Being shot gave this columbine survivor strong vie

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

Originally Posted by Chris0nllyn

Dylan and Klybold (sp?) didn't use a semi-auto shotgun though.

A double barrel and pump action were used at Columbine.

My point was only that there are proposals, with a possibility of passing, that will limit citizens access to shotguns and handguns. MD sb281 does and it has a chance of passing.

[Chris0nllyn]

Originally Posted by thatguy

Wirelessly posted



My point was only that there are proposals, with a possibility of passing, that will limit citizens access to shotguns and handguns. MD sb281 does and it has a chance of passing.

I think the words of Joe Curran's (MD's AG 87-07) "A Farewell to Arms" rings clear. Now more than ever.

His closing statement:

Our goal, then, must be to eliminate widespread handgun ownership through
restrictive handgun licensing. This will preserve the benefits of handgun use while
finally ridding our communities of its terrible cost. Law enforcement personnel
must have handguns for use on the job. Business owners may need a licensed gun
on the premises under certain circumstances. Sports shooters will still practice
their sport. Where guns are needed to advance reasonable law enforcement purposes
or to participate in a regulated sporting activity, they will be licensed for use
in that manner. People will no longer, however, own guns without demonstrating a
compelling law enforcement or recreational reason to do so.

The presence of handguns in homes across America endangers everyone. We do
not need them, and the misguided desire people feel to own handguns for self defense
would be greatly diminished if they did not feel threatened by widespread
handgun ownership. We certainly do not need handguns badly enough to continue
numbly to accept the pain and anguish they inflict. Handguns exact too high a
price. We should pay it no longer.

[itsbob]

Originally Posted by thatguy

Wirelessly posted



My point was only that there are proposals, with a possibility of passing, that will limit citizens access to shotguns and handguns. MD sb281 does and it has a chance of passing.

AND it calls for confiscation, which the democrats scream from the top of the mountains that NOBODY is doing..

NOBODY is taking your guns!! (well, except MD, Washington, possibbly CA... and maybe the FEDS) NOBODY!!

A commuter in So CA is taken out of his car as others look on, he's walked across the street, put on his knees and shot in his head and back, while the helpless unarmed masses have to look on and watch, powerless to help.

IF the government insists we be unarmed victims, than they too need to give up their armed security as well as be liable for our lack of protection. EVERY single unarmed victim of any crime should be able to hold those responsible liable. If they want to take on the mantle of being big brother and the big protector of the masses, then they need to take on the responsibility for their actions.


I can't imagine the anger and disgust I'd feel if I had to watch powerless and helpless as somebody else was summarily executed in front of me.. or should I just say.. WHEW, glad that wasn't me, and continue on with my day?

[thatguy]

Originally Posted by itsbob

AND it calls for confiscation, which the democrats scream from the top of the mountains that NOBODY is doing..

NOBODY is taking your guns!! (well, except MD, Washington, possibbly CA... and maybe the FEDS) NOBODY!!

A commuter in So CA is taken out of his car as others look on, he's walked across the street, put on his knees and shot in his head and back, while the helpless unarmed masses have to look on and watch, powerless to help.

IF the government insists we be unarmed victims, than they too need to give up their armed security as well as be liable for our lack of protection. EVERY single unarmed victim of any crime should be able to hold those responsible liable. If they want to take on the mantle of being big brother and the big protector of the masses, then they need to take on the responsibility for their actions.


I can't imagine the anger and disgust I'd feel if I had to watch powerless and helpless as somebody else was summarily executed in front of me.. or should I just say.. WHEW, glad that wasn't me, and continue on with my day?

you are going to have to piont out where the MD bill talks about confiscation. I didn't see it, not saying its not in there, just that i didn't see it.

[itsbob]

Originally Posted by thatguy

you are going to have to piont out where the MD bill talks about confiscation. I didn't see it, not saying its not in there, just that i didn't see it.

Doesn't it say you are allowed to keep your banned weapons until you die, than the state will take them??

Or was that Feinsteins bill?

THAT would be confiscation.

[thatguy]

Originally Posted by itsbob

Doesn't it say you are allowed to keep your banned weapons until you die, than the state will take them??

Or was that Feinsteins bill?

THAT would be confiscation.

it was your assertion......


as far as i have seen only the fienstien bill

[GURPS (Premo)]

California and Minnesota are going for out right turn in or JAIL