gun regs yay or nay???

[mallardsx2]

I said "I" didnt have any use for them. If "You" have a use for them and can afford them then I guess thats fine by me as long as you dont shoot them at me....

 

[JimP]

apache helicopter would be a trip on a pig hunt though.

During the Vietnam War there was a company of cobra gunships stationed in Utah. I knew one of the pilots and he would talk about finding a coyote out on the west desert and going after them. Some of the stories that he would tell were hilarious.

 

[idcwby]

would that be any different then how they are now??????????????????????

No. They are pretty brazen at the moment, but they seem concerned after the raid on the capital and that it may happen again. So if the military is the only ones armed they would have no fear of the people. The news media is helping with all of it because they are keeping the gun control laws out of the news and making it seem like everything the one political party is doing is the right thing for the country.
I think that there are people on this country that will go along with most anything, but once they have to cross that line and use the second amendment against the government, it won’t stop until everyone is happy with the outcome. This is why they want to disarm us, so they can become the ruling power. I hope this makes sense because when I type it out it doesn’t always come across correctly.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

In my view there should be backgrounds checks on people purchasing a firearm. They should be able to run one that is capable of saying that a person is eligible or not in less than half a hour. For this to happen all criminal records are going to need to be in a central data base and not scattered over 50 states and a few thousand cities. If they can't do it in that time frame then the purchaser gets to take the firearm home. As for a back ground check between family members I'd say a big no. I have placed a few firearms on consignment at a gun shop just so that I don't have to worry about just who is buying them. I let the gun shop have the headaches of filling out forms and getting the back ground check.

I also don't see a need for a person to actually own a full automatic firearm. Perhaps the feds could reduce the fees and checks that are required now for a person to obtain a class 5 license, I think that is what the class is.

On suppressors they need to just make them legal with no extra fees or licensing. People have watched way too many cop shows where it shows a revolver with a suppressor being shot making a noise like they do. I doubt that I will own one but if you want to thread the barrel of your rifle and put one on then go ahead.

There should also be a national right to carry, it will never happen but it should happen.

Also back to back ground checks, if a person holds a concealed carry license then they have already gone through more of a back ground check than any other firearm purchaser ever will. So allow them to purchase the firearm on the spot with no more back ground checks.

I have been without my computer until Tuesday and have not been able access any of the recent posts. Answering the questions is a bit tedious. I do agree with most, but not all. I agree 100% with Jim's post.

My basic views on firearms controls and restrictions have been based on 65 years of firearms ownership and use. Some of the questions were just plane stupid....owning a gunship, live grenades and military weapons are crazy, what would anyone need to have them and have a legit use for them? I believe in background checks. I do not believe in "open carry" as most of the people who open carry that I have personally observed are doing because of their "in your face attitude", not because of a need to do it. Who "needs" a full auto firearm? No one but law enforcement IMHO. There has to be some limitations, but unfortunately a lot of politicians want to take away all our 2nd Amendment rights.

Unfortunately the NRA has NOT done us any favors in recent years. I am an Endowment Life Member and have been for over 60 years. I believe they have muddied the waters a lot in recent years. Their message is ...all gun laws are bad and just the begining of laws to take all your guns away. That ain't going to happen because we won't elect people who will do that.

 

[HuskyMusky]

I didn't see it questioned....but I always wonder why non-violent felons are banned from gun ownership? Honestly it feels like just another gun law aiming to strip away gun rights. especially if that's their 1 conviction and with 10, 20, 30+ years good behavior.

there have been violent felons who have successfully petitioned the courts for their gun rights back.... just seems like a lot of hoops for people that don't pose any threat.

 

[Hilltop]

I don't want to see any added restrictions and I believe many that are in place are wrong. I do have an issue with the way #24 was worded. I think many will answer yes to the questions but keep in mind that would be adding restrictions in places like Wyoming where no permit is required.

