I don't like guns. I don't like that my "Jerry Springer guest" like neighbors in the apartment might have them, I don't like that the guy riding my tail on the highway may have one, I don't even really like the thought that you (yeah you) have one.

 

I don't see where I would feel comfortable with the aftermath of killing someone with a weapon. I don't really see the need that I should one.

 

I concern myself with how guns are a hobby culture. And in nearly every hobby culture that has element of danger to, the participants of the hobby like to test the boundaries of that danger, and in may cases to a lethal conclusion.

 

In my perfect world we don't have guns. I wouldn't mind the second amendment getting repealed, but I do respect that it is part of our constitution and I respect the argument that those have who defend it. In other words I don't like guns but I can agree with your arguement not to get rid of them.

 

However, I don't like this legislation proposal. I agree with those that question what this bill actually does for the good of the nation. I also question whether this should even be a topic of discussion as it is merely the assumption that this bill will be brought up again. I really just think this is the right trying to bring up the few fights they can still win, they are losing ground on nearly every other front. Obama has not made focus on these unwinnable ideological battlefronts, he's talking economy.

I like your honesty even though I disagree with your opinion. :thumb:

Obama will be talking more than just the economy and there is no doubt that he is the most anti-gun president we have ever had in our lifetime. The concern is legitimate.

But, he grew up surfing, swimming, and living an All-American life :lol: Not every All-American life involved a Daisy Red Ryder BB Gun...I'll bet he never made a snowman as a child either.:sssh:

You can bank that kids of his age group certainly grew up with toy guns, I'd bet he didn't. How many kids these days do you see getting toy guns as a present?

At least there are plenty of them in video games. :banana:

I much prefer the "spread the wealth" mantra to the "grow the wealth gap" reality we've been witness to the last decade.

How about you give up yours?

Don't you think that should be up to the individual?

:thumb:

You can feel free to give up yours as well...

I have the education of my experiences. Most every gun enthusiast I hear tale tails also has a "I did something really stupid story" to go along with it. This is common in every hobby particularly the dangerous kind. People get a rush from the danger, the more they participate in the activity the more danger is needed to recreate that rush and then begin to test the bounds.

I know a lot, and I mean, a lot of gun owners and have never witnessed anything but extreme caution every time they've handled their guns. I've never heard any of them with a "I did something really stupid story" involving heir guns nor do I have any to share.

I much prefer the "spread the wealth" mantra to the "grow the wealth gap" reality we've been witness to the last decade.

 

Do not bite at the bait of pleasure till you know there is no hook beneath it.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. (Just a couple of quotes from Thomas Jefferson.)

 

One of my favorites: I owe my soul to the company store. (Ernie Ford song.)One of the proposals to be on the table would put one of the tax brackets at 39.4%! Sure feel bad for those that may have to pay that.:thumb:

However, I don't like this legislation proposal. I agree with those that question what this bill actually does for the good of the nation. I also question whether this should even be a topic of discussion as it is merely the assumption that this bill will be brought up again. I really just think this is the right trying to bring up the few fights they can still win, they are losing ground on nearly every other front. Obama has not made focus on these unwinnable ideological battlefronts, he's talking economy.

 

Sure it's the assumption that it'll be brought up again. It was initially introduced on 1/6/09 and, if it follows the normal course of other passed law, will be brought up several times for discussion and possible tweaking before going for a full vote. Why should we assume it will just die? It's certainly very possible, but the simple fact of the matter is that Rush introduced this thing now because he knows it stands a far better chance of passing with the Democrats owning both sides of Congress.

 

I hardly think this is the "right" looking under cracks to find some meaningless cause they can champion or refusing to let something die (it was introduced less than two weeks ago!). No, this is an issue important to those on the right, left, and middle who respect the Constitution and some of the basic rights and freedoms that come with it. And I don't care whether it's on Obama's scope or not (I'd say you're right - he'll be very busy with the economy) - they don't need Obama to write, introduce, or pass law.

Actually , everything that has been done in this country to undermine gun ownership thus far has gone against our 2nd amendment. To know this for yourself one needs to know and understand the definition of " infringe". That is exactly why this word was used. A word that was originally protected by the "Bill Of Wrights" to gaurantee that what is now happening wouldn't happen.)

 

Of, by, and for the people seems to have been replaced by "we know what's best" for you people.

 

I guess (the one ) summed it up the best..........."they're just a bunch of red necks":rolleyes:

Based on your thinking we should also ban cars, beer and cigs as they kill far more people than guns. Guns have helped to protect your right of free speech. I am quite sure there are already laws in place to cover the stupid behavior of the ones you know. Enforce the laws we have already. Why is it when something happens, some want to pass a law, instead of enforcing the ones already on the books.

But then you wish to eliminate a freedom. After repealing the 2nd Amendment, it will then be easier to repeal the 1st, the 3rd, the 4th, the.., well you get it, I hope.

I said in my perfect world, I'm not trying to ban any of those things, I just said I don't like them. Now I wouldn't mind the banning of cigs but don't touch my beer.

You can bank that kids of his age group certainly grew up with toy guns, I'd bet he didn't. How many kids these days do you see getting toy guns as a present?

At least there are plenty of them in video games. :banana:

 

 

Yeah...and I'm not even going to get into my thoughts of violence in video games/TV shows/movies and juvenile crime rates.

Yeah...and I'm not even going to get into my thoughts of violence in video games/TV shows/movies and juvenile crime rates.

Oh come on, you don't really believe that, do you?

Actually , everything that has been done in this country to undermine gun ownership thus far has gone against our 2nd amendment. To know this for yourself one needs to know and understand the definition of " infringe". That is exactly why this word was used. A word that was originally protected by the "Bill Of Wrights" to gaurantee that what is now happening wouldn't happen.)

 

Of, by, and for the people seems to have been replaced by "we know what's best" for you people.

 

I guess (the one ) summed it up the best..........."they're just a bunch of red necks":rolleyes:

 

Interesting how you use quotes to, I assume, state something that Obama DIDN'T say. If you use quotes, at least give what he said...don't make it up.

Interesting how you use quotes to, I assume, state something that Obama DIDN'T say. If you use quotes, at least give what he said...don't make it up.

 

Didn't he say that ?? Assume ?? Well maybe you didn't hear him say that !

Didn't he say that ?? Assume ?? Well maybe you didn't hear him say that !

You're the one that maintains he said it ... can you show us some proof?

You're the one that maintains he said it ... can you show us some proof?

 

No.....it may have been his body double on Fox news!:idunno: It's kinda like Ripley's---Believe It Or Not.

 

I really don't care what is believed about what he said,or didn't say. I just hope China doesn't cut out our allowance before our country gets back to some kind of normal operation. I do know he is comparing himself to Lincoln, and FDR(New Deal), (according to history, two of the best), and he hasn't even taken office yet. This country lost 600,000 people under Lincoln , and the New Deal ( according to history of economics) was actually over before the U S came out of that one. I'm not sure this country wants to revisit either of those times. He has included in his plans (and that also has been reported several times on the news) $600 million dollars to buy new vehicles for the Government fleet. I really don't understand how that will help.

 

The above statements are accurate to the best of my recollection. Or not. Your choice !:thumb: