- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Gabby Giffords taken to a studio, told to talk to Congress about guns
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:15 pm to weagle99
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:15 pm to weagle99
Democrats are some confused people.bSo they would have us to get a back ground check before buying a gun. But Democrats also say a person shouldn't have to have picture ID to vote. Their conflicted I tell ya,conflicted.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:16 pm to Cockopotamus
quote:
And the guys who wrote the Constitution couldn't possibly see the consequences industrialization would have on the gun.
What consequences did industrialization have on the gun?
LC
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:18 pm to 4LSU2
quote:
The conversation about background checks is pointless. Convicted felons can't legally possess firearms, but how many violent crimes are committed by convicted felons?
End of thread.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:24 pm to StrangeBrew
quote:dumbass! does the 1st apply to your laptop?
Guns are drastically different now than they were in 1776
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:27 pm to Cockopotamus
quote:
Guns are drastically different now than they were in 1776.
So are our means of communication. Perhaps it's time we considered some alterations to the First Amendment. It doesn't apply to television, radio, or the Internet, for example
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:30 pm to Cockopotamus
quote:
Guns are drastically different now than they were in 1776. A
So are the methods of printing! Should we do awAy with freedom of the Press.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:34 pm to Cockopotamus
quote:
Nobody is preaching that because the government knows you have it they'll come and take it
Rack up a few unpaid parking tickets and see.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:49 pm to SundayFunday
quote:
In my opinion the problem is when you decide which "mental illnesse" deprive you of your right to have a gun.
And who decides this? What would happen is that sane people taking appropriate meds would lose rights to own weapons and people with issues may avoid treatment to avoid losing gun rights.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:55 pm to Cockopotamus
quote:
I've never understood the big fear of universal background checks.
FFL holders are required to do background checks.
Private citizens without such licenses are under no such obligation. I've never understood the desire to regulate these transactions between presumably law-abiding citizens.
Loughner purchased his pistol at a FFL dealer, and underwent a background check. Although it is rare, it does happen.
Lanza killed his mother for her guns. Kliebold and Harris got proxies to buy their guns - even if it were "the law" that private transactions would require a background check - these would not have helped, because the transfers themselves were illegal - highly unlikely Lanza would have run a background check on himself - tipping off the authorities to his murdering his mother - likewise, the suppliers of Kliebold and Harris would not have run a background check, because they were acting illegally as well.
I've never understood the big fear of lawfully armed citizens.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 10:59 pm to Cockopotamus
quote:
Guns are drastically different now than they were in 1776.
Methods of surveillance have increased drastically. Throw out the 4th Amendment.
We have truth serum - throw out the 5th Amendment.
quote:
And the guys who wrote the Constitution couldn't possibly see the consequences industrialization would have on the gun.
They understood the danger of being unarmed under and armed, tyrannical state.
quote:
Registration wouldn't take away your right to own a gun anyways.
It is the last step before confiscation (or some extreme regulation of a handful of privileged individuals) - it is wholly inconsistent with the Second Amendment.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 11:07 pm to Ace Midnight
The government has no business knowing who owns a gun and who doesn't.
Posted on 1/27/14 at 11:39 pm to BamaFan89
quote:
Gabby Giffords taken to a studio, told to talk to Congress about guns The way Kelley has exploited his wife since her injuries is absolutely sickening. How anyone can do that to their wife is beyond me.
Your words make you seem like a dumbfrick.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 1:50 am to Cockopotamus
Where does the government derive the right to know about when I buy guns?
Posted on 1/28/14 at 2:21 am to Cockopotamus
quote:
I've never understood the big fear of universal background checks.
what's your definition of UBC's?
Posted on 1/28/14 at 2:38 am to SmackoverHawg
quote:
What would happen is that sane people taking appropriate meds would lose rights to own weapons and people with issues may avoid treatment to avoid losing gun rights.
We can't allow anyone who has taken antidepressants to own a handgun due to the threat of them using it to shoot themselves.
THANK OF POOR SALLY WHO LOST HER FATHER TO THIS!
Posted on 1/28/14 at 8:09 am to Upperaltiger06
quote:
Your words make you seem like a dumbfrick.
Clearly you're a very intelligent person. I like how you avoided personal attacks and instead directly addressed what I posted.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 8:21 am to BamaFan89
quote:
The way Kelley has exploited his wife since her injuries is absolutely sickening. How anyone can do that to their wife is beyond me.
The closer they get to big-time power...the more intoxicated they become. Universal axiom. Power corrupts. That's why the Founders wrote the Constitution in a way that LIMITED GOVERNMENT.
But we can trust Obama/Progs.
Oh well. Live and learn. Again and again.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News