Americans Fight For Right To Bear Arms - At Work

[F430murci]

These guys should team up with the Westborough Baptist Church and the tea- baggers!

If evolutionists are still searching for the missing link...half man/ half monkey, they are!

And you should do a little research. Have a look at my link in post #413, it's already been shown there was no heckling, it was an editing hatchet job by NBC/MSNBC. And once again, no need to let the truth get in the way is there, that's why I and others can't take your posts seriously.

Here's another link, I think video clip is included.

http://mrctv.org/vid...ghts-supporters

Deference, respect and humility allude some or perhaps just common sense, class and respect. The guy lost his child. Anyone with class or dignity would sit there, keep their mouth shut and have some empathy. If you don't get it, you just don't get it and no reason to argue about it.

I get it just fine and agree that silence would have been the better option. The argument from me, is apparently for some it's no problem if major news media misrepresents the situation, never mind the truth.

Cool. The guy was just dealing with his horrible grief in whatever way he can. I just cannot imagine losing a child, especially that young in that manner or any manner. I just cannot imagine how horrible the last moment of their precious lifes were like.

[Chicog]

I suggest anti gun hand wringers concentrate on making it easier to commit and confine pyschotic - disturbed individuals and hire armed guards for schools. And - as individual communities wish - train and arm school officials or even teachers (which has already been done in numerous areas in the USA.

I suggest you accept that fact that putting more guns out there simply increases the likelihood of an argument turning into a killing.

Less guns = less killings. It's not rocket science.

And it really doesn't matter if it's at Grand Central or the middle of an Iowa field.

[Sing_Sling]

I suggest anti gun hand wringers concentrate on making it easier to commit and confine pyschotic - disturbed individuals and hire armed guards for schools. And - as individual communities wish - train and arm school officials or even teachers (which has already been done in numerous areas in the USA.

I suggest you accept that fact that putting more guns out there simply increases the likelihood of an argument turning into a killing.

Less guns = less killings. It's not rocket science.

And it really doesn't matter if it's at Grand Central or the middle of an Iowa field.

True, true . . . if I may be so bold as to quote myself:

From the article cited:

"He said a dispute with someone at the building became heated, and the suspect pulled out a gun and started shooting."

And this is where the problem lies. Take away the guns and harsh words would have been exchanged, shouting probably, maybe even a fist used - though the guy was 70 so doubtful - but no-one would be dead or near death.

Make guns available and problems are escalated. Scared and angry people making pathetic decisions.

So, in this case, like in so many . . . less guns . . . no deaths

[F430murci]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/02/01/us-gun-deaths-sandy-hook_n_2602074.html

U.S. Gun Deaths Since Sandy Hook Top 1,280

[DocN]

http://www.huffingto..._n_2602074.html

U.S. Gun Deaths Since Sandy Hook Top 1,280

Would have been better, if there were more guns around...as we know!

[oldsailor35]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

Edited February 3, 2013 by oldsailor35

[chuckd]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

There are "idiots" on both sides.

[Chicog]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

There are "idiots" on both sides.

I prefer the unarmed idiots.

[Sing_Sling]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

There are "idiots" on both sides.

I prefer the unarmed idiots.

Most normal people would!

[F430murci]

I guess taking guns to work even when you work at a gun range doesn't really help either . . .

Another sad story.

Chris Kyle, Author Of 'American Sniper,' Shot And Killed At Gun Range

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/02/02/chris-kyle-dead_n_2608772.html

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/02/former-navy-seal-american-sniper-author-chris-kyle-reportedly-killed-at-tx-shooting-lodge/

Chris Kyle, a former Navy SEAL who became known as the deadliest U.S. sniper was one of two men murdered on Saturday at a gun range in Erath County.

http://patdollard.com/2013/02/breaking-killer-of-navy-seal-sniper-chris-kyle-arrested-photo/

Edited February 3, 2013 by F430murci

[Chicog]

No matter what your individual style, Rough Creek Lodge and Resort is a “have-it-all” place for our “want-it-all” guests.

Not quite sure he wanted all that.

[NeverSure]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

I happen to be one of your "idiots" and I have no idea why your flaming and personally insulting posts are tolerated. Let's back up and reiterate why there is a Second Amendment.

It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government. That removes all of the reasonableness of arguments against having military style rifles. If I ever have to exercise my Second Amendment rights it will be a battle and I won't want a bird gun. The Second Amendment mentions a militia, which at the time was an ad hoc group of citizens rising up. It is a military purposed amendment.

ALL of the arguments about why people in certain areas such as cities shouldn't have guns, or about what types of guns people should be allowed to own are moot.

