Amos McCoy

United States

#41 Jan 19, 2013
Yes Yes the NRA book a very fine read yes indeedey!!! I'll read NRA book and you read Barry Hussein Obama book

“Dewey Beats Truman!”

Since: Apr 12

Here

#42 Jan 20, 2013
I think there is a reasonable limit. First, magazines did not exist then so I cannot see how anyone can argue that a clip size is protected by the 2nd amendment. Second the speed at which you can kill needs to be limited. Unless you break the law or are in the military or armed forces, you will never, ever need to find yourself in a situation where you are going to need to fire upon a group of people at one time.
I know this confuses you because you think all gun owners are slaves to the mantra and myths of the NRA which tells you that any gun controls equates to a total ban, which is obviously not true. The NRA itself used to support reasonable gun control like the 68 Gun Control Act and the Firearms Act. It wasn't until the urban war profiteers in the gun industry hijacked the NRA in the 70's to become a free lobbying arm that it became this radical all or nothing organization. I would not give those people a damn dime, because they care nothing about gun rights and only about increasing profits by creating a "cold war" among the citizenry in which we all feel we must own a weapon to protect ourselves from our armed neighbors. It preys on insecurity and paranoia which only will create more tragedy. There is no easy "cure" for gun violence, but part of it has to be reasoned limits on weapons that serve no purpose than to kill large groups of people.
SHAFT

Asheboro, NC

#43 Jan 20, 2013
Having your own gun is a peace keeping method. Gun ownership keeps the peace by maintaining a balance of power.
SHAFT

Asheboro, NC

#44 Jan 20, 2013
time to move on wrote:
I AM A MOTHER....of 2 children...and I OWN a semi-automatic 380....if these "intruders" come into my home...I (in my sleep) will do the best to defend my home....but really...do you think my owning a weapon that can shoot 30+ rounds will do ANYTHING inthat event????
No method of self defense is perfect.
USA

United States

#45 Jan 20, 2013
Here's the bottom line. As a citizen of this country I should be able to buy any gun I want. Let them do a back ground check on me. They wouldn't even find a speeding ticket on my record. Therefor I should be able to collect all I want. I should not be punished because the thugs of this world. Number one the thugs will ALWAYS have any gun they want with or without a gun ban.

If the court system would clean up their own actions and punish these thugs like they should some of these guns would get off the street.

I'm sick and tired of this president working against the people instead of for the people.
logic

Tucker, GA

#46 Jan 20, 2013
Really, it doesn't matter. Kentucky will not enforce these restrictions, along with a few other states. This is why we are called free states.
TRUTH

Hopkinsville, KY

#47 Jan 20, 2013
the real anonymouse wrote:
I think there is a reasonable limit. First, magazines did not exist then so I cannot see how anyone can argue that a clip size is protected by the 2nd amendment.
This is one of the stupidest things i have every read in my life. Using your clearly idiot argument -

Guns in 1791 WOULD

...be made by a gunsmith.
...have rudimentary rifling.
...be single-shot weapons.
...be loaded through the muzzle.
...fire by means of a flintlock.

Guns in 1791 WOULD NOT

...have interchangeable parts.(Popularized in 1798)
...be revolvers.(Invented in 1835)
...be breachloaded.(Popularized in 1810)
...use smokeless powder.(Invented in 1885)
...use a percussion cap, necessary for modern cartridged bullets.(Invented in 1842)
...load bullets from a clip.(Invented in 1890)
the real anonymouse wrote:
Second the speed at which you can kill needs to be limited. Unless you break the law or are in the military or armed forces, you will never, ever need to find yourself in a situation where you are going to need to fire upon a group of people at one time.
And you know this how? Just because?

Home invasions have more than one person. For example, the house in the Springmont area that got invaded last year. Wasn't it four people?

Sexual assault? Attempted gang rape? No, let's let them be victimized. Old people who aren't the greatest shots?

It really doesn't matter. Your point is moronic as hell. You are a stupid assed Communist.
USA

United States

#48 Jan 20, 2013
TRUTH wrote:
<quoted text>This is one of the stupidest things i have every read in my life. Using your clearly idiot argument -

Guns in 1791 WOULD

...be made by a gunsmith.
...have rudimentary rifling.
...be single-shot weapons.
...be loaded through the muzzle.
...fire by means of a flintlock.

Guns in 1791 WOULD NOT

...have interchangeable parts.(Popularized in 1798)
...be revolvers.(Invented in 1835)
...be breachloaded.(Popularized in 1810)
...use smokeless powder.(Invented in 1885)
...use a percussion cap, necessary for modern cartridged bullets.(Invented in 1842)
...load bullets from a clip.(Invented in 1890)

the real anonymouse wrote, "Second the speed at which you can kill needs to be limited. Unless you break the law or are in the military or armed forces, you will never, ever need to find yourself in a situation where you are going to need to fire upon a group of people at one time."

