Gun control discussion

Mr. Kraft's point is we should be banning all handguns and leave the assualt rifles alone. Interesting point of view. I for one would support it. I have to agree with him, it is tougher to conceal an assualt rifle than a handgun.

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Once again Worried will take something out of context and this letter by Jim Kraft is no exception. No where that I see is Kraft indicating a ban on handguns. Your eyesight must need correction Worried or the neurons don’t synapse.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I am still looking for that one gun supporter to show me in the constitution where it specifically states that they are guaranteed the right to own a military style assault rife, a clip size bigger than ten shots, or a 50 caliber gun. It does not state that fact. Are you too chicken to register your guns. Are they really going to come and get the guns? If you believe that, then you guys are nuts.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Jim Kraft watches too much TV!

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

There is nothing in the Constitution that limits the type of gun, rifle, clip size, etc.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

You are right, disgusted, but it also does not limit the governments right to manage, regulate, register, or limit specific arms. It is my understanding that most all handguns will be allowed but registered. What is the problem with that? Oh, I forgot the gun fanatics cry about the government coming to get the guns from 70% of the population or the 270 Millions guns out there. Any sane person with a brain can figure out that will not happen.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Evil is only as strong as the good let it be... You actually think that criminals will obey gun control law? You are a special kind of stupid, aren’t you?

The 2nd Amendment doesn’t exist so we can go hunting, but so we can defend our Freedom from Tyrants!

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

She Survived Hitler, Now Warns America 'Then They Took Our Guns' Posted on the 12 January 2013 by Susanduclos An informative, detailed piece at Beliefnet of an Austrian woman, Kitty Werthmann, who describes how Austria voted for Adolph Hitler, then documents her eye witness account of his regimes rise and takeover, regulations, euthanasia, gun confiscation and more.

“Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long afterwards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily. “No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

but also priests and ministers who spoke up. “Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.”

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

" You are a special kind of stupid, aren’t you? " Well, that certainly summarizes your statements and lorex's as well. What are you guys drinking? It must be horrible to be as ill informed as you two are. Oh, by the way, can you give us a timeframe when Yellowstone park will erupt as well. Is either one of you Carnac the magnificent?.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thanks for your input centerfold.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

"After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it."

- William S. Burroughs.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

It's all going in the direction of gun registration, what a fiasco that will be.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Centerfield, A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That word INFRINGED is very important.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

A militia or irregular army, generally refers to an army or other fighting force that is composed of non-professional fighters; citizens of a nation or subjects of a state or government that can be called upon to enter a combat situation, as opposed to a professional force of regular soldiers or, historically, members of the fighting nobility. Without guns we have no Militia.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Let us remember that at the time this was written, muskets were the armaments of the day. I certainly have no objection to everyone that wants one can have an unregistered musket or musket pistol. That is what the reference was. Now, as to the regulated militia, was there not a supreme court justice who wrote something on the militia and the military and who would win out?

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Yup, muskets were "the armament of the day" the same muskets used by the Military and Militia of "the day" just as the AR-15 is compareable but less (no full auto)than the modern M-16 rifle used the Military of our day.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Centerfield you are infringing.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EarlyBird...You're way off the mark!

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

If all guns were confiscated we would still have the psycopaths bent on killing people. The other means of destruction available to them might be worse than guns. We could consider watching all deranged individuals. The problem there is we are all crazy in someone elses eyes. We need to fix the problem but effective solutions just are not on the table yet. p.s. If armed guards work at banks, concerts, meetings, malls etc.; why would they not work in schools?

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Nobody knew where the Constitution would lead peoples thoughts and interpretations to and nobody knew gun ownership would be as it is today. They did know we need to be able to defend ourselves at times. With no predetermined end point we can only adapt as we go along. If we need guns to protect the people in the urban areas so be it, if we need guns to protect the people in the suburban areas so be it. When outlaws outnumber police we tend to lend a helping hand or gun if that is the situation.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

If centerfield has no problem with people retaining a right to a musket, then there should be no problem with giving up one's electronic gadgets like scanners, computers, phones, TVs, credit cards, and especially internet to engage in commerce. centerfield is certainly welcome to quills, ink, parchment, sealing wax and coinage. After all, our modern commercial methods weren't available back in the times the Constitution was written.

I'm facetious on purpose. EarlyBird has it right: musket was high tech at the time, and high tech of our time shouldn't be infringed upon either.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Sorry, 73hockey had it right, about muskets being the "the armament of the day" during the time the Constitution was written.

Credit where it's due...

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

center field, Could you define assault weapons? I thinks you are the one drinking the kool'aid. It is made up liberal term they like to use to make themselves feel good.So I agree with 73 hockey and early bird.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

From a recent supreme court decision: "The court also ruled, though, that "the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." Kinda like you guys don't really know what you are talking about... But we knew that before this.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »