U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 02-23-2007, 02:07 PM
 
Location: Spots Wyoming
18,696 posts, read 35,486,539 times
Reputation: 2147483647

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by FistFightingHairdresser View Post
Well, I'll ignore it then until we can attribute the statement to a source.

Your logic doesn't follow here. Where do you get the conclusion that they will have no guns if they register them? Registration is a process to match the gun to its legal owner. If the owner has no gun, or if it's taken away, there's nothing to register.

If the government really wanted your guns, they'd just arrest you and take them. Why bother with registration?

Nah, I like the way I said it better.

So you didn't hear that blacks and women didn't have the vote for over a century?
Lets take this one at a time.

You choose to ignore because I do not have a positive reference. You don't either. I haven't seen you provide one iota of evidence that they (oops, you will challenge that so I'll define it for you. DEMOCRATS.) do not want to take our guns. The Democrats have said it many times over the past few years, in paticular since Bill Clinton was elected.

My logic doesn't follow? We were discussing "CONFESCATION". I said, first they'll make us register, and then they'll take them. I'm sorry you can't keep up with what we're talking about.

Government would arrest me? For what? With your logic, they don't know I have anything so what are they going to put on the arrest warrant?

I choose to ignore your next statement.

You are correct, the blacks, women, and many others didn't have the right to vote. Neither did the Romans have a choice to not have their heads chopped off. Is this my fault? What does it have to do with Gun Registration. Keep on track here, it's not difficult.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-23-2007, 02:33 PM
 
Location: Spots Wyoming
18,696 posts, read 35,486,539 times
Reputation: 2147483647
Registration will lead to confiscation or banning of weapons.

President Clinton's Gun ban
http://www.clintongunban.com/ (broken link)

Clinton's attach of what he defines as assault weapons. The assault weapon was clearly defined in 1934 Gun act. Clintons definition, and ATF's is completely different.
http://www.nracentral.com/bill-clinton-assault-weapons-ban.php (broken link)

How the "Law Enforcement Alliance of America" looks at Clintons ideas.
http://www.leaa.org/Shield%202003/shield2003sunset.html

Scienc Blog
http://www.scienceblog.com/community...3/pub3286.html

DC Thornton
http://www.dcthornton.com/2004/09/13...n-ban-expired/

Senate report
http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/31698GunBan.pdf (broken link)

It took a while to dig up old archives but I found them.

Course, I really don't expect you to even look at these. They back up reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2007, 10:49 PM
 
919 posts, read 1,670,243 times
Reputation: 478
Im sure FFh will research your list and not ignore facts over emotion. How many countries do we need to list that have registered then confiscated before you folks admit it happens alot? The Brady org and guncontrol inc are just two of many that have made full reports on why they want all guns and ammo confiscated. Just read a long list of countries to register then confiscate. I was surprised that New Zeland confiscated all hand-guns in 1974. And you think Im parinoid? Again I ask pro-regs folks please tell us how you can gaurentee no confiscation after registration. Please go to a pro-gun site, read afew reports, then IF you can pick it apart let me know. There are way too many law professionals that will tell you registration wont work. My fellow Americans, please leave me and other law abiding folks alone. Go after the bad guys some other way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2007, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Haddington, E. Lothian, Scotland
752 posts, read 595,450 times
Reputation: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgussler View Post
Lets take this one at a time.

You choose to ignore because I do not have a positive reference. You don't either.
I didn't provide the quote, you did. It's not my burden to provide a reference for something you said.

I don't do nameless quotes or sourceless data. That's why I'll ignore it. If you can attribute it to a source, I'm happy to either accept it or dispute its merit. Until then, it's a nil point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgussler View Post
I haven't seen you provide one iota of evidence that they (oops, you will challenge that so I'll define it for you. DEMOCRATS.) do not want to take our guns. The Democrats have said it many times over the past few years, in paticular since Bill Clinton was elected.
I don't speak for the democrats, but let's look at your assertion. So it's my place to prove that we WON'T do something? OK, then why don't you prove you WON'T go on a shooting spree if you have a gun? Since when is the burden of proof on someone that they WON'T commit a crime? Gun fetishists are always banging on about law-abiding citizens being innocent until proven guilty. Why am I the exception?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgussler View Post
My logic doesn't follow? We were discussing "CONFESCATION". I said, first they'll make us register, and then they'll take them. I'm sorry you can't keep up with what we're talking about.
No your logic doesn't follow. You equate registration with confiscation. It's not the same thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgussler View Post
Government would arrest me? For what? With your logic, they don't know I have anything so what are they going to put on the arrest warrant?
The point just zinged past you. If the government really wanted to take your guns by force, in violation of the 2nd amendment, why would they bother with trying to legally finesse it? If they don't care about your 2nd amendment rights, why would they care about illegal search & seizure? Your side of the political aisle is so paranoid of your own government, I'm just telling you if they had an inkling to disarm the population they could do it a lot easier than bothering with registration.

