O/T Who NEEDS guns

I was looking at the thread on guns posted by farmerboy. It becomes clear that it is less of a question. He is not asking why people have guns as much as feeling we that have guns are some sort of whacky, out there Americans.
I will try to give a little of my experience as the real reason why. People that live in cities, suburbs, and urban areas don't really have what I would call a NEED for guns except in 2 basic categories which are self/home defense and sportsmanship. I define sportsmanship as recreational hunting (remember - urban dwellers, the meat is not NECESSARY) and recreational shooting (trap, skeet, target shooting, etc). Is this a 'need' per se? I think it is because for example some like to build furniture, grow vegetables ,or a myriad of activities that 100 or more years ago where NECESSARY to a families survival. Today, in most areas of the world you simply go to the store and buy what you need. So you don't HAVE to hunt, farm, cut wood etc.. you have a job that provides funds to buy the meat, vegetables, firewood, etc. 100 years ago your job was to provide the same thing but you did it directly. I hope that you are grasping my meaning here. Money has become the middle man to life's necessities. Now, if you had no job and no money then you would still be required to have food, shelter, and clothes so you have to hunt, farm, and provide heat.
Now on to my point. I grew up in rural Alaska. Not near a city such as Anchorage or Fairbanks or Juneau. The place is called Bethel and the population is around 4000. This is the biggest town in a 100,000 square mile area. There are many small villages of 400-600 people that rely on Bethel. The only way to get to this region is to fly 400 miles due west over two mountain ranges by jet or turboprop aircraft. There are no roads into this region. There are no roads between the villages except the rivers in summer and the frozen rivers in winter. So what is my point. My point is that in areas like this, and there are many in the world. In Canada there are many times more than in the US. Alaska is probably the only place left in the US. Guns are a tool of survival. Not a luxury, not a nicety, not a plaything but a tool. Just like a farmers tractor or a woodworkers chisel. You can not take these tools from people. There are all types of guns. Bolt action rifles are still the choice of the providers of meat. BUT at the same time automatic handguns and carbines are tools too and taken right along. Taking down a moose or caribou with a rifle and defending themselves (and more importantly the meat they have killed) with the automatics. It is just as it is....
Now, if you have gotten this far you will see that there will be 100 opinions... most anti-gun folks will disregard what I have said and try to discredit the facts due to their own beliefs and the fact they are uneducated about what I am saying. I know what I have written to be true because I have lived it for many years. They have never had these facts presented to them in a real world and in focus situation. Some will agree but not based on the situation I present but based on hunting as a tradition. Tradition is different than necessity and as stated I define it as recreational.
So the bottom line in MY opinion is that although gun laws are necessary that there will HAVE to be some ability to see that guns do a real job. To some they are tools, necessary for survival. Oh... no SUV's and shiny cars out where I am from.. just tundra.

edit- I am glad that farmerboy rephrased his question. Many times heated debates come because a nerve is touched due to question phrasing.

I carry a gun because a cop is to heavy.

When seconds count, Help is just minutes away.

Just a couple of reasons.

That's the problem with federalized socialism. One size fits all laws don't fit everybody. What is needed to keep the piece in New York City isn't what fits in the middle of Alaska or Montana. It's just frustrating beyond words. We loose our freedom because a bunch of stinking,disease ridden sub humans packed in like rats elect the politicians who use power that wasn't even given to them by the Constitution to RULE over us!

There is no doubt as to the utilitarian value of a firearm, and anyone who has grown up on a farm, land or similar, would know that, personally, I can't see there being no firearms secured at ones homestead or wherever if you have a farm or some land. We've had to put animals down, unfortunate but true, accidents and or mortal injuries have occurred, necessitating the use of a firearm at our farm, years ago, but something you do not forget.

We also have to consider varmints, another area where, amongst other methods of mitigating ground dwelling and predatory animals, both require the use of firearms, it's that simple.

All of us hunt for food around here, it's more of a luxury, but then again, you have a big family, live away from metropolitan or suburban areas, it does help put food on the table, lot of people still hunt to supplement their stock of food, and kids still grow up with venison as part of their diets.


