Gunowner quiz on Obama

[soberups]

In matters such as the drinking age, I may lean toward the state handling there own populus rather than the Feds. But I still feel if you can fight and die for this country than you should be treated as an adult.
The state law was 18 when I became legal (which was changed to 21 soon after), maybe I'm a little biased....

How hypocritical. You would deny college students their constitutional 2nd amendment rights, yet you feel that they should be allowed to drink alcohol---which kills FAR more people than guns do. If they are old enough to "die for their country", they should be old enough to decide how best to protect themselves.

 

[soberups]

Chaos brings chaos. Your gun will only add to it.
What about the gunmans rights (not that I care about them) isnt he entitled to due process for his crimes or would you be Judge, Jury and Executioner?
Think about it.

One gun equals a massacre. Two guns equals a fair fight. I like balanced equations.

I also feel my right to survival supercedes a murderer's right to a fair trial. I dont want to be a judge, jury or executioner. I just want to go home alive to my family. It is ridiculous to imply that defending yourself is somehow a violation of the due process rights of the person who is trying to murder you.

 

[sortaisle]

Both sides have there good points. I've lived in Los Angeles, Ca Vancouver, WA(Portland Or) and Spokane, WA. Living in LA you can see the effects that guns have on the communities down there. However, most of the guns down there are completely unregistered or stolen (trust me). In Portland and Spokane, most of the guns are registered and there isn't even a tenth of the gun violence you see in LA. This is going to turn out to be just like the prohibition ban of alcohol. People are going to get guns wether the government wants them to or not. And good luck shutting down the companies that make the guns in a free market society like ours. I however completely am in favor of gun rights. I have no problem whatsoever with the waiting period on buying firearms. I would rather be on an even playing field in the very unlikely event that someone tries to harm me or mine. I don't think that ammunition needs to have the same death tax put on it like alcohol or cigarettes, they won't kill you eventually from common usage like liquor or cigarettes. Loosing someone to gunfire is a terrible way to go. But there's vehicular homicides, stabbing, and poisoning with common everyday ingredients. Are you willing to regulate those things as well because they can pose a danger? If those kids who take guns to school shoot other kids, the tragedy is in the way the kids behavior was ignored and got to escalate to that point. If guns weren't allowed, it would've have been a knife or a hatchet or a bat.

 

[diesel96]

How hypocritical. You would deny college students their constitutional 2nd amendment rights, yet you feel that they should be allowed to drink alcohol---which kills FAR more people than guns do. If they are old enough to "die for their country", they should be old enough to decide how best to protect themselves.

Your straying again Sober....I not against gun ownership.......just respect the law in place of the state, and the policies of the Universities. If you can lobby the players to change the law I would respct that to even if I disagreed with it. But I still think we should lower the drinking age, but like I said, stricter laws enforcing DWI among 18-21 yr olds and making sure they understand it.

 

[The Other Side]

Sober, I am only curious on your postion on what I posted about liabilities??

All the other stuff you wrote about is not what I asked.

Are you willing to assume responsibility if you were at a school, a person walked on campus, began firing in a classroom, you took out your concealed weapon and began a shootout with the guy and either "his" or "your" bullets hit innocent persons causing an "accidental" death(s)???

Would you feel responsible? Should you face prosecution?

The defense of the shooter could claim, that his client was only using self defense as "you" were shooting at him...and while you were doing so, you shot innocent people causing death.

Wouldnt that make you just as guilty? or do you feel that "you" would be exempt from any liability?

So many things would have to go perfectly for "you" to remedy the situation yourself. Maybe the perpetrator would stand still for you while you took out your gun, undid the the safety, loaded the clip, aimed and squeezed the trigger.

When (in our system of justice) would the shooter face the legal system?

Before or after "you" killed him?

Wouldnt that make us vigilante's? And would'nt that just open the door to many more shootings in other situations?

What if I was at the grocery store, and a man walked in, took out a pistol, pointed it at the clerk, asked for the money, I took out my pistol, made a demand for him to drop his weapon, he fires at me and i shoot back killing the clerk accidentally, should the robber face a murder charge or I?

There are many intangibles to think about when it comes to guns. What I am asking you about is the many circumstances "after" the fact. Would you agree that the family of any child killed as a result of a firefight you started with your gun, could sue you in court for damages? Would you think that was fair?

These are important questions that need answers before we allow anyone to carry a weapon on a campus.

Where I live, there are many cities trying to get guns off the streets.

Shootings happen everyday, homes, businesses, freeways & playgrounds.

It all depends where we live. Our perspectives will all be different.

People in compton could give a rats behind about the 2nd amendment.

