*
David Melson

Candidates take aim at gun owners

Posted Sunday, September 23, 2007, at 10:44 PM
Comments
View 8 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Very well stated...

    Guns will always be around, and I think we should not over rule the 2nd amendment... But I do agree, that each and every gun and its owner should be registered in a database, just like people and their automobiles are.

    We will never take the guns away, regardless if we make it illegal to have them, because pot, cocaine, crack, and meth or all illegal and their sales and users are still at all time highs. In other words, if selling guns becomes illegal, then there in lies a new black market, this time for deadly weapons.

    But, just like with illegal drugs, you can arrest a person for using or having them in their posession, but that doesn't prevent them from obtaining it again.

    -- Posted by darrick_04 on Mon, Sep 24, 2007, at 7:48 AM
  • agreed. There are lots of guns that aren't good for much but target practice, collecting and killing a man with one shot to the right area. Although, I do not own any AK-47's I wouldn't mind popping off a few rounds just to say that I have. =) Criminals get most of their guns by means of stealing them, which as ironic as it may seem is why most law abiding citizens buy them, to keep people from stealing our stuff. If you own any "serious kill a bunch of people in a few seconds, military grade weapons" they should be stored in a LOCKED gun safe. I assure you that you won't need much more than a 38 to stop a robber/home intruder in his/her tracks, so that gun safe with trigger locks should be no inconvience to you.

    -- Posted by LauraSFT on Mon, Sep 24, 2007, at 8:02 AM
  • I believe the original intent of the 2nd amendment was to allow for a "citizen army". It was also a right that the forefathers put in place so that the people of this country would have the means to hold off an enemy attack. This being the case, I believe that RESPONSIBLE citizens should be allowed to own and maintain assault rifles in their homes as long as they are secured. It's not that I think that Bedford county is going to be invaded (at least not any more than it already is), but with the second amendment intact, we have the means to defend ourselves if it is.

    -- Posted by Thom on Mon, Sep 24, 2007, at 12:27 PM
  • I think some of the paranoia about gun control these days is based on the fear that we might have to defend ourselves against our own government. I agree that most of the radical groups hoarding arms and going undergroud are nuts, but not all paranoids are crazy.

    -- Posted by devan on Mon, Sep 24, 2007, at 1:34 PM
  • Actually, the reason they want the citizens to have guns is to overthrow a possible dictator if they ever gained control....hey wait a minute....

    -- Posted by Evil Monkey on Mon, Sep 24, 2007, at 3:55 PM
  • Evil Monkey, I was going to mention that part, but I knew where it would head. I'm much more concerned with the politicians that are trying to limit our right to bear arms, and everyone else should be as well. As far as the people being paranoid, it's not paranoia if everyone's really out to get you.

    -- Posted by Thom on Mon, Sep 24, 2007, at 5:06 PM
  • I agree with the majority of the aticle, but a national registry would ultimately be used for confiscation as soon as the winds of political change shifted direction. Indeed, there is already a rather underhanded registry kept through forms used in background checks. However, those papers are thrown out after 20 years. I really don't want people knowing what I have when they decide it's time to take it. It's happened in much of Europe and Austraila, at the urging of "concerned gun safety" activists. Ironically but predictably, the confiscations have done anything by reduce gun crime.

    Even if a registry were created, I would not comply. Such a thing could never be used in order to stop crimes or anything of that nature- the "ballistic fingerprinting" of CSI is a bunch of Hollywood myth, and "microstamped pistol parts" are another crock. It would only be used to harass law abiding gun owners- say that someone is killed with a .45 caliber handgun. They have no way of knowing what gun it came from- even after all of that ballistic analysis (Ask Maryland what they think about it). At most, police could tell the type of bullet and caliber. That leaves them with only millions and millions of .45 caliber handguns and rifles out there. They would have to check everyone with a .45 ACP, .45 Colt, .45 GAP and every other caliber sharing a common diameter. Then they would have to harass every person who owns a weapon in those cartridges to be even remotely objective in many shootings.

    The registry is just another means of encroachment on the rights of gun owners. While it may sound nice and pretty on the surface, it will do no good, and it will be used by the gun control gang as soon as they get the chance.

    -- Posted by Cstrad on Mon, Sep 24, 2007, at 7:44 PM
  • When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. Count me in as an outlaw.

    -- Posted by rebel4ever37 on Thu, Sep 27, 2007, at 1:23 PM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: