oh silly anti gun people-don't you know your time is near. soon you shall be utterly defeated, utterly disgraced & utterly despised. the courts hate you. the legislatures hate you. the president & all the governors hate you. the only thing you have accomplished is delivering house & senate seats to the republicans. such silly little fools. don't you know that you were used. your opponents wanted you to campaign for gun control because your campaigning does nothing but promote gun ownership :)
only the uneducated people say guns are dangerous. All people who are against handguns should watch their wifes being raped by some nut case criminal. Lets see if they change their mind
Yeah because those same forces were so good at stoping the prohibition of Alcohol and by banning all guns only law breakers i.e. criminals and the police will have guns. So bassically unless the police are right at your door to protect you any criminal can go in. I agree that there needs to be limits, History Checks and Restrictions but all that is to prevent criminals from getting guns, NOT law abidding citizens (who are the only ones who follow gun laws).
Washington, D.C., a handgun ban went into effect during 1977, and after 29 years of the ban D.C.'s murder rates have ranked second among the 50 largest cities for 15 years.
President Obama's gun control policies are ineffective. In almost every case where handgun bans have been implemented, murder rates have risen. With overwhelming evidence the question must now be asked, why ignore the facts any longer?
So why are American gun owners sitting this election out? Do they think this Supreme Court decision is going to protect them against Obama and Biden, with a Democrat Congress?
Obama has already promised the Brady group that he will "continue their fight as President," and Biden has already introduced S.2237 to renew the Clinton semi-auto ban, with even tighter restrictions on semi-auto pistols.
If we sit on our asses for this election, we'll get a screwing - that we'll deserve!
If Obama makes it to office and tries to restrict my Bill of Rights, they can come get them. I will shoot at any government official trying to disarm me. There should be not doubt at all about the nature of the 2nd Amd, just look at Lexington and Concord in the Rev. War. Individual citizens with personally owned firearms stood up against a tyranical government. That's all the proof you need right there, you can't take down a corrupt gov't if the gov't only has the guns. No self defence either!
A lot's happened since then. I still have my firearms and I won't give them up. In my opinion the Bill of Rights, especially the 2nd Amendment, is one of the few things still keeping this country at the roots of what it is. The times may change, but the Bill of Rights, our heritage, the God-given right to life (and the preservation of it), and the spirit of the people are what keeps America what it is.
the day they take our guns, you can burn the Constitution. Remember this, SLAVES didnt have a right to bear arms. Read that again! SLAVES did not have a RIGHT to bear arms!
true...people have to see this issue more than just street violence..were talking about a whole government being able to obtain ABSOLUTE control with no real resistance from its people....SLAVES
"A gun in the hands of a bad man is a very dangerous thing. A gun in the hands of a good person is no danger to anyone except the bad guys". Charlton Heston
The point here is that legislative efforts on the part of reps is done on the basis that statistical trends and case file analyses would determine the direction that the writers of said legislation should take.
If a trend cannot be mapped to determine causality then the legislation's wording would end up more and more vague with each successive writ.
This is a major reason why blanket legislation should never be used to counter such anomalies; they usually end up affecting unrelated parties.
The reason why I call it statistically insignificant in light of the other more prevalent stats is simple. The larger the occurrences the easier it becomes to plot trends and thusly reveal causative determinations through case file studies.
If out of 79 children there are at least 30 different reasons or activities that lead to the accidental death then it becomes impossible to plot a trend to predict furthered future causes.
As the reasons go down the trend can be mapped more effectively.
In 2005 there were just over 1000 accidental drownings in swimming pools for children aged under 14. In the same year there were 79 accidental deaths due to firearms for children under 14. Drowning: 1.6/100,000 pop Shooting: 0.12/100,000 pop (Field sample of 69 million children) To compare: Murder 5.6 Robbery 140.7 Assault 290 Rape 31.7 Property 3,429.8 Burglary 726.7 Vehicle theft 416.7
One thing I learned NOT TO DO -- depend on just what "MAN" says. Though I respect your position, that's just not good enough necessarily -- Fact. When people learn to verbally communicate you'll be better off. This stone aged mentality you're constantly promoting is tiresome. I knew there was possibly a hidden message from all those crazy, dignified cave man commercials -- y'all missin' what you'd call the good old days (smile)!
"The difference between the potential scenarios is that..."
That's what YOU say! You keep bringing up stats like...they matter on ONE HAND and NOT on the other!. It's NOT an anomaly that MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT victims of guns. Go ahead, walk up to your everyday person and ask them have they been robbed at gunpoint. Like I said, you got your wish, but that doesn't change the fact it's opined ya "DON'T NEED" guns. Rates can go up and down at any time of the year, in ANY year - whether guns or not.
"On the other hand...it is not projection to assume that you could get robbed or shot by a violent offender, quite simply because it is something that does occur and can be measured to provide a trend analysis."
On the other hand shyt! Don't sit up and say that the other things DON'T happen; I'm not just pulling it out my ass. You do have my point, though THAT ALL the things CAN CONTINUE TO happen...from BOTH sides. Yes, there is a difference (smile).
The difference between the potential scenarios is that robberies, rapes, murders, assaults with firearms are not statistical anomalies.
Their occurrences can be noted and trend analyses can be plotted to reflect future trend patterns based on social responses and conditions within said communities and localities.
Your examples cannot be plotted simply because they are statistically insignificant due to the low sample size. Any high school grade 12 mathematics class would have revealed this.
The puerility of your response is reflected in the desire to create any type of legislative effect towards the rest of the public that was neither involved in the anomalies, nor the cause of their statistical insignificant existence.
This type of residually emotional directive is exactly what has brought Washington DC to this point in the first place. You would do well to remember that legislation based on emotion has never been well thought through.
Well, wake up then! Seriously though, listen, you NEVER read where I said you'd DEFINITELY do a terrible thing, so let's get THAT much straight. Again, anyone can be read as such, yet ya STILL projected that emphasis the way of moi. Again -- why so?
Please, feel free to join us again on our next edition of "Selective Psychoanalysis with Peckerwood's Neighborhood" -- hehe.
The posts in question related to your immediate fears that:
a) a mad toddler would shoot you
b) your neighbour would shoot you
c) someone defending their life or property would choose to shoot you
Your assumptions...all negative emotion based responses to improbable scenarios.
On the other hand...it is not projection to assume that you could get robbed or shot by a violent offender, quite simply because it is something that does occur and can be measured to provide a trend analysis.
Of course the reason why I say "you" in the above examples is because that the examples you provided came from your brain...and you provided to case file presentation to the contrary to remove yourself from the examples given.
This type of irrationality is repeated when someone suggests that their neighbours would kill them with a gun...and the question is asked of them "why their neighbour would want to kill them in the first place".
The CDC has just come out with some significant statistics that in 2005, a
whopping 55% of DEATHS BY GUN SHOT WOUNDS were self inflicted. The US Supreme Court just ruled that any kind of gun control is a no-no. i believe the USA is encoraging people to commit suicide. We have a very sucky economy and people are going to get very depressed over losing their job and home. And there is a GUN in the house. Thank you NRA for decreasing the population. Movie Soylent Green is finally coming true.
Twilightfun...what you are doing is called projection.
Projection is where a person harbors negative emotions about a certain subject/object and thusly feels subconsciously guilty about those emotions.
To rid oneself of these feelings of guilt, they "project" them onto anyone else who happens to be a proponent of the certain item that was the original target of the felt guilt.
In truth the evil intentions you speak of are inside you...not the gun owners.
"Twilightfun...what you are doing is called projection."
Well gee! We're all projectionists then, depending IF you're calling things negative OR not! (shrugs)
Hell! The intentions don't sometimes bother us anyway, not as much the result from some action (wink). I don't think anyone'd care about a mad toddler hitting them as much as they would about IF that hit comes directly from a loaded gun in that same kid's hand that just happened to be unlocked (smile).
The negativity does not relate in accordance as to whether the opinion is in, or out, of favor in regards to the object in question.
The negativity in question relates directly to personal EMOTIONS in reflecting what the "projector" subconsciously wishes to do with said object.
The "projector" harbors guilt over these negative EMOTIONS...and then to rid the guilt simply PROJECTS them onto anyone or anything related to the original object in question.
