Pro/Forums - View Single Post

Blackeagle · 05-22-2003, 03:32 PM

The gun bill now being considered needs to get a quick boot.

But I won't bet on that happening.

This is a move by those who wish to ban ALL guns in time to get a good start. And their excuse for this is the risk of terrorism in the US. Yet the terrorist attacks that have been carried out havn't used guns. The terrorists have used fertilizer and fuel bomb in one instance, the Fed. building in Oaklahoma city, a bomb that I don't recall the make up of in the first world trade center attack, and airliners in the 9/11 attacks along with a few box cutter knives. SO WHY DON'T THEY BAN GUNS?? WHY NOT AIRLINERS, FERTILIZERS AND BOX KNIVES?? It's because that they are only useing the 9/11 attack as cover for passing legislation they have wanted for years, but couldn't pass.

I don't see any use for full automatic firearms in hunting or target shooting. But I most strongly support gun ownership of all other guns.

If the choice were to be banning all these other guns along with the fully automatics OR allowing unrestricted ownership of fully automatics I'd have to opt for the second choice.

Sadly so called gun control is, I think, best described two ways.

1) It's really people control by the goverment, not gun control.

2) Use both hands.

And why is it that Rosie O'donnel speaks out in favor of banning gun ownership for others? It makes no sense as she has armed body guards. She's in favor of them being armed to insure her & her loved ones safty. She's just aginst others with the will to protect themsilves to having the same right. I happen to think the joke regarding her is really a good one. "Saying guns cause crime, is like saying it's the foods fault Roise is fat."

The Clinton gun ban should be allowed to expire, not expanded.

05-22-2003, 03:32 PM	#52
Blackeagle Thermophile Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: U.S.A = Michigan Posts: 1,243	The gun bill now being considered needs to get a quick boot. But I won't bet on that happening. This is a move by those who wish to ban ALL guns in time to get a good start. And their excuse for this is the risk of terrorism in the US. Yet the terrorist attacks that have been carried out havn't used guns. The terrorists have used fertilizer and fuel bomb in one instance, the Fed. building in Oaklahoma city, a bomb that I don't recall the make up of in the first world trade center attack, and airliners in the 9/11 attacks along with a few box cutter knives. SO WHY DON'T THEY BAN GUNS?? WHY NOT AIRLINERS, FERTILIZERS AND BOX KNIVES?? It's because that they are only useing the 9/11 attack as cover for passing legislation they have wanted for years, but couldn't pass. I don't see any use for full automatic firearms in hunting or target shooting. But I most strongly support gun ownership of all other guns. If the choice were to be banning all these other guns along with the fully automatics OR allowing unrestricted ownership of fully automatics I'd have to opt for the second choice. Sadly so called gun control is, I think, best described two ways. 1) It's really people control by the goverment, not gun control. 2) Use both hands. And why is it that Rosie O'donnel speaks out in favor of banning gun ownership for others? It makes no sense as she has armed body guards. She's in favor of them being armed to insure her & her loved ones safty. She's just aginst others with the will to protect themsilves to having the same right. I happen to think the joke regarding her is really a good one. "Saying guns cause crime, is like saying it's the foods fault Roise is fat." The Clinton gun ban should be allowed to expire, not expanded.