Comments on: President Obama To Announce New Gun Control Initiative

By: GD Jackson

GD Jackson — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 04:09:05 +0000

What makes it wrong for someone to stockpile the weapons and ammo? It could be, and is for the ones I know, that they have the money to indulge in their hobby. I get tired of all the demonizing that goes on just because someone owns a weapon, or God forbid, more than one weapon.

I hope the House and Senate Republicans fight him every step of the way and not budge an inch when it comes to this matter.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 03:58:53 +0000

So 99 percent of the guys who (perfectly legally) stockpile enough weaponry to fight a small war are harmless law abiding guys, and every single person who thinks that maybe semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity magazines are a step too far are dangerous threats to our nation and need to be stopped before they destroy it? Seriously? That’s really pretty scary.

By: GD Jackson

GD Jackson — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 02:37:28 +0000

There may be a ton of them but I would wager that 99 percent of those you speak of are decent law abiding citizens who never bother a soul. And there is no law against them stockpiling all the weapons and ammo they want. Just because you don’t agree with it or think they “need” it doesn’t make it wrong or against the law.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 02:26:14 +0000

I don’t think that any doctor needed the Affordable Care Act to ask the question about guns in the home and I don’t think the ACA requires anybody to answer that question either. I totally agree it’s a stupid provision of the bill but once again I fail to see how it infringes on your Second Amendment rights. You revert once again to the slippery slope instead of dealing with the merits of the argument or the reality of the vast support for gun rights. You’re happy to call out lefties who would ban all weapons but what about all the right wing nuts who stockpile weaponry sufficient to fight world war three? There are tons of them but they always seem to get a pass from the right.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 02:21:37 +0000

Let me give you a hypothetical situation to illustrate my point about high-capacity magazines. Admittedly, the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with self-defense, but just suppose a woman is in her house with her children and someone breaks in with evil intent. Would it not be better for her to be armed with a pistol with a double-stacked magazine containing 19 rounds, instead of a single magazine with 10 rounds? What happens if there are more than one or two perpetrators?

My point is, high-capacity magazines do have a legitimate purpose in the hands of a law-abiding citizen. Banning them because a crazy person went on a shooting rampage using a weapon that utilized such a magazine is not the right approach.

As a side note, if I had my choice of a self-defense weapon for the home, it would be a sawed-off shotgun with a pump action. 12 gauge with a 5-round magazine and several other rounds attached to the butt of the gun. Something about the sound of a shell being racked into the chamber should be enough to make anyone think twice about doing me or my family harm. If that doesn’t work, Mr. Buckshot would make its case even better.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 02:09:29 +0000

Trust me when I say Wal-Mart not selling a particular type of gun will not affect the ownership of the kinds of guns the proposed legislation would ban. There are many places to purchase a gun besides Wal-Mart or other big retailer.

By: GD Jackson

GD Jackson — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 01:57:04 +0000

One of the executive orders is to make sure the Affordable Care Act, (read obamacare), doesn’t prevent a doctor from asking questions about guns in the home. They already ask questions of children and adults alike if they feel safe in their home or if they feel threatened in their home, things like that. I went to the DR last Friday for the flu and was asked if I felt depressed or threatened or unsafe. I can’t wait until I’m at the DR for myself or my child and they ask if we have guns in the home. I will flat tell them it is none of their business, which it is not. Just another way to intrude in our lives.

And I will repeat this as I did in another comment.

The end goal for the gun control people is a total ban and confiscation of all firearms and if they get their foot in the door with some sort of ban on assault weapons or high capacity magazines they won’t stop until they get the rest of them.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 01:43:11 +0000

No, that’s not what I am saying at all. My point is simple. Far too many gun control advocates have made villains out of AR-15-type weapons and high capacity magazines, all because some crazy person went on a shooting rampage. Because of these shootings, they have decided the millions of law-abiding citizens who have legally purchased their weapons and magazines should not be allowed to purchase more of the same. Many of them would like to confiscate those weapons, if they could get their way. Why should law-abiding citizens be punished for the actions of these shooters? What gives any politician or gun control advocate the right to ban these weapons? I say they have no right. The bans they seek will do absolutely no good to keep these weapons out of the hands of the people who would abuse them.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 01:39:06 +0000

“Gun control works best at the state level.” I agree with that 100%. I wish Obama had left this alone and just allowed the states to do what they want to do. You can like what FL has done and dislike what NY and IL have done but I hope you respect the right of those states to act as they see fit. But that also requires individuals to respect state borders and state law. No, you cannot carry concealed in NY even if you have a VT license to do so. Is that okay with you?

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 01:33:28 +0000

If I interpret you correctly then you’re basically saying that anything law abiding citizens want they’re entitled to have and the government has no legal right to ban anything. Do you think fully automatic weapons would be okay to sell openly to the public? I doubt it — I’ve certainly never heard you advocate for that. The line, as I said earlier, is what’s at issue here. You believe the line should lie between fully automatic and semiautomatic weapons. Gun control folks who aren’t all the way to the left on this think the line lies on the other side of semiautomatic rifles. The issue is not nearly as draconian as you and others make it out to be.