"You can call it an opinion, I'll call it a fact."
So? It's a fact that your OPINION is it's best called a fact; my opinion is I don't need to have a problem with that -- just don't CHOOSE to shoot an innocent me, or any OTHER non-crime committing person, with your "right" now to do so. Thanks (smile).
"It is a right! It is a choice whether or not to exercise that right."
Ah, but since ya wanna get technical wit' it, it is ALSO an opinion it is right to "Call" it a right, or wrong for that matter, that you exercise choice to (wink). See, you don't come in this world with that stuff, buddy. And frankly, only 'cause the LAW says do your parents HAVE TO DO MORE for you than just kill your ass off the bat, if they...chose to. Remember that -- hehe.
I just want to reiterate what I said about blacks killing blacks mainly in some of these cities with high crime rates. I'm not trying to disparage our black citizens. I'm bringing up a point that the government does not want to address the sub standard conditions that exist in many of the black ghettos throughout various cities in the U.S.
That's a harder situation for us as a society to deal with so it is much better to bring up an escape goat. that's nothing new. They need our help.
I never said it's not your right 2 have 'em. No, no, no! There's no argument against the right 2 bare arms, so I won't attempt 2 sideline any of this with th@. I said all this 2 stress on logistics behind PREFERENCES not 2. Respecting we don't all THINK so, I just feel it's part historical 4 "humans" 2 HELP put themselves "in position" for BAD shyt 2 kick off. Indeed, the right IS YOURS, no problem there. I just disagree th@ it's undeniably so good, though I can accept the end decision, no prob.
Yeah, it kinda sounds like abortion debate -- people're gonna do it illegally if they can't have it THEIR way, when it's against the law -- true. So they don't mind contributing to the harm done potentially, as long as someone else can be blamed, which some call an excuse -- but oh well (shrugs).
"It is better to have it and not need it than need it than not have it."
Cool ya feel that way. We all don't agree(shrugs). What's so bad about NOT having it when the chances are still there you'll get killed either way? -- push it however ya want, the chance is...still there. So you don't have to raise chances of ANYONE getting harmed because ya chose to share in potentials to raise those same chances.
Never - the crying doesn't start until the facists start taking them away. Get the "left" to start confiscating cars and you will hear some crying. And it would be legally more feasible too... as cars are a priveledge, not a right enshrined in the constitution and affirmed by the Supreme Court.
And yes, cars present an infinitely greater public health risk and do guns.
That type talk don't change when those hot balls in your ass. Oh gee, oops! Ya had a gun but ya weren't as crafty AS that crook. ANYWAY. Pssst -- people FIND ways.
"Fact is the majority of states in this country allow..."
Crime would be SO FAR down EVERYWHERE, though it isn't. You hear that a person carryin' these guns you support actually kill MOST attackers, WHILE the crimes still goin' on? Yep! People STILL get robbed, killed, raped and what not.
It is the fact that crime will always go on and the police is under no obligation to protect us that we have to defend ourselves. You should watch John Stossle's interview with prisoners who said they are more afraid of people with guns than they are police. The prisoners said they don't get their guns at shops. They get it from illegal dealers just like illegal drug dealers that the war on drugs was never able to stop.
"That type talk don't change when those hot balls in your ass. Oh gee, oops! Ya had a gun but ya weren't as crafty AS that crook. ANYWAY. Pssst -- people FIND ways."
You can start speaking in plain English anytime ya like. Because that shit doesn't make any sense.
Then why in every single place guns were banned, crime with guns has risen.
"Tell that to women who are the targets of raping..."
Oh, you mean the SAME one who ends up hitting another INNOCENT PERSON instead of the attempting rapist?
"You act is if people with guns are walking around patrolling..."
Uh -- they are in fact. That's the whole purpose they carry the gun -- all in the "perception from the FACT" they would carry 'em (wink). Keep that shyt IN YO' HOME,with no choice of automatic whatsoever!
no choice of automatic weapon? you may not know this but people do have automatic weapons in their possession. All it takes is a class 3 license and permission from the sheriff. As far as innocen tbystander, I can say the same thing about cars. YOu never know when one will swerve to hit you on the side walk. You also never know whether that was intentional as the driver gets out of the car and takes your wallet and drives away. Lets ban cars
Provide the link to the last woman who when about to get raped in attempting to shoot her attacker...shot someone else. Women get raped every day, should be easy to find yes?
"You act is if people with guns are walking around patrolling..."
Uh -- they are in fact. That's the whole purpose they carry the gun -- all in the "perception from the FACT" they would carry 'em (wink).
So, the reason I carry a gun is "all in the "perception from the FACT" they would carry 'em (wink)"
Dude, I have no fucking idea what that even means. You may want to consider staying away from drugs son. If I wanted to patrol streets with a gun, I'd be a cop.
It is better to have it and not need it than need it than not have it. Since conceal carry was permitted in many many states, the crime did not go up as some people would portray more highway shooting and blood on the streets everywhere. It didn't happen. Why should our rights be limited based on fear which is only a feeling. I may feel unsafe crossing the street. The more cars there are, the more chanse I may get hit. Ban cars...
Ah well, I just hope neither my family members nor I get hit while minding our business & peacefully trying 2 live our lives. More guns now will tend to make that "more likely." As if things weren't interesting enough, this seems just another added excuse on how not 2 practice more effective verbal communication. And being as though violence is not of color, people just again said "Fuck what you mean N the depth of your dream, Dr. King"; specifically 'cause some don't believe N its possiblily.
Seriously, DavyCrockett2, the point I was making in my initial post was that, whether we get shot or not, more guns means greater "chance" the possibility exists to actually be shot by a gun. Just because U don't KNOW folks who've been does not mean more are better, though I'm glad the types and places for them are restricted to DC homes. The love 4 having guns, I feel, though intended as a positive, is the negative attempt at the easy way out.
Look at the statistics. There has NEVER been an innocent bystander who got shot by someone who was lawfully carrying a firearm. Moreover, this ruling only pertains to guns in the home.
Just watch, the crime rate will drop. How do I know this? Because the crime rate shot up in the year after the ban went into effect.
[By the way, the NAACP and the KKK agree that black people shouldn't own guns ---- and Dr. King applied for a gun permit and was denied because of his skin color.]
True, the NAACP says they don't feel Blacks SHOULD HAVE guns. But since when are we all honestly to believe they are truly for equality, just off THAT stance alone? LoL! Please! The funny thing about your mentioning Dr. King -- well, he could've gotten an illegal gun, my friend, but he was much BIGGER THAN THAT; it doesn't matter that IT WASN'T EVEN HIS FAULT he was denied. See, the right to carry was not extended to ALL PEOPLE then anyway, in case ya need more info 'bout Blacks.
So you are agree with me -- gun laws make sure that those who would obey the law can't get guns. And it wasn't his fault that he was denyed, just like it wasn't Heller's fault that he was denyed his right because he lived in DC.
And the right to carry still isn't extended to all people [but maybe this rulling will change that]
NO! Previous gun law N DC took it out of question whether it's even necessary 2 go through trying 2 figure WHO "MIGHT" OBEY the law -- let's get 2 the point. It's like control over a "virus," by stomping it out 2 the greatest extent while also working 2 improve treatment needed (the LAW did that). By the way, I never said the right "SHOULD BE" extended to all people. You tryin' to hint you like underage drinking or something?
"The fact is that why should we take tips on how to fight crime from areas where crime is so out of control?"
I'm sayin' -- beat your kids asses since they're out of control! You shouldn't need a gun for 'em. After all, that's WHERE the guns are for -- HOME protection. You got NO excuse walkin' up and down the streets like you're the deputy, wanna-be vigilante. Bronson already stole the show in Deathwish. Get over yourself!
It's not my kids who are out of control, [and I wouldn't use my guns to keep the offspring in line.]
And if we don't protect ourselves on the streets, who will? The police [laugh] --- have a look at Katrina, or the LA riots, there were no cops to be seen [except for the metallic kind].
Seems like we should be doing more to keep repeat offenders off the street rather than keeping law abiding citizens from being able to get firearms.
Don't let twilightfun get under your skin... his era of Nazi style gun control is comming to an end. One of the suburbs of Chicago has already canceled their ban since the ruling.
The question is, how will he/she explain why the crime rate dropped following the ruling? [Harder to mug someone who can shoot you for your troubles.]
[PS, google "nazi gun control act of 1938, because that's what these liberal pansies are asking for]
"Seems like we should be doing more to keep repeat offenders..."
They go hand in hand. That's the point. Thank you. Everybody does not need to be walking around (again) like we're in the Wild, Wild west. The police handle MOST of it effectively. Sure, it's not ALL out of question; still, better control is through trusting law enforcement instead of making excuses to show how bad we are, increasing fear. It's like the BAD guys aren't bad enough already (sarcasm).
LOL, someone has been watching too many westerns. The "Wild West" has some of the lowest crime rates in history, and often in areas where there was little or no police presence.
If guns caused crime, then why haven't I ever seen a shooting at a gun show or at a gun range?
But yeah, good job trading your civil rights for an illusion of safety.
As they say, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
Dude, you're one of the ones who wanted that bull! I was happy already -- LoL! You talk about giving away rights? I was okay, so there was nothing I was "giving up." Perception is key, my friend. You feel like a target, you'll be on defense, sort of like a crooked Congress person hiding behind security. See, but I don't have to watch MY BACK like "dat."
Hummm, so if you feel that you will never need protection from anything in your life, then why do we even have police?
I don't feel like a target at all, and being 6'4" I don't think that a mugger would really want to try and make me one, but my 86 year old grandfather might be a target, so he carries a 357 revolver. Why do you feel the need to take away his means of defense?
Tell that to women who are the targets of raping murderers OUTSIDE the home.
You act is if people with guns are walking around patrolling the streets like their some sort of mythic hero. I got news for ya, that's all just in YOUR head.
Todays ruling by the Supreme COurt makes it clear that a right'of the people'is affirmed for all citizens and makes it clear that laws which ban the possesion of firearms, or make it impossible thru regulation for citizens to excercise their right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional.
AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY
AN UNARMED SOCIETY IS A POLICE STATE
A DISARMED SOCIETY IS A TYRANNY!
Thank God and Justice Scalia the 2nd Amendment is still alive!
If you have to worry about getting shot by some yahoo that might be your victim...you might be less inclined to rob them.
If you are a criminal anyway, you aren't going to care about breaking the law against carrying a firearm...and if you assume that your victim is going to be law-abiding, you don't have to worry about getting killed when you are killing them.
Before I forget, if anyone is a citizen of the state of Florida, please sign the petition for open carry. We are one of only six states left that do not allow open carry.
flopencarry . com
I developed the petition, and another member made it up.
opencarry . org
Go to the Florida forum section in that forum. It's really starting to take off!!!
We need to remember, it doesn't matter how they vote. This is our country "We the people" own this land. If they try to take freedom from us we have the right to remove them & the tree of liberty will grow!
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" Noah Webster
"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason
Yup but in order to keep this phrase true "constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops" we need to be allowed the same luxuary as the regular troops. I mean anti-tank, anti-personnel, anti aircraft. I have a pretty easy solution. The state militia or national guard is controlled by the civilian and they can have all the weapons needed to defend the state. They do not answer to federal or state government and only answer to the civilian population.
If youre a psycho, and you wanna blow someones head off, I dont think a law saying that you cant own guns is gonna stop you. So making them illegal, makes the psycho more secure about what hes doing, cuz he knows that the victims wont have any guns to defend themselves. Banning guns is almost as if that piece of metal has more consciousness than the human mind itself. Someone who wants to go trigger happy MIGHT think twice if he knows who hes gonna shoot has a gun as well.
Someone needs to begin impeachment proceedings against those 4 Supreme Court Judges who voted to limit the Constitution. I hope the NRA will start the ball rolling on impeachment for these subversive Judges.
5-4 decision. I think we came pretty close to starting a revolt in this country. The same liberal judges who voted to give the Guantanamo detainees Constitutional rights, same as a US citizen. The same judges who knocked down the death penalty for child rapists.
Does it really matter anymore, honestly man, the fucking titles?
liberal, conservative, leftwing rightwing, fuck that, its 2 different nuts in the same pile of shit. There is no difference anymore, its a fucking madhouse!
The whole idea of having something vs. something is to keep the simple human mind stimulated, it keeps the puppets dancing, this is basic psychology really.
That would mean we could put a City Ordanance on other Amendments.Like OK,what if we diddnt like the 16th Amendment could we put a city ban on that and not pay taxes?They wouldn't like that.Or what if we put a city ordanance on women being able to vote?Rights are rights,and no statistics back up that it lowers crime,NONE.Just the opposite.Its about control freaks,that think they could take our power and when I say we I mean "WE THE PEOPLE".
read the comments posted by the liberal fascist news pukes. They all speak of the dc gun ban but never mention the actual gun crime rates. they jump to the CHICAGO gun crime rates. Such an obvious slant it makes me sick. I heard a funny quote the other day "snipe the left"
Obviously, looking at DC murder rates, public safety was severely damaged by this ban on self-defense, not increased. The only losers in this cases are the home invader criminals and fascist politicians who seek to control everyone. And Obama applauded the individual rights approach of this ruling!
I might even consider moving to DC now that the ridiculous ban has been thrown out. Get rid of the city income tax and it's a done deal.
Call me an idiot, but here's a question: does this mean that as long as I'm registered and all that, I can buy a gun? So, if I was a disturbed but legal individual, I could buy one?
This is NOT meant as an attack on one side or the other: it's an honest-to-goodness question, to settale a debate between me and a friend.
good. honest business men can make some money, and the criminals that sell illegal guns will be out of business in D.C. and think about it more guns in D.C mean Bush is more likely to be shot :-)
the reason why the ban was passed was because ted kennedy didn't want to get shot after his loser mafia brothers all did so he passed this and now all a criminal does now is go into Virginia and Maryland for illegal guns because legals aren't allowed here
Ted Kennedy killed more woman with his car than with my hand gun so how is it dangerous? I think we should ban mob connected playboy senators with brain tumors because that might prevent dead women found in swamps in abandoned cars.
You being disrespectful is real cute. But anyway you have gang violence, teenagers committing suicide, kids finding loaded guns, etc... has caused a lot more death.
gang violence is committed with illegal firearms which I all for taking away. Teens would commit suicide some other way and if their really that messed up, where were the parents who are responsible for them?
Kids finding loaded guns? I know their parents are being completely irresponsible anyways and if every kid who grew up in a house with a firearm then shouldn't every NRA member, every gun owner in the world be dead right now but they arn't, are they?
yeaahhh now that people are going to burglarize homes LESS, because they don't know whether or not the people there have a gun? Smoke another one, dumbass!
People owing guns will not reduce the crime rate in America. We have gang violence and a very bad economy that has lead to high crime rates. People owing guns will not make those problems just go away, its simple logic. Explain to me, how by you and me owning hand guns is suppose to make gang violence and bank robberies etc.... cease.
You mind explaining then to everyone here using that brilliant wisdom of yours why D.C.'s murder by gun rate increased every single year save one, of the 36 year gun ban?
Looks like...you're wrong, less guns does NOT equal less crime.
And it's a simple reason why.
A criminal by definition, DOESN'T CARE ABOUT LAWS. But they do understand that an unarmed person is an easy target, that they understand. Why can't you?
Monterey725. You are an idiot! By me having a gun, I reduce the likelihood of a criminal having a successful break-in into my house. The odds go from a strong chance that he breaks in, does a violent crime to me, and/or my family, and goes about his business...to... he breaks in, and receives 2 rounds of 40S&W to the chest and one to the face. He does not violate me, or my family, he does not steal my property and he does not walk away.
And the first amendment needs to be modified to fit the rights of people on the internet, the radio and the TV because hey man, they didn't have those in 1776. The founding fathers meant what they said when they wrote "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"
black victims being killed by black criminals. I'd like to see the stats on crime victims and criminals. They would rather ban the guns instead protect their fellow citizens who are poor and in need.
This was a 5-4 decision. If the next president is a democrat and appoints more liberals, the next time this comes up for a vote may produce a different outcome.
The court got this right. I'm from Toronto and our mayor David Miller wants to ban handguns here. He's already succeded in getting two gun clubs to move out of the city. He's thinks these measures will stop gun violence on the street. Not only is he wrong he's stupid.
