The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 195
  1. #161
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sithly View Post
    Classiest COTH smackdown ever!

    Also, just for the record, I agree with G. completely on this issue, even though I'm pretty much the polar opposite of the old, rich, conservative white male stereotype (being absolutely none of those things). This issue is deeper than that. People from all walks of life care about and have an interest in gun ownership.
    Delusion is free...We have moved to the majority of people living in urban environments and that has changed the attitudes towards guns. The rural idea of the second ammendment rights allowing you to own any gun you want is over.

    Gotta love those of you still clinging to your guns. Times have changed and common sense on the second ammendment is clearly in need. And newsflash for you, you don't make up the majority view today and it has nothing to do with "stereotyping".


    2 members found this post helpful.

  2. #162
    Join Date
    Dec. 27, 1999
    Location
    Midland, NC, USA
    Posts
    7,202

    Default

    Gun control laws are not going to stop criminals from obtaining their guns illegally, like the Sandy Hook shooter. The only thing that stops CRIME is PENALTIES for those crimes that are severe enough to make criminals think twice before breaking the law!! The average potential murderer is not going to be put off by a month in prison or a small fine, on the off chance he actually gets convicted instead of pleading down to a ridiculous charge. Jails overcrowded? That's because the penalties for most crimes are comparatively irrelevant.

    Time for some Draconian measures if you ask me.

    Jennifer


    2 members found this post helpful.

  3. #163
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,473

    Default

    And so now some of those who want to protect the 2nd amendment are against the 1st amendment?

    Now, gun rights activists are fighting back. A petition created Dec. 21 on the White House e-petition website by a user in Texas accuses Morgan of engaging in a "hostile attack against the U.S. Constitution" by targeting the Second Amendment. It demands he be deported immediately for "exploiting his position as a national network television host to stage attacks against the rights of American citizens."


    http://omg.yahoo.com/news/thousands-...141037563.html

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #164
    Join Date
    Feb. 25, 2012
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThirdCharm View Post
    Gun control laws are not going to stop criminals from obtaining their guns illegally, like the Sandy Hook shooter. The only thing that stops CRIME is PENALTIES for those crimes that are severe enough to make criminals think twice before breaking the law!! The average potential murderer is not going to be put off by a month in prison or a small fine, on the off chance he actually gets convicted instead of pleading down to a ridiculous charge. Jails overcrowded? That's because the penalties for most crimes are comparatively irrelevant.

    Time for some Draconian measures if you ask me.

    Jennifer
    actually I think you will get a lot of support for looking at penalties for gun-related crimes. I know several individuals who have never seen more than a few days of jail (not prison) for some pretty intense gun-related crimes (no deaths but not for lack of trying). As far as that goes, at that point someone's behavior has clearly demonstrated they are not able to competently manage firearms, and I, for one anyway, would have no problem restricting their firearm rights. Of course, no matter what state they are in its not likely they will have trouble accessing one, but making penalties more meaningful might have some impact. I really don't know, but it is another idea. But if we are going to stiffen penalties, as I mentiond on another thread, we need to prepare to really, really pony up funding for Dept of Corrections which will likely be warehousing many more people, and look at what we are doing with people in DOC to prepare them to live in society,unless we are willing to lock them up for life.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  5. #165
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,473

    Default

    Those who aspire to cause a lot of damage/casualties will not be deterred by stiffer penalties. Most likely they are not planning on a living future after the attack in the first place.

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"


    4 members found this post helpful.

  6. #166
    Join Date
    Dec. 16, 2012
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    In case you missed the last election, the far right (and I put your views there) did not garner the votes for their far right boy, Romney. The demographics are changing, whites are a minority population in many areas especially Calif. The idea that the second ammendment gives people the right to own any weapon that makes them happy, is simply not in the majority. That voting population is not increasing it is decreasing.

    I am sorry that you took offense to that point.

    Have a wonderfull Christmas Day !
    In case you did miss the last election, it wasn't about the 2nd Amendment! Yes, California has been overrun by it's own lack to curb illegal immigration. And, by the way, has very strict firearm laws from county to county but has one of the highest rate of gun violence in the country. Oh, and, by the way, the 2nd doesn't say a word about having "any weapons" of our chosing. It talks about "arms" which are firearms! Many of you city dwellers may think you are the majority but one better take into consideration the largest states in the union, two of which are considered "frontier" states. Yes, they do have a say in this, too, and let me tell you, the minority vote from those states (most are gun owners) did sway the elections! Oh, and one more thing, the American Indian vote is just now coming to power, and believe me, most of them are gun owners and will not stand with your narrow anglo view. Merry Xmas


    2 members found this post helpful.

