Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason
anyone watch cnn or msnbc lately? they’re in a complete uproar over something that’s been written in this country’s constitution. they think it’s there for their interpretation. there’s a big difference between anti-gun and anti-violence and the media wants everyone to believe they are the same.
imagine having to rely solely on the police for your own wellbeing. would you choose a gun or a cell phone if you had to face a knife yeilding criminal in your home? this just in, police to not have to risk their lives for anyone nor are they required to respond to any call
:bigthumb:
X1000000000000000000000000000
Finally this country has done something right as of late.
people kill people legal or not.
For all of you morons that are going to vote for McCain based on this decision :doh: This is DC vs. Heller, not PA. Having guns in DC is just stupid. Have any of you even been there? Baltimore/Houston/DC fight for the 1,2,3 murder capitals in the USA. Why would we want guns there? And what Obama is saying is 100% correct, it’s not teeter tottering…
Obama:
“I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today’s ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country.
“As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact common-sense laws, like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Today’s decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.”
so you don’t want people in their homes to be able to protect themselves in the most dangerous cities in the world? that’s the only issue at hand here. i support common sense gun laws, i’m not a felon and i couldn’t give a rats ass if the state knows i have a gun…but to say no one is allowed to have a legal means of protecting themselves from a home invasion is insane
no one in this thread supports violence, guns do not equate violence. take away guns and see what happens to violence…not a damn thing, criminals are criminals, they do not care what the law says
I support home defense, If the wife gets loud pop a cap in her ass.
You got to be fucking joking right?
If i was president, I’d ban all bullet sales and replace it with rubber one’s.
so if anyone replaced the rubber with lead clear cut case of trying to kill someone :finger:
If other countries like england and canada have alot less gun violence we can too. Just slash a throat instead.
:bowrofl:
this is the internet dark…there are no more bounderys…and besides sire…one mind alone cannot think of all possiblilitys;but many minds can when compeating in the arena of idea’s .
For all of you morons that are going to vote for McCain based on this decision This is DC vs. Heller, not PA. Having guns in DC is just stupid. Have any of you even been there? Baltimore/Houston/DC fight for the 1,2,3 murder capitals in the USA. Why would we want guns there?
There already are guns there- hence the 1,2,3 murder capitals in the USA competition. The guns are owned by criminals. Criminals break the law. Criminals do not listen to the law. The law prohibits murder. Criminals still kill people. The laws there prohibit guns. Criminals still have guns. Why? Because they’re criminals.
Law abiding people don’t break the law. Law abiding people don’t murder people, because it’s illegal. Law abiding people in Washington, DC, didn’t have guns, because guns were illegal.
So- with guns illegal, we have a situation where criminals are armed (because, by nature, criminals break the law), and law abiding folks are not (because, by nature, law abiding citizens do not break the law). Does this seem like a good thing to you? Do you think that leaving law abiding citizens defenseless against criminals is a good idea?
blah blah blah
law abiding citizens still break the law, add alcohol instant idiot.
law abiding citizens still break the law
That’s impossible. If someone is breaking the law, by definition they’re no longer a law abiding citizen.
only if they get caught
There is no gun show loophole, that’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Have you ever bought a gun at a gun show? The dealers are required to do a BG check, just like at a gun store. Common sense gun laws?? Do some research on Obama’s voting record on guns and gun owners. He voted (on a specific case) in IL to make a man’s defense of his home with a legally owned and registered firearm illegal, yet the law passed overwhelmingly to support the man’s actions and make them legal. Yeah, he’s a real friend of gun owners.
And one more thing… all you gun haters pay close attention to this one…THE 2ND AMENDMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HUNTING!
“Keep and bear” translated to modern language = “own and carry” It’s not just about in the home.
there is a town in ohio where the city made an ordanance requiering all lawfull citizens to have a hand gun on them at all times if over the age of 21 years…crime droppd by 99%…look it up
u say it,u LOOK it up!:wtcslap:
Hell why bring up ohio, when it has happened in PA.
http://www.pafoa.org/forum/pennsylvania-10/1349-civil-protection-ordinance.html