Lets find out where we all stand.

I think we need to know where some of us stand and others need to go on record. This is the situation; The president and congress have agreed (finally) to find out what the American people want when it comes to gun laws. A national referendum is set up and bills are written. Whichever point of view is selected by the people, that bill will be voted upon, passed, and sent to the White House for signature. Here are your choices and you can only pick one:

1. I want a total ban on firearms for everyone in the United States including police officers. Violation will bring a twenty year sentence.

2. I want a ban on assault weapons (or what the media considers assault weapons) and all semi-automatic handguns with the exception of police officers.

3. I want complete registration of all firearms but anyone who can pass a competency test can purchase one.

4. I want to keep what we have now. Unregistered ownership, training for concealed carry rights, and no restrictions on what you can own or possess.

5. I harken back to the original thoughts of the founders. Any able bodied man (or woman) between the ages of 18 and 80 should be able to own any firearm that they can afford and be able to carry the same without restriction at any time or in any place.

Your short descriptions and long descriptions do not match.

I actually think #5 is too restrictive. Any human, any age, any nationality, any weapon. Keep things open and it'll work out just fine.

Your short descriptions and long descriptions do not match. Originally Posted by Old-T

JDIdiot was still a little inebriated when he started the thread. Last night's Family Klan, errrr Clan rally must have extended into the weeee hours of the morning.

I actually think #5 is too restrictive. Any human, any age, any nationality, any weapon. Keep things open and it'll work out just fine. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

I agree. If #1 is a total ban, #5 should be total freedom.

BTW JD, your statement about the founding fathers restricting firearm to those between the ages of 18-80 -- am I misreading that?

Bring back dueling.

Bring back dueling. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

You mean the type of duel where a man was either willing to defend or restore his honor by risking his life for it or face humiliation for not accepting the challenge.

I wonder how many politicians on either side of the aisle would be man enough to challenge an opponent to a duel or accept one. How many of them would be more reasonable if they knew there was a chance an opponent would challenge them for questioning their honor.

It's easy to put other people's money or life on the line when you have nothing to lose. Even easier to say and do stupid shit when you know the worst you will get is a tongue lashing. How many of you on here were kept honest and learned the value of honor by fear of a beat down when you were a kid? How many beat downs did you actually take to learn to do the right thing?

What firearm law/restrictions ?

What ever firearm/weapon local law-state enforcement can possess; a private citizen should be allowed to possess. Criminals convicted of violent felonies excluded.

This would include tear gas, assault weapons, etc.

You mean the type of duel where a man was either willing to defend or restore his honor by risking his life for it or face humiliation for not accepting the challenge.

I wonder how many politicians on either side of the aisle would be man enough to challenge an opponent to a duel or accept one. How many of them would be more reasonable if they knew there was a chance an opponent would challenge them for questioning their honor.

It's easy to put other people's money or life on the line when you have nothing to lose. Even easier to say and do stupid shit when you know the worst you will get is a tongue lashing. How many of you on here were kept honest and learned the value of honor by fear of a beat down when you were a kid? How many beat downs did you actually take to learn to do the right thing? Originally Posted by boardman

Yes dueling, calling someone out for a duel. Or even better let everyone pack on their hip and have shootouts at high noon like in the movies.

I agree. If #1 is a total ban, #5 should be total freedom.

BTW JD, your statement about the founding fathers restricting firearm to those between the ages of 18-80 -- am I misreading that? Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

It is actually the spirit but not the words. A militia was considered every able bodied MAN between the ages of 16 and 46 years of age. Taking today's sensibilities into mind that became PEOPLE (including women), and 18 sounds better than 16 (military age), and 80 is the new 46. In reality it would be much more open than that. This is discussion and not law. I personally believe in a mixture of the last two but it would take too much space and energy to try to pin it down exactly only to have someone like EVA go *snick*.

As far as dueling goes EVA, I can accommodate with pistol, rifle, knife, or sword. I do (or have done) pretty well with all four. Anything you have in mind like flame throwers?

I agree.

Your short descriptions and long descriptions do not match. Originally Posted by Old-T

It is actually the spirit but not the words. A militia was considered every able bodied MAN between the ages of 16 and 46 years of age. Taking today's sensibilities into mind that became PEOPLE (including women), and 18 sounds better than 16 (military age), and 80 is the new 46. In reality it would be much more open than that. This is discussion and not law. I personally believe in a mixture of the last two but it would take too much space and energy to try to pin it down exactly only to have someone like EVA go *snick*.

As far as dueling goes EVA, I can accommodate with pistol, rifle, knife, or sword. I do (or have done) pretty well with all four. Anything you have in mind like flame throwers? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm sure Judy, every time you post I think of the old song " I've been every where man". However your forte is bullshit.

Bring back dueling. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Fuck ya, brotha, I'm all for that!!!
I hope JD goes after you with his motherfucking flame thrower!!!

I would have voted for #5, but I oppose letting violent offenders and illegals have guns; especially domestic abusers with anger issues, known gangbangers, and such.

Fuck ya, brotha, I'm all for that!!!
I hope JD goes after you with his motherfucking flame thrower!!! Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Why are you hiding here when the fighting is in Israel?