Because the American people dont know how to read?Weve always known what the Second Amend. ment,only when lawyers and politicians got involved was there ever a question as to our rights,I hope that this will finally put an end to the question.
This has been flagged as spam show
oh silly anti gun people-don't you know your time is near. soon you shall be utterly defeated, utterly disgraced & utterly despised. the courts hate you. the legislatures hate you. the president & all the governors hate you. the only thing you have accomplished is delivering house & senate seats to the republicans. such silly little fools. don't you know that you were used. your opponents wanted you to campaign for gun control because your campaigning does nothing but promote gun ownership :)
XQ55QX 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
only the uneducated people say guns are dangerous. All people who are against handguns should watch their wifes being raped by some nut case criminal. Lets see if they change their mind
Redcaster916 1 year ago
Let's ban all the guns, and have military+police check points all over the country. Then, we can truely live in a SAFE AND SECURE society.
He101A 1 year ago
@He101A
Yeah because those same forces were so good at stoping the prohibition of Alcohol and by banning all guns only law breakers i.e. criminals and the police will have guns. So bassically unless the police are right at your door to protect you any criminal can go in. I agree that there needs to be limits, History Checks and Restrictions but all that is to prevent criminals from getting guns, NOT law abidding citizens (who are the only ones who follow gun laws).
Greginda11 1 year ago
Washington, D.C., a handgun ban went into effect during 1977, and after 29 years of the ban D.C.'s murder rates have ranked second among the 50 largest cities for 15 years.
President Obama's gun control policies are ineffective. In almost every case where handgun bans have been implemented, murder rates have risen. With overwhelming evidence the question must now be asked, why ignore the facts any longer?
why760nitro 2 years ago 2
answer the question PERVERT.
do you fuck kids?
TexWhatever 3 years ago
so answer the question PERVERT!
do you fuck kids?
TexWhatever 3 years ago
Why do they need a complete outlawing of guns?
TO CONTROL PEOPLE AND NOT LETTING THEM THE SLIGHTEST CHANCE TO REVOLT, FOR EXAMPLE WHEN PRIVATE PROPERTY WILL BE ABOLISHED!
How will they be able to ban all firearms?
THEY NEED PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING AND EVEN DEMANDING IT, THEY NEED A GOOD EXCUSE!
What would be the single best excuse for it by far? You don't know? C'mon ..
THE ASSASSINATION OF OUR BELOVED PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA BY WHITE, SUPREMACIST RACISTS !
Who would not accept such an excuse?
HailTheWhiteRace 3 years ago
Score one for the values of freedom and liberty over the values of marxism.
mainestategop 3 years ago 2
INVESTIGATE 9-11
BushBlewUpTwinTowers 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MSG ME ON MSN MESSENGR !!! ID IS jane22fallim bored and need someone 2 talk 2 Q
Pigie50 3 years ago
So why are American gun owners sitting this election out? Do they think this Supreme Court decision is going to protect them against Obama and Biden, with a Democrat Congress?
Obama has already promised the Brady group that he will "continue their fight as President," and Biden has already introduced S.2237 to renew the Clinton semi-auto ban, with even tighter restrictions on semi-auto pistols.
If we sit on our asses for this election, we'll get a screwing - that we'll deserve!
Get involved.
MsgtSpook 3 years ago
If Obama makes it to office and tries to restrict my Bill of Rights, they can come get them. I will shoot at any government official trying to disarm me. There should be not doubt at all about the nature of the 2nd Amd, just look at Lexington and Concord in the Rev. War. Individual citizens with personally owned firearms stood up against a tyranical government. That's all the proof you need right there, you can't take down a corrupt gov't if the gov't only has the guns. No self defence either!
armormaster 3 years ago 2
Well he's in office now...No ifs any more.
Chin9y8302 2 years ago
A lot's happened since then. I still have my firearms and I won't give them up. In my opinion the Bill of Rights, especially the 2nd Amendment, is one of the few things still keeping this country at the roots of what it is. The times may change, but the Bill of Rights, our heritage, the God-given right to life (and the preservation of it), and the spirit of the people are what keeps America what it is.
armormaster 2 years ago
This is a quote I saw on you tube. Don't remember where....
If someone breaks into your home and your confronted by them you have 2 choices.
1) Draw a firearm and try to defend yourself.
2) Call the cops. Now remember there is a 100% chance they WILL come. And they will take a picture of your dead body.
Donaticus 3 years ago 3
the day they take our guns, you can burn the Constitution. Remember this, SLAVES didnt have a right to bear arms. Read that again! SLAVES did not have a RIGHT to bear arms!
vdubs4life1964 3 years ago 2
true...people have to see this issue more than just street violence..were talking about a whole government being able to obtain ABSOLUTE control with no real resistance from its people....SLAVES
kappa27 3 years ago
"You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a a kind word alone".... Al Capone
A man who dies as a result of pointing a gun at me has merely succumbed to an occupational hazard of being a thug! Vince Lightning. Biker
VincentLightningMC 3 years ago
suck on that liberals!!!!
mallon42 3 years ago
"Arms in the hands of citizens (may) be used at individual discretion...in private self defence." John Adams
"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson
"Americans possess the advantage of being armed." James Madison (the guy that actually wrote the second amendment and Bill of Rights).
If those quotes don't define the true meaning of the second amendment as our founding fathers intended, I don't know what does.
tuckamania76 3 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
TO ALL LIBERAL FAGS: 6/26/2008 The day that the DC gun ban was struck down and the real definiton of the 2nd amendment was defined!
Mark it down bitches! The days of your "follow the popular opinion" and "try to be European" fagness are over!
LET FREEDOM RING! (a.k.a. fuck liberals)
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago 4
"A gun in the hands of a bad man is a very dangerous thing. A gun in the hands of a good person is no danger to anyone except the bad guys". Charlton Heston
VincentLightningMC 3 years ago 2
exacto!
lafamatj 3 years ago
Feel strongly about your right to Open Carry?
Is your right to free speech ok as long as you cover your mouth?
Please sign the Florida Petition to Open Carry, go to flopencarry . com and join us at opencarry . org
You can also sign the Texas Petition to Open Carry at petitiononline . com / texasoc / petition . html
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago 6
Statistics Sources:
Center for Disease Control, WISQARS compiler, 2005
Department of Justice-Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2005
peckerwood321 3 years ago
You're not actually trying to teach him something are you?
The dude's Librium prescription ran out and he's here filling time waiting on it.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
There is truth in what you say...in that those that cannot learn cannot be taught.
But as I said before to Davy, "others are reading"
;)
peckerwood321 3 years ago
Carry on : )
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
The point here is that legislative efforts on the part of reps is done on the basis that statistical trends and case file analyses would determine the direction that the writers of said legislation should take.
If a trend cannot be mapped to determine causality then the legislation's wording would end up more and more vague with each successive writ.
This is a major reason why blanket legislation should never be used to counter such anomalies; they usually end up affecting unrelated parties.
peckerwood321 3 years ago
The reason why I call it statistically insignificant in light of the other more prevalent stats is simple. The larger the occurrences the easier it becomes to plot trends and thusly reveal causative determinations through case file studies.
If out of 79 children there are at least 30 different reasons or activities that lead to the accidental death then it becomes impossible to plot a trend to predict furthered future causes.
As the reasons go down the trend can be mapped more effectively.
peckerwood321 3 years ago
peckerwood321 3 years ago
One thing I learned NOT TO DO -- depend on just what "MAN" says. Though I respect your position, that's just not good enough necessarily -- Fact. When people learn to verbally communicate you'll be better off. This stone aged mentality you're constantly promoting is tiresome. I knew there was possibly a hidden message from all those crazy, dignified cave man commercials -- y'all missin' what you'd call the good old days (smile)!
Singing: "Everywhere I gooooooo..." -- hehe
twilightfun 3 years ago
"The difference between the potential scenarios is that..."
That's what YOU say! You keep bringing up stats like...they matter on ONE HAND and NOT on the other!. It's NOT an anomaly that MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT victims of guns. Go ahead, walk up to your everyday person and ask them have they been robbed at gunpoint. Like I said, you got your wish, but that doesn't change the fact it's opined ya "DON'T NEED" guns. Rates can go up and down at any time of the year, in ANY year - whether guns or not.
twilightfun 3 years ago
"On the other hand...it is not projection to assume that you could get robbed or shot by a violent offender, quite simply because it is something that does occur and can be measured to provide a trend analysis."
