Exactly, rambill. Which puts a great responsibility on gun owners to somehow secure their weapons from children and anybody else that should not have access, yet still have them available for protection.

... well it helps to be smarter than the kids on such things.....

I guess if they are just for hunting it is a good idea to keep them safe from children.

But I wondered that as well, how are they "protection" if they are unloaded and locked?

A good number of those attending public school couldn't read them to begin with, let alone understand what the Federalist Papers have to say.

If you doing something you shouldnt be you got it coming to you

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants, they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Thomas Jefferson

tobias..... you are right in that there was another thread that dealt partly with gun control. I participated in that and I will repeat my stance.

Restrictive gun laws were first tried in the late 1800's, not in Europe, but in violence prone states here in America. The laws failed and violence rates continued to rise. Those laws were repealed after World War I.

Stricter gun laws I am convinced will not prevent senseless killings, or even sensible ones. All they will do is make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain firearms and infringe on their Second Amendment rights.

There is a myth that most murders are committed by ordinary, law-abiding citizens who kill a relative or acquaintance in a moment of anger only because a gun is available. The real truth is that the overwhelming majority of murders are committed by career criminals, people with lifelong histories of violence. Even those people who accidently kill others with guns tend to have felony records and histories of substance abuse.

Studies consistently show that on the average, gun owners are better educated and hold more prestigious jobs than non-owners. Of course, criminals are not included in the afore-mentioned statement. Early studies that labeled gun owners violence prone turned out to be based on questions that addressed only willingness to come to the aid of crime victims. In other words, good citizenship was confused with violence.

There are only about 100,000 police officers on patrol at any one given time. That is 100,000 police officers patrolling our streets to protect approximately 300 million people. Unless you get attacked in a Dunkin' Donuts, the chances of a police officer being near enough to you to assist are practically nil.

This is a violent country. Until something is done about the conditions that cause our country to be violent, it almost makes sense to own a gun for protection than not to. In any case, every American has the right, thanks to our Founding Fathers, to make that decision for themselves.

Drivenmenutz had it right, if we lose this right how are we to keep our government in check. I mean if you think about it, we are here to insure we as a people are safe and secure. It is a right and a privelege to own a firearm, I don't I prefer knifes but I have a big gun cabinet in my room...so if I can't find a knife, I know where the key is haha.

I do not agree with the stance that gun owners are by statistics more responsible Americans. I do not agree that only psychos shoot others. Violent people come in all backgrounds and economic levels. Violence or propensity for violence is a mental state of mind. I have seen racists use their weapons as a form of perpetuating their beliefs of others being animals. This is not a responsible gun owner. Although they have no felonies, they are dangerous individuals. I have seen neighbors use firearms to "solve" a neighbor dispute, this is not a responsible gun owner. A propensity for violence is not always just in a criminal. Men use guns as a form of "controling" their victim in a domestic abuse situation, this is not a responsible gun owner. "Going postal" is a term used for a worker with no previous felonies who shoots fellow employees for disputes at work this is not a responsible gun owner.

The list of those who should not have access to a gun but are not career criminals goes on and on. This does not even cover those idiots who leave a gun available to a child who then blows his sisters head off.

This is not a simple and easily solved issue.

I am still an advocate of responsible people having the option of a firearm but we are not deciding who these responsible individuals are well to this point.

You dont need grenades cause u can make explosive from home items. The experts say gun control works...Hitler and the like.

Unless you get attacked in a Dunkin' Donuts? ...Great way to profile

I thought that was the icing on an already excellent post

Let me just say to those of you that profile Cops as being lazy and hanging out in Dunkin Donuts. My Father served over 20 years as an Officer on the street protecting every single one of us. Everday he put his life on the line to make sure we could sleep at night. The stories I have heard, the depression he encountered, and to ultimatley lose his career and get retired on diability because of a low life drug user that in my opinion should be wiped of existence completley. If the neighbor of the loser that my Father went to save had a gun, it wouldnt have injured my Father and to this day he would still be healthy. These are the people that hate the police when they pulled over, but when your in danger's harm they are all of a sudden your hero....

