Obama Gun Control Policy

[pocketfullofshells]

The "big bad boogie man" is the criminal with the gun who is ransacking your house, while YOU hide under your bed, wishing you had more than a dull pocket knife to defend yourself.

“Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You?

I know deep down in places you dont talk about at parties, you don’t want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it.

I prefer you said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand to post.”

("A Few Good Men", Colonel Nathan Jessup)

since I am not saying we should take away anyones right to a gun ( outside the normal..criminals with violent history, and people who are certified nuts) I fail to see your point...NO ONE IS TAKING YOUR GUN>>so not stopping you from shooting the guy breaking into your house...

that said the most likely person to be shot with that gun...is you or someone you love...but thats your choice to make...

Also I don't sit around living in fear that someones going to break into my house all night, I am fine with calling the police if needed. I don't have wild ideas of some night I will be in a shoot out in my house with some random intruders...could it happen? sure, but I am more likely to get hit by lightning...

 

[TruthSeeker]

since I am not saying we should take away anyones right to a gun ( outside the normal..criminals with violent history, and people who are certified nuts) I fail to see your point...NO ONE IS TAKING YOUR GUN>>so not stopping you from shooting the guy breaking into your house...

that said the most likely person to be shot with that gun...is you or someone you love...but thats your choice to make...

Also I don't sit around living in fear that someones going to break into my house all night, I am fine with calling the police if needed. I don't have wild ideas of some night I will be in a shoot out in my house with some random intruders...could it happen? sure, but I am more likely to get hit by lightning...

Like an old deputy sheriff friend of mine always said: "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away".

I'm not worried about somebody taking my guns. Anybody who would try to take my guns is the one who should be worried.

 

[dahermit]

since I am not saying we should take away anyones right to a gun ( outside the normal..criminals with violent history, and people who are certified nuts) I fail to see your point...NO ONE IS TAKING YOUR GUN>>so not stopping you from shooting the guy breaking into your house...

that said the most likely person to be shot with that gun...is you or someone you love...but thats your choice to make...

Also I don't sit around living in fear that someones going to break into my house all night, I am fine with calling the police if needed. I don't have wild ideas of some night I will be in a shoot out in my house with some random intruders...could it happen? sure, but I am more likely to get hit by lightning...

It is too bad that you cannot use a time machine to go back to pre- statehood Texas when Comanches prowled the plains. Tell the Texas settlers that they should give up their guns because the guns would more likely be used against them or a family member. It is relevant that the average citizen of the U.S. is more likely to be harmed by criminals today than citizens of Texas, by the Comanches in the old days.

Also, stop quoting as fact: "...that said the most likely person to be shot with that gun...is you or someone you love..." Unless you do not know the difference between findings from a legitimate study and anti-gun rhetoric; it is embarrassing to liberals who know the difference.

 

[dahermit]

I fail to see your point...NO ONE IS TAKING YOUR GUN>>so not stopping you from shooting the guy breaking into your house...

Many people (Sarah Brady, Pelosi, Finestine, Conyers, et. Al.), have stated that all handguns should be removed from America. They have stated that the ideal would be an outright ban, but that not likely, choose to enact more legislation (Brady Ban, G.C.A. 1968, Gun Show "Loop hole", etc., etc., etc.). Such legislation and proposed legislation's purpose is to make owning, and using guns ever-increasingly difficult to the point where the eventual outcome is that it is too difficult to go through the process to get a gun.
Note: Historically, there have been proposals for a law that would require handgun owners to turn in their guns for a nominal fee in a government "buy back". So...they do want to take my guns.
They have been saying it for years even if you have not been paying attention.

 

[dahermit]

Also I don't sit around living in fear that someones going to break into my house all night, I am fine with calling the police if needed. I don't have wild ideas of some night I will be in a shoot out in my house with some random intruders...could it happen? sure, but I am more likely to get hit by lightning...