There are statements all over the place in this thread about what types of guns are necessary. Someone said that hunters should be limited to such as shotguns. That person hasn't seen the US. There are vast open spaces with nothing but sagebrush where you can see your prey for a mile or more. You have to figure out how to stalk it to get within a more reasonable distance like no farther than 600 yards. You should see some of the rifles and high powered scopes and spotting scopes and range finding (distance measuring) scopes those hunters have.

Yes, the law and court precedents over time allow guns for hunting too.

But primarily they are for defense, and I want the best defensive weapons I can get.

Also, as to the OP, I have a state issued license to conceal a handgun. That's on my person or in my car. A person without that license may not conceal a weapon in his car. He may carry it open in a holster or on the seat, but he may not conceal it. If he wished to leave it concealed in his car he must remove the ammunition and store it in a different place than the gun, and the gun may not be within his reach. For most people that means putting the unloaded gun in the trunk and the ammo under the seat. Laws vary state to state on the subject, but that's my state.

Again, if the owner of private property bans guns from that property, I must obey or I'm a trespasser subject to arrest even with my license. It's his property, even if rented.

Some things are worth dying for, and freedom is one of them. Apparently some people will never understand that. A lot of Americans understood that in WWII and thousands of their graves are in Europe, thanks to Hitler, and thanks to the loyalty those soldiers showed to their fine friends in Europe.

[canman]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

I happen to be one of your "idiots" and I have no idea why your flaming and personally insulting posts are tolerated. Let's back up and reiterate why there is a Second Amendment.

It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government. That removes all of the reasonableness of arguments against having military style rifles. If I ever have to exercise my Second Amendment rights it will be a battle and I won't want a bird gun. The Second Amendment mentions a militia, which at the time was an ad hoc group of citizens rising up. It is a military purposed amendment.

ALL of the arguments about why people in certain areas such as cities shouldn't have guns, or about what types of guns people should be allowed to own are moot.

There are statements all over the place in this thread about what types of guns are necessary. Someone said that hunters should be limited to such as shotguns. That person hasn't seen the US. There are vast open spaces with nothing but sagebrush where you can see your prey for a mile or more. You have to figure out how to stalk it to get within a more reasonable distance like no farther than 600 yards. You should see some of the rifles and high powered scopes and spotting scopes and range finding (distance measuring) scopes those hunters have.

Yes, the law and court precedents over time allow guns for hunting too.

But primarily they are for defense, and I want the best defensive weapons I can get.

Also, as to the OP, I have a state issued license to conceal a handgun. That's on my person or in my car. A person without that license may not conceal a weapon in his car. He may carry it open in a holster or on the seat, but he may not conceal it. If he wished to leave it concealed in his car he must remove the ammunition and store it in a different place than the gun, and the gun may not be within his reach. For most people that means putting the unloaded gun in the trunk and the ammo under the seat. Laws vary state to state on the subject, but that's my state.

Again, if the owner of private property bans guns from that property, I must obey or I'm a trespasser subject to arrest even with my license. It's his property, even if rented.

Some things are worth dying for, and freedom is one of them. Apparently some people will never understand that. A lot of Americans understood that in WWII and thousands of their graves are in Europe, thanks to Hitler, and thanks to the loyalty those soldiers showed to their fine friends in Europe.

"It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government." and does it?? I am not anti gun ownership by the way, I had my first .22 at 12 and still enjoy shooting when i get the chance. However, I have never understood the argument that civilians armed with a variety of weapons could possibly pose any threat to the American military. Have you ever or can you imagine a scenario where a group of citizens have taken up arms against the US government and it ends well for the civilians?

Edited February 5, 2013 by canman

[F430murci]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

I happen to be one of your "idiots" and I have no idea why your flaming and personally insulting posts are tolerated. Let's back up and reiterate why there is a Second Amendment.

It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government. That removes all of the reasonableness of arguments against having military style rifles. If I ever have to exercise my Second Amendment rights it will be a battle and I won't want a bird gun. The Second Amendment mentions a militia, which at the time was an ad hoc group of citizens rising up. It is a military purposed amendment.

ALL of the arguments about why people in certain areas such as cities shouldn't have guns, or about what types of guns people should be allowed to own are moot.

There are statements all over the place in this thread about what types of guns are necessary. Someone said that hunters should be limited to such as shotguns. That person hasn't seen the US. There are vast open spaces with nothing but sagebrush where you can see your prey for a mile or more. You have to figure out how to stalk it to get within a more reasonable distance like no farther than 600 yards. You should see some of the rifles and high powered scopes and spotting scopes and range finding (distance measuring) scopes those hunters have.

Yes, the law and court precedents over time allow guns for hunting too.

But primarily they are for defense, and I want the best defensive weapons I can get.