In this area, a lot of people, from nearby cities and suburbia hunt or try to find places to hunt, like where I am and in the immediate area, to them it may be more of sport etc,. but even amongst those people, you have those who came from rural or semi-rural areas, having grown up hunting, so it never leaves them, hunting is traditional. Inexperienced or poorly educated hunters come from both cities and the rural areas, a lot of them end up on state land, and is why I don't hunt anyplace except our own. On that note, most of the land around here is occupied by hunters during the season, it is competitive to find new hunting areas, even old but still existing farms have changed drastically, my friends dad came up to hunt from Tennessee,(grew up and is from here) he hunted this farm near his home with permission for nearly 60 years, they ran him off, owner passed on, family don't remember him now, lots of stands built and people hunting. He also hunts our place, was good to see him this year. A lot has changed over the years, you could hunt most farms, but as time has progressed, that simply is not the case anymore, one has to have a high appreciation to have the privilige to hunt someone's farm or even your own land.


Home defense, well that is what it is, it is a "peace of mind" to know you have a firearm available for the purpose, however, you still have to keep it secured, yet be able to retrieve and load it on short notice, in today's society one has to think in a "secure manner" always be aware of your surroundings and discipline yourself to be attentive, and have a plan to execute if a situation ever did arise, again that privilige afforded to us citizens in the 2nd amendment should allow all responsible people to have the right to own what they deem necessary, within reason obviously, don't matter where you live for home defense. Simply understood, any firearm can be dangerous, and it's the poorly trained people who most often make mistakes with them, and the criminals who don't respect the law or rights of others that ruin it for responsible people, it's that simple, people make it complicated, you know what a firearm does and what it's potential is, it's up to you how you handle them and what you do with them, period.

When they come to get mine and martial law kicks in, I and my neighbors will join arms and defend what is ours!

F*** external_link, F*** him...

Thank you,

Charles

> A little Gun History Lesson > > In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. > ------------------------------> In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. > ---------------------------> Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated > ------------------------------> China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. > ----------------------------> Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. > ------------------------------> Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. > ------------------------------> Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. > -----------------------------> Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. > ------------------------------> It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.. The first year results are now in: > > Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent > > Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent > > Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! > > In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns! > > It will never happen here? I bet the Aussies said that too! > > While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. > > There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. > > You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. > > Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens. > > Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! > > The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind him of this history lesson.. > > With Guns...........We Are 'Citizens'. > > Without Them........We Are 'Subjects'. > > During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! > > Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attach to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country. > > It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U. S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U. S. & knew that almost all households had guns.

I agree with gun laws in most respects. Felons don't need guns and guns shouldnt be around schools. I think gun checks are a reasonable requirement.
America is a gun culture. We have ALWAYS had them. We aways will. The abundant left that advocates a socialist path as we are seeing will most likely find the gun issue the one that makes America finally stand up and say enough.

Nobody is going to have people kicking in thier doors to collect their guns if they are normal and law abiding citizens. To suggest you are going ot fight to the last etc is ludicrous. Kinda like puffing up your chest to try to be a big wheel.
The point is that laws are written for evreyone but in America individuality is a primal force in our culture. When you start trying to control individuals there will be toruble and that is why I think the abundant Left may just be in for an awakening.

This thread is not about who attacked who because they did or did not have guns. It is about the interpretation of who NEEDS them vs who enjoy them. Take the history lessons, and puffing up, and who hates who over to the other 400 topics where people get all het up over it. This is simply to try to explain to some who don't understand that guns are not just expensive toys, they can be necessary tools...

Martial law.. ok, yep... I am sure that's coming. Do people really beieve this stuff?? I would LOVE to see that basis on where the drivel like that comes from but put it in a different post. sheesh.

I figure if a person had five guns it would be all they ever needed. That would cover protection, deer hunting, varmit, whatever.
If you're a gun collector, show me Billy the Kid's guns, some old buffalo hunting gun, don't show me how many assault rifles you have.
Had a recent experience to stay at a gun nuts house. He had stuff that you shouldn't be in the same house with.

I agree with RedTom... If our arms (for whatever reason we have them) are taken, bad things happen. It is historicaly proven that when the people do not have arms, bad things happen (EXTERMINATION). It is historicaly proven when people give up their arms to the government it is expensive and crime goes up (AUSTRALIA)... NOBAMA!

