Gun Control Debate - Chico, CA

Discuss the national Gun Control debate in Chico, CA.

Would you support a ban on handguns?

Chico opposes
Oppose
 
26
Support
 
3

Vote now in Chico:

Comments
41 - 60 of 136 Comments Last updated -
Not a moron like HIO

Lincoln, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Jan 10, 2013
 
Any chance someone could please post a link to a reliable source where main -stream Democrats or Democratic politicians say they want to take ALL guns away from the public?
GRANDPA ICOLAI

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Jan 10, 2013
 
annoyed wrote:
<quoted text>
But you stop short of saying citizens should only be allowed flintlocks as THAT was what the Signers intentioned??? There are many who make that, and similar comments and suggest these "pop guns" are what citizens could arm themselves with in case of internal or external war; sounds like morons trying to interpret and understand policies created by brilliant men.
My interpretation was instead, the Founders wanted to give the citizens a way to defend their Liberty. To defend their Liberty the citizens needed arms equivilant to those to be used against them; musket, cannon, grapeshot, etc. etc. etc. Nowhere is there EVER a mention citizens are to be restricted in their choice of arms, which would make a mockery of the intent.
There are many (most) who would hide under their beds (desks, etc.)before defending their Freedom. Are you one of those? Or would you like to make sure no one has any Freedom as is the case in many other countries?
This is the USA....if you don't like it you can always hitch a ride with an Obama hater on his way out of our country. I'd suggest France. Or maybe England...You'd like it; just remember to leave any sharp knives at home as those are frowned on, banned and confiscated as well.
>
>
The founders were men of enormous intellect and farsightedness , our Nation has not been graced by such men since.

Jefferson, in particular, understood that change is the only constant in life and that man's progress is inevitable... that is why he stated that each generation should leave it's mark on our Constitution.

Put another way,the Founders viewed our Constitution as a living document intended to be amended to keep up with the times...

When the founders wrote the US constitution muskets where the state of the art, but not even a Jefferson could have possibly imagined modern day assault weapons, let alone unmanned drones raining missiles upon unsuspecting targets...

So only God knows how the second amendment would have been worded had Jefferson been allowed a brief glimpse at our times...

Taking their era into consideration, my interpretation of the second has always been that the founders intended for the citizenry to have a standing militia ( army, navy, Marines etc? to protect our freedoms, and possibly "a flintlock" to hunt rabbits or fowl,....

I am fairly confident they did not intend for all kinds of crazies running around the countryside with machine guns and killing third graders.

I don't know about what others would do to protect our freedoms but I myself enlisted in the Marines over 40 years ago, at a time when many of my contemporaries were running away to Canada or seeking other ways of avoiding military service, and there have been many,many times when i thought they took the proper action....

But you know what?

I understand there are around 300 million guns in this Country, and as far as I know, not a single shot has been fired as the plutocrats took over our government.... So much for all the gun owners defending America.

But anyways, thanks for posting sensibly and not being a complete jackass like HERE IS ONE...
Not a moron like HIO

Lincoln, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Jan 10, 2013
 
GRANDPA ICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
The founders were men of enormous intellect and farsightedness , our Nation has not been graced by such men since.
Jefferson, in particular, understood that change is the only constant in life and that man's progress is inevitable... that is why he stated that each generation should leave it's mark on our Constitution.
Put another way,the Founders viewed our Constitution as a living document intended to be amended to keep up with the times...
When the founders wrote the US constitution muskets where the state of the art, but not even a Jefferson could have possibly imagined modern day assault weapons, let alone unmanned drones raining missiles upon unsuspecting targets...
So only God knows how the second amendment would have been worded had Jefferson been allowed a brief glimpse at our times...
Taking their era into consideration, my interpretation of the second has always been that the founders intended for the citizenry to have a standing militia ( army, navy, Marines etc? to protect our freedoms, and possibly "a flintlock" to hunt rabbits or fowl,....
I am fairly confident they did not intend for all kinds of crazies running around the countryside with machine guns and killing third graders.
I don't know about what others would do to protect our freedoms but I myself enlisted in the Marines over 40 years ago, at a time when many of my contemporaries were running away to Canada or seeking other ways of avoiding military service, and there have been many,many times when i thought they took the proper action....
But you know what?
I understand there are around 300 million guns in this Country, and as far as I know, not a single shot has been fired as the plutocrats took over our government.... So much for all the gun owners defending America.
But anyways, thanks for posting sensibly and not being a complete jackass like HERE IS ONE...
Only problem Gramps is that lemmings can't deal with a living document.
GRANDPA ICOLAI

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Jan 11, 2013
 
Not a moron like HIO wrote:
<quoted text>
Only problem Gramps is that lemmings can't deal with a living document.
>
>
You are correct,....