Also, as to the OP, I have a state issued license to conceal a handgun. That's on my person or in my car. A person without that license may not conceal a weapon in his car. He may carry it open in a holster or on the seat, but he may not conceal it. If he wished to leave it concealed in his car he must remove the ammunition and store it in a different place than the gun, and the gun may not be within his reach. For most people that means putting the unloaded gun in the trunk and the ammo under the seat. Laws vary state to state on the subject, but that's my state.

Again, if the owner of private property bans guns from that property, I must obey or I'm a trespasser subject to arrest even with my license. It's his property, even if rented.

Some things are worth dying for, and freedom is one of them. Apparently some people will never understand that. A lot of Americans understood that in WWII and thousands of their graves are in Europe, thanks to Hitler, and thanks to the loyalty those soldiers showed to their fine friends in Europe.

"It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government." and does it?? I am not anti gun ownership by the way, I had my first .22 at 12 and still enjoy shooting when i get the chance. However, I have never understood the argument that civilians armed with a variety of weapons could possibly pose any threat to the American military. Have you ever or can you imagine a scenario where a group of citizens have taken up arms against the US government and it ends well for the civilians?

Those that really believe they need guns to fight off our government are exactly those that should not be allowed to have guns.

[Sing_Sling]

Those that really believe they need guns to fight off our government are exactly those that should not be allowed to have guns.

Precisely

[NeverSure]

"It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government." and does it?? I am not anti gun ownership by the way, I had my first .22 at 12 and still enjoy shooting when i get the chance. However, I have never understood the argument that civilians armed with a variety of weapons could possibly pose any threat to the American military. Have you ever or can you imagine a scenario where a group of citizens have taken up arms against the US government and it ends well for the civilians?

Yes I certainly can. First, you have to assume that members of the military would back an oppressive government and I'm not sure they would. Second, there are fewer than 2 million members of the US military and that includes National Guard and reserves. They are scattered all over the world. Compare that to 90 million US gun owners with what some are now estimating may own nearly 300 million guns and Lord knows how much ammo.

Now realize that the military, even if it followed orders (which I doubt) couldn't just nuke cities. The Powers would need to preserve the infrastructure. They'd have to go after individual civilians, not knowing which ones they even wanted. No, they couldn't take the general population under those circumstances. I don't think individual pilots would fire on their own people, nor would other military members. Now you're down to the few who might, and they are far outnumbered.

There are more military style rifles in the hands of civilians than are owned by the US military, and the people know how to shoot.

Texas Tan Line.

Edited February 5, 2013 by NeverSure

[NeverSure]

Those that really believe they need guns to fight off our government are exactly those that should not be allowed to have guns.

Precisely

Unless that time comes. How soon we forget history. A couple of hundred years is a blink of the eye in history. It hasn't been that long ago that the Brits and the US and allies had to go re-take France and Germany and other countries in WWII. Why do we forget so quickly?

[F430murci]

"It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government." and does it?? I am not anti gun ownership by the way, I had my first .22 at 12 and still enjoy shooting when i get the chance. However, I have never understood the argument that civilians armed with a variety of weapons could possibly pose any threat to the American military. Have you ever or can you imagine a scenario where a group of citizens have taken up arms against the US government and it ends well for the civilians?

Yes I certainly can. First, you have to assume that members of the military would back an oppressive government and I'm not sure they would. Second, there are fewer than 2 million members of the US military and that includes National Guard and reserves. They are scattered all over the world. Compare that to 90 million US gun owners with what some are now estimating may own nearly 300 million guns and Lord knows how much ammo.

Now realize that the military, even if it followed orders (which I doubt) couldn't just nuke cities. The Powers would need to preserve the infrastructure. They'd have to go after individual civilians, not knowing which ones they even wanted. No, they couldn't take the general population under those circumstances. I don't think individual pilots would fire on their own people, nor would other military members. Now you're down to the few who might, and they are far outnumbered.

There are more military style rifles in the hands of civilians than are owned by the US military, and the people know how to shoot.

Oppressive government. Give me a break. We live in the US and cam pretty do and be what we want to be as long as you don't break the law. My wife is from Russia and I know many hotties from there and the Ukraine. Everyone whining about the US keeping them down are just flat losers who should be grateful they don't live in places like Mexico, Eastern Europe, Africa, middle east where people really have problems. My wife used to have to wait in bread lines, in the snow having to spend your entire paycheck that day before it would not buy a loaf of bread.

Oh and all of the fat loser slobs whining about not being able to get a job and how bad the economy. Stop spending your money on guns, get out of your bunker, take some Prozac for your delusional paranoid state of mind and get education and a job already.