On the other hand shyt! Don't sit up and say that the other things DON'T happen; I'm not just pulling it out my ass. You do have my point, though THAT ALL the things CAN CONTINUE TO happen...from BOTH sides. Yes, there is a difference (smile).
Thank you.
twilightfun 3 years ago
The difference between the potential scenarios is that robberies, rapes, murders, assaults with firearms are not statistical anomalies.
Their occurrences can be noted and trend analyses can be plotted to reflect future trend patterns based on social responses and conditions within said communities and localities.
Your examples cannot be plotted simply because they are statistically insignificant due to the low sample size. Any high school grade 12 mathematics class would have revealed this.
peckerwood321 3 years ago
The puerility of your response is reflected in the desire to create any type of legislative effect towards the rest of the public that was neither involved in the anomalies, nor the cause of their statistical insignificant existence.
This type of residually emotional directive is exactly what has brought Washington DC to this point in the first place. You would do well to remember that legislation based on emotion has never been well thought through.
The DC gun ban is an example of the same
peckerwood321 3 years ago
"...It is not a conscious action."
Well, wake up then! Seriously though, listen, you NEVER read where I said you'd DEFINITELY do a terrible thing, so let's get THAT much straight. Again, anyone can be read as such, yet ya STILL projected that emphasis the way of moi. Again -- why so?
Please, feel free to join us again on our next edition of "Selective Psychoanalysis with Peckerwood's Neighborhood" -- hehe.
twilightfun 3 years ago
The posts in question related to your immediate fears that:
a) a mad toddler would shoot you
b) your neighbour would shoot you
c) someone defending their life or property would choose to shoot you
Your assumptions...all negative emotion based responses to improbable scenarios.
On the other hand...it is not projection to assume that you could get robbed or shot by a violent offender, quite simply because it is something that does occur and can be measured to provide a trend analysis.
peckerwood321 3 years ago
Of course the reason why I say "you" in the above examples is because that the examples you provided came from your brain...and you provided to case file presentation to the contrary to remove yourself from the examples given.
This type of irrationality is repeated when someone suggests that their neighbours would kill them with a gun...and the question is asked of them "why their neighbour would want to kill them in the first place".
Firearms are not causative factors in murder
peckerwood321 3 years ago
The previous post should read: "and you provided No case file presentation"...spell check.
peckerwood321 3 years ago
One out of five people have some degree of mental illness in the United States-and they all own guns. SWEET!
WinterHaven 3 years ago
The CDC has just come out with some significant statistics that in 2005, a
whopping 55% of DEATHS BY GUN SHOT WOUNDS were self inflicted. The US Supreme Court just ruled that any kind of gun control is a no-no. i believe the USA is encoraging people to commit suicide. We have a very sucky economy and people are going to get very depressed over losing their job and home. And there is a GUN in the house. Thank you NRA for decreasing the population. Movie Soylent Green is finally coming true.
WinterHaven 3 years ago
Here in Canada after our gun registration and background checks, our gun suicides went down...but overall suicides continue to rise.
What this means is that more people committed suicide after registration...and they simply chose other means to do so.
The Coalition for Gun Control calls this a success; translation = "it is OK to commit suicide, just so long as you don't use a gun"
peckerwood321 3 years ago
Twilightfun...what you are doing is called projection.
Projection is where a person harbors negative emotions about a certain subject/object and thusly feels subconsciously guilty about those emotions.
To rid oneself of these feelings of guilt, they "project" them onto anyone else who happens to be a proponent of the certain item that was the original target of the felt guilt.
In truth the evil intentions you speak of are inside you...not the gun owners.
They are your thoughts. :)
peckerwood321 3 years ago
"Twilightfun...what you are doing is called projection."
Well gee! We're all projectionists then, depending IF you're calling things negative OR not! (shrugs)
Hell! The intentions don't sometimes bother us anyway, not as much the result from some action (wink). I don't think anyone'd care about a mad toddler hitting them as much as they would about IF that hit comes directly from a loaded gun in that same kid's hand that just happened to be unlocked (smile).
twilightfun 3 years ago
The negativity does not relate in accordance as to whether the opinion is in, or out, of favor in regards to the object in question.
The negativity in question relates directly to personal EMOTIONS in reflecting what the "projector" subconsciously wishes to do with said object.
The "projector" harbors guilt over these negative EMOTIONS...and then to rid the guilt simply PROJECTS them onto anyone or anything related to the original object in question.
It is not a conscious action.
peckerwood321 3 years ago
"You can call it an opinion, I'll call it a fact."
So? It's a fact that your OPINION is it's best called a fact; my opinion is I don't need to have a problem with that -- just don't CHOOSE to shoot an innocent me, or any OTHER non-crime committing person, with your "right" now to do so. Thanks (smile).
THE END
twilightfun 3 years ago
If a man dies as a result of pointing a gun at me, then he has merely succembed to an occupational hazard of being a thug!
Folks remember: There is always free cheese in a moustrap!
Ask not if you are proud of your Country; Ask if your Country is proud of you!
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. H.L. Mencken.
VincentLightningMC 3 years ago
For all you're trying to say, as a matter of fact, we'd all have been born with bones in our hands at birth. GTFOH -- LoL!
twilightfun 3 years ago
It is a right! It is a choice whether or not to exercise that right.
Ataxicabdriver 3 years ago
"Man's right to keep and bear arms is innate. The constitution merely confirms this."
Wrong! It's a CHOICE to keep and bear arms, my friend, whether the constitution says you can "rightfully" do that under law, or not, is another.
twilightfun 3 years ago
I'm not going to let anybody make that choice for me.
Ataxicabdriver 3 years ago
"It is a right! It is a choice whether or not to exercise that right."
Ah, but since ya wanna get technical wit' it, it is ALSO an opinion it is right to "Call" it a right, or wrong for that matter, that you exercise choice to (wink). See, you don't come in this world with that stuff, buddy. And frankly, only 'cause the LAW says do your parents HAVE TO DO MORE for you than just kill your ass off the bat, if they...chose to. Remember that -- hehe.
twilightfun 3 years ago
You can call it an opinion, I'll call it a fact.
Ataxicabdriver 3 years ago
Man's right to keep and bear arms is innate. The constitution merely confirms this.
Ataxicabdriver 3 years ago
I just want to reiterate what I said about blacks killing blacks mainly in some of these cities with high crime rates. I'm not trying to disparage our black citizens. I'm bringing up a point that the government does not want to address the sub standard conditions that exist in many of the black ghettos throughout various cities in the U.S.
That's a harder situation for us as a society to deal with so it is much better to bring up an escape goat. that's nothing new. They need our help.
wait887 3 years ago
I never said it's not your right 2 have 'em. No, no, no! There's no argument against the right 2 bare arms, so I won't attempt 2 sideline any of this with th@. I said all this 2 stress on logistics behind PREFERENCES not 2. Respecting we don't all THINK so, I just feel it's part historical 4 "humans" 2 HELP put themselves "in position" for BAD shyt 2 kick off. Indeed, the right IS YOURS, no problem there. I just disagree th@ it's undeniably so good, though I can accept the end decision, no prob.
twilightfun 3 years ago
"It is the fact that crime will always..."
Yeah, it kinda sounds like abortion debate -- people're gonna do it illegally if they can't have it THEIR way, when it's against the law -- true. So they don't mind contributing to the harm done potentially, as long as someone else can be blamed, which some call an excuse -- but oh well (shrugs).
twilightfun 3 years ago
"It is better to have it and not need it than need it than not have it."
Cool ya feel that way. We all don't agree(shrugs). What's so bad about NOT having it when the chances are still there you'll get killed either way? -- push it however ya want, the chance is...still there. So you don't have to raise chances of ANYONE getting harmed because ya chose to share in potentials to raise those same chances.
twilightfun 3 years ago
"Lets ban cars"
How many TIMES you seen people crying about having a car to DEFEND themselves against potentials of violence? Wtf? LoL!
twilightfun 3 years ago
Never - the crying doesn't start until the facists start taking them away. Get the "left" to start confiscating cars and you will hear some crying. And it would be legally more feasible too... as cars are a priveledge, not a right enshrined in the constitution and affirmed by the Supreme Court.