  7. #167
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    Those who aspire to cause a lot of damage/casualties will not be deterred by stiffer penalties. Most likely they are not planning on a living future after the attack in the first place.
    I was thinking the same thing. The crazy ones who plan to kill themselves are not worried about the length of the possible prison sentence.

    The Piers Morgan petition story cracks me up a little. Some people really pick and choose the amendments they support. Second amendment to bear arms, very important. First amendment for free speech, not so much.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  8. #168
    Join Date
    Dec. 28, 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,966

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    Delusion is free...We have moved to the majority of people living in urban environments and that has changed the attitudes towards guns. The rural idea of the second ammendment rights allowing you to own any gun you want is over.

    Gotta love those of you still clinging to your guns. Times have changed and common sense on the second ammendment is clearly in need. And newsflash for you, you don't make up the majority view today and it has nothing to do with "stereotyping".
    Thank you, your contribution to this discussion has been noted.



  9. #169
    Join Date
    Sep. 24, 2004
    Location
    Piedmont Triad, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    And so now some of those who want to protect the 2nd amendment are against the 1st amendment?

    Now, gun rights activists are fighting back. A petition created Dec. 21 on the White House e-petition website by a user in Texas accuses Morgan of engaging in a "hostile attack against the U.S. Constitution" by targeting the Second Amendment. It demands he be deported immediately for "exploiting his position as a national network television host to stage attacks against the rights of American citizens."


    http://omg.yahoo.com/news/thousands-...141037563.html

    Like law suites, anybody can petition for anything. They are just using their rights as citizens to speak their mind too. Piers is not a citizen and doesn't have the rights of citizens. He lives, works, and enjoys the US at our sufferance.



  10. #170
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    And so now some of those who want to protect the 2nd amendment are against the 1st amendment?

    Now, gun rights activists are fighting back. A petition created Dec. 21 on the White House e-petition website by a user in Texas accuses Morgan of engaging in a "hostile attack against the U.S. Constitution" by targeting the Second Amendment. It demands he be deported immediately for "exploiting his position as a national network television host to stage attacks against the rights of American citizens."


    http://omg.yahoo.com/news/thousands-...141037563.html
    That whole crazy petition idea is too funny. I guess the loon in Texas would have everyone who disagrees with him deported. I actually thought the story was made up by CNN until I read the article.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  11. #171
    Join Date
    Sep. 24, 2004
    Location
    Piedmont Triad, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    Delusion is free...We have moved to the majority of people living in urban environments and that has changed the attitudes towards guns. The rural idea of the second ammendment rights allowing you to own any gun you want is over.

    Gotta love those of you still clinging to your guns. Times have changed and common sense on the second ammendment is clearly in need. And newsflash for you, you don't make up the majority view today and it has nothing to do with "stereotyping".
    The majority view is irrelevant until the majority amends the constitution. Till then, the Constitution governs the USA.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  12. #172
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    I actually thought the story was made up by CNN until I read the article.
    It could have just as easily appeared in The Onion.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  13. #173
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hosspuller View Post
    The majority view is irrelevant until the majority amends the constitution. Till then, the Constitution governs the USA.
    The interpretation of the constitution is done all the time. You have your opinions of what the second ammendment means and myself and others have a different interpretation. That is the real issue, your views are not the correct interpretation nor are others views, it is up to the courts to decide.

    Myself and others do not view the second ammendment has allowing citizens to have whatever weapons they choose. And this concept appears to be difficult for some of you.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  14. #174
    Join Date
    Sep. 24, 2004
    Location
    Piedmont Triad, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    Myself and others do not view the second ammendment has allowing citizens to have whatever weapons they choose. And this concept appears to be difficult for some of you.
    The concept is not at all difficult for me. Your clairvoyant ability is failing.

    You are showing ignorance of weapons. Actually, most weapons you are refering to are available.
    Grenades, mortars, machine guns, assault rifles are classed by the ATF. Regulated but available if one choses.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #175
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,473

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hosspuller View Post
    Like law suites, anybody can petition for anything. They are just using their rights as citizens to speak their mind too. Piers is not a citizen and doesn't have the rights of citizens. He lives, works, and enjoys the US at our sufferance.
    He doesn't have the rights of a citizen? Maybe as far as voting is concerned.

    Are you suggesting that legal immigrants (even w/o citizenship) should be treated differently than citizens?

    Forgot that America was built by immigrants (foreigners)?

