Gun Control

[AppyLover2]

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....4149&EDATE=

This is one of the sites in which the President of the Illinois Rifle Association posted his Open Letter to Nation's Sportsmem regarding his experience with Obama regarding gun control.

I've heard bits and pieces regarding the gun control issue and the election but never any detail. I'm posting it because I feel that those of us who believe we should be allowed to own guns can read it.

I'm not trying to start anything so I'll tell you up front that those of you who support Obama will probably take exception to it.

 

[Pepipony]

I would question anything written by either a lobbyist or someone who holds a vested interest in getting the other guy in. When that much is at stake, anything can/will be said. Doesnt mean its all fact, but doesnt mean it isnt either.

 

[Bassett]

He's not getting my gun. I've heard a lot about his gun control but he has flip-flopped several times so I think people are confused on what he really stands for on the issue.

What will probably happen is they won't be able to take guns away so all ammo will be taxed so much you won't be able to afford it. My oldest son hunts big game a lot. He is an assistant big game guide in Alaska. He has hunted in Alaska, Idaho, Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Wyoming and maybe a few other states. This has happened before. He went to get his reloading supplies, (he reloads his own ammo) and there was none to be found. Everyone had bought it up because of the price of ammo. I don't think they should have control over our guns. So that is one reason not to vote Democrat in my opinion. And I haven't hunted for years. But they still are not getting my guns.

Thanks Donna it is good to know what someone else thinks.

 

[Keri]

I know if a democrat gets elected into the presidency, they are going resort back to the clinton era and ban the sell of semi-auto (think I'm getting it right). Anyways, guns like your AR-15s and such will be banned. So go out and buy yours now just in case!

They can't take them away, they can just ban the sell of them.

As far as taking away guns, I think that would never happen. Cause a huge debate/ruckus. They take away our guns, where does the hunting go?? Guess its safer for us to hit them on the highway??

Guns don't kill, people kill.

 

[mrgizzmoe]

i feel its ok to own gun for protection and hobby/hunting and for work. i have a .357 that i use for armed security . still have it but its locked away . florida is one of the most gun friendly states there is . to my understanding you can carrry a loaded gun in your glovebox of your car legally.

i dont see our rights changing

 

[LowriseMinis]

No one's ever going to succeed in taking away your guns, plain and simple.

I didn't read the link because you're right, I'm sure I would have taken exception to something. But here are a few factual links about Obama (and some others) stance on gun issues.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gun_Control.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_pos...ama#Gun_control

And just as a reminder, sometimes liberals own guns, too.

 

[minimule]

As my signature says...I'm a bitter gun owner and I vote.

I also sell guns for a living. Our gun sales are over the top with folks buying while they can. The Dems do have a history of trying everything they can do make getting and having a firearm as hard as possible.

According to his record Obama will try to make it hard for us gun owners.

He has all ready proven he will vote against the Castle Doctrine. He believes that if you shoot someone that has broken into your house then you should be charged with murder, not self-defense. You can look it up.

Another of his plans is to tax guns and ammunition 500%.

The NRA doesn't just make stuff up. They do a lot of research and DO get the facts.

So.....that being said, IF he wins, he will put our Chain store out of business since the gun department keeps the store alive. There will also be a lot of Mom and Pop shops that will go under.

 

[Nathan Luszcz]

Obama has already banned concealed permits in his home state, I would be very surprised if permits were not nationally banned following his election. You can still have hunting rifles and ammo, but the proposed plans including taxing ammunition very high plus banning pistols (and the assult type weapons which have been off and on banned for a long time). Kentucky is also very gun friendly state.

 

[AppyLover2]

I'm not a hunter although I do believe there is a need to keep game animals at manageable levels. My primary concern with gun control is that they may well be taken from the honest people but I'd be willing to bet my right arm the dishonest people will still have them. One way or another, by legal means or not, they'll keep theirs.

 

[Laura]

I don't currently hunt, but hunting does occur on our property. We are gun owners and always will be. When I used to travel alone, I carried a handgun. Now that I have small children, all guns are under lock & key. I'm in favor of strict regulation on handgun concealed carry, a ban on automatic and many semi-automatic weapons. The specifics of law regarding gun control has often been left to the individual states, as it should be. In *my* opinion

the next president has a LOT to deal with before they get around to changing laws regarding regulation of guns. I would never change my vote based on the single position of gun control. There's a lot of issues ahead of it in my book.

 

[mrgizzmoe]

Laura could not of said it better myself

 

[Cathy_H]

the next president has a LOT to deal with before they get around to changing laws regarding regulation of guns........... There's a lot of issues ahead of it in my book.

I agree there are priorities ahead of gun control......... While concentrating on the major issues some of us just don't want to wake up one day to see that we've lost our rights on the lesser issues!

The drip drip accumulations of single freedoms being TAKEN away from us could very well some day result in very few or no freedoms for all of us.

Stay the course, stay alert and stay informed!

 

[Ashley]

He believes that if you shoot someone that has broken into your house then you should be charged with murder, not self-defense.

You can not kill somebody just because they broke into your home. You can only use as much force on them, that they use on you. If they have a gun and they are going to kill you then you can shoot. But if you have a gun, they have a baseball bat you can not shoot at them, you do and they die yes you will be charged with murder.

 

[AppyLover2]

Ashley I believe that depends a lot on state law. I once had a stalker and the police asked me if I had a gun and whether or not I knew how to use it. When I told him yes he said if he came in to shoot him, just to be sure he was inside when I did. Fortunately my stalker was so bright he wrote one of his obscene notes on the back of a rent receipt that had his name and address on it.

 

[Bassett]

Had a friend on the police force many years ago in Indiana. He always says if your going to shoot someone make sure they are dead, that way they can't testify against you.

He also did say, make sure they are ALL the way in your house. I don't think I'd go that far but I do know my husband deterred many an attempt on himself by carrying a 38 and letting it show in his back pocket while he was carrying the days receipts from his business. Many times someone hung around after he was closed until they saw his gun.

Read this morning that they will charge 500% on ammo if they can't take your guns. Clintons tried that. Who can afford that?? Not many..

 

[Nathan Luszcz]

In most states you can shoot to kill if you FEEL that you are threatened with deadly bodily harm... In your home the rules are even looser. In SOME states you can shoot for TRESPASSING. In Kentucky the only reason you can shoot someone who is not in your house and not actively threatening you with deadly force is if they are in the process of committing arson or rape.

Also remember its not just the ammunition you carry for self defence... that already is very expensive (sometimes close to $1 per bullet), but the ammunition you practice with. If you use a gun in self defense when you go to trial they WILL ask you how often you practice and when the last time you shot. If that was six months ago, they won't look at you fondly.

Right now a box of Walmart 9mm ammunition costs $18 for 100 rounds, which at a range lasts about 10 minutes. If that was raised to $100 per box, NOBODY would be shooting for fun anymore, and probably not carrying either. I know I couldn't afford it!

 

[Miniv]

"The Right to Bear Arms" is only ONE of many individual rights that people need to hold on TIGHT to!

Many people feel it's not an "important issue".......and perhaps by itself and TODAY it isn't to them. But it is important because it represents our Freedom to protect ourselves, our family, and our property.

Too many folks take what we have for granted. They feel protected by our society, our laws, our police and other emergency services. I believe we should NEVER take our Freedom and our Rights for granted. It's the "little" things that will be stolen away from us first (and some people say it's already started.)

Personally, I HATE firearms. But in today's world they are necessary. No, we do not own a handgun, but we own a 22, a shotgun, and a hunting rifle. I had all of them shipped off and kept at a friend's home while our daughter was very young and just this year we had them returned and they have been put out of reach under lock & key.

Looking at our life in the short term -- We live in a rural area where we have wildlife predators who could kill or injure our miniatures/ponies/livestock...... If our rights are taken away -- then what???

Looking at our life in the long term -- How can anyone guarantee that this economy and this society is going to survive into the next generation??? How can you promise that History is not going to repeat itself (as it has over and over again!)??? No, I am not a fear-monger. I'm a realist. And the best way for a power-hungry leader to take control of "the masses" is to make sure they have no weapons. Period. It may not happen in the next few years.......but the way the subject keeps coming up over and over, it could easily happen within this decade or possibly the next.

I am fearful for what my child's world is going to be. And I do not want to have blinders on TODAY because of that. So FLAME AWAY at me if you want.........I sure hope I won't have to say -- "I told you so".......

In the meantime, I am hanging onto OUR RIGHT to own a firearm and will own it RESPONSIBLY.

 

[minimule]

Each state does have it's own gun laws. I sell guns for a living so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about.

Our state is still "wild west". We still have an open carry law, meaning I can carry my gun out in the open all over except PO, schools, bars, banks.

If someone breaks into my home and I feel threatened, no matter what weapon the intruder carries, I can and will shoot to kill. It's called the Castle Doctrine.

 

[Bassett]

Very well said MA. I couldn't have said it better myself. People should just read this and think about it. If we have a Democratic President and everything is controled by the Democrats a lot of what some people consider LITTLE issues will be bigger than they even care to think about. And sooner or later it will all happen it Obama is elected. Like MA said might not be immediately but it will come. I'm thinking of my children and grandchildren. We have to think of their future also. Would hate to see what this country will become if little by little all our constitutional rights are taken away one by one.

 

[LowriseMinis]

Can anyone point out to me when and where Obama said he was going to repeal the 2nd Amendment?