In view of what has happened to these, and indeed other School children, and many other incidents that have taken place, involving the use of Shotguns and Section 1 Firearms.do you think that any individual should be allowed to own seemingly as many weapons as they like?.in the U.S.A.
Personaly, I think the 2nd should be fine tuned, to allow anyone to own the minimum of weapons they REALY need, And all weapons be kept in a secure place within the owners property, or at a gun club, where they are secure.
Should they adopt the same rules and regs as we have here in the U.K.
The other week, I was watching a U.S.A. program where a family business purchased and sold, also traded weapons, and one chap brought to them a pristine GATLING gun he wanted to sell, need I say more?.
What are members views on gun ownership in the States?.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: Lincoln 7 - 21st June 2013 at 07:34
So people who break the speed limit shouldn’t be allowed guns?
Rick, Don’t be a pillock!! people who break the speed limit, within a few MPH are not criminals.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: Edgar Brooks - 21st June 2013 at 00:45
Then your research must be bogus or just plain bs..
Obviously you haven’t bothered to read any of it; I refer you to the thread, in Historic Aircraft, on aircraft compasses.
If the ex-armed robber who is father of some of my nieces and nephews were still alive (cancer did him in) I would want him to meet you, he always liked a good comedian
Yes, I’ve always found that people with a sense of humour are more popular than rednecks.
By: ZRX61 - 20th June 2013 at 23:16
So people who break the speed limit shouldn’t be allowed guns?
By: Lincoln 7 - 20th June 2013 at 18:40
Rick, Read the word Criminal instead of Felon, basicaly the same. So read the top line again re a “Criminal” being able to get a gun if they want to.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: ZRX61 - 20th June 2013 at 18:18
I also agree with his idea of Mags not holding more than 10 rounds, if you can’t hit your target within 10 rounds, then sell it.
You mean liken those 2 NYPD cops who shot the perp & nine bystanders?
Rick, You know that the 2nd is “Cast in stone” and everyone has the right to bear arms. Agree?
No, it doesn’t apply to everyone, you know that.
however, as has been frequently stated on this Post, If a criminal wants a gun, regardless of his standing in the community, they will get one, and I guess that’s why Obama wants to bring in, as part of his gun control policy, background checks, and stop the use of buying guns “On the spot” at Auctions.
Tell me exactly how that stops felons having guns? We’ve already established that if gun control worked then Chicago would be the safest town in the US… Just as it has been established that towns with less interference with legally owning a gun have far lower crime rates.
Not to harp on about politics again, but EVERY ghetto hell hole in the US has been Democrat for decades & has the tightest gun control… & the highest crime rates….
By: Lincoln 7 - 20th June 2013 at 08:12
Rick, You know that the 2nd is “Cast in stone” and everyone has the right to bear arms. Agree?
Somewhere, after the 10th, which the 2nd CAN be amended, there must be a clause re Felons not being allowed to bear arms.They know their Constitutional rights, as laid down by Congress, so they just have to expect their “Right” has by their own actions been taken away from them, however, as has been frequently stated on this Post, If a criminal wants a gun, regardless of his standing in the community, they will get one, and I guess that’s why Obama wants to bring in, as part of his gun control policy, background checks, and stop the use of buying guns “On the spot” at Auctions.I also agree with his idea of Mags not holding more than 10 rounds, if you can’t hit your target within 10 rounds, then sell it.
Seems fair enough to me.
Jim.
Lincoln .7.
By: ZRX61 - 20th June 2013 at 01:11
Yes, yes, like I said in my previous post, shootings are nothing to do with guns, just people. By the same token, all criminals, lunatics and terrorists should be allowed the right to possess whatever weapons they wish. After all, the 2nd amendment is all about the right to bear arms in case people need to overthrow an oppressive Govt, and many terrorists believe that is just what they should do; surely it’s their Constitutional right?
No it isn’t their constitutional right FFS, that’s why Felons aren’t allowed to vote. They have no say in the matter.
By: Mr Creosote - 18th June 2013 at 20:11
Because we all know that car crashes are the fault of the car….
Yes, yes, like I said in my previous post, shootings are nothing to do with guns, just people. By the same token, all criminals, lunatics and terrorists should be allowed the right to possess whatever weapons they wish. After all, the 2nd amendment is all about the right to bear arms in case people need to overthrow an oppressive Govt, and many terrorists believe that is just what they should do; surely it’s their Constitutional right? And if, for example, someone were to detonate a “dirty” bomb in New York, that would be absolutely no reason at all to be all beastly and unfair to nuclear weapons because people would have caused the carnage, not the poor old much-maligned nuclear device which on the day in question probably killed less people in America than died in car accidents.
