Area gun sales, fears rising

Area gun sales, fears rising

There are 7566 comments on the North Port Sun story from Nov 14, 2012, titled Area gun sales, fears rising. In it, North Port Sun reports that:

Gun stores in Charlotte County have experienced increased sales since Election Day as local gun owners brace for an anticipated restriction of gun laws following the re-election of President Barack Obama.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at North Port Sun.

“Why call 911? 1911 is faster”

Since: Feb 08

Wesley Chapel, FL

#2709 Jan 11, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Forrest, Reagan was the Gov of CA at the time - get with moron!!!
Even as governor he had the protection of all state resources. Do you honestly think he was afraid?

Where’s your evidence related to Zimmerman? How did you enjoy being incorrect about the KKK? Keep spouting liberal idiot. You’re amusing.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#2710 Jan 11, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Reagan's shooter was far form a sniper.
Reagan's shooter used a .22cal revolver.
sickofit

Austin, MN

#2711 Jan 11, 2013
Like the second amendment says we should all be able to have any gun or weapon that the military has or had.....AT TIME OF WRITING OF CONSTITUTION.......Our founding fathers had no idea a gun would be made that a single person could go into a room filled with 100 people and kill them all in spray of lead in less then few minutes.....REMEMBER EVEN MANY OF FOUNDING FATHERS WHEN THEY WERE MAYORS AND GOVENORS OF STATES WOULD BAN CERTAIN WEAPONS...........

Since: Jan 13

Clearwater, FL

#2712 Jan 11, 2013
okimar wrote:
<quoted text>W. Bush signed,in his first term,the law limiting SS coverage for former Presidents. Obama just re-instated lifetime coverage. The lizard lipped azzwipe must have realized how unpopular he is really gonna be when he's done f**king America...... You'll notice THIS new law wasn't signed in the Rose Garden filled with friendly fawning media coverage.
Uh, actually, the law he signed was introduced by a Republican, and passed with bi-partisan support. The law was intended to make sure that the first President Bush continued to be protected. Obama acutally had nothing to do with the bill. The new law includes all future presidents.

I just brought it up to see how fast some dumbass right-winger would spin it into an evil Obama act. Thanks. LOL

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#2715 Jan 11, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, actually, the law he signed was introduced by a Republican, and passed with bi-partisan support. The law was intended to make sure that the first President Bush continued to be protected. Obama acutally had nothing to do with the bill. The new law includes all future presidents.
I just brought it up to see how fast some dumbass right-winger would spin it into an evil Obama act. Thanks. LOL
Your infinite use of @#%&* Right-winger will do nothing to bring Americans together for solutions to problems we all share.

I never fought a fire that behaved differently in the home of a liberal or a conservative , a black or a white.

Armed criminals are no different.

How many bank robbers walk in to a bank and yell "all Left-wingers hands in the air".

We need solutions that will work for all of us in the US.
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#2716 Jan 11, 2013
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
Even as governor he had the protection of all state resources. Do you honestly think he was afraid?
Where’s your evidence related to Zimmerman? How did you enjoy being incorrect about the KKK? Keep spouting liberal idiot. You’re amusing.
Read Reagan's memoirs, read Zimmerman's court transcripts, I don't give a flying f*** about the KKK, your ignorance is spectacular ... if you have problems reading, ask your little sister to read it for you!!!
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#2717 Jan 11, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Reagan's shooter used a .22cal revolver.
I agree, don't want to give up your automatic weapons? Fine, then you should have to get your ammo like one has to get any other controlled substance prescriptions – through a numbered window, recorded in triplicate and not to exceed a certain number within a regulated time period. Smart and effective gun control that protects society has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment at all! Qualified people certainly have the right to own or carry but the government has a duty and responsibility to regulate the sale and ‘the carry’ of guns. The notion that a mob of people are ready and equipped to take on the US Gov’t is comical at best. Besides, don’t you think we're pretty damn safe from that scary tyrannical rule propagated by the NRA?

