Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: spunkets

The point of gun control is to keep guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, who like you said pose no threat to society, and to keep them out of the hands of criminals, thugs, gangs, etc. The way to do that is to make sure you have standards so law abiding citizens can purchase them and to get illegal guns off of the streets.

As much as I disagree with Bloomberg and I think he is going too far, but I don't know how any conservative regardless of how pro 2nd amendment they are could oppose ridding the streets of illegal weapons.


241 posted on 02/11/2007 9:01:28 AM PST by NorthEastRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies ]


To: NorthEastRepublican
The point of gun control is to keep guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, who like you said pose no threat to society,

Baloney. The opposite is true.

...and to keep them out of the hands of criminals, thugs, gangs, etc.

No law has ever done so. The cities that have imposed the most draconian "gun control" laws are the ones in which it isn't safe to walk down the street.

Your misrepresentations are why it is unacceptable for any presidential candidate who could be described by your screen name to be president.

242 posted on 02/11/2007 9:11:34 AM PST by EternalVigilance ("With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]

To: NorthEastRepublican
"The point of gun control is to keep guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, who like you said pose no threat to society. ... The way to do that is to make sure you have standards so law abiding citizens can purchase them and to get illegal guns off of the streets."

It was Rudy that took all guns away in NYC. He took them from FReepers. Even Dinkins didn't do that. He also tried to screw the gun industry and backed fed laws that banned semi-autos. Bloomberg is simply carrying on the Rudy tradition.

The 2nd Amend does not allow for "standards". What that means is one needs permission from the govm't to have them, and some gun grabbing bureaucrat gets to decide who is worthy enough to have them. Since that's the mentality of a gun grabber. I have no respect for them, and will not support anyone that has such a mindset. It is repugnant to freedom, and to the Constitution.

"I don't know how any conservative regardless of how pro 2nd amendment they are could oppose ridding the streets of illegal weapons."

Their efforts don't regard "illegal weapons", they regard all. They make no distinction between the criminal and the citzen. They treat hte citizen, as if they were criminals. They ban guns and forbid folks from mounting an effective self defense. Population density is irrelevant. I grew up in Chicago, and the neighborhood didn't go down hill, until king Daley and the police forbid effective defense of self and property. It had nothing to do with race either. It had to do with gun grabbing, and forbidding folks from taking effective action against thugs.

I was mugged at knife point on Michigan ave in downtown Chicago, at noon, on a weekday. The response of all the folks on the sidewalk, was that I was the bad guy, because I got loud and told the creep to shove it. NY prosecutors, and their enablers did the same to Bernie Goetz. I see no difference between a gun grabber and a murderous thug. The only diffence is the clothes they wear, and one does it under the color of law.

"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do and how you do it."
Rudy Giuliani

Yeah, I'll toss a vote for someone that hates Freedom as much as him.

249 posted on 02/11/2007 11:07:20 AM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson