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.
I am very pro military, but I am very anti-war. I am pro gun right, but I don't believe gun right is really a right, I believe it is a privilege.
Your belief is wrong.
Driving is a privilege, owning a firearm is a right as spelled out in our constitution. Rights are not privileges, they are rights that you are entitled to by virtue of citizenship.
Driving is a privilege, owning a firearm is a right as spelled out in our constitution. Rights are not privileges, they are rights that you are entitled to by virtue of citizenship.
I believe my gun right is my privilege. Too bad Adam Lanza's mother took her right for granted.
Well, somehow or another I read your post wrong. For some reason, I thought you said a gun without a round in the chamber is an unloaded weapon. Clearly you did not say that, and I'm not sure how I read that so wrong. My bad..
When I am out, I get to leave all my firearms at home as I live in communist Maryland. I only carry on my own property (a farm in a rural area).
Quote:
Are you telling me that you know of no reports of Glocks discharging due to clothing being snagged?
Sure, but that is user error and has nothing to do with safely carrying while at condition zero. Same as deciding to drive sober or drunk, the operator makes the choice. You can safely carry at condition zero.
Quote:
I'm sure there have been times when someone with a holstered weapon was killed prior to them being able to draw it.
Correct, now add to that having to remove a weapon from a holster and rack the slide... if you want to be ready, the less obstacles the better.
Quote:
I'd bet the vast majority of times a person has needed their weapon, they've also had time to chamber a round.
It only takes that one time though. Why risk it?
Quote:
If you choose to carry chambered, that is your choice. I'm just saying there is more danger to carrying that way, and I choose to add safety, even if that requires the extra second to chamber a round.
There is no more danger in carrying at zero, there is just a proper way to do it.
Quote:
I'm quite comfortable with carrying one of my semi-autos and chambering when required.
K.
Quote:
I've known one guy who has shot himself and another guy with an accidental discharge who both felt as confident.
What about all the people (LEO for example) that carry at zero day in and day out with no AD?
Quote:
Like I said, if you choose to carry chambered, that is your choice. I just believe the odds are greater of an accidental discharge than a situation where a second is going to make a difference; therefore, I choose to carry unchambered.
Their absolute ignorance of what the words mean is astounding. And, after all, the law is settled.
Quite correct. These cases were heard a hundred years ago, and there is nothing in there which says an ordinary citizen has a right to own a firearm. More recently,. the courts have affirmed this finding, with certain, limited specific exceptions. That gun advocates still hide behind the Second Amendment is ridiculous. I suspect it is part of the NRA's corporate spiel to protect the gun manufacturers, who fund the gun lobby. It is ALWAYS about following the money.
I equate it to the abortion battle. Long since decided by the Supreme Court, but people still are trying to argue that it can't possibly be real.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toryturner
Do you argue so passionately against every right afforded you as a citizen or just this one?
See above. I am passionate about this one because people die every day for no reason. Clearly as a society we are unable/incapable of safeguarding lives from people with guns. You either eliminate the people, or more easily, eliminate the guns. Sadly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
How do you get rid of them, laws?
Is that how we got rid of meth and heroine?
I think you work a global solution to eliminate manufacturing of guns except under controlled conditions. We do it with nuclear materials; we can do it with guns. Strict global control. Licensing and control of use, as i outlined earlier. As a person who grew up with guns and hunted regularly, it is sad to see this development, but every day we lose lives to people who are, for whatever reason, unable to control their firearms. Sadly, when that happens, a bigger portion of society needs to intervene and take control of the situation.
And quite honestly, if we all are real in our introspection, what use does a gun really have in modern society? Sure, occasionally a robbery is thwarted, but more often there is a senseless death either directly or indirectly related to the gun...and the person supposedly responsible for it.
I've known one guy who has shot himself and another guy with an accidental discharge who both felt as confident.
I would wager that most people who've shot themselves or who've been shot when their kids or friends got a hold of their firearm felt comfortable before said shootings occurred. That includes LEO who've shot themselves as well.
Unfortunately feeling confident about your situation doesn't mean that you or those around you are actually safe.
It seems so obvious: more guns, more bullets flying, more death.
It seems to me the reluctance of some Americans to accept the facts on guns-and-death data is the same kind of intellectual vapor lock that makes them buy lottery tickets.
I declare a holy war started
If they are right or wrong I still want a gun and it is up to me not you.
It doesn't matter what you believe, facts are facts regardless. Your right is your right, that's just it.
The Adam Lanza emotional plea is silly btw.
I've never said anything about law, you did.
Of course gun right is a right, but practicing common senses doesn't hurt. wouldn't you agree?
If you want to talk about law, then this is law
Federal law prohibits the purchase and possession of firearms by people who fall within certain categories, such as convicted felons, domestic abusers, and people with specific kinds of mental health histories.1 Although background checks have prevented over two million people in these categories from obtaining guns,2 the federal law does not generally include other types of people identified by public health researchers as being at a significantly higher risk than the general population of being dangerous,
including:
Those who have been convicted of violent or gun-related misdemeanors;3
Those with a history of abusing alcohol or drugs4;
Those convicted of juvenile offenses;5 and
Additional people who have suffered from severe mental illness.6
so your right is your right argument is rather silly.
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.
The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun
