Off-Topic: Thanks once again for looking into it

Lake Martin Topics

(Lake Martin Specific)

111,143 messages

Updated 4/25/2024 7:30:23 PM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,605 messages

Updated 4/25/2024 9:33:24 PM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Lake Martin Fishing

(Lake Martin Specific)

4,169 messages

Updated 4/16/2024 3:16:57 AM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,260 messages

Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Lake Martin SCUBA

(Lake Martin Specific)

169 messages

Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Welcome, Guest

Select View Mode: [ classic | beta | recent ]

	Name:	MartiniMan -
	Subject:	Thanks once again for looking into it
	Date:	1/11/2013 1:33:16 PM

My limits would be with the individual and not the equipment. You could give me a briefcase nuclear weapon and no one would suffer any harm.......well except maybe GF if he cuts me off in traffic with all his Save the Whales, Coexist and I {heart} Obamacare bumper stickers. :-)

It seems obvious to me that anyone convicted of a felony should at least not be able to legally buy a gun. Maybe the same with people that suffer certain mental illnesses. But at the end of the day, like the shooter at Sandy Hook, they can steal what they want if they are so motivated.

But no, I don't see any reason to limit the kind of guns that a law abiding citizen can purchase because I want criminals to always wonder what they might encounter during an illegal act. And it won't prevent criminals from getting what they want and doing with it what they want. Having said, I have no interest in owning a machine gun or an M16 but if someone has the money and are a law abiding citizen then I see no reason to restrict them.

However, if there were to be some form of gun control laws it should be done at the state level and should not infringe on the 2nd Amendment. If some state wants to restrict guns then at least I have the right to move out and/or not visit the state if it is no longer safe and I can't protect myself. I specifically avoid travel to places like DC or Chicago because I know their gun control laws make them less safe. When I fly myself I take a handgun with me (assuming where I am going has no restrictions). But I also take along a bottle of water and toiletries in a greater than 4-ounce size so I am really a rebel.