And you know this how? Just because?

Home invasions have more than one person. For example, the house in the Springmont area that got invaded last year. Wasn't it four people?

Sexual assault? Attempted gang rape? No, let's let them be victimized. Old people who aren't the greatest shots?

It really doesn't matter. Your point is moronic as hell. You are a stupid assed Communist.
that was great. You broke that down for even the dumbest kid on the block. When I read anonymouse's quote that was the first thing I though of the house invasion or gang rape.

“Dewey Beats Truman!”

Since: Apr 12

Here

#49 Jan 20, 2013
I wonder how you guys even leave the house being so paranoid that there are gangs of 20-30 people trying to rape or invade you home so you need to buy a large magazine semi automatic rifle anonymously at a gun show. Why would a handgun, revolver, or shotgun not be good enough in your home invasion rape fantasies?

P.S. How often do you imagine that scary people are going to break in and rape you? It seems you have really thought this out.
Fat Boy

Hopkinsville, KY

#50 Jan 20, 2013
A pump shotgun can be cycled faster (and fire rounds)than an automatic. If guns reloaded slower, which child would stop a shooter between shots? Somebody tell me who is gonna stop a shooter between shots without a gun? If anyone thinks that slower guns with limited capacity will stop (or reduce) murders, you are just nuts. Also, for all of you that are trying to re-write the amendments, try learning from something besides TV and Google. If you need the 2nd amendment explained to you, you're not going to understand anyway. If it gets really bad, someone with a gun might be your best friend.
TRUTH

Hopkinsville, KY

#51 Jan 20, 2013
the real anonymouse wrote:
I wonder how you guys even leave the house being so paranoid that there are gangs of 20-30 people trying to rape or invade you home so you need to buy a large magazine semi automatic rifle anonymously at a gun show. Why would a handgun, revolver, or shotgun not be good enough in your home invasion rape fantasies?
P.S. How often do you imagine that scary people are going to break in and rape you? It seems you have really thought this out.
You prove how damn stupid you are every time you type and post.

You know why the 2nd amendment is in the Constitution. Quit trying to push your Communist bullshit.

No, wait, i need 30 round magazines for deer swarms, yeah that's it. Have you ever been in a deer swarm? It's awful. They had deer when the 2nd amendment was written. The founders didn't know the herds would multiply to such great numbers. If they were around today, they would support the citizens owning tanks to kill deer as they swarm.

TRUTH

Corbin, KY

#52 Jan 20, 2013
Once we take back America from you damn commies we will reinstate all the original intent to the Constitution Mouse. You will be executed as a traitor and that negro you worhip will be held in chains and forced to work as it is stated is his proper place in the Constitution.

I bet he would fetch millions at the slave auction!

Can you hear the rebel yell Mouse?
TRUTH

Hopkinsville, KY

#53 Jan 20, 2013
Mouse once again steals my name and posts.

“Dewey Beats Truman!”

Since: Apr 12

Here

#54 Mar 11, 2013
What Republicants don't want you to know:
The first attempts at gun control were started in the era of the "founding fathers"! It was generally assumed that the ideas of a common defense and regulating militias were a political power and not an individual one.
The NRA was founded on the principles of responsible gun ownership, to promote rifle clubs as a leisure activity, and increase shooting skills in drafted and volunteer military men. Therefore the NRA was one of the earliest advocates of gun control. It was not until the mid 70's when weapons manufacturers became the largest donor members of the NRA that this point of view changed.
Several Republicans, including avid hunters, have supported various forms of gun control, including Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, and Rudy Giuliani.
Why would they alter and malign the truth? Why are gun makers RIGHT NOW refusing to sell guns to multiple state law enforcement agencies at the danger of the populace? Is it because the gun lobby has bought and paid for a new Cold War among the American people that will cripple the police while it increases death in our streets and profits in their wallets? It is really starting to look like that!
TRUTH

Hopkinsville, KY

#55 Mar 11, 2013
THEY WANT THEM ALL!!!

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), a member of the Democratic Party’s leadership in the House of Representatives, suggested to Jason Mattera at a Feb. 13 women’s rights rally that plans for an assault weapons ban and private-sales background checks were only the beginning of a broader gun control agenda extending to handguns as well.

Schakowsky evidently did not recognize Mattera, a conservative video journalist and senior investigative reporter for Talk Radio Network, who infamously confronted Vice President Joe Biden in the Capitol.(Mattera introduced himself to Schakowsky by name but did not indicate that he was filming or that he is conservative.) She spoke to Mattera as if he were a fellow gun control enthusiast--and Mattera played along, eliciting answers about Schakowsky’s enthusiasm for gun control.

