Mr VJP

I didn't know there were bars on college campuses. When did that happen? People carry concealed in bars now. The incidence of unjust shootings committed by CCW holders is statistically less the 1/10th of 1 percent nationwide. These permit holders value the right to have that permit and are well aware of the responsibility of having one. The law requires they be instructed at length of the consequences of shooting someone without just cause. Believe me they hope they will never have to use that gun. Because if they do, they know the law makes them prove they had to, not the other way around. The age for a pistol permit in most states is 21. Many of these college students are ex-military now in college on the G.I. Bill. Why should a permit holder not have the right to defend himself just because he is in college? It's sad that our society has made people feel the average youth in American is not a responsible person. Maybe that's because the good ones are ignored by this society.

Really? Do you know how many gun laws have been imposed on gun owners since 1968. Doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting a different result is insanity. No threat is required, but a lot more aggressiveness is.

Don't confuse fear with anger, pal. Enough is ENOUGH! Some of us have decided we are fed up with the whipping post.

Not vengeance, but the cost of keeping them alive could be considered "future harm to society".

More gun laws and less freedom is not the answer. More enforcement of existing laws regarding actual violence, as opposed to oppressive gun, magazine and ammo possession laws, is the answer. Government is infringing on the freedom and liberty of law abiding citizens because it refuses to remove the freedoms and liberties of criminals and felons who have no respect for laws, citizens or America. I'm also tired of taxes being spent in massive amounts to keep felons alive and living in prisons, where there is no hope they will ever become productive members of society. They often come out more dangerous than they were when they went in. More felons on the prowl is also one of the reasons more citizens want to arm themselves. The inmates are starting to run the asylum.

This measure only allows Concealed Carry Permit Holders to keep their guns on them when they go on campus. These people already have a CCW permit, but college rules say you can not carry your gun on campus. Considering the number of school shootings in the last decade, would you want to leave your gun at home if you had already gotten a CCW permit? These people are not just students. This means anybody. But they are at least 21 years old, have been given an extensive background check, specialized training and passed a written and practical exam to get that permit. They can carry just about any where else in Texas as well as many other states with reciprocity laws. So why is there a problem? Anti-gun media hysteria, that's why.

Virgil, you mention sportsman in England. Do you know what these sportsman in England have to do to go hunting? Do you know they are only of the privileged class and have to keep their guns at the club, not at home? Do you know what their murder and violent crime rate is compared to a equally populated US state that allows concealed carry of a handgun for self protection? Do you know that when seconds count, the Police are only minutes away? They don't show up to stop crimes, they show up to clean up the mess and fill out a report.

It is important to understand the only reason these bills are not passed into law is because they know how many votes they will lose if it does. The point being, if we do not make our voices heard each and every time one of these anti-gun or anti-hunting bills is proposed, they will begin to actually pass into law. If you sit on the sidelines smugly assuming they will never pass, you are going to be very upset when one of them does. No bill should ever be ignored, no matter how sure you are they're just stupid. These are legislative trail balloons floated to see if anyone complains, not so much to pander to constituents. A bill is only different from a law in the fact that it can be killed, where as a law is hard to reverse.

Welcome aboard

We're all just brainwashed and paranoid, don't you know? :

Attention all law abiding gun owners. News Flash!! The government is NOT your friend! :

last thing, i know it's great for dramatic effect to mention hitler. but, it's really a silly comparison. How so? Have you studied the history of gun control and confiscation in Germany in the late 30's? Tell me how their gun control plan is any different from the idea of taking them from Americans today? and, as far as i recall, it was the french who armed the colonists, not a stockpile from back home. Not sure what this has to do with the American government trying to disarm it's own people in order to control them. The point was if the Brit's did that we wouldn't have had any arms to resist with. Smellin' my breeze here?

