billvon 3,120
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
Recommended Posts
I'd actually be ok with that provided I don't have to register my firearms. The government does not need to know which firearms I own.
www.FourWheelerHB.com
rushmc 23
And again I wll say, most if not all of the regulation you list above it to make sure you are trained or put in place to collect money, not control whether or not you can own or participate. That is NOT the case in gun regulation (for the most part)Quote>I prefer 41,000 people die in traffic accidents each year, rather than not
>have the freedom of personal mobility from private ownership of automobiles.
I agree that we do have a great amount of freedom that comes from driving - even though we need driver's licenses, car registration and insurance to exercise those freedoms.I see a difference here Bill. In the case of the car all you list is mainly to collect money, not control ownership
>I prefer that 9,000 people die from drowning each year, rather than not have the
>choice to go swimming or own a backyard pool.
I agree, it's great that we can do that. And we can do that even when the law says we have to put up fences to keep kids from drowning in our pools.
>I prefer that 30 or so people die skydiving every year, rather than not have the
>freedom to skydive.
I agree there too. We all have the freedom to skydive, despite having to follow two very long lists of rules (one mandatory and government enforced, one semi-mandatory and organizationally enforced.) Indeed, partly _because_ of those rules, we avoid some of the more dramatic accidents that might restrict our ability to skydive Again, what you list here is not to control whether or not you can skydive
I could go on and on, but I feel I have made my point. Every single one of the activities you listed above can be dangerous. Every single one is regulated by the government to some degree. The key is finding the balance - and that balance is not "no guns" (as some think) nor is it "no restrictions whatosever" (as others think.) The great majority of americans are amenable to discussing where that midpoint should be.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
billvon 3,120
>I see a difference here Bill. In the case of the car all you list is mainly to
>collect money, not control ownership.
You're kidding, right? Have you ever heard of:
-revoking a driver's license due to speeding or drunk driving
-liens being placed against a car's title
-safety and emissions requirements for registration
>Again, what you list here is not to control whether or not you can skydive
Try jumping into Washington, DC with a BASE rig and see whether or not the rules are in place to control where, when and how you skydive.
>most if not all of the regulation you list above it to make sure you are trained
>or put in place to collect money, not control whether or not you can own or
>participate.
As I have demonstrated, it is clearly both.
>collect money, not control ownership.
You're kidding, right? Have you ever heard of:
-revoking a driver's license due to speeding or drunk driving
-liens being placed against a car's title
-safety and emissions requirements for registration
>Again, what you list here is not to control whether or not you can skydive
Try jumping into Washington, DC with a BASE rig and see whether or not the rules are in place to control where, when and how you skydive.
>most if not all of the regulation you list above it to make sure you are trained
>or put in place to collect money, not control whether or not you can own or
>participate.
As I have demonstrated, it is clearly both.
kallend 2,150
QuoteAnd again I wll say, most if not all of the regulation you list above it to make sure you are trained or put in place to collect money, not control whether or not you can own or participate. That is NOT the case in gun regulation (for the most part)Quote>I prefer 41,000 people die in traffic accidents each year, rather than not
>have the freedom of personal mobility from private ownership of automobiles.
I agree that we do have a great amount of freedom that comes from driving - even though we need driver's licenses, car registration and insurance to exercise those freedoms.I see a difference here Bill. In the case of the car all you list is mainly to collect money, not control ownership
>I prefer that 9,000 people die from drowning each year, rather than not have the
>choice to go swimming or own a backyard pool.
I agree, it's great that we can do that. And we can do that even when the law says we have to put up fences to keep kids from drowning in our pools.
>I prefer that 30 or so people die skydiving every year, rather than not have the
>freedom to skydive.
I agree there too. We all have the freedom to skydive, despite having to follow two very long lists of rules (one mandatory and government enforced, one semi-mandatory and organizationally enforced.) Indeed, partly _because_ of those rules, we avoid some of the more dramatic accidents that might restrict our ability to skydive Again, what you list here is not to control whether or not you can skydive
I could go on and on, but I feel I have made my point. Every single one of the activities you listed above can be dangerous. Every single one is regulated by the government to some degree. The key is finding the balance - and that balance is not "no guns" (as some think) nor is it "no restrictions whatosever" (as others think.) The great majority of americans are amenable to discussing where that midpoint should be.
And I want the EXISTING law to be enforced with enough controls to make sure that it really is followed. Like you need a Dr's say-so to drive a heavy truck or pilot a plane. After all, as Scalia told us, gun ownership is not an unlimited right. (Must really piss off some people that he wrote that.)
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteQuoteQuoteNot a peep out of the conservatives when the Bush administration stomped over our other rights, but any suggestion from the SCOTUS that the 2nd is "not unlimited" and that existing restrictions are legal and they get all pissy.
so why is their hypocrisy worse than your's?
They both smell to me.
Do you think anyone should be allowed to buy a machine gun without any check? Or do you actually recognize shades of grey?
Do you, like JR, think a few massacres are the price others have to pay for your recreational gun use?
Until you can explain why Bush's moves to infringe on our rights to fight terrorism is bad, but sacrificing medical privacy rights in gun control is good, good evening to you. Vacation is coming soon and I have better uses for my time than herring laced hypocrisy.
JR's most recent posting, along with Ben Franklin, have a clue.
>have the freedom of personal mobility from private ownership of automobiles.
I agree that we do have a great amount of freedom that comes from driving - even though we need driver's licenses, car registration and insurance to exercise those freedoms.
>I prefer that 9,000 people die from drowning each year, rather than not have the
>choice to go swimming or own a backyard pool.
I agree, it's great that we can do that. And we can do that even when the law says we have to put up fences to keep kids from drowning in our pools.
>I prefer that 30 or so people die skydiving every year, rather than not have the
>freedom to skydive.
I agree there too. We all have the freedom to skydive, despite having to follow two very long lists of rules (one mandatory and government enforced, one semi-mandatory and organizationally enforced.) Indeed, partly _because_ of those rules, we avoid some of the more dramatic accidents that might restrict our ability to skydive.
I could go on and on, but I feel I have made my point. Every single one of the activities you listed above can be dangerous. Every single one is regulated by the government to some degree. The key is finding the balance - and that balance is not "no guns" (as some think) nor is it "no restrictions whatosever" (as others think.) The great majority of americans are amenable to discussing where that midpoint should be.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites