101 comments posted · 1 followers · following 0

9 years ago @ - Gun owners weigh in on... · 5 replies · +7 points

There are robberies and assaults unrelated to this but the majority of gun violence is between gangs. Outlawing a product people want just forces it on to the black market where the customers and vendors are no longer provided protection by the police and other legal means. This gives rise to the gangs, who work in protection and distribution for various black market goods and services such as drugs and prostitution. Overall there is a small number of people who commit virtually all the crimes.

That is a world away from where most gun owners are. Those of us with a revolver by the bed or a rifle in the closet are not the issue. Those of us with a polymer-framed semi-auto hidden beneath our shirts while having dinner with our wives are not causing the problems.

Passing laws just to "do something" is a tremendous waste of resources and tax dollars. It feels good to the people behind the measures but will fail to make any noticeable difference in the crime rate.

Rather than struggling over how many bullets fit in the magazines of people who are likely never going to have to shoot anyone, we need to focus on how to recognize and detain those who are mentally ill while preserving their rights. We need to spend time making sure our kids understand what gangs really are and why they need to stay away from them. Studies should be done not on how to curb violence by the non-violent gun owner but to determine how gangs and street violence would atrophy with the legalization of certain recreational drugs like marijuana.

But none of this is the root of the current regime's agenda. Gun control isn't about guns; it's about control.

9 years ago @ - Gun owners weigh in on... · 8 replies · +8 points

Words have caused far more ills than weapons. Even doctors kill more people than guns.

When addressing tyranny, you're assuming that all the members of the military would continue to obey orders. I have more faith in the intelligence and integrity of our men and women in uniform. I contend that, upon the realization that they were being used for nefarious purposes by a tyrannical government, most enlisted would abandon post. I believe many would also liberate military weaponry to equalize the resistance.

9 years ago @ - Gun owners weigh in on... · 15 replies · +8 points

How many words should we limit you to using before you stop considering your first amendment rights intact?

"High capacity" is a false term for most magazines. Typically guns come with standard capacity magazines. During the previous AWB, manufacturers were forced to provide reduced capacity magazines.

With the popularity of flash mobs and instantaneous communication / organization, more and more victims face multiple attackers. Put yourself in that situation. If you were facing 3 or more attackers, how sure are you that 10 rounds is enough? Wouldn't you prefer to hedge your bets with up to 15, maybe 18 rounds?

It doesn't matter how many bullets a gun has though. Criminals are still going to shoot people they shouldn't and law-abiding gun owners will continue causing no problems at all.

9 years ago @ - Gun owner: Law won\'t ... · 0 replies · +4 points

You need to defend all our rights equally. You're making good use of the freedom of speech. Just because you choose to offload the responsibility of your protection onto some other imagined entity doesn't mean that those of us who choose personal responsibility should have false limitations placed upon us so you "feel safe."

9 years ago @ - Gun owner: Law won\'t ... · 1 reply · +1 points

Nobody is saying that and you doing so makes a mockery of the trauma these families are enduring.

9 years ago @ - Gun owner: Law won\'t ... · 12 replies · +28 points

If guns were the real problem, most shootings occur at gun stores, gun shows and shooting ranges. Since 1950, virtually every public shooting which has claimed more than 3 lives has been in "gun free zones," from colleges that prohibited legal carry by faculty to theaters that banned legal carry by patrons.

Willingly limiting your ability to protect yourself in order to feel safe has been proven a foolish choice over and over. The entities that take weapons away from the law-abiding do nothing extra to protect them once they are helpless. The Supreme Court has affirmed multiple times that even the police have no legal obligation to protect you. Your safety is your responsibility.

10 years ago @ - Rodent problem closes ... · 2 replies · +3 points

Waffle House is an anti-gun establishment. Most people shouldn't eat there simply on that factor.

10 years ago @ - Two Norfolk-based ship... · 0 replies · +1 points

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin

Government transparency, including military operations, is essential to us maintaining what it means to be free. Don't want our troops to be killed? Let's pull them back from the 170 countries they're in around the world.

10 years ago @ - TSA reveals weapons ha... · 0 replies · +10 points

The growing list of what the geniuses at the TSA have determined to be dangerous is well-publicized. It's been simple for them to make themselves appear successful and necessary. They simply refer to everything as a weapon. Embroidered logo of a handgun on your purse? Weapon. Baby rattle? Weapon. Cupcake? You guessed it: weapon.

The TSA is on a course to cause more problems than terrorists ever could. On top of that, it's our tax dollars funding the rapid usurping of our rights, the public groping and the rest of the security theater portrayed by the TSA. Airport security needs to be returned to the sane and affordable levels of the private sector.

10 years ago @ - Virginia State Parks v... · 0 replies · +1 points

Correcting the gun laws in state parks seems to have opened the doors to a number of visitors. There's lots I don't agree with him on but in this case, well done Mr. McDonald.