And yes, cars present an infinitely greater public health risk and do guns.
unregisteruser 3 years ago
"That wild wild west bullshit is..."
That type talk don't change when those hot balls in your ass. Oh gee, oops! Ya had a gun but ya weren't as crafty AS that crook. ANYWAY. Pssst -- people FIND ways.
"Fact is the majority of states in this country allow..."
Crime would be SO FAR down EVERYWHERE, though it isn't. You hear that a person carryin' these guns you support actually kill MOST attackers, WHILE the crimes still goin' on? Yep! People STILL get robbed, killed, raped and what not.
twilightfun 3 years ago
It is the fact that crime will always go on and the police is under no obligation to protect us that we have to defend ourselves. You should watch John Stossle's interview with prisoners who said they are more afraid of people with guns than they are police. The prisoners said they don't get their guns at shops. They get it from illegal dealers just like illegal drug dealers that the war on drugs was never able to stop.
sariwat1 3 years ago
"That type talk don't change when those hot balls in your ass. Oh gee, oops! Ya had a gun but ya weren't as crafty AS that crook. ANYWAY. Pssst -- people FIND ways."
You can start speaking in plain English anytime ya like. Because that shit doesn't make any sense.
Then why in every single place guns were banned, crime with guns has risen.
That is a fact, whether you like it or not.
"People still get robbed, killed and raped."
Yea the ones who don't carry or own guns.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
"Tell that to women who are the targets of raping..."
Oh, you mean the SAME one who ends up hitting another INNOCENT PERSON instead of the attempting rapist?
"You act is if people with guns are walking around patrolling..."
Uh -- they are in fact. That's the whole purpose they carry the gun -- all in the "perception from the FACT" they would carry 'em (wink). Keep that shyt IN YO' HOME,with no choice of automatic whatsoever!
twilightfun 3 years ago
no choice of automatic weapon? you may not know this but people do have automatic weapons in their possession. All it takes is a class 3 license and permission from the sheriff. As far as innocen tbystander, I can say the same thing about cars. YOu never know when one will swerve to hit you on the side walk. You also never know whether that was intentional as the driver gets out of the car and takes your wallet and drives away. Lets ban cars
sariwat1 3 years ago
Provide the link to the last woman who when about to get raped in attempting to shoot her attacker...shot someone else. Women get raped every day, should be easy to find yes?
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
"You act is if people with guns are walking around patrolling..."
Uh -- they are in fact. That's the whole purpose they carry the gun -- all in the "perception from the FACT" they would carry 'em (wink).
So, the reason I carry a gun is "all in the "perception from the FACT" they would carry 'em (wink)"
Dude, I have no fucking idea what that even means. You may want to consider staying away from drugs son. If I wanted to patrol streets with a gun, I'd be a cop.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
"Why do you feel the need to take away his means of defense?"
And -- uh -- HOW MAN times did ya say he HAD TO use it again already? (smile)
twilightfun 3 years ago
It is better to have it and not need it than need it than not have it. Since conceal carry was permitted in many many states, the crime did not go up as some people would portray more highway shooting and blood on the streets everywhere. It didn't happen. Why should our rights be limited based on fear which is only a feeling. I may feel unsafe crossing the street. The more cars there are, the more chanse I may get hit. Ban cars...
sariwat1 3 years ago
righto supreme court, it's about time!! bears need to be armed!!!
dsgspm 3 years ago 2
Live in Florida?
Sign the petition for open carry.
flopencarry . com
Live in Texas?
petitiononline . com / texasoc / petition . html
These two states are two of only six states in the US that do not allow some form of open carry.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
Ah well, I just hope neither my family members nor I get hit while minding our business & peacefully trying 2 live our lives. More guns now will tend to make that "more likely." As if things weren't interesting enough, this seems just another added excuse on how not 2 practice more effective verbal communication. And being as though violence is not of color, people just again said "Fuck what you mean N the depth of your dream, Dr. King"; specifically 'cause some don't believe N its possiblily.
twilightfun 3 years ago
Twilight, You are not making sense or I am not understanding.
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago 3
"Twilight, You are not making sense or I am not understanding."
^^^ English 101 then, my friend. Just let it be both and call it your life. I know I did (wink + smile). Thanks.
twilightfun 3 years ago
Seriously, DavyCrockett2, the point I was making in my initial post was that, whether we get shot or not, more guns means greater "chance" the possibility exists to actually be shot by a gun. Just because U don't KNOW folks who've been does not mean more are better, though I'm glad the types and places for them are restricted to DC homes. The love 4 having guns, I feel, though intended as a positive, is the negative attempt at the easy way out.
Eye 4 eye, N the end, means no eyes 4 anyone.
twilightfun 3 years ago
The "belief" that more guns equals more death by guns is (and the pun is intended) dead wrong.
This isn't about an eye for an eye at all.
It's about the sanctity of life, the right of the people to protect themselves against those who would seek to take away their life.
If your house was invaded by gun toting murderers would you want a gun then?
If you were held up on the street by the same, would you want a gun then?
If we were invaded by a foreign enemy, would you want a gun then?
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago 3
Look at the statistics. There has NEVER been an innocent bystander who got shot by someone who was lawfully carrying a firearm. Moreover, this ruling only pertains to guns in the home.
Just watch, the crime rate will drop. How do I know this? Because the crime rate shot up in the year after the ban went into effect.
[By the way, the NAACP and the KKK agree that black people shouldn't own guns ---- and Dr. King applied for a gun permit and was denied because of his skin color.]
IsntItWeThePeople 3 years ago 3
True, the NAACP says they don't feel Blacks SHOULD HAVE guns. But since when are we all honestly to believe they are truly for equality, just off THAT stance alone? LoL! Please! The funny thing about your mentioning Dr. King -- well, he could've gotten an illegal gun, my friend, but he was much BIGGER THAN THAT; it doesn't matter that IT WASN'T EVEN HIS FAULT he was denied. See, the right to carry was not extended to ALL PEOPLE then anyway, in case ya need more info 'bout Blacks.
Thank you.
twilightfun 3 years ago
So you are agree with me -- gun laws make sure that those who would obey the law can't get guns. And it wasn't his fault that he was denyed, just like it wasn't Heller's fault that he was denyed his right because he lived in DC.
And the right to carry still isn't extended to all people [but maybe this rulling will change that]
IsntItWeThePeople 3 years ago 3
NO! Previous gun law N DC took it out of question whether it's even necessary 2 go through trying 2 figure WHO "MIGHT" OBEY the law -- let's get 2 the point. It's like control over a "virus," by stomping it out 2 the greatest extent while also working 2 improve treatment needed (the LAW did that). By the way, I never said the right "SHOULD BE" extended to all people. You tryin' to hint you like underage drinking or something?
twilightfun 3 years ago
What are you trying to say? You just responded to a logical argument with a nonsecical rant.
The fact is that why should we take tips on how to fight crime from areas where crime is so out of control?
jmangle 3 years ago 2
"The fact is that why should we take tips on how to fight crime from areas where crime is so out of control?"
I'm sayin' -- beat your kids asses since they're out of control! You shouldn't need a gun for 'em. After all, that's WHERE the guns are for -- HOME protection. You got NO excuse walkin' up and down the streets like you're the deputy, wanna-be vigilante. Bronson already stole the show in Deathwish. Get over yourself!
twilightfun 3 years ago
It's not my kids who are out of control, [and I wouldn't use my guns to keep the offspring in line.]
And if we don't protect ourselves on the streets, who will? The police [laugh] --- have a look at Katrina, or the LA riots, there were no cops to be seen [except for the metallic kind].
Seems like we should be doing more to keep repeat offenders off the street rather than keeping law abiding citizens from being able to get firearms.
jmangle 3 years ago 2
Don't let twilightfun get under your skin... his era of Nazi style gun control is comming to an end. One of the suburbs of Chicago has already canceled their ban since the ruling.
The question is, how will he/she explain why the crime rate dropped following the ruling? [Harder to mug someone who can shoot you for your troubles.]
