I believe gun laws should be states rights. the same laws in New Jersey or New York should not apply to people in Wyoming. So I believe each state should decide their own gun rights. However I believe background checks & psychological tests are a MUST before owning a gun.
what do you mean by states rights? Each state already has their own state gun control regulations. what regulations are you wishing to implement?
As I said Psychological tests & Background checks should be a mandatory across all 50 states. Every state should allow the minimum of someone allowed to walk around with a handgun on them. Beyond that I say the states should decide further regulations and laws
hmmm. to be honest im not quite sure. i go back and fourth on gun rights. both sides have great arguments. It's tough for me to stand on one side or the other on this issue
I think the states already violate the constitution by allowing some to have guns and denying others, owning a gun is a right.. not a privilege like driving a car
Still its a weapon that people use sometimes for the soul purpose of killing other people. Plus in the 1700's all they had were single shot muskets. which were extremely inaccurate and hard to use. The equivalent of say a bow and arrow made today. So i believe everyone should be allowed to bear a bow and arrow or a musket.... but an automatic weapon with pin point accuracy and a 50 round clip is not something the founding fathers had in mind back when creating the constitution. Im not sure how effectively we can really function as a society today by following a set of 250 year old rules coming from a completely different society. just sayin
[HR][/HR] Pragmatically it sounds nice to have background checks, but there are plenty of ways to acquire guns aside from visiting a gun shop. The states should definitely make a strong effort to provide background checks quickly and easily, but any owner can gloss over someone's record or sell under the table. Besides, if someone is too dangerous to own a gun (i.e. from criminal activity) why are they on the street? Psychological issues are tricky. No comment.
There was never a "right" to have a gun. Incompetents, criminals, and coloreds and other non-desirables weren't allowed to have them, right or no right.
There was never a "right" to have a gun. Incompetents, criminals, and coloreds and other non-desirables weren't allowed to have them, right or no right.
Ayuh,.... Do you own a gun,..?? Which 1,..?? Do ya know anybody who owns a gun,..?? Have you ever shot a gun,..?? Do you know Anything about guns, at all, other than what you've read in the MSM,..??
1. no i do not own a gun (im 1 2. yes, two of my uncles own guns. my best friends dad owns guns, my neibor owns a gun 3. yes i have shot a got. many guns in fact. I've shot a p226 pistol suppressed, m249 SAW, and an HK-MR566. 4. I know tons about guns.... so whats the point of this?
Many of our Founders were "techno-geeks" and gun enthusiasts. One can research what the various quotes were, but I didn't see anything about them not wanting anything but the very best firearms, weapons and technology for their armed forces and militias. Look at the Militia Act of 1792, many of the Founders signed this and our very Constitution. In the Act, they demanded handguns for horsemen. Do you actually think any of these hyper-intelligent leaders would have NOT wanted repeating firearms if the technology existed? Pure rubbish to think otherwise. In fact, Washington and the Revolutionary Army pioneered the use of accurate rilfes instead of inaccurate muskets. I can say for a fact that if our same technology was available today in small arms back in the 1790's, the Militia (private male citizens..ie the people today) would be allowed to carry Glock pistols or AR assault rifles without permits. And because the Founders, in gerneral, were more intelligent that our current government leaders, they would actually punish criminals who went around killing other people with them by placing them on the end of a rope. Armed robbers and rapists are put in our current "catch and release" justice system. Over the last 60 years, leftist liberals have jacked-up our perfectly good 250 year old criminal justice system.
If that's the case, are the airlines infringing on your 2nd Amend. rights when they say "no guns on board"?
That certain reasonable limitations or exceptions must be placed on every right is a well established and obvious principle agreed to by all.
You can just as easily shoot up a movie theater as an airliner or a shopping mall. I can't see why United Airlines gets to restrict my god-given right to carry.
yes I do believe it. But since they fly the infernal contraptions...maybe we should all take to riding our mules... But since I drive and do not fly, I have no issue with airlines just saying no......due to the reason I don't fly. It isn't that I am fearful of flying, I just don't want my crotch felt up by some friggin degenerate who really loves stroking up kids and old ladies.
they own the boat and docks (analogy), protected, allegedly, by the ones who like to be felt up and groped