I know many European girls who can barely speak English that have 3 jobs and knocking down close to 6 figures and they are grateful for every little opportunity give.

Oppressive government my butt.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Scott

[ggold]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

I happen to be one of your "idiots" and I have no idea why your flaming and personally insulting posts are tolerated. Let's back up and reiterate why there is a Second Amendment.

It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government. That removes all of the reasonableness of arguments against having military style rifles. If I ever have to exercise my Second Amendment rights it will be a battle and I won't want a bird gun. The Second Amendment mentions a militia, which at the time was an ad hoc group of citizens rising up. It is a military purposed amendment.

ALL of the arguments about why people in certain areas such as cities shouldn't have guns, or about what types of guns people should be allowed to own are moot.

There are statements all over the place in this thread about what types of guns are necessary. Someone said that hunters should be limited to such as shotguns. That person hasn't seen the US. There are vast open spaces with nothing but sagebrush where you can see your prey for a mile or more. You have to figure out how to stalk it to get within a more reasonable distance like no farther than 600 yards. You should see some of the rifles and high powered scopes and spotting scopes and range finding (distance measuring) scopes those hunters have.

Yes, the law and court precedents over time allow guns for hunting too.

But primarily they are for defense, and I want the best defensive weapons I can get.

Also, as to the OP, I have a state issued license to conceal a handgun. That's on my person or in my car. A person without that license may not conceal a weapon in his car. He may carry it open in a holster or on the seat, but he may not conceal it. If he wished to leave it concealed in his car he must remove the ammunition and store it in a different place than the gun, and the gun may not be within his reach. For most people that means putting the unloaded gun in the trunk and the ammo under the seat. Laws vary state to state on the subject, but that's my state.

Again, if the owner of private property bans guns from that property, I must obey or I'm a trespasser subject to arrest even with my license. It's his property, even if rented.

Some things are worth dying for, and freedom is one of them. Apparently some people will never understand that. A lot of Americans understood that in WWII and thousands of their graves are in Europe, thanks to Hitler, and thanks to the loyalty those soldiers showed to their fine friends in Europe.

Surely having to keep the ammo and weapon in seperate compartments could mean by the time you've loaded the weapon you are already dead, if the shooter is aiming at you! Maybe you're time would have been better off trying to flee the area!

So your second amendment rights gives you the right to revolt against the government, I would like to see what happens when that happens!

I really don't see what WWII has to do with the right to carry arms? Would America have entered the war if Japan had not attacked Pear Harbour? Not that I want to sound ungreatful for Americas assistance, even though I wasn't born!

Seriously the more people with access to guns the more chance of those guns being used! Shoot outs in the office or in the streets, all in the name of self protection! How Paranoid can a society get, and the NRA feed on that paranoia!

Edited February 5, 2013 by ggold

[NeverSure]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

I happen to be one of your "idiots" and I have no idea why your flaming and personally insulting posts are tolerated. Let's back up and reiterate why there is a Second Amendment.

It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government. That removes all of the reasonableness of arguments against having military style rifles. If I ever have to exercise my Second Amendment rights it will be a battle and I won't want a bird gun. The Second Amendment mentions a militia, which at the time was an ad hoc group of citizens rising up. It is a military purposed amendment.

ALL of the arguments about why people in certain areas such as cities shouldn't have guns, or about what types of guns people should be allowed to own are moot.

There are statements all over the place in this thread about what types of guns are necessary. Someone said that hunters should be limited to such as shotguns. That person hasn't seen the US. There are vast open spaces with nothing but sagebrush where you can see your prey for a mile or more. You have to figure out how to stalk it to get within a more reasonable distance like no farther than 600 yards. You should see some of the rifles and high powered scopes and spotting scopes and range finding (distance measuring) scopes those hunters have.

Yes, the law and court precedents over time allow guns for hunting too.

But primarily they are for defense, and I want the best defensive weapons I can get.

Also, as to the OP, I have a state issued license to conceal a handgun. That's on my person or in my car. A person without that license may not conceal a weapon in his car. He may carry it open in a holster or on the seat, but he may not conceal it. If he wished to leave it concealed in his car he must remove the ammunition and store it in a different place than the gun, and the gun may not be within his reach. For most people that means putting the unloaded gun in the trunk and the ammo under the seat. Laws vary state to state on the subject, but that's my state.

Again, if the owner of private property bans guns from that property, I must obey or I'm a trespasser subject to arrest even with my license. It's his property, even if rented.

Some things are worth dying for, and freedom is one of them. Apparently some people will never understand that. A lot of Americans understood that in WWII and thousands of their graves are in Europe, thanks to Hitler, and thanks to the loyalty those soldiers showed to their fine friends in Europe.

