Kinda like saying “I’m from the government and I am here to help”.

independent thinker, yeah, just like the oaths they take when they go inot office, they don’t mean a stinking thing!!!

Ain’t that the truth.

Evidence that our politicians are neither smart nor wise. Or they are evil and hiding something.

A smart person learns from his/her mistakes.
A wise person learns from other peoples mistakes
In both cases history must be remembered.

The constitution CAN be change. There is a process for that written into it. We can add AMENDMENTS. If we, the people decide that something in the constitution is out of date we can change it by amending it. We can even nullify an amendment if we discover we were stupid.

Unfortunately we have had presidents and legislators – and judges – that have abused the constitution for generations. So much so we’ve been lulled into acceptance. Even now we don’t seem to be doing much more than sitting at our computers and griping.

I’ve recently become active in the republican party. I’m a disabled senior but if I’m not doing enough, I’ll do more. And I’ll keep doing more until I make a difference.

Kinetic1

I meant the term “living Constitution” in the sense that the Founding Fathers created a document that can be amended. It can be adjusted and added to in view of things that they may have overlooked. That when they studied all the failed governments in history it was obvious, to them, that times change; so they created a map that can be altered by amendment or Constitutional Convention.

They framed it so that it could breathe new life into itself.It wasn’t written in stone like the Ten Commandments. They also made it very tough to change by those two processes. They were brilliant thinkers.

And it is notable that Mexico has very strict gun laws. Are they doing any good? I think not.

And why is Florida’s crime rate down 35-40% with stand your ground law and castle law as well as conceal carry law?
Because the criminals are afraid of the citizens…simple.

Good one 45, enjoyed it.

Thats right the clowns cant read the Arizona immigration law either.I does not matter who you are you get pulled over for a traffic infraction.What doe the officer as you ,thats right license a registration stupid.If you are an illegal alien you are supposley above everybody else in the country who is a citizen.

They are deciding on laws based on “emotion”. Therefore laws mean absolutely nothing to them. They can decide a case one way and an identical case the other way simply on what emotions they feel at the time. Laws were set up with the idea that EVERYONE must follow exactly what the law says so that one person can’t get an advantage over another.

I agree with SC on this one. They can read, they just have ulterior motives.

You should do a little more study.

An army, whether a permanent one or not, is a trained force meant to fight battles. A militia is a group of armed citizens who are NOT trained but are armed. When you try to insist that the Army or the National Guard takes the place of a militia, you are very wrong. England found that out during WWII. There were several cases where the militia was able to successfully defend the borders of England against invasion. Further the militia of France, even though France was under the military control of Germany, was able to do a lot to defeat the enemy.

You are trying to say that because we have an army we don’t need a militia. Our Founding Fathers were much more knowledgeable and intelligent than you are despite your carefully worded essay.

“The next issue is “the right of the people…” This wording, in most situations would be construed to mean the collective people,”

The Supreme Court, in cases on other subjects, has ruled that the phrase or term “the people” refers to individuals. In fact, in a ruling on something else the second amendment use of “the people” was specificaly mentioned along with other amendments as an example of refering to the individual.

A lesson in English grammar for kinetic1 and others.
Warning this is a long lesson.
http://old.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel051601.shtml

An amusing side note is that the argument that the 2nd restricts gun possession to those who are IN the militia fails to notice that all the people ARE the militia.

“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people…To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
George Mason, during Virginia’s ratification convention (1788).

vicki,
Thank you. This is a very interesting and informative article. While the opinions of the noted grammar experts is at odds with the opinions of many noted historical language experts, it does give me more information to consider and that is always welcome.

For now, I will continue to hold to my belief that both the gun rights and gun control factions read too much into the 2nd amendment, and that we should neither deny americans their right to own guns, nor give them free reign to own any and all firearms without some control over the most extreme.

All the control we need is felons cannot even look at a firearm much less posess one and the instant check (with no records kept) to insure a felon does not purchase a firearm legaly. All other gun control should be good grip and hit your intended target.

Give it up, Kinetic. The Liberals abandoned that approach a long time ago because it is so obviously bogus. If they meant that, they would have simply said “The right of the militia members to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”.

Another point I would like to make is the ridiculous idea that any government would need an amendment to protect the right of their military to bear arms.

We don’t need a law to tell us we have the right to bear arms.

To Independant Thinker: Felons don’t care about gun laws. All they have to do is go to the nearest meth trailer or crack house, and they can buy an 800 dollar semi-automatic firearm for 100 bucks. And if you catch those zombies when they’re hurting, you can get it for 20 bucks.

Jessica…………I know that that is why I said legally.

I am from Arkansas as well, proudly still live in west central Arkansas in fact. I was raised in south central Arkansas (about 35 miles north of the La. line) and things were much different down there. While crime was not as bad then as now you still locked the doors if you intended to be gone for more than a few minutes.

We once left the house to go to California for a few months hunting work when I was 13. We left May 1 and got back Nov 18th.

On the kitchen table were several notes that all basically said, “We came by but you were gone. See you later.”

Nothing in the house was disturbed. And we lived on a busy highway.

Where in the Ozarks were you raised?

My Grandparents lived about 50 miles south of the river in the Ouachita mountains and I do not remember their doors ever being locked when we visited.By the time my grandmother passed away in the 1990′s she locked her doors if she was going out of town for a few days but not if she was going to church or to town for groceries etc. Too bad we cannot get that part of the past back.

Don’t bury your heat, man. What good is a rifle under the ground when the sh*t hits the fan?

Hide spares for the possibility of abandoning your home. An emergency kit so to speak. There are a few of us who have done this and we have a destination figured out. We’ve done all this based on the idea that if certain things happen we’ll collectively move and meet in the never never…

DaveH, You are partially right, but it was the constitution that lost. Those who view the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms as synonyms, have now acquiesced to federal oversight of the right, within the States.

Have you ever noticed that humans never recognize History when they’re living it?

I notice it every day Jessica. We’re surrounded by people who either A) Want to strip us of our freedoms, or
B) Haven’t got a clue what’s happening.

When I say “we” I mean those of us who are armed and aware.
I mean Patriots.

Or rather a law that basically disarms you at the whim of a government. Wrong!

“Fire them all” I identify with as all I have ever been is a private citizen. “Fire them up” just sounds great though.

I don’t own a firearm. I don’t know if I will ever own one. I am not sure I would trust myself. If someone were to break into my house, I would be all too tempted to shoot to kill just because our legal system seems to favor the criminal all so much and make those of us living by the law into enemies of the people it seems. Unfortunately, another reason I don’t own a gun, is that when I shot one in the past, I may have had a good “pattern” back then but all of my shots were far off target. And, now, I probably wouldn’t have a good pattern of shots or anywhere near target….

You need to ‘Point’ shoot. An old gunfighter taught me when I was a kid. You point a pistol like you point your finger and you’ll always be close. You also squeeze the trigger rather than jerk it. You can’t aim in the dark anyway and most people won’t because they get excited. Learn to point and you’ll be alright.

Actually it is fairly hard to kill a person. People are a lot more resiliant than you would think. TV and movies have caused people to think a gun gives you instant power of lift and death. I know of some men who survived after being shot a dozen times. One recent man who passed away (he won the Congressional) had been wounded 14 times in one year alone! All you need to do is stop him. Generally one shot will do that unless he’s really high on some drug. Don’t be afraid to get a gun and protect yourself. Keep in mind that you have the God-given right to protect yourself and he doesn’t have the right to attack you.

I don’t think it’s a good idea to shoot in the dark. It may be somebody you love. Or worse, the police in this age of mistaken nazi-style drug raids.
They have remote controls now so you can turn on any light in the house which would give you quite an edge on the intruder who wasn’t expecting a sudden lighting.

The main thing to remember is that if your life is in immediate danger, and you’re under extreme duress, you aim for the center of mass. In other words the chest, the largest part of the body. Shoot him in the legs to slow him down? Doesn’t work, since he may be armed, too. Even the old west gunfighters had sense enough to know that much.

If you believe the constitution means what it says like the authors intended it is a lie. If on the otherhand you are an unabashed supporter of Obama and ever more government control of our lives she had a “new revelation” about its meaning.

That is true of today’s vets as well. The problem is that the people who refuse to fight are the ones trying to make laws to govern those of us who do.

How did he loose? Or maybe I should ask what did he loose?

45Cal – that is terrible, to even charge someone for protecting and defending themselves is unthinkable. What is wrong with society when we start giving rights to criminals? They have taken it upon themselves to violate and in many cases “even take anothers life” and for that they deserve to be heard? deserve a defense? deserve food, water and shelter?…ok maybe basic medical rights but I say, if we weren’t so soft and they did hard time, it just might deter others from testing the waters in criminal behavior and those that might think about “repeat offense”…We need to go back to the rock quarries, make them pay real consequences for such vile and evil abuse to another, they can scrub toilets, clean up ghettos, repay the victims with servitude, have just bread and water…it should not be pleasant or even decent…start sending a strong message to criminals and you will see crime go down…and execute murderes…take a life, lose yours…that’s the message that needs to go out to start instilling real fear into criminals and “would be criminals”…we are way too soft and you wonder why our prisons are overflowing! No one is really afraid of going to prison…that is just wrong!