“We want everything on the table,” Schakowsky told Mattera.“This is a moment of opportunity. There’s no question about it.”

One poignant exchange was as follows:

Schakowsky: We’re on a roll now, and I think we’ve got to take the--you know, we’re gonna push as hard as we can and as far as we can.

Mattera: So the assault weapons ban is just the beginning?

Schakowsky: Oh absolutely. I mean, I’m against handguns. We have, in Illinois, the Council Against Handgun... something [Violence]. Yeah, I’m a member of that. So, absolutely.

In another exchange, Schakowsky proposed allowances for states and municipalities to ban guns--though such laws have been repeatedly rejected by the Supreme Court:

Mattera: We’ll never get a handgun ban with the Second Amendment as stated.

Schakowsky: I don’t know. I don’t know that we can’t. And there may be an allowance, once again, for communities--I have communities in my district that prohibited handguns within their borders. The rights of municipalities and states to view that as a sensible way to keep people safe--I don’t think it’s precluded.

When Mattera asked why legislators were not pressing for a handgun ban, given that most murders are committed with handguns, Schakowsky replied:“Because we’re not going to be able to win that. Not now.” She went on to explain why background checks were a useful interim policy, arguing that they would “address any kind of weapon.”

Schakowsky’s remarks about plans for broader gun control are not the first time she has revealed the long-term goal behind short-term policy debates. She has a tendency to do so when speaking to apparently sympathetic audiences. In 2009, she told a crowd that the goal of Obamacare would be to “put the private insurance industry out of business.”

Officially, Democrats--including Schakowsky--hew to the party line as laid down by the president, which pledges support for the Second Amendment and for gun ownership in rural communities where hunting and shooting are viewed as traditional pastimes.

Gun owners fear that the Sandy Hook-inspired gun control measures before Congress--none of which would have stopped the mass shooting at Sandy Hook--are a prelude to broader regulations, including the banning of handguns and the eventual registration and confiscation of firearms, despite earnest assurances by Democrats to the contrary.

The Democratic Party has taken a hard line on guns recently, with President Obama’s strategist, David Axelrod, joining New York mayor Michael Bloomberg in backing gun control enthusiast Robin Kelly over former Rep. Debbie Halvorson, who has an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association, in the recent primary to replace former Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Illinois. Kelly has promised to be a “leader” in “banning guns.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/...

“Dewey Beats Truman!”

Since: Apr 12

Here

#56 Oct 21, 2013
What if there was another school shooting but nobody cared? You win NRA, you have made people so numb to violence that even kids murdering people in schools with guns are just a page 2 b-line. I think it is really sad that we've been manipulated by arms dealers to declare war on each other. This isn't about rights anymore, it's about increasing sales of guns and ammunition at the cost of innocent lives.
love my freedon

Hopkinsville, KY

#58 Oct 21, 2013
the real anonymouse wrote:
What if there was another school shooting but nobody cared? You win NRA, you have made people so numb to violence that even kids murdering people in schools with guns are just a page 2 b-line. I think it is really sad that we've been manipulated by arms dealers to declare war on each other. This isn't about rights anymore, it's about increasing sales of guns and ammunition at the cost of innocent lives.
Will somebody help me set up dontaion boxes across Amercia to send commie mouse to North Korea or China .

“Shoot to protect!!!!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#59 Oct 22, 2013
love my freedon wrote:
<quoted text>Will somebody help me set up dontaion boxes across Amercia to send commie mouse to North Korea or China .
Can I put the stamp on his head,,, with a hammer?
SHAFT

Franklin, NC

#60 Oct 22, 2013
the real anonymouse wrote:
What if there was another school shooting but nobody cared? You win NRA, you have made people so numb to violence that even kids murdering people in schools with guns are just a page 2 b-line. I think it is really sad that we've been manipulated by arms dealers to declare war on each other. This isn't about rights anymore, it's about increasing sales of guns and ammunition at the cost of innocent lives.
Wow! This man wins first prize in the DUMBEST STATEMENT OF THE YEAR contest!
SHAFT

Franklin, NC

#61 Oct 22, 2013
Did Boeing manipulate the 911 hijackers?

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.

Hopkinsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Rotary club theft thread 10 min The whit 2
County football recruiting 1 hr One parent 4
chris "the rock" bentzel 2 hr Trey 24
DUI's 2 hr Capt Dan 10
lmao at you! read me ya'll!!! 2 hr HeadTurn 17
Who can save Hoptown 5 hr HSTruman 18
Message to Mr. President (Jeff Davis) 5 hr HSTruman 3
YMCA new director Sun WilmaRudolf 40

Hopkinsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hopkinsville Mortgages