Friday, April 5, 2013 9:10:09 PM
@jops360 Wow, just wow! Were you paid by the gun lobbyists to show how mad the anti-gun people were?
This woman doesn't know the difference between a magazine and a bullet, yet she presumes to legislate on them, and you go off like a madman spouting all kinds of inconsistencies, and with terrible grammar and punctuation.
Friday, April 5, 2013 4:10:12 PM
crakerjak - http://www.snopes.com /politics/guns/untreaty.asp had to space it out the treaty you mention has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. it is to stop INTERNATIONAL sales of weapons. the president cannot ban ALL guns. this is just a scare tactic the right threw out to make people scared. just like the one about obama not being american. this is nothing but another way you guys are trying to scare people into thinking like you do. shame on you for pushing this pile of trash.
Friday, April 5, 2013 3:49:10 PM
we are not trying to save ALL life. there will always be death and murders. the whole idea here is to LIMIT it. if we use your guys notion why dont we stop giving out DWI's. how about not making sure pilots or doctors have appropriate licenses? people die everyday in the hospital, in their cars and on airplanes right. why limit their freedoms, oh i know, because it hurts those that are around them. they are not trying to take away ALL guns. you can still buy shotguns, rifles, and handguns. they are just trying to stop the sale of firearms that are easily turned into fully-automatic killing machines. i know it wont stop the killing but it is at least a start. there will always be someone who will find a way to get around it, be it a handmade gun or holding multiple guns, but thats where the police come in. remember this, its not just your freedoms, its others as well. others want to know that one of these gun nuts doesnt go overboard because of fox news and start shooting up the block.
Friday, April 5, 2013 3:28:11 PM
5kats/paperduck - you are correct handguns should also be in the ban since they do near all of the killings. also the government does help provent deaths. they have proven this with things like the seat-belt laws, the alcohol limit, and other laws. so whats so wrong with this law? whats so wrong with taking away guns that have only one purpose of existence(killing people). call asault weapons whatever you want, they are designed for war. they were made to kill people very efficiently. rarely does anyone actually use them for hunting. they are bought for two things, showing off and murder. they can easily be obtained by anyone, without a background check and they need to be taken away. simple legislation is all they want yet it is just to hard for you to swallow.
Friday, April 5, 2013 3:15:53 PM
dromed - how does that compare to what i am saying. they already over tax gas, liqueur and tobacco. what i am saying is to cut those taxes and replace the income with a tax on firearms and ammo. seems like a good idea. first, the government wont want to limit the sale because they would make money off of it. second, it would actually help people since gas, liqueur and cigs would cost less. these items are bought by far more people than ammo/guns, it would allow normal people to save a little more back instead of spending it at the pump and it might actually stop people from buying guns/ammo. you are just mad because you dont want anything to happen to your precious guns. any simple legislation to limit the crazy peoples ability to obtain them, let alone, any thought of even looking into just how bad the situation actually is, is just to much. no one is going to take away your ability to protect your family, they are just trying to starve off some of the more drastic ways of doing it.