First amendment in danger

It is comforting to retreat into fantasies of the past, especially to a war where chivalry ruled the field. The facts bear out that chivalry died in 1066. WW-I was a no holds barred mass slaughter. The American pilots of WW-I were fighting to make the world safe for Democracy, while the German pilots were fighting to inflict German Kultur on the world. Read your history, or you will be repeating it during your lifetime. JL

[Richard_Schrader]

I am afraid we will shortly have to fight to save the rights our forefathers fought and died for.

I'm sure Buford whatshisname STILL believes he was a reponsible gun owner, JimACE.Of, course, he was, after all, in a WELL REGULATED MILITIA(that part of the 2nd amendment you conveniently ignore....)And,Of course, now he's an 'outlaw' so I guess he doesnt count towards gun violence stats, eh?I also, like you, find the rate of gun death in this country acceptable, as long as its no one I know.

Devils Advocate,
Or is that newspaper reports/news channel reporter in disguise? Buford was a member of a White Supremacist Radical Group, and from all accounts he was a little TOO radical even for them. Gee it looks like that German Kultur is still alive and kicking! Anyway he was far from being a responsible gun owner. I refer to the everyday average Joe who uses his weapon for hunting or just for sport such as target practicing on PAPER TARGETS! Did I say newspaper reporter earlier, GOSH... I'm REALLY sorry...I MEANT BLEEDING HEART LIBERAL DEMOCRAT! You know the kind of crowd that covered up things like Chappaquidick!
VBR,
Jim

Hey, keep your hunting gun, I think you should have it.Thats common sense. But, lets SUPPORT your fellow citizens that want their TEK-9s,too!For hunting, of course!!!....I am not going to get into this with you, its a dead end:you will never agree that the average Joe American's "RIGHT" to a machine gun might not have been what the Founding Fathers had in mind, or that the rate of gun injury in the US has anything to do with the rate of persons with guns(OH-RIGHT- all gun owners are careful& follow the rules.those who use them for other than careful uses were criminals anyway, so that DOESNT COUNT!) I respect your right to feel as you do.But I ask you: HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A GUN WOUND IN A PRIVATE CITIZEN? I have. Several times. In children under 16, every time I have seen it.Preventable almost every time....so dont spring that dogmatic stuff as gospel truth,pal; or tell me Thomas Jefferson gave us all the right to blow each other away..I reiterate=you would feel differently if that victim was your wife or kid.

Devil's Advocate,
I do not think that any private citizen needs a machine gun! The reason that these Tek-9s, and other assorted weapons get out into the hands of these murderers is through unscrupulous individuals that don't care AS LONG AS THEY MAKE A BUCK! There you have it...capitolism at it's worst! If they take away all the guns, then what? A kid or some guy will start manufacturing 'shanks' and they'll use those, or whatever else they could get their hands on. It is sad when kids and innocents get shot. I DO NOT CONDONE THESE RANDOM ACTS OF SENSELESS VIOLENCE. I honestly feel that is why the Death Penalty needs to be brought back. If a kid or adult makes the choice to kill someone, then they should pay for that choice with their life. Maybe then there would be some thought put into things and these acts would drop. No it won't bring the victim back, but it would bring a measure of justice. If it were my wife or kid...I'd want to be there to turn the switch on when the guilty person went to the chair. But it won't help to take away all the guns, because they'll just find a way to get something else to do their dirty work with. It starts with education, proper parenting, and moral values being instilled in kids at a very young age. You know.. like the 2nd Commandment...Thou shalt not kill! Or how about the golden rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Teaching the kids that it is okay to be themselves and not have to identify with a gang or cult to be somebody. And MOST importantly that guns should not be used to settle disputes, because the end result is permanent and oft times fatal. Once the act is done, it can never be undone. Screen what you feel is appropriate for your children to watch, after all their formative years are the chance for you to mold them into the type of person you would like them to be. And for God's sake, monitor what they are doing when they go through their school years. Once they turn 18 they make their own choices. I have been taught the use of deadly force through military training. I know the ramifications of what it does, and I sincerely hope that I'll never have to use it. But I do believe in my constitutional right to keep my weapons!
VBR,
Jim

JimACE- thank you for dropping the dogma and putting together a rational argument! My only caveat is contained in your last reply: the results of gun violence are oft times fatal. As you say, the criminal will find another way, but that 'not-a gun' weapon is NOT going to be near as fatal to the victim(statistically. you could look it up. ) And there is no such thing as an innocent bystander getting offed at a distance by a shiv.The gun increases the fatality rate like no other weapon.I support your right to weapons; but I respectfully disagree with the NRA(and, presumably, you) that the US citizenry should have no restriction whatsoever in the available firepower.Thats it, in a nutshell.

Devil's advocate makes sense! Take away the instrument of the crime and you have no crime. What about the fact that the most prevalent violent crime in America is forcible rape. How you gonna take away those guns?

[mike_baram]

Looks like I opened up one hell of a can of worms....
Let's talk about "responsible" gun ownership. Let's talk about licensing users (just like you need a license to drive a car), with required training, and the obligation to respond WITH YOUR WEAPON if a national emergency should arise.
That's the gist of the problem. At least we could find a legal, constitutional way of requiring a mocicum of responsibility as a condition for gun ownership.
That, and more effective enforcement of the myriad of laws that we already have.
Leave it to the liberals to say "Let's pass a law making the violation of a previous law illegal, and if someone breaks THAT law, we'll pass a law making it a crime to violate the law against breaking previous......
Excuse me, I'll be in the back yard digging my new bunker.
Mike

[mike_baram]

John,
They did that in Queensland, Australia. The law-abiding citizens turned in their weapons. The CRIMINALS did not. Violent crime shot upward in the first year. All the cops can do is put you in a body bag afterward. Anti-gun legislation succeeds in leaving the populace defensless in the face of criminal activity.
Definition: Criminal - someone who does not obey the law.
Mike