The lemmings also seem to have a problem dealing with life in general...

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Puerto Vallarta, Mexico

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Jan 11, 2013
 
GRANDPA ICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
You are correct,....
The lemmings also seem to have a problem dealing with life in general...
......Post number 44 here http://www.topix.com/forum/city/chico-ca/TISB...

Grumpy makes one of his most stupid claims yet………….LOL

Jim Bettencourt wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with people owning guns, I own them and have hunted for 47 years. I have never had to use a gun to protect myself or my family. I have never had anyone try to take my guns and no on no one crediable that has ever had their gun or guns taken. I just find all this pro-gun fear mongoring over hyped non-sence. Considering our government has heat seeking missle, tom-a- hawk, bunker buster missle if they had a desire to get rid of our guns an assault rifle with a 1000 round clip ain't shit. All the hype just keeps the wacko's like the one's on this thread busy so that their mindless heads have a non-issue to keep them busy while waiting for their disability or unemployment checks.

Grumpy wrote:
Agree,

No one in this country needs to have anything more powerful than a hunting rifle.

I have had first hand experience with assault weapons and I know what they can do to a human body, I had a buddy whose had was completely shattered not 5 feet away from me decades ago in a forsaken war, the experience of being showered with blood, brains and shreds of bones still haunts me to this day...

So the last thing we need in this country is these crazy wackos running around with AK47's and M16's...

If the morons want to play with high powered weapons then let the cowards join the military and do their shooting where their targets shoot back at them....

Now tell me Grumpy………How is a AR shooting a 22. Cal bullet weighing 55 to 70 grains more powerful than my
30/06
300 win mag
300 super win mag
7mm mag
30/06 AI
375 H&H
600 nitro
700 nitro
All hunting rifles bolt action…………….LOL

Ps my 700 nitro can shoot a 1300 grain bullet compared to the ARs 55 grain bullet.
Even a AK is a smaller bullet than a 30/06…………….ROTFLMAO
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Jan 11, 2013
 
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
Grumpy makes one of his most stupid claims yet………….LOL
>
>
Right, and the moron HERE iS ONE aka MEXITROLL implies the folks in the DOD don't know what they were doing when they replaced the M1 and the M14 with the M16....ROTFLMAO

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Puerto Vallarta, Mexico

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Jan 11, 2013
 
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Right, and the moron HERE iS ONE aka MEXITROLL implies the folks in the DOD don't know what they were doing when they replaced the M1 and the M14 with the M16....ROTFLMAO
Please post a link to that village liar..........LOL

oooops ya cant can ya..........9th lie today........

But what do you expect from a moron that thinks a 22 cal is more powerful than a .700 cal..........LOL
yo mama

Lincoln, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Jan 11, 2013
 
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
Please post a link to that village liar..........LOL
oooops ya cant can ya..........9th lie today........
But what do you expect from a moron that thinks a 22 cal is more powerful than a .700 cal..........LOL
Come on now fornication face, you have to prove him wrong your rules.

You'vebeen telling everyone for years that we have to prove you wrong when you post your out -right lies.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Jan 11, 2013
 
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
Please post a link to that village liar..........LOL
oooops ya cant can ya..........9th lie today........
But what do you expect from a moron that thinks a 22 cal is more powerful than a .700 cal..........LOL
>
>
Really...?

Weren't you the one who said the military switched from more powerful guns to the pea shooting M16...?? LOL

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Puerto Vallarta, Mexico

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Jan 11, 2013
 
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Really...?
Weren't you the one who said the military switched from more powerful guns to the pea shooting M16...?? LOL
NOPE..........LOL

But nice try village liar..........Why cant you post a link like I asked you???

Besides it is just another of your daily lies you are caught telling.......LOL
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Jan 11, 2013
 
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
NOPE..........LOL
But nice try village liar..........Why cant you post a link like I asked you???
Besides it is just another of your daily lies you are caught telling.......LOL
>
>
Nice dodge, but it does not change the fact that, as always, you are full of dog excrement....LMAO
one is a liar

Lincoln, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Jan 11, 2013
 
sw47y

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Puerto Vallarta, Mexico

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Jan 11, 2013
 
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Nice dodge, but it does not change the fact that, as always, you are full of dog excrement....LMAO
Yes duck and dodge from you.........LOL

YOU cant answer the question so it is spin spin spin
annoyed

Paradise, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
Jan 12, 2013
 
GRANDPA ICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
The founders were men of enormous intellect and farsightedness , our Nation has not been graced by such men since.
Jefferson, in particular, understood that change is the only constant in life and that man's progress is inevitable... that is why he stated that each generation should leave it's mark on our Constitution.
Put another way,the Founders viewed our Constitution as a living document intended to be amended to keep up with the times...
When the founders wrote the US constitution muskets where the state of the art, but not even a Jefferson could have possibly imagined modern day assault weapons, let alone unmanned drones raining missiles upon unsuspecting targets...
So only God knows how the second amendment would have been worded had Jefferson been allowed a brief glimpse at our times...
Taking their era into consideration, my interpretation of the second has always been that the founders intended for the citizenry to have a standing militia ( army, navy, Marines etc? to protect our freedoms, and possibly "a flintlock" to hunt rabbits or fowl,....
I am fairly confident they did not intend for all kinds of crazies running around the countryside with machine guns and killing third graders.
I don't know about what others would do to protect our freedoms but I myself enlisted in the Marines over 40 years ago, at a time when many of my contemporaries were running away to Canada or seeking other ways of avoiding military service, and there have been many,many times when i thought they took the proper action....
But you know what?
I understand there are around 300 million guns in this Country, and as far as I know, not a single shot has been fired as the plutocrats took over our government.... So much for all the gun owners defending America.
But anyways, thanks for posting sensibly and not being a complete jackass like HERE IS ONE...
"Taking their era into consideration, my interpretation of the second has always been that the founders intended for the citizenry to have a standing militia ( army, navy, Marines etc? to protect our freedoms, and possibly "a flintlock" to hunt rabbits or fowl,...."
So I believe you are saying you do not believe the founders believed in any special right for individuals to be armed...in clear opposition to the "individual right" intended by the Signers and confirmed by SCOTUS a couple of years ago? What do you see yourself as, some type of Constitutional scholar? The question has already been answered by people greater than you, let's move on (or you join those whose rejection of our democratic process forces them to live in the past, that would be a shame).
You would ignore historical data concerning weapon confiscation in order to bow down to those in authority (who, after all, create, install and enforce the laws) you consider your superior (really, really rich people) and accepting any bone left on your plate?
And while we all sit around in a big circle insane crazy people are plotting to attack innocent people RIGHT NOW....RIGHT NOW...RIGHT NOW...RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!
The NRA is right.....The ONLY thing we can do RIGHT NOW is protect the kids in school RIGHT NOW before we continue wasting our time discussing what happens later. And yet Biden and the rest sit on their fat asses doing NOTHING to try to maintain anti-gun pressure; disgusting creatures who would rather win an argument than protect our kids.
annoyed

Paradise, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
Jan 12, 2013
 
"I am fairly confident they did not intend for all kinds of crazies running around the countryside with machine guns and killing third graders."
Liar....you know the discussion is not about machine guns....what are you, a Republican liar; I hope it's not just "automatic?"
"I understand there are around 300 million guns in this Country, and as far as I know, not a single shot has been fired as the plutocrats took over our government.... So much for all the gun owners defending America."
So YOU would have suggested an all out attack on the Pentagon? Are you nuts or are you trying to be funny?:) You DO remember the plot (foiled by the government and your friend nixon) where people would surround the Pentagon...hold hands..and levitate the building? Instead we have the NRA fighting for us here (as other organizations help protect our other rights)...as good citizens do....so so much for your personal problems with violence. This unthinking attitude forces people into the others camp, something you don't want to do (in fact, the exact opposite).
Please use a reasoned approach (as I know you're capable of) if you decide to respond, unlike hereisone.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
Jan 12, 2013
 
