RDC
  • RDC
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
24 years ago
A picture is worth a 1000 words.
24926.jpg

Click to View Image119 View(s)

decasere_CW
24 years ago
mmm hmmm and we need to have uzi's and converted semi to fully automatic AK 47's right. I have no problem with guns for hunting, but too many idiots have pistols in thier cars and on thier person for my taste. Anyway that picture is a joke most NRA guys try to be super macho Charleton Heston wannabe's
rookie139
24 years ago
BS...Most gun owners are law-abiding good people...Don't believe the hype that Sarah Brady and her organization dish out...Great cartoon!!...I love it!...I love how (and I know that this may belong in the Politics Forum) PEOPLE ACTUALLY BELIEVE (DAMN CAPS) that criminals get their guns from gun shops...They buy them off the street for $20...Unbelievable
rookie139
24 years ago
and no, I don't believe that anyone except the military and police should have fully automatic weapons
rookie139
24 years ago
scratch that...I believe that only military and police should have weapons like that (fully auto)...My error
RICKAMAVEN
24 years ago
but how will i kill bambi without my uzi? or what if a bunch of people all break into my house at the same time and i have to shoot them all real fast including my kids who got home early from a party and came in the front door and i didn't have time to recognize them? i suppose i could always use my gatling gun.
calavera
24 years ago
I dont believe that fully automatic weapons are necessary for the general public to own. However, there is something called the second amendment that guarantees the right to own firearms. I guess the anti gun nazis just dont care about the constitution though, if the freedoms that it guarantees are inconvenient for them. The way I see it, anti gun people are also anti constitution and to me anti constitution equals anti american. Just ask the Japanese how well strict gun control works. Law abiding people have no guns, and get killed by the guns of criminals that get them illegally.
decasere_CW
24 years ago
what about England and Scotland, you can't have guns there and the violent crime rate is way down compared to the USA. I dont believe we can get rid of guns unless the government was willing to immediatly execute criminals found doing crime with one, which will never happen because we can't hafve the death penalty no can we. pffftttt (raspberry sound) why do i even worry myself with this??
hegemonic
24 years ago
Gatling guns work GREAT on large groups of kids!
ellesson
24 years ago
Decasre needs to do a little more reseach about the facts before posting.

The second amendment right to bears arms was not put into the constitution so we can hunt or to defend our homes. It was put there so that the people of the U.S had the means to defend the rest of the bill of rights such as the freedom of speach, assembly,etc. The second amendment is one our tools to keep the liberals from turning this country into another failed socialist state. cj
ClancyDaBulldog
24 years ago
they don't have rabies either, but you can still own a dog...
ClancyDaBulldog
24 years ago
"they" is england and such
rookie139
24 years ago
England and Scotland is a different culture entirely from the US..Poor comparison in my opinion...Most gun owners I know are responsible people who actually keep their firearms secured and locked away...We have more than 2,000 laws regulating firearms on the books as of today...We simply don't need more..We need to enforce the current federal/state laws that exist regarding criminals using firearms during the commission of a crime...Blame it on the attorneys (including state and US attorneys for agreeing to plea bargains for these types of crimes..We have here a bunch of uninformative jackasses who know absolutely nothing about firearms..No offense
RDC
  • RDC
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
24 years ago
Here is more fuel for the fire...

Jim Crow tactics erode gun rights


By David L. Peltz


I was raised in racially diverse New York City. In the 1950s, I took my first trip to the South and was in for a big shock.
Before me were "white" and "colored" drinking fountains, restrooms, etc. Segregation was rampant. Worse, it was totally acceptable to the white locals, the local governments and even to the Southern state governments.

Then, in the 1960s, the federal government stepped in and the civil rights of those who had been affected were restored. Local and state laws allowing civil rights deprivations and violations were eliminated.

The U.S. Constitution is the unquestioned law of our land. Its Bill of Rights protects the various unalienable rights of individual Americans. Among these are freedom of speech and the press, freedom of religion, and, though quite unpopular in California, the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. These are our civil rights.

Today, California's state government and a portion of its population are acting exactly in the same way that segregationists did in the 1950s. Only now, California firearms owners are the civil rights victims.

The Second Amendment clearly states that the individual "right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

You wouldn't know that in California, where the governor falsely believes it isn't an individual right at all.

