PDA

View Full Version : San Francisco handgun ban...


M-Funf
11-09-2005, 12:30 PM
I'm thankful I don't live in SF. Now only non-licensed handguns (you know, the ones the criminals have) will be out there...

"...Measure H prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and make it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

Although law enforcement, security guards, criminals (I added that part :rolleyes: ) and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April..."

Link to the whole article:

handgun ban in SF (http://www.ktvu.com/politics/5281949/detail.html)

vegashomeexpert
11-09-2005, 12:32 PM
I'm thankful I don't live in SF. Now only non-licensed handguns (you know, the ones the criminals have) will be out there...

"...Measure H prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and make it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

Although law enforcement, security guards, criminals (I added that part :rolleyes: ) and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April..."

Link to the whole article:

handgun ban in SF (http://www.ktvu.com/politics/5281949/detail.html)
What are they thinking?

M-Funf
11-09-2005, 12:34 PM
What are they thinking?

No idea...:rant:

bcampbe7
11-09-2005, 12:36 PM
Disarm the Man, crime goes up. Arm the Man, crime goes down.

bigmac
11-09-2005, 12:40 PM
What are they thinking?

Knee-jerk reaction of a liberal majority that ISN'T thinking. I'm no fan of the NRA, but I do applaud the no-holds barred challenge they are sure to mount.

Dan K
11-09-2005, 12:42 PM
Having lived in SF for awhile, I would not want to live or work in some areas without a handgun.

Workin' 4 Toys
11-09-2005, 12:49 PM
I'm thankful I don't live in SF. Now only non-licensed handguns (you know, the ones the criminals have) will be out there...

"...Measure H prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and make it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

Although law enforcement, security guards, criminals (I added that part :rolleyes: ) and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April..."

Link to the whole article:

handgun ban in SF (http://www.ktvu.com/politics/5281949/detail.html)

Is this really for real? What country am I in?????

tommcat
11-09-2005, 12:58 PM
damn hippies :mad:

Ric
11-09-2005, 01:19 PM
damn hippies :mad:
milk or stevo, do you have a smilie wielding some pistolas????

88 PS190
11-09-2005, 01:19 PM
Morton Grove IL has a NO! firearm policy. How's that strike you, its been in effect for awhile too.

Weren't able to get it to go through in skokie though, the Jewish population is wary, and has seen this happen before.

Andyg
11-09-2005, 01:19 PM
Makes you wonder what we have the second amendment to the constitution for.

Amendment II

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

M-Funf
11-09-2005, 01:22 PM
Makes you wonder what we have the second amendment to the constitution for.

Exactly my thoughts...shouldn't the people who wanted this ban have been forced to try to change the constitution??? Of course, that will never happen, so they go for the local ban with sympathetic liberals...

djhuff
11-09-2005, 01:59 PM
Am I the only one who sometimes wishes for that big one to go ahead and hit and for Cali to slide off into the pacific?

Danimal
11-09-2005, 02:04 PM
Damn tree huggin, Birkenstock wearin, pot smokin, long haired, entitlement wantin, far left wing moon bat hippies!!!!! :mad: :mad:

mgurley
11-09-2005, 02:06 PM
Ridiculous!!!!!!! :(

bcampbe7
11-09-2005, 02:11 PM
Am I the only one who sometimes wishes for that big one to go ahead and hit and for Cali to slide off into the pacific?


As long as out California friends get out first!

shepherd
11-09-2005, 02:15 PM
Do you all really feel safer with a gun? When I mentioned to my wife that maybe we should get a gun, she looked at me kind of strange and said "you don't really want a gun in this house do you?" :eek:

She is kind of crazy.... uh, never mind :o

AirJunky
11-09-2005, 02:20 PM
So since the federal laws takes precedense over the city & state laws when talking about the recent legalization of pot in areas like SF & Denver, wouldn't this be the case here too? Federal law, or the 2nd amendment, would preside over this local law too.
Seems like it would be a helluva battle.

mgurley
11-09-2005, 02:23 PM
Do you all really feel safer with a gun? When I mentioned to my wife that maybe we should get a gun, she looked at me kind of strange and said "you don't really want a gun in this house do you?" :eek:

She is kind of crazy.... uh, never mind :o

It really doesn't matter wether you feel safer with a gun in your house or not. To each his own! But if the criminals know you don't have a gun what's to stop them.