annoyed wrote:
<quoted text>

So I believe you are saying you do not believe the founders believed in any special right for individuals to be armed...in clear opposition to the "individual right" intended by the Signers and confirmed by SCOTUS a couple of years ago? What do you see yourself as, some type of Constitutional scholar? The question has already been answered by people greater than you, let's move on (or you join those whose rejection of our democratic process forces them to live in the past, that would be a shame).
>
>
What I am saying is the founders had no inkling that weapon technology would advance to the point where any member of our "well regulated militia.." would some day have almost instantaneous access to a weapon capable of spitting from 100 to over 300 rounds per minute, otherwise they would have been less ambiguous about the wording of the second amendment....

But I do believe the founders intended the people to have weapons for hunting, self defense and at that time, fighting off the British and other invaders but not to overthrow our own government....

What do I see myself as....? I will ignore your lapse into "right wing wacko mentality" and simply say that a forum is intended to exchange opinions and ideas, and I expressed my opinion about the second , and I am so sorry it clashed with yours....

I also beg to disagree with your opinion that I am joining those whose rejection of our democratic process forces them to live in the past..blah.. blah" because....

The father of out Constitution, Jefferson himself, has stated that it is incumbent upon each generation to leave it's mark upon our Constitution.... Jefferson understood that what applied in his days might no longer apply 230+ years down the road and that the Constitutional provisions will become anachronisms with the passage of time and will have to be revisited again and again and again.....
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
Jan 12, 2013
 
annoyed wrote:
<quoted text>
.
You would ignore historical data concerning weapon confiscation in order to bow down to those in authority (who, after all, create, install and enforce the laws) you consider your superior (really, really rich people) and accepting any bone left on your plate?
And while we all sit around in a big circle insane crazy people are plotting to attack innocent people RIGHT NOW....RIGHT NOW...RIGHT NOW...RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!
The NRA is right.....The ONLY thing we can do RIGHT NOW is protect the kids in school RIGHT NOW before we continue wasting our time discussing what happens later. And yet Biden and the rest sit on their fat asses doing NOTHING to try to maintain anti-gun pressure; disgusting creatures who would rather win an argument than protect our kids.
>
>
Historical data shows that weapon confiscations in ADVANCED and CIVILIZED countries such as Australia and Great Britain has cut way down on mass shootings and other murders committed by fire weapons....

I am not sure of exactly what you mean by me "accepting any bone left on my plate," because that is definitely a very conservative trait and I am far from being a conservative....

As far as the NRA's suggestion to surround our school children with armed cops...?

I view that as a form of brain washing our most impressionable into living in a police state in which eventually we all will be surrounded by military men toting sub mashing guns, just like they do in some of those third world dictatorships....
Blame

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
Jan 12, 2013
 
I don't believe that those with an opinion different from my own are not crazy, stupid or less important than my own. I believe our strength comes from the differences in opinion and the discussion of those differences. I think many people make the mistake of beklieving that our founding fathers all agreed on what should be written in the Constitution and they all held hands while they wrote it. There was not one person who had all of their beliefs and ideas included and there were incredibly heated disagreements all along the way.

Having said that I believe some of the comments I am reading here put Thomas Jefferson well on the wrong side of the debate on guns from where he actually stood.

First the word "militia" refers to normal citizens that were not part of the army. In the Constitution the country's military was cleared referred too often but it was not referred to as a "militia" - it was ALWAYS referred to as the Army. The word "militia" refers to the small bands of local citizens that would group together to protect themselves and each other during any type of emergency or unusual event. The militia are the normal citizens and NOT the army.

I agree that our founding fathers were brilliant and most especially Jefferson but I also believe that the Consitution was not some document that was thrown together in a barn on the weekend. Every word was given amazing levels of condiseration - the 2nd Amendment in particular was written using non-specific wording for great purpose. The founders wished the citizens to have the specific ability to adapt - actually well beyond what you and I both think is rational. They believes strongly that the citizens should have access to any method of defense that the government had at its disposal to use against them.

Jefferson was one of the loudest voices in never allowing the right to bear arms to be infringed. If you simply search "Jefferson Quotes" you want get far before you see one.

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As for the species of exercises I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion in your walks". Jefferson made this comment in 1785.

