Supreme Court to back right to bear arms

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

Unless your advocating the government completely outlawing all guns and then going door to door to confiscate every gun in America the gun crime will not be effected by outlawing guns. Do you really want a big brother action like that? Never mind that a federal law outlawing guns would without a doubt be against the 2nd amendment. There is an adage that may sound trite but is most definitively true. When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

I have one for you: When frogs have wings, they won't bust their a$$es when they hop.

I have never called for outloawing ALL guns. However, I think all HANDGUNS should be illegal. If not that, I think that handgun ownership should at the very least require an FBI name check and mandatory course, like that for a CCL.

[GaryC 7]

Unless your advocating the government completely outlawing all guns and then going door to door to confiscate every gun in America the gun crime will not be effected by outlawing guns. Do you really want a big brother action like that? Never mind that a federal law outlawing guns would without a doubt be against the 2nd amendment. There is an adage that may sound trite but is most definitively true. When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

I have one for you: When frogs have wings, they won't bust their a$$es when they hop.

I have never called for outloawing ALL guns. However, I think all HANDGUNS should be illegal. If not that, I think that handgun ownership should at the very least require an FBI name check and mandatory course, like that for a CCL.

Your trying to draw a correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crime. There isn't one. With the exception of a few sensational shooting sprees most gun crimes are committed by people with illegal guns. Outlawing legal ownership will not change gun crimes.

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

Unless your advocating the government completely outlawing all guns and then going door to door to confiscate every gun in America the gun crime will not be effected by outlawing guns. Do you really want a big brother action like that? Never mind that a federal law outlawing guns would without a doubt be against the 2nd amendment. There is an adage that may sound trite but is most definitively true. When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

I have one for you: When frogs have wings, they won't bust their a$$es when they hop.

I have never called for outloawing ALL guns. However, I think all HANDGUNS should be illegal. If not that, I think that handgun ownership should at the very least require an FBI name check and mandatory course, like that for a CCL.

Your trying to draw a correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crime. There isn't one. With the exception of a few sensational shooting sprees most gun crimes are committed by people with illegal guns. Outlawing legal ownership will not change gun crimes.

However, the vast majority of "illegal" guns were at one point purchased by legal means. That is how it all got started.

[rhymeswithcandi 0]

Unless your advocating the government completely outlawing all guns and then going door to door to confiscate every gun in America the gun crime will not be effected by outlawing guns. Do you really want a big brother action like that? Never mind that a federal law outlawing guns would without a doubt be against the 2nd amendment. There is an adage that may sound trite but is most definitively true. When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

I have one for you: When frogs have wings, they won't bust their a$$es when they hop.

um... seriously? I know you're trying to say your frog thing is the same as the outlaw adage... but it's not.

Edited March 19, 2008 by rhymeswithcandi

[HAL 9000 96]

Unless your advocating the government completely outlawing all guns and then going door to door to confiscate every gun in America the gun crime will not be effected by outlawing guns. Do you really want a big brother action like that? Never mind that a federal law outlawing guns would without a doubt be against the 2nd amendment. There is an adage that may sound trite but is most definitively true. When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

I have one for you: When frogs have wings, they won't bust their a$$es when they hop.

I have never called for outloawing ALL guns. However, I think all HANDGUNS should be illegal. If not that, I think that handgun ownership should at the very least require an FBI name check and mandatory course, like that for a CCL.

Your trying to draw a correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crime. There isn't one. With the exception of a few sensational shooting sprees most gun crimes are committed by people with illegal guns. Outlawing legal ownership will not change gun crimes.

Which is why oversight is required all the way up the chain of supply- an example of sensible law. Its pretty hard making a gun at home out of scrap metal even though I'm sure it could be done... Control the trade, condition the sale, limit the crime.

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

um... seriously? I know you're trying to say your frog thing is the same as the outlaw adage... but it's not.

Because adages are stupid and have no place in intelligent discourse.

The same people that state that guns should remain uncontrolled will argue that delegalization of marijuana is a horrible idea. So, we make the natural things that make people giggle illegal. Yet the man-made things that make people dead are entirely okay? Can you draw that parallel?

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

Outlawing legal ownership will not change gun crimes.

How are you so certain of it, Gary? It could make it much easier to find illegal guns and keep "legal" guns from becoming "illegal" guns.

[GaryC 7]

Unless your advocating the government completely outlawing all guns and then going door to door to confiscate every gun in America the gun crime will not be effected by outlawing guns. Do you really want a big brother action like that? Never mind that a federal law outlawing guns would without a doubt be against the 2nd amendment. There is an adage that may sound trite but is most definitively true. When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

I have one for you: When frogs have wings, they won't bust their a$$es when they hop.

I have never called for outloawing ALL guns. However, I think all HANDGUNS should be illegal. If not that, I think that handgun ownership should at the very least require an FBI name check and mandatory course, like that for a CCL.

