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.
You haven't met many thinking conservatives, have you?
When I was born, Harry Truman was President. And guess what? I've lived all over the country and have never owned a gun or felt any need for one. You don't need a gun, Rick, if you make wise choices in life.
Do I think individual liberty is of critical importance? You bet!
But I'm intelligent enough and independent enough to understand that by fighting for individual gun ownership rights, one is fighting for the right of every knuckle-dragging savage and psychologically dangerous individual to have guns. We've seen more than enough of the results of that state of affairs and I'm tired of living in that kind of primitive society.
There is a reason guns and religion are often used together in the same sentence. Zealots for both are almost always one-and-the-same and exist because of childhood indoctrination and that childhood indoctrination simply will not hold up to an intellectual challenge. We need to break the cycle if we are to advance and thrive as a species.
Always be closing!!
I disagree.
1. Fighting for individual gun rights is just that. The knuckle dragging savage psychos will always find an illegal way to get a gun.
2. Over 2.5 million crimes are prevented each year by a legally armed citizen. That's a Department Of Justice statistic.
3. I am a legally armed citizen, and fall into statement #2, having protected a neighbor and holding an intruder until police came to take the intruder away.
4. Ever heard of Kennesaw Georgia?
Quote:
Kennesaw crime rates are less than half of US averages. Crime rates declined from 2003 through 2008.
In 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21]
(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
There are people who are armed in all walks of life, MANY of them you haven't a clue that they are carrying. They don't broadcast the fact, because they don't need to. They carry as much for YOUR protection as their own.
I'm not going to read through all 11 pages to find out if it's been mentioned or not, but nobody did it in the first 4 or 5, so I'm going to bring it up.
The law in question that allows the carrying of a gun in a National Park ONLY allows citizens who can legally carry a concealed firearm outside the boundaries of the National Park to carry one inside the park.
In other words, in almost all states, one already has to have a permit to carry a concealed firearm to carry in a NP. The people who get those permits aren't gang bangers. They're not serial killers. They're the most upstanding citizens in your community. The states issuing their permits do extensive background checks on those people, including fingerprintiing. In a lot of cases, they're more familiar with their guns and better practiced with them than the policemen patrolling your streets.
These people are NOT the problem.
In most states, if you run a few errands in a day, you're mingling with at least a few people carrying a concealed weapon. Were you afraid of them when they were next to you in the checkout line? Did you witness any mass shootings that day? Did something make you think, "Something's not right about that woman. I think she's carrying a gun."? No. In fact, the people carrying are probably the people you would least expect to be carrying a gun.
So now that you're better informed about who this law applies to, perhaps you can shelve the paranoia long enough to realize that it's a common sense law that keeps the most upstanding citizens in the crowd from becoming felons, just for crossing an arbitrary and invisible boundary while driving through a state.
You haven't met many thinking conservatives, have you?
When I was born, Harry Truman was President. And guess what? I've lived all over the country and have never owned a gun or felt any need for one. You don't need a gun, Rick, if you make wise choices in life.
Do I think individual liberty is of critical importance? You bet!
But I'm intelligent enough and independent enough to understand that by fighting for individual gun ownership rights, one is fighting for the right of every knuckle-dragging savage and psychologically dangerous individual to have guns. We've seen more than enough of the results of that state of affairs and I'm tired of living in that kind of primitive society.
There is a reason guns and religion are often used together in the same sentence. Zealots for both are almost always one-and-the-same and exist because of childhood indoctrination and that childhood indoctrination simply will not hold up to an intellectual challenge. We need to break the cycle if we are to advance and thrive as a species.
Always be closing!!
Where did I hear those words about religion and guns being the things that most people from the sticks of any part of the US go together. Oh yeah, our Glorious Leader said those words to a group of elitist San Francisco liberals back there in the far past.
I see that only knuckle draggers want to own guns. Will you be able to stand up for any of your other Constitutionally guaranteed rights when the purple shirts come to your house to take them? I won't either but I may be able to take a couple of them with me when they take me out. I said purple because it is the color of SEIU and I didn't want to hurt feelings of anyone who doesn't like to see references to brown shirts.
I'm not going to read through all 11 pages to find out if it's been mentioned or not, but nobody did it in the first 4 or 5, so I'm going to bring it up.
The law in question that allows the carrying of a gun in a National Park ONLY allows citizens who can legally carry a concealed firearm outside the boundaries of the National Park to carry one inside the park.
In other words, in almost all states, one already has to have a permit to carry a concealed firearm to carry in a NP. The people who get those permits aren't gang bangers. They're not serial killers. They're the most upstanding citizens in your community. The states issuing their permits do extensive background checks on those people, including fingerprintiing. In a lot of cases, they're more familiar with their guns and better practiced with them than the policemen patrolling your streets.
