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.
Exactly my point, I'm just wondering how Democrat voters who own guns for self defense justify the legislation being proposed by Democrats all over the country to limit or eliminate gun rights in their area.
Well some of them (keep in mind when I referred to liberals earlier, I wasn't referring to all democrats, there is clearly a split there) are in favor of "reasonable" gun control but would object to a ban.
But to be honest I don't think I've seen any of the gun control crowd on here take issue with the NY law which goes a hell of a lot farther than background checks and most "reasonable" measures they usually toss out there as examples. I really would like to know where they'd draw the line. Perhaps the CA proposal will give us a clearer picture; I doubt I will be surprised.
At the end of the day, the extreme anti-gun crowd's willingness to lie and act in such an underhanded manner in general has convinced me that they are not to be reasoned with. You can't compromise with people like that.
O’Malley (D) said last month that he would “absolutely” sign a state ban on assault weapons if it’s passed by the General Assembly. The governor said he likely will introduce a bill of his own but was still working on the details.
The discussion, he said, should focus on three interconnected issues: school safety, making sure guns aren’t sold to those with dangerous mental illnesses and possibly banning assault weapons and high-volume magazine clips.
“It’s just hard to conclude that these guns should be in the hands of anyone who isn’t a soldier on a battlefield or a law-enforcement ...................
...............Raskin, along with Sens. Brian E. Frosh (D-Montgomery), Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore) and Lisa A. Gladden (D-Baltimore) will introduce legislation to ban assault weapons, give Maryland State Police the authority to audit gun shops, ban magazine clips holding more than 10 rounds and add restrictions on concealed weapons permits.......
...........Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles) plans to reintroduce a bill he proposed last session prohibiting felons and people with a mental illness from owning a firearm. The bill failed to pass the House Judiciary Committee.
State law already bans felons and violent criminals from owning a handgun or any of 45 specific “assault weapons.”
A U.S. Army combat veteran and former criminal prosecutor, Wilson believes that proposals to ban anyone from owning those “assault weapons” don’t go far enough because the list excludes semiautomatic hunting rifles and shotguns that can just as effectively be used to shoot people.
When the committee voted down his bill last session, “the argument was what about if they want to hunt, but that’s not a necessity like it was 100 years ago. You don’t have to hunt,” Wilson said.
Wilson, who owns an AR-15 rifle along with handguns, reasoned that if a person is deemed unfit to own a handgun or “assault weapon,” then they shouldn’t be allowed any firearm.
“If you’re not trying to get rid of all semi-automatic assault rifles, then you’re really not saving anybody’s life; you’re just trying to grandstand,” he said. “If it’s not a bolt action, then it should be considered an assault rifle.”........
Someone wanted cites, here are three from MD from this single article.
O’Malley (D) said last month that he would “absolutely†sign a state ban on assault weapons if it’s passed by the General Assembly. The governor said he likely will introduce a bill of his own but was still working on the details.
The discussion, he said, should focus on three interconnected issues: school safety, making sure guns aren’t sold to those with dangerous mental illnesses and possibly banning assault weapons and high-volume magazine clips.
“It’s just hard to conclude that these guns should be in the hands of anyone who isn’t a soldier on a battlefield or a law-enforcement ...................
...............Raskin, along with Sens. Brian E. Frosh (D-Montgomery), Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore) and Lisa A. Gladden (D-Baltimore) will introduce legislation to ban assault weapons, give Maryland State Police the authority to audit gun shops, ban magazine clips holding more than 10 rounds and add restrictions on concealed weapons permits.......
...........Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles) plans to reintroduce a bill he proposed last session prohibiting felons and people with a mental illness from owning a firearm. The bill failed to pass the House Judiciary Committee.
State law already bans felons and violent criminals from owning a handgun or any of 45 specific “assault weapons.â€
A U.S. Army combat veteran and former criminal prosecutor, Wilson believes that proposals to ban anyone from owning those “assault weapons†don’t go far enough because the list excludes semiautomatic hunting rifles and shotguns that can just as effectively be used to shoot people.
When the committee voted down his bill last session, “the argument was what about if they want to hunt, but that’s not a necessity like it was 100 years ago. You don’t have to hunt,†Wilson said.
Wilson, who owns an AR-15 rifle along with handguns, reasoned that if a person is deemed unfit to own a handgun or “assault weapon,†then they shouldn’t be allowed any firearm.
“If you’re not trying to get rid of all semi-automatic assault rifles, then you’re really not saving anybody’s life; you’re just trying to grandstand,†he said. “If it’s not a bolt action, then it should be considered an assault rifle.â€........
Someone wanted cites, here are three from MD from this single article.
In many issues, I am liberal. Socially, government should not have their nose in peoples bedrooms. Government spending is different than individual households. Belt tightening in bad times causes unnecessary prolonging of misery. Proof? Look at the great depression, and those counties that tried to cut spending to get out of the recession, this time around. It does not work in real life for governments.
I have issues with "common sense" rules. If someone is a violent felon, make it illegal for that person to have a gun or knife too, for that matter. Otherwise, let good people arm themselves with what is best for themselves. For example, those 'scary looking guns' have low recoil (close to 22lr), can put several shots on target, and can be quickly adjusted for a small female to shoot, as well as the huge burly big guy. I am against a ban on those guns. These are the most sold guns for a reason, for people who have a working knowledge about guns.
There are evil, truly viciously, evil people in this world. To believe that a law will stop a felon from getting a gun is simple minded, but if they are caught with an illegal weapon, at least then, they have another learning opportunity away from the general populace. To trust that that feral person won't ever cross my path or my family's path is not a risk I will willingly take.
I was a juror in a murder trial. Bad guy (a violent felon) had a beef with, stalked, waited in ambush until his victim went home. The victim was going out with the felon's ex-girlfriend. The bad guy broke down the door of the house, shot the victim, then finished with an execution shot.
The victim heard the door being broken down, and called 911. He was hit with the first shot while on the phone. He fell to the floor, then was shot to the head, while the felon straddled him, standing. We listened to the 911 recording. The victim died before police even had a chance to respond. If the victim had grabbed a powerful gun at the first sound of the door being broken into, the outcome could have been different. At least he would have had a fighting chance.
When I was a boy, my father was laid up with illness. We were broke. Government assistance wasn't available, and we were too proud to take it if it were. I was in school, and too young to work, but I could hunt squirrel and rabbit. We ate what I brought home for the stew pot. A few boxes of 22lr and 12 gauge shells was a savings account for desperate times. It is very self absorbed, for a rich politician to define how others need to live, by his limited view of life.
Let me know when they have presented a bill to ban all guns, then we can discuss, until then it is simply more talk. Good grief because one or two politicians say they would like to do something does not mean the entire Party believes the same, if that were true the Repubs would been in exactly the same position.
openly lust for complete gun bans and/or confiscation?
I continually see liberals here on CD claim that gun owners like myself are overreacting when we talk about things like gun bans or any level of gun confiscation. You instantly claim that you only want "common sense gun control" and that "gun control doesn't mean a gun ban" and belittle those who talk about gun bans.
If this is true why do so many of your most outspoken, senior, prominent Democrat politicians openly call for complete gun bans while proposing legislation that would eliminate our 2nd Amendment rights over time?
I frequently hear the old typical "I'm a liberal gun owner and I support common sense gun control" from people here, how do you logically support politicians who openly want to eliminate your right to protect yourself and your family? When so many of them make no effort to hide their desire to ban all guns why do you still support them?
I am a conservative and try to look at things objectively. This country became a great nation by defending its principles and individual freedom. Freedom from persecution. A lot of people died for my right to print this without fear of retaliation. I agree with your statement. To depend 100% on the government to protect you in a crisis (local or federal) many times does not have a favorable outcome because many times it is to late. We need to enforce the laws on the books and not make new laws to restrict law abiding citizens. No one with any respect of human rights and decent values wants to see innocent people harmed or killed. That's why we need to identify the criminals and keep them from harming others. Banning guns and restricting law abiding citizens to defend themselves opens the doors for criminals to do what ever they want. We need to hold them accountable for their actions and they need to know that law abiding citizens will defend themselves.
Want to take my guns? You can have them, bullets first.
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.
