Posted on 02/07/2007 2:40:44 PM PST by Jim Robinson
"Do you think it applies to children too? the right to own a gun? it doesn't give an age in the big C. when you get technical".
I keep seeing this question pop up all over this thread.
Well the restriction is kinda silly-my son can hunt and carry a gun, but he cant "own" one.
I think the younger a child (within reason) learns how to properly handle a weapon, the better.
An example.
My son knows that a weapon is not a toy and how it should be handled at all times.
He went to see a friend and they went over to another kids house. that kid (not being properly trained) pull out his 22 and pointed it at my son and his friend. my son knew enough to LEAVE and not go back.
But kids that dont know, that arent taught, would more than likely not realize the danger OR would think it was cool to "play" with a weapon.
The kids exuse? "well its not loaded". famous last words.
Boats I could handle!
Idaho is beautiful country.
My husband and i drive thru thier every summer on our way to washington. Actually thought of retiring out that way, but land is too expense:(
Yeah, hardly any TV for me iether unless its criminal minds or CSI lol
LOL:)
"You would think the liberals wouldnt want that type of job, but perhaps thier values have price tag?"
ROFL you should see how many high&mighty liberals saturate the "Defense Industry".
Try walking into a school zone carrying a rifle and telling everybody that.
Perhaps you advocate providing inmates in prisons and asylums firearms so that they can manifest their (unlimited) Second Amendment rights?
Hear hear!
But what about after August '08?
In my opinion, the point in question is: what is the appropriate action to take IF the Republican who emerges as the candidate is not a strong conservative?
In my opinion, if we get a weak conservative (as, in my opinion, a Ford, a Dole, a GHW Bush) then we have a choice: give our full support, or allow the Democrat to win through inaction.
I think history's told us that crying 'meh' when our guy is a weak candidate provides us with object lessons on exactly how bad (Carter, Clinton) it can get when we let the Democrat win. We're only now dealing with the full impact of the disasters Carter unleashed.
The 'rats don't have this problem. Somehow the pink triangle brigade, the union guys, the trial lawyers and the KOS wackos ignore their disputes in November and pull the D lever. We had some good fortune with the Green types in '00 but that was not nearly as big a dent as Perot made in our party.
That having been said, I'm 100% with you with regard to the primaries. Now is not the time to compromise or settle for anything less than what we want. Now is the time to fight for the best conservative we can.
Thanks for everything and especially for standing up now.
Well thats a scary thought!
But it's true.
Imprisoned convicts lawfully have most of their other rights infringed due to being convicted, so that is a completely absurd argument. But that's about all you have left, eh?
well that explains alot.
My children, when old enough to responsibly understand and use firearms, will be given suitable rifles. My niece just got her first .22 - at age 10. Some posters in this thread got theirs at age 8.
Are there rules? Yes.
All guns are always loaded.These rules cover all safety issues. If you obey them, fine - do what you want. Scale them accordingly depending on what arms are being discussed (yes, even WMDs fit in once you get past the hysteria). Violate them, and others have the right to disarm & detain you until you deal with the consequences and they can trust you will follow those rules.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
Know your target, and what is beyond.
Once someone has the mental & moral capacity to exercise 2nd Amendment rights, they may do so - or, put more accurately, once someone has the mental & moral capacity to safely exercise 2nd Amendment rights (or ANY rights), nobody else has any right to stop them.
Yeah? hmmmmm....... you might have to freepmail me some info.
Though hubbie thinks 2500 an acre is high anywhere (but hes getting more reasonable LOL)
Amen and big Bump!
Used to be that kids would take rifles to school, to either participate in the school shooting team or hunt on the way home. No problems.
It is huge and probably hard to follow if you weren't there at the beginning of it. :-)
What Rudy is saying (badly) in my interpretation, and I have gone on you tube and watched this several times, is that “The right to restrict arms is not granted to the federal government.” That is a correct statement. However, the thinks that States which according to the constitution are not bound be the restrictions on the federal government may have that right and it will be to use his words (If I remember them correctly) “interesting to see how this works out”.
He’s willing to let the Supreme court decide. Which IMHO is how it will be as well.
Links
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMAXw3ZZuYU
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bM-r3dDMd8
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.