Gun laws

[Guest simpleton woodchuck]

I posted on bcvoice for the first time yesterday looking for some competitive debating experiences. apparently anti-gun people are so spineless and moronic that they are not capable. Go cry to your buddyfriends. sit back,, relax and suck on societies teet for your lack of gumption.

[Madned]

I have yet to hear an argument what would a lower amount of ammunition would do. Sure there would be less wounded and possibly dead, but the act still continued and would continue. people would still be hurt and killed by a ten round clip. So come one. figure out what is a good number of rounds legally in a clip. One dead person killed my a whack job is one too many. limiting the amount of rounds is a simple minded fix but doesn't solve the problem.

You are right about the whack job behind the gun and most of them come well supplied with ammo when they decide to go postal, interestingly these semi auto hand guns can be converted to full auto and then that 31 round clip would be a fit for your machine pistol. This issue comes up every time a nut case goes on a shooting spree. A 9mm does not have the stopping power of a 45 caliber round and our state police have changed over to the 45.

[Guest Guest]

simpleton rent a center woodchucks think they can channel the thoughts of our founding fathers

 

A simpleton such as yourself is so ingnorant that they do not even know that courts of today have also stated that the 2nd amendment is an individual right and that the purpose was exactly the reasons stated by gun owners on this site. Too bad it doesn't support your ignorant, uninformed, liberal agenda. Call us "woodchucks" all you want but we obviously know what we are talking about, unlike you.

[Guest Guest]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fum0czT9hh0&feature=relmfu

[Guest Guest]

No hope for gun grabbers

 

The Washington Times6:50 p.m., Tuesday, March 1, 2011

 

 

The left has permanently lost the argument on gun control. Despite their best efforts to take advantage of the tragic shooting in Arizona to promote pointless restrictions on things like the size of handgun magazines, the propaganda campaign is unlikely to go anywhere. Instead, the right to keep and bear arms continues to gain steam as state lawmakers around the country are enacting measures that would have been unthinkable not so long ago.

 

On Monday, Wyoming lawmakers sent Gov. Matt Mead a "castle doctrine" bill that recognizes the right of residents to use a gun to protect themselves from home invasion or carjacking without fear of civil or criminal prosecution. A spokesman for Mr. Mead said the governor would review the proposal today, along with a second bill granting residents the ability to carry concealed weapons without a permit. The lawmakers also proposed a constitutional amendment recognizing the perpetual right to hunt, fish and trap.

 

No less should be expected from a place calling itself "The Cowboy State," but even swing states are open to the idea of ditching obsolete relics of an anti-gun past. A Pennsylvania Senate committee held a hearing yesterday on a castle doctrine bill. The General Assembly has adopted similar legislation in the past only to be thwarted by the veto pen of then-Gov. Ed Rendell. Voters have since replaced the Democratic party chieftain with Gov. Tom Corbett, a Republican who promised, "I would sign it" during the campaign.

 

The North Carolina Senate passed its own castle doctrine bill Monday. In Arizona, where laws are already gun-friendly, the House last week endorsed a proposal that would prevent overzealous homeowners associations from denying residents their constitutionally protected right to own firearms. The legislature's Democratic and Republican caucuses likewise support a Senate bill that would prevent university administrators from denying students with concealed carry permits from bringing weapons on campus.

 

Whenever the left is defeated at the statehouse and ballot box, it turns to the courts. The Supreme Court shot down most of these efforts with the District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago rulings reviving judicial recognition of the Second Amendment. Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe received legislation on Monday that forbids local governments from attempting to file liability lawsuits against manufacturers of guns and ammunition. The same bill also prohibits localities from passing any sort of "emergency ordinance" to seize Americans' firearms as happened in New Orleans during the Katrina hurricane.

 

At the national level, Rep. Cliff Stearns, Florida Republican, and Rep. Heath Schuler, North Carolina Democrat, introduced a measure providing for national reciprocity of concealed carry permits. That means anyone with the legal ability to carry in his home state could do so in another state as long as he abides by all applicable state laws. It's unfortunate this common-sense bill has no chance of getting past the Oval Office as long as it is occupied by a bigoted man who derisively describes small-town America as a place where people "cling to guns."

 

The Stearns-Schuler bill will likely have to wait until at least 2012, but grass-roots groups like the National Rifle Association aren't waiting until then to shape the landscape for gunowners' rights. Passage of these NRA-backed measures also reflects the growing realization among many Democratic lawmakers that they've lost gun control as a political issue.

[Guest Guest]

EDITORIAL: Guns for us, not for you

Land of fruits and nuts could see pistol-packing politicians

By THE WASHINGTON TIMES-The Washington Times7:10 p.m., Tuesday, March 15, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

Some of the most far-out anti-gun laws are found on the left coast, but that could change - for privileged politicians. A California state Senate committee will consider a bill next week that grants legislators permission to carry concealed firearms. The measure highlights the growing rift between the bureaucratic class and taxpayers who don’t have the luxury of exempting themselves from bad laws.

 

Ordinary Californians who want a concealed carry permit need to apply to the local sheriff. In practice - outside of conservative, rural counties - only celebrities and the well-connected end up obtaining the coveted document. In a state of nearly 37 million, about 40,000 permits were issued in 2007. The proposal being offered by a pair of pro-gun state Senate Democrats would automatically define as eligible for a permit “any applicant who is a member of Congress, a statewide elected official or a Member of the Legislature.” These could carry a gun “for purposes of protection or self-defense.” Coddled lawmakers living in gated communities may think they face heightened risk, but it’s unlikely poor residents in sketchy urban neighborhoods have any less of a need.

 

California’s gun laws are strict and include a ban on high-capacity magazines and scary-looking “assault weapons” - a statute so arbitrary that the state had to create a 96-page picture book to illustrate which items are prohibited. The latest scheme took effect last year requiring guns to imprint their serial number on every shell casing fired. This law was adopted even though such “microstamping”technology isn’t available, and it would be extremely expensive if it were.

 

The motivation of lawmakers in layering restriction on top of restriction hasn’t been to stop bad guys. Criminals, by definition, don’t abide by the law. Rather, the primary purpose is to harass gun owners who do try to do what’s right. Such laws have proved irrelevant anyway. The gun grabbers predicted the 2004 expiration of the federal assault weapons ban would fill our streets with blood. The latest available FBI crime stats showed a 6.2 percent decrease in violent crimes for the first half of 2010. The number of murders without the ban is now 34 percent lower than when it took effect in 1994.

 

Practically any bill that respects the right to keep and bear arms in a left-leaning state ought to be supported, no matter how unlikely final passage may seem. Exempting politicians may be the exception. Already the Golden State’s legislative class doesn’t have to worry about high gas prices because taxpayers fill up their tanks. They use a “per diem” scheme to avoid paying their own high taxes on about $40,000 worth of their $140,000 annualcompensation. Forcing legislators to live under the same crazy laws they expect everyone else to follow may help a few to appreciate the need for true reform.