'The' Gun Thread (Page 23)

So when someone acts in a manner you do not like you retaliate in the same manner in which you disagreed with in the first place?

Sounds odd to me.

Couldn’t disagree more. Being passive and not being a troll on a message board are two totally different things. I think reason and facts should win out not who can get the most emotional and yell the loudest.

Where did I make any snarky comment regarding the accidental shooting?  Where?  My comments are directed at Tealeaf and her continued approach in using single incidents, diluted with her spin that comes complete with made up garbage.

Yep, as Spector said, I'm tired of it....we all should be....it's a load of bullcrap that we, as gun owners, should no longer allow to go on without calling it what it is.

And that is exactly where I'm at. I've said it plenty... I do not have a problem with universal background checks... but universal back ground checks isn't the end, it's the beginnning. gun control advocates do not want less crime, less violence, or less accident. they want less guns...meaning no guns. so their solutions to problems are not solutions to problems, they are nothing more than using any thing they can to advancing their agenda to get rid of guns.

Again, if that's what you want, that's fine, just begin a honest movement to repeal the 2A and we can vote on it. But until then, meaningful solutions to crime and violence go by the way side because they are so focused on getting rid of guns. Hence the compelety ridiculous effort to outlaw a "type" of gun responsible for 1% of the problem.

And the equally ridiculous use of a tragic event to highlight a "type" of accidental death that is responsible for .0047% of all accidental deaths.

But ya... let's just ignor that and keep giving into their ridiculous demands and illogical arguments for why I do not get the choice to exercise a right.

Reason and facts?  Look a Piers Morgan.  He has had reason and facts in front of him for a long time but he continues his idiocy.  No, seriously, he needs punched in the face and beat to a pulp.  Reason and facts mean nothing to some people.

A troll? My posts?  No, Appa, a troll post is one like Tealeaf put up.  It has nothing to do with the context of what is being discussed, and contains information/comments that are blantantly made up in order to charge the discussion.

I agree with everything you said but on a Tri forum talking about guns and someone disagrees with me I wish to see their points of view and discuss it while I use my vote to keep my rights.

Ok basic point I am getting at if I saw my kids arguing in this manor no matter the subject I would teach them the correct way to debate or discuss. So if I think my kids shouldn't do it I think I should act the same way but lead by example even when on a message board they will never read.

I agree with you on all topics except when we beging discussing rights.  Rights are not debated.  Rights are fought for tooth and nail.  Good men and women died for those rights and people should not be able to take them away without facing some serious opposition.   

So Tony, can you elaborate on what you just said?  I don't want to hit you with the same "broad brush" comment before giving you an opportunity to clarify.

When a person has an auto accident, do you believe they should have their license and automobiles confiscated and refused the priviledge to ever drive again?  After all, that is dangerous and nobody has a right to drive in the first place.

I agree with you but I just don't see yelling over a Tri message board as fighting tooth and nail. I think giving real ideas to think on to people who might normaly would not would be a much better use of my time to help in persrving my rights in this situation.

No, YOU started it!!

Meh... you only get worked up when the spin conflicts with what you believe. Like the picture of Edge that was posted here with the "... said no criminal, ever." That's just as much "made up garbage" and unprovable as anything I've said or posted, yet I don't see the same level of protest from you.

Lumping these two things together is going overboard.  If I have to prove I am who I say I am, much less undergo a back ground check, before I may excercise my 2A rights, why shouldn't you be made to prove your identity before exercising your right to vote.  Shall we do a backbround check on anyone who wants to vote before they are allowed to obtain a ballot?  This is the same argument that goes on again and again and again.  Compare apples to apples and think about putting the same restrictions on your rights to free speach, or the right to vote, or any of your other rights as you want to on the 2A and see how "reasonable" it sounds to you.

The second bolded part goes for you too, and your made up innuendo that alcohol was involved in the accident. How dare you.  I think it's nothing short of dispicable to make those comments based on NOTHING except your conjecture and need to try to further your agenda, which continues to lack facts.

In some states not all.

I am ok wtih back ground checks for firearms and I'm ok for showing an ID for voting.

But see here again Pitt we have equating showing an ID with a much more invasive check aka a background check.  Compare apples to apples.  Should you have to undergo a background check before we will allow you to obtain a ballot?

Completely beat me to it. 

I have no issue with background checks.  In PA they talk about a "gunshow loophole" but it does not exist.  Vendors all do background checks as required by law.  The only way people can transfer guns without a background check in PA is through a face to face transfer of long guns (no handguns allowed).  Now, what I would like to see in any "universal background check" bill is an amendment making it unlawful for any state or federal agency to retain the records of the transaction and 2, I want an amendment requiring law enforcement to follow up on all failed checks. 

In the state of PA, most gun owners on a popular gun owner forum will request to see a state drivers license and a current LTCF or recent purchase receipt to validate that you can legally purchase the firearm.  The biggest problem we face in PA is that handgun transfers go through NICs and PICs (PA version of the background check).  The state maintains this information in a database.  When they encounter someone with a firearm, they run it against this database.  However, this results in a hassle for gun owners because the database is incomplete.  It is illegal for the state to have a database but when challenged in court, they got away with it because the state maintained that it not a complete database.  It's utter nonesense but it gives a good vision into why I want there to be no permanent record at a state level.  Also, with the irresponsibility media outlets have shown with publishing permit holders in some states, I do not trust that someone will not gain access to this data and do it on a wider scale.  Bottom line is that I purchase my stuff legally and it's nobody's business as to what I own.