Look at it this way: Let's say I am a criminal in SF obviously I already have a gun but if I don't guess what I can get one on the black market relatively easy with or without this silly *** law. O.K. now I know that you don't have a gun because it is against the law and you are a law abiding citizen. Now, I am coming to your house to take whatever and whoever I want with me because I know you can't stop me. Know why because I know you do not have the means to stop me.

shepherd
11-09-2005, 02:24 PM
current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April..."


Hmmm, classic method to subdue the population...

first step: everyone who owns a gun must register with the govt so we know who you are.

second step: bring your guns in and turn them over to us by April.

next step??? : if you don't, we're coming after you and putting you in the concentration camp


I don't own a gun, but I'm proud that I live in a country where I can legally do so if I want.

M-Funf
11-09-2005, 02:26 PM
Do you all really feel safer with a gun? When I mentioned to my wife that maybe we should get a gun, she looked at me kind of strange and said "you don't really want a gun in this house do you?" :eek:

She is kind of crazy.... uh, never mind :o

About 6 months ago, my wife informed me that she would like a handgun as a birthday gift this year (next month). We went shooting with my cousin and her husband, who live in AK part time and have several handguns/rifles.

I asked her if she wanted it for self defense, because a 12ga. or 20ga. shotgun would be much more effective.

She said it's not about protection, it's about exersizing our second amendment rights :D

Of course, now we're getting the handgun as well as a shotgun...

M-Funf
11-09-2005, 02:29 PM
Look at it this way: Let's say I am a criminal in SF obviously I already have a gun but if I don't guess what I can get one on the black market relatively easy with or without this silly *** law. O.K. now I know that you don't have a gun because it is against the law and you are a law abiding citizen. Now, I am coming to your house to take whatever and whoever I want with me because I know you can't stop me. Know why because I know you do not have the means to stop me.

The argument really doesn't hold water. This applies to handguns ONLY. Shotguns are a much more effective form of self defense.

The two most terrifying sounds known to somebody who breaks into your home????

1) The sound of a shotgun racking a round into the chamber...

2) "WOOF"

:D

bigmac
11-09-2005, 02:35 PM
Do you all really feel safer with a gun?

From MY standpoint, no. I have a CCW, required by work I do for the Sheriff's Dept (SWAT doc (http://www.pbase.com/hmac/tac_team) ), but meth raids and high-risk warrants are about the only times I actually carry a weapon. And yes, despite body armor and helmet, I feel safer armed in those situations. At home, in this area, however, no. I have several handguns, but they're all locked up. If I wanted to increase my home security, I'd start locking my doors at night.

Nevertheless, my particular situation is different than living in San Francisco by a long shot.

shepherd
11-09-2005, 02:40 PM
The argument really doesn't hold water. This applies to handguns ONLY. Shotguns are a much more effective form of self defense.


Yeah, but try sleeping with a shotgun under your pillow ;)

jmyers
11-09-2005, 02:41 PM
The way I see it I'm not giving up my guns!!! Mine are locked up, but until they can assure me the crimminals gave up all their guns mine stay!! :mad: When my wife is at home and I am away on buisness she will be alot safer with a way to defend herself!! Locks and alarms are nice, but if someone gets through that bring them on!! I can 't figure out the laws, they lift the ban on assault guns, and then ban hand guns what the H**l!!! Sorry if this offends any tree huggers but we live in a different world now SORRY!! :twocents:

Zach S
11-09-2005, 02:50 PM
This is going to force normally law abiding citizens to make the choice of wheter or not they want to give up their constitutional right to bear arms. I personally would be a criminal in April.

