Democrats look poor on guns and gun rights

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Larry - You are right in the fact that those two and many more, on both sides (repub, and demo) have a disdain for the 2ND Amendment, but would like to remind you and other readers that the 2ND Amendment is not about hunting or hunting weapons and ammunition. While the protections the 2nd Amendment gives to everyday hunting type of weapons and ammunition. It also refers to all types of weapons (firearms).

Do not be swayed by a forked tongued smooth talking shyster, when they say they support the 2ND, they also have in mind that they DO NOT believe that you and I and millions of other American citizens need to have pistols or revolvers, and many types of rifles and ammunition.

A candidate either supports the 2ND as a whole or they DO NOT.

Posted by time2share (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 11:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm kinda dumb about the different kinds of guns (weapons). As every citizen does know, there are weapons intended exclusively for killing humans and other weapons for killing game, deer, pheasant or duck, etc. It looks to me like some people are using this issue as an excuse to condemn democrates. I feel that the automatic weapons intended to be used exclusively on humans should be banned or at the very least controlled in a way that they are not readily available to criminals and citizens who don't need them. Give them to soldiers, police officers, prison guards etc. but keep em out of the hands of citizens of whom there only intent for their use is to kill PEOPLE.

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 12:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

time2share - said "I feel that the automatic weapons intended to be used exclusively on humans should be banned or at the very least controlled in a way that they are not readily available to criminals and citizens who don't need them."

HMMM - Lets see here, automatic weapons (class III) are already controlled (although still an infringement) but not illegal to own, criminals will get these types of weapons irregardless of what the law says, thats why they are criminals.

Also what proof do you have that full auto-weapons are intended to be used to kill humans? Care to site some statistics? Who are you or anybody else to decide what a person should own as a weapon or not or whether or not that they need them? What do you consider an automatic weapon, please cite some examples.

Of these types of weapons, why do you feel that some could not be intended to be used as a weapon to hunt with?

Why do you feel that soldiers, police officers and security guards are better suited to use these types of weapons? Just because someone you feel is suited for these types of weapons does not necessarily confer that these types of weapons will be used correctly or that accidents won't happen, when they do.

There is a plethora of information regarding fire arms, either in print or online, I suggest that you educate yourself instead of making blind blanket statements that have been espoused by many anti-weapons groups out there, many of their rhetoric ramblings has been thoroughly de-bunked.

Posted by scurvydog (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 1:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The reason for the Second Amendment is to enable the people to overthrow the government if it becomes like it did under the British.

THAT'S why they want to take your guns away. We should be able to own any kind of gun the government or military has, as long as we remain law-abiding citizens (with the exception of government becoming totalitarian).

Posted by time2share (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 11:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Veneratio" I did my homework. M16A2 semiautomatic rifle; M4/M4A1 Special Operations; M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW); M60E3 machine gun; M240G medium machine gun; M40A1 sniper rifle; M24 sniper rifle; M82A1M special application scoped rifle; M2 .50 caliber machine gun; M9 pistol; MP-5N 9mm submachine gun. Do you use any of these for hunting rabbits??? What are they used for? Killing people... Don't get me wrong I enjoy hunting, trap shooting etc as much as the next guy but I do think there should be limits on the type of weapon we can own. This is what I'm saying....

Posted by mnisgreat (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 1:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

New Corruption allegations could lead to an indictment of Norm Coleman.

Nasser Kazeminy is the Iranian born businessman that has been been flying Republican Norm Coleman around on his jet and apparently buying Norm expensive suits. So the question no one has asked is why Norm is palling around with someone from Iran, which we still have on the axis of evil.

Today we find out the Edina businessman Nasser Kazeminy has been accused of secretly funneling $75,000 through a Houston-based oil-rig servicing company, Deep Marine Technologies, to Laurie Coleman, Norm Coleman's wife.

The DFL issued a statement tonight, saying, "The allegations of criminal behavior are serious and deeply troubling... Senator Coleman has a duty to explain why those allegations aren't true."

If these new accusations are true Norm Coleman could be the next indicted U.S. Senator. Looks like Senator Ted Stevens may be getting a cell mate.