I did a search to determine if there were convicted sexual offenders living near us...I got a map showing the crimes that were committed in my area (I live in a rural area, not metropolitan). I was shocked. I suggest you do such a search also. Also, do a search of crime statistics... Lightning deaths are rare, victims of crimes are not, but a person who's head is in the sand would not be aware of that.

All that aside, most gun ownership is not motivated by fear of crime. I own them mostly for sport. I shoot in my back yard range, I cast bullets, I hand load, I shoot raccoons, skunks, opossums, that try and raid my goose nests. I shoot woodchucks digging under the foundations of my buildings, etc. My guns have very little to do with fear of crime or shooting other people.

By the way, I had a break and entering (was not home) a few years ago. They caught the guy...a druggie and his druggie girl friend, they had committed many such break-ins.

 

[bododie]

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

Gosh oh golly, how stupid was Jefferson!

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Many people (Sarah Brady, Pelosi, Finestine, Conyers, et. Al.), have stated that all handguns should be removed from America. They have stated that the ideal would be an outright ban, but that not likely, choose to enact more legislation (Brady Ban, G.C.A. 1968, Gun Show "Loop hole", etc., etc., etc.). Such legislation and proposed legislation's purpose is to make owning, and using guns ever-increasingly difficult to the point where the eventual outcome is that it is too difficult to go through the process to get a gun.
Note: Historically, there have been proposals for a law that would require handgun owners to turn in their guns for a nominal fee in a government "buy back". So...they do want to take my guns.
They have been saying it for years even if you have not been paying attention.

boo hoo...you know who supported the Brady Bill? Reagan...
and guess what, none of those people are..Obama...the one stated in the thread...
also what some in the house or Senate would like, and what is actually being pushed on the agenda and may actually pass are not the same.

and O dear, closing the Gun show "loophole" aka the think that makes it so Drug dealers and anyone with a violent past, or maybe some kids looking for some high powered guns to shoot up there school...If you take away the gun show loophole, you poor people will not be able to get a gun right? ..O wait unless your a felon or something, you will.

And yea, some guy may randomly break in with a gun to kill me...and I will not be able to call the police...its just so likely I should cry myself to sleep and live in fear all day cuz I don't have a gun...of course I am about 1000 times more likely to get hit by a drunk driver...so maybe I should also never drive..screw it I should bunker down in my home and live in fear all my life...I need a gun...like a baby with its blanket.

you have a right to own a gun today, you did 5 years ago, 10 , 20 , 50, 100, 200 years ago...guess what, no one is coming from the white house to take it...they are not politically stupid also the courts would stop them...damn those facts.

 

[dahermit]

boo hoo...you know who supported the Brady Bill? Reagan...

Do not care... Reagan's support of the Brady Bill is relevant to this conversation how?

and guess what, none of those people are..Obama...the one stated in the thread...

You are the one who stated: "...even when no one is pushing anything, the gun nuts..." and, "...NO ONE IS TAKING YOUR GUN..." To which I supplied the names of organizations who's only purpose is the eliminate/take/by back/eliminate by attrition, private ownership of guns in the United States. They pressure Congress and Obama to support and propose such measures. They have influence on President Obama because they are the ones who will decide if he has another term.

also what some in the house or Senate would like, and what is actually being pushed on the agenda and may actually pass are not the same.

Even broken clocks are correct twice a day. You are correct. With the current Republican control of congress, it is very unlikely that any gun control will pass.

and O dear, closing the Gun show "loophole" aka the think that makes it so Drug dealers and anyone with a violent past, or maybe some kids looking for some high powered guns to shoot up there school...If you take away the gun show loophole, you poor people will not be able to get a gun right? ..O wait unless your a felon or something, you will.

The idea that there is a "gun show loophole" is the invention of anti-gun persons/organizations. The right for a private person to sell his/her gun to another private party has existed since the first white settler put foot on the Americas, long before it was deemed a "gun show loophole". Please cite which school shooting was enacted by a school kid that got his gun via gun show "loophole". Please cite data that indicates drug dealers get their guns via the "gun show loophole". If you take away that "loophole", kids and drug dealers will not be able to get guns right?

And yea, some guy may randomly break in with a gun to kill me...and I will not be able to call the police...its just so likely I should cry myself to sleep and live in fear all day cuz I don't have a gun...of course I am about 1000 times more likely to get hit by a drunk driver...so maybe I should also never drive..screw it I should bunker down in my home and live in fear all my life...I need a gun...like a baby with its blanket.

I do not know what you intended to convey in this seemingly emotional statement. Unless it was not an emotional expression but something that was so erudite that I did not understand it.

you have a right to own a gun today, you did 5 years ago, 10 , 20 , 50, 100, 200 years ago...guess what, no one is coming from the white house to take it...they are not politically stupid also the courts would stop them...damn those facts.

More rights than when Democrats were in power (Clinton's Assault rifle ban has expired, and due to Republican influence, almost all states have enacted the right to carry concealed laws. However, relative to your time statement, we had the right to own firearms that was virtually without restriction 200 years ago. More restrictions as time passed, more crime as time passed, more violence as time passed.
In as much as you are anti-gun, despite utterances to the contrary, can you cite one example of an anti-gun law actually effecting violent crime?
But, do not pull the anti-gun dodge by stating "x" number of "people were denied guns/ people were saved" under the Brady law... The people who are denied guns under some law are only denied a gun if they are lawful citizens. The felons/criminals/etc. just seek unlawful means of obtaining guns.

 

[TruthSeeker]

dahermit, PFOS can't cite anything. I doubt he could recite the ABCs.

 

[dahermit]

dahermit, PFOS can't cite anything. I doubt he could recite the ABCs.

Many/most of the anti-gun people's motivation is emotion (not logic), based. I refer to it as: The grey rat response. If a large rat ran across the floor, many people would recoil in terror despite the fact that it is illogical to fear a rat inasmuch as they never attack but always run away. In short, it is an emotional response to an irrational fear.
If a gun were to be put on a table in view of anti-gun people, it would elicit the same emotional response; they would recoil in a feeling of dread and fear despite the fact that a gun is an inert piece of metal.
In either instance, the rat or the gun, it seems to have no effect to reason using logic against what is an emotion based response. If someone points out the fact that their response to the rat/gun is based on emotion, they just become angry.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

dahermit, PFOS can't cite anything. I doubt he could recite the ABCs.

I have cited them before, that you guys ignore them is not my issue.

 

[dahermit]

I have cited them before, that you guys ignore them is not my issue.

Just like you, instead of responding to my points, just egnore them and raise others?

 

[TruthSeeker]

Many/most of the anti-gun people's motivation is emotion (not logic), based. I refer to it as: The grey rat response. If a large rat ran across the floor, many people would recoil in terror despite the fact that it is illogical to fear a rat inasmuch as they never attack but always run away. In short, it is an emotional response to an irrational fear.
If a gun were to be put on a table in view of anti-gun people, it would elicit the same emotional response; they would recoil in a feeling of dread and fear despite the fact that a gun is an inert piece of metal.
In either instance, the rat or the gun, it seems to have no effect to reason using logic against what is an emotion based response. If someone points out the fact that their response to the rat/gun is based on emotion, they just become angry.

The leftists thrive on emotion. Pushing the "emotional" buttons of other people allows the leftists to avoid logic, common sense, accountability, objectivity, facts, and honesty.

 

[dahermit]

The leftists thrive on emotion. Pushing the "emotional" buttons of other people allows the leftists to avoid logic, common sense, accountability, objectivity, facts, and honesty.

Was that a double blind study?

 

[TruthSeeker]

Was that a double blind study?

LMAO! Actually it was a triple-blind study, using mice.