Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Do handguns serve a purpose other than killing people? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ok1day who wrote (187)	9/23/1999 3:33:00 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 289

Ossnat I mean license to carry and to own.... There is no danger if the wrong person speaks at a council meeting, however if the wrong person owns or carries a gun that does present a danger. Who is the wrong person? And who gets to decide this? We might agree on felons and mental patients. Is this as far as it goes? Should we have to prove our worthiness to own (not carry) a gun when the Constitution acknowledges we already have the right inherently? BTW you did not address the free press or freedom to assemble issues, only the free speech (hate speech...hummm).

To: ok1day who wrote (187)	9/23/1999 3:42:00 PM
From: j__z	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 289

"License to own" I think a better idea would just be to stick it on everyone drivers license. I mean everyone’s. If you have the ability to own a gun, put a mark on the license. Just like the under 21 is on licenses. You could put, Eligible to own firearm. Then even if you don't want one, you still have a mark saying you can own one. Present when you buy a firearm, whether it is a secondary sale or not. Then there is no registration, no governmental list to abuse. Yeah fakes would be a problem, but I know of way of combating that.