Firearms rally scheduled for Chambers...

Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

There are 10983 comments on the Chambersburg Public Opinion story from Mar 29, 2013, titled Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square. In it, Chambersburg Public Opinion reports that:

Two local organizations are hosting a Second Amendment Freedom Rally on from noone to 2 p.m. April 6 on Courthouse Plaza in downtown Chambersburg.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chambersburg Public Opinion.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1762 Apr 30, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
“Universal” background checks won’t work. The fact is we have them now. Anytime a law-abiding citizen purchases a gun from a brick-and-mortar or online retailer, pawn shop owner or private dealer—essentially any licensed dealer who sells more than a handful of firearms per month—he or she must submit to a background examination via the National Instant Check System. What’s more, it is already a crime to knowingly transfer a gun to someone who is not authorized to possess one. Neither safeguard has stopped criminals from doing what they do—break the law.
Checks on dealer purchases is only universal if those are the only sales that happen. Is that the case?

Shall I post the definition of "universal" for you? LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1763 Apr 30, 2013
think about it wrote:
<quoted text>He doesn't know the difference between HEAR/HERE either. It's kind of like the saying if you're going to talk the talk you better be able to walk the walk. All Dan has is talk, and he can't even do that right half the time.
think about it wrote:
<quoted text>That's what he does when he has nothing. He starts calling people names and curses at them That's real mature now isn't it? Of course we all know Dan has the maturity of a 12 year old, if even that much.
think about it wrote:
<quoted text>Poor Danny, doesn't know when to use the correct "SURE". Also doesn't know the difference between HEAR and HERE? Poor DUMB DAN? You really should stop calling people names when you exhibit such poor grammar and spelling. For someone that likes to think he knows it all, sure doesn't live up to it.
Looks like someone's DTMDS is back.

LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1764 Apr 30, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the modus operandi for the majority of the leftists in this country. Most amazing is that they believe that this tactic is somehow effective.
If you had ever been here before you would know that I never START name-calling or personal attacks. I give what I get, so if that's happening it's because someone else decided to play that game.

You for instance - you CAME with name-calling, so evidently that's how you like it. From that point forward you don't get to cry about it when you get it back.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1765 Apr 30, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the modus operandi for the majority of the leftists in this country. Most amazing is that they believe that this tactic is somehow effective.
Was that tactic effective here?
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it ironic that in your effort to ridicule others by your misspelling of smart (SMRT) that you UN-intentionally used the incorrect application of the word "shore" (should have been sure).
shore : the land bordering a usually large body of water
It would appear that you are the idiot. Please ... now tell us how S-M-R-T "you" are.
No, it wasn't. You just embarrassed yourself by not recognizing intentional ridicule.
think about it

Chambersburg, PA

#1766 Apr 30, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Looks like someone's DTMDS is back.
LOL!
Is this all you can come up with when you are caught using the wrong spellings? Man, you are desperate. You might want to try something else, something that makes sense. But not our Dan. He thinks it's Dan the man derangement syndrome when people question his inability to use the proper spelling. Not only are you dumb, your full of yourself.

But you "SURE" do provide entertainment "HERE" for us. So thanks for giving us all a good old fashioned laugh.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1767 Apr 30, 2013
think about it wrote:
<quoted text>Is this all you can come up with when you are caught using the wrong spellings? Man, you are desperate. You might want to try something else, something that makes sense. But not our Dan. He thinks it's Dan the man derangement syndrome when people question his inability to use the proper spelling. Not only are you dumb, your full of yourself.
But you "SURE" do provide entertainment "HERE" for us. So thanks for giving us all a good old fashioned laugh.
Grow up.

When you get to the point that the only argument you have left is to attack a typo and a DELIBERATE misspelling, then you've clearly lost the argument.

Come back when you can debate the issues rather than make obsessive personal attacks.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#1768 Apr 30, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>What you and other liberals tend to forget is that our inalienable rights aren't subject to public opinion.
See, this is why I don't bother in discussions like this. It's all one sided. Any sort of opinion other than all guns, all the time gets you labeled a liberal, insulted, and cast off.

I even agree with you, 100%, that public opinion really should not factor into our rights as guaranteed by the constitution. I support the second amendment and the right to bear arms.

I just also believe in taking a few steps to maybe - just maybe - keep guns out of the wrong hands without infringing on the rights of responsible gun owners. I don't see the need for high capacity magazines. And I'm willing to have a civil discussion about it.

Fuck me, right?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#1769 Apr 30, 2013
Squach wrote:
Or will you continue to blame it on the Republicans?.
Blame it on the Republicans?

Only running down the list, honey.

And it is a rather long list.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#1770 Apr 30, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it ironic that in your effort to ridicule others by your misspelling of smart (SMRT) that you UN-intentionally used the incorrect application of the word "shore"
I bet you need people to explain punchylines to allot of joaks, eh?
think about it

Chambersburg, PA

#1771 Apr 30, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Grow up.
When you get to the point that the only argument you have left is to attack a typo and a DELIBERATE misspelling, then you've clearly lost the argument.
Come back when you can debate the issues rather than make obsessive personal attacks.
I see you are projecting again! Poor dumb Danny.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#1772 Apr 30, 2013
I see Danny Boy is spinnin' some wild yarns trying to cover his stupidity. In the midst of his obsessive personal attacks on other forum members he pauses to complain that no one will debate the issues. When others misspell a word it's a Danny Boy cue to proclaim them stupid but when Danny Boy misspells a word it's DELIBERATE. Go figure.... ROTFLMAO!!!!