Surely having to keep the ammo and weapon in seperate compartments could mean by the time you've loaded the weapon you are already dead, if the shooter is aiming at you! Maybe you're time would have been better off trying to flee the area!

So your second amendment rights gives you the right to revolt against the government, I would like to see what happens when that happens!

I really don't see what WWII has to do with the right to carry arms? Would America have entered the war if Japan had not attacked Pear Harbour? Not that I want to sound ungreatful for Americas assistance, even though I wasn't born!

Seriously the more people with access to guns the more chance of those guns being used! Shoot outs in the office or in the streets, all in the name of self protection! How Paranoid can a society get, and the NRA feed on that paranoia!

The bit about separating the gun and ammo is only if you leave the gun unattended by an adult in a locked car, and that's only true if you don't have a concealed handgun license. If you have the license, you can leave it in the car loaded. The only time I have to lock my gun in my car is if I enter a place which prohibits guns, and I can just conceal it in the car loaded.

The bit about WWII was to point out that some citizens weren't adequately armed, or maybe instead willing, to defend their freedom and it was taken.

Your last bit simply fails to understand the culture and roll with it. We take the risk to preserve our freedom. I take a lot of risks so that I can have freedom. I have lived for 66 years in the US and have never been confronted by someone with a gun. I can't think of anyone else who I know personally who has, atm. I've never had a car accident either. My gun is like my car insurance. I don't expect to need it but I won't be without it just in case, either.

I will simply say that shootings make big news headlines worldwide, while things which are far more deadly don't. It seems that airline crashes and shootings bring out the emotions and make the news, although they are a tiny percentage of what kills people.

Edited February 5, 2013 by NeverSure

[chuckd]

Oppressive government. Give me a break. We live in the US and cam pretty do and be what we want to be as long as you don't break the law. My wife is from Russia and I know many hotties from there and the Ukraine. Everyone whining about the US keeping them down are just flat losers who should be grateful they don't live in places like Mexico, Eastern Europe, Africa, middle east where people really have problems. My wife used to have to wait in bread lines, in the snow having to spend your entire paycheck that day before it would not buy a loaf of bread.

Oh and all of the fat loser slobs whining about not being able to get a job and how bad the economy. Stop spending your money on guns, get out of your bunker, take some Prozac for your delusional paranoid state of mind and get education and a job already.

I know many European girls who can barely speak English that have 3 jobs and knocking down close to 6 figures and they are grateful for every little opportunity give.

Oppressive government my butt.

"I know many European girls who can barely speak English that have 3 jobs and knocking down close to 6 figures and they are grateful for every little opportunity give." (sic)

We have lots of girls like that working in Thailand too. There are many of them in Pattaya and Patpong.

Have you ever been to Thailand?

[ggold]

Maybe perhaps when Americans fought for the right to bear arms all those years ago (tell me when) they really did need it. But what was necessary a hundred years ago is surely not necessary today. Therefore they need to bring their gun laws up to date !

And stop this constant 'whingeing' about their rights, by a few idiots.

I happen to be one of your "idiots" and I have no idea why your flaming and personally insulting posts are tolerated. Let's back up and reiterate why there is a Second Amendment.

It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government. That removes all of the reasonableness of arguments against having military style rifles. If I ever have to exercise my Second Amendment rights it will be a battle and I won't want a bird gun. The Second Amendment mentions a militia, which at the time was an ad hoc group of citizens rising up. It is a military purposed amendment.

ALL of the arguments about why people in certain areas such as cities shouldn't have guns, or about what types of guns people should be allowed to own are moot.

There are statements all over the place in this thread about what types of guns are necessary. Someone said that hunters should be limited to such as shotguns. That person hasn't seen the US. There are vast open spaces with nothing but sagebrush where you can see your prey for a mile or more. You have to figure out how to stalk it to get within a more reasonable distance like no farther than 600 yards. You should see some of the rifles and high powered scopes and spotting scopes and range finding (distance measuring) scopes those hunters have.

Yes, the law and court precedents over time allow guns for hunting too.

But primarily they are for defense, and I want the best defensive weapons I can get.

Also, as to the OP, I have a state issued license to conceal a handgun. That's on my person or in my car. A person without that license may not conceal a weapon in his car. He may carry it open in a holster or on the seat, but he may not conceal it. If he wished to leave it concealed in his car he must remove the ammunition and store it in a different place than the gun, and the gun may not be within his reach. For most people that means putting the unloaded gun in the trunk and the ammo under the seat. Laws vary state to state on the subject, but that's my state.

Again, if the owner of private property bans guns from that property, I must obey or I'm a trespasser subject to arrest even with my license. It's his property, even if rented.