PendO
11-09-2005, 02:56 PM
The way I see it I'm not giving up my guns!!! Mine are locked up, but until they can assure me the crimminals gave up all their guns mine stay!! :mad: When my wife is at home and I am away on buisness she will be alot safer with a way to defend herself!! Locks and alarms are nice, but if someone gets through that bring them on!! I can 't figure out the laws, they lift the ban on assault guns, and then ban hand guns what the H**l!!! Sorry if this offends any tree huggers but we live in a different world now SORRY!! :twocents:


Man, SF is F'ed up! Hopefully the upper level cts (CA Supreme and US Supremem) will eventually visit this issue ... sure seems to be violating a citizens constitutional rights.

MYMC
11-09-2005, 03:00 PM
Hey it worked for the Aussies...right?
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/aus.html

A little history for you:
"The laws adopted by the Weimar Republic intended to disarm Nazis and Communists were sufficiently discretionary that the Nazis managed to use them against their enemies once they were in power." In other words, they didn't need to pass additional laws. The Nazis did pass a weapons law in 1938, but that only added restrictions to the previous law, especially for Jews and other "non-citizens."

Further:
although gun control laws helped the Nazis suppress political dissidents and round up German Jews for extermination, "they weren't the major part of the process." Later, when they invaded Eastern Europe, Cramer says the Nazis did indeed benefit from the inability of their victims to fight back

I hate to sound reactionary but for the longest time now I only buy stainless and composite weapons...I figure I'll need to hide them one day.

M-Funf
11-09-2005, 03:03 PM
I hate to sound reactionary but for the longest time now I only buy stainless and composite weapons...I figure I'll need to hide them one day.

I didn't want to spend the extra $$ on SS or Comp, so I bought myself a foodsaver 8p

Works like a champ! I can leave a firearm at the bottom of the pool or toilet tank for weeks vacuum packed in those bags...

MYMC
11-09-2005, 03:05 PM
Good idea...used zip locks for ammo before.

88 PS190
11-09-2005, 03:07 PM
it'd be an interesting poll to see how many gun owners would still keep a couple firearms around despite a change in local laws.

I agree about shotguns for self defense. Lower risk of overpenetration, can be loaded with less lethal alternatives. And much easier to use in dim lighting, or w/ nerves goin.

milkmania
11-09-2005, 03:12 PM
milk or stevo, do you have a smilie wielding some pistolas????

http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/images/smilies/gun_smiley.gif

http://www.wannabebigforums.com/images/smilies/shoot.gif

PendO
11-09-2005, 03:13 PM
Really though, how may conservative gun owners live in SF ... it probably just makes all those crazy womens' basketball fans a little safer after a few pops at the bar.

jmyers
11-09-2005, 03:14 PM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/images/smilies/gun_smiley.gif

http://www.wannabebigforums.com/images/smilies/shoot.gif
Ok, who's the bad guy smiley? :confused: Remember take away the good smiley's guns!! :noface:

milkmania
11-09-2005, 03:20 PM
they shoot back!!!

OhioProstar
11-09-2005, 04:16 PM
So since the federal laws takes precedense over the city & state laws when talking about the recent legalization of pot in areas like SF & Denver, wouldn't this be the case here too? Federal law, or the 2nd amendment, would preside over this local law too.
Seems like it would be a helluva battle.

This is an obvious attempt by the far left to legislate away citzens rights. Liberals can't win at the ballot box in most cities and would certainly lose a ballot issue regarding gun ownership. What they are doing is passing a local law that will challeged and then heard by some leftist Federal judge. He will rule in favor of the law and then whole thing will end up tied up in law suits...meanwhile other liberal cities will enact similar laws throughout the country until the Supreme Court turns the original decision over. By then the damage will be done and the Frenchy Leftest will have had a couple years of "safe" living and will have wasted a lot of taxpayer monies. You heard it here first.

shepherd
11-09-2005, 04:30 PM
I believe Washington, D.C. has a complete "no gun" law -- not just handguns are banned. They say don't even try to drive across the city (i.e., from MD to VA) if you're carrying a weapon in the car... They take it very seriously there.

Federal law does take precedence over local and state laws, but only if those laws are inconsistent with the federal law. I don't think there is a specific federal law that prevents states from regulating gun ownership (other than the Constitution, which is what you gun-huggers are hanging your hat on -- and I agree with you there).

