IMO this whole gun control push is such a dynamic situation. Let me state I am against gun control and all for the 2nd Amendment.

 

 

 

However, as someone who has a CCDW license but no gun yet I can't help but be confused about some the stances people are taking in defending the right to own whatever gun you want to own. People say I want to protect my family. Does it really take an AK-47 to protect your family? Does it really take magazine with 22 bullets in it to protect your family? And let me also say I understand the hunter's perspective on the issue and I do believe that hunters shouldn't be restricted from purchasing guns they have always been allowed to purchase but even if some guns were restricted will you really not be able to hunt anymore? Will your kill ratio suffer or something? Guns are instruments designed to kill. Not to shoot clay pigeons. Not to shoot at gun ranges. These are instruments of death. I will be purchsing a gun because my wife is paranoid that someone is going to rob us and that's cool. I'll buy a gat and keep it close by just in case somebody wants to steal my tv but if not for her and her gun loving, gun toting family I probably wouldn't buy one. Never needed one in 38 years of life and I doubt I'll get to kill anyone before I die so a gun is useless to me in my life and lifestyle. I'm just trying to truly understand why people are so bent up in arms for possibly not being allowed to arm themselves like the military anymore. Should the citizens really be armed like the military? Should my neighbor have a better arsenal than the police department? And don't give me that protect ourselves from the government crap either. The Civil War is over. Isn't it?

 

I wish weed was legal and I understand it isn't a constitutional amendment but I still conform to the laws of the land even if I don't agree with them. Just got another speeding ticket the other day. Back to traffic school to work on my Masters. I guess what I am saying is the world is changing daily and if the government decides my gat can only hold 6 bullets then I am fine with that because if I have to use it then I'll only use one bullet anyways.

IMO this whole gun control push is such a dynamic situation. Let me state I am against gun control and all for the 2nd Amendment.

 

However, as someone who has a CCDW license but no gun yet I can't help but be confused about some the stances people are taking in defending the right to own whatever gun you want to own. People say I want to protect my family. Does it really take an AK-47 to protect your family? Does it really take magazine with 22 bullets in it to protect your family? And let me also say I understand the hunter's perspective on the issue and I do believe that hunters shouldn't be restricted from purchasing guns they have always been allowed to purchase but even if some guns were restricted will you really not be able to hunt anymore? Will your kill ratio suffer or something? Guns are instruments designed to kill. Not to shoot clay pigeons. Not to shoot at gun ranges. These are instruments of death. I will be purchsing a gun because my wife is paranoid that someone is going to rob us and that's cool. I'll buy a gat and keep it close by just in case somebody wants to steal my tv but if not for her and her gun loving, gun toting family I probably wouldn't buy one. Never needed one in 38 years of life and I doubt I'll get to kill anyone before I die so a gun is useless to me in my life and lifestyle. I'm just trying to truly understand why people are so bent up in arms for possibly not being allowed to arm themselves like the military anymore. Should the citizens really be armed like the military? Should my neighbor have a better arsenal than the police department? And don't give me that protect ourselves from the government crap either. The Civil War is over. Isn't it?

 

I wish weed was legal and I understand it isn't a constitutional amendment but I still conform to the laws of the land even if I don't agree with them. Just got another speeding ticket the other day. Back to traffic school to work on my Masters. I guess what I am saying is the world is changing daily and if the government decides my gat can only hold 6 bullets then I am fine with that because if I have to use it then I'll only use one bullet anyways.

 

How fast were you going? :lol: I'm glad we share the same driving record. :lol:

 

To your overall point on gun control, I agree with much of this & continue to ask a lot of the same questions. As I've said elsewhere, I'm a gun idiot since I have never owned one (nor do I plan to own one). They frighten me a great deal because I had a rifle pointed at me on one occasion (it was empty, it was a gag, but I don't know if I've ever been more shaken in my life).

 

Having said that, like you, I am fully supportive of the right to bear arms. I'm just not sure our forefathers had in mind some of the firepower that is available today when they included that in the Constitution.

How fast were you going? :lol: I'm glad we share the same driving record. :lol:

 

To your overall point on gun control, I agree with much of this & continue to ask a lot of the same questions. As I've said elsewhere, I'm a gun idiot since I have never owned one (nor do I plan to own one). They frighten me a great deal because I had a rifle pointed at me on one occasion (it was empty, it was a gag, but I don't know if I've ever been more shaken in my life).

