Comments on: The Government Wants Your Guns

By: bmxpunk2

bmxpunk2 — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:24 +0000

Will definitely agree with you on that one. And I do agree with you above on the second amendendment.

By: NFormD

NFormD — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:24 +0000

Oh..you mean like the propaganda and fear the government spreads? like the
H1N1 bullshit

By: NFormD

NFormD — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:24 +0000

its your constitutional right to feel that way and speak your opinion…its also our constitutional right to bare arms….I havent heard anything more about this law, I just post anything I hear or see.

BTW I am in no way a “right winger” I dont consider myself a part of any direction or party, its all the same bullshit either way. I am an American and that is the only label I will claim!

By: IreneH55

IreneH55 — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:24 +0000

Bullshit. There is no law in the process to take away your guns. Funny how right wingers want everybody to have a gun but would let you bleed to death for lack of health insurance when one of the idiots shoots you.
My father was killed with his own gun. He was a former Marine and knew how to handle it, but shouldn’t have been carrying it around with him.

By: bmxpunk2

bmxpunk2 — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:24 +0000

So its nice of you to spread propaganda and fear. This bill was never introduced in 2009, it was squashed clear back in September 2000. A simple internet search will provide with the correct facts.

By: SnellvilleChristian

SnellvilleChristian — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:24 +0000

Hate to tell you, but this is a hoax. There was a bill SB-2099 back in 2000, but it never went anywhere.

By: dizzyboiler

dizzyboiler — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:24 +0000

None of that seems like gun safety…more like government control. How did we make airliners safer? We gave pilots guns. It worked. Taking them from the populous does not make them safer. It makes them weaker. If they required you shoot your gun at a range and take a class, THAT’d be better than just disarming good people. But control, NOT safety is the reasoning. Unless I’m missing something here.

By: hrwulf

hrwulf — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:23 +0000

Really? Well since it will be mandatory to have said insurance and failure to purchase said insurance would put you in violation of federal law, you would then be guilty of commiting a felony…

Explain to me where the mere desire to have a law passed to personally benefit an individual at anothers expense is ethical? How is it a law that is in direct violation to Amendment 10 of the U.S. Constitution can even be passed without making those that pass it a felon themselves?

By: TheCrystalRiver

TheCrystalRiver — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:23 +0000

Again – we govern our legislators.
When myself and others call our Congressman and tell them we don’t support something – they listen.

And maybe gun related crime is very low, but when guns were banned in the Britain crime spiked – home invasions, burglaries, etc.

Criminals will always have guns, whether or not a law is passed against them.

I hardly think of a flag. I’m thinking in terms of freedom versus tyranny.

And you’re right. Columbine was not about freedom. It was about murder

By: youalldisgustme

youalldisgustme — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:22:23 +0000

@TheCrystalRiver

This is the last thing I’m going to say, because I don’t like the unnecessarily aggressive way you people argue. As far as I am aware, your Congress is in place to pass or reject legislation, thus they govern you.
As a citizen of a country where gun control is very strict, and gun-related crime very low, I am against looser legislation. Perhaps if you thought with your mind, not a flag, you would understand why. And your freedom? Columbine wasn’t about freedom.