There are different types of gun owners.

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by opaww, Dec 26, 2013.

  1. opaww

    opaww New Member

    4,868
    0
    0
    Not all gun owners think alike, some are almost as much anti gun as osamaobama.

    We have someplace around 85 million gun owners as of right now, and they are so divers that we gun owners cannot depend on each others for support of pro gun measures nor even who they will vote for.

    It’s hard to pin down just what each type of gun owner supports but I will list the common types here that I know we have.

    1. The shotgun owner. (Believes that only shot guns should be legal)
    2. The hunter. (Believes that only guns made for hunting should be legal) aka bolt action rifles, and double-barreled shotguns.
    3. The Black Powder shooter, (Believes that only black powder rifles and pistols are covered under the 2A.)
    4. The limited, (Believes that there should be limits on types of guns owned) aka Revolvers for home protection, Hunting rifles and shotguns.
    5. The licensed, (Believes most common guns are ok but they and their owners should be licensed.)
    6. The Elite, (Believes that only they posses the right to own guns)
    7. The semi-auto, (Believes semi-auto’s are ok as long as they don’t look like assault weapons)
    8. The all butt, (Believes any gun should be legal to own butt High powered sniper rifles) aka The .50 cal Barrett
    9. The safe stored, (Believes it’s ok to own guns as long as they are kept in a government approved storage facility)
    10. The Real Patriots, (Believes that anyone should be able to own any type of weapon they choose)

    This list is but the few beliefs in gun ownership that I actually have run into. So they are not just wishful thinking on my part, these types of people actually do exist. Some are a mix and match from the list like, someone who believes that it is ok to own black powder rifles, and normal shot guns for hunting, or The Semi-auto as long as they are registered.

    There are variations of any of the listed categories. Even in the membership of the NRA there are such a wide variety of beliefs that we cannot even get an absolute consensus of what to support. Most every group listed above says they support the 2A, but most believe that there should be some form of restriction placed on either the type or amounts of firearms, and ammo that we should be allowed to own.

    The 2A is unconditional, not one anti-gun law was ever passed up until after the civil war, where (democratic) whites wanted to keep the former slaves from owning guns. Then the ball started rolling and we just got it shoved deeper and harder through out the years.

    The main push right now should be to bring all gun owners and Second Amendment supporters together as one voice that is very loud and clear. The need for every gun owner to understand that any threat to gun rights is a threat to all gun rights.

    opaww
     
  2. QueenGlamis

    QueenGlamis New Member

    235
    0
    0
    I am in the #10 group. I do live in Arizona though and have friends with all the aforementioned guns and everyone of them I think are cool.
     

  3. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    16
    38
    So if I believe that a runaway paranoid schizophrenic should not be able to own a 12 gauge Street Sweeper, I am not a Real Patriot?
     
  4. JW357

    JW357 New Member

    6,716
    1
    0
    I'm a pretty big fan of all firearms. If I could afford to own (and shoot!) every type of firearm I would.

    I'm also a huge proponent of having an armed society. The more, the merrier.

    The only restriction I believe is justified in putting on this is violent felons. But I believe they should never be allowed free of prison anyway (either that or they should be given the death penalty).
     
  5. opaww

    opaww New Member

    4,868
    0
    0
    That is for the courts to decide and not you and I as to who is mentally incompetent to have their rights restricted. until due process of law is enacted on a person, no one has the right to decide for others what they can and can't own.
     
  6. RJMercer

    RJMercer New Member

    519
    0
    0
    In a world of unregulated carry of whatever you want to own or carry, said paranoid schizophrenic would be slow to act given that good honest sane people outnumber the insane and evil 1000:1. Even insane people understand the threat of overwhelming violent force in reaction to their actions. That is one of the main reasons why the insanely evil mass shooters choose legally mandated and clearly labeled "gun free zones"..... they want to be the only person armed and thus unopposed.
     
  7. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    16
    38
    I doubt you have met or dealt with violent delusional individuals. They can be as quick and coordinated as they are often determined and unpredictable. What insane people do or don't understand, you cannot possibly know. They are insane, and sometimes suicidal.

    Of course they must be properly diagnosed, not just labeled. Point is, all weapons for all human beings, regardless, is a fantasy that does not serve us well.
     
  8. unclebear

    unclebear New Member

    1,154
    1
    0
    Im gun lover mostly old war guns (m1 garand, mauser, mosins...etc) im not really into glocks or ar's i do love aks with a passion though. But honestly im all for gun ownership people just own whatever. Hell if i could afford it i would love to own the old howitzer the broke down into several pieces so it could be carried by donkies or pack horses. The only problems i have with other gun owners are the stupid ones that give other gun owners bad names and the uninformed ones that own guns but dont really know guns laws.

