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.
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,082,780 times
Reputation: 3937
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigr
That is one law I have never payed any attention to. Always have a gun in my vehicle no matter where I go. Have never been robbed and don't plan on it.
Same here...I am not a militia freak in the least,but I am a "you ain't robbing me or my family" freak and I go by the old saying..."I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"
I'm actually glad that the measure failed. Not because of gun control, but because it opened the door to increased federalization of gun laws when those laws should be imposed on the state and local levels. I know that you won't agree with me, Muleskinner, but I think that some of the people who voted against it were also considering the impact on state laws and on state autonomy on this issue.
Right now, 31 states have reciprocity agreements, 2 of which have no requirement for carry other than being legally allowed to purchase a firearm. I hope they can eventually pass something like this, as robbers, rapists and other scum bags lurk in every state.
Also, since the Constitution clearly states "shall not be infringed" all state and local laws are unconstitutional.
Unfair comment bolded above.
If I want to interject emotional bs, I could counter with wackaloon murders who use guns lurk in every state.
If you can't be objective, don't expect objectivity in response.
________
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound
Not yet, I don't think it has been posted for the record yet. They like to drag their feet.
The votes are NEVER published immediately.
How many extra employees (that you'd whine about) would it take to get every vote published immediately?
A little realistic thinking would be a good thing here.
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,082,780 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
I'm actually glad that the measure failed. Not because of gun control, but because it opened the door to increased federalization of gun laws when those laws should be imposed on the state and local levels. I know that you won't agree with me, Muleskinner, but I think that some of the people who voted against it were also considering the impact on state laws and on state autonomy on this issue.
I understand what you are saying DC,but this is a common sense issue like the CDL was and the CDL law pretty well busted that door down years ago didn't it?
exactly, wacaloon murderers who use guns do lurk in every state, that is why law abiding firearms owners should have the right to defend themselves.
Thanks!
I really like that word, wakaloon, I hope you don't mind if I use it from time to time.
Feel free to use it.
Point is, and you got the point, is that you do more harm than good by going for the base emotional response. It has a tendency to backfire.
Clearer heads prevail.
Same here...I am not a militia freak in the least,but I am a "you ain't robbing me or my family" freak and I go by the old saying..."I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"
Feel free to use it.
Point is, and you got the point, is that you do more harm than good by going for the base emotional response. It has a tendency to backfire.
Clearer heads prevail.
You're right. Sometimes it does backfire, other times it attracts fringe elements you may not want associated with your cause.
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.