 

Having said that, like you, I am fully supportive of the right to bear arms. I'm just not sure our forefathers had in mind some of the firepower that is available today when they included that in the Constitution.

 

78 in a 55. Coming back from the Ballard/Trinity game. Drove all the way from Louisville and got pulled over right outside of Danville. Go figure.......

 

 

Exactly.....guns scare me also. When holding a gun I am amazed that I could end someone's life purposely or accidentally and that troubles me. At the same time the rush from firing a gun is a rush of power that is unmatched IMO. I am all for the 2nd Amendment but I am willing to conform to the parameters of whatever law they push forward. Call me naive but I think it is for the best.

1st Amendment didn't foresee the use of National Media(propaganda) and use of the internet. So should we limit it also?

78 in a 55. Coming back from the Ballard/Trinity game. Drove all the way from Louisville and got pulled over right outside of Danville. Go figure.......

 

 

Exactly.....guns scare me also. When holding a gun I am amazed that I could end someone's life purposely or accidentally and that troubles me. At the same time the rush from firing a gun is a rush of power that is unmatched IMO. I am all for the 2nd Amendment but I am willing to conform to the parameters of whatever law they push forward. Call me naive but I think it is for the best.

 

 

SO they ban their made up term"Assault Weapons".

 

What happens when the next mass shooting is with a lever action Winchester or multiple handguns?

SO they ban their made up term"Assault Weapons".

 

What happens when the next mass shooting is with a lever action Winchester or multiple handguns?

 

Me personally, I would conform to the law. It honestly wouldn't bother me if every house and vehicle was searched and all guns confiscated. PP92 would survive.

IMO this whole gun control push is such a dynamic situation. Let me state I am against gun control and all for the 2nd Amendment.

 

 

 

However, as someone who has a CCDW license but no gun yet I can't help but be confused about some the stances people are taking in defending the right to own whatever gun you want to own. People say I want to protect my family. Does it really take an AK-47 to protect your family? Does it really take magazine with 22 bullets in it to protect your family? And let me also say I understand the hunter's perspective on the issue and I do believe that hunters shouldn't be restricted from purchasing guns they have always been allowed to purchase but even if some guns were restricted will you really not be able to hunt anymore? Will your kill ratio suffer or something? Guns are instruments designed to kill. Not to shoot clay pigeons. Not to shoot at gun ranges. These are instruments of death. I will be purchsing a gun because my wife is paranoid that someone is going to rob us and that's cool. I'll buy a gat and keep it close by just in case somebody wants to steal my tv but if not for her and her gun loving, gun toting family I probably wouldn't buy one. Never needed one in 38 years of life and I doubt I'll get to kill anyone before I die so a gun is useless to me in my life and lifestyle. I'm just trying to truly understand why people are so bent up in arms for possibly not being allowed to arm themselves like the military anymore. Should the citizens really be armed like the military? Should my neighbor have a better arsenal than the police department? And don't give me that protect ourselves from the government crap either. The Civil War is over. Isn't it?

 

I wish weed was legal and I understand it isn't a constitutional amendment but I still conform to the laws of the land even if I don't agree with them. Just got another speeding ticket the other day. Back to traffic school to work on my Masters. I guess what I am saying is the world is changing daily and if the government decides my gat can only hold 6 bullets then I am fine with that because if I have to use it then I'll only use one bullet anyways.

 

 

You say that you are only going to use one bullet? How do you know? What if there are three perps breaking in? What if your adrenaline kicks in and you miss?

IMO this whole gun control push is such a dynamic situation. Let me state I am against gun control and all for the 2nd Amendment.

