Why Gun Owners Distrust Our Government Where The 2nd Amendment Is Concerned

Originally Posted by Bluegrasscard

One thing could help is to not assume we can live a gun-free and armed security free-zone. Guns are 'around' in one way or another and the ability to stop someone bent on a killing spree is required.

Off the top of my head here are some notable multiple murders that were public and random. All of them did not have armed security present or were 'gun free' zones by law or company practice.

- Recent Aurora: Theater had policy and signage barring CCW in the building.
- Giffords Shooting: Armed security was not present for an even that featured a Congresswoman and a sitting and controversial Federal judge.
- Virgina Tech: Gun-free campus.
- Luby's Cafeteria Killeen (incident that Suzanna Gratia testified about to Congress): Texas did not allow CCW inside businesses.
- UT Tower sniper, 1966: UT campus - a gun free zone legally.

The data seems to indicate the passion for 'gun free' zones is a a common thread in mass shootings. It is the fallacy that safety comes from disarming free good men and women. Cowards, like most of these shooters are, strike at the weak and the disarmed.

Recently at a national combine my wife noticed a gentlemen with a holstered large caliber pistol as they were existing the car. He had on a large T-shirt and when standing it was not to noticeable. I later talked to him on the sidelines and we talked only about youth football and not about the fact that he was packing. I found out he was Chicago off-duty police officer. I assume the campus had a no-gun rule but it felt good knowing that someone was prepared if needed.

References:

Lack of security at Giffords event: Giffords Shooting: The Security Problem - Phoenix News - Valley Fever



BTW - a picture with Ms. Giffords with a Kalashnikov in the article above.

Of course Dr. Suzanna Gratia's testimony - maybe the best comments from an actual victim on the subject of gun free zones and on the 2nd Amendment.

THIS! Well said, Bluegrasscard!

And for those of you agreeing with the president or others calling for a ban or more limitations, if you haven't done so, please listen to Dr. Gratia's testimony and please....please.....try to let it sink in.

Originally Posted by PepRock01

So basically any hunting weapon would require those tests. As I said before the rounds used in hunting rifles are actually more powerful, in most cases, than those used in most assault rifles and those rifles that are civilian versions of your military rifles.

Extensive testing for the right to buy all guns then. Even BB guns. Civilian versions, hunting versions, military versions. Extensive psychological and psychiatric testing that is done yearly and charge at least $150.00 a bullet for the most basic and cheapest bullet with the price/bullet rising for better bullets. Whatever the answer is it has to be made harder to receive weapons. Period.

Originally Posted by PurplePride92

Extensive testing for the right to buy all guns then. Even BB guns. Civilian versions, hunting versions, military versions. Extensive psychological and psychiatric testing that is done yearly and charge at least $150.00 a bullet for the most basic and cheapest bullet with the price/bullet rising for better bullets. Whatever the answer is it has to be made harder to receive weapons. Period.

Absurd! Come on PP92, you're better then that. I can argue the same should be done to buy a car, talk about a lethal weapon. Perhaps you should have to pay $150.00 per gallon of gas? A hell of a lot more civilians are killed every year by irresponsible drivers, drunk drivers and nut-jobs with anger issues.

Originally Posted by Run To State

Absurd! Come on PP92, you're better then that. I can argue the same should be done to buy a car, talk about a lethal weapon. Perhaps you should have to pay $150.00 per gallon of gas?

I heard it from a comedian.

He said if people had to pay an absurd amount of money for bullets I bet they'd think twice before they shot their gun. He also said if they do shoot someone you know they meant it.

I don't know what else to say though. There is an affable solution without banning guns.

Originally Posted by PurplePride92

I heard it from a comedian.

He said if people had to pay an absurd amount of money for bullets I bet they'd think twice before they shot their gun. He also said if they do shoot someone you know they meant it.

I don't know what else to say though. There is an affable solution without banning guns.

Whew! You had me worried for a minute there!

I really hope we can find a way without banning guns or adding more limitations. Believe me, I feel for the victims and their families. I pray that we can come up with a sensible, viable solution. Hard part is, you can't always know when someone is losing their marbles in time to react.

THAT is one of the most powerful testimonies that I have ever heard! RTS, you need to help me figure out how to post that to my Facebook page. I have some friends that need to consider her point of view.

Cancel that request, RTS. I figured it out.

Reading what some of you post, I suppose I should be shocked that I have managed to survive this world without ever having owned a gun. Even more amazing....my kids are doing quite well without owning guns.

But...I am not shocked. I respect your right to own your guns. I resent your attempt to paint people who question the need for certain types of guns or question the reasoning for such as anti- American.

Originally Posted by PepRock01

He never said they were.

Not talking about RTS, any one that knows anything about guns and or the military knows whom I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by sportsfan41

Not talking about RTS, any one that knows anything about guns and or the military knows whom I'm talking about.

