By plane? Being the victim of a crime is tragic, but it does not grant one the power to take away my rights.
I am a communist who opposes gun control, and in fact has an AK 47 in my house (semi auto of course). Banning "assault rifles" (even though they are more or less functionally the same as any other rifle) only ensures that people willing to be criminals are the only citizens who have access to them. Regardless, there is basically nothing on a semi automatic "assault rifle" that can't also be found on another rifle. It's a policy based on banning guns based on how scary they look.
I think we should ban cars, smoking, fast food, and alcohol, those all kill far more people than guns.
You'll find out when the balloon goes up and someone's shooting one at you looking to take what ever food you have away.
Well, about twice as many people die in the US from drunk driving than from gun homicide. Where's the movement to ban booze?
The NRA will endorse candidates that protect the 2nd Ammendment regardless of political party. In fact, where I live, during the 2010 elections the NRA endorsed a democrat for governor and a democrat for the House in my district. Of course, I didn't vote for either because of their stances on other issues, and because the NRA gave their Republican challengers "A" ratings.
Your guessing again. Get your facts straight in a debate, just like firing pins and military grade, these concepts you base your opinions on are myths. You have no idea how the green zone operated in respect to the carrying of weapons or gear, yet you present your opinions matter of factly like they are real. I know BS when I see it.
Want to see what happens if there is no NRA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkS2BRoCd2I&feature=youtube_gdata_player After they banned guns, they learned people started to use knives. Well duh..... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
Have you talked with this person shot in the neck to know her opinions on guns? Maybe she wished she had one to shoot back. If your going to guess, then I am going to guess too. Do you want to keep playing this game? Bring real facts to this discussion and not myths.
lets quite making excuses for something like this. If we outlaw guns tomorrow the law abiding citizens who have never caused a probelm will be punished because we feel sorry for this guy. You may have missed it but we all obey the law so more laws don't mean anything, let start to really punish people who can't get along with the rest of us. Gunmen, rapists, child molesters and the like remove the permanently from society. My guns do not break the law and neither do I.
This may be the most idiotic post I've read in a month, particularly because it tries so hard to seem intelligent. You and Sanjay have no idea what you are talking about. Do yourself a favor: Learn a few things about firearms first, THEN opine about gun control. You obviously would not know the difference between an AR-15 and a Remington 750, nor be able to discern which of the two is capable of causing the most fatalities in the Aurora movie theatre scenario using which sort of ammunition. "Giving up our guns" is not a "middle ground of agreement." It is a radically stupid sacrifice of a most sacred human right, a right no less sacred than the right to free speech and the right to due process of law.
I don't see how reasonable gun control like outlawing staw purchases on the border, and requiring a background check for ammunition sales would result in an illegal market. Indeed, guns and ammo are easy to regulate. They're made of metal and hard to smuggle. Since the NRA opposes ALL reaonable gun control measures, including the banning of armor piercing bullets, that can only be used to kill law enforcement officers, I have to conclude the NRA is a terrorist organization that wants to arm Mexican drug lords and other enemies of our country. The records there.
The truth is the NRA supports arming of America's enemies, at home and abroad. It's a terrorist organization and real Americans would never join this alien group.
Sure it does. We outlaw murder even though murder continues to occur and will continue to occur. We do so because murder is wrong and we want to say so. Doesn't matter if it costs a fortune to outlaw it, and we could make more money just decriminalizing it and letting murderers pay a fine. Similarly, owning guns is a danger to people and should be tightly regulated or controlled. Let's hope we do that in the future and you leave the country for Somalia where you can feel safe and sound with a warm gun.
You liberals should do some basic research into the reason why our Founding Fathers established the 2nd Amendment. Maybe there would be less stupid comments made...maybe.
Perhaps not tyranny directly. But it will be an aid to tyranny. We are better off if we use this mass murder to push for laws that give tax incentives for those who choose to always be armed. Everyone should keep a weapon suitable to their size and talents. And anyone who pledges to carry a weapon at all times should be allowed to subtract the cost of the weapons, ammunition and training from their bottom line taxes. An armed society will not fear the mas murderer any longer.
I nominate this for stupidest post of the month! Hmm...maybe I should double my donations to GOAL, the NRA, and JPFO.
A background check on ammunition sales during hunting season would literally cause manpower issues at Walmarts all across the country. It is just not feasible. Background check on guns, sure, totally appropriate. Ammunition...nuts.
