About Col. Oliver North: Washington, D.C. 2nd Amendment case to be heard Page 4
|February 29th, 2008||#33|
| || |
Because firearms are a Constitutional Right. Driving is not.... you do have the right to travel. But driving is not a right. The right to travel is.
By creating a licensing system (NYC) you can restrict those that you feel are socially undesirable to not be able to posse arms.
Firearm ownership ties into the right to keep and bear arms and also the right to self defense. By creating a licensing system, you will setup a situation that can be abused and controlled.
Nazi Germany did that, the Soviet Union did that, the People's Republic of China does that, Cuba does that, Venezuela does that, etc......
You can either live in a free and open society in which you have the rights that we all enjoy. The right to freedom of speech, the right of freedom of choice if religion, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to be secure on our persons and in our homes, the right to a fair trial, the right to not incriminate yourself, etc...
Or you can live in a secure society. Yeah you have safety but you have no freedoms. You will be safe because the government will go through your house when ever they want to check for "bad things". Criminals will not have guns because people that do have them will be arrested on the stop and never face trial. You won't have to worry about people screaming and cursing at each other because you will not have the freedom of speech. etc......
In the end, you can either live in a free and open society with rights or you can live in a closed and secure society with no rights. I will never trade my rights for security. Because sadly you cannot live in a free and open society with rights and be secure. It's one or the other.
|February 29th, 2008||#34|
| || |
In those countries it is illegal to own most firearms and if you do own one, it's probably a .22 rifle for competition shooting.
I believe in freedom. I just don't believe in putting things in the hands of people who don't know how to use them properly.
I don't think we should have licenses in talking but I think you'll know what I mean by watching or hearing some dumbass talk about some subject (parents at a little league soccer game comes to mind... they argue like hell when they don't even know the laws of the game) and when an authority on the subject (someone with the proper qualifications) talks about it. There's a difference.
Also if I was with you in a room and you had a pistol on you and you took it out for some reason, I'd be alright. But if someone who didn't have the proper qualifications and just bought his/her first pistol at the gun store two hours ago pulled theirs out to take a look at it, I'd be leaving the room.
|February 29th, 2008||#35|
| || |
"Our politicians do not serve us; they serve the multinational corporations that pay them. It's time to change that. Let's end the corporate takeover of our government." — Cenk Uygur
|February 29th, 2008||#36|
| || |
I am pro-gun as well. There's no mistaking about it. But I think before anyone can buy one, they should take a few courses on firearms safety, basic marksmanship and maintenance.
A firearm in the hands of someone who knows handle it is a fine weapon for self defense. A firearm in the hands of some douche bag is dangerous to everyone, the very people firearms are legal in order to protect.
|February 29th, 2008||#37|
| || |
It's the part of the NRA that people who dislike guns like to ignore, the NRA believes that all citizens have the right to own guns but also believes that all gun-owners should have the necessary knowledge to ensure they are not putting themselves and others in danger through reckless use. That's why the NRA offers free firearm safety lessons to kids in pretty much every State of the Union. I don't like the idea of licenses for firearms, but I do like the idea of mandatory safety classes for all gun-owners, and of course the would need a certificate or license to prove they had undergone the necessary safety courses.
Please note that 98% of what I say is my opinion and/or my "version" of the facts. Most of what I say is rumor with little to no evidence to back it up, just something I picked up somewhere.
|February 29th, 2008||#38|
| || |
The license I'm referring to is some kind of proof of qualification of a course.
Whether it's handled like a qualification you can earn at an academy or if it's handled like a drivers' license.... that's a whole new argument and it's not what I'm really getting at.
|February 29th, 2008||#39|
| || |
We already have a license for handguns in NY which requires you to take a safety course. I had to attend to a handgun safety course for the peace of mind of my totally liberal parents, who were quite surprised when I walked in the door with a Mosin-Nagant and SKS on my 18th birthday. Didn't cover anything I didn't already know, and was totally unrelated to my rifles, but it was fun nonetheless. The instructor was a nice guy, and showed me a few things that you normally don't get until you take a defensive pistol class.
At least now when I apply for a CCW permit all my papers will already be in order.
I am not against the idea of a required training lesson, but I am very much against the idea of keeping a list of every firearm owner and all their details. Could be exploited by a totalitarian government, or a foreign army for that matter.
"Mankind, when left to themselves, are unfit for their own government." - George Washington
|March 1st, 2008||#40|
| || |
|To Prod N. Korea, U.S. Relents In Counterfeiting Case|
|Midshipman Guilty In Sex Assault, Cleared In 2nd Case|
|D.C. Circuit Court Hands Down Victory for Individual 2nd Amendment Rights!|
|U.S. Concedes Uncertainty On North Korean Uranium Effort|
|N. Korea Aims To Improve On Clinton-Era Nuclear Deal|