Gun Control, who's for it?

Because if you don't bother to quote your source you look like you made it all up.

My point exactly. If I post something I say is a FACT, I also post my source. I asked Bro Maisky to please show me a while back where he came up with the quote that the order came from the White House to disarm the citizens of New Orleans after Katrina hit. He never came up with it. Why? I don't know. He thinks we won't believe it. Well Maisky, who cares! At least it won't look like you made it up.

By the way here is the article on the event. It was Nagin and the Police superintendant who gave the order to disarm the citizens of New Orleans.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=177


By the way, the NRA sued the City of New Orleans and the city tried to have it thrown out but the judge refused. It's still in progress. Oh, also the only one who were disarmed were the law abiding citizens but the criminals ran wild.

Look like I made it up? Where you quote sources who made it up? What difference? This IS politics. ROFL

sources who made it up? So what you're saying is that the NSC, national safety council, a video of the New Orleans PD superintendent stating that all guns will be removed, is all made up? I don't know Maisky, but you almost sound like someone who makes up lies to cast doubt. How do you expect to be taken seriously?

I know one thing for a fact, and that is if guns were instantly eradicated from this earth. We would still be killing each other, even if we had to do it with our bare hands. So maybe guns aren’t such a bad thing? At least they’re a lot faster then being strangled to death. So I think that you guys need to agree to disagree. Guns are a fact of life, and we’re going to have to learn to live with them. We’re running out of room boys.
Oh yes, one more fact. I’ve got a couple of bottles Champagne, chilling for New Years on my back porch. Hope you all have a good one.
JC

Take away the right to keep arms? No way!

“Gun control insists that a woman lying raped and strangled with her own pantyhose is preferable to that same woman explaining to the police how her attacker got shot.”
– Mike Rivero, whatreallyhappened.com.

Gun legislators should take heed of Arthur Conan Doyle’s remark: “I had come to an entirely erroneous conclusion which shows, my dear Watson, how dangerous it is to reason from insufficient data.”

Statistics can sometimes tell the truth. In America’s capital, Washington, in the District of Columbia, crime is as rampant as it is on the Durban beachfront. Honest citizens are not allowed to own guns in Washington, D.C.

Yet, gun ownership in Kennesaw, Georgia, became mandatory over 20 years ago to control crime. The population of the city tripled between without one gun homicide during the measured time. This city has become an example to other American cities as a way to control crime – make it a law that honest citizens must own a gun.

Greenleaf, Idaho Councillor Steven Jett said, after legislation he introduced requiring citizens to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, “the thing is, Greenleaf doesn’t really have crime, at least as most cities define it. The most violent offence reported in the past two years was a fist fight.”

It is hard to argue with facts...qualify your citizens, train them, and make them own guns for a safer community. Bad guys are going to be a little more careful about attacking citizens that they know are armed. It’s already evident that they do as they please with an unarmed citizenry.

Harsh gun laws just make it easier on the bad guys, so why introduce them?

Unless you’re on the side of the bad guys or in cahoots with them, which seems, I hate to say, more and more to be the case in this country.

The South African Constitution “One Law For One Nation” says, “When interpreting any legislation, and when developing the common law or customary law, every court, tribunal or forum must promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights, the Bill that protects the rights of all citizens of South Africa... and…The Bill of Rights applies to all law, and binds the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and all organs of state.”

High up in the order of rights in the Bill are these: Freedom and security of the person.

Everyone has the right to freedom and security of the person, which includes the right:

a. not to be deprived of freedom arbitrarily or without just cause;

b. not to be detained without trial;

c. to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources;

d. not to be tortured in any; and

e. not to be treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way...

..especially from criminals who don’t care for or abide by this Constitution of ours!

I personally interpret this section of the South African Bill of Rights as the right of the woman mentioned earlier to always be able to explain to the police how her attacker got shot, because the law made her own a gun


Just something to remind us of our rights here in the new year.

Gun town U.S.A., revisited - success of Kennesaw, GA's gun ownership requirement law in preventing crime
National Review, August 15, 1994 by Luther M. Boggs, Jr.

Find More Results for: "Kennesaw, Georgia and gun control "
Delving into the deep...
The Glock gun spiel: a...
Active membership...
Section...
In March 1982, responding to the passage of a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Illinois, and the fawning media coverage that accompanied it, the city council of Kennesaw, Georgia, decided to make a statement of its own. With exceptions duly made for convicted felons, the disabled, and those with religious objections, the council passed (unanimously) an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun.

The moment the story hit the wire services, a media invasion swept into Kennesaw, a small city on the northwestern frontier of suburban Atlanta. The telephones of council members began ringing off the hook. CNN called. Today called. The then-mayor, Darvin Purdy, went on Donahue.