    I cant even tell you the number of guns owners i met that thought full autos where illegal no matter what and didnt know with the proper paper work and money you could own one.
     
  9. Axxe55

    Axxe55 The Apocalypse Is Coming.....

    7
    2
    0
    if a person truly believes in the words of the 2nd amendment as the founding fathers wrote it, then a person should be able to place themselves in group #10.

    IMO, it's unconditional. there is no middle ground, what-ifs or butts. either all the way in or all the way out.

    what is so hard for people to comprehend about, "Shall Not Be Infringed"........
     
  10. RJMercer

    RJMercer New Member

    519
    0
    0
    Weapons as deemed appropriate by the purchaser of said weapon that has made the conscious cogent decision to have the most effective equipment available for the purposes of personal defense. Not every single breathing human being.
    If violent delusional individuals are so determined and unpredictable and sometimes suicidal and won't rethink themselves even in the face of impending doom as a result of their actions, what makes us think they will respond in compliance with a law that you and I would comply with? I don't expect a person with a strained connection with reality to be able to connect with legality or morality. Do you?
    Murder has been frowned upon for millenia but it still tends to happen. Passing prohibitive laws against owning an instrument that could possibly be misused to murder is pointless. When you have crossed that line to take innocent life the other laws you chose to break are ancillary. Those prohibitive laws just make victims more plentiful and easier to find.
     
  11. danf_fl

    danf_fl Retired Supporter

    12,388
    101
    63
    There are freedoms I enjoy, just as there are rights I enjoy.

    To infringe on any right of mine is wrong.
    To take away my freedom is wrong.

    If there is a problem in my area, then I have the means to handle it without forcing a "fix" on other areas of the country and infringing on the rights of others or taking away their freedoms.

    So I guess I'm a #10!
     
  12. 1911love

    1911love New Member

    1,488
    0
    0
    Exactly! The 2A, or the BoR for that matter, doesn't take a damn doctorate to decipher. People try and pervert it, just like some Muslims who pervert the Koran to wage Jihad. Both groups are sick.

    Either we have a 2A right or we don't, no middle ground. Either we have a 1A right or not, no middle ground. Same with the others, 3A, 4A, 5A, etc.

    AFAIK, the 2A is the only right we are punished on before a crime is committed. You have to abuse your other rights before they are infringed, conversely our 2A rights are infringed before any crime has taken place. Utter BS.
     
  13. Jagermeister

    Jagermeister New Member

    6,811
    1
    0
    I sure you all figured me to be a #10 guy. :D
     
  14. Axxe55

    Axxe55 The Apocalypse Is Coming.....

    7
    2
    0
    the only thing i see where there should be limitations are in the ownership of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. my reasoning is this though, that i don't think anyone, even countries ought to have them in the first place either.

    even tanks and military type aircraft, should be fair game. if a person can afford it and afford the upkeep, then they should be able to won them.
     
  15. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    16
    38
    If we didn't have the nukes, you'd be organic fertilizer at a socialist reeducation farm.
     
  16. Axxe55

    Axxe55 The Apocalypse Is Coming.....

    7
    2
    0
    reread my statement. notice i said i didn't think anyone should have them. reality is, we do. but i still stand on my stance that no one should have them in the first place. not even countries.


    this is more of a sarcastic remark in reply to what some liberal gun haters try and pull. should private citizens have nuclear, biological and chemical weapons too?
     
  17. texaswoodworker

    texaswoodworker New Member

    10,198
    0
    0
    I fit into number ten. No restrictions, no compromises, no nothing. GIVE THEM NOTHING!
     
  18. texaswoodworker

    texaswoodworker New Member

    10,198
    0
    0
    The Federalist papers sheds some light on this. The founder's wanted us as well armed as the average soldier. The means that machine guns, sniper rifles, "assault" weapons, pistols, ect are all fair game for us. Nukes and such are not what the average soldier would carry.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2013
  19. Mercator

    Mercator Active Member

    11,342
    16
    38
    The founders had no idea about WMD. It is not really the point. We have lost enough elections in part because we scare people away with this rhetoric. Women won't vote with us, and the undecideds will stay home. Many of you are well aged and have convictions hard as a rock, but maybe someone can still listen.
     
  20. F4U

    F4U Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,601
    195
    63
    The concept that "It is illegal for me to kill you" won't stop me from killing you, but if you make guns illegal I won't kill you because it is illegal to own a gun. In other words killing you being illegal won't bother me but owning a gun being illegal will!!!

    Who thinks this is logical?