Charles

In TLAK's reply is the crux of the problem. What one person feels as a NEED is what another feels is overkill. That is exactly the same as saying that you should have 2 tractors, one for pulling stuff (mowers, rakes, etc..) and one with a loader for lifting and digging, etc.. Guns and tractors are both dangerous, correct? Bet you can find an incident where someone killed another by running him down in a tractor. If you don't like guns that is fine. Some don't like tractors because they pour out air pollutants.
As I said, this thread is about when guns are NEEDED to sustain a family and when they are needed to sustain a pleasure.

And I put my idea of all thats NEEDED is five. I've only owned one tractor and it's did everything I've needed.
You just want somebody to agree with you, whatever your idea is.

I look at it like this. Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Its just how its portrayed and what you want to be afraid of.

Examples:

A man walks into a restuarant pulls out a gun and starts shooting. Headlines the next day, Crazed Gunman kills several innocent patrons. Then we listen to proposals of more gun laws, banning guns ect becasue the gun killed those people. Then we want to blame the gun dealer, manufacturers etc.

Now take this scenario: Man walks into restuarant grabs a steak knife out of a patrons hands, and starts stabbing people at will killing several innocent people. Headlines the next day. Deranged mentally unstable person kills several innocent people. Then we listen to how society should have helped this person. I bet you a dime to a dollar there wouldnt be a word mentioned about banning steak knifes at restuarants. Or cracking down an regulating steak knife manufacturers and there sells to restuarants.

The whole premise of this is making me SICK. This talk about NEED is WAY to close to Carl Marx comunist manifesto. Skrew you!

re- steak knives, exactly. Why is it you have 'tractor enthusiasts' and gun nuts? Just cause one elects to have more than one because they want too. I have multiple tractors and multiple guns.. So which am I?

See.. the 'skrew you' people are the ones giving gun owners a bad name. Come up with a meaningful discussion. You are more than likely the guy running around in a camo hat, no teeth, and saying 'I'm gonna git 'em when they come for me'. Please....

My whole point is that the people trying to get all guns taken away are those that don't understand NEED vs want. I NEED guns so legislation to take mine would hurt me. The ones you hear about are 'he had a bunch of assault rifles he doesn't need'. I sold a few of mine because I got a 300% profit on them. I don't hear the stock traders getting the same treatment.

I was a US Marine scout/sniper for 20 years. I take my guns very seriously. I also understand the need to keep the idiots away from something they don't understand ("skrew you" jumps to mind).
So how do we get it done? How do we get people to understand that people NEED guns in a lot of cases just like you NEED car to get to work.

TLAK, maybe YOU need five. I have two tractors. One to pull and one to lift. That is all I NEED. I wouldn't mind more but the costs outway the need.
I see the NEED for the number of guns i have and the missions that each carries.
I just don't think that I should be regulated on the basis of what you think I need which is just what the anti-gun people are trying to use to get peoples guns.

Everyone has an opinion and that is what is great in a democratic society. You have your idea and I have mine and through the process of debate we should be able to come to an agreeable end.

Need is based on the individuals desires and requirements. Antigun people say I don't need a gun. Or I don't need this amount or that kind. I say that the individual needs have to be validated before we will get reasonable gun laws.

As far as communist manifesto's that is garbage.

Isn't it interesting how a simple topic can get so many people to react versus think... Have you read (read and understood, not just skim through it) what I am trying to debate or just flying off the handle because you see a word or too?

The nation will regulate weapons. Period. We have the least restrictive laws that I know. Yet, to keep the ability to enjoy our freedom's, we HAVE to be able to talk sensibly and with credibility. "Prey my gun from my cold dead fingers", I have always laughed at THAT one. Usually because it is spoken by the individual that watches a lot of tv and has NO clue what it would mean to go against authority much less kill someone. So when a cop comes up and says he has been told you violated this law or that and he has been sent to take your gun... Are you going to start shooting him down? I say THAT is the type of talk and attitude that gets people trying to take away our guns. Because you don't sound stable or sane. Think about it....

