Firearms? Whos got em.

[setishock]

Well...

As I see it this boils down to a difference in cultures. While the UK doesn't let its subjects have firearms the citizens of the US have a consitutional right to have firearms.
I have a Colt 45 1911a1 model 70 semiautomatic handgun.
My baby is tricked out for sport shooting but I can dot you at 100 feet with it and you won't get up afterwards. It has a beveled mag well guide. Lenghten and lower ejection port. Combat ejector. Full lenght recoil spring and guide, double padded. Millet adjustable combat sights with glow dots for night target aquiring. It's been ramped and polished. Baby has had a trigger job done to her and the pull is now 2lbs instead of 7lbs. The slide has been blued while the frame is brushed. I use Wilson Rogers combat mags. I use Fiocchi full jacket rounds on the range and Glaziers in the real world. And yeah I've put the recoil spring in the ceiling a couple of times.
Possesing an FFL means a lot to me as it means I'm not just another gun owner. It means I can buy and sell guns if I choose. It also means I can carry a fully automatic weapon. It also means I can carry my firearm in to a bank and not be arrested.(You have to have a good reason) It also means that with all the s**t I had to go through to get it that the US government and the state I reside it don't think I'm a crazy American...

 

[per]

We are crazy Americans! If we weren't crazy enough to do the things we do the rest of the world would still be in the 19th century. Who invented the car, the airplane, penicillin, ad infinitum. Who killed Hitler and Tojo when no one else could? If we thought like the rest of the world we would all still have a f***ing King and be kissing the rest of the worlds ass. I could go on and on but unless you have American culture in you, you wouldn't understand a word I am saying.

 

[lurkswithin]

Ok let us look at this as you say that I ignored..
1) the dog issue...a person has the right to own anything he is legally capable of owning...no problem there.now if that dog was causing problems by barking all night like you implied then as I sataed there are laws to protect against that sort of thing which you just ignored...
2)The second amendment in itself does not includ giving firearms to criminals but it was amended to cover the fact that a criminal of felonious conviction shall lose that right to bear arms but through due recourse may in fact have that right reinstated. So
No I don't condone criminals to have guns and for you to try to insert a bogus statement is outrageous. There are already laws covering that and it is not an issue because of that.
3)murder rates in other countries....for every country that you come up with I will show one that is higher but let us look at the statistics that murder rates are not well published in other countries as they are concidered not good publicity and all. These so called countries that you are talking are so far inbetween the facts that it is rediculous. 95% of Africa in itself is a murderers capital. whole tribes are being wiped out in almost every country there. But that doesn't count because the governing bodies are doing it. and of course you don't even want to get into Bosnia or anything even close to there where genecide is still very popular with fueding neighbors. you wish to discuss the murder rates of the east. The city of hongkong has a murdr rate almost as high as our national average by itself. malaysia, you don't want to visit there. mexico,latin america,south america...the people there are slaughtered there for the clothes they have on their backs and then the slave markets that are brought about within the drug lords and their ruling authority. So just what countries are you refering to. Canada, England and some other western europian countries... I named three fourths of the world and you name how many...so I guess that 1 is answered too.
4) I am not very good at debating....please.... you are slaying me....... but that is ok you can type faster than me and it interferes with a good debate...you rationalize about how ever you wish to to make you feel like a winner... fine with me..If I edit something it is because of a typo....you edit a whole different subject matter and then accuse me of not being very good at at debating that is so outlandish that I have to just shake my head.
Now I think that we have answered all these things that you say that I didn't even though they were not even in the topic to begin with. You need to do me one favor though...please show me or atleast refer to the part that you took as threatening. For I would really like to know where that came from.