Some things are worth dying for, and freedom is one of them. Apparently some people will never understand that. A lot of Americans understood that in WWII and thousands of their graves are in Europe, thanks to Hitler, and thanks to the loyalty those soldiers showed to their fine friends in Europe.

Surely having to keep the ammo and weapon in seperate compartments could mean by the time you've loaded the weapon you are already dead, if the shooter is aiming at you! Maybe you're time would have been better off trying to flee the area!

So your second amendment rights gives you the right to revolt against the government, I would like to see what happens when that happens!

I really don't see what WWII has to do with the right to carry arms? Would America have entered the war if Japan had not attacked Pear Harbour? Not that I want to sound ungreatful for Americas assistance, even though I wasn't born!

Seriously the more people with access to guns the more chance of those guns being used! Shoot outs in the office or in the streets, all in the name of self protection! How Paranoid can a society get, and the NRA feed on that paranoia!

The bit about separating the gun and ammo is only if you leave the gun unattended by an adult in a locked car, and that's only true if you don't have a concealed handgun license. If you have the license, you can leave it in the car loaded. The only time I have to lock my gun in my car is if I enter a place which prohibits guns, and I can just conceal it in the car loaded.

The bit about WWII was to point out that some citizens weren't adequately armed, or maybe instead willing, to defend their freedom and it was taken.

Your last bit simply fails to understand the culture and roll with it. We take the risk to preserve our freedom. I take a lot of risks so that I can have freedom. I have lived for 66 years in the US and have never been confronted by someone with a gun. I can't think of anyone else who I know personally who has, atm. I've never had a car accident either. My gun is like my car insurance. I don't expect to need it but I won't be without it just in case, either.

I will simply say that shootings make big news headlines worldwide, while things which are far more deadly don't. It seems that airline crashes and shootings bring out the emotions and make the news, although they are a tiny percentage of what kills people.

Sure the thing about culture is that it evolves, is the second amendment really applicable in this day and age? If people are not happy with the way government is organised then surely they would strive to change that. Or is it reserved for tyrant presidents, I could think of one President, everyone followed him blindly into a second war!

Culturaly speaking is there a desire to return to the good old days of the wild west? I'm not saying if a guy wants to go hunting he shouldn't be allowed to carry a rifle, but in cities? I can see scenarios where three good guys pull out guns because of one bad guy carrying a gun, they all get shot because no one really knew who the bad guy was!

The idea that taking the risk to protect your freedom is some how a valid reason to carry arms! Well maybe somewhere in the history of America that was applicable, but surely that real freedom has been lost in America decades ago? Americans are not free to travel unhindered even in America. Look at the ATS. I have been in a few airports in the states since 9/11 most of those they searched were kids who probably had a reefer before entering the airport or maybe suspected of carrying a bit of personal! The thing is every American became a terrorist suspect after 9/11! Is that FREEDOM?

Edited February 5, 2013 by ggold

[Sing_Sling]

The ideas and principles of checks and balances in an established democracy is lost on some frightened people . . . comparing 21st century USA to 1940s Germany is not only simplistic to the extreme but is also the worn-out paradigm of the bogey-man and reds under the beds.

Do you vote? Why do you vote? You assert gun ownership as being your 'right', but under this tyrannical dictatorship you are so afraid of you wouldn't have any guns.

As for your description of using nuclear weapons on one's own population and the like . . .

[F430murci]

Oppressive government. Give me a break. We live in the US and cam pretty do and be what we want to be as long as you don't break the law. My wife is from Russia and I know many hotties from there and the Ukraine. Everyone whining about the US keeping them down are just flat losers who should be grateful they don't live in places like Mexico, Eastern Europe, Africa, middle east where people really have problems. My wife used to have to wait in bread lines, in the snow having to spend your entire paycheck that day before it would not buy a loaf of bread.

Oh and all of the fat loser slobs whining about not being able to get a job and how bad the economy. Stop spending your money on guns, get out of your bunker, take some Prozac for your delusional paranoid state of mind and get education and a job already.

I know many European girls who can barely speak English that have 3 jobs and knocking down close to 6 figures and they are grateful for every little opportunity give.

Oppressive government my butt.

"I know many European girls who can barely speak English that have 3 jobs and knocking down close to 6 figures and they are grateful for every little opportunity give." (sic)

We have lots of girls like that working in Thailand too. There are many of them in Pattaya and Patpong.

Have you ever been to Thailand?

Classy. You obviously hang around a different element than I. No, these girls are not hookers and they earn a legal and honest living without sitting around whining about ridiculous things of which they have zero knowledge. You alone complain more about a country you don't live in they I hear them collectively complain about anything over the course of a year.