What ever happened to the Off Topic section of this site? At least I could avoid that page. I am not taking a stand on either side of a gun issue, but it's postings like this that I don't like about this site. It only stirs up bad feelings. I never see this stuff on my stovebolt site or on Roger Welsch's Tall Tales site.

A THOUSANDFOLD AMEN to your lengthy, but informative post. It is absolutely for the reasons that you have mentioned that I"m a die hard defender of the 2nd Amendment. I loath the "gun control" crowd with all the power in me and consider them the lowest life form on this planet. To me they are my worst enemy on the earth. Anyone who would deny me the right to defend myself and home is lower than the individual(s) who might seek to harm or kill me.
I consider those who fight against the 2nd Amendment as traitors to the U.S. Constution and think they should receive the punishment befitting traitors.
Mr. Bob

Hey, thought you were asking for opinions, you just want to say yours and everybody to agree with you.
I said Needed, I didn't say take your guns away. If you feel guilty about being a gun nut, so be it. Most people can get by with a 12ga, couple handguns, and a deer rifle. Never seen the need for a fifty cal. May need it in Alaska. They're for sale and some of our troops are probably getting killed by these public sale guns. overseas.

George Patton said: "The lowest form of human life is a politician and abundant nnalert are the lowest form of politician".

Tlak, I AM asking for opinions... no I am not trying to just voice mine, amigo.. Like I said, that's how you get ideas. I have ideas, yes, but if I dont get others input and prospective then it is close minded. Like I said your opinion is 5, mine is a different number and so on. Everyone has a different idea.
I am not sure that limiting to a number will work. I think that someone that hoards guns waiting 'for the big one' is maybe going to far.

I don't have an answer... just a question..

I never saw a reason for the .50 in civilian hands. I have used it in combat but other than vehicles it is really overkill. It's primary design is antivehicle and equipment. Using it on personnel becomes legally reiky because of the Geneva Convention. Not to say it isn't used, it is.
It is much easier to get combat arms (selective fire capable) in overseas markets than the US. It is actually pretty hard to get guns in and out of the country legally or not. One thing the gun laws did do was cut down the ability for legally sold firearms to be made into full automatic. There is no reason to have that capability although it can legally be had. It costs a ton of money but a reasonable, law abiding person can own one. That is the great part of america. You can do it within the law. So getting the law to recognize the needs of different people is hard but hopefully we can make it possible.


Does it sound like I am being unreasonable or just wanting to hear myself talk? I was just trying to get an idea of peoples different point of view..

Twice on the news in the last couple weeks.. Older couple found shot to death in home.. I am 63, wife is almost 60 and we live by ourselves.. Sure makes me feel better having a 9mm with full clip within easy reach.

I feel this is a need, the cops will be too late..

"People that live in cities, suburbs, and urban areas don't really have what I would call a NEED for guns except in 2 basic categories which are self/home defense and sportsmanship."

Home defense is a NEED.... I have trained many older couples to use weapons who had never picked one up since they where young. A good training program will not only give you a better legal standing but most importantly the ability to live through whatever situation you may find yourself in. Practice is paramount. Use the gun (unloaded, magazine out) in practice as you would for real. Both you and your spouse need to learn and be current. The most important aspect of a gunfight is confidence and training.

O/T O/T O/T O/T when you see that go on to the next post and you won"t have to read it.

If you ever needed a gun in a home break in you would be super glad that you had one. There is nothing like an equalizer tool----12 gauge pump shotgun. I hope I never have to use mine to blast away a bad guy.
I wouldnt want to have to clean up the mess.

If you can tell me why a woman needs a couple dozen sets of earings or umpteen pairs of shoes I'll tell you why I need my half dozen guns.

GUN CONTROL: Being capable of hitting what you aim at. When confiscation begins, I think I have enough ammo to hold them off for about three days, if I can stay awake. They can have my gun when they pry my cold dead fingers from around it. When they outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns!

I, for one, need my guns.

Why? I'll be darned if I know, but one of them is a Daisy Red Ryder BB gun that I got for Christmas in 1947...It's sort of sentimental to me.

The other is a Winchester Model 12 Lightweight (maybe "Featherweight") that I won in a sales contest while working for Rath Packing Company back in 1961. I shot at a lot of phesants with it in Iowa, but it has not been fired since 1977, when I moved to Florida. Again, a sentimental item to me.

I may possibly use one of them if I get invaded by someone.

Stan

He spoke very wisely.
Mr. Bob

Need?

It"s not about need, it"s about CHOICE. I choose to own several, and that, is reason enough. I should not have to, and will not submit to, justifying my needs. That is nobody"s business.

How much money do you need? One dollar, 2 quarters, 7 dimes and eight pennies? Four hundred thousand dollars, 1 quarter, 1 dime, 2 nickels, and 4 pennies? Well...it is the same difference. You can have as little, or as much, as you can accrue. Or should the Government dictate how much money you should be allowed to have?

"O/T O/T O/T O/T when you see that go on to the next post and you won"t have to read it."

ABSOLUTELY correct. I still say the name of this forum should be "The Coffee Shoppe" since that is what it is most like. If you don't like the conversation in one group, go on to the next one.

Does anyone NEED a gun no. You can move to town or closer to a store. But if Americans weren't allowed to have guns we'd not be the USA. and we would be paying 60-80% taxes for our tea

wallacedw, it seems to me as I read your post you have know what idea it means to be an American. I do not have time to expose all the errors you made in your premis, that is guns are tools and only those that need that tool should have it. It is like asking why need so many old tractors, need to own a fast car or big truck, need to vacation in France, need to start a business, or why need to get marrried, need to have kids, need to go to college, ect. It is simply un-american to ask those sorts of questions. Why do you feel a need to regulate 50 caliber rifles ? No civilian owned one has ever been used in a crime. We understand that growing up in Alaska that the state has lavashed cash and social services on you and your family, and that has caused you to feel your are privilaged and entitle, and perhaps a bit smarter that everyone else. For instance, help paying for those jets and turbo props that hauled you 400 miles to a city. I suggest you spend time in the other 49 states before you "need to be so judgemental about gun ownership".

Hunting and sport shooting are fun, and sometimes beneficial diversions of owning guns. But the real reason we Americans own guns is to protect ourselves from overreaching and tyrannical goverment.

" This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it."
(Abraham Lincoln, first inaugural address)

I live just North of Detroit Michigan , and i will never give up my fire arms.

The animals that come out of the city looking for trouble is growing with the lack of jobs and school of choice we now have.

Gun contol in Detroit is hitting what your aiming at.

What the -ell is this world coming to ?


Don't get me wrong i don't ever want things to come to the point i have to shoot someone.

It will be intresting to see what happens if this Dip $hit we just put in office trys to take our fire arms away.

As an American citizen I don't have to show any "need" to own whatever I wish - I can own firearms simply because I choose to! The negro mooslim will never get my guns.

It will be a bad day for me when they come to get them because it will be the end of me, but I'll take some of the pro-government thugs out first.

I can't agree that crime has increased in Australia since the banning of guns,however the incidence of crime with KNIVES appears to have increased, a substitution, ban knives then it will be screwdrivers.If someone intends to do harm there will always be a weapon, eg. broken beer glass, baseball bat etc.

I've got some of that "stuff". I hardly ever shoot them. When I do have the rare moments of spare time to shoot them, I have a lot of fun. What's wrong with that?

"wallacedw, it seems to me as I read your post you have know what idea it means to be an American. I do not have time to expose all the errors you made in your premis, that is guns are tools and only those that need that tool should have it. It is like asking why need so many old tractors, need to own a fast car or big truck, need to vacation in France, need to start a business, or why need to get marrried, need to have kids, need to go to college, ect. It is simply un-american to ask those sorts of questions. Why do you feel a need to regulate 50 caliber rifles ? No civilian owned one has ever been used in a crime. We understand that growing up in Alaska that the state has lavashed cash and social services on you and your family, and that has caused you to feel your are privilaged and entitle, and perhaps a bit smarter that everyone else. For instance, help paying for those jets and turbo props that hauled you 400 miles to a city. I suggest you spend time in the other 49 states before you "need to be so judgemental about gun ownership"."

OK! I GIVE UP!!! Apperantly I am NOT AN AMERICAN!! Oh, by the way... I apperantly also didn't say 30 or 40 times that I am trying to discuss how to save our right to guns by getting people to understand that there is still a need!!! You dont get trucks or tractors or kids or any of that stuff taken away because somebody says you don't have a need. Gun owners DO have that problem.

