no comments from me (some of you will be pleased to see) except to say.... WOW.

Shall we have a captioning contest for Chuck Schumer?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4069761537893819675]

Are you talking about supporting the 2nd amendment for the guy that shot up people in the restaurant or the woman that wished she had her handgun in her purse at the time?

They each seem to pontificate both positions on the issue.

great point. I'm not a gun person. But I lean away from those that think they can legislate safety generally and saving us from those whackos who pull into a place to shoot up the place seems to be impossible. Might reduce the occurances if whackos don't know what they might run into? Kinda like those towns that see less robberies when the robbers don't know who has weapons to repel intruders? Or places with lots of Lojacks have less car thefts? Just a thought.

uh.... whacko's... by definition ... ignore logic.

So the gun lobby logic which is "gun's will deter whackos" is fatally flawed!

Even less likely is the chance that somebody with a legal conceal carry weapon will intervene in this crime by a wacko.

The probability that a crime by a rational or wacko criminal will be detered by conceal carry law is far less then the probability that a conceal carry gun will result in a crime of passion or accidental discharge.... (See NY Giant football player in a bar as a recent data point) So... this is a public policy issue.

The Court has spoken about the right to own a firearm (see DC case)...

it's the flawed logic that you are entitled to carry the weapon in public that is in dispute and so this is a matter of public policy... not consitutional right.

OK, I can't stay out of this one. Are you going to call the Court when the police can't get there fast enough? Do you think DC is the safest city in the country? And the Burress incident, even if he had a concealed permit, it was violating the law by having it in a place that served alchohol. Gun control in DC has done nothing to make the city ANY safer against gun violence. More laws will not keep someone from comming in and shooting you. TOTAL gun bans will not keep anyone safe. Do you think if tomorrow, all guns were outlawed, you would be safe from ever being robbed or shot? The gun isn't the problem, the idiots who commit stupid acts of violence are. Cars are used to commit more acts of violence every year than guns. Are you willing to give up your car? And as a matter of Constitutional Right, yes a "Law Abiding Citizen" has the right to keep and bear arms! Check your "data point"...he's being prosecuted because he broke the law! Do you think any other laws would have prevented this? You seem to ignore the logic here, should I continue?
If one chooses to keep thier head in the sand, they should get Kevlar underpants.

Is a double barrel shotgun the 'catamaran' of the gun world?

J

C'mon. Does this really belong here? Her testimony is no sadder than this.

There is no winning side on the debate. Every cited case has an inverse. The Framers intended to prevent another instance of a foreign occupying force facing a legislatively-disarmed populace by making sure militias could keep and bear arms. All the nonsense since about 1798 about it is contrary to the original premise.

John, that is a sad story. Only hope the Texas Troopers now make a quicker response. The shooter should have never made it to the Troopers car. Also, what was with the lack of response when the other Troopers arrived?

Recent local gang related shootings have again pointed to the need for self protection. Will be picking up a few more boxes of shells for the 12 gage.

Caleb

That's my point, Caleb. If only. If only she'd had her gun in her purse, if only one of the drug charges would have stuck and Hennard hadn't bought his two handguns, if only someone had decided that Melvin Hale's interpretation of the Second Amendment was a little off... cold, dead hands, right? Let's talk about sailing instead.

I heard a full container of spanking new AHPC boats are headed to FL (USofA) to be assembled and distributed across the Eastern US. A couple different sized boats... that might be worth talking abt.

nice.

Yes, back to sailing!
The only gun I care about is the start gun!
Had a Hobie training session last sunday.
Only about 4C and a little snow and was still sweating like crazy, gotta love drysuit technology.
Anyone interested in some pics from the new F18?
I'm thinking about making the trip to the boat show this weekend.

4C ? That must explain why it took one full short track race for the lining in our daggerboard cases to thaw enough so that could finally jam the foils down (and that's where we kept them for the rest of the afternoon).

Bit of a surreal experience, but loved the crowd. We'll be back this Sunday.

Mamaloe

Ah no, it is in place to keep the Government in check. A dis-armed citizenry is easier to control, where as armed citizens have the capacity to rise up and overthrow a corrupt tyranical gov't.

I really didn't want to contribute to the extension of this topic -

- how many of you really believe that the people, without the support of the military, could actually overthrow the US Government?

- how many of you believe that there will ever be a time when such a maneuver is necessary? (i.e. have we evolved beyond that culture and society?).


I'm not proclaiming pro-gun or anti-gun. I don't own any guns but I don't really care if you own one or want to. The crazies will be crazy with or without them and if you take away gun ownership rights, there will potentially be a long painful period when the dishonest people have them and the honest people don't. I do, however, take issue with some of the nutty arguments presented by both sides.

Look at what just happened in Thailand. It wasn't completely peaceful, but the people stood up and through largely non-violent means, managed to make a major change in the government. Granted, it's much more complicated than that - the protesters might not actually be the majority opinion so the action and end result may be questionable as it relates to justice. They also appear to have had idle support (through inaction) from the military. It was a big whopping pain in the butt for everyone else involved - but they accomplished something through financial and political hardship and without abundant death and destruction.

Karl, we're saying only slightly different things. The "foreign occupying force" the Framers were talking about were the British troops being forcibly housed in American homes. Even before the Declaration, the Colonials had come to see themselves as something other than British subjects. So to put it another way, yes, the Second Amendment was conceived to provide for armed militias which the King (our government at the time) had outlawed. Remember that the Framers' absolute and greatest fear was the emergence of another King following the Revolution. The armed militias were an insurance policy.

edit: crap. I meant to say "I'm going sailing this weekend on a Hobie 16!"

- Depends on who's side the military is on. Technology isn't everything, but it does leave the scale a bit lop sided.

-We're closer to collapse of the government everyday. It gets more corrupt and vile with every new law, and every turning of the screws to the people. Whether or not it'll every happen, I don't know. I think we take a 1/2 step towards it every day. The trouble is going half way never gets you there.


There is a real good chance that I will die fighting our Government. If our Second Amendment Rights are revoked, as they almost were this past spring, out of my cold dead hands will more than likely become a reality. I will not surrender anything, to anyone for any reason. Its important to me, and many close to me who are willing to do the same.

Ok. How do we dump the antiquated Portsmouth system and adopt something more user friendly? Like SCHRS for instance.

I was putting up Christmas lights outside yesterday and got sunburned.

Do you trust your government enough to leave yourself with no recourse? Seems most that oppose are the ones that hate our President now.

Criminals DON'T obey laws,that's what makes them criminals.
You just make it easier for them.

Karl, my guess would be your actual firearms are safe, they'll go after the ammo first.

Jake, I think you don't give the civilian population enough credit, you might be surprised what they'd accomplish if they had to.Don't worry, We'll take care of you as long as you can cook.

Mark, A tip for ya .Your a$$ is the thing your sitting on, a hole in the ground is a thing you dig with a shovel. There is obviously some confusion on your part.

No one seemed to have a problem with off topic on "drill,baby,drill" so what's wrong with this? Don't like the topic?

Todd