Your trying to draw a correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crime. There isn't one. With the exception of a few sensational shooting sprees most gun crimes are committed by people with illegal guns. Outlawing legal ownership will not change gun crimes.

However, the vast majority of "illegal" guns were at one point purchased by legal means. That is how it all got started.

So I ask again, if you want all HANDGUNS outlawed then you would need to have the government go door to door to confiscate them all. Is that what you want?

Outlawing legal ownership will not change gun crimes.

How are you so certain of it, Gary? It could make it much easier to find illegal guns and keep "legal" guns from becoming "illegal" guns.

How are you so certain it will? You are the one that wants to take away a right. You need to prove that it will be of a benefit. Your surmising isn't enough.

[rhymeswithcandi 0]

um... seriously? I know you're trying to say your frog thing is the same as the outlaw adage... but it's not.

Because adages are stupid and have no place in intelligent discourse.

The same people that state that guns should remain uncontrolled will argue that delegalization of marijuana is a horrible idea. So, we make the natural things that make people giggle illegal. Yet the man-made things that make people dead are entirely okay? Can you draw that parallel?

I'm actually pretty liberal and I think criminalization of marijuana is ridiculous. So that's not the case here and I can't draw any parallels in relation to that. But I'm also pro-gun. I believe that having and carrying a gun comes with huge responsibilities - including not only practical knowledge but also rights and restrictions. Carrying also comes with the huge responsibility of making sure your own gun doesn't end up in the wrong hands etc. Gun bans prevent the very people who would actually be responsible about gun ownership from having them. That's unconstitutional. Disagree or not, that's the way it is here (and is supposed to be in DC).

If a situation were ever to arise in which my life were being threatened by someone armed with a gun or a knife, I would much rather be drawing handgun than hunched in a corner on hold with 911. That's just me. Waiting for police to come when there is an intruder in my house makes about as much sense to me as sitting back and watching a fire on my stove get bigger until the FD arrives. Again, that's just me.

[Ban Hammer 13,651]

If a situation were ever to arise in which my life were being threatened by someone armed with a gun or a knife, I would much rather be drawing handgun than hunched in a corner on hold with 911. That's just me. Waiting for police to come when there is an intruder in my house makes about as much sense to me as sitting back and watching a fire on my stove get bigger until the FD arrives. Again, that's just me.

ditto

[Scott & Lai 12]

If a situation were ever to arise in which my life were being threatened by someone armed with a gun or a knife, I would much rather be drawing handgun than hunched in a corner on hold with 911. That's just me. Waiting for police to come when there is an intruder in my house makes about as much sense to me as sitting back and watching a fire on my stove get bigger until the FD arrives. Again, that's just me.

ditto

[SaadBell 0]

[britty 1]

If a situation were ever to arise in which my life were being threatened by someone armed with a gun or a knife, I would much rather be drawing handgun than hunched in a corner on hold with 911. That's just me. Waiting for police to come when there is an intruder in my house makes about as much sense to me as sitting back and watching a fire on my stove get bigger until the FD arrives. Again, that's just me.

ditto

I absolutely agree here also. I will NOT be the victim of some low life who wants what I have, or wishes to cause me harm. I have the right to defend myself and my home, and I will in a heartbeat. I am trained in the use of hand guns, have respect for firearms, and keep and use them safely, and responsibly. I live in Northern VA and we do have a much lower crime rate than DC, even though we are just a ten minute drive across the river. I believe the fact that many Virginians have firearms deters the criminal element. Lets face it, we are a very short drive from DC, and criminals do have access to cars. The argument that VA is a wealthier area with a different demographic to DC is weak IMO. It is the risk of getting shot dead that deters the criminals here.

[Ban Hammer 13,651]

If a situation were ever to arise in which my life were being threatened by someone armed with a gun or a knife, I would much rather be drawing handgun than hunched in a corner on hold with 911. That's just me. Waiting for police to come when there is an intruder in my house makes about as much sense to me as sitting back and watching a fire on my stove get bigger until the FD arrives. Again, that's just me.

ditto

I absolutely agree here also. I will NOT be the victim of some low life who wants what I have, or wishes to cause me harm. I have the right to defend myself and my home, and I will in a heartbeat. I am trained in the use of hand guns, have respect for firearms, and keep and use them safely, and responsibly. I live in Northern VA and we do have a much lower crime rate than DC, even though we are just a ten minute drive across the river. I believe the fact that many Virginians have firearms deters the criminal element. Lets face it, we are a very short drive from DC, and criminals do have access to cars. The argument that VA is a wealthier area with a different demographic to DC is weak IMO. It is the risk of getting shot dead that deters the criminals here.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I still think the majority of US gun crime is related to organised gangs and the drug trade. You see a similar pattern in many densely populated inner cities. DC is a major hub as is nearby Baltimore.

I don't its the threat of being shot that deters those types of criminals in Virginia. I would imagine its because the drug trade doesn't have as significant a presence as it does in DC.