Do You Support ANY Gun Control Laws? - Page 10

View Poll Results: Do You Support ANY Gun Control Laws?

Voters
81. You may not vote on this poll
  • None,the 2nd A,shall not be infringed,rules

    63 77.78%
  • Yes,there must be some restrictions

    17 20.99%
  • Undecided

    1 1.23%
Page 10 of 18 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 180

Thread: Do You Support ANY Gun Control Laws?

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,414
    Quote Originally Posted by XD40scinNC View Post
    Criminals, mental patients, mentally impaired do not need to have guns.

    Probably a good idea to not allow these guys to buy guns.

    Attachment 10507 Attachment 10508
    And yet.....they had legally-purchased guns. So what did the gun control "preventing" the mentally ill from buying guns do to prevent the mentally ill from buying guns?

    This is not a good argument for gun control.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  2.   
  3. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnerbob View Post
    I've got a thread in Off-Topic discussing my back, working on getting the surgery scheduled before Xmas.

    Who wasn't acting like a gentleman? Just two dudes talking, name calling is an eventual happening.
    It's a happening that would get you banned from every major gun forum except here and perhaps Glock Talk.

    But hey, if that's the way it goes down here, continue to blaze away!

  4. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnerbob View Post
    I've got a thread in Off-Topic discussing my back, working on getting the surgery scheduled before Xmas.

    Who wasn't acting like a gentleman? Just two dudes talking, name calling is an eventual happening.
    Pray and prep in the ways the docs are telling you to. And for goodness sake when the surgery is over and the feel good meds are cranking, don't go weight lifting or anything like that!

    Prayers Brother.

    Do You Support ANY Gun Control Laws?-violent-smiley-017.gif
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

  5. When are politicians going to start pushing for control on baseball bats,knives,scissors,hammers,screwdrivers,pressure cookers etc.
    Let us not forget that box cutters were used on 9-11 where over 3000 Americans were killed.
    Gun control is a complete failure.How is it helping in Chicago and D.C.?There is also that myth that allowing people to carry guns will create a Wild West scenerio and the streets will be covered in blood.This has yet to happen in AZ or Wyoming where unlicensed carrying is permitted by citizens.
    Constitutional Carry SHOULD be the law of the land,in all 50 states.Whenever I say this,the antis accuse me of being crazy and of wanting criminals to carry also.I point out to them criminals ALREADY do carry,regardless of if it is illegal for them to do so or not.

  6. #95
    Good point,LB1973.Got a poll all ready to go on Constitutional Carry. Alaska,Arizona,Vermont and Wyoming. ( CC only for WY residents. All others need a permit)

  7. #96
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,414
    Like gunnerbob I get a little indignant when someone suggests that they know more about the mentally ill than anyone reading their posts. My only sister suffered from mental illness all her life from about 10th or 11th grade up until she committed suicide at age 56. It was at least her 20th attempt. Her delusions were so twisted that her suicide note included blaming her only son for her troubles, but he had only lived with her for the first five years of his life. He had spent the last three years of her life trying to take care of her and help her through her many delusions. What he got for his efforts was the "privilege" of finding her drenched in her own vomit and piss with a hateful note pinned to her robe addressed to him.

    I don't say any of the above in anger towards my sister. She was one of the truly mentally ill, and I have no anger towards her, nor foist any blame for how difficult being her brother was, because of that. I only speak about this in highly personal terms because I wholeheartedly believe that many, many people have first-hand experience with mental illness and don't need lectures from strangers on the internet to tell them what they don't know.

    The incidence of mentally ill folks getting a hold of guns and going on killing sprees is so statistically infinitesimally small that to think that more government intrusions in our lives is justified by them is, in and of itself, a pretty good sign of mental illness. The only significant difference between someone like Loughner, Holmes and the others, and "run of the mill" killers is that those with a history of mental illness that comes out after their crimes are committed get more press and are used for political fodder to impose more useless and ineffective gun control on the sane and law abiding. And I don't know of a single proven incidence of someone committed to a psychiatric facility first, getting a hold of a gun and, second, finding their way out of the facility to go kill people. Visiting one of those facilities would do absolutely nothing to justify government passage of more gun control laws. Having a nearly life-long, first-hand experience with debilitating mental illness in my sister did nothing to justify more laws either.

    The "Yes" voters in this thread are engaging in canard-o'-matic kinds of arguments. On a gun rights site there are actually people who answer "Yes" to a question about gun control. How does that happen? Only someone who was mentally ill would lobby for laws that basically say, "Oppress me, oppress me!" Let the government get involved in defining mental illness as it relates to gun ownership, and I'll guaran-damn-tee ya that all it will accomplish is a shifting definition of mental illness until it applies to virtually all of us.

    Shall not be freakin' infringed. Learn it, live it, love it. Molon Labe gun-grabbers. Put your money where your mouths are, and Molon Labe!

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  8. #97
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer1113 View Post
    I agree.
    If we suppose for a moment the "Government" coming for our guns, do you really think in this day and age they could do it? I don't.
    I'm not lining up to hand over my guns, ever. Read up on what our government did to the citizenry who tried to stay and protect their belongings in New Orleans when Katrina came through. Our government can and has taken our guns away. I provide a fact, you provide an opinion.

    I am not advocating for mental health testing prior to buying a gun either.
    I have seen real mental illness. It is a painful and ugly truth that many people face.

    Most of the people on this forum consider themselves "Doers" those able to get the job done.
    What I am asking all the "Doers" to do, is take an hour out of your life and visit a facility where the mentally ill are being "treated".
    Tell the people at the door why you are there. If they permit you to experience mental illness you will come away knowing those people should not own a gun. For our protection and their own.

    Mental Illness is not the Funny Face of "Howlin Mad Merdock" of the A-Team.
    The Mentally Ill do not know its wrong to shoot someone, thus the Insanity plea.
    How can it be advocated that these people should be allowed to own a gun?
    One of the posters asked those who are opposed to any gun control not to be emotional. Yet, you ask us to visit a mental health facility and have our heart strings tugged by how cruel and insensitive mental health issues are and how out of touch those with a mental health issue are with reality and then use this emotional outcry to say that no one with mental health issues should be allowed a gun. On the part of "should", I agree. On the part of the government regulating it, I completely disagree. There is a reason why the words "shall not be infringed" exist on the 2nd Amendment, when it was clear when the Constitution was written that these rights were inalienable from the government and none of them were to be infringed. Why did the 2nd get special consideration. The reason being is because our forefathers realized that there is not a soul that can be trusted to limit this right correctly. I know people that have been treated by a psychologist. I know some that are being treated with Lithium for their condition. I knew one that did not even know what world he was in, truly sad. How do you write a piece of legislation to differentiate those people? Even if it could be done, at what point does the limiting legislation stop? This is the problem with any gun control legislation. There is more to lose with allowing it, then there ever is to gain.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  9. #98
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Quote Originally Posted by XD40scinNC View Post
    Criminals, mental patients, mentally impaired do not need to have guns.

    Probably a good idea to not allow these guys to buy guns.

    Attachment 10507 Attachment 10508
    Anyone who is a danger to society whether it be due to criminal acts or mental issues, should either have stayed in prison or a mental facility. Neither places allow weapons. Your point?
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  10. Quote Originally Posted by wolf_fire View Post
    Anyone who is a danger to society whether it be due to criminal acts or mental issues, should either have stayed in prison or a mental facility. Neither places allow weapons. Your point?
    How easy it is for those myopically working the ideologically pure, absolutist 2A agenda to ignore the realities that neither the world nor the legal system works that way. Some people should not have guns. They will usually be released from prisons and mental institutions at some point as defined by law. That doesn't change because you don't like the law. It's the business of lawmakers and judges to maximize public safety with minimal intrusion into gun rights. The usual and predictable "camel's nose under the tent" rhetoric does not change that.

  11. #100
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer1113 View Post
    I Smell it, is that you?

    Your kidding yourself, you assume no one would sell them a gun, that doesn't make it true. So the point is no point at all.

    Take yourself out of the Lazy Boy, get down to the institution and see all the fine people you think should own guns. Don't be lazy. Know what you are talking about rather than speculate and guess.
    The side I am defending is the current FEDERAL LAW. I do not defend State Laws as to many are greatly flawed.
    The FEDERAL program works for us. I will show in red how the FEDERAL program does NOT work for us.

    PROHIBITED PERSONS

    1. Indictment or Information for a Felony - This person (indicted for a felony or has a felony information filed against him) has restrictions placed on his firearms activity. He may continue to lawfully possess the firearms and ammunition he already has, but may not ship or take them across State lines and may not acquire more firearms or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (n), 5 years.