These people are NOT the problem.
In most states, if you run a few errands in a day, you're mingling with at least a few people carrying a concealed weapon. Were you afraid of them when they were next to you in the checkout line? Did you witness any mass shootings that day? Did something make you think, "Something's not right about that woman. I think she's carrying a gun."? No. In fact, the people carrying are probably the people you would least expect to be carrying a gun.
So now that you're better informed about who this law applies to, perhaps you can shelve the paranoia long enough to realize that it's a common sense law that keeps the most upstanding citizens in the crowd from becoming felons, just for crossing an arbitrary and invisible boundary while driving through a state.
No one in Alaska needs a permit to carry a firearm, concealed or not, and there are more square miles of National Parks in Alaska than in all the lower-48 combined.
Where did I hear those words about religion and guns being the things that most people from the sticks of any part of the US go together. Oh yeah, our Glorious Leader said those words to a group of elitist San Francisco liberals back there in the far past.
I see that only knuckle draggers want to own guns. Will you be able to stand up for any of your other Constitutionally guaranteed rights when the purple shirts come to your house to take them? I won't either but I may be able to take a couple of them with me when they take me out. I said purple because it is the color of SEIU and I didn't want to hurt feelings of anyone who doesn't like to see references to brown shirts.
Roy, I can't, off-hand, think of a more unrealistic expectation than an individual's arsenal of guns holding off a government out to deprive us all of every last one of our freedoms. If/when it gets to that point, it will be far too late for individual gun ownership to make the difference, I assure you.
Additionally, I think the second amendment, written for a society bearing no resemblance in 1791 to ours today, is very much subject to interpretation and should be interpreted in accordance with the best interests of the people today. The gun proliferation and associated death and injury we see today in our far different environment is in no way arguable as in the best interests of the people.
I see gun zealotry today as an extremist and centuries outdated position. And, if it sadly comes to Big Brother at your front yard poised to deprive you of your remaining freedoms, it will be as a result of the ultimate empowering of the left - those wanting government involvement and oversight in every minor detail in our lives. And there's no better way to empower the left than to cling to extremist positions, thereby forfeiting political clout and credibility to their ranks. In other words, the tighter conservatives cling to guns and religion, the greater the haste and probability of their ultimate loss.
Take a look at the current election year. Republicans are poised to lose....again. Why? Because from their cafeteria you've got a choice of Big Business, and Guns and Religion.
It is utterly incredible to me that something like 4/5 of the posters here are convinced that they are safer in our gun soaked world custom-tailored by Archie Bunker....when that gun saturation is the reason they feel so threatened. Childhood indoctrination is a very powerful thing.
Roy, I can't, off-hand, think of a more unrealistic expectation than an individual's arsenal of guns holding off a government out to deprive us all of every last one of our freedoms. If/when it gets to that point, it will be far too late for individual gun ownership to make the difference, I assure you.
Our government, in the form of the largest and best equipped military group on the planet has been fighting against people in Afghanistan for a decade now who live in caves and throw rocks when they run out of ammo... based on our "progress" there I can honestly say that we're not winning anything. The US gov. knows that the free people of this country would put up one hell of a fight if it ever came down to it.
I served for 4 years and I would much rather fight against 200 Afghan soldiers than go up against my 5 neighbors in their homes any day.
I think that banning guns from national parks is a great idea. The last thing I want when I am hiking or rockclimbing is a bunch of yee haw hillbillies, boozed up with guns running around and shooting animals.
The animals need a safe haven anyways to live. We have already destroyed too many of their habitats due to uncontrolled sprawl in theis country.
Our government, in the form of the largest and best equipped military group on the planet has been fighting against people in Afghanistan for a decade now who live in caves and throw rocks when they run out of ammo... based on our "progress" there I can honestly say that we're not winning anything. The US gov. knows that the free people of this country would put up one hell of a fight if it ever came down to it.
I served for 4 years and I would much rather fight against 200 Afghan soldiers than go up against my 5 neighbors in their homes any day.
Sounds like a plan. Stockpile guns and be ready to bunker down with a few days food and water, blasting away when they get too close.
That's your idea of freedom?
It isn't 1776 anymore....the battle we are in is going to be won or lost with ideas - not guns.
Sounds like a plan. Stockpile guns and be ready to bunker down with a few days food and water, blasting away when they get too close.
That's your idea of freedom?
It isn't 1776 anymore....the battle we are in is going to be won or lost with ideas - not guns.
I don't carry a firearm to defend myself against the US gov., I carry a firearm to protect myself against the random meth addict that wants my pickup truck and is willing to kill me for it.
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.
You haven't met many thinking conservatives, have you? 
