Jump to content

Arizona Congresswoman shot.

132 eight pointer

By 132 eight pointer,
in General Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

Karpteach Newbie

Karpteach

Posted
Posted

While its sad , it doesnt really surprise me too much. With the way things are and have been going politically in this country, Im actually more surprised it hasnt happened before or more often.

You are sooo right. I think if our politicians don't get it together we will see more of this. It's the sign of the times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
132 eight pointer Apprentice

132 eight pointer

Posted
  • Author
Posted

And the result will be more time and resources wasted to enact "tougher"gun laws against the law abiding.The Sarah Brady's are probably organizing as we write.Anarchy in the U.S.A will not bring politicians together for the common good.But I am just a working class,tax paying,patriotic,law abiding outdoorsman and father so what the hell do I know.The system is broken and I don't know how to repair it.(o.k. I think I feel better now). >:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SteveMcD Newbie

SteveMcD

Posted
Posted

My heart goes out to all of the victims and Friends and Family members. How very sad and tragic. 

Regarding the "Gun Nut" comments. I know I'll get blasted for this.. but it was reported the shooter had an extended magazine for the pistol. This is where I do not support the NRA.. we do need common sense gun laws. Show me one hunter or "sportsman" that needs a 20 round magazine. Also the "Sarah Palin" and "Huckabee" political rhetoric needs to stop. With all the outright vicious politics in this country today... is it really any wonder.. someone short a full deck of cards would eventually go off?  ::):(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Proficient

Doc

Posted
Posted

Show me one hunter or "sportsman" that needs a 20 round magazine.

Sure we can apply that same logic to a lot of features of privately owned weapons. Do we have to show a need before we can justify ownership. Do we need guns that have multiple shot capabilities? There are those that argue that we don't need any guns. Where does that line of restrictive reasoning end? There is something basically flawed with that kind of definition of what we should be allowed to own. That is one reason why I belong to the NRA. With a zero tolerance attitude, they fight this kind of incremental encroachment on gun owner rights.

And by the  way, since when have the needs of sportsmen become the sole criteria for gun owner's rights? That's kind of a narrow and incorrect interpretation of 2nd amendment issues, wouldn't you say? I don't remember anything in that amendment that talks about sportsmen.

Doc

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SteveMcD Newbie

SteveMcD

Posted
Posted

Well, Doc... I am also a Life-Endowment Member of the NRA. But the NRA of today is not the same organization I joined in 1969. I have lost a lot of respect for them. Having son's and relatives in law enforcement, the ( NRA) went over the top with the "Jack-Booted Thugs" comment, and with the likes of Ted Nugent as their poster child, I find the NRA somewhat embarrassing. Look at how Jim Zumbo got chastised and nearly ruined his career, when he commented about sporting rifles vs military style rifles. Sad truth is.. He was right! And who would dispute Jim Zumbo's credentials. There has to be common ground, the all or nothing attitude on both sides of the gun issue and everybody eventually loses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr VJP Newbie

Mr VJP

Posted
Posted

Tell me this, why do cops and military need weapons civilians don't?  Because they have to have superior firepower? 

Then what that says is they have to have civilians out gunned!  That means they are circumventing the 2nd Amendment because that amendment is supposed to give the PEOPLE the right to keep the government in check by bearing arms if need be.

What happened at Ruby Ridge and Waco was government abuse of power and the NRA was right to say so.  Any limit on private ownership of guns that serves to subjugate the people to the government is wrong.  The government has to be challenged any time it starts moving towards a Police State!

If some one uses a gun to harm another, he should be prosecuted for that.  But should a person be prosecuted or killed for mere possession of an object the government feels you should not be able to own?  I think not!

Anyone in law enforcement or the military who thinks otherwise is not fit to serve, as they are violating their oath to protect and defend the US Constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Proficient

Doc

Posted
Posted

Well, Doc... I am also a Life-Endowment Member of the NRA. But the NRA of today is not the same organization I joined in 1969. I have lost a lot of respect for them. Having son's and relatives in law enforcement, the ( NRA) went over the top with the "Jack-Booted Thugs" comment, and with the likes of Ted Nugent as their poster child, I find the NRA somewhat embarrassing. Look at how Jim Zumbo got chastised and nearly ruined his career, when he commented about sporting rifles vs military style rifles. Sad truth is.. He was right! And who would dispute Jim Zumbo's credentials. There has to be common ground, the all or nothing attitude on both sides of the gun issue and everybody eventually loses.

Well the good news is that there is no requirement that any member of any advocacy group needs to agree with every word, thought or notion of that group. If we expect that, then I guess there would not be any advocacy groups.....lol. I'll bet there are some things where I don't see eye-to-eye with them too. However those things are totally irrelevant to the reasons that I belong to the NRA. My membership is for one single purpose, which is to prolong the well-being of the Constitution's second amendment. And that is a job that the NRA has done better than any individual or organization in existance. So whether they have a problem with Jim Zumbo, or somebody in the NRA likes to pal-around with Ted Nugent, or somebody in the organization made some statement about "jack-booted thugs", I could care less. I sincerely believe they are the only reason that we have private gun ownership today. Without the NRA, the Kennedys, Schumers, Bradys, Boxers, etc, etc, would have long ago crippled or deleted the second amendment and all gun ownership rights that goes along with it. That fact alone gives them my support. They are serving the function that I require.

In terms of looking for common ground, that is just another way of preaching appeasment. I have no interest in that. And don't for a second imagine that the anti-gun side believes in that either. Their incremental elimination of private gun ownership such as the magazine restrictions that you suggested is just one more item that falls in their version of zero tolerance for guns. The NRA sees through that tactic and others and refuses to play that game. That by the way is not an attitude that has developed just since 1969. The NRA was never any different regarding the zero-tolerance reaction to second amendment encroachments. Thank-Heavens!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
First-light Veteran

First-light

Posted
Posted

Well, Doc... I am also a Life-Endowment Member of the NRA. But the NRA of today is not the same organization I joined in 1969. I have lost a lot of respect for them. Having son's and relatives in law enforcement, the ( NRA) went over the top with the "Jack-Booted Thugs" comment, and with the likes of Ted Nugent as their poster child, I find the NRA somewhat embarrassing. Look at how Jim Zumbo got chastised and nearly ruined his career, when he commented about sporting rifles vs military style rifles. Sad truth is.. He was right! And who would dispute Jim Zumbo's credentials. There has to be common ground, the all or nothing attitude on both sides of the gun issue and everybody eventually loses.

I agree with you Steve, Zumbo got the shaft and it wasn't right. Common ground is good it makes things happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pygmy Experienced

Pygmy

Posted
Posted

Steve McD...  I'll tell you what sportsman needs a 20 rd mag....

He's the one defending himself against some sleazebag who will have a 20 rd mag whether it is legal or not...

Why is it so difficult to understand that passing legislation to ban certain weapons or accessories only affects LAW ABIDING citizens, and actually AIDS those who pay no attention to the laws...??...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MuzzyLoader Newbie

MuzzyLoader

Posted
Posted

I guess this incident gives Jordan more fodder for the controversial essay he is writing for his English Class project (ref: Chit Chat Forum).

What a tragedy!  I fear our country is on the verge of implosion.  Prayers for all victims involved in this devistating event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
First-light Veteran

First-light

Posted
Posted

I guess this incident gives Jordan more fodder for the controversial essay he is writing for his English Class project (ref: Chit Chat Forum).

What a tragedy!  I fear our country is on the verge of implosion.  Prayers for all victims involved in this devistating event.

Pretty ironic he is writing this. Hope he gets its right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...