PendO
11-09-2005, 04:49 PM
other than the Constitution, which is what you gun-huggers are hanging your hat on -- and I agree with you there

"other than the constitution" ... well at least we have that on our sides, plus with the potential makeup of the Supreme Ct. we can breathe a little easier ... honestly, I couldn't imagine living somewhere where it was illegal to own a gun (handgun or otherwise) ... not that I need one to feel safe, but I don't think that is is necessary or statistically warranted to ban gun posession. If other cities have been successfull then it does not bode well for those in SF who want to see if overturned. Oh well, its lock and load in E. Wash. and N. Idaho!

bigmac
11-09-2005, 04:56 PM
Man, SF is F'ed up! Hopefully the upper level cts (CA Supreme and US Supremem) will eventually visit this issue ... sure seems to be violating a citizens constitutional rights.

The case in Morton's Grove, Illinois in 1981 is illustrative. They enacted a complete handgun ban almost identical to the new one in San Francisco. It went to district court and the judge upheld the ban. It then went to Federal Court, where the Seventh Circuit Court upheld the district court's decision supporting the ban. It was then appealed to the US Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case, stating that it was not a Constitutional issue - the Second Amendment did not prohibit such a ban. It's even more interesting because Illinois has a specific constitutional amendment that mirrors the US Constitution's 2nd Amendment.

So there you go...I would be skeptical that overturning San Francisco's handgun ban will succeed.

OhioProstar
11-09-2005, 05:20 PM
The left and their liberal agenda's will be the downfall of the US.

pilot02
11-09-2005, 05:22 PM
This is going to force normally law abiding citizens to make the choice of wheter or not they want to give up their constitutional right to bear arms. I personally would be a criminal in April.


That makes 2 of us!

tommcat
11-09-2005, 06:25 PM
I believe Washington, D.C. has a complete "no gun" law -- not just handguns are banned. They say don't even try to drive across the city (i.e., from MD to VA) if you're carrying a weapon in the car... They take it very seriously there.

yep, and they have one of the highest violent crime rates in the country. so that's workin out well for 'em :rolleyes:

stevo137
11-09-2005, 07:14 PM
milk or stevo, do you have a smilie wielding some pistolas????

http://deephousepage.com/smilies/2gunsfiring_v1.gif

This is crazy! What are they thinking??? This is my house dammit!!!
Don't tell me that I can't protect it!
Not to mention, how are they going to compensate people for their valuable guns?

http://deephousepage.com/smilies/AR15firing.gif

shepherd
11-09-2005, 07:15 PM
The left and their liberal agenda's will be the downfall of the US.

I agree, but I also think the right and their conservative agenda is just as dangerous to our liberty. They are taking away our freedoms too, just different freedoms (freedom of speech, right to die, medicinal marijuana, freedom from debt...).

It's us moderates in the middle with reasonable minds who will save the world!

shepherd
11-09-2005, 07:20 PM
yep, and they have one of the highest violent crime rates in the country. so that's workin out well for 'em :rolleyes:

Well, things have cleaned up there a lot, but not because of the gun control laws. At any rate, the violent crimes in that city were mostly criminals shooting each other (and the occasional bystander) -- you know, drive-by gang-related stuff. The fact that the people they were shooting at also had guns didn't discourage them, so I doubt putting guns in the hands of law abiding citizens would have helped.

Although I'm debating against you guys, I still agree that banning guns is unconstitutional and an unwarranted intrusion on our freedoms. Whether or not it makes you safer or reduces crime is beside the point -- we have a constitutional right to bear arms!

juju151
11-09-2005, 07:52 PM
You all might as well face it...

It's coming!...we will ALL be disarmed in the not so distant future!

I honestly believe that...

But I'll tell you what...When it happens, I'll either hide every gun I own, or I'll go down blazin', just like a replay of Waco!

It's kind of funny...They passed a law a while back in Kennesaw, GA...it's a very small town here on the outskirts of Atlanta, and the law was that EVERYONE HAD to have a weapon! The crime rate there dropped to nothing! Go Figure??? :D

All the scumbags were too scared to mess with anyone in that town!