Obviously! Even Russia isn't using the AK-47 anymore. I was just commenting on it due to the fact that you directly quoted him.

Originally Posted by Run To State

Too funny. I'm guessing you're kidding.
The point I was making was the president and the media (as well as some on here) keep using the AK, a military copy mind you, as their poster child for a gun ban. The president's quote:

“But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers and not in the hands of crooks. They belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities,” he added.


It's obvious he has no clue about the very rifle he's speaking of.

You know we're on the same page my man it's just hard to show it via the internet. My line was simply the spike which you had set for me.

Originally Posted by Run To State

Too funny. I'm guessing you're kidding.
The point I was making was the president and the media (as well as some on here) keep using the AK, a military copy mind you, as their poster child for a gun ban. The president's quote:

“But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers and not in the hands of crooks. They belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities,” he added.

It's obvious he has no clue about the very rifle he's speaking of.

Ha I quoted you before reading your entire post, but that's EXACTLY what I was referring to, I figured you had an idea.

Originally Posted by PurplePride92

I don't have an answer. That's my point. I also never specified what the fix could be. It could be extensive psychological tests to receive high powered guns. It could be more extensive licensing and testing to receive these guns. It could be an abnormal tax on ammo. I don't know what the fix could be but IMO there has to be something better than 'it's gonna happen anyways.'

Exactly the point, lets add make it more expensive for law abiding citizens to get the guns they want. Also taxpayers as a whole will contribute to this.

Originally Posted by rockmom

Reading what some of you post, I suppose I should be shocked that I have managed to survive this world without ever having owned a gun. Even more amazing....my kids are doing quite well without owning guns.

But...I am not shocked. I respect your right to own your guns. I resent your attempt to paint people who question the need for certain types of guns or question the reasoning for such as anti- American.

RM, I'm sorry if any of my posts came off that way. That was not my intention. I certainly don't want anyone owning a gun that doesn't want to or is uncomfortable with them.

Originally Posted by rockmom

Reading what some of you post, I suppose I should be shocked that I have managed to survive this world without ever having owned a gun. Even more amazing....my kids are doing quite well without owning guns.

But...I am not shocked. I respect your right to own your guns. I resent your attempt to paint people who question the need for certain types of guns or question the reasoning for such as anti- American.

That's great and I sincerely hope you and they never find yourself/themselves in a situation where you/they wish a gun was available. Nobody on here is saying you should have to own a gun.


You're going to have to show me where in this thread anyone painted people who question the need for certain types of guns or question the reasoning for such as anti- American. I have a problem with it, yes. Why? Because I resent your/their attempts to limit my 2nd amendment rights. I also resent knee-jerk reactions as solutions, especially when it's obvious many don't even understand guns in question or the fact that banning or limiting them will solve nothing.

Originally Posted by rockmom

Reading what some of you post, I suppose I should be shocked that I have managed to survive this world without ever having owned a gun. Even more amazing....my kids are doing quite well without owning guns.

But...I am not shocked. I respect your right to own your guns. I resent your attempt to paint people who question the need for certain types of guns or question the reasoning for such as anti- American.

Not sure how you connected the dots to reach that conclusion. I can't seem to find anything in the thread to get that.

Originally Posted by spindoc

Not sure how you connected the dots to reach that conclusion. I can't seem to find anything in the thread to get that.

I'm confused as well. I looked again, unless I missed it, it's just not there.

Originally Posted by Run To State

Whew! You had me worried for a minute there!

I really hope we can find a way without banning guns or adding more limitations. Believe me, I feel for the victims and their families. I pray that we can come up with a sensible, viable solution. Hard part is, you can't always know when someone is losing their marbles in time to react.

Just saw the stand up routine. It was Chris Rock:Bigger and Blacker(1999)

He said bullets should be $5,000 apiece. He said if they were $5,000 apiece there wouldn't be anymore innocent bystanders. He then said when someone gets shot then you know they did something messed up. They unloaded 50K worth of bullets in him he must have really made somebody mad.


Good stuff.

Originally Posted by PurplePride92

Just saw the stand up routine. It was Chris Rock:Bigger and Blacker(1999)

He said bullets should be $5,000 apiece. He said if they were $5,000 apiece there wouldn't be anymore innocent bystanders. He then said when someone gets shot then you know they did something messed up. They unloaded 50K worth of bullets in him he must have really made somebody mad.




Good stuff.

Have seen and loved that skit. Love Chris Rock.

Originally Posted by ekubum

Wow. I don't understand this line of thinking at all. If someone comes into my home to cause my family or property harm you better believe I'll do what I need to protect my family.

While I"m not for banning guns, I'd certainly not argue with James Brady on it. He's experienced it firsthand, and I can understand his viewpoint.