Jefferson also said "The beauty of the 2nd Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it". Now by current standards that comment alone would get Jefferson labeled as a gun nut by many.

Unfortunately I don't believe that Jefferson would view the advancement of weapons technology as the greatest danger to the country.

Jefferson was also a strong believer in limiting the debt of the nation as he believed that there were few ways to enslave a people faster than to have them owe other money. Jefferson said again and again that there should never be a time in which the country's debt would reach a level beyond a point where it couldn't be paid off completely in 19 years maximum.

Jefferson believed that the right to keep and bear arms was a natural right given by God - he believed the 2nd Amendment only recognized a right that was already there.

I appreciate the different views without a doubt but some of the comments I have seen don't accurately reflect what I believe the intentions of the framers of the Constitution had in mind.
TWP

Iowa Park, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#60
Jan 12, 2013
 
Blame wrote:
Jefferson believed that the right to keep and bear arms was a natural right given by God - he believed the 2nd Amendment only recognized a right that was already there.
Old "GRANDPA NICOLAI" and the rest of the National Socialist Liberal Democrats have a "New Religion" and believe that Barack Hussein Obama is the "New" God and Messiah who overrules the "Old" God of the Bible...

And the "New" God Obama's plan is to tear up the old and outdated Constitution of the United States and crush any opposition by disarming the population...

If old "GRANDPA NICOLAI" was REALLY so concerned about the safety of Americans from Guns he would have been shouting a long time ago about the Gun violence that has taken over 500 lives in Chicago this past year...

But instead he wants to stand on the graves of the children who were killed in Connecticut by a psychopath and LIE about why he REALLY wants to disarm the American people...

Old "GRANDPA NICOLAI" knows that without the ability to defend ourselves they will be free to impose Martial Law and their Glorious National Socialist Revolution and rule by ABSOLUTE TYRANNY...!

The Founding Fathers knew EXACTLY what they were doing by making the right to possess weapons and the ability to protect ourselves from the very TYRANNY that the "New" God Obama and his disciples like old "GRANDPA NICOLAI" want to force on the American people...!

"Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."
- Mohandas Gandhi: Autobiography, page 446.

Molon Labe...!!!
Law

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61
Jan 12, 2013
 
GRANDPA ICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
The founders were men of enormous intellect and farsightedness , our Nation has not been graced by such men since.
Jefferson, in particular, understood that change is the only constant in life and that man's progress is inevitable... that is why he stated that each generation should leave it's mark on our Constitution.
Put another way,the Founders viewed our Constitution as a living document intended to be amended to keep up with the times...
When the founders wrote the US constitution muskets where the state of the art, but not even a Jefferson could have possibly imagined modern day assault weapons, let alone unmanned drones raining missiles upon unsuspecting targets...
So only God knows how the second amendment would have been worded had Jefferson been allowed a brief glimpse at our times...
Taking their era into consideration, my interpretation of the second has always been that the founders intended for the citizenry to have a standing militia ( army, navy, Marines etc? to protect our freedoms, and possibly "a flintlock" to hunt rabbits or fowl,....
I am fairly confident they did not intend for all kinds of crazies running around the countryside with machine guns and killing third graders.
I don't know about what others would do to protect our freedoms but I myself enlisted in the Marines over 40 years ago, at a time when many of my contemporaries were running away to Canada or seeking other ways of avoiding military service, and there have been many,many times when i thought they took the proper action....
But you know what?
I understand there are around 300 million guns in this Country, and as far as I know, not a single shot has been fired as the plutocrats took over our government.... So much for all the gun owners defending America.
But anyways, thanks for posting sensibly and not being a complete jackass like HERE IS ONE...
And amending for the purposes of expanding rights and liberties.
The one time that it wasn't amended for such purpose (18h Amendment), it too another amendment (21st) to repeal after hundreds of lives were lost and countless dollars wasted on such insanity.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

5 Users are viewing the Chico Forum right now

Search the Chico Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 1 hr scirocco 68,456
Illegals are the New Slaves for Democrats 10 hr Godfrey 7
House leaders abandon border bill 10 hr The right is wrong 6
Social Security's $300M IT project doesn't work 11 hr The right is wrong 1
AquaAlliance denied injunction for water transf... 15 hr News 24
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 15 hr seekers 4,900
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 15 hr Pole swap 7,855

Related Topics

Chico Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]