don't forget Reagan who signed into law a bill to ban fully automatic guns

or G H BUSH who signed into law the Brady Bill,,,

and the list goes on





gun regulation is not gun 'confiscation'

Show show me in the 2nd amendment where they have the power to impose even these restrictions.....

And for the record.....

You're talking about a hollywood actor and a former head of the CIA

Both neo-cons, for big gov't and neither a very good example of leadership for the common person/tax payer

Yeah,right!
You really need to get out more and find out what happened with the Data from the Weimar-Republic,or how the Bolsheviks conned the Russian People!
Or just ask your own Native Americans!
I don't believe yo,I don't believe that Canadian Bear,nor any of the Politicians when they try tell me they are not out to get every Firearm out of the Hands of Civilians!
All of your Gunregulators at one time or another made it perfectly clear in Word and Deed what their aim is,so did the Politicians here!


BTW,the Topic of the Thread is whether good People should be armed,and the answer from you anti-Gunners was a resounding NO!
Hope that Koolaid you're drinking has a pleasant Flavor at least!

Country with the highest and most deversified population in the world as well.... and what remains of property rights and a Constitution

Also the freest (despite attempts to change that) nation on earth and the most powerful thanks to those rights

Thank you for pointing out so clearly why the 2 party system is nothing more than 2 evils competing for control and the need for a change in that system or the end to its monopoly

My Constitution says I have a right to both

I understand your viewpoint, I can agree that people who are a danger to themselves and others should not be carrying. Legally, they can't. In fact it's against the law for them to own a firearm, or even be in the same household as one if; they've had a violent history, have committed a felony, or been deemed a potential danger to him/herself or others by a psychiatrist.

I must respectfully disagree about carrying firearms not providing security. Here in Lewiston, Maine (a neighboring town), we had a huge influx of Somali immigrants. Most of whom have made every effort to become a functioning part of society, and are leading productive lives. However, a few formed a small gang who pick people at random, flog them senselessly and take their possessions. I have a friend who works in that area. He was walking to his car that night and he saw two dark figures approach him, one seemed to be carrying an object he thought looked like a pipe. My friend then said "That's close enough", and they proceeded to approach him. Then he reached back to pull out his sidearm (exaggerating his movements so they could see what he was doing), and said "I said stop, that's close enough". The two figures paused, then turned and walked away. Again, the guns aren't what saves the day the majority of time. It's the possibility of being armed, that serves as a deterrent. The unknown is hard to calculate, and as a result, makes a career criminal's life a bit tougher.

That all being said, I cannot see where would be helpful in our security. In fact, anything we make illegal creates a black market, which funds cartels. I point to you our history with Prohibition.

I think China and India have higher populations.

I think most western countries are just as ' diverse'

there are dozens of countries with constitutions, as well as property rights


I don't know how to quantify 'freest'


these are all blessings wherever they are, just pointing out these things don't make AMerica quite so unique.

due to military and money, we probably are the most 'powerful' though

i have a question for you... as conrad pointed out earlier, this thread is about good people with guns... you agree with barry about gun control... who gets to decide who the good people are that can keep their guns and doesn't get to keep them? regulation still has it's price...

We all know by now that you feel it is the obligation of others to lay their lives on the line because you don't have the ambition or desire to learn to protect yourself as long as someone else is willing to take that risk for you. But then, in your way of thinking, because you choose to be a victim it is your desire to make victims of everybody else whether they choose to be or not. If it is their desire not to be a victim, you wish to either limit their options or make criminals of them.

You want people with guns to take away the rights of others to own guns...... and you think that is logical? But then you think Obozo droning women and children is acceptable....which leaves your logic to question.... Kill people to prevent them from killing people.....smart!


Does that about sum it up? You have no regard for the rights of others if it doesn't fit your belief system?

