already have an AR-15, so who cares if they ban them?

[Ingomike]

 

[KLB]

That's a weak argument. So if someone murders someone and they serve their time you want to give them a firearm? GTFOH

Yep. That is how it is supposed to work. A free man is supposed to be free.

 

[TrueSeanamus]

I already have one with hi cap mags and reload 223, so if they ban them I don`t care, plus I see so many out there for sale on line and at gun shows, how could banning them have any effect?

That’s nice for you. Kind of screws over all the people who don’t, or like my case with the Hughes amendment, aren’t even born yet that will be f**ked out of ever being able to get their hands on something when the prices inevitably explode, if they are even legally transferable. People like you are no better than gun grabbers.

 

[TrueSeanamus]

wow, a bunch of paranoid people out there, anyway to clarify the most they will do is ban the sale of assault rifle, and all us older guys that went thru the last ban know how it works, they will define what an assault rifle is and ban those features like pistol grips etc, anyway, like last time there are ways to find a loop hole and the ban will be worthless, just like last time. so, who cares, its just a way of getting votes for looking like they are doing something

I’d rather not have ugly anti-ergonomic gimped rifles. I’m just thankful they put a sunset clause on the original one. They wouldn’t make the same “mistake” this time as well as knowing what else they would need to do after learning from the last ban. There shouldn’t have to be a never ending list of “work arounds” and “loopholes” for a constitutional right.

 

[qwerty]

This will fix it....

CITIZEN FREE PRESS

The Greatest News Site On The Internet. Home of CFP Nation.

citizenfreepress.com

 

[KG1]

This will fix it....

CITIZEN FREE PRESS

The Greatest News Site On The Internet. Home of CFP Nation.

citizenfreepress.com

This was pretty much to be expected. The real battle is in the Senate.

 

[BigRed]

This was pretty much to be expected. The real battle is in the Senate.

The senate will save us......read it here on INGO

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

If they're too dangerous to be in society, then they shouldn't be in society. Simple as that really. If they've served their time, including any parole, then they should be free to defend themselves. Don't want them to do that? Then keep them in prison or execute them.

 

[DadSmith]

I guess he has his AR so he doesn't care about this.

Inactive Campaign

 

[BigRed]

I guess he has his AR so he doesn't care about this.

Inactive Campaign

Newsflash for these statist pieces of ****:

My God given rights are NOT negotiable.

These ***holes can go to Hell.

 

[garni]

I already have one with hi cap mags and reload 223, so if they ban them I don`t care, plus I see so many out there for sale on line and at gun shows, how could banning them have any effect?

Everything that is banned is another chip at our rights. Every single one.

 

[tackdriver]

Where in "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" does it make exceptions for felons?

Also, per the person being called the president stating that the second amendment is not absolute, let us take it to the first as well. SHUT DOWN THIS WEBSITE! At the writing of the constitution, hand written notes were delivered usually by foot or horseback, so internet, cell phones, and any electronic transmission could also be denied if the second amendment supposedly (which it does not) only apply to weapons at the time of it's writing.

There, now to pour the bourbon. Hey they tried to ban that and look what happened!!!

I think you missed the point. I don't believe that there should be any exception for felons, and never implied that. That's a whole separate subject.

 

[tackdriver]

If they're too dangerous to be in society, then they shouldn't be in society. Simple as that really. If they've served their time, including any parole, then they should be free to defend themselves. Don't want them to do that? Then keep them in prison or execute them.

^^^ What he said...

Plus, there is a long list of "felonies" that have nothing to do with violence or being a danger to others. If the creatures behind this current attack on gun owners gets their way, the mere possession of a magazine with more than X capacity will make YOU or ME a felon. The fact that came with the gun from the factory, or you obtained it legally, won't matter. THAT is the point.

 

[tackdriver]

If 'we the people' allow 'them the government' to write unjust and irrational laws, then we invite them to do unjust and irrational acts.

It's almost certain that, given time, devious minds will twist the words, and these acts will go far beyond even what was imagined when written. We will cry "That's not right!" and they will smirk and yell back "That's the law! We're a nation of laws!!" They win! This isn't a theory, it's a truth demonstrated over and over again.

See something, Say something. I see evil at work, and bad intentions FAR beyond the current talking points.

F**k Nike - JUST DON'T DO IT!

 

[Mjr.Malfunction]

Fudd Thinking at it’s finest!

 

[Ashton1911]

Can we decide as a group that we need common sense gun control reform? Silencers should be deregulated, and firearms safety courses, with life fire portions, should become required to graduate an american highschool. This would lead to individuals who are safer with guns, and hopefully less careless death, and more armed good guys to defend against evil.

 

[Frosty]

Can we decide as a group that we need common sense gun control reform? Silencers should be deregulated, and firearms safety courses, with life fire portions, should become required to graduate an american highschool. This would lead to individuals who are safer with guns, and hopefully less careless death, and more armed good guys to defend against evil.

So my eight year old won’t be allowed to shoot my .22 until after graduating high school? I’ll agree, suppressor’s shouldn’t be regulated, however, requiring firearms training is still violating the 2nd Amendment. Want kids to be safe and respect firearms and life, teach them that, that’s the parents job, not the schools.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

requiring firearms training is still violating the 2nd Amendment.

I think he was saying to require firearms training to graduate school, not as a prerequisite to ownership.

 

[edporch]

That's a weak argument. So if someone murders someone and they serve their time you want to give them a firearm? GTFOH

Murderers should be executed.
If not, they should never be set free from prison.
You murder somebody, you should forfeit your life, either by execution or life in prison without parole.

 

[printcraft]