Hide your Guns…Here it comes!

  • big_g
    Isle, MN
    Posts: 22456
    #48202

    Totally. Some have higher morals than others. I guess laws are written for those who need them and the rest of us are along for the ride. As sad as it may be, it is true, has been for ages. Really guys, this time I am done with this thread. I have spent way too much time and energy, trying to point out, the title of this thread is misleading. How we get off into other areas, is not my doing. Like riverratt says, if anything, at least we may learn something from posts like this, but quite honestly, I don’t feel any smarter….

    big G

    Don Hanson
    Posts: 2073
    #48203

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a study last week that states there is no evidence to prove gun-control laws are effective in preventing violence. No kidding. There always has been substance to the cliche that guns don’t kill people, people do. Correlative to that rule is that the criminals who use guns to kill usually possess their weapons illegally. These serial lawbreakers are not deterred by statutes prohibiting or regulating gun ownership. They will continue to use guns to commit violent crimes even if the rest of the population of sitting ducks are disarmed.

    In the exhaustive brief, the CDC analyzed scientific evidence regarding “bans on specified firearms and ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition [including waiting periods], firearm registration and licensing, concealed-carry laws, child-access-prevention laws, zero-tolerance laws for firearms in schools and combinations of firearms laws.” The verdict? “The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.” The task force also concluded that “firearms-related injuries in the United States have declined since 1993” despite the fact that “approximately 4.5 million new firearms are sold each year.”

    The CDC maintains that the above conclusions are actually inconclusive, and that more research in needed. Given that a task force of 14 experts spent three years to review 51 different studies to come up with the findings, the only justification for the CDC’s equivocation is that the authorities want to continue to research the issue until they reach findings that can be stretched to justify more government regulation.

    All the taxpayer funds spent on this exercise are a waste of cash. Last year, the CDC spent $400,000 on gun reports. That isn’t much compared to the $2.6 million they spent on gun studies in 1995 during the Clinton administration. We don’t need expensive government studies to convince us that gun-control laws don’t make communities safer. When taking away law-abiding citizens’ right to defend themselves, it has always been obvious that the only people who become more safe are criminals who mug, rape, carjack and break into our homes. However, many of these same thugs will think twice before victimizing someone who might be packing heat.

    It is offensive when liberals blanketly suggest that the average American isn’t responsible enough to own a gun, and that increased gun control is needed to stop gun violence. Crimes committed by those who own guns legally are a statistical blip. The same goes for accidents. The new CDC report is welcome in that it confirms what has long been known: There is no proof that gun-control laws prevent violence.

    alanmdk
    Posts: 222
    #48204

    Post deleted by Walls_Calls

    big_g
    Isle, MN
    Posts: 22456
    #48214

    I won’t even attempt to insult someone I do not know. Call it my nature.

    big G

    Don Hanson
    Posts: 2073
    #48220

    Why would you have to insult anyone?

    big_g
    Isle, MN
    Posts: 22456
    #48222

    I know I am not a blind sheep, who is asleep…. don’t know how someone I have never met, can come to that conclusion. I refuse to stoop to that level, that’s all.

    big G

    riveratt
    Central Wisconsin US-of-A
    Posts: 1464
    #48223

    I’m not sure I follow the 14 year old and beer analogy. Raising the age doesn’t prevent minors from getting beer. At all. I was buying beer since I was in 9th grade (1989-90) with no troubles and no fake ID. Buying beer for a minor is illegal yes. Does it stop it? No. Maybe that isn’t the best comparison?

    Now we have gotten to the assumption, or stretch of the imagination, that legal gun owners are the suppliers of arms to criminals? Seriously? It is already illegal for a legal gun buyer to knowingly buy a gun for a felon. It’s called a straw purchase. Does it still happen? Of course! But for a guy advertising his deer rifle in the paper to sell it why should he have to feel responsible for doing a background check? When someone sells a car do they check to see if the buyer has had any DWI’s? Speeding tickets? Maybe we ought to give our car to the government and let them sell it for us. I’m sure no one would object right?

    I’m obviously not one interested in inviting the government into my daily routines. I’ve made it this far in life knowing right from wrong and I am very positive I don’t need some corrupt political office taking over from here. Everyone does understand our elected officials are, by and far, less ethical than Average Joe right?

    It still baffles the BS out of me how people can somehow think that further suppressing those that DO NOT BREAK THE LAW will have the slightest impact on those that do. Completely irrational thought process. Think of it like this. If the cops started to pull over non speeders and issued them citations for not wearing seat belts does anyone think others would suddenly begin wearing seat belts and slowing down?

    alanmdk
    Posts: 222
    #48224

    Post deleted by Walls_Calls

    Don Hanson
    Posts: 2073
    #48240

    We have varying view points on a very important issue gentleman. Lets make sure we keep the comments general. In another words, lets not take personal shots at each other. If it continues this thread will be locked down and I don’t want that to happen.

    robstenger
    Northern Twin Cities, MN
    Posts: 11374
    #48244

    Good Point Don. We have yet to do that here, but we will. We do not accept members attacking or insulting other members. We are all Sportsmen here and are on the same Team. We @ IDO have no problem of letting members express their opinion, but lets keep the personal attacks out of it. Thank You!

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #48248

    Good post Don! Some good points of view coming out here.

    Walls, you have a PM re your display name.

    travis_eckman
    Trempealeau County, WI
    Posts: 424
    #48255

    Can’t we all get along…Far too much poo in this world not to!!! Instead of bashing try to educate…before others can accept your opinion(s) you must be willing to accept thier views first!

    alanmdk
    Posts: 222
    #48205

    I deleted my previous post because they were seen as attacks. That was not my intention, and missread post do nothing.

    When it comes the time I will gladly stand beside any member here who wishes to defend our constitution. Weather it be with a pen, phone, or god forbid the gun, I will fight for the freedoms outlined on that piece of paper that was signed with the blood of our forefathers.

    CW

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #48206

    “Stuff” happens with the written word.

    farmboy1
    Mantorville, MN
    Posts: 3668
    #48266

    I just received this via email. It is from the NRA with their spin, but I thought there were some interested parties here.

    Hearing Postponed Indefinitely for Minnesota Gun Registration Bill
    Due to Overwhelming Member Opposition, Committee Pulls HF 953 from Calendar.
    Late last night, House File 953, introduced by State Representative Michael Paymar (DFL-64B), was removed from the schedule of the House Crime Victims/Criminal Records Division Committee. Though the bill will not be heard on Friday, it is not dead, as another committee could bring it up in the future.

    This bill was designed to not only regulate the sale of firearms at gun shows, but to regulate the sale of firearms between law-abiding persons, all across Minnesota. As a whole, HF 953 will only affect law-abiding gun owners, and in no way keeps guns out of the hands of criminals.

    A particularly troublesome provision in HF 953 creates a de facto registration system by requiring records of all transfers to be maintained by the state. These records would be made available to all authorities, including for use in “civil” cases, which are often brought by anti-gun government officials and are designed to damage or interfere with lawful commerce in firearms.

    HF 953 is a direct attack on Minnesota’s gun rights. It also removes the carry permit holders’ exemption from the purchase permit requirement for all handgun or semi-automatic rifle purchases, not just those completed at gun shows, and increases the waiting period from five to seven days.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #48267

    Until next time.

Viewing 17 posts - 61 through 77 (of 77 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.