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.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (132111)	3/21/2013 1:31:35 PM
From: JeffA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

"Is it a wise course of action?" Interesting question. I am an avid shooter. I fully support the Second Amendment. I would say leave it alone and we are all going to be fine. I truly think the US is starting to split along rural/suburban/urban lines. Guns are suffering because we are looking for a one size fits all solution. The one size for me that fits is to leave the guns alone. There are hundreds of millions of guns. They will never be confiscated. The "bad guys" will always have access to them. They have no intention of following rule of law. I say let the people who wish to be armed, be armed. If they make a mistake, their penalties should be very harsh. Most of the mass murderers are cowards. They do horrible things, then off themselves so as to not have to deal with it. An "assault weapon" ban is mis-named. But that is a moot point. Even good old Charlie Rangel today is exaggerating huge, but he will not be corrected. He said "Millions of kids" get killed with "full auto" weapons. Just lying his butt off, but he gets a pass. I do agree with the general populace not being allowed to own "small arms" as defined by the military. There is a school of thought that states the framers of the Constitution were using words to describe the military weapons available at their time and how they should be available to the People. The weapons described in their writings were the top military weapons available at that time. If we forward that position to today's world, then there is a huge amount of weaponry already banned. Some available by paying the proper tax and some available with minor gov't interference in the form of a background check. I think what needs banned, is banned. The rest is just truly political posturing. Bloomberg is making forecasts today on how many will die by gun violence and insisting something be immediately done. Cuomo is having to redefine his gun control in NY because he screwed it up so bad. Magpul is leaving Colorado because Hickenlooper signed the magazine ban. None of it will matter. People will find ways to kill each other. If it is only one or two instead of 10 or 20, is it any less horrific? A gun gives the victim a chance.