[PS, google "nazi gun control act of 1938, because that's what these liberal pansies are asking for]
obamagoddamnamerica 3 years ago 2
"Seems like we should be doing more to keep repeat offenders..."
They go hand in hand. That's the point. Thank you. Everybody does not need to be walking around (again) like we're in the Wild, Wild west. The police handle MOST of it effectively. Sure, it's not ALL out of question; still, better control is through trusting law enforcement instead of making excuses to show how bad we are, increasing fear. It's like the BAD guys aren't bad enough already (sarcasm).
twilightfun 3 years ago
LOL, someone has been watching too many westerns. The "Wild West" has some of the lowest crime rates in history, and often in areas where there was little or no police presence.
If guns caused crime, then why haven't I ever seen a shooting at a gun show or at a gun range?
But yeah, good job trading your civil rights for an illusion of safety.
As they say, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
FreeMilitia 3 years ago
Dude, you're one of the ones who wanted that bull! I was happy already -- LoL! You talk about giving away rights? I was okay, so there was nothing I was "giving up." Perception is key, my friend. You feel like a target, you'll be on defense, sort of like a crooked Congress person hiding behind security. See, but I don't have to watch MY BACK like "dat."
twilightfun 3 years ago
Hummm, so if you feel that you will never need protection from anything in your life, then why do we even have police?
I don't feel like a target at all, and being 6'4" I don't think that a mugger would really want to try and make me one, but my 86 year old grandfather might be a target, so he carries a 357 revolver. Why do you feel the need to take away his means of defense?
FreeMilitia 3 years ago
That wild wild west bullshit is old, outdated and foolish.
Fact is the majority of states in this country allow it's citizens to carry hand guns. It is the MINORITY that do not.
So just how do you explain the lack of the "wild wild west" scenario you paint?
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
Tell that to women who are the targets of raping murderers OUTSIDE the home.
You act is if people with guns are walking around patrolling the streets like their some sort of mythic hero. I got news for ya, that's all just in YOUR head.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
Todays ruling by the Supreme COurt makes it clear that a right'of the people'is affirmed for all citizens and makes it clear that laws which ban the possesion of firearms, or make it impossible thru regulation for citizens to excercise their right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional.
AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY
AN UNARMED SOCIETY IS A POLICE STATE
A DISARMED SOCIETY IS A TYRANNY!
Thank God and Justice Scalia the 2nd Amendment is still alive!
VincentLightningMC 3 years ago 4
I say we take Michael Moore and his anti-American fat ass and drop him onto the streets of Compton and see if he still believes his own bullshit!
thunderflash82 3 years ago 3
In the six year ban on guns in England, their murder by gun rate has quadrupled that of the US.
Wah happoned???
Less guns is supposed to mean less crime...I just don't understand what's going on.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
If you have to worry about getting shot by some yahoo that might be your victim...you might be less inclined to rob them.
If you are a criminal anyway, you aren't going to care about breaking the law against carrying a firearm...and if you assume that your victim is going to be law-abiding, you don't have to worry about getting killed when you are killing them.
SCE2AUX 3 years ago
PRECH ON Balck Magic, PREACH ON!!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
LOL
Thank You : )
Before I forget, if anyone is a citizen of the state of Florida, please sign the petition for open carry. We are one of only six states left that do not allow open carry.
flopencarry . com
I developed the petition, and another member made it up.
opencarry . org
Go to the Florida forum section in that forum. It's really starting to take off!!!
Live in Texas?
petitiononline . com / texasoc / petition . html
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
Yes I live in Texas. Already signed it my negro!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
Excellent, the Texas petition is just rockin'
I'll tell ya, if Texas does it, they will gain a resident. Me.
Beatiful women, huge deer and open carry?
I'm there.
If neither does it, I will be relocating to a Gold Star open carry state.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
HELL YEAH! We'll pass it though, I'm sure. You know your boy here is going to get it!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
We need to remember, it doesn't matter how they vote. This is our country "We the people" own this land. If they try to take freedom from us we have the right to remove them & the tree of liberty will grow!
eekdog2005 3 years ago
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" Noah Webster
"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason
eekdog2005 3 years ago
Yup but in order to keep this phrase true "constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops" we need to be allowed the same luxuary as the regular troops. I mean anti-tank, anti-personnel, anti aircraft. I have a pretty easy solution. The state militia or national guard is controlled by the civilian and they can have all the weapons needed to defend the state. They do not answer to federal or state government and only answer to the civilian population.
sariwat1 3 years ago
If youre a psycho, and you wanna blow someones head off, I dont think a law saying that you cant own guns is gonna stop you. So making them illegal, makes the psycho more secure about what hes doing, cuz he knows that the victims wont have any guns to defend themselves. Banning guns is almost as if that piece of metal has more consciousness than the human mind itself. Someone who wants to go trigger happy MIGHT think twice if he knows who hes gonna shoot has a gun as well.
Nwildchild 3 years ago
"If you wanna play in Texas, you gotta have a rifle in your hands!"
"That mace and tazer is nice, but not for a Lousianna man!"
"So oil up that gun, for fate and love and let's all dance!"
"If you're gonna play in Texas, you gotta have a rifle in your hands!"
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
Someone needs to begin impeachment proceedings against those 4 Supreme Court Judges who voted to limit the Constitution. I hope the NRA will start the ball rolling on impeachment for these subversive Judges.
nukedude2 3 years ago
I thought the same thing, how do you sit on one of the highest seats in this nation and vote nay on such a case as this?
High treason is what I call it, or depnding on age, possible senility. GTFO here.
It's sleazy, and shows a complete lack of insight into the founding of this country and what it represents.
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
5-4 decision. I think we came pretty close to starting a revolt in this country. The same liberal judges who voted to give the Guantanamo detainees Constitutional rights, same as a US citizen. The same judges who knocked down the death penalty for child rapists.
If I had the power I would remove 4 of these
Chief Justices.
nukedude2 3 years ago 2
"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."
— Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
azrael8585 3 years ago
Say it brother, say it.
Hey libs, we clear on the fucking comma now?
BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
Notice all the liberals are avoiding this video?
nukedude2 3 years ago
STAYING STRAPPED LIBERALS!!!
And there is NOTHING you can do about it!
FUCK YOU!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago 4
They're still crying, everybody buy stock in Kleenex!
truxton1 3 years ago 3
Does it really matter anymore, honestly man, the fucking titles?
liberal, conservative, leftwing rightwing, fuck that, its 2 different nuts in the same pile of shit. There is no difference anymore, its a fucking madhouse!
The whole idea of having something vs. something is to keep the simple human mind stimulated, it keeps the puppets dancing, this is basic psychology really.
Nwildchild 3 years ago
That would mean we could put a City Ordanance on other Amendments.Like OK,what if we diddnt like the 16th Amendment could we put a city ban on that and not pay taxes?They wouldn't like that.Or what if we put a city ordanance on women being able to vote?Rights are rights,and no statistics back up that it lowers crime,NONE.Just the opposite.Its about control freaks,that think they could take our power and when I say we I mean "WE THE PEOPLE".
nkyezlewis 3 years ago
read the comments posted by the liberal fascist news pukes. They all speak of the dc gun ban but never mention the actual gun crime rates. they jump to the CHICAGO gun crime rates. Such an obvious slant it makes me sick. I heard a funny quote the other day "snipe the left"
jbrazil2008 3 years ago
MOLON LABE
jbrazil2008 3 years ago
Obviously, looking at DC murder rates, public safety was severely damaged by this ban on self-defense, not increased. The only losers in this cases are the home invader criminals and fascist politicians who seek to control everyone. And Obama applauded the individual rights approach of this ruling!
I might even consider moving to DC now that the ridiculous ban has been thrown out. Get rid of the city income tax and it's a done deal.
regusted 3 years ago
Call me an idiot, but here's a question: does this mean that as long as I'm registered and all that, I can buy a gun? So, if I was a disturbed but legal individual, I could buy one?
This is NOT meant as an attack on one side or the other: it's an honest-to-goodness question, to settale a debate between me and a friend.
KatanaMasterBlood 3 years ago
They are working on legislation that tries to prevent you from buying if you have a mental history.
It is generally illegal if you have mental probelm, kind of like a criminal being limited.
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
Ah, I didn't understand that. So, i I interpert this correctly, one can carry guns but the states have rights to sort of limit this?
And what if someone has a hidden past of mental history, i.e. it was never diagnosed or discovered...wait, ignore that point. Sorry...
KatanaMasterBlood 3 years ago
LET FREEDOM RING!!
This is only the beginning liberals/carpetbaggers; only the beginning!
OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
good. honest business men can make some money, and the criminals that sell illegal guns will be out of business in D.C. and think about it more guns in D.C mean Bush is more likely to be shot :-)
allnamestaken00 3 years ago
There will always be illegal guns being sold to kids who cannot buy them legally.
KatanaMasterBlood 3 years ago
yup, and people will have guns to protect themselves from them.
allnamestaken00 3 years ago
Now people can. Before, they couldn't.
KatanaMasterBlood 3 years ago
the reason why the ban was passed was because ted kennedy didn't want to get shot after his loser mafia brothers all did so he passed this and now all a criminal does now is go into Virginia and Maryland for illegal guns because legals aren't allowed here
dodovining 3 years ago
It's a great day for pro-gunners. In the words of the great ric flair...WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
LamontDaGrizzly 3 years ago
I hope you gun loving conservatives have fun with your handguns because more bad comes out of handguns than good! (You and your malicious)
monterey725 3 years ago
Ted Kennedy killed more woman with his car than with my hand gun so how is it dangerous? I think we should ban mob connected playboy senators with brain tumors because that might prevent dead women found in swamps in abandoned cars.
dodovining 3 years ago
You being disrespectful is real cute. But anyway you have gang violence, teenagers committing suicide, kids finding loaded guns, etc... has caused a lot more death.
monterey725 3 years ago
Yea, gang violence, gangs, do not care about laws. Easy unarmed targets only helps their agenda.
Teenage suicide. Do they need a gun for that?
Think someone bent on suicide is going to say, awe screw it, I don't have a gun.
Kids finding loaded guns. A much higher percentage drown in pools, should we ban pools?
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
gang violence is committed with illegal firearms which I all for taking away. Teens would commit suicide some other way and if their really that messed up, where were the parents who are responsible for them?
Kids finding loaded guns? I know their parents are being completely irresponsible anyways and if every kid who grew up in a house with a firearm then shouldn't every NRA member, every gun owner in the world be dead right now but they arn't, are they?
dodovining 3 years ago
That amendment is unconstitutional. look up the videos on youtube about the dubious history of the 16th.
wait887 3 years ago
so I take it that the entire US Constitution is as well?
dodovining 3 years ago
"so I take it that the entire US Constitution is as well?"
Why would you want to call it that anyway?
twilightfun 3 years ago
The constitution needs to be rivised to the modern era. Now the crime rate is going to increase dramatically!
monterey725 3 years ago
yeaahhh now that people are going to burglarize homes LESS, because they don't know whether or not the people there have a gun? Smoke another one, dumbass!
shadowheart84 3 years ago
Hey Monterey725, DO YOUR RESEARCH! Go on wikipedia or Google. The DC Gun Ban made the crime rate SKYROCKET after 1976. FACT!
What part of........:
If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns
.......do you not understand?
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
People owing guns will not reduce the crime rate in America. We have gang violence and a very bad economy that has lead to high crime rates. People owing guns will not make those problems just go away, its simple logic. Explain to me, how by you and me owning hand guns is suppose to make gang violence and bank robberies etc.... cease.
monterey725 3 years ago
Oh really?
You mind explaining then to everyone here using that brilliant wisdom of yours why D.C.'s murder by gun rate increased every single year save one, of the 36 year gun ban?
Looks like...you're wrong, less guns does NOT equal less crime.
And it's a simple reason why.
A criminal by definition, DOESN'T CARE ABOUT LAWS. But they do understand that an unarmed person is an easy target, that they understand. Why can't you?
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
Monterey725. You are an idiot! By me having a gun, I reduce the likelihood of a criminal having a successful break-in into my house. The odds go from a strong chance that he breaks in, does a violent crime to me, and/or my family, and goes about his business...to... he breaks in, and receives 2 rounds of 40S&W to the chest and one to the face. He does not violate me, or my family, he does not steal my property and he does not walk away.
By all means, you stay unarmed and be a victim.
tic020343 3 years ago
And the first amendment needs to be modified to fit the rights of people on the internet, the radio and the TV because hey man, they didn't have those in 1776. The founding fathers meant what they said when they wrote "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"
dodovining 3 years ago
black victims being killed by black criminals. I'd like to see the stats on crime victims and criminals. They would rather ban the guns instead protect their fellow citizens who are poor and in need.
wait887 3 years ago
You said it!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
Sorry Liberals, you royally lost.
It sounds crazy but George W Bush saved our rights.
overpaidrockstar1 3 years ago
May we NEVER forget the men who fought at the Alamo. May we never forget those who died at Normandy. They DIED to give us these rights!
Like Reagan said, this thing freedom is not passed throught the bloodline or by stories; it must be fought for everyday.
Remember: Tyranny does not sleep, but it is up to good men to keep it in it's place!
LET FREEDOM RING!!!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
AMEN BROTHER!! A-FUCKING-MEN!
DavyCrockett2 3 years ago
hell yeah i knew that damn ban wouldnt last forever
punkmotherfucker3689 3 years ago
National parks next.
MidiPunk 3 years ago 2
That's OK, y760. You are welcome to come back and discuss the issues after you grow up.
TECHKLEC 3 years ago
Screw the "reasoning". No matter what, there will always be guns. How's that for rational thinking?
TECHKLEC 3 years ago
Yes, your'e right but, Il'l just be hanging out here remaining cocked and loaded, regardless!
TECHKLEC 3 years ago
This was a 5-4 decision. If the next president is a democrat and appoints more liberals, the next time this comes up for a vote may produce a different outcome.
TECHKLEC 3 years ago
True. It is scary it was so close....
gunut4FMJ 3 years ago
The court got this right. I'm from Toronto and our mayor David Miller wants to ban handguns here. He's already succeded in getting two gun clubs to move out of the city. He's thinks these measures will stop gun violence on the street. Not only is he wrong he's stupid.
cne08 3 years ago
ALL you stinking liberals, can KISS MY ASS. WE WON !!!!!!!
vidog1 3 years ago
Because the American people dont know how to read?Weve always known what the Second Amend. ment,only when lawyers and politicians got involved was there ever a question as to our rights,I hope that this will finally put an end to the question.
pidner 3 years ago
hell-yeah!!!!!!!!!!suck it obama
p15800 3 years ago
finally a supreme court ruling that makes sense
snoopster000 3 years ago 4
Happy days are here again, the skies are blue and clear again, happy days are here again : )
WOOOOOHOOOOOOO!!!
FzSBLACKMAGICK 3 years ago
Fascists love gun control.
StoogeWatcher 3 years ago 3
PARTY EVERYONE! Im going to be running up and down my backyard with my semi auto Ak47.
Good to see USA still has republicans who care.
I thougt the scum(liberals and democrats) were ruling America.
Maybe Mccain has a chance to win after all.
MCCAIN 08, because we dont want America looking like kenya.
ColbertNation88 3 years ago
mccain will not win and it is the republican party that is currently destroying the constitution.
*P.S. I am glad the 2nd amendment was unheld.
officialusa 3 years ago
sorry for the doublepost...
typo... I meant "upheld"
officialusa 3 years ago
let me rephrase that
white and no guns over blacks with guns.
:)
Mccain is better than being lead by a black.
ColbertNation88 3 years ago
racism is for the weakminded. Go upstairs and apologize to your parents.
officialusa 3 years ago
Considering over 73% of the murders in the USA are commited by non whites I would say that the Racism is justified.
ColbertNation88 3 years ago
that is a prejudice. Why do you need to exclude 99.9% of all other crime statistics to assume your perspective has any valid meaning.
90+ % of serial killers are white. Am I correct to assume you are one? Loser.
officialusa 3 years ago
Go on google and search PRISON RACE NUMBERS
first link is a gov website. Which shows in fact that 74% of all crimes in USA are commited by non whites even though 73% of the country is white.
But im sure you will say the US government is racist liers or some other excuse.
You only see what you want to see. No matter how much proof I provide.
ColbertNation88 3 years ago