    And in the meantime the IRS is happy to take his income taxes every year. And apparently he (and a lot of others) isn't complaining or petitioning against that.

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"


    2 members found this post helpful.

  16. #176
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    The interpretation of the constitution is done all the time. You have your opinions of what the second ammendment means and myself and others have a different interpretation. That is the real issue, your views are not the correct interpretation nor are others views, it is up to the courts to decide.

    Myself and others do not view the second ammendment has allowing citizens to have whatever weapons they choose. And this concept appears to be difficult for some of you.
    My point, which is clearly lost on you, is that change is due on the interpretation of the second ammendment. Access to any weapon that floats your boat needs to be reviewed and based on what is being discussed by both parties, access to any weapon will hopefully change.

    In other words, those weapons "grenades, mortars, machine guns, assault rifles" may not be legal in the near future. And for many people they should not be available today. Change is coming....common sense will prevail over the far right gun loving folks that support the NRA. Which is a lobbying group for not ONLY gun owners but gun manufacterers. Not an organization that represents only gun owners-But the companies making profits from the selling of guns. Hope this is clear enough.....


    4 members found this post helpful.

  17. #177
    Join Date
    Apr. 19, 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,000

    Default

    What do we do about the ones already in circulation?


    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #178
    Join Date
    Dec. 27, 1999
    Location
    Midland, NC, USA
    Posts
    7,202

    Default

    True, crazy shooters may not have been planning on living past the day.... But how about making penalties stiffer for making guns accessible to those who should not have them? if Lanza hadn't killed his mom, she would not be facing any penalty that I'm aware of for basically providing access to weapons and ammo. It is certainly an unusual twist that she ended up paying the ultimate penalty for having accessible guns with an emotionally disturbed kid in residence.

    Jennifer


    1 members found this post helpful.

  19. #179
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThirdCharm View Post
    True, crazy shooters may not have been planning on living past the day.... But how about making penalties stiffer for making guns accessible to those who should not have them? if Lanza hadn't killed his mom, she would not be facing any penalty that I'm aware of for basically providing access to weapons and ammo. It is certainly an unusual twist that she ended up paying the ultimate penalty for having accessible guns with an emotionally disturbed kid in residence.
    I'm sorry to say that anyone who showed such poor judgment would probably not be swayed by stiffer penalties, either.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  20. #180
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2006
    Location
    rapidan,virginia
    Posts
    1,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    Delusion is free...We have moved to the majority of people living in urban environments and that has changed the attitudes towards guns. The rural idea of the second ammendment rights allowing you to own any gun you want is over.

    Gotta love those of you still clinging to your guns. Times have changed and common sense on the second ammendment is clearly in need. And newsflash for you, you don't make up the majority view today and it has nothing to do with "stereotyping".
    Interesting. What makes you so certain that your views are in the majority? A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center after the Newtown shooting does not support your view. According to the poll:
    "Dimock said the moderate change in opinions likely is due to the finding that most Americans say the protection afforded by gun ownership outweighs the risk to other people. He said opinions also are slow to change because 8 in 10 Americans said they feel strongly about the issue.
    Two-thirds of Americans said assault-type weapons make the country more dangerous, while only 21 percent said they make people safer. Even so, 49 percent oppose a ban on the weapons, while 44 percent said they’d support such a measure, according to the poll of 1,219 adults taken Dec. 17-19. Its margin of error was plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.
    Two-thirds of people polled opposed banning civilian possession of handguns. Fifty-six percent of people surveyed said they’d support a ban on “cop-killer” bullets capable of penetrating bullet-proof vests, and 53 percent said high- capacity ammunition clips should be outlawed."

    Most everybody I know owns guns and supports gun ownership, or as you like to call us, we are "gun lovers".
    I expect that most everybody you know feels differently. It's easy to believe that your views reflect the majority when you are not exposed to anything else.
    "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
    Rainy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYpvIMVdq3k
    Stash: http://tinyurl.com/mmm3p4e


    2 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. USEF Armed Forces Attire
    By devildogtigress in forum Dressage
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Feb. 4, 2012, 05:39 PM
  2. Well Armed
    By equinedriver in forum Racing
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Nov. 17, 2011, 01:08 PM
  3. armed, mounted, and wired.
    By charismaryllis in forum Off Course
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Aug. 12, 2011, 05:10 PM
  4. Warning to all Foxhunters! Foxes are now armed!
    By spotnnotfarm in forum Off Course
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Jan. 15, 2011, 12:26 PM
  5. Well Armed in TX - Anyone Connected?
    By Zevida in forum Racing
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Oct. 22, 2009, 05:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •