U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-05-2008, 11:54 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,222 posts, read 7,021,326 times
Reputation: 6609

Advertisements

I would suggest going after gang bangers and drug dealers instead of trying to control an inanimate object like guns.

Obama has plenty of street smarts. He knows what the real problem is. In his book DREAMS FROM MY FATHER he devoted several pages to a Chicago street thug that dealt in illegal guns and ammunition. In the past it has been difficult for politicians to come down hard on crime in the inner city because the issue of "racism" always comes up. With Obama in charge that old mantra no longer has any credibility. We will see how he handles the problem.

GL2
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-05-2008, 12:44 PM
 
Location: in my imagination
11,088 posts, read 18,163,921 times
Reputation: 7686
Quote:
Originally Posted by slaleman View Post
Can someone please explain to me why anyone in this country (that's not in the military) needs an assault rifle? [/i]
Because they are generally accurate fun and cheap to shoot.ok?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2008, 05:50 PM
 
Location: West Michigan
196 posts, read 397,892 times
Reputation: 85
I am a happy gun owner myself, but I can't say that I really see anything changing under Obama in this regard. ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2008, 05:55 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,343,202 times
Reputation: 2559
Quote:
Originally Posted by slaleman View Post
Can someone please explain to me why anyone in this country (that's not in the military) needs an assault rifle? I have yet to hear an actual reason for owning a weapon whose only purpose is to kill any many people as possible as quickly as possible.
Are you some kind of firearms expert? I think not given the ignorance of that statement. Besides the fact that military arms are those protected by the second amendment theres dozens of competitions nationwide that use what you erringly call assault weapons to compete. They serve very well for defensive purposes in some situations & as mentioned they are fun to shoot. Couple that with the FACT that they are almost never used in crimes & it becomes evident that only folks with an agenda or those that are control freaks would want to ban them. I'v yet to hear one logical based on fact reason to ban them. Even if it were really legal to do so.



Quote:
And what's with all the fear that the government is going to take away your guns? Obama actually supports the second amendment.

Guns - Issues - Election Center 2008 - CNN.com

Voted for 2006 amendment prohibiting confiscation of firearms from private citizens, particularly during times of crisis or emergency
Heres a little bit of truth about your favorite socialist, From wikipedia, but its all available elsewhere if you bother to look for what a mans done & supported instead of soundbites.

Quote:
Gun control

As a state legislator in Illinois, Obama supported banning the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic firearms, increasing state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms and requiring manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.[232]

In 1996, during Obama's run for the Illinois State Senate, he was surveyed by a Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois about criminal justice and other issues. Obama's questionnaire showed that he supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns. Subsequently, Obama denied that his writing was on the document and said that he never favored a ban on the sale and possession of handguns.[233][234] In 1999, he urged prohibiting the operation of any gun store within five miles of a school or park, which according to gun-rights advocates would eliminate gun stores from most of the inhabited portion of the United States.[235] He sponsored a bill in 2000 limiting handgun purchases to one per month.

As state senator, he voted against a 2004 measure that allowed self-defense as an affirmative defense for those charged with violating local laws making it otherwise unlawful for such persons to possess firearms.[236] He also voted against allowing persons who had obtained domestic violence protective orders to carry handguns for their protection.[235]

From 1994 through 2002, Obama was a board member of the Joyce Foundation, which amongst other non-gun related activities provides funds for gun control organizations in the United States.[237][238]

While in the US Senate, Obama has supported several gun control measures, including restricting the purchase of firearms at gun shows and the reauthorization of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.[239] Obama voted against legislation protecting firearm manufacturers from certain liability suits, which gun-rights advocates say are designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.[240] Obama did vote in favor of the 2006 Vitter Amendment to prohibit the confiscation of lawful firearms during an emergency or major disaster, which passed 84-16.[241]

During a February 15, 2008 press conference, Obama stated, "I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation."[242] Obama has also stated his opposition to allowing citizens to carry concealed firearms[243] and supports a national law outlawing the practice,[244][245] saying on Chicago Public Radio in 2004 "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws".[246]

