I think the largest problem people have with licenses and registration is that the government then has a list of everyone who legally owns a firearm and --could-- the use that list to target individuals at some later date. Also there is the problem of the government releasing that information willingly or unwillingly not to the public so that criminals then have a list of people who do and do not have firearms.
-- Christopher Tyler MTCRE/MTCNA/MTCTCE/MTCWE Total Highspeed Internet Services 417.851.1107 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 11:45:57 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Campus Shootings Your points are largely good ones. Requiring a license for guns as we do for handling dangerous chemicals, driving cars, flying aircraft, etc would not impede on your ability to defend yourself from wildlife, or criminals, or even to participate in a militia..... and it would not be a completely crazy thing. Presumably, if you see a need to have a gun, then you'd get a license. With that said, I disagree with all current gun control legislation for one reason: The constitution says my right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. They get around it with tax laws and interstate commerce regulations. If it's that easy to circumvent the constitution then why do we have it? Who says they couldn't put a tax on public gatherings or regulate the interstate distribution of media? Thereby circumventing the first amendment without having to challenge it directly. IMO any gun control laws that aren't preceded by a constitutional amendment should never have happened and the supreme court should not have upheld them. On 10/12/2015 11:39 AM, Dan Petermann wrote: > Its is the person, not the gun. > > Any number of household chemicals can be used to maim or kill. There are > gasses, poisons and explosives that can be manufactured from legal to > purchase chemicals. > > The gun gets singled out because it it easy to conceal and has that > �scary� factor. > > Should we outlaw baseball bats? How about knives? Maybe only "assault > knives�, you know, those scary looking Rambo ones. > > Cars are a highly lethal weapon. I could kill more people with a car that I > ever could hope to with an assault weapon. Football game and an monster truck > anyone? > > Any farmer has the capability to build a bomb like Timothy McVeigh, outlaw > farmers? > > Any mentally ill person (and lets face it, anyone bent on murder is mentally > ill), will find a way. This is why I have a problem with the insanity > defense. You are not guilty by reason of insanity, you are guilty, but insane. > > Almost any object is a potential weapon. > > I live in an area where there is dangerous wildlife. Am I to be disarmed so I > am unable to defend myself? There are grizzly bears, black bears, mountain > lions, bob cats, wolves, & coyotes, all have been spotted fairly close to my > house. So, because some people abuse a right, I am to give up mine? > > Should we abandon the 1st amendment also because someone might yell fire in a > crowded theater? > > Lets control all speech because some people might misuse it. > > Hmm, lets see, religion is a major contributor to problems of all kinds, lets > let the state decide what religion we can be a member of. > > Other people call for the whole sale slaughter of others, so lets let the > government decide what speech is allowable. > > I get really offended by what is written in the press so lets control that > also. > > Large groups of people assembled for a specific purpose frightens me so lets > outlaw that too. > > How about the third amendment? Soldiers shouldn�t have to live in barracks, > lets quarter them in your house. > > 4th? That pesky need for warrants, think of how many criminals could be put > away if it wasn�t for the 4th amendment! > > I would go on but I think you get the point. Just because someone might get > injured, or afraid, or offended, or even have good intentions, it doesn�t > give them a right to take away my rights. > > The right to defend one�s self is the most basic right of all. > > > On Oct 9, 2015, at 10:21 PM, Stefan Englhardt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Looking at this with a foreign view I can't understand this "gun love" in >> US. It is not all about the criminals or idiots. Just look at the statistics >> for accidents with weapons. The only way to save lifes is to be very >> restrictive. If someone wants to shoot he can go to a shooting club and >> leave the weapon there. It is not freedom to have a gun at home. It is silly >> esp. with kids around. >> You can't avoid killing with banning weapons but you can reduce it. If I >> need a weapon I call for police or security.