Ric
11-09-2005, 07:54 PM
cool .
You all might as well face it...

It's coming!...we will ALL be disarmed in the not so distant future!

I honestly believe that...

But I'll tell you what...When it happens, I'll either hide every gun I own, or I'll go down blazin', just like a replay of Waco!

It's kind of funny...They passed a law a while back in Kennesaw, GA...it's a very small town here on the outskirts of Atlanta, and the law was that EVERYONE HAD to have a weapon! The crime rate there dropped to nothing! Go Figure??? :D

All the scumbags were too scared to mess with anyone in that town!

jimmer2880
11-09-2005, 08:26 PM
Yes, I do feel safer owning a gun. With that said, they are locked inside a safe. I also have pepper spray (which, for you canadians, I've been told is banned up there for some strange reason) staged throughout the house. Plan is, get to the pepper spray quickly, By then, someone should be able to get the guns out. My wife & I regularly shoot & will not bat an eye at putting a cap in someone who's going to harm anyone in the family.


I know several will argue with me & to each their own. I'm not telling anyone that it is the right thing for them to own a gun. Just let me make my own decisions.

stevo137
11-09-2005, 08:26 PM
All the things that made our country great "THEY" want to take...

BrianM
11-09-2005, 08:34 PM
This is going to force normally law abiding citizens to make the choice... I personally would be a criminal in April.

I was born and raised in Kalifornia and am now glad that I live down in the "dirty south" for reasons like this. It is going to be a very cold day in hell before a law like that is passed in Louisiana.

If I lived in SF I would absolutely be a criminal come April.

darkbrown
11-09-2005, 09:08 PM
Knee-jerk reaction of a liberal majority that ISN'T thinking. I'm no fan of the NRA, but I do applaud the no-holds barred challenge they are sure to mount.
sounds like you have a rough road ahead of you. We went tru this and as it stands, handguns and automatic (regardless of barrel length)are restricted weapons,.....[some people can own some, but automatics are out, and nobody but the law is "packin"]. Hunting rifles/shotguns are legal but havta be registered. Amunition or reloading supplies can only be purchased by those with a certificate,(gov't issued, 5 year term). We do not have a constitutional decree righting us gun ownership,.here it is seen as a privelege. But that's not the point of my rambling........our political machine(?) has squandered over $2 BILLION on this sh** so far, and there's no end in sight. Point is most citizens don't want and can't afford this nonsense. However, some very well healed($), well positioned, well meaning(?), very vocal, and incredebly stupid and niave upper middle class neoconservative types have steamrolled the political machine in this country to make it law.
Be Vocal and public,...........take this threat more seriously then we did.
just my 2 cents..............awww h*ll prolly closer to a nickle's worth,.can afford any more any more.

River Rat
11-09-2005, 09:17 PM
Do you all really feel safer with a gun? When I mentioned to my wife that maybe we should get a gun, she looked at me kind of strange and said "you don't really want a gun in this house do you?" :eek:

She is kind of crazy.... uh, never mind :o


When we travel my wife makes sure I pack my 357

And yes I feel safer with a gun in my house

Man I love that woman :D

River Rat
11-09-2005, 09:21 PM
The argument really doesn't hold water. This applies to handguns ONLY. Shotguns are a much more effective form of self defense.

The two most terrifying sounds known to somebody who breaks into your home????

1) The sound of a shotgun racking a round into the chamber...



:D

In my Opinion that only allows them to shoot first

River Rat
11-09-2005, 09:25 PM
I didn't want to spend the extra $$ on SS or Comp, so I bought myself a foodsaver 8p

Works like a champ! I can leave a firearm at the bottom of the pool or toilet tank for weeks vacuum packed in those bags...

I like the way you think :uglyhamme

River Rat
11-09-2005, 09:40 PM
Recently we were in Chicago getting gas, the old fellow next to us saw my 357 in the door of the Suburban. When he looked at me I said “don’t worry I’m from Texas”. He just rolled his eyes and got in his car.
I will always carry a gun when I am on the road. If I run into problems I will deal with that as it comes!

stevo137
11-09-2005, 10:06 PM
Recently we were in Chicago getting gas, the old fellow next to us saw my 357 in the door of the Suburban. When he looked at me I said “don’t worry I’m from Texas”. He just rolled his eyes and got in his car.
I will always carry a gun when I am on the road. If I run into problems I will deal with that as it comes!

You're lucky that a Chicago cop didn't see it.
Even the most popular celeb in Chicago will go to jail for that.

bigmac
11-09-2005, 10:15 PM
sounds like you have a rough road ahead of you. We went tru this and as it stands, handguns and automatic (regardless of barrel length)are restricted weapons,.....[some people can own some, but automatics are out, and nobody but the law is "packin"]. Hunting rifles/shotguns are legal but havta be registered. Amunition or reloading supplies can only be purchased by those with a certificate,(gov't issued, 5 year term). We do not have a constitutional decree righting us gun ownership,.here it is seen as a privelege. But that's not the point of my rambling........our political machine(?) has squandered over $2 BILLION on this sh** so far, and there's no end in sight. Point is most citizens don't want and can't afford this nonsense. However, some very well healed($), well positioned, well meaning(?), very vocal, and incredebly stupid and niave upper middle class neoconservative types have steamrolled the political machine in this country to make it law.
Be Vocal and public,...........take this threat more seriously then we did.
just my 2 cents..............awww h*ll prolly closer to a nickle's worth,.can afford any more any more.


San Francisco's move is kind of odd, and out of step with the rest of the US, where states have been passing "shall issue" concealed carry laws right and left over the last few years. The "doom and gloom" scenarios of wild west shootouts on every corner of those states, as was shrilly predicted by the anti-gun lobby, has not come true. In fact, violent crime has dropped in virtually every area where concealed carry laws have been enacted.

Laurel_Lake_Skier
11-09-2005, 10:16 PM
I agree about shotguns for self defense. Lower risk of overpenetration, can be loaded with less lethal alternatives. And much easier to use in dim lighting, or w/ nerves goin.

And at close range, they make a hole the size of your fist! An intruder with a wound like that is going to be down for the count and down right now.

Laurel_Lake_Skier
11-09-2005, 10:20 PM
San Francisco's move is kind of odd, and out of step with the rest of the US, where states have been passing "shall issue" concealed carry laws right and left over the last few years.
We are working to get this passed in Wisconsin right now......a bit behind everybody else thanks to our governor's veto. The hope is to override it this time around.

All you Wisconsin TT memebers......let your elected officials know where you stand.

Workin' 4 Toys
11-09-2005, 11:13 PM
I have been thinking of carrying it because of all the recent PITBULL attacks lately. There have been about 5 in the past 4 days. Kids, adults, and the elderly. Some had to be shot to get them away. Makes me think........

bucky
11-09-2005, 11:39 PM
It seems a person has to have some experience around handguns to become comfortable with them. If you want to change someone's mind, invite them to go plinking. The gun owners of this country are going to have to do more than file lawsuits to make the generations growing up in large cities without firearms understand.
Myself, I was always more at ease with long guns, which is why I only own 4 handguns. I have a ton of pepper spray and 5 shotguns, though, so I'm O.K. on the home defense front.http://www.wannabebigforums.com/images/smilies/shoot.gif

bigmac
11-09-2005, 11:52 PM
It seems a person has to have some experience around handguns to become comfortable with them. If you want to change someone's mind, invite them to go plinking. The gun owners of this country are going to have to do more than file lawsuits to make the generations growing up in large cities without firearms understand.
Myself, I was always more at ease with long guns, which is why I only own 4 handguns. I have a ton of pepper spray and 5 shotguns, though, so I'm O.K. on the home defense front.http://www.wannabebigforums.com/images/smilies/shoot.gif


The necessity of home defense really depends on where you live, I'm sure. It's just not an issue around these parts. My biggest home-defense problem is the fricken' muskrats that undermine my shore line and eat my boat cabling. My trusty ol' Ruger .22 auto target model loaded with some Muskrat-Be-Gone pellets (hollowpoint variety) is just what the doctor ordered.