 

[Winchester]

I am not giving up my guns. But I can live without an Apache helicopter equipt with rocket launchers....and I have not had the need for a hand grenade yet in life...lol

I have a couple thousand flight hours in the Kiowa Warrior (Apache's little brother) and I've thrown many grenades. They are both very useful and very, very cool. However I don't think myself, or anyone else, has a "need" for either of them outside of the military.

 

[kidoggy]

No. They are pretty brazen at the moment, but they seem concerned after the raid on the capital and that it may happen again. So if the military is the only ones armed they would have no fear of the people. The news media is helping with all of it because they are keeping the gun control laws out of the news and making it seem like everything the one political party is doing is the right thing for the country.
I think that there are people on this country that will go along with most anything, but once they have to cross that line and use the second amendment against the government, it won’t stop until everyone is happy with the outcome. This is why they want to disarm us, so they can become the ruling power. I hope this makes sense because when I type it out it doesn’t always come across correctly.

makes sense and I agree .

 

[kidoggy]

I have a couple thousand flight hours in the Kiowa Warrior (Apache's little brother) and I've thrown many grenades. They are both very useful and very, very cool. However I don't think myself, or anyone else, has a "need" for either of them outside of the military.

I would agree .but then I own lots of shart I don't NEED.

 

[kidoggy]

I have been without my computer until Tuesday and have not been able access any of the recent posts. Answering the questions is a bit tedious. I do agree with most, but not all. I agree 100% with Jim's post.

My basic views on firearms controls and restrictions have been based on 65 years of firearms ownership and use. Some of the questions were just plane stupid....owning a gunship, live grenades and military weapons are crazy, what would anyone need to have them and have a legit use for them? I believe in background checks. I do not believe in "open carry" as most of the people who open carry that I have personally observed are doing because of their "in your face attitude", not because of a need to do it. Who "needs" a full auto firearm? No one but law enforcement IMHO. There has to be some limitations, but unfortunately a lot of politicians want to take away all our 2nd Amendment rights.

Unfortunately the NRA has NOT done us any favors in recent years. I am an Endowment Life Member and have been for over 60 years. I believe they have muddied the waters a lot in recent years. Their message is ...all gun laws are bad and just the begining of laws to take all your guns away. That ain't going to happen because we won't elect people who will do that.

bidens in the white house but I guess close to half the nation would agree he wasn't elected. pelosi ,schummer, AOL, that crazy muslim ,pack member ......... all elected and all would take our guns.

I do understand your thought and would agree that it is at least possible we don't NEED them. but since when are we a nation that must buy only what we need . the entire concept is totally unamerican.
besides if the capitol riots showed us anything it is that the day is coming when we WILL need them.

I have no particular desire to open carry but do commend those who are willing to get in anothers face to defend their principles.

I know we live in a "can't we all just get along " society . the answer is ," no ! we can not!"
and more to the point , we should not!

open carry would eventually play out to create a more "polite" society though . which should make the can't we all just get along crowd happy.


it is a mute point because we already did it but "a nation that trades it's freedoms for security will have and deserves neither! " - some crazy right winger????????????

 

[shootbrownelk]

I am not giving up my guns. But I can live without an Apache helicopter equipt with rocket launchers....and I have not had the need for a hand grenade yet in life...lol

No yet anyway.

 

[kidoggy]

no one has any NEED for democrats either yet they thrive in our society

 

[idcwby]

 

[Bullcan]

I am not giving up my guns. But I can live without an Apache helicopter equipt with rocket launchers....and I have not had the need for a hand grenade yet in life...lol

I don't think I can afford an Apache

 

[kidoggy]

topping my wish list . no I don't Need it but I want it!!!

 

[Winchester]

Luke Skywalker blew that up ...
yer gonna have to build a new one.

 

[kidoggy]

Luke Skywalker blew that up ...
yer gonna have to build a new one.

maybe I could get a deal then...