In the wake of the mass shooting in October at a Pittsburgh synagogue, a bill was just introduced this past week before the city council that will make it a crime to transport, sell or own AR type rifles, bump stocks, ammo and high capacity mags within the Pittsburgh city limits. It will be interesting to see how far the bill goes.
Gun control
Collapse
X
-
It is too bad that emotions get in the way of common sense. A country with over 300 million citizens has a few nut cases that do terrible things, and the first thing the liberals want to do is restrict other people's rights. These actions in no way are going to stop another crazy person from doing a criminal act. Governments seem to go out of their way to take firearms away from lawful owners, but do little to keep them out of the hands of criminals. I like the Texas system of every body carrying. There are no easy solution, but a knee jerk reaction is not usually correct.Comment
-
This forum is generally against actions to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. They say any such measures will have a 0% probability of being 100% effective, but will have a 100% probability of >0% added inconvenience to law abiding gun owners. Therefore, don't do them. That is the standard articulated here and in the pro-gun world in general. So if government "does little", it's a feature of the system, not a bug.Comment
-
One thing for sure: laws don't affect the criminals.It is too bad that emotions get in the way of common sense. A country with over 300 million citizens has a few nut cases that do terrible things, and the first thing the liberals want to do is restrict other people's rights. These actions in no way are going to stop another crazy person from doing a criminal act. Governments seem to go out of their way to take firearms away from lawful owners, but do little to keep them out of the hands of criminals. I like the Texas system of every body carrying. There are no easy solution, but a knee jerk reaction is not usually correct.
It's all an act to de-arm the majority so the government can impose police power and full control at will.Comment
-
Comment
-
Obama was supposed to take your guns too. Meanwhile, the current POTUS suggested we put due process in the backseat.This forum is generally against actions to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. They say any such measures will have a 0% probability of being 100% effective, but will have a 100% probability of >0% added inconvenience to law abiding gun owners. Therefore, don't do them. That is the standard articulated here and in the pro-gun world in general. So if government "does little", it's a feature of the system, not a bug.
At this point a Democrat wanting to exercise gun control is more trustworthy than a President who operates chiefly on the principles of political expedience.
Who's going to sell law abiding gun owner's up the river when the sh!t hits the fan? Even after Sandyhook, Obama knew the laws."The first gun that was fired at Fort Sumter sounded the death-knell of slavery. They who fired it were the greatest practical abolitionists this nation has produced." ~BG D. UllmanComment
-
Yeah, but it's California. Guns are front page news. Or low hanging fruit. They are going to be weird about everything.
What bugs me, is the shootings. Kids shooting kids is bad(very bad, as Pres. Trump would say).
Anyway, it's darn near Christmas(can I capitalize that?) and I hope you all are having a great winter.If I should die before I wake...great,a little more sleep.Comment
-
"If people want to have guns then join the SS!" Henrich Himmler. Would "our" National Socialists like to comment on this?
SamComment

Comment