Gun Laws

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by road kill

CT already has these laws.
The laws that Joe Biden is going to hand to Obama in "concrete" form, to then be rammed down our throats.

The point is, outlaws won't even read the law, let alone obey it.

The progressives in the Whitehouse are using this tragedy and emotion to get another "increment" towards disarming the citizenry.
That is the ultimate goal, and eventual they will chip away and get there.

While the willing accomplces say "they will NEVER do that...." all the while they are doing it!!

Like I have said many times, in the end, the liberals will hate us for letting them have their way.

---

So Romney was a secular progressive?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngundog

So Romney was a secular progressive?

---

Romney is not in the Whitehouse.
Nor was he Governor of CT.
Where have you been??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didley

What is being WIDELY over-looked is the fact that Connecticut HAS an ACTIVE assault weapons ban (following the same form as the Clinton era's ban). The gun was still legally purchased in the state by his mother.

It is foolishness. There have been extensive studies that showed the the previous assault weapon's ban did nothing. I hope it is not news to anyone here that the term "assault weapon" was coined by gun-grabbers in the 90s to create fear and confusion about guns that "look" like assault weapons, but are not actually assault weapons. They feed off people's fear and ignorance to the truth and the unwitting masses eat it up.

As always, the problem is crazy people. And, unless this is another piece of misinformation, the mother of the shooter. She was about to have her son forcibly committed and her son found out about it. Why you leave THREE guns accessible to someone you know is mentally unstable is beyond me.

---

The part I highlighted is the issue. Although I don't like your term "crazy people" much. I have a sister who has manic depression. To make sure she doesn't get access to his guns, my dad keeps his in a gun safe with trigger locks on them. When we go hunting he takes off the trigger lock, when we are done he replaces it. I have followed his example. I have been lax this year however, I need to stay vigilant. I have like 10 guns. They are locked up AND have trigger locks on them. I always felt that if we had kids around and one got its hands on one of my guns and a tragedy happened, it would be MY FAULT. Same thing if my guns were stolen and used to perpetrate a crime. This kid's mom paid the ultimate price for being irresponsible. So did a lot of innocent people.

Maybe we need to have guns registered and start holding people responsible for their guns being misused? I HATE the idea of registration, and I doubt it would make a difference in the SHORT TERM. But in the long term it might make a difference.

And as far as having more people carrying, take a look at the other thread I started - "This is what happens when you let liberals carry guns."

I have put a lot of thought into this over the years. I have had a permit to carry for many years. The first time I sat down to fill out the paperwork it occurred to me that you don't want drunks, drug users, hotheads, dumbarses, mentally ill, or those who can't keep a level head under trying circumstances walking around with loaded weapons. Does the process of getting a permit weed those folks out? Well it does the "documented ones."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngundog

So Romney was a secular progressive?

---

In case you missed it - Romney lost & is no longer relevant. Which by his actions is exactly what he wants to be :o!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by road kill

Romney is not in the Whitehouse.
Nor was he Governor of CT.
Where have you been??

---

Where have I been? :confused: Where have you been? A month ago the Republicans ran a candidate who wanted to ban assault weapons, today they are whining about a President who wants to ban assault weapons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buzz

Maybe we need to have guns registered and start holding people responsible for their guns being misused? I HATE the idea of registration, and I doubt it would make a difference in the SHORT TERM. But in the long term it might make a difference.

---

As per usual, I do not believe you have done your research prior to pressing SUBMIT - check out the countries, all of them that had gun registatrion, NAZI germany comes to mind as one example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buzz

The part I highlighted is the issue. Although I don't like your term "crazy people" much. I have a sister who has manic depression. To make sure she doesn't get access to his guns, my dad keeps his in a gun safe with trigger locks on them. When we go hunting he takes off the trigger lock, when we are done he replaces it. I have followed his example. I have been lax this year however, I need to stay vigilant. I have like 10 guns. They are locked up AND have trigger locks on them. I always felt that if we had kids around and one got its hands on one of my guns and a tragedy happened, it would be MY FAULT. Same thing if my guns were stolen and used to perpetrate a crime. This kid's mom paid the ultimate price for being irresponsible. So did a lot of innocent people.

Maybe we need to have guns registered and start holding people responsible for their guns being misused? I HATE the idea of registration, and I doubt it would make a difference in the SHORT TERM. But in the long term it might make a difference.

And as far as having more people carrying, take a look at the other thread I started - "This is what happens when you let liberals carry guns."

I have put a lot of thought into this over the years. I have had a permit to carry for many years. The first time I sat down to fill out the paperwork it occurred to me that you don't want drunks, drug users, hotheads, dumbarses, mentally ill, or those who can't keep a level head under trying circumstances walking around with loaded weapons. Does the process of getting a permit weed those folks out? Well it does the "documented ones."

---

Right. If they have a felony record, they are weeded out. But that's the thing with constitutionally protected rights. You have to prove yourself unable to handle the responsibility before the right may be taken away.

Also, I am sorry if my use of the term "crazy person" offended you. Not my intent and insensitive of me. I should have used mentally ill.

I also have a permit to carry as does my wife. It's not for everyone, certainly. I've taken my wife to the range several times, sent her to two private training classes, and encourage her to practice at home. However, none of this preparation matters if she can't be responsible with the firearm. The woman in the article you posted is a good and clear example of someone who has no right to be near a firearm.

The AWB is the absolute most stupid and useless bill. it does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to keep ANYONE Safer.

I'm not exaggerating, I'm not blowing things out of proportion. That's the COLD HARD FACT!

Personally if another 10 yr ban is all they wanted to do, FINE! Let them think it does something to help them sleep at night.

Ridiculous.

See the AWB explained here;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...;v=6R5VxAebCng

MnGundog your argument about Romney Vs Obama is just old news.
You guys own this now. Its YOUR guy in there driving the agenda.
Its Your senate that will support him.

Quit the banter about Romney being just as bad. YOUR guy is out to take YOUR gun away...

What I dont understand,,, is if you listened to what Obama had to say yesyerday in his press conference,, most of the points he has appointed Biden to address,, are things we already do.

felons cant own guns,
Domestic violence offenders cant own guns
Under aged kids cant purchse guns
mentally ill cant own guns
There ARE already background checks being done at gun shows.
In some instances there is a time restriction before the sale becomes final.
all sales followed by law are registered.

I am more concerned about his comment he will use what ever power his office holds to make sure something like this doesnt happen again...
A gun is useless,, if ammunition,, or the components to make it, are extreamly expensive due to regulation on manufactuers which will be passed on to consumers,, or the possibility that ammo and components will also be regulated to the gun buying public in an unrealistic, oppressive way..

The feds have regulated ammo before... Non Tox shot.... there has been talk of Non Tox bullets,, studys done as to how much lead is in big game meat after an animal has been shot with a typical lead bullet...

There has been talk of taggants in Powder... There has been talk of restrictions on Quantity of components AND a private citizens requirement to keep records of every round he loads,, and that record keeping being subject to federal inspection..

Of course,, all this would require youto have a license of manufacture, that would require background information, and a heavy licence fee.

I am more concerned that the left has realised the gun is pratically impossible to remove from its dream of utopia,, but they are working on backdoor measure to render the gun as an artifact...

I am concerned that measures like these are what Obama talks about when he says He will do everything in his offices powerto make sure this doesnt happen again...

I reload quite a bit.. I have seen instances where components are short in supply due to panic Hoarding, or manufacturing troubles.. It can make them hard and expensive to purchase.. All it would take is oppressive regulation of stuff like this and the gun becomes increasingly,, incrementally,, useless...

Gooser

Not fine. I sold mine :(. And don't have the money for another. Plus I want an mk18 for home defense, but am not going to pay for one and then start the paperwork just so it can take 9 months to get approved then be banned....

Pointless legislation is pointless.