Sneakylong you got one thing right there. Barry Soetoro was a hell of a gun salesman.
Dumbest Thing I've read today, via the internet......
OK, i'll bite......what's your starting position?
There are many on your side that believe everyone should be armed. I don't buy into the theory that a well armed society is a more polite society. Here in Florida we have one of those crazy shoot first ask questions later laws (stand your ground).
I buy into the theory that if you're armed you're more likely to shoot yourself, a family member whether by accident or intentional then you are shooting an intruder. I believe the stats show that.
puttnfool Sorry, but this kind of thing strikes me as at least slightly paranoid.
It also seems to me that the gun advocates in this thread are trying to have it both ways: on the one hand they want you to believe that gun deaths are almost all suicides and gang-banging and that they are limited to a very few geographical areas; on the other they want to make sure they have their guns so they can protect themselves from intruders, murderers, etc.
So which is it? Are murders rare, or do you need your gun because you might be murdered? Hard to argue both sides.
I hope you guys click on an ad banner every time you visit this thread. 
- Edited
Well my starting position is to get rid of the Second Amendment.
But short of that.
- Expanded back ground checks (mental health etc.). I would make gun owners jump thru at least as many hoops as we do regulating buying and selling automobiles.
- Limit the type of guns available. Re-authorize the assault weapons ban. Yes I know a hunting rifle can be made into a semi automatic assault rifle.
- A buy back program to reduce the amount of guns out there. Australia just did that will good results.
- Having a gun in your home for protection, hunting or target shooting would be fine, but I would put stricter limits on what type. Military type assault weapons should be left to the military and law enforcement. At least restrict those type weapons to gun clubs where they stay.
- Limit the number of bullets in a magazine, so if some nut opens up on a crowd he has to reload more often, giving the prey (victims) more time to get out of the line of fire.
Just some ideas off the top of my head.
The Heller Case reaffirmed you can own a gun. But remember, you're more apt to shoot yourself, a family member, or someone you know (non-intruder), than an intruder.
Yup, gun nuts aren't short on paranoia and ignorance. 
Just clicked on one to help you out. 
Sneakylong I buy into the theory that if you're armed you're more likely to shoot yourself, a family member whether by accident or intentional then you are shooting an intruder. I believe the stats show that.
Where are your stats to back up that "theory".
rsvman please refer back to the visual aid posted above. Auto accidents are relative rare as compared to the cumulative miles driven in the country, but I still wear my seatbelt every time I drive somewhere and enforce seatbelt wear in my vehicles 100% of the time.
Sneakylong if, by some fluke, the 2nd amendment is ever repealed it'll mean the beginning of the end of our great country. The only thing keeping he 1st, 4th, and many other amendments intact is the 2nd.
We already have background checks. How could you conceivably make then better? Just who is gonna be tasked with determining who is "mentally fit"?
Hey, I've got an idea, let's start making people jump through hoops to exercise their 1st amendment rights, too.
The AWB did no good in the 90's. A renewed ban would serve no purpose either.
puttnfool I hear you, but the analogy is not very good. Why? Because you actually drive a car. So you are an active participant in the activity that brings the risk. Therefore you are always at a non-zero risk.
In the case of a home invasion, in all likelihood you will never experience it. You don't determine your own risk. Most people's risk is zero, which is a completely different situation from driving, in which you assume the risk by your own volition.
I'm a gun owner and a CC license holder. I carry in the grocery store, and everywhere else I legally can. I consider myself open minded. Here are some thoughts I'd like to share:
I carry because bad things happen to good people all the time. I don't want my wife to be one of those people. The gun doesn't guarantee safety, but it will give me a chance I might not have otherwise.
I never want to fire this at anyone, but I might be able to reduce/prevent loss if life by having this. I hope to never be tested.
I know that someone catching me/us by surprise is still a virtually unwinnable scenario. If someone walks up behind me in the store and stabs me, I'm probably dead.
If there was a way to remove guns from the world, I would give mine up in a heartbeat. I don't like feeling like I need to have one to defend my home and wife, but there are a lot of dirt bags out there.
I feel safer with a gun than I do without one. If you can take them away from the bad guys, you can sure as shit have mine too.
SneakyLong said-Well my starting position is to get rid of the Second Amendment..
And you call the NRA scaremongerers? This is why the right doesn't trust the left. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile. END.OF.CONVERSATION
ZWExton I've got to say this is the best post of the entire thread. You have it and carry it because you can, and that is fine imo. You also realize that you may never have to, nor even get to (if needed) use it.
I don't think most of the people complaining about guns are complaining about any amendment rights. There is just no damn reason for any of these automatic weapons to even be produced, let alone privately owned. Outside of the military. People that do own them really have no clue as to the damage they might inflict while trying to be the "hero" protecting themselves or their families. And I don't care how much training anyone has. Put that weapon in the hands of some nervous m'fer that's thinking he's Bronson saving the world & you got hell coming. Growing up, listening to those that had them, the 30.06 was a very dangerous gun to own. Those old fellas used to say..."they just get going good in a mile". Miss your intended target, and just where did the bullet go, and what did it hit? Imagine firing off several dozen rounds in a few seconds, and only hitting the target with a few.
Guns in general are fine. Get rid of the autos/semis, and anything that will make them such. Leave those for the military; if they miss intended targets, they'll hit the others behind them/beside them. And that's just fine with me.
Here’s an idea-since 90% of all Democrats live in cities and 75% of all Republicans live in rural areas, why don’t democratic controlled cities introduce a no gun policy within their city limits? That way almost everyone will be happy...........
JeffTilley That way almost everyone will be happy...........
I'm pretty sure that almost everyone will never be happy. 
Par4QC The required class to acquire the CC/OC license in TX is almost exclusively about the decision you're making to draw your gun. Regardless of intent, you are responsible for every round. They did a great job educating me/the group about the responsibility you have when you are carrying a firearm.
If you're not incredibly sure that what you're about to do is the right thing, don't do it. That means being very sure you can hit your target, and very sure your target warrants hitting. Things are not always what they appear.
If I was being shot at from a ten story balcony, I'm out of luck. I'd never be able to hit target with a pistol in those conditions. More likely to hurt someone than save someone.