 

[BuzzStPoint]

*hands lurkswithin a cold beer*

'==================================================================='
||                            ___                                  ||
||                          .'   '.                                ||
||                         /       \           oOoOo               ||
||                        |         |       ,==|||||               ||
||                         \       /       _|| |||||               ||
||                          '.___.'    _.-'^|| |||||               ||
||                        __/_______.-'     '==HHHHH               ||
||                   _.-'` /                   """""               ||
||                .-'     /   oOoOo                                ||
||                `-._   / ,==|||||                                ||
||                    '-/._|| |||||                                ||
||                     /  ^|| |||||                                ||
||                    /    '==HHHHH                                ||
||                   /________"""""                                ||
||                   `\       `\                                   ||
||                     \        `\   /                             ||
||                      \         `\/                              ||
||                      /                                          ||
||                     /                                           ||
||                    /_____                                       ||
||                                                                 ||
'==================================================================='

 

[lurkswithin]

I need it!

 

[catalyst1]

In the meantime you have a nice day and don't let that shackle around your leg chafe you too much.

 

[melissa1]

2nd Amendment

I am a law student. I am required to take two semesters of Constitutional law and believe me, I've heard all the arguments based on the Second Amendment. Moreover, my father *was* a card-carrying member of the N.R.A. and so was every other *male* member of my family. After their time in the military, they never got over the wonderful feeling of cold blue steel in their sweaty mitts, or well, any semi-automatic rifle, for that matter. I come from a blue state and that does mean a lot.

Somehow, politics and peoples' ideas about how the government should run affects everyone's attitudes about what they are personally entitled to as a basic right. That's just rubbish. As a citizen of the United States and a patriot, you should not be so selfish as to think that the Second Amendment entitles you to anything but to defend your country. It does not entitle you to stockpile weapons in your home (ala the Ruby Ridge tragedy and Waco) in fear of a civil war. It does not entitle you to infringe on others' rights so that you can feel warm and protected in your castle at night while all the mean, angry, poor, filthy people that want to rape your wife and murder your family stalk the perimeter of your house. I know, that sounds so macabre. But the basic fact is that most people who define themselves so fiercely by this SINGLE right, taken completely out of context of the Constitution, are just that paranoid and afraid. Let me just ease a bit of that fear: if you're living right, if you're not dealing with the devil and aren't engaging in activities that should cause you to fear for your safety, you don't need to fear for your safety. Plain and simple. The fear is unnecessary. The Constitution of the United States was also written during a time before women and people of color had no rights. Thank God the white men that were in control of the country didn't all get together and form a club, declaring passionately, "it's our Constitutional right to rule everything without interference from those lowly women and negroes. If the Founding Fathers wanted women and other non-white people to vote and be free, they would have said so in the first place." Egad.

It's called progress. No one wants to take away all your guns completely. No one is going to tell you that if war should break out, you can't defend yourselves. If something should threaten you or your family, by all means: go ape. However, that is not the case here. A very ignorant person previously mentioned that 95% of Africa is murderous. Well, one would expect that from places that are going through violent coups and rebellions. Death and misery usually ensue during war. The United States thankfully is not going through a civil war. We have children dying every day, gang violence, black-market underground violence that wouldn't be possible except for careless gun usage. If you use your gun wisely---KUDOS to you. Not everyone in this country is as considerate and thoughtful.

They take the Second Amendment as a blanket right that basically means, 'hey you over there, you're a citizen, you need a gun' and that's just insane. There are regulations to every single right today. Most women think it's their right to do whatever they want to their bodies, too. But abortions have regulations. Suicide is a personal decision that only directly affects one person, but the government still tries to regulate by making that act a crime. Everything you do is regulated---so that you do not infringe on others' rights. And I'm sure that there are those of you out there that will read this and say, "government regulations are what's wrong with this country"....and with that, I say: then get out while you can. If you think that the government is going to take away your Second Amendment rights, that should be the least of your worries. Think about all of the other dastardly things they'll do now that the Patriot Act is enacted.

[which reminds me, if you actually do care about the Constitution, listen to: http://www.rantradio.com {Sean Kennedy and NewsReal}]

Think about someone else that might be influenced by your decisions with guns. If you make one false move, and God forbid something terrible should happen because of your weapon, you just shot yourself in the foot and made a mockery of the Constitution that you so love to quote.

Guns are for pansies. Go stealthy.

Love,

Me

 

[root]

murder rates in other countries....for every country that you come up with I will show one that is higher but let us look at the statistics that murder rates are not well published in other countries as they are concidered not good publicity and all. These so called countries that you are talking are so far inbetween the facts that it is rediculous. 95% of Africa in itself is a murderers capital. whole tribes are being wiped out in almost every country there. But that doesn't count because the governing bodies are doing it. and of course you don't even want to get into Bosnia or anything even close to there where genecide is still very popular with fueding neighbors. you wish to discuss the murder rates of the east. The city of hongkong has a murdr rate almost as high as our national average by itself. malaysia, you don't want to visit there. mexico,latin america,south america...the people there are slaughtered there for the clothes they have on their backs and then the slave markets that are brought about within the drug lords and their ruling authority. So just what countries are you refering to. Canada, England and some other western europian countries... I named three fourths of the world and you name how many...so I guess that 1 is answered too.

Those countries you mentioned that have high gun related casualty rates also have little or no control of the guns in their contries either.

The point still stands, countries such as Canada, England and some other western europian countries... that do have reasonable restrictions in place also have a lower gun related casualty rate than those that don't.

 

[lurkswithin]

Wow, now this is getting serious to the point that a student studiing law and HAS to undergo 2 semesters of Constitutional Law( mind you ..hasn't taken it yet) and because she comes from a state that was colored blue in an election results and because all her "male members" of her family had guns, gives her the authority to somehow support her thoughts on this subject are so much better than anyones and makes reference to me as being ignorant. That takes the cake on pure audacity there.
So if I say that I have already had my classes in Constitutional Law and that I also have a A.A.S in Business law, then my reasoning is right. You should quit law and be a clown.
First off in none of my conversations with any one was there a mention that I believe that the 2nd Amendment did anything more than act as a guarantee to my freedom. That it was there to act as it was intended for and that I as an american did not have to prove myself capable of having that right. That I was born here and that in being so I was automaticaly guaranteed that I have that right and all other rights as stated in the Constitution and that If it was to be denied me then let it be done as an individual being accused of not deserving that right. That was my debate then and now. No one should be able to just orbitrarily just revolk my rights or anyone elses rights and make us PROVE that we are deserving of them. If anything then someone should have to prove that I am not deserving of that right.
Furthermore, I stated that the laws were already there to preserve that issue..But to elaborate... If someone is convicted of a felony criminal act then that person has been proved to not be deserving of certain rights to which were; but not inclusive, the right to own, possess or purchase a firearm.
Now I don't think that anyone has came out and said that the 2nd amendment did anything more than gave them the right to purchase, own and use a firearm. The idea that it gave them the right to hord an arsonal came from you....But since you brought it up. The law says tha a person can own a gun and doesn't put a limit on to how many although there are restrictions to what type so that statement from you is mute and irresponsible for a future lawyer. If they want to collect guns then for what reason is it a concern to you. Collecting guns is absolutely no different than the collection of other items that one is legally able to own. Because you seem to see a threat in it shows how irresponsible and hysterical you are.
The danger is and never has been the weapon, but the person behind the weapon... and your saying so will not change it...
Now someone used the term "murder rate" to describe the unnecessary deaths of people for the sole implication that these are caused by firearms.
But yet when I used the same facts as imposed I am called ignorant by you and chastised for including areas that were involed in violent coups and rebellions.. I guess that only works for your interpretations. Is not the gang wars that go on every day not a violent coups or rebellion against the so called leaders of a gang or against law enforcement or our society. What makes them any different than a rebellion or coup being performed in a third world nation. But these can only be used in the calling me ignorant syndrome.
And suicide affects a lot more than a single person. What about that persons spouse or sibling or parent or child... Do you honestly believe that hype you are spewing forth. I don't.
Then you try to end it with the over powering government regulations crap. That really makes me laugh. It is not the government but the nosey bodied little wimps like you that cause the malcontent and all. What should it matter to you whether I have a gun or not.. It is and never should have been any concern to you. Your choice is to not have one...fine your choice....and if I should want one it is wrong because you don't like me to have a gun. what gives you the right to deny me the right to own a gun. Nothing ...absolutely Nothing.
You don't like your neighbor to own a gun because you think that he will go berserk and kill everyone and you. The odds say that you should be more afraid to drive a car within 25 miles of home. By about 20 to 1 chance of being killed in a motor accident within 25 miles of home than you are likely to be killed by a firearm. If I was you I would be ranting about all the cars before the rants of gun ownership.
I live around a city of about 300,000 population with another 100,000 in the rural areas. In the past year there has been some 16 murders and only 3 were firearm related. 2 were beat to death by a neighbor with a hammer, one was beaten and drowned and two babies died of shaken baby syndrom and the others were from knives that were used during an arguement with 3 of those family(spousal) issues.
Why are you not out crusading against knives and hammers also.

 

[root]

"Why are you not out crusading against knives and hammers also."
This is a campaign that I plan to spearhead... /joke
I did have a bit of a laugh at that sentance though...

The question isn't about your right, Yes, we understand it's your right to be able to freely purchase and own a gun and you have chosen to exercise your right to arms, and from what you say your both passionate and responsible...

We've seen a picture on here where someone has exercised their right to the extent that they have enough guns to outfit a small terrorist organisation, but again the chances are they are sensible and won't...

The question is not about whether you think it is right to be able to own guns, (As I've said I have a small BB gun, that I like to use for target practise inside, I've been hunting, used knives axes and other "bushcraft" tools). I think it is right that the sensible members of society are able to own guns.

The point I'm making is that there is a basic lack of common sense in the issue, you have to give more details to open a bank account than you have to give to buy a (potential murder) weapon.

If you want to drive a car (as you pointed out potentially leathal) you have to obtain a license, the onus of proof is on you as the individual to prove yourself worthy, yet you don't see this as an infringement on your rights.

why would it be such a big infringement if you had to prove yourself worthy to own a gun.

In response to an earlier comment when I said that to get a gun license you have to have trusted members of the community, (I.e policemen) to sign the certificate, you can also ask doctors and some religious figures, the people do have to be in a position of trust within society, (and again they have proven themselves worthy of that trust). Certainly policemen are not the only trusted members of the community but they are trusted,

There was a person here saying that they believe the gun gives them and people all over the world freedom, (but neglected to comment when I said that most of the attrocities and repression is at the hands of the people with guns).

There was a comment that guns allow the freedom of expression, why do you need to have a gun before you feel you can express yourself, nobody in this forum is using anykind of weapon to make their point any louder or clearer, why do you need to have that extra backup when you are outside in the real world.

Quite a few people have said that they can carry their gun in the street, I have to ask the question, why would you want to?

by defending your right to freely purchase and keep guns you are supporting the rights of people with criminal intent to freely purchase guns...

For instance, a friends uncle was filling his car, when he came back from paying there were a group of people trying to break into his car to steal the stereo, when he asked what the hell they thought they were doing, he was shot in the stomach.

The point here is that if they'd needed a license to get that gun, 1, any local person would have known the person, they may know that they have a troubled past, or deal in petty crime, and hence would not be eligable to own a gun.
-the guy wouldn't have been shot.

The way that you propose is best is that the person is allowed to buy a gun, then when he shoots people the police have to spend time tracking the person down, prooving it was them, and then they are not allowed any more guns, (for a period of time!)...

that is to say you think it is best to wait until someone is dead before taking the weapon out of the murders hands?