our president

[RaginCajun]

here is what our president did for himself and his family but wants to take away our guns!

http://www.infowars.com/obama-signs-...tion-for-life/

[cherrydrpepper]

Is this that thing they call irony

[ecruz]

Is this that thing they call irony

i can call it a few other things!!!

[gixxerboy1]

my god he isnt trying to take away everyone;s guns. I have no problem with a debate but lets be honest.
He is taking away everyone's guns like you want to be able to carry grenades and rbg's legally.

[RaginCajun]

my god he isnt trying to take away everyone;s guns. I have no problem with a debate but lets be honest.
He is taking away everyone's guns like you want to be able to carry grenades and rbg's legally.

i was more or less talking about how he needs armed guards for life and changing the laws of previous presidents. what was wrong with the law before?

the point i was trying to make was he can protect his family with armed guards, why can't i?

[jimmyinkedup]

the point i was trying to make was he can protect his family with armed guards, why can't i?

Very solid point IMO.

[gixxerboy1]

i was more or less talking about how he needs armed guards for life and changing the laws of previous presidents. what was wrong with the law before?

the point i was trying to make was he can protect his family with armed guards, why can't i?

presidents always could, just went back to the old law that was for life, now it was for 10 years. And you or I arent a target like an ex president. And i dont think his guards will be carrying ar-15's with 30 bullets in a clip

[RaginCajun]

presidents always could, just went back to the old law that was for life, now it was for 10 years. And you or I arent a target like an ex president. And i dont think his guards will be carrying ar-15's with 30 bullets in a clip

i agree we are not targets like the president

true, but i bet they will be yielding semi-auto weapons

[canesfan804]

i was more or less talking about how he needs armed guards for life and changing the laws of previous presidents. what was wrong with the law before?

the point i was trying to make was he can protect his family with armed guards, why can't i?

Every president has had their secret service men for life. Reread the story Bush would be the first President affected by the NEW LAW/OLD LAW however you want to call it. Put it this way Jimmy Carter still has his. Sounds like ANOTHER person over reacting to anything Obama does. Its ok you only have 4 more years and then you can put the next moron in office.

[RaginCajun]

Every president has had their secret service men for life. Reread the story Bush would be the first President affected by the NEW LAW/OLD LAW however you want to call it. Put it this way Jimmy Carter still has his. Sounds like ANOTHER person over reacting to anything Obama does. Its ok you only have 4 more years and then you can put the next moron in office.

It was poor timing on the president IMO with all the gun talk

Jimmy Carter, hahahahaha

[bcaasdirty]

^^its worse on the state level (New York). If Cuomo gets his way the only 'legal' guns left will be muzzle loaders and single shots.

[gixxerboy1]

^^its worse on the state level (New York). If Cuomo gets his way the only 'legal' guns left will be muzzle loaders and single shots.

again, yes he is putting forward strict laws but lets not exaggerate. and OMG if it was true. What would happen, you wouldnt be able to work, feed your family, You would loose your house and robbers and rapist would over run your town

[bcaasdirty]

again, yes he is putting forward strict laws but lets not exaggerate. and OMG if it was true. What would happen, you wouldnt be able to work, feed your family, You would loose your house and robbers and rapist would over run your town

Unfortunately, I wish I was exaggerating with what is being proposed in my backwards state. Even pump action shotguns would be deemed illegal. I don't think (knocking on wood/keeping my fingers crosses) all that is being proposed will pass though. But crazier things have happened I guess.

Part of the proposed "new" gun laws would be to turn all non-legal firearms over to LE by 2015 with no compensation (or have gun welded shut), or automatically become a class B felon

[gixxerboy1]

Unfortunately, I wish I was exaggerating with what is being proposed in my backwards state. Even pump action shotguns would be deemed illegal. I don't think (knocking on wood/keeping my fingers crosses) all that is being proposed will pass though. But crazier things have happened I guess.

Part of the proposed "new" gun laws would be to turn all non-legal firearms over to LE by 2015 with no compensation (or have gun welded shut), or automatically become a class B felon

This is what they are proposing. Nothing like you are claiming

New York's top prosecutors are proposing new state laws they say will help curb gun crimes across the state.
In letters to the governor and legislative leaders, the District Attorneys Association advocates amending mental health laws, imposing stiffer penalties for gun crimes, banning all high-capacity magazines and restricting large quantity sales of firearms and ammunition.
The association, which includes all of the 62 counties' chief prosecutors, says criminal activity becomes exponentially more volatile when guns are present.

The group backs imposing a mandatory consecutive five-year sentence when a person commits a violent felony or drug crime while possessing a gun, require periodic renewals of handgun permits in every county and expressly authorize courts to remove guns and revoke licenses of people found mentally incapacitated.

[kelkel]

banning all high-capacity magazines Need that one defined more...


criminal activity becomes exponentially more volatile when guns are present. Obviously a brain surgeon wrote that part.

I agree with the rest....

[bcaasdirty]

This is what they are proposing. Nothing like you are claiming

New York's top prosecutors are proposing new state laws they say will help curb gun crimes across the state.
In letters to the governor and legislative leaders, the District Attorneys Association advocates amending mental health laws, imposing stiffer penalties for gun crimes, banning all high-capacity magazines and restricting large quantity sales of firearms and ammunition.
The association, which includes all of the 62 counties' chief prosecutors, says criminal activity becomes exponentially more volatile when guns are present.

The group backs imposing a mandatory consecutive five-year sentence when a person commits a violent felony or drug crime while possessing a gun, require periodic renewals of handgun permits in every county and expressly authorize courts to remove guns and revoke licenses of people found mentally incapacitated.

I spoke w/ a friend whom has read Cuomo's new Assault Weapon Ban bill and its much more than whats posted above (yea yea I know what you're thinking, why should I believe this guy and his 'friend'? I don't have a good reason and you don't have to, I'm just passing along information that was given to me. I, like others, hopes it turns out different :

-Utilizing the same assault weapon 'guidelines' as were drawn up in '94 (bayonet mount, grenade launder, telescoping stock, pistol grip, flash suppressor) any gun that has one of the aforementioned characteristics and can accept a detachable magazine will be classified as an assault weapon and deemed illegal (and ultimately meets demise I mentioned earlier)

-Requirement of microstamping all ammo (approx 4x increase in price of ammo)

-No grandfathering in of previous 'legal' firearms and clips--confiscation is an 'option'

[JP-MAN]

anyone can protect their family with armed guards, will be expensive but anyone in the public can hire armed guards....

[RaginCajun]

anyone can protect their family with armed guards, will be expensive but anyone in the public can hire armed guards....

but i cannot take taxpayers money to do so

[likelifting]

He'd take away our guns if he could, imo. In a NY second.

[cherrydrpepper]

Thatd be wierd to be SS. You probably know the names and locations of every skank hoe your prez has banged. Hell some of them may even have bastard children.

[kelkel]

The 2nd amandment isn't going anywhere. The government may place restrictions on certain types of weapons but they cannot just "take" all your weapons. Part of the meaning of the amendment by our founding fathers is to give the people the ability to protect themselves from an overzealous government if the need arises.

[tdoe11]

Theyare trying to ban anything that can hold a clip. Very scary. They are NOT only going after the assault rifles they are constantly talking about. This means potentially banning everything with the acception of bolt action rifles and revolvers. With the current owners there will be grandfathering but you will not be able to pass your guns along as family airlooms. Everyone should do their homework, this is a big deal guys. It is our second amendment. All the people attempting the ban are protected daily by armed men. Why should we not be able I protect ourselves

[gixxerboy1]

Theyare trying to ban anything that can hold a clip. Very scary. They are NOT only going after the assault rifles they are constantly talking about. This means potentially banning everything with the acception of bolt action rifles and revolvers. With the current owners there will be grandfathering but you will not be able to pass your guns along as family airlooms. Everyone should do their homework, this is a big deal guys. It is our second amendment. All the people attempting the ban are protected daily by armed men. Why should we not be able I protect ourselves

where has anyone said that?


not to mention the government admits they cant round up the illegal immigrants. You really think they are going to come and round up your guns? Please use some common sense. Instead of the fear mongering BS

[thegodfather]

where has anyone said that?


not to mention the government admits they cant round up the illegal immigrants. You really think they are going to come and round up your guns? Please use some common sense. Instead of the fear mongering BS

It's fear mongering BS when someone says they're going to come take your guns...But, conversely, its NOT fear mongering BS when Piers Morgan and the others on the left say that you dont care about children being killed when you disagree with their policy positions? It's not fear mongering BS when the news (CNN specifically) reports "Bodies of children at Sandy Hook shot multiple times," as if that somehow has any relevance to the story, and is in any way news worthy. Of course its not news worthy, it serves no purpose other then to cause shock value, and now they are even discussing releasing photos of the dead children, with no value to the news, other than to serve a left wing agenda towards denying law abiding citizens the right to certain firearms.