On July 3, 2001, in Donald M. Bird vs. Gray Davis et al, Gov. Davis stated through his attorney general, that:

"(There is) no legally recognized right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution" and "the (U.S.) Constitution does not provide a private right to bear arms" and "the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of a weapon by a private citizen."

Davis' above-stated opinions on Californians' civil rights are even more wrong than the way he mismanaged the power crisis in California.

Californians are also told what firearms they may or may not "keep," and are generally prevented from "bearing" them anywhere. They must go through all kinds of bureaucratic hassles to purchase them, the number they can purchase is limited and they even have to register some.

It is exactly the same as Californians being told by the state which church they can and can't attend, how often they can buy "approved" Bibles, and that they first have to be tested and licensed in order to buy one. There would be lists of "registered" Catholics, Jews, Protestants, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. Imagine the outrage that would result if California passed any such laws.

But each year, California's legislators enact even more "gun control" laws. Another nine went into effect on Jan. 1. These laws (exactly like the old segregation laws) ignore the individual civil rights of California's firearms owners.

By contrast, at the federal level, things are quite different.

On May 17, 2001, John Ashcroft, the attorney general of the United States, stated his legal opinion that "the text and the original intent of the Second Amendment clearly protect the right of individuals to keep and bear firearms."

More recently, in U.S. vs. Emerson, the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit held that "the Second Amendment recognizes the right of individual citizens to own and possess firearms. ..."

In a National Review interview, Nelson Lund, a professor of law at the George Mason University School of Law, stated "(The Emerson ruling) is the most important and favorable Second Amendment judicial decision in American history. For the first time, a federal court of appeals has unambiguously held that the right to keep and bear arms belongs to individual citizens."

Because California's governor, attorney general, legislators and courts just don't get it, it's time for the federal government to go to California in the exact same way they went to Alabama in the 1960s -- to restore civil rights.

To make this happen, a "Petition for Enforcement of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States" is being circulated nationwide. It will be sent to the attorney general of the United States. The petition can be found at keepandbeararms.com/petition.

So far, (and entirely by word of mouth) tens of thousands of people from all 50 states have signed the petition and over 1,000 new signatures are arriving each week. Download the petition and read it. No matter how you may feel about firearms, please sign it.

All elected and appointed officials in the United States are required to take a solemn oath of office to support and defend the entire U.S. Constitution, and that includes the Second Amendment. When they don't, it's a civil rights matter.

---
David Peltz lives in Reseda. Write to him by e-mail at [email protected].
decasere_CW
24 years ago
okay rookie, i have been hunting since i was twelve and around guns all my life, but i am uninformed, maybe you should keep your mouth shut if you dont know who you are talking to, second, the second amendment was put in so that states could defend themselves against an overly powerful centralized government by forming a militia. seen any of that lately?? Third yes gun owners are typically responsible people and criminals get thier guns off the street. That being said, i still believe that people shouldnt be able to carry handguns, those caught commiting a crime using one shoud be executed and automatic weapons (including those which can easily be converted) should be outlawed for the general public. Call me a liberal hippie if you want, but get your facts straight, and i have mostly conservitive leanings so youd be wrong.
calavera
24 years ago
thank you to RDC for his post. now that was useful information. as for the gatling gun comments, now those are just childish.
rookie139
24 years ago
Again (liberal hippie as you wish to be so called), no offense 😉
decasere_CW
24 years ago
no offenswe taken really, just spoutin, and tired zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..hu oh sorry
tailgater
24 years ago
Sounds like you are on the same side. The problem is the vocal opposition to guns. They see terrible crimes, drive-by shootings, and murder and they blame the guns. I don't know the stats, but I would bet that a huge majority of gun owners feel that automatic weapons should be outlawed, but they are afraid that to do so would simply be a stepping stone for the anti-gun coalition. And it would be.
RICKAMAVEN
24 years ago
tailgater: "They see terrible crimes, drive-by shootings, and murder and they blame the guns." i blame the cars for the drive by's. i know guns don't kill, people do. i own 2 s&w's that are registered. one in the house and one in the office, so i am not anti gun. is there some problem with screening buyers and having guns registered?
Users browsing this topic