I believe the idea here is that in order to take the guns from the criminals, you have to take them from everyone. The big problem with this idea is, criminals don't hand them in. Would you worry about a gun possession charge if you were out there killing people with it? Besides, they plea bargain that part of the charges away every time anyway. What does a ban on anything create? A Black Market! Why do criminals like gun bans? It gives them something else they can sell to make big money! Can anyone give me any examples of any gun or magazine ban that has ever worked to lower the crime rate? Lat's hear from someone who lived in Washington, D.C. in the 80's and 90's.

Do you own any handguns? They won't be legal much longer either, if people keep taking this crap.

They're awake, but many of them are in denial. Registration is the first step towards confiscation. That's a saying I've been hearing for decades and if you don't think it's true you are wrong. The first place I heard it was Pensacola, Fl in 1979. A good friend of mine is a retired Lt. Col USMC living there and was told he needed to register his sidearm when he moved there. Upon visiting the local PD to look into it, he was actually told that phrase, twice, by the Chief of Police. The Chief was actually trying to warn him not to do it. He didn't do it, and the Chief bid him a good day.

Even if it is satire, it is a great way to point out the fallacy that if all guns were banned, there would be no crime, which is what Bloomberg expects people to believe.

Between what is happening on the Federal level with guns in Mexico, Bloomberg's gun show antics and on the local level in cases like this, it is pretty obvious this is part of an anti-gun orchestrated scenario designed to scare the public to win their support for more oppressive gun control legislation. That fact that it takes place shortly after the disaster in Tuscon makes it even more obvious to me. All of these FFL's have pleaded not guilty and were released without bail. They have also not had their FFL's revoked and they are currently open for business as well. If they were really guilty of any real crime, do you think that would be the case? This is a tragedy caused by the abuse of power vested in Kathleen Rice. I hope she is prosecuted and jailed for this and sued for restitution by these men.

What bothers me is people that want to impose restrictions on others, because they feel they should be imposed on others. How can anyone not see the problem with that? That isn't common sense legislation, that is totalitarianism. What you're saying is, "I don't indulge in that, so if it's made illegal, I don't care. It won't affect me. I even support it because it will enhance my own status and reputation." Standing up for the rights of others, even when you don't exercise that right, is what freedom is all about. Seems to me some people are very concerned with the image of hunters and shooters and feel the best way to improve the image is to subjugate them to their critics. I think that would be a big mistake. Law abiding hunters, gun owners and shooters have no reason to be ashamed, nor should they be apologizing for anything. What we do is legal, enjoyable and healthy. Up until anti-gun politicians and animal rights activists started fabricating that negative image, it did not exist. We didn't earn that image, it was forced upon us with propaganda! We have laws to prosecute crimes. Why would anyone think it a good idea to pass laws that infringe on the possession of objects that might be used in a crime? Especially when those objects are already a man's personal property? What about just compensation for the financial loss one takes when his property is outlawed? There are many legal issues that are involved with society's push to control gun owners. And make no mistake, that's what it is about. It's not about controlling guns. It's about controlling gun owners. It extends to controlling all citizens in the long run. Imagine if the Brit's had done that in 1776. We would still be a British commonwealth. What if Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao did it. Wait a minute, they did do it!!! I rest my case.

Since 2011 is the centennial anniversary of the Colt 1911 .45ACP pistol, there are a lot of companies making them again now. We'll see if they keep making them after this year though. Lots of special edition models out this year too.

Are LEO's fully trained to identify a "pre-ban" magazine? How can you tell which are and are not pre-ban?

Those pins were not placed in the stocks by the FFL. They are made that way. That is the problem. Keep in mind you are getting that from a posting by ABC News. This NY D.A. doesn't know which end of a firearm is the dangerous end. I don't think having an AR with a collapsible stock makes it a lot more dangerous either. But, like some say, the law is the law. Question is, how did we allow that to become law?

And Homo-phobic!!

That is precisely the point. They were legal when they sold them and modified after the sale. That didn't stop this prosecutor from arresting them though.

Do you hear that knock on your door now? ??? RUN!! ;D

And denial is the realm of the oblivious.