Wow.. Your arms must be tired and hands must be sore. That's a long time to be applauding ANYONE! lol

That was a great find.. I found it pretty funny, though, on the reasoning behind Obama's gun 'policies'. Politics, as usual.

---

I think the poll is also skewed by the phrasing of the question. I dislike guns and I would vote for better gun control but I also believe the 2nd amendment does give every US citizen the right to bear arms.

Well, there is the interesting question whether the right "comes" from the Bill of Rights or actually exists even in the absence thereof.

But I'm assuming that's not the question anyone is asking about/commenting on.

Me, I'm one of those natural rights crazies. :)

(shrug)

---

Wade - Not so crazy. The Founding Fathers specifically mentioned that you are BORN with Rights, not Rights are given to you by the government.

The distinction is very important.

---

Oh, I agree, zombie.

Would we have a right to speak as we wish without the First Amendment?

Would we have a right to worship as we wish with it?

Would we have a right to assemble?

Would we have a right to due process?

I admire Madison and company immensely. But *they* did not give me the rights that matter. And neither did the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

But, I imagine, very few Americans think rights are anything but "civil" anymore. Three generations of failure in constitutional and historical education add up.

---

I was going to create a new thread...instead I wanted to use the fixed Search feature, so I did.

Lawmakers seem prepared to tackle gun control: 'This one feels different' 


I've stated my opinion on Guns a few times. I do not believe THEY kill people, however, I think many "pro Gun" people are extremely ignorant when ignoring the fact that Guns are insanely efficient at killing people. A gun is far easier to obtain than building a homemade pipe bomb and much safer for the individual to use.

Fact: Guns = more efficient killing.
Fact: Guns themselves do not kill people.

We all agree on that.

I don't think MORE gun control is necessarily the answer. And I sure as hell do NOT think MORE people need guns. That theory is absurdly moronic! Albeit, I am of the thinking if EVERYONE had a gun, we'd be much nicer to our neighbors, lol.

The loss of 20 6 and 7 year olds is spawning this debate once again. The debate of more gun control.


This worries me because ... and you've all heard me whine about this before. People will cry "why doesnt the government help make us safer!!!" ... and when they insert protocols those same people cry "why do I have to go through security just to drop my kid off at school!".

If you don't believe me, think about 9/11 and airport screening.


The more WE complain, the MORE freedom we ALLOW the government to TAKE from us. I don't want this to happen.

There has to be another method.

---

It's a dumb question, I might expect 5% of people to not know the answer or just vote no to be dumb but still. They're not asking if the second amendment allows people the right to bear guns, or bear semiautomatic weapons. Just "The right to bear arms" which makes it a very, very easy answer regardless of people's personal opinions about the amendment.

But when they wrote the words "right to bear arms" the world was equipted with muzzleloaders not AK47's and M16's. To me this issue is just like the tax issue of raising taxes 3% on the wealthy. It really isn't that big of a deal to make a compromise but you have radical people on both sides that won't budge and inch. And then the masses get caught in a black and white resolution when the real answer is grey.

---

To me it is very simple. If you commit a crime with a gun involved, don't care what the nature of the crime is, you will be punished by death.

Basically, you are disregarding the safety of others with your actions on committing a crime with a gun, a weapon that can kill easily. And since you have little regard for life, yours is now over.

This would drastically cut down on gun crime that we hear about daily. This thug mentality some have.. the "street cred" or idolization of war games for the game consoles. Placing the threat back upon the criminal that he only has one strike.. if that doesn't deter, I don't think much will.

But to me, how do you stop a person from snapping? This sounds like a guy that lost it. Unless you monitor each and every American daily, I don't know how you stop this type of crime.

There is little way to say that if he didn't have guns he would not have used another weapon at his disposal. A car at school closing. A explosive device. Hence why I think it is more of a people and societal problem than a actual gun problem. But I do agree, we citizens have little need for assault type weapons.. even semi automatics are generally overkill for hunting and protection needs.

We could delve into games such as Call of Duty, and talk about the impression left on people as they are developing. But even then we had westerns back in the day.


The root of the problem is trying to balance freedom and protection of the masses.

---

You can go back to Reagan's eighties to trace the deterioration of the Mental Health Association in this country. Yet another social program gutted to enhance the War Machine. Not all of the children in our society are well adjusted human beings, and because they are able to slip through the cracks, the ones that need help aren't getting it.

They make us get permits to hunt and fish, but any unstable asshole gets to be a parent. What happened in Connecticut is a societal breakdown on many levels including parenting, teachers, school counselors, pedestrians. And I'm not defending the crime either, there was personal responsibility for him to get help as well.

---