Obama initially voiced support of Washington DC's handgun ban. Following the Supreme Court decision that the ban was unconstitutional, he revised his position in support of the decision overturning the law, saying, "Today's decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe."[247] He also said, in response to the ruling, "I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms... The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view." [248]
Rifleman, please accept my apology, I know this thread wasn't intended to be a debate about gun control vs gun rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2008, 09:10 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
545 posts, read 2,061,172 times
Reputation: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
Are you some kind of firearms expert? I think not given the ignorance of that statement.
I never claimed to be a firearms expert. I was asking a valid question, the answer to which I had never heard, and your answer is sufficient for me to now understand why someone might want to own an assault rifle. Your tone, however, was condescending and rude. You could have just as easily answered the question without being that way.

Quote:
Heres a little bit of truth about your favorite socialist...
OK, look...this next little rant is going to be off topic, but I think it needs to be addressed. I don't care if you like Obama or not. The name calling can stop now because the race is over and the people have spoken. A far greater majority than EVER voted for W, I might add.

If you want to talk about socialism, let's talk about the $700 Billion that's going to Wall Street for doing what? Making bad decisions? Let's talk about the billions going to the American auto makers who need help from my tax dollars because they're too stupid to move to more fuel efficient cars. Let's talk about the last "stimulus package" which did almost exactly what the Obama tax plan will do - give some money back to the middle class and give the rich nothing. How quickly we forget when it's "your" guy giving out money.

You can stop with the shady references to terrorism, communism, and the like, and get over it. Be happy that we will finally have someone in the white house that can put together a complete sentence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2008, 09:44 PM
 
48,519 posts, read 81,350,619 times
Reputation: 17985
Obama talked about this in a intervi9ew. Frankly he wasn't hopped up about gun control. He more or less said that the US supreme court had recently pretty much settle the issue for some years to come. We have much more important things to work on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2008, 10:18 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,343,202 times
Reputation: 2559
Quote:
Originally Posted by slaleman View Post
I never claimed to be a firearms expert. I was asking a valid question, the answer to which I had never heard, and your answer is sufficient for me to now understand why someone might want to own an assault rifle. Your tone, however, was condescending and rude. You could have just as easily answered the question without being that way.
Ok, I apologize for answering your question in the same tone that it was asked.



Quote:
OK, look...this next little rant is going to be off topic, but I think it needs to be addressed. I don't care if you like Obama or not. The name calling can stop now because the race is over and the people have spoken. A far greater majority than EVER voted for W, I might add.

If you want to talk about socialism, let's talk about the $700 Billion that's going to Wall Street for doing what? Making bad decisions? Let's talk about the billions going to the American auto makers who need help from my tax dollars because they're too stupid to move to more fuel efficient cars. Let's talk about the last "stimulus package" which did almost exactly what the Obama tax plan will do - give some money back to the middle class and give the rich nothing. How quickly we forget when it's "your" guy giving out money.

You can stop with the shady references to terrorism, communism, and the like, and get over it. Be happy that we will finally have someone in the white house that can put together a complete sentence.
Where did you get the idea that I thought Bush was a good president?
Never mentioned terrorism or communism either.

that $700 billion is as much the fault of Democrats as republicans. IMO they should have just let the chips fall where they may. Its a problem that Obama cant & wont fix, why should he, he helped create it. I dont want my money bailing out corporations or lazy people. Obamas tax plan is bragging about taxing us the same as it was in the 90's. Hmmm, Taxes were higher in the 90's, least mine were, than they are now. Some break eh?

I call them as I see them. Bush is an idiot & Obama is a socialist, his ability to put together a complete sentence notwithstanding. You dont have to like it, but as of now I'm still free to speak my mind.

The OP specifically asked this not become a gun control pissing match. For whatever reason you felt the need to introduce inflamatory rhetoric into a conversation that you never had any intention of offering anything of substance to. I felt the need to call you on it. Now its over.

