Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > This is another blow to gun rights

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-04-2012, 11:55 AM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 2,700
Liked 2191 Times on 990 Posts
Likes Given: 2128

Default

Suggesting that things only be based on need is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard. I just don't understand why some of you gun owners still don't get "shall not be infringed".

Hell you don't need a 60 inch TV, you don't need air conditioning, you don't need more than one pair of shoes, you don't need a 300 hp car with power windows. We have all these things because we have rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We have the right to keep and bear arms. If a man is comfy carrying his 870 12 gauge it's none of my business or anyone else's. If you want to carry a 22 that's your business. You guys should step back and listen to yourselves. According to some of you, people should only be allowed to do what you would do. "I carry a 9 mm so that's all anyone else should need." "Where does Joe get off carrying a bigger gun than me?"



__________________
rjd3282 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 12:37 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,900
Liked 2056 Times on 827 Posts
Likes Given: 2706

Default

No matter what anyone does the anti-gunners/anti-rights asses will always look for something to cry about. I don't have the time left in this world to play nice with these pricks. No pro-gun owner should play nice to the social-ist anti-gunners any more. We played nice for How Many years and what did it get us? More gun control, and once we started playing dirty we started winning.



__________________
opaww is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 12:41 PM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 700
Liked 248 Times on 142 Posts
Likes Given: 163

Default

Isn't part of the reason the Founders saw fit to include gun ownership as a vital part of the country so as to insure we had a defense against tyranny? When Washington and his soldiers attacked the Hessians and defeated then they took their cannons and other things. Now these were just mere colonist, what need di they have for those wicked cannons. No doubt the British would not have wanted them to have them.

The noose is being tightened my friends. It would not bother me in the least bit if we all had access to full auto weapons and grenade launchers. But wait many gun owners feel we need to be controlled and go along with the many laws we have that limit our access to such things. I've also read post on here and other places that poke fun at those that feel we as citizens should stand up against tyranny and that we would all perish. I can only say that's being a coward and I'm glad those dear patriots didn't share many of the mindsets we see today.

__________________
Jim1611 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 12:42 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 2,700
Liked 2191 Times on 990 Posts
Likes Given: 2128

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by opaww View Post
No matter what anyone does the anti-gunners/anti-rights asses will always look for something to cry about. I don't have the time left in this world to play nice with these pricks. No pro-gun owner should play nice to the social-ist anti-gunners any more. We played nice for How Many years and what did it get us? More gun control, and once we started playing dirty we started winning.

Amen!!!!!!
__________________
rjd3282 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 01:33 PM   #15
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Detroit,mi
Posts: 2,616
Liked 755 Times on 463 Posts
Likes Given: 156

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim1611 View Post
The noose is being tightened my friends.
One tiny little knot at a time.

First you can't carry with one in the chamber
Then you can't carry with the magazine loaded
Then you can't carry a pistol
Then you can't carry a rifle.
__________________
partdeux is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 02:09 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
vincent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mid-Atlantic NC
Posts: 4,122
Liked 1956 Times on 1030 Posts
Likes Given: 4285

Default

Year in and year out, news like this comes out of CA...

Year in and year out, the people of CA put the same folks in office...

WHAT THE HELL DID YOU EXPECT CALIFORNIA??????????

__________________
Member NRA, GOA, GRNC, SAF, NAGR

Proud Supporter of USA Shooting
vincent is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:16 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
levelcross's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 971
Liked 162 Times on 114 Posts
Likes Given: 260

Default

AB1527, which makes it a misdemeanor for a person to carry an unloaded long gun in a public, passed the Assembly 42-28, with Republicans opposed. It includes a long list of exemptions for hunters, military personnel and others.

Read more: http://www.kcra.com/politics/31002867/detail.html#ixzz1tujLhnZ4


It's already illegal to carry a loaded weapon openly in California.

Read more: http://www.kcra.com/politics/31002867/detail.html#ixzz1tujRUVNx

Now just how/who does this Bill help??? If it was open carried it had to be unloaded anyway. Glad I am as far RIGHT of California as I can get.

__________________

Don't question my right to own a gun and I won't question your stupidity not to.

You give Peace a chance, we will cover you if it doesn't work out.

levelcross is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 04:14 PM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 103
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Hopefully we can get all 50 a shall issue and quit being a pita about our 2nd amendment and leave us alone

__________________
rebelcowboy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 04:25 PM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 103
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjd3282
Suggesting that things only be based on need is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard. I just don't understand why some of you gun owners still don't get "shall not be infringed".

Hell you don't need a 60 inch TV, you don't need air conditioning, you don't need more than one pair of shoes, you don't need a 300 hp car with power windows. We have all these things because we have rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We have the right to keep and bear arms. If a man is comfy carrying his 870 12 gauge it's none of my business or anyone else's. If you want to carry a 22 that's your business. You guys should step back and listen to yourselves. According to some of you, people should only be allowed to do what you would do. "I carry a 9 mm so that's all anyone else should need." "Where does Joe get off carrying a bigger gun than me?"
You are so right why aren't we just carrying and fighting back the way it should be and telling the government like it is?
__________________
rebelcowboy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 10:30 PM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Phillipsburg, NJ
Posts: 145
Liked 27 Times on 17 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TripleTap View Post
Going into Starbucks to order a double frap no whip late grande with a Remington 700 at your side is not the smartest move for gun rights!
OTOH, trudging up to a convenience store/gas station with your rifle after you've become lost/injured, or suffered a breakdown in transport would evoke the same response. Would you leave your high-end varmiter unsecured in your vehicle as you trudged to get gas or help ? >MW


__________________
Millwright is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Blow out kit - looking for ideas bkt Training & Safety 4 06-07-2011 02:57 AM
blow gun? Wings-ofthe-Luftwaffe Survival & Sustenance Living Forum 6 02-25-2010 05:18 AM
State Rights vs. Federal Rights, opaww Politics, Religion and Controversy 1 07-31-2009 08:47 PM
blow up a glock JimDuncan Glock Forum 22 02-08-2009 10:31 PM
Brandish, or Blow 'Em Away? ScottG Legal and Activism 16 07-07-2008 06:10 AM