[Sing_Sling]

I take a lot of risks so that I can have freedom.

I'm sure you do.

Your average gun-nut, anti-government conspiracy theorist deciding that enough is enough

• Step 1 - try to get out of EZ-Chair after being told he has to register his guns
  
• Step 2 - replace pizza-stained towel with battle fatigues
  
• Step 3 - wear overalls instead due to one pizza too many
  
• Step 4 - camouflage paint turned to dust so borrow wife's lipstick and make-up
  
• Step 5 - wear camouflage slippers with NRA-Logo
  
• Step 6 - amble to 1993 Honda Civic and attempt to start car. Realize gas tank is empty and take a bus to gas station
  
• Step 7 - meet up with fellow freedom fighters at Jeb's Diner and Ye Olde Gunne Shoppe and have the 3lb special on grits and bacon
  
• Step 8 - get ready to battle with Jethro, Billy-Bob and Cletus against the black-clad government forces led by president Blackenstein and his Communist European allies
  
• Step 9 - realise that gun still at home
  
• Step 10 - return home to get gun, spy half-eaten pizza and re-runs of Dallas on tv . . . decide to battle tyranny tomorrow
  

Edited February 5, 2013 by Sing_Sling

[Sing_Sling]

I take a lot of risks so that I can have freedom.

I'm sure you do.

Your average gun-nut, anti-government conspiracy theorist deciding that enough is enough

• Step 1 - try to get out of EZ-Chair after being told he has to register his guns
  
• Step 2 - replace pizza-stained towel with battle fatigues
  
• Step 3 - wear overalls instead due to one pizza too many
  
• Step 4 - camouflage paint turned to dust so borrow wife's lipstick and make-up
  
• Step 5 - wear camouflage slippers with NRA-Logo
  
• Step 6 - amble to 1993 Honda Civic and attempt to start car. Realize gas tank is empty and take a bus to gas station
  
• Step 7 - meet up with fellow freedom fighters at Jeb's Diner and Ye Olde Gunne Shoppe and have the 3lb special on grits and bacon
  
• Step 8 - get ready to battle with Jethro, Billy-Bob and Cletus against the black-clad government forces led by president Blackenstein and his Communist European allies
  
• Step 9 - realise that gun still at home
  
• Step 10 - return home to get gun, spy half-eaten pizza and re-runs of Dallas on tv . . . decide to battle tyranny tomorrow
  

Sounds like an outstanding member of the Democratic Party.

I don't think neversure is a democrat . . . but I could be mistaken!

[canman]

"It's to assure the rights and the freedoms of individuals from government." and does it?? I am not anti gun ownership by the way, I had my first .22 at 12 and still enjoy shooting when i get the chance. However, I have never understood the argument that civilians armed with a variety of weapons could possibly pose any threat to the American military. Have you ever or can you imagine a scenario where a group of citizens have taken up arms against the US government and it ends well for the civilians?

Yes I certainly can. First, you have to assume that members of the military would back an oppressive government and I'm not sure they would. Second, there are fewer than 2 million members of the US military and that includes National Guard and reserves. They are scattered all over the world. Compare that to 90 million US gun owners with what some are now estimating may own nearly 300 million guns and Lord knows how much ammo.

Now realize that the military, even if it followed orders (which I doubt) couldn't just nuke cities. The Powers would need to preserve the infrastructure. They'd have to go after individual civilians, not knowing which ones they even wanted. No, they couldn't take the general population under those circumstances. I don't think individual pilots would fire on their own people, nor would other military members. Now you're down to the few who might, and they are far outnumbered.

There are more military style rifles in the hands of civilians than are owned by the US military, and the people know how to shoot.

Texas Tan Line.

If the military would not back the 'oppressive' government and fire on it's own citizens then there is no reason for a private armed militia is there? It would be a coup d'état by the military. I also think you underestimate the power of the CIA, FBI, NSA and other 3 letter acronyms in keeping track of the leading voices of decent. If the sh1t actually did hit the fan and it was desirable for citizens to take up arms against the government you would find the revolt leaders targeted very efficently and taken out in a heartbeat. No matter how many guns you have you will not be effective without a centralised command and control structure. All the govenment has to do is shut off the power, water and bulk shipping. Within a week the populous will be far to preoccupied in trying to feed themselves then to worry about overthrowing the government.

I like the pic by the way.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Scott

[chuckd]

"I know many European girls who can barely speak English that have 3 jobs and knocking down close to 6 figures and they are grateful for every little opportunity give." (sic)

We have lots of girls like that working in Thailand too. There are many of them in Pattaya and Patpong.

Have you ever been to Thailand?

