I am not sure. The article is specific in that this is new legislation making some places that previously had the ability to prohibit guns now have to allow them. I don't know about concealed. But the zoo, for instance, prohibited weapons, and now must allow them.

 

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

 

That's the issue I have with some of your post on guns. You don't do any background research, you read headlines and you get all in an uproar without knowing the facts, just what the media tells you.

 

Maybe I should just "wow" every post you make that I disagree with?

 

You won't answer certain parts of questions which leads me to think you support the government confiscating guns.

 

You know, have tried to respond to all questions by you and others. If I haven't answered to your satisfaction, or if I missed any, my apologies.

 

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

 

That's the issue I have with some of your post on guns. You don't do any background research, you read headlines and you get all in an uproar without knowing the facts, just what the media tells you.

 

I'm done.

 

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

You have your answers.

 

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

 

My answers are seeing you tap dance around specific questions without giving specific answers.

 

"I support gun control. Not everyone should have guns." Who should? Nothing..

 

"Would you support government taking people's guns?" "I don't support Martial Law."

 

Sorry but I believe in the constitution that this country was based upon is correct and anyone believes that citizens rights should be violated needs to move to a country that is in line with their beliefs.

I'm done.

 

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

 

Wow

Now quit picking on RM.

 

We just need to get her to Mt. Sterling the second weekend of October.

 

She can pick out a nice rifle....or quilt...I am betting the quilt....both show up in this video I did find about Court Days.

 

As to owning 48 guns being expensive and indicative of responsibility, I would point out that "many criminals own more than 48 guns", and I wouldn't think they're living responsibly.

RM, you just made that up.

 

My answers are seeing you tap dance around specific questions without giving specific answers.

 

"I support gun control. Not everyone should have guns." Who should? Nothing..

 

"Would you support government taking people's guns?" "I don't support Martial Law."

 

Sorry but I believe in the constitution that this country was based upon is correct and anyone believes that citizens rights should be violated needs to move to a country that is in line with their beliefs.

 

You asked the same questions if me in 2 threads. I answered. I won't be moving. Quite happy here. Even if things aren't ideal and I have to deal with gun totin' strangers. You'll never, either, find me calling for people who disagree with me to move to another country. Unlike some, I actually celebrate the diversity that is America.

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

I trust people walking their dogs less than I do someone that would open carry.

 

There's some truth in this for me. In previous threads I've talked about being a walker and being afraid of dogs. I can promise you that if I'm out walking and I see a someone walking a large dog without a leash (in violation of local law by the way) that would make me a whole lot more nervous and likely to change paths then if I saw someone with a gun.

Since a whole lot of the motivation for mass killings of any kind stems from a warped sense of need for fame and attention by the perpetrator would those that support restricting the 2nd amendment for legal gun owners also be in favor of restricting the 1st amendment so that the coverage of mass killings is limited so as not to give the perpetrator the "fame" they often desire. I refuse the sat their names but because of the coverage who doesn't know the names of the Columbine shooters, the Sandy Hook shooter, the Aurora Shooter? How much of that is becasue of the wall-to-wall coverage that all of the incidents garnered?

So...because I am not a gun enthusiast and advocate other methods of self-protection I must be for violating a Constitutional right? Wow.

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

 

 

Yes. That is the case. You know this though.

I trust people walking their dogs less than I do someone that would open carry.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Really? A dog? Really?

 

I have three and we walk them when is warm enough. Knowing this I'll never need a gun.

 

There's some truth in this for me. In previous threads I've talked about being a walker and being afraid of dogs. I can promise you that if I'm out walking and I see a someone walking a large dog without a leash (in violation of local law by the way) that would make me a whole lot more nervous and likely to change paths then if I saw someone with a gun.

 

I absolutely can understand that you fear unleashed dogs. You don't know anything about the dog or it's owner.

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Really? A dog? Really?

 

I have three and we walk them when is warm enough. Knowing this I'll never need a gun.

 

My dog doesn't like strangers and although small is very intimidating with his growling, snarling and barking. He is always on high alert and will growl and bark even at people walking on the other side of the street. I feel quite safe with my 35 lb protector.

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

Rockmom seems to be the few against the many. I don't have an issue with people's right to own a gun. I don't see ANY reason why any citizen other than a law enforcement office has ANY need to carry deadly force into the public. Maybe we should be discussing the insecurities and traumas of those who feel they need to be armed. And for background, I did work in law enforcement, and I have had guns pulled on me.