Jim I really meant no disrespect. Cops do a nessasary job, are way underpaid & underappreciated. I went off the road Tuesday night & I was picked up by a cop & taken to a Wal Mart to wait out the storm & call for a tow. I Thanked the young man & apoligized for being out driving when it wasn't safe & putting him at risk. I also thnked the other officer who assisted the tow truck, & again appoliged for my bad desision.

However, you can alway find a cop at the donut shop! I still thought it was funny.

Jim.... I stand corrected. I was just trying to add some humour to a serious subject, and obviously it was in poor taste.

Thanks ,I read all your comments, I think KEEP the govt totally OUT of gun Control, they have NO business interfering with the PEOPLES" Bill of Rights, none WHATSOEVER. But if one Citizen damages or harms another citizen wrongly( guns or otherwise), then he should be put on trial according to Common Law(Constitution) and punished accordingly. Remember :MORE GOVT---LESS FREEDOM ,and LESS GOVT--MORE FREEDOM You can't have it both ways.So let's keep our freedom.(less govt) The NWO bunch want your guns gone. I think we need to value our freedom a little higher and hang onto our guns. any so called laws that chisel away at our right to own guns are unconstitutional (Marbury vs. Madison)(Null and Void)Same as if they were never passed since they were fraudulent from their inception. It would be a fraud just like our so called federal reserve is a fraud on the people.(unconstitutional)

If they come for your guns, I probably would give them the bullets first Since I would consider it a threat on my life, if they had the nerve to do that.Then ,I would have the nerve to protect myself. I don't like violence, but I will protect myself and my neighbors, by any means available to me.

Have you ever thought about some nice BEAR TRAPS????Old Microwave ovens??? SNARES???Bearing Arms means anything that it takes to KEEP the BILL of RIGHTS ALIVE!!!!And Keep the govt subservient to WE THE PEOPLE!!!NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!!! May God Bless America (Land of HEAVEN)

I do not agree with this at all. Someone needs to have control, even what little there is. So I assign it to our government. I sure as hell do not want all the crazies I see daily running around with a gun Just imagine the joy the racists would have ridding us of the problems they see in our country. Just imagine the joy of all those who think others should just be wiped off the face of the planet. Just imagine those grumpy hateful neighbors who hate your guts for having a dog, what joy they would get of ridding you of your dog or may be you too. ETC ETC ETC.......... So not just no but HELL no to no gun control!!!!!!!!!!!

I posted the 2nd Amendment here earlier in this thread. If you read the entire Amendment, it is not so clear that citizens have an unrestricted right to guns. I am in favor of CRIME control, not necessarily GUN control. But read the entire Amendment, not just the part that says "...the right to keep and bear arms."

Does the 14th admendment- right to life, have any overbearing to someone right to bear arms. Besides most of us are not logically arguing those who understand the right to bear arms is a civil right, it is the criminal aspect of dying by a gun that bother almost all gun control activist.

More laws might help, but I agree with anoasis accidents happen quickly and even faster when attached to a piece of metal carrying bullets and a trigger. More domestic violence, stupid decision made in the heat of the moment, mental health issues that happen because guns are so easy to get too. The loop holes put the guns in the hands of criminals or the mentally insane has yet to be controlled.

Police wear bullet proff vest, the average american is not given a bullet proff vest at birth to protect themself from gun violence.

As a Christian, a moment before Christ was taken away to be crucified, he told his disciples to put away there swords, for to live by the sword is to die by the sword. They only had the swords in the first place because of prophesy written in the old testament... and a ha for the christian arguement.

I support England and there gun control issue. There country is run very socially. I don't have the numbers, but I did research on just accidental deaths by guns and the yearly number wasn't as significant as staving people in a third world countries, but was significant enough to say it was needless.

Then in the case of having more big brother controlling our issue, we then loose other freedoms - so maybe there is a no win solution. Let those of us who believe that guns should be in the hands of the military to protect the country and that is why the admendment was made, fight with those who want to protect themselves from the country and other in the country that may or may not hurt them.

I do see the use of gun important for survival issues in the 1800 for food. But not too many people have to live off the country for food any longer, not that there that much country left to live off of anyway.

Just my thoughts.

best gun control law would be

provide training in schools from kindergarten up


upon graduation each student that graduates with a 3.0 ave

or above is issued a gun

and must keep it on them at all times when in public

for the next 15 years after that it would be optional