Ron

One example is all I PROVIDED. You could look at Jolly Old England to see that after Blair's addition to the 1920 handgun ban people had to turn them in as well. You could look at Australia. But really...All I had to do is PROVE ONCE that it has happened already in the US to prove it is a risk. Now, care to debate that? Or just resort to your normal BS? And lots of data proves that pools are involved in pool deaths, knifes are involved in knife deaths, ect. But that only means exactly that and that alone. It does not mean that those deaths would not have happened without the gun...As rising knife crime in England has shown. About people wanting to have them all turned in you claimed: HERE? Maybe, maybe not. There have been plenty of people that think they should be turned in...Maybe not melted down...But people have said they should not be allowed in private hands. And as for the Anti gun group as a whole... So you lose there as well. Members of the anti gun group DO want them turned in....The only real defense you have is to attack "Melt them down". But even you should realize that the disposition after confiscation is really just a red herring. (Of course, I think that's all you do anyway). And they do...How many cops have been mugged for their side arms? How many holdups at gunshows? When was the last time you saw a robbery at a gunstore? Criminals will go for easy targets. A shotgun sitting in an abandoned car is an easy target. A pistol sitting in the holster of a person is not. But of course you knew that, you just grasped onto a bit of wording to make an inane comment that was nowhere close to the INTENT. From the same guy that wrote this: "I suppose 2 is almost more than 10 in Ronworld." You are losing ground every time you type. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Heck, it is even easier than that...He has not needed one in 63 years (31 working on the south side of Chicago)...So there must not be a gun problem at all! "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The VT shooter bought one hangun and then waited the required 30 days to buy the second handgun he used. That right there should show you that the real crazies don't mind waiting. It was done in Japan. And don't forget OKC..McVey did that with a rental truck and some fertilizer and fuel. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And in those 63 years (31 on the S. Side of Chicago)...How many times have you been shot? Based on the data you gave..There must not be a gun problem at all then. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The confiscations in New Orleans were also considered in retrospect to be unconstitutional.... But, that didn't stop it from actually happening now did it? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I don't think anyone will freak out on you since you asked a very reasonable question to get more information. A few reasons...I'll try to list a few off the top of my head. 1. Registration almost always leads to confiscation. NYC confiscated a bunch of legally owned semi auto's in 1990 based on information that was collected in the 1968 2. "Reasonable" gun laws often lead to more and more unreasonable gun laws (see below). Plus the whole debate on what is considered reasonable is like trying to discuss reasonable wing loadings for all jumpers. 3. Despite the best efforts of gun control groups...They have not been able to show any data that proves their argument. Of course, any data brought up is debated down to the font used from either side...But the anti-gun groups have not been able to show and correlation, and one study done by the CDC in Atlanta said they could NOT find any correlation between gun bans and reductions in crime. About the only study I have seen is that gun bans reduce the number of suicides by gun...But suicides by other means is HIGHER in those areas. 4. Registration, licensing ect is often used to prevent people from doing something...Think of the Jim Crow "poll taxes". And the NFA act of 1934 is a great example. In 1934 it cost 200 dollars (The modern day equivalent of 3200.00 dollars) to register a 3 dollar silencer, or a 10 dollar shotgun. It was implemented to prevent the poor from owning those types of weapons; the rich could own as many as they wanted. The Gun Control Act of 1968 many think was really to prevent blacks from being able to obtain weapons. The AWB in 94 was to prevent "crime" but the weapons picked to be banned according to the DOJ were used in less than 4% of crimes (around 1% for the actual assault weapons). All "reasonable": The British Gun Control Act of 1920 allowed the purchase of pistols if you could prove a "good reason" and could get a police permit. They banned shot shotguns and machine guns using the same logic..."Civilians don't need these things" so no one could have a "good reason" to own one. In 1946, the Home Secretary announced a policy change: henceforth, self-defense would not be considered a "good reason" for being granted a Firearms Certificate 1953 they passed a ban on any "offensive weapon". In 1959 thy banned "flick knives"...Quick opening knifes...Of course no data actually found they were more dangerous than any other knife, but they *sounded* evil. 1966 three cops were killed by revolvers....So Home Secretary Roy Jenkins told Parliament that controls on SHOTGUNS were needed. The Criminal Justice Act of 1967 required a license for the purchase of shotguns now. Firearms Act of 1982 made certain toy guns illegal. In 1987 after Hungerford Semi-automatic center fire rifles were banned. 1996 Dunblane. a guy that had been reported to the police several times went on a killing spree. Feb 1997 all but .22 cal handguns were banned. Blair removed the .22 exemptions from the ban making all handguns illegal. Even though handguns are illegal...Gun crime is up The gun laws actually bit them in the butt when in 1940 the British Govt put ads in American papers asking Americans to send personal weapons to England. The NRA sent about 7k weapons over. The difference is that phone taps are aimed at individuals. Gun registration affects an entire group without cause. A true comparison would be phone taps on anyone named Muhammad in the US no matter what they have done. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

As opposed to the anti gun side wanting to turn them all in and melt them all down? If I have to pick between a govt that trusts honest citizens to carry a loaded gun vs, a govt that wants to disarm everyone....I'll pick the govt that trusts citizens. I still find it funny you cry about your model rocket motors being regulated, you cry about airspace being regulated, you fight against canopies being regulated...But you are all for regulating this one thing. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And yet you STILL will not answer a simple question. I bet if one of your students gave you BS like you try to spout...you would fail them. Epic fail for you...Yet again. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