    2. Felon – This person (convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year) is not allowed to knowingly possess, ship, transport or receive any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(1), 10 years. It does not matter what sentence the felon actually received. Why should non-violent felons not be allowed this? Explain that to me.

    a. Definition: 921(a)(20), a felony crime does not include offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices; or the conviction has been expunged, set aside, pardoned, or full civil rights restored unless they expressly provide for no firearms possession.

    b. After a felony conviction, the felon must rid himself of all firearms defined in 921 (a)(3) (except antique firearms 921 (a)(16)) - that affect interstate commerce. If later caught with a firearm or ammo, the felon is guilty of violating 922 (g)(1). So a felon, no matter the felony, no matter how non-violent the felony was has lost, after paying his debt to society, the very basic right of life, the right to self-preservation. Now anyone who is a violent criminal can take him down as a soft-target.

    c. Interstate Commerce, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, U.S. Constitution, “The Congress shall have Power…To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States…” In Scarborough v. U.S. (1977), the Supreme Court held that evidence that a firearm (or ammo) previously crossed State lines is sufficient to prove interstate commerce.

    d. Relief from Disabilities – If a felon did not have his felony conviction pardoned, expunged, etc., he may apply for Relief from ATF under 925(a)(1). However, Congress has not approved funds for the ATF to conduct Relief investigations for many years except for corporations.You are so right, this program works for us, we the people. Seriously? This program is NOT working for us.

    e. Armed Career Criminal – A person who is convicted of 922 (g) and has three previous convictions for violent felonies and / or serious drug offenses, committed on different occasions, must be sentenced to not less than 15 years in prison, 924 (e). How in the world does this work for us? If you are a career violent criminal, why do you get a pass to come back to society after 15 years????

    3. Fugitive – This person (who flees from one State to another State to avoid prosecution) may not knowingly possess etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(2), 10 years. And we all know how well fugitives follow the law. This one will stop 'em.

    4. Unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance – This person may not knowingly possess, etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(3), 10 years. 27 C.F.R. 478.11.A person who is high and out of his right mind, may not possess a firearm KNOWINGLY????

    5. Adjudicated a mental defective or committed to a mental institution – This person may not knowingly possess etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(4), 10 years. 478.11. If the institution agreed to their release then they shouldn't be a danger to society. If they are a danger to society and they released them, that's the institution's fault, just like a jail releasing a dangerous felon. Lock em up, keep em there while they are dangerous.

    6. Illegal alien - This person may not knowingly possess, etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(5), 10 years. A person who is out of his right mind may not possess a firearm KNOWINGLY??? I agree, he may not knowingly possess.

    a. Non-Immigrant on a Visa (tourist, student, etc) – This person may not possess etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(5), 10 years, unless the alien falls under an exception or has a DOJ waiver described in 922 (y)(2)&(3). If we have deemed these people as appropriate to living here, why did their Creator not grant unto them the same inalienable rights that we possess?

    7. Dishonorably discharged from the armed forces – This person may not knowingly possess etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(6), 10 years. If they were discharged for a violent crime, then they should stay in jail so they are not a menace to society, if not, then pay their debt to society/military, and then be about your way with the same rights as any other citizen.

    8. Renounced U.S. citizenship - This person may not knowingly possess etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(7), 10 years. Then kick em out!!

    9. Intimate partner under restraining order - where both parties had opportunity to present evidence prior to issuance of order – This person may not knowingly possess etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(8), 10 years. Tell that to the wife with a PFA against her husband and trying to defend herself

    10. Convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence - This person may not knowingly possess etc. any firearm or ammunition affecting interstate commerce: 922 (g)(9), 10 years. (Exceptions: a conviction that has been expunged, set aside, pardoned, or full civil rights restored, unless they expressly provide for no firearms possession; a conviction which did not have as an element the use or attempted use of force, 921 (a)(33)(A)). The domestic violence crimes in this country are completely screwed up. I've seen women jailed under DV who were trying to protect themselves from a violent husband. These woman need protection more than most.

    11. Juvenile and Handgun –This person (under 18 years of age) may not knowingly possess a handgun or handgun only ammo: 922 (x)(2), 1 year. Exceptions: he has the prior written consent of his parent or guardian for use in employment, in ranching, farming, target practice, hunting, or a course in the safe and lawful use of a HG; the juvenile is a member of the Armed Forces or National Guard; or as protection during a home invasion. The government should not PARENT our children in any way shape or form

    Source: FEDERAL FIREARMS LAWS
    I'm so glad you are for this wonderful program that has taken rights away from people.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

Page 10 of 18 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast