Originally posted by David O'Meara:
Hmm, seem to be in the minority here, but isn't it gun related violence that creates the need for gun ownership, or does that sound like a circular argument?
Maybe we live in different worlds
Originally posted by George Brown:
After all, if no-one has them no-one can use them in gun-related crime.
Originally posted by Bodie Minster:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
THE 1982 ORDINANCE
Sec. 34-1. Heads of households to maintain firearm
a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefor.
(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Originally posted by Greg Harris:
i think only responsible, trained people should own guns... people who have taken a safety course of some type and who are not felons.
I cant understand why people need guns.
what i am saying is that if i choose to keep a gun in my home just in case someone decides to break-in and harm my family, i will keep a gun. furthermore, if that someone does break into my home, he (or she) better be a quicker draw than i am.
Originally posted by Shama Khan:
By the way, I am all for public not having guns as soon as the police in New York City give up theirs. Because they can shoot someone in the back 20 times and get away with it, so when they are shooting someone just because s/he reached for a wallet. Maybe (just maybe) a memeber of the witnessing public can reach for his/er gun in the defense of a fellow member of the public.
Originally posted by Greg Harris:
one of the recent police shootings that got a lot of media attention was with a known criminal... the guy had around 12 or 15 previous arrests. of course, the media "forgot" to mention that part of it.
the cops that shot him knew who he was and that he had a record... they were treating the suspect like a dangerous criminal (one of his arrests was for armed robbery) and proceeding with caution. the guy made a move to his pocket, or his back, and the cops shot.
Originally posted by Sridevi Kovvali:
i felt that the General gave an appropriate answer to her level so that she can understand it.
I think that the question was stupid and the answer was not stupid. The female interviewer should have been more responsible in asking question with a General and also shouldn't jump to conclusion immediately(Just go through the interview).
Switching from electric heat to a rocket mass heater reduces your carbon footprint as much as parking 7 cars. Tiny ad:
the value of filler advertising in 2020https://coderanch.com/t/730886/filler-advertising