Kansas Right to Bear Arms Question, Constitutional Amendment Question 1

Created by CitizenTopix on Oct 7, 2010

3,442 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4383 Aug 24, 2012
wtf wrote:
<quoted text>you are realy out of your mine
No Im just capable of looking past my own personal feelings, looking at both sides and determining the truth of what really happened. Self centered dumba@#'s such as your self are not.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4384 Aug 24, 2012
unauthorized Chilli wrote:
<quoted text>I have to agree with BOTH of you. The example of Trayvon is er...dead on.
Zimmerman had no reason to claim self defense but he got away with it because of the lax in stepping up to the actual laws in place. He should have been put away for a very long time on death row because he went against what he was told to do. He stalked the young man because he was black and wearing a hoodie. He shot the young man cause is a coward with a gun. And it wasn't even a Mac 10 or AK, just a simple hand gun that was legally registered to him!
In many ways you are both saying the same things but taking different routes.
No actually this A@#H@#$ a few posts back was telling me he had a gun and wouldnt give it up for anything now hes back to saying no one should own a gun and they should be banned for personal ownership. As long as it suits him he's all for it but he don't want anyone else to have privileges he wants for himself. I'm starting to think he's a thug that enjoys robbing liquor stores or some thing.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4385 Aug 24, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for confirming above that you fringy gun abolutists / freaks can't see the color gray. In your BB brains, there's only black or white. I've repeatedly said I own multiple rifles and shotguns to hunt. I also said there's no reason for a civilian to have semi / auto firearms. Yet you believe I "want guns banished completely?"
Is your reading comprehension always this bad, or is it just when you read a POV that doesn't walk in goose step / lockstep with the NRA talking points that they feed you? Did you ride to school on the short bus? I'm going to have to ask you to pull your head out of your arse, puddin, or I'll need to stop reading your lame posts here.
Show me any comment, even one, in my prior posts that shows I "want guns banished completely." You can't do that because I didn't post one. I'd sugest you might want to stop embarrasing yourself, but you seem to do it frequently here. There, there, cupcake, I accept your apology. How ashamed of yourself should you be now? Yes, I pity you!
NO, the link I showed you had nothing to do with the NRA. If you had half a brain you would know that. It was a break down from state law associates stating the laws then telling you what they meant, but it dont take half a brain to look at it yourself and see what it means with out them telling you anything. Course you can't because you fight for hopeless causes that you don't know anything about. Course I've seen you on here for a while and that does not come as a surprise. Why don't you try looking into s@#$ before opening your big fat mouth? You didn't even bother reading the link I sent did you? NO cause you're to afraid you might find out you don't know half of what you think you do.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4386 Aug 24, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for confirming above that you fringy gun abolutists / freaks can't see the color gray. In your BB brains, there's only black or white. I've repeatedly said I own multiple rifles and shotguns to hunt. I also said there's no reason for a civilian to have semi / auto firearms. Yet you believe I "want guns banished completely?"
Is your reading comprehension always this bad, or is it just when you read a POV that doesn't walk in goose step / lockstep with the NRA talking points that they feed you? Did you ride to school on the short bus? I'm going to have to ask you to pull your head out of your arse, puddin, or I'll need to stop reading your lame posts here.
Show me any comment, even one, in my prior posts that shows I "want guns banished completely." You can't do that because I didn't post one. I'd sugest you might want to stop embarrasing yourself, but you seem to do it frequently here. There, there, cupcake, I accept your apology. How ashamed of yourself should you be now? Yes, I pity you!
People have had the right to defend themselves from a threat as far back as English common law. The key in Florida and many other states was that they could not use deadly force if it was reasonably possible to retreat.

That changed in 2005 when Gov. Jeb Bush signed into law Florida Statute 776.013. It says a person "has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground'' if he or she thinks deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily harm or commission of a forcible felony like robbery.

"Now it's lawful to stand there like Matt Dillon at high noon, pull the gun and shoot back,'' said Bob Dekle, a University of Florida law professor and former prosecutor in North Florida.