Once a troll, always a troll.
think about it

Chambersburg, PA

#1773 Apr 30, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I bet you need people to explain punchylines to allot of joaks, eh?
I think you and Dan need to go back to school. I suggest you start with Spelling 101.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1774 Apr 30, 2013
Squach wrote:
I see Danny Boy is spinnin' some wild yarns trying to cover his stupidity. In the midst of his obsessive personal attacks on other forum members he pauses to complain that no one will debate the issues. When others misspell a word it's a Danny Boy cue to proclaim them stupid but when Danny Boy misspells a word it's DELIBERATE. Go figure.... ROTFLMAO!!!!
Once a troll, always a troll.
The mumbler has DTMDS too.

So sad - two disabling handicaps.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#1775 Apr 30, 2013
Effington wrote:
<quoted text>
See, this is why I don't bother in discussions like this. It's all one sided. Any sort of opinion other than all guns, all the time gets you labeled a liberal, insulted, and cast off.
I even agree with you, 100%, that public opinion really should not factor into our rights as guaranteed by the constitution. I support the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
I just also believe in taking a few steps to maybe - just maybe - keep guns out of the wrong hands without infringing on the rights of responsible gun owners. I don't see the need for high capacity magazines. And I'm willing to have a civil discussion about it.
Fuck me, right?
I did label you (prematurely?) a liberal but where did I "insult" you, "cast you off", or say "fuck you"? What I did was point out some very basic flaws in the background check philosophy. In a nut shell; the only people who will be subjected to background checks are the people who don't need one, the criminals and crazies will continue to obtain guns through illegal channels. I also agree with you that we need to prevent criminals and crazies from obtaining and using guns illegally. I disagree that restricting the rights and freedoms of the law abiding is the way to do that. If that is "casting you off", "insulting" you, or saying "fuck you".........so be it.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1776 Apr 30, 2013
think about it wrote:
<quoted text> I see you are projecting again! Poor dumb Danny.
Still waiting.

LOL!

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#1777 Apr 30, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
The mumbler has DTMDS too.
So sad - two disabling handicaps.
ROTFLMAO!!! Get over yourself, will ya?

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#1778 Apr 30, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I did label you (prematurely?) a liberal but where did I "insult" you, "cast you off", or say "fuck you"? What I did was point out some very basic flaws in the background check philosophy. In a nut shell; the only people who will be subjected to background checks are the people who don't need one, the criminals and crazies will continue to obtain guns through illegal channels. I also agree with you that we need to prevent criminals and crazies from obtaining and using guns illegally. I disagree that restricting the rights and freedoms of the law abiding is the way to do that. If that is "casting you off", "insulting" you, or saying "fuck you".........so be it.
But how do background checks restrict the rights and freedoms of law abiding citizens? No one is suggesting that background checks will somehow magically prevent criminals and crazies from getting guns, but it does seem like a good idea to me and - apparently - 90% of people. You don't think universal background checks will keeps guns out of the hands of at least a few criminals and crazies?

Operating on the notion of common sense AND not restricting the right to bear arms by law-abiding citizens, if you're not a criminal and a crazy, what do you have to worry about when it comes to background checks? I'd say nothing.

At the very least, when gun crimes are committed, we may be able to trace the purchase of that firearm back to an individual who did pass a background check and help law enforcement find out how it got into the hands of a criminal.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#1779 Apr 30, 2013
Let me ask you something else Squatch - do you support the voter ID law?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#1783 Apr 30, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
Can one of you wingnuts explain this to me?
----------
GOP aims to slow federal bullet buys
Republicans want to limit the number of bullets federal agencies can purchase so American gun owners can buy more.
Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe and Rep. Frank Lucas have introduced a bill that would prohibit every government agency -- except the military -- from buying more ammunition each month, than the monthly average it purchased from 2001 to 2009.
----------
What's the rationale for limiting ammunition for federal law enforcement?
Do they think federal law enforcement is buying up bullets to keep them out of the hands of civilians?
Or do they think they are they are stockpiling bullets to use against American citizens?
Seriously, what's the "logic" behind this idiocy?
So nobody knows?

Or do they know but are too embarrassed to say so out loud? LOL!

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#1784 Apr 30, 2013
Effington wrote:
<quoted text>
But how do background checks restrict the rights and freedoms of law abiding citizens? No one is suggesting that background checks will somehow magically prevent criminals and crazies from getting guns, but it does seem like a good idea to me and - apparently - 90% of people. You don't think universal background checks will keeps guns out of the hands of at least a few criminals and crazies?
Operating on the notion of common sense AND not restricting the right to bear arms by law-abiding citizens, if you're not a criminal and a crazy, what do you have to worry about when it comes to background checks? I'd say nothing.
At the very least, when gun crimes are committed, we may be able to trace the purchase of that firearm back to an individual who did pass a background check and help law enforcement find out how it got into the hands of a criminal.
You have touched on one of the problems with background checks and ignored another. Yes, it might help police find where the criminal obtained the gun but the next logical step is to hold the rightful owner somehow responsible for the crime committed with his stolen firearm. Don't say "that's far-fetched" because we already have those who would hold firearms manufacturers responsible for those who abuse their products. It's only a short step to saying you're responsible because some low life broke into your home and stole your gun along with all of your other valuables turning you into a criminal rather than a victim. The problem you ignored is the propensity of government to abuse power once it is granted. How would you prevent the states that are anti-gun from abusing the background checks? It's already happening.

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.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Aren't American lives worth saving? 18 min Bozo666 37
News Watch Julianne Moore and Emma Stone implore cit... Sat Simplejim 9
News My Turn: Another day, another mass shooting in ... Sat payme 4
News Bump Stock Ban: Just the Tip of the Iceberg Oct 19 payme 3
How To Handle A Firearm With Your Opposite Hand Oct 17 SummerBB8 1
New Tactical Gear at LAX Ammo OC Store! Oct 16 SummerBB8 1
News Why are there always shootings in the US? Oct 15 youll shoot your ... 1
More from around the web