Classy. You obviously hang around a different element than I. No, these girls are not hookers and they earn a legal and honest living without sitting around whining about ridiculous things of which they have zero knowledge. You alone complain more about a country you don't live in they I hear them collectively complain about anything over the course of a year.

Yeah, I don't hang out with your element.

I'm just an old dumb country boy that spent the last 30 years of my working career on US sponsored defense contracts in the Middle East. I spent several years working for a federal law enforcement agency so I didn't have to rely on a surrogate brother to perform that deed for me. I served my country when called upon and then went back to my life.

I don't go shopping at Sak's or cocktail parties at the local country club. I have two cars but neither of them are a Ferrari or Lamborghini, although I have owned a number of Porsches in my early life if that counts. I live in a small village in Isaan in a modest 230 m2 bungalow and not in the heart of Florida, like some.

I have always been an avid supporter of the US and the Constitution, yet I feel the current administration is a very large threat to the freedoms I have enjoyed and want my children and grand-children living in the US to continue enjoying. You claim to be an attorney yet you seem to think my criticism of the current administration is somehow not within my constitutional rights in accordance with the First Amendment. Do you not believe I have that right or is it restricted to current residents of the US only?

In all of my 75 years I can make two claims. I have never performed an act that might cause harm to the US and I have never chased an ambulance.

You never answered my question about ever visiting Thailand.

[beechguy]

I take a lot of risks so that I can have freedom.

I'm sure you do.

Your average gun-nut, anti-government conspiracy theorist deciding that enough is enough

• Step 1 - try to get out of EZ-Chair after being told he has to register his guns
  
• Step 2 - replace pizza-stained towel with battle fatigues
  
• Step 3 - wear overalls instead due to one pizza too many
  
• Step 4 - camouflage paint turned to dust so borrow wife's lipstick and make-up
  
• Step 5 - wear camouflage slippers with NRA-Logo
  
• Step 6 - amble to 1993 Honda Civic and attempt to start car. Realize gas tank is empty and take a bus to gas station
  
• Step 7 - meet up with fellow freedom fighters at Jeb's Diner and Ye Olde Gunne Shoppe and have the 3lb special on grits and bacon
  
• Step 8 - get ready to battle with Jethro, Billy-Bob and Cletus against the black-clad government forces led by president Blackenstein and his Communist European allies
  
• Step 9 - realise that gun still at home
  
• Step 10 - return home to get gun, spy half-eaten pizza and re-runs of Dallas on tv . . . decide to battle tyranny tomorrow
  

And you would know an average gun nut how? I can't tell you how much I value your and others opinions, especially considering many of you have never bought or sold a firearm in the U.S., fired a firearm in the U.S., or for that matter have never been in the U.S. Thanks just the same, but I'll keep the U.S. just the way it is compared to Euroland, Australia, etc.

Edited February 5, 2013 by beechguy

[NeverSure]

I take a lot of risks so that I can have freedom.

I'm sure you do.

Your average gun-nut, anti-government conspiracy theorist deciding that enough is enough

• Step 1 - try to get out of EZ-Chair after being told he has to register his guns
  
• Step 2 - replace pizza-stained towel with battle fatigues
  
• Step 3 - wear overalls instead due to one pizza too many
  
• Step 4 - camouflage paint turned to dust so borrow wife's lipstick and make-up
  
• Step 5 - wear camouflage slippers with NRA-Logo
  
• Step 6 - amble to 1993 Honda Civic and attempt to start car. Realize gas tank is empty and take a bus to gas station
  
• Step 7 - meet up with fellow freedom fighters at Jeb's Diner and Ye Olde Gunne Shoppe and have the 3lb special on grits and bacon
  
• Step 8 - get ready to battle with Jethro, Billy-Bob and Cletus against the black-clad government forces led by president Blackenstein and his Communist European allies
  
• Step 9 - realise that gun still at home
  
• Step 10 - return home to get gun, spy half-eaten pizza and re-runs of Dallas on tv . . . decide to battle tyranny tomorrow
  

The issue for me is that you think all gun lovers are nuts. You also think they have no power. You simply don't know the culture and you don't know that there are FAR more ex military gun owners who would stand up than there are the type you just described.

In the US Army, the Special Forces are called Green Berets. Most people probably know that the Navy's version are the Seals.

Please read this article in the mainstream media about 1,100 Green Berets who recently signed a petition against gun control.

Please also read the actual petition containing their reasoning behind it. The petition came about because of the turmoil caused by the Sandy Hook School shootings.

THIS is how so very many completely sane and able Americans feel about gun control.

Take this seriously. Do you know how many Viet Nam vets there are still with us and still able, and that doesn't count the younger bunches, most of whom are conservative and pro-gun.

Edited February 5, 2013 by NeverSure