stop and frisk. I'd bet the number of deaths due to gun violence is far higher with hand guns compared to long arms. I do think we need to figure a better way to stop people like this guy from getting weapons butthats only a small part of the greater issue

Say they outlaw certain long arms...this guy just goes in there with 10 hand guns...they outlaw hand guns he uses pipe bombs..

The greater issue isnt guns imo. This is all a smoke screen.

I dont see the supreme leader giving these pationate speeches about the war zone in his old stomping ground (chicago)

This is politics at its finest.
 
this is true, your day in day out shootings are by hand gun, hand guns in the hands of bad guys. all more the reason to carry IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: celebrist
I think that it's important to note that the second amendment was made when there were fewer types of "arms" available. I don't think anyone is going to try to take away single-shot rifles in America. Ever.

But supreme court rulings have historically adapted this right to relate to the times. Not all arms should be available to citizens. Those that have the ability to shoot many bullets in a short amount of time are more of a risk to the population, and up to a certain point you really don't need that many bullets for practical applications such as hunting or self defense. Sure I have heard the excuse "well it's a pain to have to reload every 16 shots at the gun range", but it's a really small price to pay.

So do people actually think we should be able to own any arms we want? Should I be allowed to have a missile? I'm sure we can all agree that there is a point where something is too destructive to give to the average Joe. Where that line is is what we disagree on.

We have become to immature as a society to handle the responsibility of owning high end weaponry apparently.

The second amendment is about being able to defend the people from tyranny and I don't think a muzzle loader is really up to the task anymore but we have far to many individuals who take this mandated right and twist it into what we see now, ala Chicago and etc.
 
. all more the reason to carry IMHO.

Double agree but this is why im not a fan of labeling X long arm as banned.

Really wouldnt change anything except let liberals claim some mythical victory.
 
the media has so demonized the ideal of owning a hand gun and carrying one. I was very happy to see law enforcement suggesting folks should arm them selves, legally and making the point that they are secondary defense, they arrive after the fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: celebrist
MonsterFishKeepers.com