The guns on the street are uzi's, ak47's, glocks and mini assault rifles.

Tell the mother of a young person killed there, that the shooter had a constitutional right to carry a firearm whether she liked it or not.

 

[Bad Gas!]

Kill em will kindness....by peace loving Jimmy Carter...LOL

Get real....If you don't won't to carry a gun don't..But don't take away people's rights to bare arms....The libs never cease to amaze!

 

[trplnkl]

The issue of guns will have many scenarios. The "superman" scenario that you describe while carrying your concealed weapon may sound like the ultimate solution, but there are many factors that have to go completely perfect in order for this to be successful.
Yet it has tons more chance of being successful than fighting off a killer with and BIC and a notebook.

The problem with gun owners who think that they can bring down someone is always from a point of view after the fact. Studies show, gun owners are typically more likely to have their own weapons used on them versus the perpetrator.
Wrong, there are many documented cases where a would be killer was stopped DEAD in his tracks by a responsible gun owner, saving only God knows how many lives.
I sure would like to see a link or two to these "studies"?

But the real issue here is how politicians use guns to get us (the citizens) to fight with one another every 4 years.

The politicians know that the country is divided on guns and gun ownership. While there are some grounds of acceptance, guns still represent evil in many communities in many cities.

In some rural part of the country guns may be a way of life and people understand this, but in a city like Compton California, guns are hated and citizens are outraged that they exist on the city streets.

It isnt a matter of the 2nd amendment in Compton as it would be in rural america.

There will always be a diiference of opinion with respect for guns and the politicians know that all they have to do is mention it during a campaign and we will do the rest.
Bumbo Jumbo to distract from the true discussion.

There is NO credible evidence that outlawing guns will be on the agenda of an OBAMA presidency and to believe such is to participate in the circus that is the campaign.
There is credible evidence that if a bill putting severe restraints on guns and/or ammo gets to Obama (as President) he will sign it.

As for people carrying guns on campus. What about liability? There are thousands of "negative" scenarios to consider. What if "your" concealed weapon had to be drawn because someone was shooting on campus and you took out your gun and began firind trying to take the person down and in the process, you inadvertently shot and killed a couple of bystanders with "missed" shots?
A responsible gun owner doesn't yank out his/her gun and randomly spray bullets around hoping to stop the nut job. They know what their weapon is capable of and they also know what they are doing.

Should you be held liable?
To be decided by a DA or a grand jury

Should you be put in jail?
To be decided by a DA or a grand jury
What should the penalty be for this?
To be decided by a DA or a grand jury
Do you get a pass from killing innocent persons because you were in superman mode?
This is far from your degrading assumption of a "superman mode".

The gun can be empowering indeed, but there is always a down side to its use.
Not always, your amount of knowledge of this subject is becoming very obvious.

As I said in the begining, there would have to be a perfect scenario in order for you to protect anyone.
As I replied in the beginning, it's better 'n nuttin.

Chaos brings chaos. Your gun will only add to it.
Wrong again.
What about the gunmans rights (not that I care about them) isnt he entitled to due process for his crimes or would you be Judge, Jury and Executioner?
Now this is bleeding heart liberal poppycock at it's best. You're worried about the rights of a person that is (at a given time) killing people at random? HE gets what he deserves if he is dropped on the spot.

Think about it.
Give us something to think about, so far you have failed miserably

 

[trplnkl]

Sober, I am only curious on your postion on what I posted about liabilities??

All the other stuff you wrote about is not what I asked.

Are you willing to assume responsibility if you were at a school, a person walked on campus, began firing in a classroom, you took out your concealed weapon and began a shootout with the guy and either "his" or "your" bullets hit innocent persons causing an "accidental" death(s)???

The huge difference here is that the perpetrator, by definition, is causing intentional deaths, no accident. That is the INTENTION of him shooting in a school in the first place. If...IF... I were to accidentally hit an innocent person I would feel very responsible. Not for my actions but for my inability to use proper gun control. BTW, GUN CONTROL means hitting your target.

Would you feel responsible? Should you face prosecution?

The defense of the shooter could claim, that his client was only using self defense as "you" were shooting at him...and while you were doing so, you shot innocent people causing death.
What an imagination you have, you should be come a writer.....a comedy writer.

Wouldnt that make you just as guilty? or do you feel that "you" would be exempt from any liability?
Just as guilty? HELL NO. exempt? not totally.

So many things would have to go perfectly for "you" to remedy the situation yourself. Maybe the perpetrator would stand still for you while you took out your gun, undid the the safety, loaded the clip, aimed and squeezed the trigger.
Don't know squat about guns, do ya?

When (in our system of justice) would the shooter face the legal system?

