Get ready for the next round of attacks on the 2nd.

Rick wrote:

homeagain wrote:

FredHayek wrote: It is strange that when people drive drunk, we go after the drunk driver, but when someone shoots up a school, we penalize millions of legal gun owners who never shot anyone.

DISINGENUOUS,at best.........It wasn't until MADD campaigned HEAVILY for new laws and demanded that something been done.....they
got tired of burying their children because someone had that EXTRA 3 drinks and got behind the wheel (IMPAIRED) and plowed into their
children, killing them in the process. :faint:

But again, drunk driving laws only penalize people who drive drunk and not people who operate their cars RESPONSIBLY. Same thing should be done with gun laws... one strike and you're out.

YEP......but you (collectively) think pretty LONG and HARD about whose going to drive (designated driver) and IF you should chance
that "one more drink"........it's called AWARENESS and that did NOT take place till MADD created the fervor and DEMANDED something
be done......much like the mother's who have 6 and 7 years olds going into an elementary school and fearing that they won't come out
ALIVE at the end of the day. JMO

Actually, there is a LOT of evidence that the incessant whining about "being penalized" because you might have to register your assault weapons and high-capacity magazines--(but still have all of your handguns)-- is starting to fall on deaf ears...Nationwide...

Or, as Rush Limburger likes to say, "Oh, boo-hoo-hoo-hoo"....

FredHayek wrote: It is strange that when people drive drunk, we go after the drunk driver, but when someone shoots up a school, we penalize millions of legal gun owners who never shot anyone.

Isn't it strange that when people want to drive a car we make them take an extensive test, both written and practical, on how well they can handle a car before they get a license to use it, make them get liability insurance in order to use that car, and have them renew that license to drive every 5 or so years, yet when they want to own a gun no such test.....or insurance, or in many cases even a license is required.

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: It is strange that when people drive drunk, we go after the drunk driver, but when someone shoots up a school, we penalize millions of legal gun owners who never shot anyone.

Isn't it strangey that when people want to drive a car we make them take an extensive test, both written and practical, on how well they can handle a car before they get a license to use it, make them get liability insurance in order to use that car, and have them renew that license to drive every 5 or so years, yet when they want to own a gun no such test.....or insurance, or in many cases even a license is required.

But if you want to carry in public you have to go through that. Need to get renewed this year.

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: It is strange that when people drive drunk, we go after the drunk driver, but when someone shoots up a school, we penalize millions of legal gun owners who never shot anyone.

Isn't it strange that when people want to drive a car we make them take an extensive test, both written and practical, on how well they can handle a car before they get a license to use it, make them get liability insurance in order to use that car, and have them renew that license to drive every 5 or so years, yet when they want to own a gun no such test.....or insurance, or in many cases even a license is required.

Not to mention that they HAVE TO REGISTER THE VEHICLE...

Registration equals confiscation. Hawaii required registration of assault weapons years ago and now has a bill in their legislature to seize those registered weapons. Even though less than five people were killed by rifle fire in the last three years in the state.

We still have to take off our shoes at the airport even though only one person has ever been caught in the entire world with a shoe bomb.

FredHayek wrote: So what? State militias were fighting Indian's, Brits in the War of 1812, rebels during the American Civil War. If you think the 2nd amendment is only about slave revolts, you are naive.

FYI, 2nd amendment was ratified in 1790, quite a few years before the Civil War, and before the War of 1812, whenever that was.

Raees wrote: We still have to take off our shoes at the airport even though only one person has ever been caught in the entire world with a shoe bomb.

Over reaction? Just like the over reaction of squashing the 2nd amendment rights of millions of innocent New Yorkers who have committed no crimes.

LadyJazzer wrote: They're coming to take your pocket knives...

You are right, they will. But they have to take the guns first. The important thing is that we don't focus on the stuff that hurts people the most, we focus on the stuff that gets the largest emotional reaction.

Emotions > =Lives.

By the way, a number of knives are already illegal. So you not only clearly see into the future, you see clearly into the past.

How about we just cut the crap and work on legislation that will produce a short list of the items it is legal to own. It might be easier than making that long list of things we cannot. If you argue, that is fine, you would be right, but that is just today, because tomorrow you will have the right to own less things and then the day after that even less. Combine that with the struggle to keep this country going for a long time and eventually if you use the mathematical limit (a good policy test), you will not be allowed to own anything. Then we can share everything communally and it will be just perfect.

Just remember the last thing that will be stripped from you is your opinion. Which makes me wonder what folks think of living in a world where within years someone may be able to read you mind mechanically and thoughts may in fact be outlawed.