Durell Peaden, the former Republican senator from Crestview who sponsored the bill, said the law was never intended for people who put themselves in harm's way before they started firing. But the criminal justice system has been blind to that intent.

The new law only requires law enforcement and the justice system to ask three questions in self-defense cases: Did the defendant have the right to be there? Was he engaged in a lawful activity? Could he reasonably have been in fear of death or great bodily harm?

==========

Obviously a@#h@#$ you didnt read the last part. and as I stated if they went by a lawful means of asking the questions and bearing the evidence against him that he did not abide by the legal means of any self defense law he WOULD be in jail. but Florida is NOT arguing the case in the manner they should and they are NOT giving all the evidence against him of being self defense the doubt that is legally abided. The Florida injustice system is ignoring the laws intent and re-witing it as they please. But what do I know I'm just the guy that bothered to look at it first before I decided to open my mouth.

Its right at the top dude plane as day. If you can't see the FL judge tweaked it out for his own purposes then you're not even worth talking to anymore. and by the way

AGAIN I DON'T EVEN OWN A GUN NOR WANT ONE SO F@#$ YOURSELF!

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/cri...

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#4388 Aug 25, 2012
unauthorized_user wrote:
<quoted text>People have had the right to defend themselves from a threat as far back as English common law. The key in Florida and many other states was that they could not use deadly force if it was reasonably possible to retreat.
That changed in 2005 when Gov. Jeb Bush signed into law Florida Statute 776.013. It says a person "has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground'' if he or she thinks deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily harm or commission of a forcible felony like robbery.
"Now it's lawful to stand there like Matt Dillon at high noon, pull the gun and shoot back,'' said Bob Dekle, a University of Florida law professor and former prosecutor in North Florida.
Durell Peaden, the former Republican senator from Crestview who sponsored the bill, said the law was never intended for people who put themselves in harm's way before they started firing. But the criminal justice system has been blind to that intent.
The new law only requires law enforcement and the justice system to ask three questions in self-defense cases: Did the defendant have the right to be there? Was he engaged in a lawful activity? Could he reasonably have been in fear of death or great bodily harm?
==========
Obviously a@#h@#$ you didnt read the last part. and as I stated if they went by a lawful means of asking the questions and bearing the evidence against him that he did not abide by the legal means of any self defense law he WOULD be in jail. but Florida is NOT arguing the case in the manner they should and they are NOT giving all the evidence against him of being self defense the doubt that is legally abided. The Florida injustice system is ignoring the laws intent and re-witing it as they please. But what do I know I'm just the guy that bothered to look at it first before I decided to open my mouth.
Its right at the top dude plane as day. If you can't see the FL judge tweaked it out for his own purposes then you're not even worth talking to anymore. and by the way
AGAIN I DON'T EVEN OWN A GUN NOR WANT ONE SO F@#$ YOURSELF!
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/cri...
Your posts entertain do me. Thanks, snookums! I agree with some of what you're said in your multiple, bat-shite crazy-boy posts above. I believe the Castle Doctrine Laws are an excuse ginned up by the NRA to allow some guys to murder some other guys in cold blood and then to claim that, although the victim was unarmed, they were "scared."

I don't want anybody to try to take away my guns. I do, however, not want firearm laws that encourage your fellow crazies to own 10 - 50 guns, many semi and auto, "for their protection." Hahaha! For their protection from what? Hey, dude, I saw "Red Dawn" too. You still convinced that the Cubans and Russians are coming to get you? LOL

Why so angry and mentally unbalanced on this issue? Take a pill, smoke some of your ditch weed, count to 100, take some deep breaths. Generally try hard to get your shite together. You're rambling incoherently again. We'll see if replying to your posts is a waste of my time. I've more profitable things to do than to educate whackos.

Do your family, friends and neighbors a big favor. Get professional counseling for your anger issues. I'd rather not read about you, as the wuss who finally snapped and murdered 2 to 100 innocents. You have an excellent day, sweet cakes. BTW, I'll keep talking to you in the diminutive, femine as long as you keep acting like a whiny b*tch.

