Daniels: Defending the right to bear arms—with limitations

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Hop

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jan 21, 2008
    5,084
    83
    Indy
    Glad to see her getting beat up in the comments. Kirk is in there too.
     

    rhino

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    30,906
    113
    Indiana
    I admit that I’m a bit astonished to see this and don’t currently plan to join them, but I absolutely believe in their right to arm themselves for self-protection.

    . . . as long as how they do it complies with her arbitrary standards based on her obvious ignorance of firearms, self-defense, and the 2nd Amendment.


    Now for the other side of the coin: What’s wrong with passing a few laws that won’t limit the ability of law-abiding people to carry weapons but will help to limit their availability to others? I’m thinking in particular of the gun-show loophole. I see no reason not to close it and require background checks of all purchasers at gun shows.

    They just can't let go of this "gunshow loophole" boogeyman. It's been repeated so much that they just assume it's factual.



    And frankly, I don’t see any need for the general public to own semi-automatic weapons or armor-piercing bullets. Those who want to shoot such weapons for sport should be able to do so at a firing range, safely, but why should they need them anywhere else?

    She's spent some time with the Shannon Watts-approved reading list, I see,


    I’m sure I’ll now hear from National Rifle Association members who will tell me it’s their Second Amendment right. I’m aware of the constitutional issues, but can’t we be reasonable and find a middle ground?

    Oh, wait—it’s that polarization thing again. No, I guess not.

    Ah, apparently she is not aware.
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    92,863
    113
    Merrillville
    Semi autos make up the majority of the market.

    It's like saying, I'm okay with cars, but no one needs an automatic transmission.
     

    KellyinAvon

    Blue-ID Mafia Consigliere
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 22, 2012
    24,792
    150
    Avon
    That's even more ignorant than a reply from Joe Donnelly.

    And frankly, I don’t see any need for the general public to own semi-automatic weapons or armor-piercing bullets. Those who want to shoot such weapons for sport should be able to do so at a firing range, safely, but why should they need them anywhere else?

    There it is, "need". If I wanted to be told what I "need" I'd move to a country run by Communists. And does this person understand the difference between "pull-bang-pull-bang-pull-bang" and "pull-bang-bang-bang-bang"?? I think not.
     

    Expat

    Pdub
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    23   0   0
    Feb 27, 2010
    108,736
    113
    Michiana
    I heard one of the leftists on TV this morning saying that guns in Virginia prevented people from using their 1st amendment rights. I was thoroughly convinced...
     

    oldpink

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 7, 2009
    6,660
    63
    Farmland
    Is it any accident that those who are the single biggest threat to the 2A, Democrats and other leftists, are the exact same crowd making war on the 1A now?
    Just coincidence, I suppose.
     

    walleyepw

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Sep 9, 2012
    2,843
    63
    So " Bill of Rights " is "bill of well if it suits what I think might work". What is trying to be accomplished is to wash out the Constitutions and Bill of Rights to allow the groups in power to be able to forcibly snatch the power from where it rightfully presides, WE THE PEOPLE!
     

    The Bubba Effect

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    19   0   0
    May 13, 2010
    6,221
    113
    High Rockies
    She is asking for reasonable concessions. All she wants to do is cut off a few of your toes. They are not important toes and it would make her feel a lot better if she could cut them off. She's not asking to cut off your feet, just some toes off each one, and not even the big or little toes, just a few in the middle nobody will miss. What is wrong with making some compromises with people like her? It makes them feel better and all you are out are a few toes.
     

    DFM914

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Nov 7, 2010
    814
    28
    Avon
    "Daniels: Defending the right to bear arms—with limitations"
    Another liberal trying to strip America of their constitutional rights!

    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
    - Thomas Jefferson
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    92,863
    113
    Merrillville
    She is asking for reasonable concessions. All she wants to do is cut off a few of your toes. They are not important toes and it would make her feel a lot better if she could cut them off. She's not asking to cut off your feet, just some toes off each one, and not even the big or little toes, just a few in the middle nobody will miss. What is wrong with making some compromises with people like her? It makes them feel better and all you are out are a few toes.

    :yesway:
     

    GIJEW

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 14, 2009
    2,716
    47
    I'm no longer surprised but it still is amazing how in the name of common sense, they want laws based on fantasy, and then complain about not being able to have an "honest conversation"
     
    Top Bottom