By: RpR - 18th June 2013 at 19:15
I spend a lot of time doing research, and passing on what I find to those who ask for help; if these are platitudes, then I’m proud of them, and will continue to offer help.
Then your research must be bogus or just plain bs.
If control laws helped, Chicago would be one of the safest cities in the country. It is one of the worst.
Gun control laws keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens, and no one else.
If the ex-armed robber who is father of some of my nieces and nephews were still alive (cancer did him in) I would want him to meet you, he always liked a good comedian.
By: Edgar Brooks - 18th June 2013 at 18:41
It’s been answered many times, which you’d know if you didn’t just post platitudes…
Haemorrhoids playing you up, are they? I spend a lot of time doing research, and passing on what I find to those who ask for help; if these are platitudes, then I’m proud of them, and will continue to offer help.
By: RpR - 18th June 2013 at 16:38
And how many would have been shot, if there were no gun control legislation? But, of course, that’s a question that the anti-control set never answer (or even ask.)
As I posted earlier, some time back, Minneapolis, Mn had a murder rate that exceeded Chicago.
Not one single gun law was changed but they created a special group to go after the people doing the killing with great prejudice.
The murder rate dropped drastically after that and has not gotten near since.
By: ZRX61 - 18th June 2013 at 15:53
No, no, no, you’ve got it all wrong, Edgar. Shootings are nothing to do with guns, just people. More guns actually equals fewer shootings, and in fact if everyone was made by law to carry and show a gun at all times, there would be absolutely no shootings at all; that’s the way forward. Apparently. :highly_amused:
Because we all know that car crashes are the fault of the car….
By: ZRX61 - 18th June 2013 at 15:51
And how many would have been shot, if there were no gun control legislation? But, of course, that’s a question that the anti-control set never answer (or even ask.)
It’s been answered many times, which you’d know if you didn’t just post platitudes…
By: Mr Creosote - 18th June 2013 at 12:08
No, no, no, you’ve got it all wrong, Edgar. Shootings are nothing to do with guns, just people. More guns actually equals fewer shootings, and in fact if everyone was made by law to carry and show a gun at all times, there would be absolutely no shootings at all; that’s the way forward. Apparently. :highly_amused:
By: Edgar Brooks - 18th June 2013 at 07:17
And how many would have been shot, if there were no gun control legislation? But, of course, that’s a question that the anti-control set never answer (or even ask.)
By: ZRX61 - 18th June 2013 at 02:28
Lets hear it for gun control! Chicago has the tightest gun control in the nation…. They just set a new *personal best* for one weekend: 47 shot, 8 fatally….
By: RpR - 15th June 2013 at 23:49
RpR, Give us an example of what you term as “Silly” and “Moronic”.please.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
Silly is hunting to hang a trophy on the wall, period.
I see nothing wrong with hunting for food, and if one bags an extraordinary one mounting it, but some people hunt just to have a stuffed head or animal. (The fact people go out to kill the biggest and the best is actually the most **** for brains thing done.)
Asinine is anyone who goes to a game ranch, which too often amounts to a animal be corralled and then shot, for supposed trophy
Even hunting dangerous game with all kinds of paid people backing one up in case the animal gets the best of him, or he panics, is actually the worse form of cowardice.
Stupidity has just rewards and if one goes hunting dangerous game and gets stupid, that one deserves to die.
By: Mr Creosote - 15th June 2013 at 12:10
:highly_amused:
Then you are either paranoid or irrational or are using your paranoia to rationalize your being irrational.
Oooer, sounds serious. Can I get time off work for that? :highly_amused:
By: Lincoln 7 - 15th June 2013 at 09:02
RpR, Give us an example of what you term as “Silly” and “Moronic”.please.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: RpR - 14th June 2013 at 22:40
I suggest both of you look at some of the TV programs from the States re guns, hunting etc, it may well open your eyes.Most animals are shot by hunters as a trophy, not that they need to shoot them for food, which is an entirely different matter.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
I find trophy hunting to vary between silly to asininely moronic depending on the situation.
Sign In
December 15, 2012 at 9:52 am