One elderly farmer in England was beaten and robbed of his SS check seven months in a row the day after he received it by the same two men. The cops couldn’t (wouldn’t) stop it. He got a single barrel shotgun and shot the eighth time they showed up. Killed one and wounded the other.

The wounded man was given six months for assault and burglary. The farmer was sentenced to life in prison – the harshest sentence they have. Both men were about 35 – and both had more CONVICTIONS than years. The farmer came up for parole but the prosecutor argued that he was a clear and present danger to burglars and therefore needed to be kept in jail.

In another case, an 80+ year old woman was getting beaten and robbed of her check every month. She had her house wrapped in barbed wire to try to keep the thief out. The police made her take it down because some burglar might get scratched on it. (THEIR excuse, not mine!)

I worked for a short time – a VERY short time! – as a prison guard. 4 months. You would be shocked at the “rights” given prisoners by federal judges. We used to have a fed. judge here named William Wayne Justice. He finally died and I celebrated. He insisted that the prisoners can work – but only at work they want to do. They can refuse work if they wish. The worst punishment to give a prisoner if solitary confinement but only for 15 days. No more. And you can cut off their exercise and canteen privileges for a month. Sad, isn’t it?

I so don’t comprehend that mentality…it’s not even sane thinking…beat and attack a farmer? an eighty year old woman? and then get away with that evil low life behavior while the victims are made criminals for trying to feel safe or defend themselves from vermin! It’s tragic but I know it’s true…we are seeing it happen here…the canal crossing for illegals needs to be made safer so law breaking illegals don’t drown…gee what about just not breaking the law?

What about Arizona Citizens? The Government has signs posted that it is now unsafe to hike or ride ATV’s in the Wildlife Refuge area for “risk of being shot”…Americans are made to be the trespassers on their own soil while the Mexican Drug Cartel hold the once beautiful 3500 acres hostage for their drug smuggling and human trafficking…Gee what about kicking the trespassers off for breaking the law? Arrest for drug trafficking?

Americans are also made criminals just for not buying the Governments insurance whether they can afford it or not…buy or be fined or arrested! Is that morally right with this new Healthcare bill? It’s all just so wrong! The mentality of it all is just so evil and wrong…I mean, it’s so ridiculous you wonder if the powers that be are possesed and under a spell for such wayward thinking! Big Pharma drugs? the water? RFID chip implants making them do things right out of a sci-fi thriller? The type of thinking to embrace criminal behavior is mind boggling! I know…it’s the Kool-Aid! Oh those kinds of stories make me so sad and so teed off at the same time!

Outrageous isn’t it angel?

airangel__they’d be scared if we had, a Joe Aripaio(not sure of the spelling of his name) the sheriff in Arizona.
What gets me, There is the ten commandments God has given us, But OH, God forbid we use those, the idiot lawmakers today, think they have a better plan. There is right and wrong for a reason, so we KNOW THE DAMN DIFFERENCE!!_These criminals choose the wrong way of life and the innocent pay for it!__They can take this POLITICAL CORRECT CRAP AND SHOVE IT WHERE THE SUN DOESN’T SHINE, I’ll protect whats mine!

I read an article from the “Telegraph. UK” that said England had a violent crime rate of 2,000 per 100,000 population the rest of Europe was a little lower (in the 1,100-1,500 range) and the US rate of violent crime was about 450 per 100,000

You’re safe in a Police State…until you meet a Policeman.

Anthony, I live in Ariz. you can open carry here, and a new law goes into effect next month concealed carry no permit. I live at least 15 miles from any law enforcement. after my friend was murdered, I put a sign on our gate ” trespassers will be shot”. there will be no survivors. after the bastards came out to my gate at midnight and started shooting, they didn’t expect any return fire. I never go any where without a firearm, and I’m not giving up my guns to anyone, I’m taking a few with me if it comes to that.

Herein lies a better explanation from http://www.calgunlaws.com.
http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php/current-litigation/52/886.html

Monday’s ruling means that the Supreme Court’s June 2008 decision in Heller v. District of Columbia, in which the Court finally recognized that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, applies equally to all levels of government.

The Supreme Court did not actually rule on whether the Chicago ordinance being challenged, which makes legal ownership of handguns within the city virtually impossible, was unconstitutional. Instead, it remanded the case back to the lower courts to issue that ruling.

