Protest Easy Guns

That's just sad!

Yes, it's been so hard for me to get handgun Ammo from Wal-mart and Bi-mart, it makes ME want to stockpile...Their shelves are almost empty of the few calibers I need every time I stop by! Seriously, people need to calm it down.. There's no 500% Tax coming, and if people are stockpiling it for a SHTF scenario, they're going to need rifle ammo, not handgun ammo, yeesh!

The argument FOR gun control relies on propagada, ignorance, and emotion.

The argument for our right to keep and bear arms relies on facts, history, and the belief in individual Liberty.

I can attest to what Jordan says. The qualification course for the M9 pistol, as provided by the military, is far inferior to that of the Texas Concealed Handgun License course. You're talking about a 2-hr class compared to a 10-hr class.

Why would members be dropping off? Could it be their constituents are letting their opposition to this group be known, and the Mayors are buckling under the pressure (and trying to keep their positions?)

Studies that support my views:
http://www.guncite.com/kleckandgertztable1.html

http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm#chart
... Read More
http://www.largo.org/klecksum.html

http://www.largo.org/Lott.html

What's to learn from this?

1. People DO use firearms for self defense.

2. Governments use gun control to establish a Monopoly of Force against their people, enabling them to exert tyranny without opposition.

3. The people we need to fear with guns (violent criminals) aren't limited by gun control laws,

4. The people we DON"T need to fear with guns are the the ones that will obey the laws and disarm.

"Frank, this isn't a debating society"

No, it's a circle-jerk of people who hold a misguided and ignorant (well, I suppose a better term would be "uninformed") view, and who seek fulfilment, and that warm, fuzzy feeling that one finds, in the company of like-minded individuals.

"so we're just getting tired of refuting your same old tired points"... Read More

I see no refuting going on. At least, not from YOUR side of the issue. For somebody who's blasted others on not substantiating their arguments, you're certainly remiss to provide any "facts and statistics" of your own. Please stay out of debate circles, Catherine. You'd get creamed.

The "gun show loophole" does not exist. Dealers have to go through the transfer process (which includes the background check), no matter where the sale takes place. Private sales are private sales, no matter where they take place. It's as simple as that. Not a difficult concept.

Call it what it is, Catherine, you want to outlaw private sales of firearms. But even removing the p.c. label won't change the fact that the idea that you can enforce regulations on private sales is laughable. Utterly laughable.

Do you have proof they DIDN'T have assault rifles? They plead guilty to the charges against them. Should this NOT be reported?

It's doubtful they had assault rifles, which are FULLY AUTOMATIC machine guns, very expensive to purchase (but completely legal with a Federal Firearms License, and a $200 tax to the government.

They more likely had "assault weapons" which is just a scary name attributed to some weapons that LOOK LIKE military firearms.

It's like putting a grill guard and oversize tires on a truck and calling it an "assault vehicle." Doesn't make it any more dangerous than regular vehicles.

if you are a criminal or have a restraining order against you or have been forcibly detained for homicidal or suicidal ideations..... IT IS AGAINST THE LAW to buy a gun. We're just trying to make it so the people who are selling guns can't legally sell to these people and then go "oh sorry, I didn't know so it's not my fault they went on a shooting spree." It's common sense and regulating commerce is certainly something the government does ALL THE TIME.

Background checks do not even come close to accurately predicting who is going to commit a crime with a firearm... Plenty of dangerous people don't have records (pass the background check) and many people that WON'T pass the background check aren't a danger to others...

Besides, the people who are going to commit a crime with a firearm that can't... Read More pass the background check won't bother with the background check... they'll just use a straw purchaser, steal their guns, or buy them on the street.

Doesn't anyone care about the loss of rights by people that aren't going to abuse them? the restraining order restriction is especially silly, because it takes away someone's right without them even being convicted of anything or breaking any law!

Just curious, do you guys know anything about Gandhi beyond a single quote taken out of context?

Ladd, do you? Have you READ his Autobiography? here's the paragraph the quote was copied from:

"I used to issue leaflets asking people to enlist as recruits. One of the arguments I had used was distasteful to the Commissioner: 'Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as... Read More the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.' The Commissioner referred to this and said that he appreciated my presence in the conference in spite of the differences between us. And I had to justify my standpoint as courteously as I could."

Care to tell how that is taken out of context?

Why did you delete my response to this?

Moderator, have you ever filled out a 4473? I highly doubt that the person that purchased the firearms for the Columbine douche bags would have really been deterred by that. It takes all of five minutes, tops. Of course, it's easier for her to blame the system instead of herself for her poor choices.

"A. Seven states require background checks no matter where a gun is purchased. Of these seven, two states (California and Rhode Island) require background checks on all firearm purchasers. Five states (Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) require background checks on all handgun, but not long gun, purchasers." -Brady Campaign

So, only two states have truly closed the so-called "gun show loophole". I guarantee you that I could still by a handgun or rifle in all seven of those states because there's no way to enforce the ban on private firearms sales since the government has no way of knowing who has what. ... Read More

We need to push a program like Project Exile forward. It, unlike gun control, has actually been proven to lower firearms related crimes. It was supported by both the NRA and the Brady Campaign. If you're a convicted felon, you get a mandatory 5 years in prison if you're caught anywhere near a firearm. No exceptions.

It worked. Gun control hasn't, and won't.

I missed your data citations Frank. Why put links to data or show where the data you are citing come from when it's so much easier to just make up stats, right Frank?

Oh, let's see, Study in Texas:
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba324

Reports from Michigan State Police, showing that less than 1% of Concealed Carry Permits issued in a year are revoked because of a crime, and far less than that because of firearm related crime
http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1591_3503_4654-77621--,00.html... Read More

Florida statistics on concealed carry showing that 0.2% of concealed carry permits have been revoked because of a crime, and 0.01% (1 out of 100,000) were revoked because of a firearm-related crime conviction.
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html

Compare this with the fact that 0.5% of florida residents are currently in PRISON (100,000 out of 18.3 million), and that's not even counting minor misdemeanor crimes....

Every time a state has considered allowing concealed carry, the anti-gun emotional basketcases come out and claim blood will run in the streets, people will get into more shootouts over road rage and parking spaces, and every time, they've been TOTALLY wrong.

I'm not even claiming allowing people to carry concealed REDUCES crime, because the criminals just go find easier targets - There's plenty of them. What allowing concealed carry does it allow INDIVIDUALS to protect themselves, which 9 times out of 10 they accomplish without even firing a shot.

Denying people the right of self defense doesn't effect the crime rate either, it just means the criminals find their targets easier.

Last piece of data for you to consider: 11 different studies showing citizens use firearms in self defense at LEAST 770,000 times every year:
http://www.guncite.com/kleckandgertztable1.html