I'm sick of these people getting on the TV and saying they "respect the 2nd amendment," and even better is when Piers Morgan says "I respect the right of Americans to own a gun and protect themselves in their homes." He makes a point of delineating the 'in their homes' part, because he clearly does not believe that people have the right to defend themselves outside of their homes, where the majority of violent crime happens. He was accused earlier this week of standing on the graves of the dead children at Sandy Hook, and I think thats an accurate assessment, he is exploiting that tradegedy for ratings, and to advance his own political agenda. This guy is little more then a disgraced tabloid man who got caught up in the phone hacking scandal in the UK and had to come over to this side of the pond, the fact he was given a show on CNN is disgraceful. With regards to WHY "anyone" would need to own an AR-15, for starters, because it's a right guaranteed to us in the constitution, and because additionally its covered under property rights, it is a piece of property.

Yes the second amendments true purpose designed by the founders is as a last and final check&balance against the power of government, in the rare, unlikely case that it would become tyrannical. However, aside from that, it has another useful purpose, that of self-defense, an inalienable right bestowed upon people by God. Theres absolutely no concievable reason that a law abiding person who has passed all of the necessary tests, background checks, and paperwork should not be able to carry their firearm on or about their person wherever they go outside of their home, for the purposes of lawful self defense. The idea advanced by the left, that EVERYONE will be armed, and that shootouts will occur over cutting in line at the movies, or over parking spots, or other such trivial disagreements of daily life will then lead to shootouts is unfounded. It is unfounded for several reasons, not the least of which is the statistics of "Shall Issue" conceal&carry states showing that such instances did NOT come to fruition, and the number of licensed conceal&carry holders to use their firearms in a manner not consistent with the law is far below 1% of all CCW permit holders. Adding to the evidence of why this idea is unfounded, is the fact that in any of the 42 states where "SHALL ISSUE" conceal&carry permits have been on the books for well over a decade, only about 1%-1.5% of the entire population of the state decides to exercise that right and go through the processes of obtaining a conceal&carry permit. This means in a state with 10,000,000 (10 million) people, only 100,000-150,000 people have the ability to conceal&carry legally, and of those permit holders, no data exists that shows what percentage of them are carrying their firearms on a daily basis, but clearly every single permit holder is not carrying their firearm every waking moment, further debunking the idea that society will be fiilled with people carrying guns all around you. All that we ask, is that those 1%-1.5% of people who are ALREADY permitted by law to conceal&carry their firearms in any number of places throughout their state, be allowed to carry their firears into movie theaters, restaurants, shopping malls, and any other places designated as 'gun free zones,' so that they at least have some fighting chance at stopping the tragedies we've had to endure over the past 6-8 months.

No one is contending that the tradgedies would be averted in EVERY instance, just that there is a CHANCE that they could be mitigated, and in some instances stopped. And isn't a CHANCE better then NONE at all? Where the victims are consigned to the fate that their attacker assigns them, when they can do little more then dial a phone, curl up, and pray that the attacker spares their life, or has poor aim? I for one, would like to have my own fate in my hands, and not let a crazed lunatic DECIDE FOR ME. "I would much rather have a GUN in my hand, then a phone with the Police on the other end."

[gixxerboy1]

It's fear mongering BS when someone says they're going to come take your guns...But, conversely, its NOT fear mongering BS when Piers Morgan and the others on the left say that you dont care about children being killed when you disagree with their policy positions? It's not fear mongering BS when the news (CNN specifically) reports "Bodies of children at Sandy Hook shot multiple times," as if that somehow has any relevance to the story, and is in any way news worthy. Of course its not news worthy, it serves no purpose other then to cause shock value, and now they are even discussing releasing photos of the dead children, with no value to the news, other than to serve a left wing agenda towards denying law abiding citizens the right to certain firearms.

I'm sick of these people getting on the TV and saying they "respect the 2nd amendment," and even better is when Piers Morgan says "I respect the right of Americans to own a gun and protect themselves in their homes." He makes a point of delineating the 'in their homes' part, because he clearly does not believe that people have the right to defend themselves outside of their homes, where the majority of violent crime happens. He was accused earlier this week of standing on the graves of the dead children at Sandy Hook, and I think thats an accurate assessment, he is exploiting that tradegedy for ratings, and to advance his own political agenda. This guy is little more then a disgraced tabloid man who got caught up in the phone hacking scandal in the UK and had to come over to this side of the pond, the fact he was given a show on CNN is disgraceful. With regards to WHY "anyone" would need to own an AR-15, for starters, because it's a right guaranteed to us in the constitution, and because additionally its covered under property rights, it is a piece of property.

