Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by dfl, Dec 16, 2012.
You're good at making up numbers, why not put a guess out there?
Thanks for the insult. I'd like to point out that the only comment I was making was that there was a time in our history when guns were respected. No one used then in the way they were used in Connecticut. I was not speaking about any thing else. I never said they were the good old days, that was your spin on it. You don't even know what you're talking about, being gay was not crimialized, it just wasn't real popular. Hope that's not too close to home for you...
Stay on the subject if you can without branching out into all of society's woes. When you're ready to come back into the conversation like an adult, feel free.
Not that it's at all relevant, but being gay (or more precisely, certain sexual acts between same sex partners) was criminalized under many state statutes and the Supreme Court said it was constitutional until 2003 (Texas v. Lawrence), when they changed their minds. These laws are on the books all over the place but no longer enforceable.
By the way, back in 1991 Ronald Reagan wrote an op-ed arguing for passage of the Brady bill. I guess ol' Ronnie was a liberal socialist after all: http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opinion/why-i-m-for-the-brady-bill.html
Nowhere in that op-ed does Reagan support a so called "assault weapons ban" that is being pushed today. Reagan clearly supported a waiting period for buying handguns from a dealer.
Jim I really like what you had to say here. This stood out to me "The Second Amendment protects a right, a freedom, the same as the other 26. Erode one and which amendment will be the next to be weakened or eliminated?"
I was at a party last weekend talking with a few friends who feel strongly about gun control (banning guns), when I pointed out that the 2A was recognized as a civil liberty supported by significant case law (Heller, McDonald etc). The response I got was "Once Slavery was legal too" and "I could give a f@#* about the Constitution". I all could do was walk away, saying wow people really think this way.
When people start pulling at the threads of the Bill of Rights with guns, I wonder what unravels next? Databases profiling people who play first person shooter video games? Elimination of the depiction of guns from movies, TV shows, toys, comic books, video games, & novels? Massive NSA servers that search internet web forums looking for key words like guns or shooting?
This article gave me a few things to think about. I think a lot of people want to be sheep. They want the govt to protect them from everything from guns to transfats. http://sofrep.com/15278/sheep-wolves-sheepdogs/
Hello, I am a new member of this forum, Nice to meet you!
Welcome. Stunning intro post and thread choice in which to start!
From the wonderful state of NY this week:
"This is not something that will grandfather in existing weapons," said Assemblyman Brian Kavanaugh. "We are proposing to specify weapons you cannot own or sell, and we believe that law-abiding gun owners will obey that law and turn those weapons"
I wish I could say this is from the Onion
what's next on the left wing nuts' agenda? suspension of Habeas corpus?
Ehh. Reagan famously signed the Mulford act in California and not only supported the Brady Bill but convinced Bush Sr. to dump his opposition to it. Bush Jr. has said repeatedly that he supported the assault rifle ban and felt that one of his failures as a president was not getting Congress to re-instate it.
I saw Bob Hope perform live at a teachers convention in California I was performing at myself during my orchestra days. I'll never forget his "Don't Worry Be Happy" parody in which he sang, "George Bush said assault rifles ain't for fun, so Dan Quayle turned in his water gun."
Gun control isn't a bi-partisan issue, no matter what the MSM would like you to believe. It follows libertarianism more than conservatism/liberalism. The fact that people can't frame their arguments outside of a left/right political perspective is a sad tribute to media indoctrination.
This is so true. The two most polar sides will frame the debate as between volatile gun nuts vs liberals taking away your rights to own guns. The middle ground, as usual, holds the silent majority who need to stick their heads up and demand what they want. Perhaps the first place to start, as usual, is with data and not emotions...
F--king-a right boot. And the latest installment of what not to do to actually solve the problem was the NRA's shirking of all responsibility. Makes me think the talk about the NRA actually being most concerned with boosting firearms sales for its armament company donors is more true than I thought.
88.8 firearms per 100 citizens/civilians (around 300,000,000 guns in the US) vs the intent of the 2d Amendment = follow the money
not to mention all the firearms unaccounted for, those are the ones you actually have to worry about
And adding to the complicated balance of our discussion, the data for guns is easy and relatively accurate compared to the data on the mental health of adolescent boys and young men ("go figure", as mine would say). We need as much accurate data on all the relevant aspects for any long-term solution. We're a big country, but just acknowledge that more people in the US die every year from gun related violence (counting suicides and accidents) than in Iraq and Afghanistan ongoing combined or anywhere else in the world. So for me, the tragic school/postal/shopping mall events are foreground to a much much bigger problem that we ought to be able to get some traction on if we acknowledge the complexity and can move forward from there. Eventually, it's going to be about safety, about mental health, and about access to firearms--all of it.
Yes... I've had guns stolen from me, my neighbors have all had guns stolen. In my case they just picked up the entire (small) gun safe and took it (and the 32" Samsung HDTV and an Olympus camera). My neighbor had all his hunting gear stolen including some good long-rifles.
Every time I hear about someone being held up at gunpoint in this town I wonder if it was mine.
The NRA response was, in my opinion, a joke.
Oozies....anti tank weapons.....blah blah blah...small grenades in each lunchbox....blah blah blah!!! I guess we can all rest easy now. The NRA is a dangerous organization. Idiots!
I'm a member of the NRA, does that mean I'm a Idiot?
Depends on what actions you take next as a member to steer them in a more sane direction that places American individuals (gun owners and non-owners alike) before gun businesses and apocalyptic dogma.
Another way to think about it: Fool you once, shame on the NRA. Fool you twice, shame on you.
"Would any of you who have thought this through please post what you think would be a potentially politically acceptable combination of policies and laws that would prevent repeated massacres like we have in this country."
No need for new policies and laws, just enforce the myriad of ones we already have. Oh, and the same goes for our fishing related issues.
"-Require guns to be registered to their owner (just like cars) and if your gun is used in a crime, you will go to jail, circumstances dictate for how long, but you go to jail."
So if our cars get stolen and used in a crime...?