The McDonald decision does not mean that every state and local regulation of firearms will be struck down as unconstitutional, nor that any laws will be struck down overnight. Rather, the decision is a vehicle to bring legitimate strategic legal challenges to state and local laws before the lower level courts. These courts will have to define the scope of the Second Amendment right. Some questions that still need to be answered are: whether the right to keep amd bear arms extends beyond the home, whether prohibitions of certain commonly owned firearm are valid, whether certain low-level criminal convictions can result in the permanent deprivation of one’s Second Amendment rights etc. And litigation in the lower courts will be necessary to determine what level of scrutiny courts will apply in reviewing governmental infringements on the right to keep and bear arms.

The Supreme Court’s decision is a huge victory for law-abiding gun owners throughout the country. Although it is likely that many anti-gun politicians in California will not concede the victory easily, the momentum is on the side of law-abiding gun owners. The McDonald case is not the end of the fight, it is just the end of the beginning.

We, in California are now faced with these Feinstein backed zealots attempting to undermine and remove our “right to keep and bear arms” at every twist in the road and they are about to get approval passed for banning open carry of un-loaded weapons.

I never got my license to carry but I took the classes – however I got my first gun when I was eleven…I live 3 miles from Mexico, I am not giving up my gun. I live in the country, with my dogs, alone. I believe the old saying, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” I read somewhere in Fla. they were having troubles with break ins and thief – homes and cars – people got tired of it and started carrying guns. The trouble went down something like 60%. If we leave President Obama in office til 2012 – the man will totally destroyed the country. We will be socialist bordering Muslim with their sharia law firmly entrenched…

Here in Florida we have some of the best pro-Second Amendment laws in the country. Aside from the conceal/carry law, we have the Castle Law. It states that you have the legal right to bust a cap in anybody who invades your home with clearly malicious intent, and no subsequent lawsuit is valid. And we also have the Stand Your Ground law. It states that if you are on the street, and somebody tries to carjack you or otherwise comprimise your personal safety, you have the legal right to take him down (providing, of course, that you have a conceal/carry permit). And conceal/carry permits are almost ridiculously east to get. As long as you’re not a convicted felon, all you need is a 4-hour gun safety class and a 60 dollar fee. Then you can pack your heat in your car, purse or pocket, and the cops can’t mess with you about it.

Awesome…Common Sense enshrined in law. How beautifully simple.

Hemingway, who was a mercenary for about 30 years, was once asked by a reporter why he had risked his life fighting like that. Hemingway answered, “There are worse things than dying while fighting for freedom. And if you don’t fight, you will learn what every one of those things are!”

Unfortunately, we have a number of people who would rather be slaves than risk death. We call them liberals.

That guy is a dumbass, symptomatic of all that is wrong with california.

I know a real jerk!…You have to be proud of the people of Cali/SFO that chose to attend the town hall meeting…(not a lot which is sad) but the ones that did stood up for their rights…we need more of that…more people attending town halls and making themselves heard…letters and email don’t cut…needs to be in your face in person to our representatives then they can see and feel our wrath! Good for Cali…some hope for that state after all!

That clown Pete Stark must not be up for re-election this time around. Otherwise, he’d know better than to make such a complete fool of himself. What an arrogant jackass!

k1oik__and I tell you what else I find quite ridiculous, that thieves of a home invasion, have the right to counter sue if harmed! As For me, when they break in and invade a home, they’ve lost all rights, except a fair trial.

As far as I’m concerned if they enter my house and steal 50 cents they have set the value of their life to that amount. And I won’t mind collecting.

45caliber__I bought a sign a while back___it states

NO TRESPASSING, VIOLATERS WILL BE SHOT, SURVIVORS, SHOT AGAIN!__
NUFF SAID.

k1oik__and I tell you what else I find quite ridiculous, that thieves of a home invasion, have the right to counter sue if harmed!

No longer true in all states. Some have specificly exempted people defending their home from lawsuits. Too bad all states don’t do it.

NO TRESPASSING, VIOLATERS WILL BE SHOT, SURVIVORS, SHOT AGAIN!__
NUFF SAID.

Love that sign but have read of cases where posting similar signs have been used against the people. The claim is the sign shows intent to kill no matter what not just stop a home invasion. I am not disagreeing with you on the subject just pointing out a possible complication. Wouldn’t want you to give some piece of stinky stuff what he deserved and then have the sign used against you.

Oh, Angel-Wanna-Be, it’s so funny because you are warning people that, should they break into your house and get caught they will die, no matter what! I get the joke! A kid breaks in to steal your VCR, you catch him in the act and shoot him in the leg, and as he lays there, helpless, unarmed and in agonizing pain begging for mercy, you’ll murder him! It’s such a great joke.

