Well It's The Offseason And It's Slow

[YankeeRebel]

Well I have a minute to chime in been crazy at work, I mean crazy.

Guns in America are a problem anyone that does not think so is lying to themselves. The theory of guns don't kill people, people kill people, has always been and will always be an asinine argument. I firmly believe that guns are a massive problem in the US and a political one which makes it more complicated. I also believe that responsible gun owners are not the problem but at the same time no gun owner responsible or otherwise needs assault rifles. And don't ask me to define assault rifles I am not going to argue semantics. Additionally I know the manipulation of the 2nd Amendment by the legal system is where the problem begins and could end. So lets take a look at the very antiquated 2 Amendment and in doing so let's keep in mind what the weaponry was which was available at that time and understand are forefathers could not have forseen what the weapons of today would be like,

The Second Amendment: 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.

A Well Regulated Militia: Joe Smith and Fred Womeldorf members of the NRA have arsenals in their basement, what militia are they part of the NRA is not a militia and some could argue that how regulated they are.

Being necessary to the security of a free state: Pretty sure this does not refer to New Hampshire or Virginia or any of the other states. Its about a state of freedom in whole. This gets tricky because anyone can claim their freedom to them felt infringed upon. But are they a well-regulated militia or just some dude with a lot of guns and no wife?

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon: So this is where the legal beagles hang their hat. If we deregulate guns are the right being infringed upon? Well if they are not a part of a well regulated militia in the defense of a free state should they be bearing arms to begin with?

I am okay with regulation of weapons sales, each home could have 2 hand guns not tampered with, a single shot rifle and a shotgun. Each purchase is recorded using your social security number. Anyone with a criminal history can not buy guns, and people must be at least age 18. Any person caught illegaly owning any weapon gets an automatic 10 year sentence no chance of parole. Ammunition sales are also limited and can only be purchased by pre approved and permitted guns shops.

 

[Southieinnc]

Well I have a minute to chime in been crazy at work, I mean crazy.

Guns in America are a problem anyone that does not think so is lying to themselves. The theory of guns don't kill people, people kill people, has always been and will always be an asinine argument. I firmly believe that guns are a massive problem in the US and a political one which makes it more complicated. I also believe that responsible gun owners are not the problem but at the same time no gun owner responsible or otherwise needs assault rifles. And don't ask me to define assault rifles I am not going to argue semantics. Additionally I know the manipulation of the 2nd Amendment by the legal system is where the problem begins and could end. So lets take a look at the very antiquated 2 Amendment and in doing so let's keep in mind what the weaponry was which was available at that time and understand are forefathers could not have forseen what the weapons of today would be like,

The Second Amendment: 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.

A Well Regulated Militia: Joe Smith and Fred Womeldorf members of the NRA have arsenals in their basement, what militia are they part of the NRA is not a militia and some could argue that how regulated they are.

Being necessary to the security of a free state: Pretty sure this does not refer to New Hampshire or Virginia or any of the other states. Its about a state of freedom in whole. This gets tricky because anyone can claim their freedom to them felt infringed upon. But are they a well-regulated militia or just some dude with a lot of guns and no wife?

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon: So this is where the legal beagles hang their hat. If we deregulate guns are the right being infringed upon? Well if they are not a part of a well regulated militia in the defense of a free state should they be bearing arms to begin with?

I am okay with regulation of weapons sales, each home could have 2 hand guns not tampered with, a single shot rifle and a shotgun. Each purchase is recorded using your social security number. Anyone with a criminal history can not buy guns, and people must be at least age 18. Any person caught illegaly owning any weapon gets an automatic 10 year sentence no chance of parole. Ammunition sales are also limited and can only be purchased by pre approved and permitted guns shops.

I respect your opinion.
I remember my 5 round 243. Winchester rifle. One of the finest rifles ever made.
The thought of having to hunt with a single shot rifle cracks me up.

I used to hunt wild boar with a knife and a rope.
Cimb a tree and lower a noose down to the boar. Pull up and slit throat.
Wait a long time until the rest of the herd leaves.
A one shot rifle will get you killed hunting boar! I once bagged a boar with 2 . 45 slugs in his neck.
I did not ask im what he did with the hunter that did not kill him!

 

[YankeeRebel]

I respect your opinion.
I remember my 5 round 243. Winchester rifle. One of the finest rifles ever made.
The thought of having to hunt with a single shot rifle cracks me up.

I used to hunt wild boar with a knife and a rope.
Cimb a tree and lower a noose down to the boar. Pull up and slit throat.
Wait a long time until the rest of the herd leaves.
A one shot rifle will get you killed hunting boar! I once bagged a boar with 2 . 45 slugs in his neck.
I did not ask im what he did with the hunter that did not kill him!

So you could carry the side arm for the bore. Regulation has to start somewhere.