Maybe we should restrict ballerina lessons, little girls in scimpy outfits with makeup... or churches, many serial killers have been board members... cars too, definitely sports cars, the ones souped up to go faster, they kill many more people....and hospitals and doctors

You don't hunt to put food on table, you don't target shoot or take classes to learn proper care and control, so because you don't like something, or care to learn, you think nobody should have that right.....

but you are more than willing to condemn those who do, wish to deprive them of that right, and make criminals of them if need be... just to please yourself. How egotistical is that?

the same people that make laws deciding the difference between those to charge with murder or those who have acted in self defense

the same people who decide what an 'excesive fine' or 'cruel and unusual' treatment is,,,

the people, the government of the people, and common sense

let me add, this keeps being stated improperly, I have no support for deciding who 'keeps' their guns,, I have no support for laws to go take away the guns people have,, besides upholding rules for permits

just like I don't want peoples cars TAKEN from them, unless they are not properly registered/licensed

I support greater responsibility upon those selling guns and awarding permits and licenses to attempt ensuring those who receive them have the mental and emotional stability to use them responsibly

I really don't know what to tell you, its just tiring repeating myself, truly

I don't wish to take away everyones choice,,, but keep reading into it whatever you will,,,

rights are limited, regardless of how often people wish to argue they are or should be absolute

your 'rights' end where mine begin, and I have a 'right' to be secure

so if I don't feel secure with a gun that is my right, I know people who have had to kill people, I Have loved ones in the military and they would never want me to be 'proud' of them because they would tell me it is their job,, yet I am proud

and that was their choice,

I have not the where withal or desire to take a life, and no matter how much others try to make that somehow a character flaw or charge against patriotism,, I Really don't care

those same people I know who have killed have advised me often that no one without that comfort to kill should own a gun, because if you pull it you have to be prepared mentally and emotionally for the consequence, which I am not,, and I am a 'good' person

Id rather die than kill someone unnecessarily,, THAT Sums it up,, so I wont own a gun, unless I happen to live somewhere where it is common for peoples lives to be taken or I have been somehow threatened with death by someone

ANYONE ELSE STABLE WHO WISHES TO OWN A GUN< it is their prerogative





anytime one has to weigh imminent death,

for example, if I know there is someone with a gun about to shoot my child and I have a hammer, yeah, Im gonna pretty instinctively come behind them and knock them in their head,,,, In such a case, I had no choice in WHETHER someone would die, just the circumstances of who


with PResidents and military and even police, those decisions come with their territory, they often have no choice in whehter there will be death, but only the magnitude and manner........do I let the person or people I Know are going to kill thousands carry their plan out to make sure to save a dozen, or do I risk the dozen to save the thousands,, not a decision I would ever want to have to make, just like I would never want to have a gun and potentially take a life unnecessarily,,,,,,,but that is MY choice,, as a 'good' person, and 45 years I have survived with that choice,, still emotionally and intellectually stable, I might add,,














THAT SUMS IT UP

Folks, there is a difference between defending law-abiding U.S. citizens right to bear fire-arms and insisting that every law-abiding U.S. citizen go around carrying fire-arms.

The USA wouldn't be helped by the wrong people doing their "Tackleberry" impersonation.

absolutely, and a difference between supporting common sense regulations and wanting to 'take' peoples guns or keep anyone from having them

How much more "Commonsense""Regulation" do you want!
Enforce the ones on the Books and be done with!
But according to the Clown sitting in the Office of the Vice-President,we don't have time to apply those,so we need to enact more!
That whole Commonsense-Regulation-Concept smells to high heaven!
It's Bans they want in the Senate,not Regulation,else the Lice would be applying what has been enacted!
They have been clear about that,but you Commonsense Regulators have selective Hearing and Reading-Skills!
Keep on drinking their Koolaid
Stay Sheeple!
Keep on trusting them!

and Tackleberry is definitely not the image of your regular American Gunowner,except in the fevered frightened mind of the Gungrabbers!
Then tell me again why Good People shouldn't be armed!