Spoken like a true Christian.

INDPENDENT THINKER__If you peer in my kitchen window, you can plainly see the sign hanging, on my wall!__Mama’s not and idiot!.

She’s absolutely right to finish the kid off Kineticnutjob!
It’s called the darwin theory and it works.
TAT is how crime rates fall dramatically in short periods of time and do NOT return in a just society.
Don’t like it? Stay out of my living room.

Should read: THAT is how…

kinectic, or whatever you go by__first of all a KID ISN’T GETTING IN MY HOUSE WITH AN ALARM GOING OFF!__ AND SECONDLY, IF ANYONE MAKES IT PAST THE ALARM, THEY’LL DEAL WITH MY PIT BULL, THEN ME!__YOU IDIOTS ALWAYS HAVE TO GO WAAAAY FARTHER ON A SUBJECT, THAN IT WAS EVER INTENDED, I WOULD ASSUME, SIMPLY BECAUSE, YOU HAVE NOTHING MORE INTELLIGENT TO SAY,YOU JACKAZZ!!

Kinetic..there is such a thing as being accountable for your actions! There are consequences for being a “law breaker”…so better idea would be Don’t tresspass, don’t steal, don’t invade another’s property without permission…doesn’t matter what the crime, it’s a crime and a violation against another…you sound like the kid breaking and entering and then stealing is in the right! What’s wrong with You?

Angle-Wanna-Be’
I understand your concerns and fears. I have been the victim of a home invasion and I agree that it instills in us a fear that does not soon fade. So I am glade that you now have an alarm and a dog for protection. And I would never suggest that you should not have the right to protect your home and family, but you take things to far when you even joke about killing someone who survived your act of defense.

“As far as I’m concerned if they enter my house and steal 50 cents they have set the value of their life to that amount. And I won’t mind collecting” 45calibur

“NO TRESPASSING, VIOLATERS (sic) WILL BE SHOT, SURVIVORS, SHOT AGAIN!__
NUFF SAID.” Angle-wanna-be

45 discounts the value of a persons life because of a non-lethal act against his possessions. You find humor in telling potential thieves that they will die, even if they survive the first shot. And you contend that I take things too far? That I have nothing intelligent to say? These are the statements that make average folks question the sanity of “gun nuts.”

Kenetic:

You say that someone who simply takes an item isn’t threatening my life. WRONG! He is stealing part of it.

I sell part of my life to an employer to get money to buy whatever I want or need. If a criminal breaks into my house and takes it, I have lost that part of my life and must again sell part of my life, whether I want to or not, to replace what was stolen or destroyed.

I spend my life trying to help others and make a better world for all of us. The criminal spends his life trying to live free off the rest of us by stealing our lives. He destroys rather than builds. As such, he is a rogue. If you check any animal group will kill any rogues among their population if they can.

I will certainly kill anyone who breaks into my house. I was NOT joking about it.

Kenetic:

Oh, and I don’t discount the value of someone else’s life. As I said, he does that himself. Basically, because of his choices, his life is worthless to me, to society as a whole, and – in reality – to himself.

Angel:

Several years ago, an older couple (late fifties) had a knock on the door about 10 one night. The man answered, thinking it was his brother who had just left. He opened the door and found three young men wearing ski masks. One had a .22 rifle and immediately shot him.

As the other two ran away, he shot at the wife and missed as she ran down the hall to her bedroom. She closed the door and grabbed a gun. He opened the door and blasted away at her again. She shot back. The husband, who was only wounded, crawled to his chair to get a second gun and then to the hall. Between them they killed the attacker.

It turned out to be a 14 year old boy who had two friends staying over at his house. They thought it would be fun to rob someone.

His parents then sued the couple for killing the boy. His life was just starting; their lives were almost over. They shouldn’t have shot back at their son.

The way I look at it, their lives – even if they had lived only five minutes more – were worth far more than his life would ever be. Anyone who is willing to kill two innocent people for fun is totally useless on this planet and needs to be removed for the safety of all.