I'll be back here from time to time to check on any progress you've made toward sanity! Keep posting! As I said above, your out-there, whacked posts entertain me. There could still be someone, somewhere who doesn't know yet what an angry, clueless, illiterate, overly-emotional mental cripple and NRA shill, sock, tool, troll you are!:)

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#4389 Aug 25, 2012
unauthorized_user wrote:
<quoted text>People have had the right to defend themselves from a threat as far back as English common law. The key in Florida and many other states was that they could not use deadly force if it was reasonably possible to retreat.
That changed in 2005 when Gov. Jeb Bush signed into law Florida Statute 776.013. It says a person "has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground'' if he or she thinks deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily harm or commission of a forcible felony like robbery.
"Now it's lawful to stand there like Matt Dillon at high noon, pull the gun and shoot back,'' said Bob Dekle, a University of Florida law professor and former prosecutor in North Florida.
Durell Peaden, the former Republican senator from Crestview who sponsored the bill, said the law was never intended for people who put themselves in harm's way before they started firing. But the criminal justice system has been blind to that intent.
The new law only requires law enforcement and the justice system to ask three questions in self-defense cases: Did the defendant have the right to be there? Was he engaged in a lawful activity? Could he reasonably have been in fear of death or great bodily harm?
==========
Obviously a@#h@#$ you didnt read the last part. and as I stated if they went by a lawful means of asking the questions and bearing the evidence against him that he did not abide by the legal means of any self defense law he WOULD be in jail. but Florida is NOT arguing the case in the manner they should and they are NOT giving all the evidence against him of being self defense the doubt that is legally abided. The Florida injustice system is ignoring the laws intent and re-witing it as they please. But what do I know I'm just the guy that bothered to look at it first before I decided to open my mouth.
Its right at the top dude plane as day. If you can't see the FL judge tweaked it out for his own purposes then you're not even worth talking to anymore. and by the way
AGAIN I DON'T EVEN OWN A GUN NOR WANT ONE SO F@#$ YOURSELF!
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/cri...
Your posts entertain do me. Thanks, snookums! I agree with some of what you're said in your multiple, bat-shite crazy-boy posts above. I believe the Castle Doctrine Laws are an excuse ginned up by the NRA to allow some guys to murder some other guys in cold blood and then to claim that, although the victim was unarmed, they were "scared."

I don't want anybody to try to take away my guns. I do, however, not want firearm laws that encourage your fellow crazies to own 10 - 50 guns, many semi and auto, "for their protection." Hahaha! For their protection from what? Hey, dude, I saw "Red Dawn" too. You still convinced that the Cubans and Russians are coming to get you? LOL

Why so angry and mentally unbalanced on this issue? Take a pill, smoke some of your ditch weed, count to 100, take some deep breaths. Generally try hard to get your shite together. You're rambling incoherently again. We'll see if replying to your posts is a waste of my time. I've more profitable things to do than to school whackos.

Do your family, friends and neighbors a big favor. Get professional counseling for your anger issues. I'd rather not read about you, as the wuss who finally snapped and murdered 2 to 100 innocents. You have an excellent day, sweet cakes. BTW, I'll keep talking to you in the diminutive, femine as long as you keep acting like a whiny b*tch.

I'll be back here from time to time to check on any progress you've made toward sanity! Keep posting! As I said above, your out-there, whacked posts entertain me. There could still be someone, somewhere who doesn't know yet what an angry, clueless, illiterate, overly-emotional mental cripple and NRA shill, sock, tool, troll you are!:)
Gun control doesnt work