 

 

 

However, as someone who has a CCDW license but no gun yet I can't help but be confused about some the stances people are taking in defending the right to own whatever gun you want to own. People say I want to protect my family. Does it really take an AK-47 to protect your family? Does it really take magazine with 22 bullets in it to protect your family? And let me also say I understand the hunter's perspective on the issue and I do believe that hunters shouldn't be restricted from purchasing guns they have always been allowed to purchase but even if some guns were restricted will you really not be able to hunt anymore? Will your kill ratio suffer or something? Guns are instruments designed to kill. Not to shoot clay pigeons. Not to shoot at gun ranges. These are instruments of death. I will be purchsing a gun because my wife is paranoid that someone is going to rob us and that's cool. I'll buy a gat and keep it close by just in case somebody wants to steal my tv but if not for her and her gun loving, gun toting family I probably wouldn't buy one. Never needed one in 38 years of life and I doubt I'll get to kill anyone before I die so a gun is useless to me in my life and lifestyle. I'm just trying to truly understand why people are so bent up in arms for possibly not being allowed to arm themselves like the military anymore. Should the citizens really be armed like the military? Should my neighbor have a better arsenal than the police department? And don't give me that protect ourselves from the government crap either. The Civil War is over. Isn't it?

 

I wish weed was legal and I understand it isn't a constitutional amendment but I still conform to the laws of the land even if I don't agree with them. Just got another speeding ticket the other day. Back to traffic school to work on my Masters. I guess what I am saying is the world is changing daily and if the government decides my gat can only hold 6 bullets then I am fine with that because if I have to use it then I'll only use one bullet anyways.

 

To answer a couple of questions, yes, I should be able to be as well armed as a foot soldier in the Military. The fact is that it is already against the law for me to be that well armed. Yes, I should certainly be as well armed as the police. This is an amendment to the Constitution, no different than any other. People are trying to impose their will on this amendment by other means than our founders ever wanted. It is very easy. It takes an amendment to change an amendment. Get together a 3/4 majority, and you can institute gun control. If that happened, I would be willing to do so. Any other means is an effort of tyranny by a small majority, and I will instantly become a criminal the second someone tries to take away one of my Constitutionally guaranteed rights through these means.

To answer a couple of questions, yes, I should be able to be as well armed as a foot soldier in the Military. The fact is that it is already against the law for me to be that well armed. Yes, I should certainly be as well armed as the police. This is an amendment to the Constitution, no different than any other. People are trying to impose their will on this amendment by other means than our founders ever wanted. It is very easy. It takes an amendment to change an amendment. Get together a 3/4 majority, and you can institute gun control. If that happened, I would be willing to do so. Any other means is an effort of tyranny by a small majority, and I will instantly become a criminal the second someone tries to take away one of my Constitutionally guaranteed rights through these means.

 

..................................

How fast were you going? :lol: I'm glad we share the same driving record. :lol:

 

To your overall point on gun control, I agree with much of this & continue to ask a lot of the same questions. As I've said elsewhere, I'm a gun idiot since I have never owned one (nor do I plan to own one). They frighten me a great deal because I had a rifle pointed at me on one occasion (it was empty, it was a gag, but I don't know if I've ever been more shaken in my life).

 

Having said that, like you, I am fully supportive of the right to bear arms. I'm just not sure our forefathers had in mind some of the firepower that is available today when they included that in the Constitution.

 

I feel much the same way as you and 92. Don't own a gun and don't plan to. Support the 2nd Amendment but understand neither the need nor the desire for some of the artillery that's been discussed. I've had a handgun drawn on me in the workplace at night. I've shot guns before and was a decent shot, but never got a thrill doing it. Never hunted but don't begrudge those who do. I'd rather watch a round of golf or take in a ballgame. Different strokes for different folks.

You say that you are only going to use one bullet? How do you know? What if there are three perps breaking in? What if your adrenaline kicks in and you miss?

 

One per person. If three break in that's three bullets.

One per person. If three break in that's three bullets.

 

The likelyhood of taking out three intruders with three bullets is extremely small, even with the most advanced training. To think otherwise is exhibiting a high level of ignorance concerning statistics dealing with defense situations.

You will have to forgive my ignorance, but what do a set of dots mean Truthbtold?

Quit saying you "fully support" the second amendment but then in the same breath you'll comply with government mandates/regulations against that right to defend yourself.

 

We have that amendment for one purpose. Its been repeated on this site multiple times. You either support that reason and the second amendment, or you don't.

IF RedDawn breaks out, PP92 and Randy can make their way to my house. I live in a militarily advantageous spot on a mountain and am heavily armed. No ridiculous clips. Just lots and lots of ammo.