The God Damned Gun Control Thread

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

Well, I went back to find my post and now I can't find it, so here's the short version. No more frivolous laws. No more chipping away at the Constitution. If you want any more gun laws then repeal the 2nd amendment and then create all the laws you want to. Have your elected officials say it out loud to the press, "REPEAL THE 2nd AMENDMENT". I think it would be great if they would just come out and say it. Let's stop playing games and put our cards on the table so everyone can see them.

I understand your frustration, but I guarantee none of the laws being passed now violates the Second Amendment. Restrictions, background checks, bans on certain types of weapons (not that I agree with this measure) are all Constitutionally admissible. The Second Amendment calls for the creation of a well-regulated militia, so all of these laws fall under regulation - they don't go past the point of banning all citizens from carrying any type of weapon. And, contrary to what you may think MD, very few people advocate for the full repeal of the 2nd Amendment. They carry guns; they encourage others to carry guns, to exercise their rights as American Citizens, but they also recognize that some boundaries need to be set.

[MATTHEW'S_DAD]

Thanks, I didn't realize you were really Judge Napolitano. (lol)

Look, I not only feel this way about the 2nd Amendment but also the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th etc. You guys just aren't getting it. The more laws we pass today, the more tools you provide tyrants of the future. I don't give a damn about Obama or his cronies, nor am I worried about the dumbass trying to come take anything. I AM concerned about the type of people we are going to put into office 20-40 years from now.

Also, there is no need to be a part of a well regulated militia. Being part of a well regulated militia is merely a right. If you read the amendment as it's written in today's english, it's confusing and appears to say you must be in a well regulated militia to have a firearm. I'm sure someone will tell me I'm wrong though.

[Col. Hstar]

Well, I went back to find my post and now I can't find it, so here's the short version. No more frivolous laws. No more chipping away at the Constitution. If you want any more gun laws then repeal the 2nd amendment and then create all the laws you want to. Have your elected officials say it out loud to the press, "REPEAL THE 2nd AMENDMENT". I think it would be great if they would just come out and say it. Let's stop playing games and put our cards on the table so everyone can see them.

Why do you feel there is a need to repeal it? All anyone wants is better control, more responsibility, and less killing. You cannot deny that guns add to the problem. You seem to work on the basis that adding laws and regulation will aid the tyranny that is to come. I have a surprise for you. If it is going to come, any Joe having access to a gun will not stop it.

What's wrong with a little balance. You saw my proposal, its seems reasonable what part of it do you object to? What part of it would advance the goals of an evil dictator? Why can't you look beyond yourself and what you want and offer a solution.

No politician is going to say repeal the 2nd amendment, but it doesn't need to be repealed. Just enforce the part that says Well Regulated.

[WD-40]

Texas man, 21, fatally shoots intruder during home invasion

Published February 23, 2013

FoxNews.com

A 21-year-old Texas man is being credited with protecting his family by shooting one of three men suspected of forcing their way into their home outside of Houston.

Harris County Sheriff's deputies tell KHOU.com that the man's father was pushed to the ground by one of the suspects when he answered the door Thursday night.

When the intruders went to attack the mother, the son ran to retrieve his father's gun and fatally shot one of the suspects, the report states. The other two suspects reportedly fled the scene.

Police later spotted a vehicle with two men who matched the suspects' descriptions and took them in for questioning, the station reported.

Neighbors said the son's actions were justified. No charges are expected to be filed against him, according to the report.

"People can’t go breaking into people’s homes and not expect some sort of consequence," Harry Moulder told the station.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/23/ho ... z2Lj0NbMbi

Now, if he had an AR-15, for about $20 worth of bullets, he coulda hosed down all three of the the intruders and saved the taxpayers the expense of the 2 trials and annual food and housing costs to support them in prison.

[Son]

Texas man, 21, fatally shoots intruder during home invasion

Published February 23, 2013

FoxNews.com

A 21-year-old Texas man is being credited with protecting his family by shooting one of three men suspected of forcing their way into their home outside of Houston.

Harris County Sheriff's deputies tell KHOU.com that the man's father was pushed to the ground by one of the suspects when he answered the door Thursday night.

When the intruders went to attack the mother, the son ran to retrieve his father's gun and fatally shot one of the suspects, the report states. The other two suspects reportedly fled the scene.

Police later spotted a vehicle with two men who matched the suspects' descriptions and took them in for questioning, the station reported.

Neighbors said the son's actions were justified. No charges are expected to be filed against him, according to the report.

"People can’t go breaking into people’s homes and not expect some sort of consequence," Harry Moulder told the station.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/23/ho ... z2Lj0NbMbi

Now, if he had an AR-15, for about $20 worth of bullets, he coulda hosed down all three of the the intruders and saved the taxpayers the expense of the 2 trials and annual food and housing costs to support them in prison.

But WD...what about the rights of the individual who was shot and killed. I mean come on, all he did was break into a house and push an old man down.... Maybe they thought the cake smelled good and hadn't had any food because of lost jobs.

[Darth Crater]

Meanwhile, three times a day or so, a minor in the US commits suicide with a firearm, probably one belonging to an adult relative.

(Source: derived from government data available here and here)

[MATTHEW'S_DAD]

Let's see, remove a firearm from a person who WANTS to live so we can protect a person who DOESN'T want to live and will likely find whatever means they need to do their deed with or without that firearm. I'm not buying into that logic.

[mrjamwin]

This is just Crater's [poo] way of justifying his already weak position on the argument.

[Darth Crater]

Remove by force? No, I didn't say that. I'm just saying that maybe if you value your family's lives you shouldn't own one in the first place. Particularly since, as I posted last page, firearms do increase the number of successful suicides. Often, without such a quick and easy way, there will be enough time for the immediate urge to pass. Which means it's more likely they can survive and get treated.

Feel free to keep failing to support your position at all, Jamwin.

[haasd0gg]

...or maybe you keep a firearm because you value your family members lives. Maybe a responsible firearm owner would take the necessary simple precautions to stop said firearm from being used by another family member; namely a teen, based on your statistics. Its not hard and I don't recall reading any stories about teens at the range with dad turning a gun on themselves.