Same thing with marijuana, you only hear about the idiots, not the people just chillin at home watching tv and smokin a J causing no harm to anyone.

I agree they shouldn't have the right to ban either, but unfortunately they've criminalized one and are sure to do the same thing to the other. Idiots ruin it for everyone.



[edit on 9/30/2009 by TheAntiHero420]

All I can say is that a lot rides on this case.

I don't think that I'm alone in defining my country by the Bill of Rights.

It's good that some of the old decisions are getting a review, because they have made the nation less safe and have helped criminals of both political and the street variety to ravage our cities.

A lot of people will be watching this closely.

A mini hand held cannon is simply a really cool device to have fun with. I dont even own any, other than an antique that will never be fired. Its just ashame that irresponsible people have access and dont understand right from wrong, or have any morals.

It's a little late to ban guns in my opinion. The criminal element already has what they need to make life miserable for the rest of us and we can rest assured they ain't agonna turn them in.

Speaking of handguns, I've been thinking of buying one but don't know which kind to buy. I know it's off topic so please U2U me if you can give me sound advice.

Thanx!

I_R

Originally posted by idle_rocker
It's a little late to ban guns in my opinion. The criminal element already has what they need to make life miserable for the rest of us and we can rest assured they ain't agonna turn them in.

Criminal element. You mean like the po-lice?

And so it begins. Now they are trying to disarm us! Man I am so angry about everything right now that I don't even like to sleep. I feel like our time is quickly running out. I hope that's just my paranoia talking.

I highly doubt this will take effect anytime soon. People will go bezerk over this. Some will want the laws that exists to stay existing and the other side will want the change.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by buni11687]

People who actively support gun bans should be imprisoned.

They are a threat to us all.

*This is just my opinion.

I personally don't feel a current need to go around packing a firearm, so I don't own one. (And yes, I have trained with one as required during prior military service. Qualified 9mm for pier security/watch duty, as that rotation came up. So I am aware of both the power and hazards they entail, rather than just simply being afraid of them.) Yet I don't feel they should be banned either. Those that are going to break the law will break the law regardless, and in this case that just leaves those that would abide by it at a disadvantage. Besides, there are also other existing laws that cover negligence and reckless discharge, so it's not like the law abiding firearm owners are leaving them sitting out unsecured or going around town shooting nilly-willy.

Also why not look at places where firearm bans have been effectively established? (Such that almost none at all get into a controlled area.) Does it completely deter and end crime? Last I heard, knifing is a problem in the U.K. And then what, ban knives? So then you get people beating others with bats and crowbars, or stabbing with other implements like screwdrivers... And if you somehow manage to ban those, there will be things like a cosh made from a sock full o' pennies, or even plain ol' bare fists. Criminals will be criminals and commit assaults or crimes under the threat of assault regardless of what weapons the law allows them access to.

Region-wide firearm bans are somewhat pointless. If you need to implement a ban, that should be determined by the property owner (such as an apartment landlord or restaurant/club owner) or as rules for access to the grounds of a public facility or institution. Otherwise you should at least have the right to defend your own life and property, since there is evidence a city or similar governing body cannot effectively secure and police all of its domain continuously. Besides, there's a good reason why they thought of the 2nd Amendment back when they made this country.

I think the 2nd amendment should prevail (such that you can lawfully have a firearm), but a city may still get to decide what constitutes proper carry (and with what permits, such as concealed or visibly holstered, otherwise defaulting to secured) within their jurisdiction and while outside of a private property or established firing range. It seems to work well for most places, and still respects the rights of citizens to have a firearm and possibly defend themselves with it if need ever arises.