Latest gun Ban

[Royal Dragon]

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Fe...d.aspx?id=2668

[xcakid]

Banning guns based on characteristic of the gun is just plain stupid. It all depends on the assailants mental state, not the kind of firearm or weapon he/she carries. Based on the current administration this will never pass. However, if we turn it over to the democraps and liberals, then yeah I can see it passing.

Let's face it. This will only apply to law abiding citizens. Criminals never follow the law, therefore it will not pertain to them. So all this law will ever do is tip the scale towards criminals. We already have enough laws regarding the use of firearms. We need tougher enforcement rather than more laws that confuse LEO and civilians alike.

Time to start stocking up on AR15 receiver and 30rd magazines again.

[FuXnDajenariht]

lol and how exactly does one differentiate between a law abiding citizen buying a gun and a criminal?

so a criminal isn't committing a crime during a gun purchase? wow amazing....

[Mas Judt]

In the states I am familiar with, you cannot get a gun card or equivilent in order to make a purchase at a legal gun dealer. In general, If you have a felony, (I THINK) you lose the right to own firearms period.

This means, for the average citizen, if they are a 'criminal' they cannot legally purchase firearms.

Therefore the only way to get them is illegally - if you are a felon.

Can someone with bad intent and no record get a gun? Sure. But they will be a LOT less likely to use it if they think all the good citizens around them are armed.


or

Are we all just untrustworthy 'consumers' who can't manage ourselves and need a nanny-state to do everything for us - at the point of a gun?

Man, I hope not. I liked being a citizen. Still do. And despite the best efforts of a tremendous amount of 'educated' ignorant people, we still retain many of our rights.

[Royal Dragon]

This means, for the average citizen, if they are a 'criminal' they cannot legally purchase firearms.

Reply]
True, but laws don't apply to criminals, only good citizens. So this will not effect the bad guys, only disarm thier victems so they cannot protect themselves.

[xcakid]

lol and how exactly does one differentiate between a law abiding citizen buying a gun and a criminal?

so a criminal isn't committing a crime during a gun purchase? wow amazing....

Law abiding citizen will go trough proper channels to purchase a firearms. Criminals will go through black market.

Law abiding citizen with have to fill out a form for a NICS check or like myself, will go through a Concealed Handgun Licensing procedure which would involve an FBI and Local background check, credit check.

I guess you equate gun owners to criminals. My father was a gun owner. He was a lawyer by profession and never been to jail, or no misdemeanors . My brother is a gun owner, he a graphics artist and never been to jail and no misdemeanors. I am a gun owner, former military held a security clearance while in active dute, fixed income trader for an international financial services firm, concealed handgun license holder, no felonies or misdemeanors. I have owned and fired firearms since I have been 9yrs old. I currently working on a collection of WWII firearms. I have a circle of friends that ranges from lawyers, to dentist to IT directors and financial advisor that are also gun owners and never been to jail in their lives. We enjoy hunting, and shooting sports. Here in TX we can even own fully automatic weapons(read machine guns), I have friends that own them. I guess by your logic (not being able to differientiate from law abiding/criminal), since we own, and continue to buy guns we are lumped into being criminals?

When they adopted the concealed handgun law here in TX. Anti Gun people predictied blood in the streets. Almost 10yrs have passed and we actually saw a decline in muggings and armed robberies.

As far as I am concerned, banning guns is not the answer. Gun education and training is the answer. Good parenting is the answer. I know you can't force people to be good parents, but if you make parents suffer the consequence fo their kids actions up till the age of 18, I would bet you would have more parents caring about thier kids and what they do outside of the home. Psychological health is also important. After all, a gun does not walk out by itself and kill people. It take a person to pick it up and pull the trigger. A kitchen knife or a rope can also kill a person. People can kill on thier own without guns. Even mass killing like Jim Jones, Geofrey Dahmer. Heck one of the most highly publicized killing and the most violent was done with a knife, the Ron Goldman and Nicole Simpson killing. Blaming a gun for violence is a cop out. Humans have a propensity for violence, regardless of what is available or unavailable to us. We are predatory and territorial by nature. Mental health, good parenting and firearms education, and stricter enforcement of current laws is your answer. But its much easier to get rid of an item than change.

[Black Jack II]

It is upon the right to keep and bear arms that all our other rights depend. A right that we're not able or allowed to defend is no right at all. Gun grabbers and those who follow HR1022 need to recheck there history and get a better understanding of the 2nd Amendment, the Constitution and the founding fathers who made this possible.

They need to get a understanding that the Bill of Rights was not created by accident. The people who framed the Second Amendment spoke open and were fully aware of what these words meant: "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."

