via Monderno.com
CBS 5 - KPHO
Uh.
Wow.
Now a foreign government is asking for a list of US gun owners? With the Seattle Times reporting that their State Legislature introduced a bill that contained this provision...
No. Compromise isn't.
Supporters of the 2nd Amendment, not in name only but in fact, must draw a line in the sand and not give an inch on any proposal...to include back ground checks and closing the gun show loophole.
We give an inch, they'll take a mile. We must say NO to every proposal.
CBS 5 - KPHO
Uh.
Wow.
Now a foreign government is asking for a list of US gun owners? With the Seattle Times reporting that their State Legislature introduced a bill that contained this provision...
“In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall ... safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.With the mess that is going on in Colorado, New Jersey, New York, California and Maryland do you think that any responsible gun owner would believe that compromise is a viable answer?
No. Compromise isn't.
Supporters of the 2nd Amendment, not in name only but in fact, must draw a line in the sand and not give an inch on any proposal...to include back ground checks and closing the gun show loophole.
We give an inch, they'll take a mile. We must say NO to every proposal.
nice, no background checks?
ReplyDeleteso your o.k. with criminals owning guns?
why do politicians always come up with collective controls to combat specific problems? someone used the example of Sudafed. a popular sinus relief medicine. it was found that some (meaning a few people) were using it to produce methamphetamines. so now i have to show an id to buy Sudafed but if i was a user of meth then no id is necessary.
Deletewe have enough laws on the books and criminals still get guns. even in the UK and Australia where there are virtual bans, criminals still get guns.
don't force me into a database, just do a better job of enforcing the laws. we have every law enforcement agency running around with M4's, military style body armor and Bearcat MRAPs and yet they still can't get the job done? add to it they now want to use drones! there are enough laws.
just freaking enforce whats on the books...but to answer your ludicrous question...no i'm not ok with criminals owning guns....liberals either.
Background checks prevent criminals from owning guns? Cool story bro.
Deletelol
ReplyDeletei like that
"i'm not ok with criminals owning guns....liberals either."
i'm just bating you, i know your position, but seriously, gun crime in the uk, virtually doesn't exist, gun crime in the land of oz, is on the way down.
criminals can get guns, that's correct, but it's very hard & unnecessary, and mandatory, tough sentences.
the liberals line was baiting you. i know your positions too! but seriously. explain to me the need for collective behavior to take care of limited, criminal behavior.
ReplyDeletebut that's the thing, it's not limited criminal behavior.
ReplyDeletejust watched the video, i wouldn't be giving mexico any lists with names or address.
limited as regards a nation of 360 million people. the worse thing that 2nd amendment advocates have fallen for is comparing the UK or Australia or Switzerland to the US. compare us to a population base that has as many people. if you do that then the US is a safe place to be.
Delete