Delaware, OH

#4390 Aug 25, 2012
Margie wrote:
Margie said:
"We now have both a police force and an army. We no longer need a militia".
Yes Margie,yes we do have police and an army.BOTH of which have been federalized by the very same government that now wishes to take ALL of our freedoms from us and force us into socialist government servitude. It will be these police forces,and army,the same as it was for Hitler,that will come thru at the government's orders,take our firearms and subject us to servitude.Just the same as Hitler did. History is repeating itself and our founding fathers had the wisdom and foresight to see that we would very likely need a militia to defend ourselves and our country from an overreaching,tyrannical government.
We need militias now more than ever.So,if you believe living in a gun free society where only the police,military and government own firearms is a good society to live in,one only needs to look back at the holocaust to see what became of those people who lived in a gun free society.
So Chilli

Independence, KS

#4391 Aug 25, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
Your posts entertain do me. Thanks, snookums! I agree with some of what you're said in your multiple, bat-shite crazy-boy posts above. I believe the Castle Doctrine Laws are an excuse ginned up by the NRA to allow some guys to murder some other guys in cold blood and then to claim that, although the victim was unarmed, they were "scared."
I don't want anybody to try to take away my guns. I do, however, not want firearm laws that encourage your fellow crazies to own 10 - 50 guns, many semi and auto, "for their protection." Hahaha! For their protection from what? Hey, dude, I saw "Red Dawn" too. You still convinced that the Cubans and Russians are coming to get you? LOL
Why so angry and mentally unbalanced on this issue? Take a pill, smoke some of your ditch weed, count to 100, take some deep breaths. Generally try hard to get your shite together. You're rambling incoherently again. We'll see if replying to your posts is a waste of my time. I've more profitable things to do than to educate whackos.
Do your family, friends and neighbors a big favor. Get professional counseling for your anger issues. I'd rather not read about you, as the wuss who finally snapped and murdered 2 to 100 innocents. You have an excellent day, sweet cakes. BTW, I'll keep talking to you in the diminutive, femine as long as you keep acting like a whiny b*tch.
I'll be back here from time to time to check on any progress you've made toward sanity! Keep posting! As I said above, your out-there, whacked posts entertain me. There could still be someone, somewhere who doesn't know yet what an angry, clueless, illiterate, overly-emotional mental cripple and NRA shill, sock, tool, troll you are!:)
What you are saying is that Zimmerman had the right to do as he did? Shoot a preteen AFTER he was told to DO NOT FOLLOW by the dispatch, and all because he was a black teen wearing a hoodie?
He was obviously unstable and should not have been carrying a gun. That SHOULD have gone down as a HATE crime, NOT self defense!
Are you gonna follow me when you have been told not to just because I have green eyes and wear jeans?
The whole country got pretty emotional about it, well at least the 1s that relize it could have been any of their kids and actually cared. I STILL do. My oldest son was accused of moving into town just to deal all because he wears his hair long. He has been harassed by several cops (to this day, 10 years later) that chose to believe the cop that started the rumor even though the same cop turned out to a family abuser.
One even pulled his gun on him for nothing! And the cop KNEW at the time he had NO REASON to do so!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4392 Aug 25, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
Your posts entertain do me. Thanks, snookums! I agree with some of what you're said in your multiple, bat-shite crazy-boy posts above. I believe the Castle Doctrine Laws are an excuse ginned up by the NRA to allow some guys to murder some other guys in cold blood and then to claim that, although the victim was unarmed, they were "scared."
I don't want anybody to try to take away my guns. I do, however, not want firearm laws that encourage your fellow crazies to own 10 - 50 guns, many semi and auto, "for their protection." Hahaha! For their protection from what? Hey, dude, I saw "Red Dawn" too. You still convinced that the Cubans and Russians are coming to get you? LOL
Why so angry and mentally unbalanced on this issue? Take a pill, smoke some of your ditch weed, count to 100, take some deep breaths. Generally try hard to get your shite together. You're rambling incoherently again. We'll see if replying to your posts is a waste of my time. I've more profitable things to do than to school whackos.
Do your family, friends and neighbors a big favor. Get professional counseling for your anger issues. I'd rather not read about you, as the wuss who finally snapped and murdered 2 to 100 innocents. You have an excellent day, sweet cakes. BTW, I'll keep talking to you in the diminutive, femine as long as you keep acting like a whiny b*tch.
I'll be back here from time to time to check on any progress you've made toward sanity! Keep posting! As I said above, your out-there, whacked posts entertain me. There could still be someone, somewhere who doesn't know yet what an angry, clueless, illiterate, overly-emotional mental cripple and NRA shill, sock, tool, troll you are!:)
They should entertain you, seems how between the two of us I'm the only one who does research before I open my mouth. When was the last time you researched anything besides what you see on the biggest conspiracy theorists there are, MSNBC?
gee whiz

