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.
No. You guys keep saying how responsible gun owners are. Breaking the law-- even if you disagree-- is NOT responsible.
Keep your guns in the face of a change in law is NOT responsible (And come off it-- No one is coming after your reasonable hunting rifle or the handgun you want for self-protection). It is responsible to obey the law-- even when comes to guns. Even if you're you're an anti-government loon.
You can't be both responsible and advocate breaking the law. Care to explain the dissonance?
and you cant be an authority on the law and continue to change it in direct conflict with what the constitution says.
What is so sad, is that you are raging against law abiding gun owners...but yet could care less about those criminals who have guns....who don't care about the law....don't worry about what a law abiding gun owner would do if needed....
Legally owned guns were used in the Newton, CT shooting.
No there isn't. To disobey a law one disagrees with creates anarchy, which automatically is irresponsible.
Now if one wishes to continue working to elect representatives who would overturn (legally) the new law, that is responsible. But in the interim, one cannot be a lawbreaker and responsible. They are mutually exclusive.
Bob, I apologize in advance for my tone, but that is a load of horse ****.
Some laws deserve to be broken. Like oh I don't know, laws that said that only white people could sit at the front of the bus?
Again, we're talking about who's "responsible" here, not who is law abiding. If you don't put others at risk or cause harm, you are being perfectly responsible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff
Legally owned guns were used in the Newton, CT shooting.
Logic.
Those guns were criminally possessed from the moment he picked them up.
Why are they claiming they will keep their guns if the law changes? If you own a gun and law changes to make that particular weapon illegal, than keeping it is NOT responsible.
I keep hearing how responsible these gun owners are-- Yet when faced with actual gun crime, they abdicate responsibility. When faced with a possible change in law which may illegalize assault rifles, they will do the OPPOSITE of what's responsible and retain their illegal weapons.
What is legal and illegal is not always what is right and wrong. Ask these guys:
What is legal and illegal is not always what is right and wrong. Ask these guys:
Which is why we have a legislative and judiciary system to change those laws. But if you claim to be responsible, you must follow the law and advocate for change through legal channels.
whats important is courageous people and more apply who can carry don't leave home without packin and the disturbed get the picture that they are going down quickly if they think society is the target....let the doc's talk about the pills and the sicko classification, good for them, nice and safe in the office.
Legally owned guns were used in the Newton, CT shooting.
Logic.
and the 4000 people in Illinios were killed with legally owned guns also...right....
Keep living in that fantasy world....
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.
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.
