And this is why guns are bad. Period.

[Jzero]

Too bad the morons that buy guns don't follow the law.

How can you believe in the efficacy of laws banning guns, and make a statement like this in the next breath?

 

[3L33T32003]

Supreme Court ruling on individual gun ownership.

Basically, it says that a well regulated militia does not equal some yahoo walking into a wal-mart and buying a hand gun.

 

[achiral]

how do you then explain why people are legally permitted to own firearms?

 

[Hoober]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Hoober

Originally posted by: Mookow
I'm still waiting for an answer on how banning everything but rifles is going to prevent the usage of illegal fully automatic guns, which, seeing as they are already banned...

Save for those imported before 1968 and if you have a permit.

Well, I know about those, but seeing as his friends were all 18 and (presumably) gang-bangers, I doubt they applied for a Class III...

Plus, its 1986, not 1968

68, 86. Same thing.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Hoober

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Hoober

Originally posted by: Mookow
I'm still waiting for an answer on how banning everything but rifles is going to prevent the usage of illegal fully automatic guns, which, seeing as they are already banned...

Save for those imported before 1968 and if you have a permit.

Well, I know about those, but seeing as his friends were all 18 and (presumably) gang-bangers, I doubt they applied for a Class III...

Plus, its 1986, not 1968

68, 86. Same thing.

I figured it was just a mix up in which key got pressed first. I just wanted to show you that yes, I did know about that before (although, I also mentioned it earlier in the thread, too).

Also, its actually not just those that were in the country, its those that were in the country and registered, so if your grandfather happened to being himself a lttle souvenir home from WWII, such as a BAR or a MP38, and you find it up in the attic, chances are it is not legal (it is only legal if he registered it in time)

 

[illusion88]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Hoober

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Hoober

Originally posted by: Mookow
I'm still waiting for an answer on how banning everything but rifles is going to prevent the usage of illegal fully automatic guns, which, seeing as they are already banned...

Save for those imported before 1968 and if you have a permit.

Well, I know about those, but seeing as his friends were all 18 and (presumably) gang-bangers, I doubt they applied for a Class III...

Plus, its 1986, not 1968

68, 86. Same thing.

I figured it was just a mix up in which key got pressed first. I just wanted to show you that yes, I did know about that before (although, I also mentioned it earlier in the thread, too).

Also, its actually not just those that were in the country, its those that were in the country and registered, so if your grandfather happened to being himself a lttle souvenir home from WWII, such as a BAR or a MP38, and you find it up in the attic, chances are it is not legal (it is only legal if he registered it in time)

MY uncle has some fully auto gun. I think its a Car-15.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: achiral
how do you then explain why people are legally permitted to own firearms?

I would like to see some numbers reflecting on the amount of murders that are performed by people with registered firearms and licenses to carry them vs the number of Bling Bling pull my gat and bust a cap in you, I shoot with my piece sideways because I RoXors, who picked them up illegally.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: illusion88

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Hoober

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Hoober

Originally posted by: Mookow
I'm still waiting for an answer on how banning everything but rifles is going to prevent the usage of illegal fully automatic guns, which, seeing as they are already banned...

Save for those imported before 1968 and if you have a permit.

Well, I know about those, but seeing as his friends were all 18 and (presumably) gang-bangers, I doubt they applied for a Class III...

Plus, its 1986, not 1968

68, 86. Same thing.

I figured it was just a mix up in which key got pressed first. I just wanted to show you that yes, I did know about that before (although, I also mentioned it earlier in the thread, too).

Also, its actually not just those that were in the country, its those that were in the country and registered, so if your grandfather happened to being himself a lttle souvenir home from WWII, such as a BAR or a MP38, and you find it up in the attic, chances are it is not legal (it is only legal if he registered it in time)

MY uncle has some fully auto gun. I think its a Car-15.

Does he have a Class 3 for it?

 

[GroundZero]

from time to time a culling of the herd is a good thing...

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: Jzero

Too bad the morons that buy guns don't follow the law.

How can you believe in the efficacy of laws banning guns, and make a statement like this in the next breath?

*Tumbleweed rolls past*

EDIT: Awww, he ran away.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: 3L33T32003
Supreme Court ruling on individual gun ownership.

Basically, it says that a well regulated militia does not equal some yahoo walking into a wal-mart and buying a hand gun.

Bullsh!t.

It simply holds that a sawed off shotgun is of no use in a citizen militia, and therefore may be banned by the National Firearms Act, they remit the case back to federal court. It does NOT hold that an individual does not have the right to keep and bear arms. And I challenge you to give me a quote from this case that says or implies this.

The Miller court defined the Militia it refers to in it's decision:

"The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. "A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline." And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time. "

Attempting to interpret the above paragraph, a law journal article writes,

"while far from clear, this passage is not inhospitable to the view that it is a private individual right to keep and bear arms which is protected. For only if there existed such a "body of citizens" in possession of "arms supplied by themselves," could they, should the need arise, be "enrolled for military discipline" to act "in concert for the common defense." (Barnett R., and Kates D., Under Fire: The New Consensus on the Second Amendment, Emory Law Journal [1996].)

Now, even though I disagree with this ruling for other reasons, it STILL does NOT deny the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Try thinking for yourself instead of being a dupe for the anti-gun propaganda.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: WalMart1564

Originally posted by: dahunan
I just hope that nobody complains when we choose to execute this Moron

no no the Liberals could never do that
they would pickit for this total scumbag

and read poetry about how he has a right to life

and hug a tree

sorry i dont like Liberals much

I don't like Wal Mart much.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: WalMart1564

Originally posted by: dahunan
I just hope that nobody complains when we choose to execute this Moron

no no the Liberals could never do that
they would pickit for this total scumbag

and read poetry about how he has a right to life

and hug a tree

sorry i dont like Liberals much

I think I fall into the Liberal category, and I wouldn't have any complaints at all to know this guy's dead.

Originally posted by: datalink7


Actually, your point is entirely moot anyway. Guns are here, and no matter what they aren't going to go away. By outlawing them, you only take them away from law abiding citizens. The criminals would still have them.

UK has outlawed (or nearly outlawed, I forget which) guns and yet their assault and homicide rate is on the uprise. Why is this?

Maybe because guns aren't the problem?

Also good points. If a criminal wants a gun, even if they're illegal, he'll get one.

This guy would have gone and gotten a gun on the black market then came back to shoot a kid?

 

[Hoober]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: WalMart1564

Originally posted by: dahunan
I just hope that nobody complains when we choose to execute this Moron

no no the Liberals could never do that
they would pickit for this total scumbag

and read poetry about how he has a right to life

and hug a tree

sorry i dont like Liberals much

I think I fall into the Liberal category, and I wouldn't have any complaints at all to know this guy's dead.

Originally posted by: datalink7


Actually, your point is entirely moot anyway. Guns are here, and no matter what they aren't going to go away. By outlawing them, you only take them away from law abiding citizens. The criminals would still have them.

UK has outlawed (or nearly outlawed, I forget which) guns and yet their assault and homicide rate is on the uprise. Why is this?

Maybe because guns aren't the problem?

Also good points. If a criminal wants a gun, even if they're illegal, he'll get one.

This guy would have gone and gotten a gun on the black market then came back to shoot a kid?

Perhaps the one he used was acquired illegally. There simply isn't enough information in the reports.

 

[Instan00dles]

guns are bad.. depends on who uses them, my friends family has almost 40 guns betweem 4 people, they live in northern ontario. I belive in gun control but it will not work if you try to imkplement it in america because they are too attached to them and there are already way too many guns. Gun control works in canada because we had gun control along time ago and there are not alot of guns in this country.

 

[tcsenter]

Since the Supreme Court has already ruled once that individual gun ownership is not a protected right, and your beloved Judge Bork agrees, I let that argument rest.....Basically, it says that a well regulated militia does not equal some yahoo walking into a wal-mart and buying a hand gun.

Oh REALLY? Interesting.

So what you're saying is, the Court at Miller ruled that neither petitioners, Jack Miller nor Frank Layton, were members of any "well-regulated militia", therefore the Second Amendment rights did not apply to them? Really?

In fact, the Miller Court NEVER raised the question of whether petitioners were members of a well regulated militia. It would have been easy enough to, Miller and Layton were career criminals, bootleggers. If the Miller Court ruled the Second Amendment only applied to the state militias, it would seem that the Court could have saved itself a lot of trouble by ruling instead something like this:

"We reverse, re-instate the indictment, and remand back to the District Court for further proceeding because neither petitioner is a member of a protected state militia and thus cannot claim protection via the Second Amendment."

That would have taken about 3 minutes or less. Guess what? The Miller Court never raised the issue.

Instead, the Court chose to narrowly rule on the constitutionality of the weapon itself, not the status of the petitioners to raise a Second Amendment challenge. By doing so, it AVOIDED ruling on the substantive right protected by the Second Amendment.

Care to tell us what finding the Court made WRT to the prohibited weapon?

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Instan00dles
guns are bad.. depends on who uses them, my friends family has almost 40 guns betweem 4 people, they live in northern ontario. I belive in gun control but it will not work if you try to imkplement it in america because they are too attached to them and there are already way too many guns. Gun control works in canada because we had gun control along time ago and there are not alot of guns in this country.

When I decide to invade another country I'll keep that in mind.

 

[WalMart1564]

Originally posted by: axiom

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: WalMart1564
guns dont kill people MORONS do

Guns allow morons to kill with convenience.

As do cars, knives, boats, bombs, grenades, stakes, poisons, ropes, hands, teeth, the list goes on. So what?

i read about a man that was killed with his own feces anything can kill you

 

[Mookow]

I'm still, STILL, STILL waiting to hear how banning handguns will decrease the numbers of illegal, fully automatic rifles currently in the USA.

 

[pandapanda]

Nothing is going to stop people from illegally owning weapons. The people who illegally own weapons already aren't following the law. So let's ban all the guns--how would one go about that, when the people who illegally own weapons can't be traced? You can take my legal weapon away, and leave me defenseless against those people you don't realize own a gun. Is that a really good idea?

Going back to the idea that people who own guns are chicken...
Would you say that applies to the 4'11" 98 pound female who works as a home health nurse in Memphis and has to go into some pretty miserable areas? She probably is chicken--she should just fight off the gangsters, rapists, and carjackers with her stethoscope.

Look into your information before you try to support your side. If you are supporting a bad on guns, don't present a case where someone who was illegally in posession of a weapon killed someone. That's not making your point at all. The laws are there.

Going to our president, and why HE hasn't been able to do anything about crime. He is the president, but he isn't in charge of everything that goes on. He has to deal with congress to get things done on a federal level. The majority of gun related legislation is at a state level, and isn't controlled by Mr. Bush at all. You state and local governments are the ones who have the ability to make in impact on crime.

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: RSMemphis
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/02/24/snowball.shooting.ap/index.html:

A man whose daughter was hit with a snowball by a group of girls returned to the scene and opened fire with a gun, critically wounding a 10-year-old youngster, police said.

yes, yes, I know. I have heard it all. Guns don't kill people, people do. I need a gun to defend myself. If *insert name here* had had a gun during the *insert crime here*, the crime would not have happened.

What is with you gun lobbyists!!!!! Are you gonna outfit your children with guns next so that they can defend themselves? Is that the next step?

if the same story was published , but change gun for baseball bat (ie, enraged man kills 3 people with baseball bat) , are you going to call for outlawing baseball bats?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: pandapanda
Going back to the idea that people who own guns are chicken...
Would you say that applies to the 4'11" 98 pound female who works as a home health nurse in Memphis and has to go into some pretty miserable areas? She probably is chicken--she should just fight off the gangsters, rapists, and carjackers with her stethoscope.

Exactly why guns should not be prohibited. "No one ever raped a .38"

- M4H

 

[Bulk Beef]

"No one ever raped a .38"

Actually, I'm sure somebody has at some point.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: pandapanda
Going back to the idea that people who own guns are chicken...
Would you say that applies to the 4'11" 98 pound female who works as a home health nurse in Memphis and has to go into some pretty miserable areas? She probably is chicken--she should just fight off the gangsters, rapists, and carjackers with her stethoscope.

Exactly why guns should not be prohibited. "No one ever raped a .38"

- M4H

God created men and women.
Smith & Wesson made them equal.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: WalMart1564

Originally posted by: dahunan
I just hope that nobody complains when we choose to execute this Moron

no no the Liberals could never do that
they would pickit for this total scumbag

and read poetry about how he has a right to life

and hug a tree

sorry i dont like Liberals much

all liberals tree huggers?