Otherwise, all the weapons are locked up. I've found the statistics pretty compelling that, generally speaking, a gun in the house for home defense is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder.

6ballsisall
11-09-2005, 11:55 PM
What happened to the right to bare arms???? How can this be constitutional???

Workin' 4 Toys
11-09-2005, 11:59 PM
Mac, surely you must be familiar with your Minnesota native Chai Vang and havoc he reaked in Wisconsin.
That is reason enough for me to have one ready. You never know.... No matter where you are.

bigmac
11-10-2005, 12:01 AM
What happened to the right to bare arms???? How can this be constitutional???According to the US Supreme Court, the Constitution doesn't specify the right to bear any PARTICULAR type of weapon, and doesn't preclude bans on various types.

6ballsisall
11-10-2005, 12:03 AM
According to the US Supreme Court, the Constitution doesn't specify the right to bear any PARTICULAR type of weapon, and doesn't preclude bans on various types.

Sigh........... I suppose we have a group of attorneys to thank for this one. :rolleyes:

bigmac
11-10-2005, 12:06 AM
Mac, surely you must be familiar with your Minnesota native Chai Vang and havoc he reaked in Wisconsin.
That is reason enough for me to have one ready. You never know.... No matter where you are.

What a bizarre case that is. He got what he deserved, but what an utterly inconceivable tragedy. Some of those people he shot/killed WERE armed.

bucky
11-10-2005, 12:07 AM
The necessity of home defense really depends on where you live, I'm sure. It's just not an issue around these parts. My biggest home-defense problem is the fricken' muskrats that undermine my shore line and eat my boat cabling. My trusty ol' Ruger .22 auto target model loaded with some Muskrat-Be-Gone pellets (hollowpoint variety) is just what the doctor ordered.

Otherwise, all the weapons are locked up. I've found the statistics pretty compelling that, generally speaking, a gun in the house for home defense is more likely to kill a family member than an intruder.

Yes, all my guns are locked in a steel gun cabinet. I've got a 5 year old, and I regularly teach (and demonstrate) gun safety to him. His Red Ryder is locked up with the rest of the guns.
Edit: this smiley just cracks me up! http://www.wannabebigforums.com/images/smilies/shoot.gif

bigmac
11-10-2005, 12:08 AM
Sigh........... I suppose we have a group of attorneys to thank for this one. :rolleyes:

Only 9 attorneys - or at least 5 of them.

Danimal
11-10-2005, 09:37 AM
What a bizarre case that is. He got what he deserved, but what an utterly inconceivable tragedy. Some of those people he shot/killed WERE armed.


They may have been armed but it doesn't do you much good when you were shot in the back at a distance. The guy went off the deep end and even though the other people were armed , they were also sportsman that most likely never even thought about pointing a gun at anything but an animal that was in season.

Sad Sad story... dude got 6 consecutive life sentences. I wish WI had the death penelty!!

Workin' 4 Toys
11-10-2005, 01:23 PM
What a bizarre case that is. He got what he deserved, but what an utterly inconceivable tragedy. Some of those people he shot/killed WERE armed.
I would venture to say, he would have taken all their lives if they weren't armed. I'd be first in line to arm myself in that area (if I had not already had one)

PendO
11-10-2005, 02:12 PM
According to the US Supreme Court, the Constitution doesn't specify the right to bear any PARTICULAR type of weapon, and doesn't preclude bans on various types.

... but with the new, and potentially MORE conservative Sup. Ct., I would not discount the possibility that this issue will eventually make its way down that course ... they can "do" funny thing with the constituion, hell, with all that the "commerce clause" has been used for you never know:) ... they can have mine, "bullets first" ... here is a site The U.S. Constitution and 44 States have Constitutional provisions enumerating the Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms. (http://www.saf.org/default.asp?p=rkba_protections) ... glad I live in the state I do! (Concealed Weapons Permit In Wallet:))

jmyers
11-10-2005, 03:39 PM
I thought this would be my answer to the gun law!! And all the BS!! :D