"You won't take my guns!!!" - Page 7

"You won't take my guns!!!"

This is a discussion on "You won't take my guns!!!" within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by peckman28 Dude you have got to be kidding me. The stated goal of the gun controllers is to save lives, to prevent ...

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 91 to 99 of 99
Like Tree86Likes

Thread: "You won't take my guns!!!"

  1. #91
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    11,200
    Quote Originally Posted by peckman28 View Post
    Dude you have got to be kidding me. The stated goal of the gun controllers is to save lives, to prevent pointless deaths. The AWB is PROVEN to have NO effect on the mortality rate in this country. So YES, it is perfectly valid, because it puts their idiotic nonsense into perspective. They are focusing on something that people have a very low risk for meeting their end from, and they should be called to task for it. Wake up.
    And to bolster your argument, look how well "gun free school zones" worked.
    MrsHB and atctimmy like this.
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member
    NROI Chief Range Officer


  2. #92
    VIP Member
    Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,667
    "Our Founding Fathers would have been shooting by now."
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  3. #93
    VIP Member Array xXxplosive's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,817
    This could probably get out of hand quickly, IMO.......remember the Gov't can and has shut down internet communications before. Who would know...?

  4. #94
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,102
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius View Post
    please provide evidence for this fascinating story.
    Is this what you are looking for?

    moose003.jpg
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  5. #95
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,041
    Quote Originally Posted by peckman28 View Post
    Merely possessing something the State thinks you shouldn't have is not legitimate grounds for being arrested, as that harms no one. I have a huge problem with it, and it disturbs me that you and a lot of other people don't.

    I think you missed the salient point MCP made. Those arrested were people in illegal possession, you know, the nice folks who
    violated their parole; were felons in possession; that sort of thing. No doubt a few just got picked up on warrants once they were identified.

    People weren't being arrested solely because they possessed a particular type of weapon, at least that isn't what I think MCP said happened.

    I hope he pops up to clarify what he was describing.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  6. #96
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius View Post
    you're comparing deaths caused by automobile accidents, to deaths caused by the purposeful use of a firearm?

    really?
    Yeah really!

    The people killed are just as dead. They just don't count for as much in a car crash resulting from any form of deliberate or merely thoughtless irresponsibility as they do when the gun is involved. Isn't that convenient?

    The comparison is perfectly reasonable.
    bombthrower77 likes this.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  7. #97
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,102
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    I think you missed the salient point MCP made. Those arrested were people in illegal possession, you know, the nice folks who
    violated their parole; were felons in possession; that sort of thing. No doubt a few just got picked up on warrants once they were identified.

    People weren't being arrested solely because they possessed a particular type of weapon, at least that isn't what I think MCP said happened.

    I hope he pops up to clarify what he was describing.
    Some of the people arrested were prohibited persons, others opened their gun cabinets and were found to have items such as hand grenades, sawed off shotguns, or automatic weapons for which they had no stamp. Some were war trophies, some origin unknown.

    And of course there were the usual idiots with illegal drugs in plain sight when they invited the officers in.

    But my main point is that anyone that says "it will never happen" does not know what they are talking about. I was part of the task force (still have the t-shirt) and they came looking for my rifle even though they knew exactly where I was (in uniform, on duty, thirty witnesses) when Sonny was shot.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  8. #98
    Member Array Cbuffett556's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The boonies
    Posts
    179

    "You won't take my guns!!!"

    The anti's are going to try to get the most restrictive ban possible passed.

    It is up to like-minded gun owners to make their voices heard and limit if not eliminate their ability to infringe on our rights.

    The second amendment was created in a time long before 30rd mags and red dots. But, when the 2A was created it was designed to allow people to take home their weapons after the revolutionary war and be allowed to posses them without persecution. It allowed the people to posses the same weapons as the government and stand ready as a militia to protect AND challenge the union if necessary. Fast forward 2+ centuries and you get to today where the government has mini guns, drones, 5k pound bombs and nukes. The people are grossly under armed compared to the government. The only advantage the people (militia) have is sheer numbers. Being allowed to posses the same (similar) handheld weapons as most of the members of the military does nothing but fit the status quo as it was when the 2A was written.

    I hope that makes sense to everyone


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk, please excuse typos.

  9. #99
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius View Post
    you're comparing deaths caused by automobile accidents, to deaths caused by the purposeful use of a firearm?

    really?
    Pythius, Let's step back. Both alcohol and firearms are "implements" that if used responsibly will not cause death.

    Drunk driving fatalities in the US are about the same as firearm fatalities - about 10k per year. But more die from alcohol abuse, so alcohol kills many more than firearms per year. And many innocent children are killed each year due to drunk driving.

    Yet alcohol is freely available. I only need to be 21. There is no background check when I buy some Stella or MGD. The reason is that alcohol use is widely accepted and alcohol is understood to be an product that, if used, responsibly, should not lead to death. There is no talk of an "alcohol culture." And do you not find it odd that Bloomberg does not crusade against alcohol?

    Guns and 2A have become political issues heavily, but not exclusively, drawn along party lines. The societal cost of alcohol abuse likely exceeds the societal cost of gun "abuse" and crimes.

    So I respectfully request that if you want to engage in the argument, then you reply with something other than a rhetorical question. And the answer to that question (Yes, I know it rhetorical) is yes, the comparison is there and is valid.

    The comparison does not diminish what happened at Sandy Hook. But one must ask why the public places the burden of alcohol abuse on the abuser, but places the the burden of firearms violence on the manufactures and supporters of firearms. It is this kind of unbalanced and emotional approach that causes concern in 2A supporters.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

can government take my guns
,

can the government take my guns

,

can't take my guns

,
they can't take my guns
,
they won't take my guns
,
they wont take my guns
,

will the government take my guns

,
you can't take my guns
,
you will never take my guns
,

you will not take my guns

,
you won't get my guns
,

you won't take my guns

Click on a term to search for related topics.