United States

#4393 Aug 29, 2012
I would vote yes
door king

Corpus Christi, TX

#4394 Aug 30, 2012
I would say that of ways to own guns, the pure investor/collector causes the least mayhem. They won't even fire thier weapons because the value would be lessened. Lay off them. Of course, the disadvantage here is you are sitting on a valuable gun collection which has to be protected. I would suggest the best way to do that would be to not let anyone know you have it.

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#4395 Aug 30, 2012
So Chilli wrote:
<quoted text>What you are saying is that Zimmerman had the right to do as he did? Shoot a preteen AFTER he was told to DO NOT FOLLOW by the dispatch, and all because he was a black teen wearing a hoodie?
He was obviously unstable and should not have been carrying a gun. That SHOULD have gone down as a HATE crime, NOT self defense!
Are you gonna follow me when you have been told not to just because I have green eyes and wear jeans?
The whole country got pretty emotional about it, well at least the 1s that relize it could have been any of their kids and actually cared. I STILL do. My oldest son was accused of moving into town just to deal all because he wears his hair long. He has been harassed by several cops (to this day, 10 years later) that chose to believe the cop that started the rumor even though the same cop turned out to a family abuser.
One even pulled his gun on him for nothing! And the cop KNEW at the time he had NO REASON to do so!
No, read my priors. I'm not defending Zimmerman. From what I've heard and read, the only thing that might save him from a Murder conviction would be the NRA's Castle Doctrine Law, intended to allow a guy to kill an unarmed guy, because "he's scared." Sure makes the NRA sound like a bunch of wannabe tough, yet wimpy guys, doesn't it? That said, a jury will eventually decide his guilt or innocence.

The concern many sporting gun enthusiasts, owners have with fringy, radical gun freaks is that for them, enough is never enough. So they think any law that makes it illegal for them to own a semi, or auto firearm or a 25-round clip is intended to "take away their guns." Most of these unreasoning freaks seem to be a bunch of scared, spineless wusses, with no self-confidence in their own gun-handling skills.

Even fringy, radical gun freaks are welcome to respond to this post. Just so they don't expect me to necessarily read their posts or click on their links. It's not like their opinions actually matter to me!

Thanks for your reply! You have a good day!
well Chilli

Independence, KS

#4396 Aug 30, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
No, read my priors. I'm not defending Zimmerman. From what I've heard and read, the only thing that might save him from a Murder conviction would be the NRA's Castle Doctrine Law, intended to allow a guy to kill an unarmed guy, because "he's scared." Sure makes the NRA sound like a bunch of wannabe tough, yet wimpy guys, doesn't it? That said, a jury will eventually decide his guilt or innocence.
The concern many sporting gun enthusiasts, owners have with fringy, radical gun freaks is that for them, enough is never enough. So they think any law that makes it illegal for them to own a semi, or auto firearm or a 25-round clip is intended to "take away their guns." Most of these unreasoning freaks seem to be a bunch of scared, spineless wusses, with no self-confidence in their own gun-handling skills.
Even fringy, radical gun freaks are welcome to respond to this post. Just so they don't expect me to necessarily read their posts or click on their links. It's not like their opinions actually matter to me!
Thanks for your reply! You have a good day!
If you dont care about the opinions why do you keep coming back? Sounds like you think ONLY your opinion matters!
Another school shooting, in Maryland! All because of yet another child brought up to be a bully who feels ONLY HIS opinion matters!Yep, just anyone should be allowed to own a gun! Adults are just SOOOO responsible!

