Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Routes Available | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Gun control discussion

February 17, 2013

Jim Kraft, Minot Gun control was discussed between Jay Leno and Piers Morgan. Like too many others offering ideas to solve violence with guns, Morgan showed he knows little about firearms or huntin....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(62)

WorriedAmerican

Feb-17-13 10:15 AM

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 »

centerfield

Feb-17-13 3:22 PM

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 »

disgusted

Feb-17-13 6:27 PM

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

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

centerfield

Feb-17-13 7:24 PM

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 »

centerfield

Feb-17-13 11:14 PM

" 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 »

muleskinner

Feb-18-13 7:04 AM

"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 »

EarlyBird

Feb-18-13 7:51 AM

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

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EarlyBird

Feb-18-13 7:55 AM

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 »

EarlyBird

Feb-18-13 8:08 AM

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 »

centerfield

Feb-18-13 11:54 AM

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 »

73Hockey

Feb-18-13 12:38 PM

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 »

EarlyBird

Feb-18-13 1:07 PM

Centerfield you are infringing.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Legend

Feb-18-13 1:37 PM

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 »

EarlyBird

Feb-18-13 1:54 PM

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 »

locomotive

Feb-18-13 4:42 PM

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 »

locomotive

Feb-18-13 5:43 PM

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 »

teabag2

Feb-18-13 6:19 PM

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 »

centerfield

Feb-18-13 6:47 PM

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 »

centerfield

Feb-18-13 7:01 PM

Bagger, you must have been sleeping behind the door in the barn. Your comment smells that way... Lame.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

teabag2

Feb-18-13 7:30 PM

center field Still waiting on your definition. I think you should read a little history. Then you might see why as you say {LAME] The Quote: I thinks is government that gives you everything can take everything away.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

teabag2

Feb-18-13 9:51 PM

veritas You are splitting the hair.You know what I am talking about with the term assault weapon.Many on the left like to used the term to persuade people to believe they are the same as the military arms.Which is not the case.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

disgusted

Feb-18-13 9:53 PM

Derogatory name calling speaks volumes. We have Centerfield who doesn't answer a question, but resorts to 'bagger' and smelly. Veratis, teabagger, really? Guess teabag2 got your goats.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProgressiveLiberal

Feb-18-13 11:10 PM

Weapons of mass destruction for all? No concern of who gets those killing machines? If that’s the way it’s going to be, the only solution will be manned and armed checkpoints every other block. Worried about a little government overreach.? Just you wait. Say hello to big brother and the tax increase to pay for it.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EarlyBird

Feb-19-13 7:17 AM

Infringe- to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another. The definition implies this has individual concerns in mind.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EarlyBird

Feb-19-13 8:43 AM

veritas the definition of Militia again; "A militia (pron.: /m?'l???/),[1] 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." It says made from citizens and non professional soldiers to me.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 62 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web