Again, Rifleman, I apologize.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2008, 10:20 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,343,202 times
Reputation: 2559
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Obama talked about this in a intervi9ew. Frankly he wasn't hopped up about gun control. He more or less said that the US supreme court had recently pretty much settle the issue for some years to come. We have much more important things to work on.
He doesn't have to work on it. Theres plenty of legislators & legislation that have been waiting for this moment. I'v no doubt that very soon after Mr Obama sits at his desk gun control will cross it & he will stamp it without blinking an eye. After all, he will be too busy with other things to give it much thought.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2008, 07:49 AM
 
Location: 80904 West siiiiiide!
2,867 posts, read 7,119,271 times
Reputation: 1546
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Because they are generally accurate fun and cheap to shoot.ok?
Because many rilfes, like the AK-47, are collectors items. They are no more dangerous than a semi automatic deer rifle.

It's nothing personal, some people collect stamps, I collect guns.

True, it doesn't serve a purpose other than collective killing of as many people as possible in a war situatiom, but that's what makes it worth so much. It's a hugely signifigant part of history. (i.e Viet Nam, etc..)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2008, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,093,294 times
Reputation: 3718
Unhappy Oh my....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
Rifleman, please accept my apology, I know this thread wasn't intended to be a debate about gun control vs gun rights.
[quote=slaleman;6030939] Can someone please explain to me why anyone in this country (that's not in the military) needs an assault rifle? I have yet to hear an actual reason for owning a weapon whose only purpose is to kill any many people as possible as quickly as possible.

and this from backfist: It's premature to assume that President Obama will issue executive orders or sign constitutional amendments to take away people's guns. (rifleman's interjection: I agree!) I don't think there's an interest in confiscating your Glock 9 mil or your Kalashnikov collector's item as much as there's a concern about the irresponsible proliferation of firearms by and to the wrong hands.

In fact, it's not premature; it's simply not accurate.[quote]

Well, I didn't say it would absolutely happen. Read below about "being prepared". I'm also trying to point out that in the past we gun owners have gotten side-tracked by vitriolic, strident hostile, blatantly and statistically inaccurate and insulting posts. Our resulting defensive, insulting, vitriolic responses are then used against us. I'm a voice for reason. A voice for CHANGE! A voice for a New AMERICA!!! (hey.... haven't I heard this recently?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaleman View Post
OK, look...this next little rant is going to be off topic, but I think it needs to be addressed.

I can see that this really is a potentially testy little topic, but I can again only ask that we keep it to the OP. But PS, I kinda innocently, legally and safely enjoy my "assault rifles". Among other things, I'm a mechanical engineer, and I enjoy the design complexities and solutions. I also appreciate the potential it provides me for serious protection in the "highly unlikely" social scenario in which some well-funded, well-armed, extremist left-wing organization (i.e.: the government?) might decide that they finally, really, absolutely, want things their way. And I did say that knowing you might disagree, there is still a good possibility that the Pelosi / Schummer / Kennedy-clan / Boxer / Feinstein crowd might see an opportunity during one of their off minutes to introduce some irritating legislation just to urinate on us patriots. They have proven in the past, even without their new big majority, that they just can't help themselves. I did say somewhere else that "hubris" is a contagious disease. They all caught it!

So again, what do you guys suggest in the form of positive suggestions, to be prepared. To derail their bad intentions. To present ourselves to the legislators and Prez. Obama as thoughtful, positive, realistic (and voting) citizens. Was it me who originally said "Better to hope for the best but prepare for the worst"? Nah, guess it wasn't me, but it's darn sure a good philosophy, yes?

Thx for the apologies, TK. Let's keep up the happy positive thoughts! No more controversial statements about whether there will be, or should be, limitations on this or that. My OP was more general. And positive, I hope.

Last edited by rifleman; 11-06-2008 at 12:21 PM.. Reason: clarity, typos
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top