And they wouldn't need to register your guns if they wanted to know you owned one. They could just match your credit card to the purchase. Or see if you've bought a duck stamp. There are many ways for them to know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgussler View Post
You are correct, the blacks, women, and many others didn't have the right to vote. Neither did the Romans have a choice to not have their heads chopped off. Is this my fault? What does it have to do with Gun Registration. Keep on track here, it's not difficult.
We're talking about the constitution and you're talking about Romans? And you tell me to keep on track?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2007, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Haddington, E. Lothian, Scotland
752 posts, read 595,450 times
Reputation: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark6052 View Post
Im sure FFh will research your list and not ignore facts over emotion. How many countries do we need to list that have registered then confiscated before you folks admit it happens alot?
I asked you for that list earlier Mark, and you didn't provide it. You've claimed that the UK registered guns then confiscated them. And you would be wrong.

You can own a gun in the UK for hunting purposes. In fact, there are a number of gun sporting shops in Scotland that are popular with bird hunters.

There are laws governing the calibre, storage and transportation of guns. But confiscated? No.

http://www.ukgundealer.com/rules.htm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2007, 08:27 AM
 
Location: Haddington, E. Lothian, Scotland
752 posts, read 595,450 times
Reputation: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgussler View Post
Registration will lead to confiscation or banning of weapons.

President Clinton's Gun ban
http://www.clintongunban.com/ (broken link)

Clinton's attach of what he defines as assault weapons. The assault weapon was clearly defined in 1934 Gun act. Clintons definition, and ATF's is completely different.
http://www.nracentral.com/bill-clinton-assault-weapons-ban.php (broken link)

How the "Law Enforcement Alliance of America" looks at Clintons ideas.
http://www.leaa.org/Shield%202003/shield2003sunset.html

Scienc Blog
http://www.scienceblog.com/community...3/pub3286.html

DC Thornton
http://www.dcthornton.com/2004/09/13...n-ban-expired/

Senate report
http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/31698GunBan.pdf (broken link)

It took a while to dig up old archives but I found them.

Course, I really don't expect you to even look at these. They back up reason.
I looked at a few of them, and shrugged. Too bad they didn't ban assault weapons. They should be banned, along with concealable firearms. There's no reason anyone should have anything more than a firearm suitable for hunting. You could outlaw everything but sport guns and still make the argument that citizens are entitled to bear arms. The 2nd Amendment doesn't specify the type of arm...which is open to interpretation.

A .308 has plenty of knockdown power, and a 12 gauge will take out a burglar like nobody's business. Anything more is just pandering to gun fetish. The rest of society shouldn't have to live with military grade weaponry just to satisfy the perverse hobbies of a few Guns & Ammo subscribers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2007, 10:02 AM
 
Location: FLORIDA
22 posts, read 27,486 times
Reputation: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by FistFightingHairdresser View Post
I looked at a few of them, and shrugged. Too bad they didn't ban assault weapons. They should be banned, along with concealable firearms. There's no reason anyone should have anything more than a firearm suitable for hunting. You could outlaw everything but sport guns and still make the argument that citizens are entitled to bear arms. The 2nd Amendment doesn't specify the type of arm...which is open to interpretation.

