Replies

The last time this was suggested in AZ, the mediots trotted out the tenured, intelligent, distinguished U of A college professor, and all he could come up with was the same old mindless, lame, unthinking cliches, "This isn't the Wild West any more, we don't need gunfights at the O.K. Corral", blah, blah, blah.

Of course the "reporter" couldn't ask him where was his statistical evidence, that loosening gun restrictions on trained, background-checked, law-abiding citizens, has ever caused anything but a deterrent to crime.

We have people teaching us, and reporters reporting to us, who can't think. They are supposed to be thinking, curious, honest, investigative people.

But they can't do it.

Of course the “reporter” couldn’t ask him where was his statistical evidence, that loosening gun restrictions on trained, background-checked, law-abiding citizens, has ever caused anything but a deterrent to crime.

What part of the first amendment is, trained, background check, law abiding found? those words have to have come from the people who will do anything to infringe on the rights of the first amendment, along with permits, liences, etc.

It seems to me you are using the very words of the anti gun activists, i understand you have common sense in mind, but if we use thier reasoning we simply can not win, because they will determine who has a right to keep and bare arms.

If anyone has to belong to a gun club and have training to have the right to keep and bare arms, it is no right what so ever

Its the same as if you would have to be a member of a church to call yourself a christian.