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#4397 Aug 30, 2012
well Chilli wrote:
<quoted text>If you dont care about the opinions why do you keep coming back? Sounds like you think ONLY your opinion matters!
Another school shooting, in Maryland! All because of yet another child brought up to be a bully who feels ONLY HIS opinion matters!Yep, just anyone should be allowed to own a gun! Adults are just SOOOO responsible!
My comments in my last paragraph on not caring about their opinion were directed to the gun freaks, not to you. Keep posting! I have few issues with your priors. The senseless use of firearms in our country seems to be getting worse.

The whole pathetic, sad NRA dodge: "guns don't kill people, people do" is a huge crock. The easier, more accessible semi and auto firearms become, the higher the risk that some unbalanced whack job will kill others, just because he can.
yes

Coffeyville, KS

#4398 Nov 5, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
My comments in my last paragraph on not caring about their opinion were directed to the gun freaks, not to you. Keep posting! I have few issues with your priors. The senseless use of firearms in our country seems to be getting worse.
The whole pathetic, sad NRA dodge: "guns don't kill people, people do" is a huge crock. The easier, more accessible semi and auto firearms become, the higher the risk that some unbalanced whack job will kill others, just because he can.
true dat
BiG mACk aTTacK

Leavenworth, KS

#4399 Nov 5, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text> "guns don't kill people, people do" is a huge crock..
Yep just like silverware at the dinner table makes people fat!LOL
X Obama Supporter

Coffeyville, KS

#4400 Nov 6, 2012
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
My comments in my last paragraph on not caring about their opinion were directed to the gun freaks, not to you. Keep posting! I have few issues with your priors. The senseless use of firearms in our country seems to be getting worse.
The whole pathetic, sad NRA dodge: "guns don't kill people, people do" is a huge crock. The easier, more accessible semi and auto firearms become, the higher the risk that some unbalanced whack job will kill others, just because he can.
So it's a "crock" and yet you end with telling us about a PERSON killing others....not a gun, huh that's weird.

If guns are outlawed the only people that will have them is the outlaws. We have a right to protect ourselves and our homes and it's kinda hard to do with a ball bat if the person wanting to harm us has a gun. We have a right to equal protection!

"whack jobs" will kill and do what they do because they are "whack jobs", outlawing guns won't stop them. Do you really think they care about the law? Try to come up with something that is outlawed and that criminals cannot still get and sell. Do you really think outlawing them will stop it or their access to them? We've had a "war on drugs" for decades....how's that one working out?
billy bob

Junction City, KS

#4401 Nov 6, 2012
Where do I find these automatic weapons people talk of? I could use one. All I need is my federal license, my state license, signed approval from the sheriff and alot of money to pay the federal and state tax. By then who could afford the auto weapon.
earlpittsamurica n

Parsons, KS

#4403 Nov 8, 2012
Holy Crap. I've been gone for 7 months and this one is still alive. I wonder if the global warming thread is still going?
User

Leavenworth, KS

#4404 Nov 12, 2012
Civil War is Coming WASHINGTON (Reuters)- The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto. The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better. On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States . The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms. It will never happen! The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth? What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment. This is not a joke nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control. Please forward this message to others who may be concerned about the direction in which our country is headed. Straight into socialism if Obama has his way... We are being led like a lamb to the slaughter (Socialism/Dictatorship).

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Coffeyville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How 'bout them Royals, huh? 2 hr Barry Bonds Jr 16
Country Mart 7 hr Shop Cville First 9
word game (Mar '13) 8 hr Hatti_Hollerand 326
~~ Take one Leave one game ~~ (Mar '11) 8 hr Hatti_Hollerand 4,661
border town and Sonja 12 hr truth 7
Joy Shields Mon Being real 6
Crocked Ex In_Laws Sun Not rich 9

Coffeyville News Video

Coffeyville Dating
Find my Match

Coffeyville Jobs

Coffeyville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Coffeyville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Coffeyville

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]