47 States Revolt Against Obama Gun Control

reply to post by randyvs


That's the wrong picture to post for your argument.
I think that woman looks like she can protect herself just fine.

reply to post by Indigo5


No, but my livestock has been before. I don't have kids of my own, although I was a legal guardian for a few years.

reply to post by randyvs


of all the sexist posts I have ever seen on this site, that one takes that cake, I will say no more on it.

I like how Governor Bryant of Mississippi is throwing down on Obama's legislation, defending the second amendment. yeah


Link To Video

Originally posted by SpookyVince
It certainly does NOT make me feel any safe to know that all the lunatics in the street are allowed to carry guns everywhere they please.

Poor america.

So, the alternative is to disarm law abiding citizens so that the criminals who don't obey gun laws and the government are the only one's with guns.

That is monumentally dumb!

Here is what happens when stats allow gun control to pass: I just read on MSN that the new York Gun law messed up, they did not provide an exclusion for cops, The NYPD are just like the citizens now they are not allowed to carry no more the 7 rounds in their pistols. I bet that gets a slurry started when they are used to carrying 15 round clips. This could get interesting real fast, seeing as the law is set to go into effect in march. The link: news.msn.com...

This is how it starts. Someone is going to make a mistake and then it'll be game over. You gun folks need to be careful and keep the more unstable of your lot in check.

Protest is exactly what they need to take your guns away.

My prediction? During a protest very soon, gun related violence will probably occur, the govt will say "we told you so" then act.

You are playing right into their hands.

reply to post by zedVSzardoz
Bravo!! I'm a non gun owner that supports gun owner's rights! Attacking the 2nd amendment is just like attacking someone's intelligence - their ability to know right from wrong. And that will not be tolerated by me.

your right to bear arms does not state the right to hold an automatic rifle and kill 30 in 30 seconds, and you only supposed to keep while under threat from britan!

reply to post by Afterthought

I think that woman looks like she can protect herself just fine.

As long as she has the right.


reply to post by vkey08
[more

of all the sexist posts I have ever seen on this site, that one takes that cake, I will say no more on it.

I know, I know, what can I say ? I'm a guy.

reply to post by randyvs


Exactly.
Maybe women would have a better chance at getting this legislation overturned if they banded together and left the testasterone fueled men out of this. After all, no woman has ever gone into a school or building and shot up everyone. Maybe women should be the only ones to own guns.

Here is a simple message for anyone that thinks the Constitution is too old...

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by randyvs

 

Exactly.
Maybe women would have a better chance at getting this legislation overturned if they banded together and left the testasterone fueled men out of this. After all, no woman has ever gone into a school or building and shot up everyone. Maybe women should be the only ones to own guns.

Ya ! Maybe it's time they protected us for a change.

I'm pretty.

reply to post by SpookyVince


how many years ago did we have
to come over there and set your
ancestors free from tyranny?

I your memory not any longer
than another ....?

reply to post by randyvs

Ya ! Maybe it's time they protected us for a change.

I'm pretty.

I can see it now: "I brought you into this relationship and I can take you right out."
Wow! It feels good to be a woman!

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by HopSkipJump

 

If god gave you the right to protest, you would have been born with a picket sign. See how ridiculous that sounds? The right that was given is self defense, a gun is a tool used. Just as the right to speech and protest are inherant, and a picket sign is just a tool.

Protesting isn't a god-given right either. It's a right bestowed by the Constitution, not God.

Originally posted by EL1A5
reply to post by TKDRL

 

And what were those weapons the common soldier carried in those days?

What are the weapons carried by common soldiers today? Honestly can't you see the adsurdity of that statement as an argument against the 2nd amendment?

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by EL1A5

 

Prettymuch. If people in the cities want to disarm, I have no problem with that. I only have a problem when the federal antigunners think they can come in and pass sweeping bans etc, that it seems city people are fine with, but does nothing for the country folks like me, but make us less safe. Antigun people would be upset if we were trying to legislate our way of life on them as well. We don't do that though.

That would be trying to pass laws that every dwelling must have a gun, in working order, and a minimum amount of ammo. Said gun would have to be taken to a range, at least once a month, inspected, and shot a minimum of 200 rounds. Stuff like that would certainly upset the antigun people I am sure.

....and those that don't want to own one can apportion part of their taxes to pay others that will do it for them. Hmmmm, let's call them "police officers". Every community can have their own police force and there can also be a police force that concentrates on the state at large, we can call them "State Police". hmmmm, we can even have special police forces for the nation, maybe we can call them "Rangers" or "Marshalls" or something...

Oh wait, we already do

reply to post by HopSkipJump


Wow, I can not believe the way you think........
So you believe the government is god then?
LEt's try another way of putting it then. It is a right given to us by nature itself. Better?

reply to post by HopSkipJump


Apparently you totally misunderstood. There would be no "opting out", it would be a requirement...........
Same as there is no "opting out" of a ban.........
Following me now?