What kind of pinhead are you, dude?? Forget it... just friggin forget it. Oh, I shouldn't write probably. Apperantly I am "unAmerican" because I chose to have a conversation... Funny, seems the 1st amendment guaranteed the right to free speech.

"Lavished cash and social services".. Oh.. because we don't have roads and fast food and FLUSH TOILETS, a$$hole... WE ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE?? I would LOVE to know what gets lavished on us. Gas is $5/gal. Milk is $6. Oh, the permanent fund.. yep.. we sure have it good.
GO SKREW YOURSELF as I was so politely told... That jet is Alaska Airlines and we have to buy a ticket or I suppose that everything is just free in Alaska, huh.. If it is so good, why don't you go? Then let me know what you think.

Ya know what, go ahead, don't let yourself think about how to combat this problem then go moan and puff your chests out about how you will shoot dowbn the "pro-government" people.... Guess I didn't realize it is us agin' them...

As far as being "unamerican". I have been shot twice, spent time in pretty much every little S#$thole in the world covered in scuz, lost two wives, and did 20 years so that you can sit on your little pi$$ant pedestal and call me 'unamerican'. I am also 100% permanently and totally disabled by the VA. So you know what? I think I have a little bitty right to think I am an American.

Go blow yourselves.....

For those that believe in gun control!

If ever the need to protect you arises,-- Don't stand at my back, and let me do all the shootin cause I'll save one for you.

The day may come that you may want to eat your words.

I hope we never see that kind of battle in this Country but if you get shot at, Don't come lookin for a gun to protect yourself.you should learn how to throw rocks good.

Go back and read about the Wolves, the Sheepdog, and the sheep. Sheep need guns but won't touch them. Sheepdog knows the value of guns and is on the alert. The Wolves shouldn't have guns but they do. So get a gun, sheep, or you better be close to a Sheepdog.

Thank you, the first person i have herd say it like it is " people kill people" .


Media causes alot of these issues because they support a political party that happens to want to take them away.

Here in Micigan { Detroit } area it is very easy to see that channels 2,4,and 7 support the democratic party. What is amazing is that people are STUPID and don't see that there only getting one side of the news or a issue.

Media networks should not be allowed to support anyone that is running for office in anyway, it is a conflict of intrest.


There will always be stupid people out there that are not able to think for them selves this is what the media and bible thumpers pray on.


Or to quote Ted Nudgent "sheeple".

In Michigan they made it simple for people to get there C.P.L a few years back as long as you had a clean record.

I have carried a gun for going on 15 years when you had to go in front of a gun board and all kinds of red tape.

Maybe there making it easy so they know ware the guns really are , food for thought.

I keep my shot gun under the bed, It's my "equalizer" when anyone wants to drop in after the lights go out

Well,you can say whatever you want but crooks dont care what laws get passed,they are still going to have and use guns.Besides that,and we legally have guns,thats all you need to know.When you start trying to mess with the part that people legally have guns is when you start heading toward stupidity.Any politician that decides he can take guns is a traitor and is undermining the constitution.When thats done the offending politician should be automatically thrown out.These stupid politicians are in every country,and are not there for the interest of the people,they are for the interest of the crooks.The interest of the crooks is to disarm the victims.It makes being a crook easier.Some politicians are crooks/criminals anyway and are doing whatever they can to help out their fellow crooks,and more and more a big percentage of politicians are just stupid and being used by crooks.Things always were like this,except we used to be smarter than we are now and would not elect a politician that wanted to grab our guns.The smart thing to do would be pass a law that every family has to have guns.Then there would be no need for further gun laws,you would already have to have a gun and know how to use it.Also everybody than can should be in the military for about a year,to learn how to use a gun right.That would lower the amount of crooks,criminals,and politicians that are controlled by them.Because you live in Alaska,or have a viewpoint that a gun is a tool,or were a Marine,especially if you were a Marine,does not make your opinion any better or worse than another Americans.Maybe its different than mine,but not better.The oath you take to defend the Constitution against all enemies Foreign or Domestic is what counts.

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family?

Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand.

The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"

- The Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn