The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct. 25, 2006
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    875

    Default Spin off - another vision on what ppl think of gun control...

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gall...ortant-problem


    I think this shows how MOST of Americans feel about gun control.

    Personally, I dont worry about it much. It isnt the gun that kills, but the person using it.

    I think the more GOOD people that carry a gun, the better.

    Why is it whenever someone shoots a bunch of innocent people, the Government wants to take away the gun rights of the GOOD people??

    There are already lots of laws about Guns on the books. The problem is that they are not often enforced. How about instead of coming up w/MORE laws, we enforce the laws already on the books

    Just a thought

    BTW - I just got my FOID card, and signed up for a pistol class. I live in Central Illinois. As most know, Chicago has the toughest gun laws, yet, I believe leads (or is at the top) the number of murders.

    Perhaps if the GOOD people could defend themselves, the murder rate would go down. It has been shown that everytime, Conceal Carry has been enacted, the crime level goes down.

    It stops people from being easy targets for criminals. After all, they have to wonder if their possible victim is packing or not.
    Riding is NOT meant as an inside sport, GET out of that arena!!!


    5 members found this post helpful.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct. 2, 1999
    Location
    Mendocino County, CA: Turkey Vulture HQ
    Posts
    14,506

    Default

    I have no problem with good, responsible people owning guns.

    I don't get the objection to universal background checks. That's what ensures you trustworthy gun owners aren't joined by loony, dangerous people who screw up your activity for you. We have laws that say certain people can't buy guns because of their past behavior. Why wouldn't you want that law to be enforced (and enforceable)?
    If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket


    3 members found this post helpful.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar. 3, 2010
    Posts
    1,433

    Default

    Criminals don't worry about background checks. THey don't ensure anything.

    National registry is an infringement of second amendment rights. I don't believe in messing with the constitution.
    “Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.”
    ? Albert Einstein


    2 members found this post helpful.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct. 2, 1999
    Location
    Mendocino County, CA: Turkey Vulture HQ
    Posts
    14,506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horsefaerie View Post
    Criminals don't worry about background checks. THey don't ensure anything.
    So why make anything against the law then? Why do we even bother having Grand Theft Auto as a crime?

    There's no question that background checks do make it harder for people who are on the do not sell list to get weapons, and harder for people to spontaneously get weapons to commit a crime.

    And it shouldn't be legal for me to go buy ten guns and sell them for cash to anyone on the street, or to someone I hook up with via craigslist. Currently this IS legal, and makes it harder for law enforcement to deal with criminals.

    National registry is an infringement of second amendment rights. I don't believe in messing with the constitution.
    A background check is not a national registry. No question of constitutionality.
    If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket


    2 members found this post helpful.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul. 29, 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poltroon View Post
    A background check is not a national registry. No question of constitutionality.
    As long as you really believe that both buyer and seller names are not retained by the government after the check is complete and approved. What was buried in that 800 page proposed federal law???


    3 members found this post helpful.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    17,967

    Default

    Where are you getting your information that there were 800 pages to the bill? Looks like about 6 or 7 pages tops to me.

    Here's the text of the bill posted by Sen. Toomey.

    http://www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=968
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul. 15, 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    855

    Default

    I don't have a problem with the background checks really, but it does seem a bit intrusive. I have more of a problem with this being a fedral law instead of a state issue. I think more and more states rights are going away and the fedral government is overstepping.
    That said, I think unemployment, the economy and government spending would be my top 3 issues that are effecting this country right now.
    Railgirl.blogspot.com


    2 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Vision test?
    By kcmel in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Nov. 14, 2012, 08:56 AM
  2. Spinoff--vision and spooking
    By vineyridge in forum Eventing
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Jul. 28, 2011, 12:40 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: Oct. 14, 2010, 02:36 PM
  4. Spin-off: What do you do to control your diet?
    By rodawn in forum Off Course
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: Sep. 16, 2010, 10:02 PM
  5. Replies: 9
    Last Post: Aug. 23, 2010, 09:14 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
  •