That's one of the things I like about President Bush. He shot the first nutty attempt at additional gun control down and very likely this one will go by-by as well. It's an American's Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms and those without there head buried up there own a$$ can understand this sacred point. There are already around 20,000 unconstitional gun laws on the books which currently exist to disarm its citizens....citizens like the one linked bellow who could very well be dead now, the tides turned if certain people had there way.

http://www.columbusdispatch.com/news...p?story=250554

[golden arhat]

Banning guns based on characteristic of the gun is just plain stupid. It all depends on the assailants mental state, not the kind of firearm or weapon he/she carries. Based on the current administration this will never pass. However, if we turn it over to the democraps and liberals, then yeah I can see it passing.

Let's face it. This will only apply to law abiding citizens. Criminals never follow the law, therefore it will not pertain to them. So all this law will ever do is tip the scale towards criminals. We already have enough laws regarding the use of firearms. We need tougher enforcement rather than more laws that confuse LEO and civilians alike.

Time to start stocking up on AR15 receiver and 30rd magazines again.

no what u guys need is a complete weapons ban for civilian purposes

seriously the only reason u guys need to be armed is cos u were armed in the first place
take away guns and you take away the need for guns

burglars fear dogs more than guns

[xcakid]

no what u guys need is a complete weapons ban for civilian purposes

seriously the only reason u guys need to be armed is cos u were armed in the first place
take away guns and you take away the need for guns

burglars fear dogs more than guns

Then you give ABSOLUTE power to the government/authorities with no possible recourse for the citizens. That is not how this country was built. The US is a democratic REPUBLIC. The government should not have absolute power. The government is set up to serve the citizens of this coutry not rule over them. I understand that that is not the case is the UK since that is built on a monarchy system.

Its not about criminals. Its about the people rights and the right to protect your own property and person. And your country from its government if need be. If you think I am BS'ng you, read some of the writings by some of our founding fathers like Thomas Jefferson etc.

[Black Jack II]

I know your like really young so I will try and make this less of a rolleyes type of thing.

no what u guys need is a complete weapons ban for civilian purposes

No. There are a lot of reasons why this is a very horrible idea. Some very grand and some more grassroots.

seriously the only reason u guys need to be armed is cos u were armed in the first place

No. That showcases a lack of history, of our given rights as American's to self protection, self protection being a god given right to everyone despite social ranking and a lack of straight out practical thinking on the subject of pesonal defense.

take away guns and you take away the need for guns

Deserves a rolleyes but that is a dreamworld way of looking at reality and it goes against commonsense man.

burglars fear dogs more than guns

Guns are used more than to protect yourself from one criminal class.

[golden arhat]

roughly 60 ppl die hear from firearm related incidents here out of a population of 60 million (of course this has gone up recently from an influx of weapons and immigrants from bulgaria and other eastern bloc countries joining the e.u)

many thousands die in the u.s
i understand that the u.s population is bigger
but on the same ratio your gun crime rates would still dwarf ours

now tell me banning guns is a bad idea

(btw guns are allowed here for sport and hunting purposes)

[Mas Judt]

The story above would have had a very different ending if the old man 'drew his dog' instead of his gun.

I'd argue that a lot oof crime problems woukld be solved if we had MORE guns in the hands of citizens, with the right training.

Remember when the UK forbid people from defending themselves in thier own home? Home invasions SKYROCKETED. Even the liberal government was forced to change the ruling.

Governments can be good when run for the people, by the people. But an all powerful super-state where citizens do not have the right to defend themselves is... unacceptable.

Is our way perfect? no. We have a lot of work to do get back to the concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Unfortunately our higher education system and news media is dedicated to a different path - one that has failed time and again.

[Black Jack II]

now tell me banning guns is a bad idea

Yes. I will say it again. It's a horrible idea.

Dude, the UK is becoming one of the most crime ridden countries in the developed world, its also exploding in gun crime.

The scholars Joseph Olsen and David Kopel pointed out a few years ago the uncanny relationship between the enactment of English gun laws and subsequent increases in crime. Even a small child could look at the 100-year graph showing the crime rate vs. gun laws and see the tragic conclusion.

I like the UK but man you guys have been screwed over hard. It's like Bradbury's
Fahrenheit 451 in your neck of the woods. The quest for a utopian existance that is destorying itself in the search for perfection. All of this after the harsh gun laws enacted after the "Dunblane Massacre" in 1996.

We have a lot of work to do get back to the concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

Word.

[Mas Judt]

Unfortunately, you are not taking into account the lives SAVED by gun possesion.

[PangQuan]

its the small and large animals that suffer the most from firearms.

if you cant catch it with a spear or bow you shouldnt be allowed to kill it..

lets see a man take an elk down with a knife. then its real sport.

or put guys in the woods hunting hunters....so the hunters know its a fair game.