The press reacted predictably. The Washington Post issued a mock salute to "the brave little city of Kennesaw, Ga., soon to be pistol-packing capital of the world." In a column titled "Gun Town U.S.A.," Art Buchwald described a place where routine disagreements would be settled in Wild West shootouts. Mayor Purdy declined to talk to the Post about his own guns, claiming that "the caliber of my weapons is a personal matter." In the hands of the Post's reporter, Purdy ended up sounding like Dr. Strangelove's General Ripper, the nut bent on preserving his "precious bodily fluids."

"The national media," recalls Chief of Police Dwaine L. Wilson, "made a big shadoo out of it, [but] most of the people in this area already owned some type of firearm." Actually, the media's amazement rang hollow. The press gang expected as much from the rural South. But it is safe to say they did not expect the results.



This is a very interesting article. I'm sure all those who hate guns would hate to hear about this place in Georga. I'm sure my fellow "Yankees" would just attribute it to the backwardness of the South. Well the anti gun folks were WRONG! For over 20 years they, the anti gun crowd, have been waiting for the "old west" gun fight. But, it has yet to happen.

Here's and interesting statistic. It's for all the gun haters who think the Police will protect us every time.

Currently, there are about 150,000 police officers on duty at any one time to protect a population of more than 250 million Americans or almost 1,700 citizens per officer.

To all those who think Pelosi is good for America better think again.

Nancy Pelosi isn't just anti-gun. She's also an anti-speech Speaker. Mark Tapscott of the Washington Examiner recently reported on a bill that Pelosi hopes to push through Congress. It's called the "Honest Leadership and Open Government Act." But if we had truth-in-labeling laws for lawmakers, this bill would be called the "First Amendment Extermination Act."

Under this bill, grassroots organizations that let you know what's going on in Congress would be required to register-that's right, register-with the government. Even worse, according to Tapscott:

"All informational and educational materials produced by such groups would have to be registered and reported on a quarterly basis. Failure to report would result in severe civil penalties (likely followed soon by criminal penalties as well)."

Why on earth does the government think it has the authority to register grassroots lobbying groups, and why do they think they're entitled to require these groups to turn over "informational and educational material?" Nancy Pelosi might know what the First Amendment says, but she obviously has little respect for it. Just like the Second Amendment. I'm beginning to wonder if there's anything in the Bill of Rights that she agrees with.

You can bet this is just the first step for Pelosi. As gun owners, we know the drill. First comes registration, then comes confiscation. If Pelosi gets her way, it won't be long before Congress is deciding whether what you have to say can ever be said without their review and approval.

Well, I believe in the First Amendment, and I'm going to keep speaking loud enough for you to hear me. If Nancy Pelosi doesn't want to listen, that's her choice. But she can't shut me up, and she can't shut NRA down

You know what I don't get. The NRA is about preserving gun rights to the American citizen. Why are there so many other organizations trying to take away that right. I mean the ACLU who says they are for all the rights say the 2nd amendment isn't for today in so many words. Thats hypocritical if you ask me.

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
~Samuel Adams

Wow, not only can this guy brew great beer, he also knows what he's talking about when it comes to firearms ownership! It sure would have been fun to 'talk guns' with this guy while drinking a nice cold Sam Adams. I don't drink very often but I think Sam Adams will be my prefered beer from now on.

This is totally hypocritical. So typical of those in the anti-gun with money and or political power. Guns aren't good for those in the socalled commoner bracket. The ones who are are more at risk of being involved in a violent crime. I personally feel sorry for those in the Chicago area. I've been there before and it's a beautiful city. But the gun laws SUCK! Now here's the article.


Unfortunately for average citizens of Chicago, the possession of handguns has basically been banned since the early 1980’s. However, if you live in the Windy City and would like to own one for personal protection or target shooting, there is an avenue available to you: Become a City Alderman!

Apparently, these Chicago officials are part of an elite ruling class that can exercise their innate and (supposedly) protected right to keep and bear arms while forbidding you to do so. I was not aware of this discriminatory and despicable policy until I read an article from The Chicago Tribune reporting on a criminal raid of Chicago Alderman Arenda Troutman that resulted in the discovery of her legal .357 revolver.

Believe it or not, but this blatant hypocrisy is not what upset me most about this story. Sam Adam Jr., Troutman’s lawyer, defended his client’s need for owning and carrying a concealed handgun:
Adam said Troutman needed protection in the economically depressed area where she lives and serves. Her home has been broken into in the past…

"She didn't go up to the North Shore to run, or to the southwest suburbs among the affluent to make things better," he said. "She's right there in the 'hood."
No kidding? She felt the need to carry a handgun for personal protection? I bet she is not the only one out of millions of Chicago residents that live in one of our nation’s most crime-ridden cities.

It's all right if you think they are wrong, and obviously you don't agree with them. But what makes it "hypocritical"? Are you assuming ACLU functionaries are carrying while they are denying everybody else the right?

It is "hypocritical to defend ANY of the ammendments and then turn around and attack another! They ALL stand or they ALL fall! You can't pick and choose!