Yes the second amendments true purpose designed by the founders is as a last and final check&balance against the power of government, in the rare, unlikely case that it would become tyrannical. However, aside from that, it has another useful purpose, that of self-defense, an inalienable right bestowed upon people by God. Theres absolutely no concievable reason that a law abiding person who has passed all of the necessary tests, background checks, and paperwork should not be able to carry their firearm on or about their person wherever they go outside of their home, for the purposes of lawful self defense. The idea advanced by the left, that EVERYONE will be armed, and that shootouts will occur over cutting in line at the movies, or over parking spots, or other such trivial disagreements of daily life will then lead to shootouts is unfounded. It is unfounded for several reasons, not the least of which is the statistics of "Shall Issue" conceal&carry states showing that such instances did NOT come to fruition, and the number of licensed conceal&carry holders to use their firearms in a manner not consistent with the law is far below 1% of all CCW permit holders. Adding to the evidence of why this idea is unfounded, is the fact that in any of the 42 states where "SHALL ISSUE" conceal&carry permits have been on the books for well over a decade, only about 1%-1.5% of the entire population of the state decides to exercise that right and go through the processes of obtaining a conceal&carry permit. This means in a state with 10,000,000 (10 million) people, only 100,000-150,000 people have the ability to conceal&carry legally, and of those permit holders, no data exists that shows what percentage of them are carrying their firearms on a daily basis, but clearly every single permit holder is not carrying their firearm every waking moment, further debunking the idea that society will be fiilled with people carrying guns all around you. All that we ask, is that those 1%-1.5% of people who are ALREADY permitted by law to conceal&carry their firearms in any number of places throughout their state, be allowed to carry their firears into movie theaters, restaurants, shopping malls, and any other places designated as 'gun free zones,' so that they at least have some fighting chance at stopping the tragedies we've had to endure over the past 6-8 months.

No one is contending that the tradgedies would be averted in EVERY instance, just that there is a CHANCE that they could be mitigated, and in some instances stopped. And isn't a CHANCE better then NONE at all? Where the victims are consigned to the fate that their attacker assigns them, when they can do little more then dial a phone, curl up, and pray that the attacker spares their life, or has poor aim? I for one, would like to have my own fate in my hands, and not let a crazed lunatic DECIDE FOR ME. "I would much rather have a GUN in my hand, then a phone with the Police on the other end."

I wouldn't call that fear mongering but manipulation/ using. either way there are people on both sides that are wrong. I dont disagree.

Since you studied the Constitution i want your opinion on this. Especially since you bring it up allot. That the 2nd amendment is there to protect us from a the government. I saw an interview with a "Constitutional Scholar" and they were saying that is not the reason for the 2nd amendment. Its for a well regulated militia to assist the government in case of an invasion

[--->>405<<---]

personally i think this gun thing is a bunch of bullshit! im tired of hearing about it and tired of people arguing about it. personally i dont think they should be able to take away our guns but they are the freaking government and they can do whatever they want. to think they cant eventually make guns illegal is naive IMO. they can chip away and chip away.

[likelifting]

[--->>405<<---]

the whole thing is ridiculous. common sense should tell anyone not making clips that carry more than 9 rounds isnt gonna do any good. so what.. they shoot 9 people, or put 9 rounds in 4 people and pop the clip out and put another one in.. cmon man.. u cant stop people from killing people.

but i suppose people think well we can make it harder for em? so lets chip away at the freedom of everyone else so nutjob x can only kill 13 people instead of 23.. yeh thats a great idea!

whats gonna happen 5 yrs from now when all these impotent "feel good cuz we did something" laws are in place and some a-hole kills 10 people with a 9mm that holds 8 rounds? we gonna decrease the capacity to 6 rounds then?

its a dang B.S. idea..

[gixxerboy1]

the whole thing is ridiculous. common sense should tell anyone not making clips that carry more than 9 rounds isnt gonna do any good. so what.. they shoot 9 people, or put 9 rounds in 4 people and pop the clip out and put another one in.. cmon man.. u cant stop people from killing people.

but i suppose people think well we can make it harder for em? so lets chip away at the freedom of everyone else so nutjob x can only kill 13 people instead of 23.. yeh thats a great idea!

whats gonna happen 5 yrs from now when all these impotent "feel good cuz we did something" laws are in place and some a-hole kills 10 people with a 9mm that holds 8 rounds? we gonna decrease the capacity to 6 rounds then?

its a dang B.S. idea..

if your 1 of those 10 people that survive i would think so.
I agree you arent going to stop anything, but yes make it harder. Really are your freedoms infringed that much because your gun could only hold 9 bullets?
We have free speech too, but there are limits set to that. And that hasnt turned into a slippery slop

[--->>405<<---]

if your 1 of those 10 people that survive i would think so.
I agree you arent going to stop anything, but yes make it harder. Really are your freedoms infringed that much because your gun could only hold 9 bullets?
We have free speech too, but there are limits set to that. And that hasnt turned into a slippery slop

i have to walk down the street just like everyone else. if its my time to die its my time to die..

as for the bold i think that logic is dangerous.. how bout this.. is my safety increased that much more cuz nutjob x can only carry a gun "Legally" that holds 9 bullets?? how bout the fact that the lunatic is hell bent on wreaking havoc and gets an ar 15 on the black market? i dont suppose the fact that hes using an illegal firearm is gonna be much of a deterrent.

but to answer ur question YES my freedoms are infringed that much cuz my gun can only hold 9 rounds when right now i can have one that holds 30.. meanwhile sicko number 1537 is naked in his abandoned schoolbus makeshift house in montana polishing his bullets and planning the next mass killing.. probably laughing at all the bleeding heart liberal morons who actually believe limiting our access to guns is gonna do some good!

[gixxerboy1]

u shouldnt pass laws based on hypotheticals.. i have to walk down the street just like everyone else. if its my time to die its my time to die..

as for the bold i think that logic is dangerous.. how bout this.. is my safety increased that much more cuz nutjob x can only carry a gun "Legally" that holds 9 bullets?? how bout the fact that the lunatic is hell bent on wreaking havoc and gets an ar 15 on the black market? i dont suppose the fact that hes using an illegal firearm is gonna be much of a deterrent.

but to answer ur question YES my freedoms are infringed that much cuz my gun can only hold 9 rounds when right now i can have one that holds 30.. meanwhile sicko number 1537 is naked in his abandoned schoolbus makeshift house in montana polishing his bullets and planning the next mass killing.. probably laughing at all the bleeding heart liberal morons who actually believe limiting our access to guns is gonna do some good!

arent those all hypotheticals

and if your that worried stay out of Montana

[--->>405<<---]

arent those all hypotheticals

and if your that worried stay out of Montana

LOL yeh thats why i deleted the hypothetical part.. i suppose i let emotion get in the way of my logic. i think most laws are passed based on hypotheticals.. (duh) LOL..

[lovbyts]

The 2nd amandment isn't going anywhere. The government may place restrictions on certain types of weapons but they cannot just "take" all your weapons. Part of the meaning of the amendment by our founding fathers is to give the people the ability to protect themselves from an overzealous government if the need arises.

Unfortunately that maybe sooner than later.

[jasc]

Unfortunately, I wish I was exaggerating with what is being proposed in my backwards state. Even pump action shotguns would be deemed illegal. I don't think (knocking on wood/keeping my fingers crosses) all that is being proposed will pass though. But crazier things have happened I guess.

Part of the proposed "new" gun laws would be to turn all non-legal firearms over to LE by 2015 with no compensation (or have gun welded shut), or automatically become a class B felon

looks like we'll be gettin hella deals on firearms in the surrounding states if it passes

[jasc]

to limit clips to 9 rounds would be assinine (sp?).. hell a standard 9mm glock holds 15

[gixxerboy1]

to limit clips to 9 rounds would be assinine (sp?).. hell a standard 9mm glock holds 15

honestly didnt know that.
but asking you as a gun person was a realistic number you feel like you would need in 1 clip?

[Sgt. Hartman]

to limit clips to 9 rounds would be assinine (sp?).. hell a standard 9mm glock holds 15

Have you seen the saiga 12 with the 30 round drum? There's some YouTube vids on it.....amazing the damage that thing can do in less than 10 seconds.

[Zodiac82]

im neither here nor there but definitely agree with Gixx on compacity of a gun....ppl who are law abiding citizens shouldnt have a problem with a gun that holds 9,8, or 5 rounds....ur not lookin to harm others then it shouldnt matter

[--->>405<<---]

im neither here nor there but definitely agree with Gixx on compacity of a gun....ppl who are law abiding citizens shouldnt have a problem with a gun that holds 9,8, or 5 rounds....ur not lookin to harm others then it shouldnt matter

the reason i have a problem with it isnt cuz i think i need a gun that holds 50 bullets, its because i think the logic behind passing the restrictions is flawed and it is giving the government a bigger foot in the door to limit our freedoms and its not gonna do any freaking good!

[kelkel]

im neither here nor there but definitely agree with Gixx on compacity of a gun....ppl who are law abiding citizens shouldnt have a problem with a gun that holds 9,8, or 5 rounds....ur not lookin to harm others then it shouldnt matter

Agree that nobody really needs a huge banana clip but the thing is there are idiots out there that are looking to harm others.