Before or after "you" killed him?
Irrelevant, he forfeited his right to a fair trial when he started shooting up the school and there was a responsible gun owner present.

Wouldnt that make us vigilante's? And would'nt that just open the door to many more shootings in other situations?
Not really, vigilantes go out looking for would be perps, in your scenario the shooter presents himself first. The fear of the unknown, what other situations are you talking about? However there is some proof that what you suggest only shows to decline.

What if I was at the grocery store, and a man walked in, took out a pistol, pointed it at the clerk, asked for the money, I took out my pistol, made a demand for him to drop his weapon, he fires at me and i shoot back killing the clerk accidentally, should the robber face a murder charge or I?

By law in many states, if someone dies while you are committing a crime, you can be charged with murder, regardless. in Your example here the store bandit would be charged.

There are many intangibles to think about when it comes to guns. What I am asking you about is the many circumstances "after" the fact. Would you agree that the family of any child killed as a result of a firefight you started with your gun, could sue you in court for damages? Would you think that was fair?
Wait, are you placing the "you" in your question as a perp or as a responsible gun owner? The gun owner is responding to the action of the person who actually "started" the gun fight(as you put it).

These are important questions that need answers before we allow anyone to carry a weapon on a campus.
I'm thinking there are already laws in effect that cover most of your "what ifs".

Where I live, there are many cities trying to get guns off the streets.
Taking guns away from responsible citizens is not the way to do it, it has been proven that gun laws DO NOT keep guns off the streets.

Shootings happen everyday, homes, businesses, freeways & playgrounds.
Do y'all not have laws in place to adress these concerns? or are ya too worried about criminal's rights to do anything about them?

It all depends where we live. Our perspectives will all be different.
I don't know what to tell you, here citizens have the right to own guns and we do have more shooting than we should, but I'm pretty sure that many shootings are not happening because the criminals here know that they are not the only ones with guns.

People in compton could give a rats behind about the 2nd amendment.
NOTE TO self: Never go to Compton, CA.


The guns on the street are uzi's, ak47's, glocks and mini assault rifles.
Excuse me, correct me if I an wrong. Are's uzis, AK47s and mini assault rifles already illegal? Glock is a brand name, not a type of gun.

Tell the mother of a young person killed there, that the shooter had a constitutional right to carry a firearm whether she liked it or not.
The compassion in my heart would not allow me to say anything to that Mom except, " I can only imagine how you feel, I am sorry for your loss." I am only guessing that the "young person" was not the shooter at the school that Sober dropped like a hot rock.

 

[over9five]

Re: Gun free zone

Thankfully, it was a gun free mall...

Knife wielding maniac at the mall

 

[Jagger]

The point is, Obama (and you) are anti 2nd Amendment.

The Second Amendment protects only the militia's right to keep and bear arms. Any other interpretation is anti-Second Amendment.

 

[Catatonic]

The Second Amendment protects only the militia's right to keep and bear arms. Any other interpretation is anti-Second Amendment.

Obviously, you are qualified to be on the US Supreme Court since they decided differently.

 

[outamyway]

The Second Amendment protects only the militia's right to keep and bear arms. Any other interpretation is anti-Second Amendment.

Well, a militia is an army of people made up of common citizens. WE are the militia. If we were to be invaded by an opposing force(this includes tyranny within our own Government) and our Government controlled armed forces were severely crippled (Obama's cut backs of a huge amount of military spending will help this), to the point where defeat is a likely scenario, would you bow down and accept your fate, even if the fate was to know you were going to die?

Think about that.

There's a reason it is the 2ND amendment and not the 10th or 20th. It is our human right to defend ourselves when facing harm or death. Anybody who tries to take that away has no idea what it means to have freedom.

 

[drewed]

The spirit of the 2nd amendment would be commonality of defense, think Russia 1943 the nazis knocking on the door of Stalingrad common citizens given arms (or their own, or some sent out to find what they could) to defend their homeland.

 

[soberups]

The Second Amendment protects only the militia's right to keep and bear arms. Any other interpretation is anti-Second Amendment.

If this were the case, the amendment would read "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The founding fathers distrusted standing armies. It was their intent that the entire population be armed, so that a militia of the people could band together in times of danger.

 

[soberups]

Are you willing to assume responsibility if you were at a school, a person walked on campus, began firing in a classroom, you took out your concealed weapon and began a shootout with the guy and either "his" or "your" bullets hit innocent persons causing an "accidental" death(s)???

I would not be guilty of a crime in this case, since I was acting in self defense or in defense of another.