 

[Yankee Traveler]

So you could carry the side arm for the bore. Regulation has to start somewhere.

There already is regulation that has not fixed the problem, more regulation is not the answer when the current regulation is not enforced.

 

[YankeeRebel]

There already is regulation that has not fixed the problem, more regulation is not the answer when the current regulation is not enforced.

The regulation is minimal and I also suggested very stiff non-negotiable prison sentences for people that poses fire arms that are not allowed to have them

 

[Yankee Traveler]

The regulation is minimal and I also suggested very stiff non-negotiable prison sentences for people that poses fire arms that are not allowed to have them

You also suggested common citizens are only allowed to own single shot rifles or shotguns.

Haa Ha!!!

No, seriously though. Firearms charges are usually dropped.

Enforce current laws on criminals before coming up with more stringent laws aimed only at non criminals.

"...arrests of convicted felons caught with a firearm showed about 70% of the cases were not being prosecuted by the state"

Why are so many cases against felons accused of gun possession being dropped?

Records show as many as 70% of these cases are being dropped.

www.wftv.com

 

[nefansince75]

Ever go hog hunting and have a passel of hogs turn on you?

Well, me neither, but feral hogs are a SERIOUS issue and it is a real danger.
Not everybody can afford to do it from a helicopter.

I'm not a hunter nor a gun enthusiast of any type but I agree a total ban (on anything) is not a solution that works. I think BK is partially correct in some funds need to be collected and annual registration as well as certifications should be required, with the goal keeping guns in stable, properly trained hands. However, those fees can't be to the point that either the rich or even the reasonably well off are the only ones that can continue proper ownership.

 

[nefansince75]

But I have it because the second amendment says I can.

But it doesn't come close to saying that....

 

[nefansince75]

You also suggested common citizens are only allowed to own single shot rifles or shotguns.

Haa Ha!!!

No, seriously though. Firearms charges are usually dropped.

Enforce current laws on criminals before coming up with more stringent laws aimed only at non criminals.

"...arrests of convicted felons caught with a firearm showed about 70% of the cases were not being prosecuted by the state"

Why are so many cases against felons accused of gun possession being dropped?

Records show as many as 70% of these cases are being dropped.

www.wftv.com

I'm not a hunter nor a gun enthusiast of any type but I agree a total ban (on anything) is not a solution that works. I think BK is partially correct in some funds need to be collected and annual registration as well as certifications should be required, with the goal keeping guns in stable, properly trained hands. However, those fees can't be to the point that either the rich or even the reasonably well off are the only ones that can continue proper ownership.

YT - You are 100% correct that I and others don't know the complete extent of the current regulation vs enforcement and a lot of what we hear is rhetoric aimed at inflaming negative sentiment. But statements like "the constitution guarantees me the right to by my own missile defense system" (clearly exaggerating for a point) isn't helpful either. I don't want your guns, I want fewer mass shootings... much, much fewer.

I remember a time years back hearing about the occasional instance where a child got dad's gun and either killed another child or themselves while playing. Scary to think I wish we could have those days back.

 

[nefansince75]

Well I have a minute to chime in been crazy at work, I mean crazy.

Guns in America are a problem anyone that does not think so is lying to themselves. The theory of guns don't kill people, people kill people, has always been and will always be an asinine argument. I firmly believe that guns are a massive problem in the US and a political one which makes it more complicated. I also believe that responsible gun owners are not the problem but at the same time no gun owner responsible or otherwise needs assault rifles. And don't ask me to define assault rifles I am not going to argue semantics. Additionally I know the manipulation of the 2nd Amendment by the legal system is where the problem begins and could end. So lets take a look at the very antiquated 2 Amendment and in doing so let's keep in mind what the weaponry was which was available at that time and understand are forefathers could not have forseen what the weapons of today would be like,

The Second Amendment: 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.

A Well Regulated Militia: Joe Smith and Fred Womeldorf members of the NRA have arsenals in their basement, what militia are they part of the NRA is not a militia and some could argue that how regulated they are.

Being necessary to the security of a free state: Pretty sure this does not refer to New Hampshire or Virginia or any of the other states. Its about a state of freedom in whole. This gets tricky because anyone can claim their freedom to them felt infringed upon. But are they a well-regulated militia or just some dude with a lot of guns and no wife?

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon: So this is where the legal beagles hang their hat. If we deregulate guns are the right being infringed upon? Well if they are not a part of a well regulated militia in the defense of a free state should they be bearing arms to begin with?

I am okay with regulation of weapons sales, each home could have 2 hand guns not tampered with, a single shot rifle and a shotgun. Each purchase is recorded using your social security number. Anyone with a criminal history can not buy guns, and people must be at least age 18. Any person caught illegaly owning any weapon gets an automatic 10 year sentence no chance of parole. Ammunition sales are also limited and can only be purchased by pre approved and permitted guns shops.

Thanks for taking the time to spell all that out. Theses are good opinions.

I understand the passion some have toward their guns, but their argument to keep them does not start with the constitution. I think civic organizations supporting reasonable militia activity could be formed and provide some of the solution.

 

[BigKen]

The truth is that there are valid and emotional arguments on both sides of this issue as there are with any.

I'm my long life I've personally owned .22s, 3 MM, 5 mm, 308s, 30-30s, 10 and 12 gauge shotguns. I never killed anyone with any of them.
I've used a Colt .45 cal and a 30 cal. Those I've used a totally defensive and offensive manner.

You can argue all day, but no gun in a cabinet, on a wall, in a store or laying on a table by itself has never jumped up killed anything. The only way any weapon will work is if a human being makes it operate. Same for a bow and arrow, a spear and knife.

Nothing is deadly until it is in the hands of a human.

Humans are the most dangerous weapon ever created.

 

[YankeeRebel]

You also suggested common citizens are only allowed to own single shot rifles or shotguns.

Haa Ha!!!

No, seriously though. Firearms charges are usually dropped.

Enforce current laws on criminals before coming up with more stringent laws aimed only at non criminals.

"...arrests of convicted felons caught with a firearm showed about 70% of the cases were not being prosecuted by the state"

Why are so many cases against felons accused of gun possession being dropped?

Records show as many as 70% of these cases are being dropped.

www.wftv.com

Dropped is part of the problem, and remember I specifically people that posses a firearm that are not allowed to have them, ie did not attain through regulated means. In other words the person that committed a crime and crime that involved a firearm that he / she possessed and did not possess through regulated means.

 

[YankeeRebel]

The truth is that there are valid and emotional arguments on both sides of this issue as there are with any.

I'm my long life I've personally owned .22s, 3 MM, 5 mm, 308s, 30-30s, 10 and 12 gauge shotguns. I never killed anyone with any of them.
I've used a Colt .45 cal and a 30 cal. Those I've used a totally defensive and offensive manner.

You can argue all day, but no gun in a cabinet, on a wall, in a store or laying on a table by itself has never jumped up killed anything. The only way any weapon will work is if a human being makes it operate. Same for a bow and arrow, a spear and knife.

Nothing is deadly until it is in the hands of a human.

Humans are the most dangerous weapon ever created.

And forks don't cause obesity. The argument that guns don't kill people is asinine IMO. They do kill people and the people that weild them kill people they literally go hand in hand. This is why I said responsible gun owners are not the problem, but may feel the wrath of any new regulated measures, not that this will happen in America. We seem to have become numb to all the mass killings, murders, armed robberies etc, we accept as a way of the American life much like we accept freedom of speech.

 

[Yankee Traveler]

But it doesn't come close to saying that....

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.


No.
That is exactly what it says.

 

[Southieinnc]

So you could carry the side arm for the bore. Regulation has to start somewhere.

Agreed on the regulation. Problem is that activists want no guns and it's a slippery slope.
All guns can kill people. How does taking away a few fix the problem?

Hard to get traction when the liberals want your guns, your meat, your car, your sexuality, your money, etc.....

 

[YankeeRebel]

Agreed on the regulation. Problem is that activists want no guns and it's a slippery slope.
All guns can kill people. How does taking away a few fix the problem?

Hard to get traction when the liberals want your guns, your meat, your car, your sexuality, your money, etc.....

I agree its a slippery slope but you get a less rounds off in a minute with a side arm than you do an assault rifle. It's easier to engage a target as well.

 

[Southieinnc]

I agree its a slippery slope but you get a less rounds off in a minute with a side arm than you do an assault rifle. It's easier to engage a target as well.

Spraying rounds is all about how fast you can pull the trigger.
Engaging target is all about the range.....

i can kill at 300 meters faster with a rifle.
I can kill much faster in a hallway with a handgun.....

Can't stick a rifle in my pants.....

 

[YankeeRebel]

Spraying rounds is all about how fast you can pull the trigger.
Engaging target is all about the range.....

i can kill at 300 meters faster with a rifle.
I can kill much faster in a hallway with a handgun.....

Can't stick a rifle in my pants.....

You cannot pull the trigger faster than an assualt rifle can send rounds down range. And it's a lot easier to engage a target reloading

 

[Southieinnc]

You cannot pull the trigger faster than an assualt rifle can send rounds down range. And it's a lot easier to engage a target reloading

If you are talking about an M-16 on auto agreed.
an AR-15 semi you have to pull the trigger each shot - just like a handgun

 

[nefansince75]

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.


No.
That is exactly what it says.

Being able to keep and bear arms is not the same as keeping and bearing any armament you feel like.