Posted by scurvydog (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 6:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

time2share

Would you change your tune if we were living under totalitarian martial law? Wouldn't you want something to level the playing field - or would you be one of the "if you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about" crowd?

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 11:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow - leave for a flight and this is buried.
Anyways...
M16 fires a 5.56x45mm (.223)
M4 / M4A1 - The M4 also shoots a 5.56x45mm (.223) in burst mode, the M4A1 - same round as the M4 and M16 in full auto
M60E3 - 7.62x51mm (very close to a 30-06 round) the E3 designation to the M60 is a change to the types of cyclic duty and barrel types.
M240G - is no different than the M60 variations, same round is used.
M40A1 sniper - You do know that this rifle is a Remington Model 700? and either use .308 Winchester/7.62mm NATO, 7 mm/08 Remington.
M24 sniper -(pretty much the same as the M40A1) The Army M24 uses the long action version of the same rifle. The long-actioned M24 can use the .308 Winchester (7.62x51 NATO) but is mainly designed for full-length cartridges, such as the .30-06 Springfield, and Magnum cartridges, such as the 7 mm Remington Magnum, .300 Winchester Magnum and .338 Lapua). The U.S. Army reasoning behind this decision was to allow them to reconfigure the rifle in the larger, longer-range calibers if necessary. The M24's most popular cartridges are the .308 and .338 Lapua.
M82A1M special - 50cal sniper rifle, SEMI-AUTOMATIC only, produced by Barret, and can be sold to the public.
M2 .50 cal - This weapon is vehicle mounted and quite heavy, was primary used to suppress infantry, unarmored or lightly-armored vehicles and boats, light fortifications, and low-flying aircraft.
M9 - Your kidding right? Umm 9x19mm Parabellum, you can buy this type of weapon at just about any pawn-shop, gun show, your neighbor, or your local fir-arm dealer, I believe it was a Beretta 92F (I bought my dad one for Christmas one year)
MP-5N 9mm submachine gun - Heckler and Koch 9mm caliber, with select fire mode Auto / Semi, made for close combat situations and not very accurate in a sustained ROF, I also believe there is a civilian version of this model for sale.
Did you even look at the specs of these weapons, or just saw some evil pictures of weapon you felt had no dutiful purpose other than killing humans?

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 11:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

cont -

Of all of those weapons that you mentioned they all share one thing in common, the caliber. All of which can be used to take small game to big game. Again, the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of this great Republic has NOTHING to do with HUNTING. Those type of weapons that you listed are produced to supply suppression fire, casualties are a side effect with the exception of a sniper rifle (which is no different than using one for hunting.

Seems to me you have bought into the rhetoric that certain weapons should be off limits. Those type of weapons are really no different than their semi-auto or single shot version, other than cosmetics and the ability to fire in burst mode.

As I have said before a law abiding citizen is and should be able to own any type of fire-arm and should not be vilified because of it, someone owning these types of fire-arms is hurting no-one, and as been said before, the average populace needs to be on an even plane as our service men and women, and federal and state agents, our Founding Fathers (specifically Thomas Jefferson) were pretty adamant about this.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 11:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"We should be able to own any kind of gun the government or military has, as long as we remain law-abiding citizens (with the exception of government becoming totalitarian)."

Gosh darn, I thunk ah well oda ma howitzer tamarra!!!

Us workin class folk need mo guns so as ah youngins
can bay teached whut laf iz aul bout.

Kill o be kilt!!!

Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on November 1, 2008 at 12:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

trifid - again glad to see your public education working for you.
Try reading the Constitution some day, it might do you some good, also read the original framing of the Constitution by Thomas Jefferson, then read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers to gain even further construction of the Constitution.

Do you even know what a howitzer is?

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on November 5, 2008 at 1:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yez, ah do, Killer. Somthin ya wunt want ta park yor brain cheeks on, bubba. S'pecly wen ah am on da udder end.

Posted by trifid (anonymous) on November 7, 2008 at 3:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As I read the comments above I can sense the adrenaline rush of the gun owners as they fantasize about the killing power of their toys.

Para-military types, I presume. Wanna-be mercenaries who don't quite dare jump in the fight.