If some lunatic is shooting the campus up and murdering people, then "accidentally" shooting someone is a risk I am willing to take. The alternative---certain death for a room full of victims---is unacceptable. sometimes in life we are stuck between a rock and a hard place and we have to make tough choices.

 

[soberups]

What if I was at the grocery store, and a man walked in, took out a pistol, pointed it at the clerk, asked for the money, I took out my pistol, made a demand for him to drop his weapon, he fires at me and i shoot back killing the clerk accidentally, should the robber face a murder charge or I?

You dont order someone to "drop it" if they are holding a gun on a store clerk. That only happens in movies.

I would draw my weapon and remain hidden. Hopefully, the clerk would give the robber the money, the robber would flee, and the incident ends without violence. If it becomes apparent to me that the robber intends to murder the clerk, then I guess I would have no other option but to shoot him. In that case, I would shoot first and without warning.

 

[soberups]

Tell the mother of a young person killed there, that the shooter had a constitutional right to carry a firearm whether she liked it or not.

Criminals do not have the right to carry a firearm. They lost that right when they were convicted in a court of law. Blaming guns for the violence in Compton is sort of like blaming pencils for misspelled words. Instead of trying to get the guns off the streets, maybe we need to get the criminals off the streets an back in jail where they belong. Trying to solve the crime problem by taking away the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens is wrong, whether they live in Compton or Wyoming.

 

[The Other Side]

I would not be guilty of a crime in this case, since I was acting in self defense or in defense of another.

If some lunatic is shooting the campus up and murdering people, then "accidentally" shooting someone is a risk I am willing to take. The alternative---certain death for a room full of victims---is unacceptable. sometimes in life we are stuck between a rock and a hard place and we have to make tough choices.

Amazing response. What does the law say about this? Does it match your opinion? Of course not. I wonder what parent would agree with you taking the life of their child "accidentally" cause thats a risk "YOU" decided to take with "their" children.

Lets take this one step further.

Lets say you and your concealed weapon are on campus, the school is full of kids, your in a classroom and somebody comes in and yells...THERES A GUY IN THE HALLS SHOOTING KIDS!!!!

You take out your gun (your the responsible gun owner type) and you go into the halls and see me standing there with a gun in my hand, What do you do?

Ask me a series of questions? Start shooting, ask questions later?

All you know is there is a guy in the halls shooting kids. How much information do you really have?

When you see me, you overreact because you are not a TRAINED professional (like a policeman) and you shoot me, or likewise, I see you and your gun and I shoot you first and ask my questions after your on the ground.

When the smoke clears, it turns out that I am just another idiot citizen carrying a concealed weapon on campus believing I can be superman for a moment and this lack of judgement caused a death.

How would anyone account for someone else carrying a concealed weapon??

You yourself said you carry one and no one else knows about it while your on campus.

How would you distinquish in a matter of a split second who the good guy is from the bad guy with kids running around screaming and crying and then you see me in the middle of it?

Think about it. Guns on campus is a bigger disaster than it sounds.

Little boys dream about being Billy the Kid or Wyatt Earp and getting into that ultimate gunfight, but they grow out of it by 15, at least some do.

 

[sortaisle]

The Second Amendment protects only the militia's right to keep and bear arms. Any other interpretation is anti-Second Amendment.

This has been debated in the courts. Here is the link from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

It's always been a close match but the second amendment right to bear arms has been held up in court many times.

Text without context is pretext. The Second Amendment does have a preamble about the militia, but that was the way it was, there was no standing army. The same concept of self preservation holds though even though we don't have a standing citizen militia anymore.

 

[soberups]

Lets say you and your concealed weapon are on campus, the school is full of kids, your in a classroom and somebody comes in and yells...THERES A GUY IN THE HALLS SHOOTING KIDS!!!!

You take out your gun (your the responsible gun owner type) and you go into the halls and see me standing there with a gun in my hand, What do you do?

First of all, I would never go out into the hallway to confront the gunman in the first place. I am not a SWAT team member, nor do I wish to be. I am armed with a compact 9mm handgun, suitable only for close range, last-resort self defense. In the scenario you describe I would draw my weapon, lock the door to the classroom, duck behind a desk and wait for help to arrive. If the gunman kicks or shoots the door down, then at that point all bets are off and I obviously would have no other choice but to fight for my life.

You make the mistake of assuming that anyone who owns a gun or obtains a concealed weapon permit is some sort of Rambo wannabe. This is a common misconception, especially among liberals. The fact of the matter is that I will always seek a nonviolent solution to any conflict, whether I am armed or not. I'm not going to kill someone over the contents of my wallet, I will just hand it over to a mugger. Having a gun simply mean that, should the criminal decide that my wallet isnt enough, I have one final option available to me other than begging for my life.