A .308 has plenty of knockdown power, and a 12 gauge will take out a burglar like nobody's business. Anything more is just pandering to gun fetish. The rest of society shouldn't have to live with military grade weaponry just to satisfy the perverse hobbies of a few Guns & Ammo subscribers.
Why should it be anyones business to ban a gun solely on cosmetics and features which make the gun a good defense tool.
These "assault weapons" you talk about are nothing more than semi-automatic "scary looking rifles" and arent any different than any other semi-automatic hunting rifles.Alot of rifles have military history even a 12 gauge shotgun has military history and a bolt action rifle or lever action rifles all have military history.So you say we should ban a gun used in the military in the past just because its a more effective and reliable gun.If you would ban
"assault rifles" almost every semiautomatic rifle and pistol will be affected.
Why cant you allow people to make their own decision on what they want to buy instead of trying to ruin their freedom just because you dont like scary looking semi-auto rifles.My sks is semi-automatic rifle holds 10 rounds and has a bayonet but it doesent have more power than a .308 in fact most of these "assault weapons" are no more powerful than any other hunting rifle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS
And conceal carry is a personal choice and right you infringe on that right then you dont belong in the US.Its none of your business to say "I dont want anyone to have this type of gun or conceal a gun"
1.you dont live in the US
2.you infringe on other people freedom of personal safety and choice of what gun they want or need.
3.you cant vote here in US even if you could you wont get far with that selfish attitude
4.Let people do what they want in their personal lives
5.You know very little about guns so you shouldnt have a say in politics about guns.
6.Bans dont work on criminals only on law abiding citizens
7.Registration is stupid and ineffective
8.The second amendment is not about hunting or sporting purposes it was intended for defense against tyranny and personal self-defense and of family.
9.second amendment applies to any Military grade gun now and of the past so it applies to any gun.
10.You need a reality check about what the US Constitution is about and what it means.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2007, 11:03 AM
 
Location: in my imagination
11,060 posts, read 18,138,581 times
Reputation: 7674
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmxx99 View Post
Why should it be anyones business to ban a gun solely on cosmetics and features which make the gun a good defense tool.
These "assault weapons" you talk about are nothing more than semi-automatic "scary looking rifles" and arent any different than any other semi-automatic hunting rifles.Alot of rifles have military history even a 12 gauge shotgun has military history and a bolt action rifle or lever action rifles all have military history.So you say we should ban a gun used in the military in the past just because its a more effective and reliable gun.If you would ban
"assault rifles" almost every semiautomatic rifle and pistol will be affected.
Why cant you allow people to make their own decision on what they want to buy instead of trying to ruin their freedom just because you dont like scary looking semi-auto rifles.My sks is semi-automatic rifle holds 10 rounds and has a bayonet but it doesent have more power than a .308 in fact most of these "assault weapons" are no more powerful than any other hunting rifle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS
And conceal carry is a personal choice and right you infringe on that right then you dont belong in the US.Its none of your business to say "I dont want anyone to have this type of gun or conceal a gun"
1.you dont live in the US
2.you infringe on other people freedom of personal safety and choice of what gun they want or need.
3.you cant vote here in US even if you could you wont get far with that selfish attitude
4.Let people do what they want in their personal lives
5.You know very little about guns so you shouldnt have a say in politics about guns.
6.Bans dont work on criminals only on law abiding citizens
7.Registration is stupid and ineffective
8.The second amendment is not about hunting or sporting purposes it was intended for defense against tyranny and personal self-defense and of family.
9.second amendment applies to any Military grade gun now and of the past so it applies to any gun.
10.You need a reality check about what the US Constitution is about and what it means.
wow,I had to come back to this thread to say dmx99 said this well,though I think ffhd does know something about firearms gathering from some of his posts.

ain't nothing wrong with catering to the fetish,as long as they are used responsibly,if someone isn't resposible punish him not the rest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2007, 03:26 PM
 
919 posts, read 1,670,243 times
Reputation: 478
Default youre losing me

FFH, for awhile I thought you were middle road, but I now wonder. You have started calling us names that show youre true beliefs. We are preverse, with a gun fetish? You want proof that I wont go on a shooting spree?Even with registration and a medical check, many have gone "postal" for no reason, that happens. Registration doesnt lead to confiscation? How many countries do you need listed? No wait thats been Documented but you ignore it. People in the UK can own guns? Any special restrictions maybe? You know they do. Your last posts show me just how restrictive you are. Sorry Ive wasted so much time trying to believe you meant me no harm, you do. Its folks like you that are mindlessly scared of legal gun owners that are causing this problem. Not the legal gun owners. You have shown me the true colors of youre kind. I connot converse with such blind hatred anymore. I know you are an American citizen, but choose to live outside of this country. I hope you stay gone and dont vote. My fellow 2nd belivers, we are in a fight with this new congress, please join the NRA or GOA, but get involved now, FFH is why.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2007, 03:56 PM
 
Location: Orange County
354 posts, read 762,749 times
Reputation: 169
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

Regulation is expressly stated in the amendment, as well as the dependent clause stating the purpose of the amendment. I don't understand why anyone would be against gun registration, unless he had no moral qualms about a loved one encountering a military grade weapon serving to "protect" its owner.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
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