45caliber, thankfully the 95 robber was gone, by the time we got home. __Now heres another one for ya____We live in a semi rural wooded area.___Three years ago we had another incident, we had just gotten home from doing a DJ gig, it was around 3:20 in the morning. Our Daughter and Granddaughter were already asleep_ The old man and I, we’re just walking through the hallway to go to bed, when we heard, both the front door and the back door, being jimmied at the same time___Our dog went ballistic!___The old man took the dog and went to go outside,
I hollared at him, while calling the police, “you don’t have protection”, he said “yes I do, a pitbull!”__Once outside, He heard a couple people take off running down through my inlaws christmas trees,.___In the morning, he walked out through the trees, and found a hat and called the police again.___Later that morning, the old man and I were standing at the kitchen sink talking, and saw four teens one was a girl, run down the bank into the trees. The old man, Figuring these were the kids who tried to break in, and who also lost a hat, returned, trying to find the lost hat. The old man leashed the dog and out they went, he hid behind a large pine tree, and over heard one the kids say, “this is where I lost my hat, I know it”___with that, the old man and the dog walked out from behind the tree. They all took off, until the old man said “STOP or I’ll let the dog go”. All stopped and came back, but one. The old man said “you’ve got til the count of three to stop”__The last boy returned at two.__We took their names and called the police__To make the long story shorter, after that, the kids were arrested___but a red Mustang appeared and had been parked near, or in our driveway for almost two days. We called the police about it, and it just so happens one of the policemen, heard the call and was coming to our place anyway for signatures, and had to go around the car. The police stopped, and noticed the boy in the passenger seat, was one of the kids they arrested for our attempted breakin, and was also wanted in several other area breakins___His Father was driving and parked in our driveway to intimidate us, he was pissed off at us, for having his son arrested.___Now to any and all who think I’m kidding, or know better than me???__ I had my own Daughter arrested for stealing stuff out of my house to sell and my Fathers car, when she was on drugs, she’s solid clean today, 9 years!!______IT DOESN’T MATTER WHO IT IS, CRIME IS CRIME, what’s mine is mine, unless I lend it to you or give it away! Otherwise it’s stealing!!!___NUFF SAID

Angel:

What is sad is the Father wanting to intimidate you for getting his son arrested. Actually you didn’t; the son got himself arrested. I know similar stories. It explains why the kids decided to break in in the first place. They didn’t expect anyone to be able to do anything to them and besides, Dad would keep them out of trouble.

The funniest thing I’ve run into like that was in Kentucky. A boy raped a girl and was arrested for it. He came from a rich family. He spent the night at jail telling the cops how his rich dad was going to get him off. Shortly after dawn the girl’s two uncles showed up to pay his bail. The cops asked him if he wanted to get out on bail or confess to rape. He decided that the jail was much MUCH safer!! He plead guilty to the judge with her uncles sitting right behind him and got a fifteen year sentence. As far as I know, he’s still there.

45caliber, I’ll just bet that kid that raped that girl, felt safer in jail, than with her two uncles posting bail___The crime itself is serious, how the girls family dealt with it is GRAND!!!!!!!__I’m old school caliber, eye for and eye__You need something, ask and it’s yours, take it, or threaten me, you’ll deal with the consequences and I ain’t kiddin’ either!___God Bless

Kinetic’s reasoning is by definition insane and does not warrant a response.

Angel,
I saw a great bumpersticker the other day. It said ” Gun control means using both hands.”

Well, I guess I’m insane, but not so insane as to bother arguing any further with this group. Let me just leave you with a few thoughts;

1) I would never depend on a pistol in my home for defense. A shotgun is more dependable in a moment of panic, and the sound of it being cocked is enough to scare anyone.

2)I do not own anything that is worth more than a human life.

3)I would stop at nothing to defend myself or prevent my wife and children from being harmed.

Angel, I’m glad your child stole from you and not 45. You had enough love for your child to have her pay for her crime, and now she will have a chance at a good life. It sounds as if 45 would not have taken any chances on her recovery and would have ended any future she may have had.

Momof4, I have another sign, that Say’s
24 HOUR SURVELLANCE BY SMITH AND WESSON!__LOL

KINECTIC, Bottom line is bud, if you’ve broken in someone else’s home unlawfully, they have a right to protect themselves at all costs. Victims of unlawful intrusion, have no idea of the intent of these intruders. Whether or not they have a weapon or intend to do bodily harm, robbery or whatever._If you’ve broken into a house, you’ve sealed you own fate. and It’s called accountibility!__My Daughter is fine and now thank you,and a married working mother of two!__At that time, She needed to know who was boss in my home, what we’d tolerate, and it wasn’t her behavior or actions!___Tough Love folks__Stand up for yourselves and your kids!!!__I can’t promise tough Love always works and will have a positive outcome, but in our case it did!__Thankn Christ! Having her arrested and Running the risk of her never speaking to me again, was better, than, looking at her, in a casket, Think about it!__I Thank Christ every day!