Since: Jan 13

Clearwater, FL

#2718 Jan 11, 2013
Where Is My America wrote:
<quoted text>Your infinite use of @#%&* Right-winger will do nothing to bring Americans together for solutions to problems we all share.
I never fought a fire that behaved differently in the home of a liberal or a conservative , a black or a white.
Armed criminals are no different.
How many bank robbers walk in to a bank and yell "all Left-wingers hands in the air".
We need solutions that will work for all of us in the US.
Well, I am a proud left-winger, liberal, socialist, or whatever the right prefers to call me. Why do I use the term "right winger" so much? Because that's what the Obama haters are. Because the opposition party, the Republican Party, is thoroughly right wing now. Because people like Bill O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush Limbaugh,etc always refer to people who don't conform to their beliefs as "liberal losers" "far left kooks", and so forth.

Here is the thing. I don't mind being called "far left" or a "liberal", because that's exactly what I am. And likewise, right wingers should not object to being called that.

So there is no need for you to take offense. If you are a right winger, you should not object to being called one. If you are not, then I'm not talking about you anyway, so what do you care?
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#2719 Jan 11, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I am a proud left-winger, liberal, socialist, or whatever the right prefers to call me. Why do I use the term "right winger" so much? Because that's what the Obama haters are. Because the opposition party, the Republican Party, is thoroughly right wing now. Because people like Bill O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush Limbaugh,etc always refer to people who don't conform to their beliefs as "liberal losers" "far left kooks", and so forth.
Here is the thing. I don't mind being called "far left" or a "liberal", because that's exactly what I am. And likewise, right wingers should not object to being called that.
So there is no need for you to take offense. If you are a right winger, you should not object to being called one. If you are not, then I'm not talking about you anyway, so what do you care?
I am not a Republican nor am I a Democrat; I am a social liberal and fiscal conservative. I hold just about all politicians in equally low regard, the only exceptions being those I hold in utter contempt. I also think the establishment two-party system in Washington is a recipe for disaster! Something has gone terribly wrong when the biggest threat to the American economy is congress ... let’s face it, the guys who rejected the English Monarchy and opted for a liberal constitution instead were outrageous progressive at the time!
KKK

Estero, FL

#2720 Jan 11, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not a Republican nor am I a Democrat; I am a social liberal and fiscal conservative. I hold just about all politicians in equally low regard, the only exceptions being those I hold in utter contempt. I also think the establishment two-party system in Washington is a recipe for disaster! Something has gone terribly wrong when the biggest threat to the American economy is congress ... let’s face it, the guys who rejected the English Monarchy and opted for a liberal constitution instead were outrageous progressive at the time!
you want your cake and eat it too?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#2721 Jan 11, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, don't want to give up your automatic weapons? Fine, then you should have to get your ammo like one has to get any other controlled substance prescriptions – through a numbered window, recorded in triplicate and not to exceed a certain number within a regulated time period. Smart and effective gun control that protects society has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment at all! Qualified people certainly have the right to own or carry but the government has a duty and responsibility to regulate the sale and ‘the carry’ of guns. The notion that a mob of people are ready and equipped to take on the US Gov’t is comical at best. Besides, don’t you think we're pretty damn safe from that scary tyrannical rule propagated by the NRA?
What part of "the right of the people to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms shall not be infringed" do you not understand??

How about this? Before you can type or say ANYTHING from here on out, you must submit an outline of what you wish to communicate to a govt agency that will review it. Then, only upon their approval, will you be able to communicate that thought in public. Or how about applying for a license to able to practice the religion of your choice?? And if there are too many people signed up for that religion...you get denied.

The idea of personal fredom and liberty truly are foreign edicts to you, aren't they??? And this country is closer to tyrannical rule than you realize.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#2722 Jan 11, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, don't want to give up your automatic weapons? Fine, then you should have to get your ammo like one has to get any other controlled substance prescriptions – through a numbered window, recorded in triplicate and not to exceed a certain number within a regulated time period. Smart and effective gun control that protects society has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment at all! Qualified people certainly have the right to own or carry but the government has a duty and responsibility to regulate the sale and ‘the carry’ of guns. The notion that a mob of people are ready and equipped to take on the US Gov’t is comical at best. Besides, don’t you think we're pretty damn safe from that scary tyrannical rule propagated by the NRA?
And who said anything abut giving up automatuc weapons??? They are already regulated to high heaven. When was the last time a legally-owned full-auto weapon was ever used in a crime???? Full-auto weapons are NOT the problem.

