Restrictions on the right to bear arms

Oh were you wanting me to answer that? An out of control government is a vague accusation. My opinion is when a government does things on its own without the citizens. AKA pretty much any government in existence.

Due to various political opinions that come into play, the point of revolution is when the citizens rights are being infringed upon to the point of rebellion. It is the nations choice to decide when this is. A government can hold it off for a while but when you make a peaceful revolution impossible, you make a violent one inevitable.

Also my sources are the Times who ran a story in 2007 that claimed crime has doubled in the decade handguns were banned. Also the British Home Office, by the BBC news , 'Targeting Guns' by Gary Kleck, and Fear in Britain, Gallant, Hills, Kopel, Independence Institute,

 

I suggest you do some research on castle laws. Many states have laws that make it legal to shoot at anyone on your property armed or not.

 

One redeeming quality of texas

 

Word.

One of the only things I hate about living in Wisconsin is our gun laws. We don't have a castle doctrine, we can't carry concealed, and even open carry draws heat.

 

I believe if a person is mentally capable and has not committed any violent crimes or malicious acts against others, He/She should be able to own/carry a firearm for personal protection. I do agree that a firearm safety class should be mandatory.

Also my opinion on The debate about owning assault rifles is this...People say that you shouldn't be able to own assault rifles and that there is no use for them. To those people I pose this question... What is the difference in owning a semi-auto M-14,or AR-15, or like weapon and owning say a semi-auto .308 or 30-.06 hunting rifle? They shoot basically the same round.

I do believe that in heavily populated areas (big city or big multiple family dwellings) any weapon that fires a full metal jacketed round should be prohibited, or you should at the very least have to purchase lead tipped ammo. Even in experienced hands in a self defense situation, in a densely populated area a FMJ is dangerous to bystanders or other residents in a building. If you were to fire a 7.62X51mm(standard NATO assault rifle round) at an intruder in your home...even if you hit him, that round is going to pass through him and 2-3 more apartments before stopping. i'm not saying that any other weapon is not dangerous to bystanders, but FMJ's certainly have an added risk.

 

COLDWATER..... the m-14 is an archaic rifle and the m-4 is a .223 round--- nothing like a .306 or a .308 (the m-14 does shoot a similiar round- but compared to modern rifles that you mentioned, even hundting rifles... it sucks)
The point you are trying to make is lost because your comparison is off. Assault rifles are not more dangerous in the whole scheme of things than any other rifle or gun, its the same. Just because the military chooses to use these lowest bidder rifles does not make them superior.

I also beleive that enforcing your idea of certain rounds or defining heavily populated area is going to be near impossible. These kinds of decisions will lie with the user of said guns. Personally I use some federal ultra shock round .40 s&w for my house gun, but I think any person whose selected a certain gun or ammo is oging to be thinking about how their hunting rifle might go a bit further than just a wall or 10.

A bigger or faster shooting rifle may actuall be more viable because not every one is lving in the cernter of a tight packed suburbia- which in any case is not going to allow you to show what exactly is heavily populated is.

 

I would agree that non violent crimes should not bar you from owning guns... but you are dead wrong to think that just because a crime is non violent means that it should not be a felony (and fyi I don't think that growing pot should be a crime period)

 

<<< Look at my location.

Needless to say, I have several guns, and if anybody decides they're going to break into my house they're going to be one sorry son of a bitch

 

why not just get a big dog instead of a gun. what about automatic firing guns..they are designed to kill himans only. i live in wyoming..lots of grizzly bear and other dangerous wildlife...so i have guns but they are kept locked up...i have never actually needed a gun.also people who bring guns to drug deals need to go to prison in my mind...in the old days we just needed money to buy ganja..i say make it harder for people to have guns made for killing people only...pry that gun from a living hand instead of a dead hand...

 

I have a big dog and he eats and shits a lot... which means lots of food to buy and lots of crap to pick up. And what do you mean by automatic firing guns? full autos are generally illegal, but semi autos are not... im assuming your talking about full auto guns.

You must be in a crappy area to have to be worried about being armed to buy some ganja... even when I pick up pounds I don't worry about that.

And you can pry my gun from my dead hand... just try it.

 

Heh, you do realize that whites have been oppressed just as much as blacks, natives, etc, right? People weren't and aren't oppressed along racial lines, they're oppressed along class lines.

 

what about the right to arm bears?


or if you need to call your wife and ask her what you were sposed' to get from the store,whilst pumping some hot lead into a crazy serial face smasher

the right to bear i-arms

 

1. A dog can be killed
2. A dog takes time to do the job
3. A gun has significantly more stopping power
4. I don't want to ALWAYS have a big dog with me
5. What if the dog gets sick?
6. A dog cannot be concealed
7. A gun has a ranged attack
8. I don't have to feed and provide medical care to a gun. Sure it's a high initial cost, and you have to buy ammo, but that doesn't compare to 15 years of food and vet bills (plus initial cost).
9. I rent and cannot keep pets

 

This happened in the WI state capitol this weekend:

Two wearing guns cited at Madison restaurant

I have communicated with several of the people involved.

Currently, neither the state of Wisconsin of the city of Madison has any statute requiring persons to identify themselves to law enforcement without a reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime, the Culvers in question has not banned firearms, and no one was being disruptive.

This kind of shit needs to change.

 

i want one of these for when my girl goes to walk the dog.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D99NHb6B03s]YouTube - Magpul Industries SHOTSHOW 2008 Part 2[/ame]

 

I feel most people should be able to have a firearm of thier choice. (But really, no one needs a full auto). The state where I live (Arizona) has passed a stupid no training or license concealed carry law. The lawmakers probably had good intentions but there are many people that now have concealed guns that have no idea of the responsibilities of that right.

 

Well, my state just elected a pro 2A governor. I can't wait for my CWP!!!!

 

I just want to say that I live in Holland and we have pretty close to a zero tolerance policy on guns, and we also have very little crimes with guns.

 

Note to self: Invade Holland...