I wonder if the politicians would defend themselves like us citizens have to, if they didn’t have their bodyguards protecting them. If they kill a perpetrator would they be held accountable like us if they killed someone? Whats good for the goose should be good for the gander. You think?

The problem with gun control, is that it will only control the law abiding citizens. It will not stop the gang members who are already armed with illegal guns like AK47′s Mac10′s and others. How nieve can people be to give up there right to bear arms?? Hasn’t anyone ever seen the “Tienamen Massacre” Beijing 1989? Do some research fool!!!!

While you’re researching that, take another look at the 2nd amendment. Study the meaning of the words, not just as we understand them, but as they were used at the time of their writing. The “original intent” was not an open invitation for every man, woman and child to arm themselves to the teeth.

The Bill of Rights was was appended to the Constitution in Dec. of 1791. By May of 1792, Congress had passed a uniform militia act that required “Each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia…[and] every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock” …”and shall appear, so armed, accoutered and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.”

One gun, one man, prepared to train and fight as a member of the States’ militia. These are the words of men concerned about the protection of their country. This is the act of a nation that does not have a standing army.

Justice Story, writing in the early 19th century wrote;
“And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.”

Could a man better describe the United States today? Is it not clear that distortion of this bill has lead, not to a well armed militia, ready to defend the nation from “sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers.”, but rather a nation in fear of each other?

William Rawle, U.S District Attorney of Pennsylvania (1791-?) was among the first to state that the 2nd amendment protected the people’s rights, as individuals to posses guns when he said;
“No clause could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general presence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”
However even he saw the potential for abuse.
“[a]n assemblage of persons with arms, for unlawful purpose, is an indictable offense, and even the carrying of arms abroad by a single individual, attended with circumstances giving just reason to fear that he purposes to make an unlawful use of them, would be sufficient cause to require him to give surety of the peace.”

Don’t get me wrong, I own 2 rifles and I’m not offering to hand them over. Had we dealt with this early on we might be able to live without fear of every punk kid on the block carrying a gun, but that’s just not realistic now. We have made a multi billion dollar industry out of arming criminals, and there’s no turning back. But that does not mean that we have to go off unrestrained. Making automatic weapons illegal doesn’t remove them from the streets, but it will reduce the number available in the future. Requiring a license to carry will not stop criminals from carrying guns, but it will allow the police to arrest them just for possession. There is a place and a reason for sensible gun laws.

Kinetic, “Don’t get me wrong, I own 2 rifles and I’m not offering to hand them over.” Then what is it you want…I think you want to restrict legal gun ownership! You’ve fooled no one.
Restrict automatic weapons?
In case you don’t know, automatic weapons are restricted to Class III and the military and law enforcement. Thus, a law abiding citizen cannot own one without a Class III license which is a very tough jar to get into.

To respectfully disagree…….. AND to insert your own qualifier of original intent at the time……. the militia was secondary in scope as a means of protection from invading armies. The PRIMARY reason for the 2nd amendment (and this is an unarguable FACT) was for protection of “We the People” from an out of control government…. DOMESTIC… not foreign!! Having just escaped the “blessings” of King Georges’ monarchy, AND witnessed first-hand the “modus operandi” of the oppressors, this is the ULTIMATE guarantor to insure “We the People” never become “We the Enslved”!

alpha:

You are quite correct. The British government was not an invasion by any stretch of the imagination. They were the legitamate government … that was enslaving their own people, the American colonists. At the time King George had a war with France going on. The taxes, etc. imposed on the colonists was to help pay for his war – even though it didn’t affect them directly. Further, the taxes were much worse than those on his own people in England.

The reason for the 2nd Amendment was to act both as a deterent and a warning to anyone in the US who might get the idea of enslaving us again. And if we can’t have weapons to act as that deterent, then it certainly isn’t either a deterent or a warning, is it?

JeffH,
Yes, I realize they are restricted and that is why I chose to point to then as an instance where regulation makes sense. Not everyone would have these restrictions if their view of the 2nd amendment were followed.

What do I want? I’m not trying to fool anyone. I want sensible restrictions on gun ownership and use, and an end to this ridiculous notion that the 2nd amendment protects everyone’s right to own their own personal arsenal to do with it as they please.

I mention my own guns only to say that I am not afraid of or opposed to guns.

