I have to question the reasoning of the person that would object to laws for voter ID, especially since they cite the dubious reasons for not wanting voter ID laws as they don’t want more laws or bigger government. BUT in the same day they espouse support for more laws restricting firearms magazines and usage, restricting gun rights. If I were to look up the definition of liberal in the dictionary, I would not be surprised to find such an example of those opinions defining a liberal person. What we post here defines what we are. Today, some people have been clearly defined.
I do not want a law, I want responsible gun owners to stand up and do what is right, but I am not holding my breath I realize you may be a bad shot, but most of us can get it done with one
I didn’t mention who the uber liberals on this site are but thanks for taking one step forward. Recognizing the problem is the first step on the road to recovery.
It does not make them a liberal. It simply exposes the pre-existing condition known as liberalism contained within. The ethical standards of American liberals are more malleable than they would admit. In practice they do not oppose the violation of civil or human rights, and seem happy to slowly chip away, one bite at a time to eventually arrive at the same result. http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2012/07/gun-control-and-limited-liberal.html
I struggle with the thought of government definin g how much capacity ny magazines should have. I have alot of reservation of people having Access to 100 round drums like wehad in the military. Should they be illigal? Maybe, but you can bet before they are i will buy a couple for my sks.
Exactly that...your opinion, and I respect that. Nothing in your post to make me consider changing mine though. Simply feeling something is un-American doesnt do much to save any lives. Me naming a limit does nothing to save any lives either. If I knew, I would gladly share that information. Maybe 10 is a fair compromise? Maybe not? Nothing short of unlimited will suit you. Thats your perogative, again I respect that. I will never consider the tragic consequences of crazy people with guns as folly. I'm sure we all wish we could have done something to stop him. Maybe we could have???? My joke may have been in poor taste. Why am I already limited to not owning a fully auto tommy gun? That seems kind of un-American.....perhaps my rights were trampled. I would gladly trade my freedom to own high capacity magazines for what I feel MIGHT be a little safer world for my kids and their kids.
That’s why I “think” rather than “feel”. What makes such comments un-American is that they are un-American. You are the one suggesting that high capacity magazines ought not be legal for the general public. That demands and definition of what you define as high capacity and based on your comments about 100 round magazines, I asked what your max limit would be. It seems like ten rounds is your limit. Not true. The sheer weight of a 200 or 500 round magazine would make it impractical so “unlimited" seems mechanically unfeasible. You should know that you are not prohibited from owning such a weapon, you just need to take the proper steps to get one. There is increased rigor involved with obtaining such a weapon. I would not and neither should you since trading freedom is not now nor will it ever be even a modest guarantee of safety for your kids, only a limit on your kids. Also, rid yourself of the "Feelings" and instead opt for thinking and logic and reason. Such an exercise is not best addressed by “feelings” when “ thinking” is so much better suited for the job.
If one has planned and committed himself to talking a life (or lives) he has made It clear that there is not a single law on the books that matters a whip to him since he is willing to violate the most important law of man and God. No law will prevent him from his goal since he is bent on violating the most important law. I would invite everybody here to craft a law preventing murder. (not slowing down or making it harder) but preventing murder.
It doesn't, neo-con's think everyone is a liberal that does not tow the line. Free thinking is strictly prohibated.
I only wish there were more of me. Oh the things we could accomplish in this country. Our numbers are on the increase and in November will materialize as the pendulum swings the other way. Trying to get the left to regain reason is a daunting task as witnessed here.
We surely live in troubled times. I have tried to tell myself that I would raise my kids less militant than my father did with me, but I am not sure if I can. I was raised to fight and fight quickly if needed, and if that meant pick up a knife or gun and take care of business, that is what it meant. We have more and more whackos out there and I am afraid for my kids, and even more so if I do not teach them how to fight not only with their bodies, but also weapons if need be. But once again, I really do not want my kids growing up with my jaded mentality and want them to see the world with rosier glasses than I do each day. Such is the dilemma.
I do not own a pistol but dont have a problem with any one using them. I dont have an assault type weapon and again I dont have a problem with some one owning them. I dont have a need for a large capacity clip but dont have a problem with gun owners using them for recreation. I do have a problem with giving into any type gun ban whether that be a large clip, assault rifles, pistols or any other type of gun. That will not satisfy the people that want to take away our gun rights. I believe if we give in to anything that will make it easier for them to go after more. This will not stop any sense less shooting either, because the people who do things like this do not care about any laws or society. If we told PETA we wont stop eating beef but we wont eat pork, do you think they would stop their BS?
Your opinion. Not necessarily right or wrong, but yours and I respect it. Just dont agree with it. I guess we could all get along on fewer shots than that if we needed to. Unless you can show me a real need for more. That sounds more like a liberal avoidance answer. Why would you stoop to their tactics? Actually, I am prohibited from owning it because I dont have the necessary permits. That seems un-American to make me go through such rigorous effort just to own a weapon. Have my rights been trampled?! I would settle for the slightest chance. I'm not looking for any guarantee here. I am fine with speed limits, I am fine with magazine limits. Label me what you will, but I am done with this as I have never once heard any compelling reason to think otherwise and have offered many chances.
Since when has need been a driving factor in mankind? Do you really need a car that goes 80 MPH? There would be a lot few deaths on the road if the max speed cars could travel was 25 MPH. Do you really need a printer that holds 100 sheets of paper? I think the better limit would be 10 sheets. Does one really need a bow that shoots 400 FPS? I think the limit ought to be 200 FPS. My stapler hold far to many staples, Why? My new truck has a 28 gallon gas tank. 5 gallons would be better. I mean who needs more?? A 6 arrow quiver? Hah! One arrow is all anybody needs. Do we really need to go to outer space when we have a perfectly good planet right here? 300 channels on the TV, I grew up with 4. We dont need any more than that. 32 gig thumb drives??? I "feel" 2 gig would be more than anybody would need. The obvious answer for the “need” for 100 round magazines is because you don’t have to stop to reload as often. You somehow have equated that with wrong or evil and want to try to convince yourself that if only 20 round magazines were the largest allowable by law, less people would die. You are willing to trade not only your freedom but the freedom of all gun owners on such a poorly thought out concept and trade for what???? Ive heard no good reason why, just that you “feel” it would be a feel-good measure to make you feel we are actually doing something when logic insists otherwise. Reducing the number of rounds in magazines by law will not change the hearts of evil men bent on destruction. To argue such a thing only exposes your limited horizons and naivety. Nope! With great power comes great responsibility. I cant drive until I meet certain rigor and if I want to drive a big rig, A CDL means even more rigor. If you want it bad enough, you will meet the requirements. So anyway, who needs a big gulp 32 oz drink? I think the limit ought to be no more than 6 oz for any soft drink. Government should protect us from ourselves, right? And you are more than happy to give them permission. That my friend is an epic failure on your part but you wont notice it until its too late.