[Beyond The Wall]

Just because you own a firearm does not make you a right wing nut job. Get training, go practice and be prepared. If the recent events, pandemic and “mostly peaceful” protest have taught us anything is rely on yourselves and be prepared.

Also “ Due to the high cost of ammunition, no warning shots will be fired!

[Westie Man]

But I don't currently own a gun

[VApeople]

Even though we may disagree about the use of firearms, maybe we can agree this is a great song.

Waylon Jennings "The Devil's Right Hand" - YouTube

[stan the man]

NO anonymous voting..........

[Freehiker]

Originally Posted by David Fletcher

The facts do not bear out that owning a gun gives you any extra protection or safety.

I guess the police and military carry guns just to look cool then...

[dougjb]

I am fully in support of the Second Amendment as it would properly be interpreted by strict originalists on the Supreme Court (of which, some claim to be but, in reality, none are).

By that I mean, any citizen should be allowed to own as many muzzle loading rifles as they wish (since that was really the only weapon available when the Bill of Rights was adopted). Citizens can also own as many muzzle loading cannons as they wish. But, as to any other gun, rifle or armament, absolutlely not. No other guns should be allowed under an originalist's view of the Second Amendment. All armaments other than muzzle loaders should be confiscated and after a reasonable time for compliance, the owners should be prosecuted. There is NO need for anyone to possess or use the type of weaponry now available.

[Pedrocarrasco01@yahoo.com]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I don't own a firearm and I won't own a firearm. I do own a bow and have a quiver of arrows, but I'm also not a hunter.

If I ever felt the need to catch my own food, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot down a deer for supper. I wouldn't feel guilty about murdering Bambi.

But I won't use a weapon to kill something I don't plan on consuming. And as such - I will never use a weapon against another human being.

I have no problem with other people choosing to own a firearm for self-defense or target shooting (which is fun, at least with archery).

I do have a problem with ANY people doing that though. I feel firearms need to have controls, checks and balances. It needs to be national. In every state in this country, you need a license to drive a car, and that license requires a written test, an eye test, and an actual driving test. I feel it is not unreasonable to require the same for anyone wanting a license to own a firearm. You have to know the laws of your state and the regulations for using it, you have to prove you're capable of seeing the target, and you have to prove you know how to use it properly.

I think that's reasonable. Sadly that's not the case in this country, some states don't care one way or another and some states have so many restrictions it's easier to just not bother at all.

I own several, I would die first than allow any confiscation, I was born in Cuba, came over in 1962, the first thing that Fidel Castro did was to confiscate all the guns from the people, after that he established communism, it was easy since the population could not revolt, therefore 2% of the population controlled 98% of it, he also established “revolutionary committees” which was a family set up on each block that their job was to find out what each family within the block was up to including eavesdropping on them.
We live in trying times, I saw what is happening here already in Cuba, the riots, looting, defunding of the police, misinformation, the media control, whether you believe it or not, those are communist tactics, please don’t say “It won’t happen here” I remember my father saying that too, I also remember the same scenario happened in Venezuela, total control of the people is their goal and they are getting closer to it. MAY GOD BLESS MY COUNTRY AMERICA, LAND OF THE FREE.

[kanoa1kale2]

Originally Posted by Mrprez

It is illegal to be sitting at a bar drinking while in possession of a firearm.

Depends on what you are drinking!

[George Page]

Only a fool would respond to this survey.
Oops, I think I just did.

[Malsua]

Originally Posted by dougjb

I am fully in support of the Second Amendment as it would properly be interpreted by strict originalists on the Supreme Court (of which, some claim to be but, in reality, none are).

By that I mean, any citizen should be allowed to own as many muzzle loading rifles as they wish (since that was really the only weapon available when the Bill of Rights was adopted). Citizens can also own as many muzzle loading cannons as they wish. But, as to any other gun, rifle or armament, absolutlely not. No other guns should be allowed under an originalist's view of the Second Amendment. All armaments other than muzzle loaders should be confiscated and after a reasonable time for compliance, the owners should be prosecuted. There is NO need for anyone to possess or use the type of weaponry now available.

The second amendment is very clear. The federalist papers and other writings clarify it further. The point was to prevent government from having a monopoly on violence and that the people should be the final check on government by having equivalent arms. Not many muskets teams in the Marines are there?

By your interpretation, get out the printing press or quill because that's the only freedom of expression that is protected speech.

One day all will realize how wrong guns are, or any other object kept as a weapon. The only reason to believe that guns are necessary to protect life and/or property is if you believe this life is all there is. If you take another life, or harm another, even in defense of some form, you will have to make amends to the one harmed. Heaven is not what you think it is. And yes, the same is true for war and soldiers, although for most soldiers who were teenagers those who trained them may be just as culpable. Pooh pooh this now, that’s ok. You will eventually see the truth of it.

[peglegnc]

Probably would own handgun if wife wasn’t so adamantly opposed. Much prefer happy wife over owning handgun.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I don't own a firearm and I won't own a firearm. I do own a bow and have a quiver of arrows, but I'm also not a hunter.

If I ever felt the need to catch my own food, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot down a deer for supper. I wouldn't feel guilty about murdering Bambi.

But I won't use a weapon to kill something I don't plan on consuming. And as such - I will never use a weapon against another human being.

I have no problem with other people choosing to own a firearm for self-defense or target shooting (which is fun, at least with archery).

I do have a problem with ANY people doing that though. I feel firearms need to have controls, checks and balances. It needs to be national. In every state in this country, you need a license to drive a car, and that license requires a written test, an eye test, and an actual driving test. I feel it is not unreasonable to require the same for anyone wanting a license to own a firearm. You have to know the laws of your state and the regulations for using it, you have to prove you're capable of seeing the target, and you have to prove you know how to use it properly.

I think that's reasonable. Sadly that's not the case in this country, some states don't care one way or another and some states have so many restrictions it's easier to just not bother at all.

I don't own one. I reserve the right to own one in the future. And if the riots keep happening and the ummm unrest spreads, that may be sooner than later.

To all reading this;

And their children and grandchildren;

If a cop says stop.

STOP!

[Pmarlow]

Originally Posted by dougjb

I am fully in support of the Second Amendment as it would properly be interpreted by strict originalists on the Supreme Court (of which, some claim to be but, in reality, none are).

By that I mean, any citizen should be allowed to own as many muzzle loading rifles as they wish (since that was really the only weapon available when the Bill of Rights was adopted). Citizens can also own as many muzzle loading cannons as they wish. But, as to any other gun, rifle or armament, absolutlely not. No other guns should be allowed under an originalist's view of the Second Amendment. All armaments other than muzzle loaders should be confiscated and after a reasonable time for compliance, the owners should be prosecuted. There is NO need for anyone to possess or use the type of weaponry now available.

You obviously don’t know what the constitution says and even why it says what it does. The constitution says “we have the right to bear arms.” If you read the Federalists Papers the reason for this is so the people can protect themselves and their property from others including the government if the government doesn’t live up to its responsibilities as defined in the Constitution.

[stadry]

we probably have as many as we need but not as many as we want