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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rarebird who wrote (60995)	11/13/2000 11:45:25 AM
From: Zardoz	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 116764

Wonder where Scotty is, wasn't there a full moon on Nov 11? Hutch PS: Can we keep the thread on the GOLD subject? Can we? I repeat... CAN WE? After all it's climbing today. Darn, I got to cut my toe nails today.

To: Rarebird who wrote (60995)	11/13/2000 11:56:44 AM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116764

<<Second Ammendment Limits?>> There should be some. I'm not convinced we have not already oversteped them. <<The founding fathers probably never anticipated the invention of automatic weapons, armor piercing shells, and the like, but many gun advocates support a person's right to own such things simply because the 2nd amendment doesn't specifically prohibit a private citizen from possessing such weapons and related paraphenalia.>> Every time the more liberal side brings up gun control, they bring up this issue, which little they really understand about firearms and firearms of history. When one compares the mountain rifle used by our winning founders to the brown Bess musket carried by the Red Coats, we find ours was near the most technologicaly advanced of the day! When we look at the modern day model(the Swiss) our founders also looked toward, we find FULL auto rifles not just the semi-autos wished be banned here. << So tell me... how far does this right actually go? At what point do gun enthusiasts acknowledge that there must be some sort of limit to what kind of arms a private individual can possess? Surely such a limit must exist.>> When Hillary has marched below a banner calling for a total ban ,as in the US & Australia, I no longer discuss that there should be any restrictions. Be informed, These demands of the most extreme will no longer draw "the gun lobby" to the table for talks.

To: Rarebird who wrote (60995)	11/13/2000 1:52:20 PM
From: Hoa Hao	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116764

Actually, the answer is pretty simple. Weapons available to the average infantryman should be available to the average citizen. The price of more advanced weapons pretty much keeps them out of the hands of the most unstable. Those most unstable generally can not generate the cash necessary to acquire, accouter, or gain proficiency with more advanced weapons. Our problem lies within the heart of the society itself. 25, 30 years ago it was not uncommon for kids to take guns to school, give them to the principle, then collect them afterwards to go hunting. Some would even take them to shop classes to work on stocks or the steel workings. Face it, Baby Boomers suck as parents, just as they suck as Presidents.