gunowners are racist
christ sake n stake

Cicero, IL

#24 Jan 31, 2013
Maggot
lol

Frankfort, IL

#25 Jan 31, 2013
Really people the government isnt trying to take our guns away from us they r trying to make it were regular citizens can't buy assault rifles. Why would u need one for unless u plan on a mass shooting.
christ sake n stake

Ripon, WI

#26 Jan 31, 2013
It's these crazy preppers fault
LLS

Francesville, IN

#27 Jan 31, 2013
Coming from a gun-loving family (myself included) I have to say there is NO reason an everyday citizen NEEDS an assualt rifle. I understand some people want to own them just to make up for the size of their package BUT isn't that what big trucks and over the top tricked out vehicles are for?
maggie c

Herndon, VA

#28 Jan 31, 2013
idk who the other maggie is but i for one am for guns. what are you goin to do if they have a gun? i dont think a bat or taser will save you. how old are you anyways?
wow

Fox River Grove, IL

#29 Jan 31, 2013
I think you ppl really need to get a grasp on what an assault rifle is. We can not, without very stiff regulation and expensive licensing, buy a fully automatic weapon. What you are terming an assault rifle is nothing but a cosmetically altered hunting rifle. A Remington 750 has a wood stock and no pistol grip but is still a semi auto(meaning you must pull the trigger for each bullet you want shot) rifle just without the scary black stock and pistol grip. Still shoots the exact same. 223 Cal bullet. Why is it that it is OK to have that one with the wood stock but not the scary black one.
maggie

Whitewater, WI

#30 Jan 31, 2013
Looks like on t v there's hostage in bunker. We gotta get these guns!
Cotton

Connersville, IN

#32 Jan 31, 2013
If I give up my guns, can I be sure that the government will put away (forever) any thugs that are caught committing crimes with guns? No, didn't think so. The gun laws will only take away guns from the people who follow the laws. Proof. There are very strict drug laws. And a lot of meth heads, pot heads, druggies.
maggie

Rushville, IN

#33 Feb 1, 2013
Well think if drugs were legal. They would be everywhere. We get these guns and the world will be at peace.
What??

Connersville, IN

#34 Feb 1, 2013
Cotton wrote:
If I give up my guns, can I be sure that the government will put away (forever) any thugs that are caught committing crimes with guns? No, didn't think so. The gun laws will only take away guns from the people who follow the laws. Proof. There are very strict drug laws. And a lot of meth heads, pot heads, druggies.
So under that thinking then, shouldn't we do away with all laws since criminals don't follow them? That is very stupid logic.
Medic 1

Loves Park, IL

#36 Feb 2, 2013
maggie wrote:
Well think if drugs were legal. They would be everywhere. We get these guns and the world will be at peace.
I'm sure all the criminals and terrorists will surrender all their guns. GOOD ONE! Maggie=DUMBA$$
Cotton

Connersville, IN

#37 Feb 5, 2013
[QUOTE who="What??"]<quo ted text>
So under that thinking then, shouldn't we do away with all laws since criminals don't follow them? That is very stupid logic.[/QUOTE]
I'm just saying, if law abiding citizens give up their guns, as per the law, who is left holding the guns. Yeah, you get the picture. And, no, I don't think all laws should go away just because criminals don't follow them. That is a very stupid anti logic.
What??

Connersville, IN

#38 Feb 5, 2013
Cotton wrote:
[QUOTE who="What??"]<quo ted text>
So under that thinking then, shouldn't we do away with all laws since criminals don't follow them? That is very stupid logic."

I'm just saying, if law abiding citizens give up their guns, as per the law, who is left holding the guns. Yeah, you get the picture. And, no, I don't think all laws should go away just because criminals don't follow them. That is a very stupid anti logic.
And most proposals do not take guns away from law abiding citizens. They just make it harder for those with blemishes on their records to get them. It also means harsher punishment for those criminals if they get caught with something they aren't suppose to have.
ACTUALLY

Rushville, IN

#39 Feb 6, 2013
[QUOTE who="What??"]<quo ted text>
And most proposals do not take guns away from law abiding citizens. They just make it harder for those with blemishes on their records to get them. It also means harsher punishment for those criminals if they get caught with something they aren't suppose to have.[/QUOTE]

That's just wrong. The proposed BANS make it impossible to purchase certain guns based solely on cosmetic features. A gun that would be legal to manufacture today would become illegal to manufacture under the proposed BAN. A magazine that is legal to own today would become illegal under the proposed BAN.
You want to make an argument for gun control? Fine, go ahead make your argument, it's your right, but please, don't lie. If your argument is so weak that you have to lie to support it, perhaps you need to reexamine your support of it.
clarence carter

Lockport, IL

#40 Feb 6, 2013
Maggie and I be stroken
RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER

Rushville, IN

#41 Feb 6, 2013
I am a responsible firearm owner. I have the handgun I carry registered, I keep it loaded at home also, and readily available, yet out of reach of any child. All other firearms I own, are locked up in a secure gun safe, unloaded, and I have cataloged all the serial nos. and description.

That being said, I see this debate as an infringement of our Constitutional rights to purchase and own any firearm of our choice, as long as we are responsible, law abiding citizens of the United States of America.

Just because a firearm is covered in black and holds multiple cartridges, it is not dangerous to the public in the proper hands.

How about this scenario, and would this scare you?

I am 99% covered in black

I have multiple cartridges

Do I intimidate you?

Do I scare some children?

Do you completely trust that I will work as I am designed?

I have just described the majority of Police/Swat officers in the United States!

Think about the complete issue, and be informed.

maggie

Lake Geneva, WI

#42 Feb 6, 2013
Whatever you prob hate women too
female gun owner

Hoffman Estates, IL

#43 Feb 6, 2013
Who is to decide what is considered an "assault rifle"? Why should they be able to change the laws that are protected by the constitution? Thats what people are getting upset about. Has nothing at all to do with race. I am home alone with my babies a lot bc my husband is a truck driver; and no i would not feel safe protecting my home and children with a baseball bat. Dumbass.
What??

Connersville, IN

#44 Feb 6, 2013
You people do realize that there was an assault weapon ban in the past and that the world didn't end, right? This is not a new concept.
ACTUALLY

Chicago, IL

#45 Feb 6, 2013
[QUOTE who="What??"]You people do realize that there was an assault weapon ban in the past and that the world didn't end, right? This is not a new concept.[/QUOTE]

And you do realize that according to multiple studies, including ones done by the Department of Justice the AWB did nothing to affect crime rates right? You also realize that violent crimes, including crimes with guns actually dropped after the AWB sunsetted?

You try to excuse current bad acts by saying, "It's been done in the past...." That's like saying, slavery used to be legal, and the world didn't end. Women used to be able not to vote and the world didn't end. We interred millions of citizens due to race before....and the world didn't end. Sorry, but your argument doesn't hold water. Just because the government previously got away with a major infringement on the rights of Americans doesn't make it ok for them to do it again.

I've carried a gun every day of my adult life. I carry a gun for work, and I carry a gun in my personal life for protection, the same reason I carry it at work. I can almost guarantee you've passed me in Walmart or Kroger, or the Gas Station, or on the street while I've been carrying one of my guns. Never has my gun jumped out of the holster and shot somebody.

Also, what Maggie fails to realize is that the whole reason "gun control" laws were put in place originally was to prevent blacks (and other minorities) from getting guns. See, the government was systematically denying blacks (and other minorities) their God given rights, and it's much easier to do that when the victim can't fight back. So, based on the history of the movement, a more accurate statement would be; "Gun Control" advocates are racist. Look at proposed legislation in MD that would require a $100 license to even purchase a gun. The poor (who statistically are predominantly minorities) will be less able to buy a gun due to that fee....so the trend of "gun control" advocates discriminating against people continues.

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.

Rushville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Must be crazy bout the Young Stuff 31 min Glen Becker 1
The Wind Farms are coming. The Wind Farms are ... 13 hr Told you so 1
No Fall Festival in Greensburg. Sat Who Cares 3
JM Manufacturing / JM CNC Fri Great now 1
Honda Hiring Process? (Jun '11) Jul 22 Call me back 1,289
Streaming TV Jul 19 hooterville 2
NICE Homes for rent Jul 19 hooterville 2

Rushville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Rushville Mortgages