If you think so...But in reality gun shows are filled with guns and ammo, yet they do not have shootings. You can try to claim that auto shows are also not shooting filled...And you would be correct. But that does not prove your point in anyway. Guns do not cause crime. Guns do not commit murder. Otherwise large concetrations of guns would have move violent events. But places like schools that do ban guns have a higher rate of events than places packed with guns. So, guns do not cause crime. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

*I* have always know a difference. YOU have always just avoided answering simple questions. If we could get you to answer simple questions instead of ducking them...Then maybe you would make some progress of your own. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

More tap dancing? Sure it was clearly not in reality a gun free zone. But according to LAW it was a gun free zone meaning it was illegal to carry there. So it raises two points: 1. This just shows that laws will not prevent a criminal from committing a crime. A criminal is not going to turn around at some sign saying the possession of a gun is not allowed...This has been proven time after time. 2. I have asked this before...And you have avoided answering. How many shooting sprees have occurred at a gun show? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Dance , dance, dance. More intentional obtuseness from you. You know EXACTLY what was being discussed. But being honest and answering it would not allow you to rant, so you perform some convoluted twisty dance like normal. Sad...You might be fun to discuss if you didn't play so many BS games. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And those restrictions are to prevent speech that prevent someone creating a "clear and present danger according to Holmes. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), it said the free speech could only be limited in if it was planned and likely to cause a danger like a stampede. So you could theorize that any limits on ANY Amendment follows the same logic. CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER. Like carrying a firearm and waving it around. Reckless discharge...ect. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And you also seem to think that he would be OK with AQ having nukes. I guess that means you are not...Then you must be willing to go invade them to prevent it. See how slippery slope works? And you are just trying to back peddle since you know I have your number. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

What makes you think mnealtx has no problem with AQ buying nukes? All I did was use YOUR same logic on YOU. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And banning an object to prevent an activity from a criminal has worked how well? What I still fail to see is how people can get upset about any infringment on several rights....But suggest more on others is just fine and we should just accept it and help. You think my type is "crazy". Well, I just support the Constitution...To INCLUDE the Amendments you hold dear. Others seem to select which ones they approve of and which ones they do not care about....The ones they care about they will fight tooth and nail to protect them, the ones they do not care about they are willing to let go. I'll leave you with a poem that describes why some "gun nuts" do not want yet another stupid law passed that will do nothing....Yes, a majority of America does not care, and will sit by and maybe even support more gun restrictions. But that does not make it right anymore than most people not caring that some anti god billboard has been taken down. You suggested that the pro gun group get together and define Assault Weapon so that the Govt could better ban them, unlike the last attempt. At what point do we realize that our freedoms have been taken? And at what point is the tipping point that there really is no hope of the founding fathers original intent being possible? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

So if you (private citizen) wanted to buy a gun from me (private citizen)...We should have to take it to a dealer first? Most (all?) dealers at gunshows run a NICS check already. It is private to private sales they want to require background checks. NICS covers that pretty well now. But you think I should have to run a background check on you if you wanted a gun from me? NICS removed that years ago. No, hanguns are NOT registered now except in some states. Not according to the 2nd. "Shall not be infringed". "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nope as long as they do not use them. I guess you are for invading NK and Iran to prevent them from doing exactly that then? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

It was a gun free zone since legal citizens are not allowed to be armed there. Answer me this....How many shooting sprees have happened at gunshows? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No. I understand the difference. The biggest thing I see is how you cannot answer a simple question for fear of looking foolish. Instead, you tap dance and backpeddle till just watching you gets people winded. See, more tap dancing...You really should try out for dancing with the stars. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Your previous dodge you mean. So by wading through your normal BS, we see that you do in fact admit things are better now than in 2004. It is such a shame that it requires so much BS and tap dancing to get you to answer a simple question. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I bought 4.5k rounds of 7.62 X 39 at Academy Sports for I think 150.00 per k. But even online has it for around 200 per k. for stuff like Wolf. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No, you just want to read it that way since it would make it fit into your view of those people. I see very few conservatives on here that condemn anyone that decided to use force. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Actually it is supported by facts. The DOJ released a report that stated that less than 4% of the types of weapons banned by the AWB had been used in a crime. And if you recall the weapons used in the LA shootout were illegally converted FULL AUTO weapons. The crime for converting, or even telling someone how to convert, a semi to full auto is a crime with a max 10 year prison sentence. Those guns were ALREADY illegal long before the shootout...Like 1934. Feinstein told 60 Minutes television: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America turn them all in, I would have done it." This was after she slipped the AWB into the Clinton-Schumer crime bill. She also tried to ban .50 cal rifles with some claim to terrorism that does not exist. And I also agree. But to trample all over someones rights is not the answer. You want to save more lives? Ban swimming pools. There are more guns than swimming pools in the US, yet pools kill more people. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And yet most of Congress voted to allow the use of force. And if that is the case than it is not Bush's fault either. The point of THIS line of discussion is that Amazons claim that I still support being there is not true. Several people supported the invasion based on what they knew at the time (To include HRC, Bush and most of Congress and me). Several of those think that it is time to withdraw based on several other factors. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334