Every restrictive gun law is passed with the label of ” sensible restrictions” and that’s bullcrap, you know it and I know it…sensible is a political term for restrictive legislation and those supporting these “sensible restrictions” are as guilty of restricting the liberty and freedom of law abiding citizens everywhere.
I live in California and fight the likes of Diane Feinstein, who coined the phrase “sensible” with every piece of anti-gun legislation she has championed, and in Congress, Feinstein is the anti-gun legislator who authored the meaningless and now defunct 1994 ban on assault weapon and stated “I’ll pick the time and the place, no question about it” to fight for another assault weapons ban. Don’t stand there and say you support “sensible restrictions” and support the 2nd Amendement because any attack on our 2nd Amendement right to keep and bear arms is not sensible in any way, shape or form. Your’re either “with us or agin us”…there is no middle ground!
Keep some powder dry!

Our Founding Fathers never intended for us to be restricted IN ANY MANNER of gun control. At the time, the rifles the colonists owned were BETTER weapons than the military of the day used (muskets). Muskets were seldom accurate for more than 20 or 30 yards; rifles were accurate for more than a hundred yards. The British army depended upon volleys to place a lot of bullets out there at once hoping some would hit; basically an early form of a machine gun. The colonists preferred to stay behind cover and aim at a distance.

But today it is illegal to own guns that are even the equal of the military unless you own a special Class III license that tells them who has such weapons.

I have to agree with others here; there are NO “sensible” restrictions on our freedom.

It is like the “sensible” restriction on free speech. If a person yells, “Fire!” in a crowded building, it is illegal. It should not be illegal. Those in the building should have the right to beat that person to a pulp if desired for his “joke”. If a person uses a gun to kill for fun or to aid him robbing someone, he should be stood before a firing squad – without appeals.

The only sensible gun control is

1. No convicted felon should be permitted to have one.
2. Good grip, careful aim, hit your intended target.

Amen Independent Thinker.

There should be no restrictions what so ever on gun ownership. That applies to full auto’s as well!
What needs to happen is that when people are caught breaking the law (regardless of whether or not a gun was used )there should be penalties imposed on them that would not only deter them from doing it again but deter anyone else that might be considering breaking a law. I for one like full auto’s and it sickens me for someone outside of my household to have any influence as to whether or not I am allowed to have them. Would you like if I got to decide whether or not you could have sexual relations with your blow up doll thats hidden in your closet. I think not!

Pugsley, these damn gun laws alwasy affect the innocent and never the criminals__Why, because they obviously don’t care!!!

Independant thinker, I must respectively disagree with you on (1. No convicted felon should be permitted to have one.) It is in my humble opinion that anyone that has done their time should be accepted fully back into society regardless of their crime. KEEP IN MIND THAT I HAVE NOT SUGGESTED WHAT THEIR PUNISHMENT SHOULD BE IN THE FIRST PLACE. I say this in an attempt to keep off all of the “what if they done this” comments. The facts are that punishment is decided by society and if X amount of time is deemed enough then so be it. After time spent you should be able to go about your life.

ALEX, AH, THE BRILLIANCE, I DID’NT HAVE ONE THEN!

Angel, I am not being critical of you for your choice of a pit for canine protection, If that is what works for you good. Personally I do not care for Pits but that is just a personal predujudice. Currently I have a Pyranese-Golden Retriver mix and a Husky-? mix outside inside I have a little ear splitter yapping dog and a couple of 20 pound tom cats that will tear your face off. If they make it by them I will be prepared with appropriate means of stopping them in their tracks.

independent thinker, Our pit was 3 months old when we got her__She was raised with our family & Grandaughter, they are both 6__Our Grandaughter and now our Grandson both, swim, play and take naps, while laying on the dog.__She is extremely sensitive and knows the sound of our son’s truck, before he even hits our road!!___It depends how you raise & treat them. These dogs must be disaplined, and they must know you mean it. No I don’t mean beat them!___ On the other hand, I’m not the kind of dog owner, who’s stupid enough, to fully trust an animal, they are after all animals, and can snap anytime__Our eyes are on our dog at all times!__BTW, we’ve had a Schnauzer and a Cocker Spaniel, I’d take a pit any day. I’d never take one from a shelter, unless it was a pup. If your going to have pits, You must get them when they are pups.

Independent thinker__the only thing I don’t like about pits, they’r yappers!__They’ll yap at the chirp of a bird they haven’t heard before!

The chow and the Peakanese (sp?) are the two dogs that still follow their initial breeding. The chow is a guard dog; the Peak is an alarm dog. I don’t need a dog to defend my house; I just want one to let me know there is a problem. I’ll take it from there.

Had a chow once, good dog. My little yapper is a wiener dog (can’t even begain to spell the proper name) Poodle mix. He has one of the most irritating high pitched barks I have ever heard definately a good alarm dog.

I’ve got a yappy Doxie wiener dog myself – thank God!

Like I said Angel it is my personal predjudice If it works for you good deal.