“Voters elect Big Bird”

Since: Jan 07

Dump American Eagle

#2723 Jan 11, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never heard of that. Especially since that would have removed SS security from his father--a former President.
Correction: The order limiting SS protection for former Presidents was signed in 1994.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#2724 Jan 11, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I am a proud left-winger, liberal, socialist, or whatever the right prefers to call me. Why do I use the term "right winger" so much? Because that's what the Obama haters are. Because the opposition party, the Republican Party, is thoroughly right wing now. Because people like Bill O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush Limbaugh,etc always refer to people who don't conform to their beliefs as "liberal losers" "far left kooks", and so forth.
Here is the thing. I don't mind being called "far left" or a "liberal", because that's exactly what I am. And likewise, right wingers should not object to being called that.
So there is no need for you to take offense. If you are a right winger, you should not object to being called one. If you are not, then I'm not talking about you anyway, so what do you care?
I am a registerd independent .


Spocko

Oakland, CA

#2725 Jan 11, 2013
KKK wrote:
<quoted text>
you want your cake and eat it too?
Spare me with your stupid cliches!!!

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#2726 Jan 11, 2013
Spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a social liberal and fiscal conservative.
Please explain how you can liberally support social programs and be fiscally conservative?

Maybe we're supposed to believe you want all entitlement or "social programs" paid for with pixie dust?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#2727 Jan 11, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>

Here is the thing. I don't mind being called "far left" or a "liberal", because that's exactly what I am. And likewise, right wingers should not object to being called that.
So there is no need for you to take offense. If you are a right winger, you should not object to being called one. If you are not, then I'm not talking about you anyway, so what do you care?
All of these labels and generalizations and pigeonholing are part of the problem.

This country will NEVER see partisan governing again.
sickofit

Austin, MN

#2728 Jan 11, 2013
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
Please explain how you can liberally support social programs and be fiscally conservative?
Maybe we're supposed to believe you want all entitlement or "social programs" paid for with pixie dust?
It means keep religion out of government it means let people live lives as they wish as long and no one else is hurt...It means small government EVERN MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCMENT.....It means what TRUE REAL CONSERVATIVE USE TO BE UNTIL THE RELIGOUS CONTROL FREAK NEO-CONS TOOK OVER...

It means like Ron Paul....
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#2729 Jan 11, 2013
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
Please explain how you can liberally support social programs and be fiscally conservative?
Maybe we're supposed to believe you want all entitlement or "social programs" paid for with pixie dust?
Huh? Your "every man for himself" attitude is un-american and entirely foreign to decent, civilized folks!
GhostofRaygun

Rochester, KY

#2730 Jan 11, 2013
Calm Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, actually, the law he signed was introduced by a Republican, and passed with bi-partisan support. The law was intended to make sure that the first President Bush continued to be protected. Obama acutally had nothing to do with the bill. The new law includes all future presidents.
I just brought it up to see how fast some dumbass right-winger would spin it into an evil Obama act. Thanks. LOL
You know Dem or Repub should not matter on this subject. I never want any former President held hostage or gunned down by a nut case. It's Americas Office of President we are protecting as much as the persons.

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.

Port Charlotte Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News On Your Side - Ken Amaro Answers Your Mail (Mar '08) Jun 16 grace cararie 93
Nude beach (Apr '13) Jun 14 Fishperson 9
William Tyler ward Jun 13 Looking 1
Any Jobs (Oct '13) Jun 9 CaseyM 3
What do you think of North Port, Fl? (Feb '09) Jun 7 Fjdloach 270
health care (Sep '13) May 30 Wackjob 148
News 10-year-old bicyclist critically injured in Cha... (Sep '11) May '16 Kelcy frame 15
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Port Charlotte Mortgages