An amazing case for reducing gun ownership in America

Vermont, where I grew up, has perhaps the most permissive gun laws in the USA. No permit is required for concealed or open carry, assuming that the carrier is not among the excluded classes (criminal, insane, court order, etc). However, because of recent events, the Republican Governor has announced he will suggest a modest set of gun control measures for the Legislature to consider this session.
 
Wez said:
The two have nothing to do with each other, you may as well say, "You can't talk about gun control because you don't believe in my fairy in the sky"
Click to expand...

Guns require a human hand to kill. Abortion takes a human hand to kill. No similarities?

Tell me how does the fairy kill? Especially since it doesn't exist?
 
Booter said:
Borrowed:
Why shouldn't these current military style weapons be any different? Would we as gun owners be willing to surrender our high capacity clips? I know I would.
Click to expand...
Liar. What do you want? A cookie? Just do it. I’m surprised you even own HCM’s!! Spare us your pat on the back and let your action do the talking.
 
Booter said:
Borrowed:
it seems that any mention of removing a particular style of weapon from commercial sales is interpreted as a violation of the 2nd Amendment which only states that we can own a weapon not define the type of weapon we can own. Modifying these military style weapons for commercial sales in such a way as to limit their round capacity to 3 - 5 shells vice allowing 30 round clips to be mounted would seem workable.

War has been instrumental to the introduction of era weapons into our hunting community since WWI. Why shouldn't these current military style weapons be any different? Would we as gun owners be willing to surrender our high capacity clips? I know I would.

As a hunter, who owns a military style weapon, a veteran and NRA Life member, I favor a single shot rifle for that activity because it actually takes some skill to harvest animals I put in the freezer.

Why do we have to continually link solutions to these issues as an effort to totally remove our rights to keep and bear arms?

When do we, as gun owners, step up and help guide the NRA and others to do more to saving our children, grandchildren and families?
Click to expand...
Whoever you borrowed this from return it, full of inaccuracies. Shotguns shoot shells and clips are what you use in your hair. Makes no sense,
 
Booter said:
Borrowed:
it seems that any mention of removing a particular style of weapon from commercial sales is interpreted as a violation of the 2nd Amendment which only states that we can own a weapon not define the type of weapon we can own. Modifying these military style weapons for commercial sales in such a way as to limit their round capacity to 3 - 5 shells vice allowing 30 round clips to be mounted would seem workable.

War has been instrumental to the introduction of era weapons into our hunting community since WWI. Why shouldn't these current military style weapons be any different? Would we as gun owners be willing to surrender our high capacity clips? I know I would.

As a hunter, who owns a military style weapon, a veteran and NRA Life member, I favor a single shot rifle for that activity because it actually takes some skill to harvest animals I put in the freezer.

Why do we have to continually link solutions to these issues as an effort to totally remove our rights to keep and bear arms?

When do we, as gun owners, step up and help guide the NRA and others to do more to saving our children, grandchildren and families?
Click to expand...
So you're trying another Rabbit Hole?
 
espola said:
What you said - " you do a wonderful job of talking out both sides of your ass".
Click to expand...

Your statement is there for you to read. You are pro abortion. I asked you a direct question and you tried to skirt the obvious position you hold. Hence, you talking out of both sides of your ass.

Thanks for playing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top