What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
317 Comments
- scottdrock, on 04/08/2009, -13/+97 Eric Holder is misguided. Making guns illegal would only leave law-abiding citizens defenseless. Criminals will ALWAYS have guns because they don't obey the law. Besides, a little old document called the Constitution GUARANTEES that our God-given right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. DONT TREAD ON ME
- alanocu, on 04/08/2009, -22/+75If guns kill people, then spoons make Michael Moore fat.
- richmomz, on 04/09/2009, -6/+57Guns are banned in Mexico - look how well that worked out for them!
- normlsparky, on 04/09/2009, -12/+55When are the Democrats going to learn? The passage of the assault weapon ban in '94 cost them both houses of congress for 12 years. From 1995-2007 (with the exception of the 107th Senate, where it was split 50/50 but Democrats technically had control because of the vote of outgoing VP Gore). Source:
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_ ...
and
http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/house_history/p ...
You'd think they would want to stay in power for awhile, just for a change of pace. Yet, here they go again, repeating the same mistakes they failed to learn from in the past. Republicans and conservatives ARE NOT the only people who value their right to own firearms. - scottdrock, on 04/08/2009, -8/+41Maybe. You might wanna get a gun so you can protect yourself.
- richmomz, on 04/09/2009, -6/+35This is why: "New Gallup poll taken last week shows that support for stricter laws governing the sale of guns is the lowest it has been since the poll was first taken in 1959"
http://digg.com/politics/Support_for_gun_control_a ... - ManHammer, on 04/08/2009, -18/+47arm yourselves now....
- TCSavant, on 04/08/2009, -2/+28The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting and target shooting.
- pagit, on 04/09/2009, -3/+26the firearms industry loves the Obama administration and the economic climate
- ProfessorSYM, on 04/09/2009, -12/+34The government is not coming to take your guns away, but it makes for a great sales pitch.
- jpop, on 04/09/2009, -5/+25Yeah, last I heard, they were blaming the upsurge in bazookas, RPG's, and full auto weapons on the US. Of course, they aren't really coming from here, but it's still the US's fault...
- wissler, on 04/09/2009, -3/+20Notice to the liberals: SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED means SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
- Hetman, on 04/09/2009, -5/+22I am glad. At least we are still making and selling some products in this country.
- blorc, on 04/08/2009, -5/+21I just need to pick up a good rifle, a lot of ammo, and I should be set for a while. Unfortunately, I live in a small condo so I can't really do reloading or I'd take that up too.
- Trekhawk, on 04/08/2009, -4/+19Dweller99, have you read the Heller decision? It's an individual right and the militia clause is the most misunderstood part of the entire Bill of Rights. It's not the purpose for the 2nd amendment.
http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=DC_v._He ... - sotloo, on 04/09/2009, -4/+19I ‘m a moderate left leaning liberal and yes I own guns. Bottom line is if you ban all guns the only people that will be able to get them will be criminals. There are after all illegal international arms dealers out there that don’t give a hoot about gun laws. Most of the people that rail against gun ownership have never owned a gun, never fired a gun and don’t know how to responsibly use one. Believe it or not the human race was violent prior to the advent of guns go banning them will not result in less violence. Oh and btw crossbows are deadly too, guess we should ban them.
SL - JesusSaidSo, on 04/09/2009, -9/+24Buy a weapon. Own a weapon. It is your duty, and your right.
It is not about being paranoid or being violent or any sort of nonsense you've been told.
It is about your freedom and your right to defend it. The police are great when things are fine. But ask anyone in New Orleans about the police. Ask them how much the government did for them when they needed help and protection. - Dimensio, on 04/09/2009, -1/+16Please substantiate your assertion.
- richmomz, on 04/09/2009, -8/+22The administration has publicly stated that they want new restrictions on firearms - there's no "paranoia" at work here, just a rational reaction to an official policy against gun ownernship.
- stinieroo, on 04/09/2009, -2/+16I work in the industry and I still get customers who ask, "Why is ammo so hard to get?" They just haven't been paying attention.
In a more disturbing trend, a small minority already think the administration has banned ammo and that all bullets have to have a serial number now. *sigh* - jpop, on 04/09/2009, -6/+20Define assault rifle.
- yarcod, on 04/08/2009, -10/+23No... pretty sure it's tied to the fears that Obama and a democratic congress will restrict gun ownership. But... that wouldn't fit into your anti-paul paranoia... so I'm sorry... please continue.
- wissler, on 04/09/2009, -1/+14You have no right to limit what arms I bear. On the contrary, by not allowing civilians the right to bear any arm the military bears (save WMD's), you undermine a key purpose of the 2nd amendment: to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government.
- Cloned, on 04/09/2009, -5/+18While it is most certainly our right, it is not our "duty". People have a right to not own a gun just as much as we have the right to own one. We should respect their decision to not have a gun, just as they should respect ours.
- mysmartypants, on 04/09/2009, -4/+17Owning a gun is like owning a life jacket. You may never need to use it, but you sure are glad you've got one if you do.
To those who snobbishly scoff at those who own guns, consider this: sanctimony provides no protection when the bad guy is looking down his barrel at you. - DevinKev, on 04/09/2009, -3/+16Sure buy a semi-automatic weapon for $500 in the US and smuggle it south, when you can buy them from the Chinese fully automatic for significantly less. There's a reason the Mexican government won't provide the serial numbers.
1) Not from the United States.
or
2) They are from the United States as provided to the Mexican army, which then gets sold to the Drug Cartels. - badfrog, on 04/09/2009, -1/+14You should have done it a year ago... There's hardly any ammo available anywhere, and it's 3x as expensive as a couple years ago.
- mparker21311, on 04/09/2009, -5/+18When no one trusts the police anymore, we resort to policing the police.
- TCSavant, on 04/08/2009, -3/+15I'm not sure I understand your point. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed is pretty clear. Being part of a militia is not a requirement in order to carry a weapon.
- Dimensio, on 04/09/2009, -2/+14What "limitations" do you believe are justified?
- tgc1, on 04/09/2009, -2/+14Do any of you people who do not advocate gun ownership understand how America was formed? Do you think they just sort of sat down with the British and had some tea and signed some papers and magically became the owners of a new country? You people need to educate yourselves and stop being so blind and naive. Every single government in history, when given the chance, has always proven that they cannot be trusted. Because in every circumstance where the populous was not armed, there was a dictatorship. Now if you dummies can't figure that out, then you're bound to be part of the next one.
For the rest of you gun owning people. Good for you. You'll be the ones on the free side of the fence. At least you people know a little something about history.
You'll also of course note that I did not throw in any labels on any of the people on either side of that idea. Not a liberal, not conservative. Not a wing nut, not a sheep. Just people making decisions. Because honestly, it doesn't matter what the hell you call it, because in the end you've either got your rights and your freedom or you don't. And the people who own guns are, in my view, much more likely to retain theirs as opposed to those who do not. Who depend on their government for protection. My, my, how quickly people forget history and how so many are eager to repeat it. - inactive, on 04/09/2009, -2/+13It really shouldn't be a "which side of the political fence are you on" issue. It's a constitutional thing, and I just really don't see much room for debate, unless you're going to actively debate the 2nd amendment itself. I think some Democrats tend to forget that, and so they carry on about gun control, just like some Republicans tend to forget that flag-burning is a constitutional thing, as well.
When you find yourself arguing with the constitution, you know you've gone off course. - spritom, on 04/09/2009, -4/+15The Constitution enumerates some rights, but does not grant them. Only the people themselves decide what their rights are.
- saynt, on 04/09/2009, -1/+12Pragmatic thing that I am, I would rather have one and not need it...
- Dimensio, on 04/09/2009, -1/+11"http://lmgtfy.com/?q=mexican+drug+cartels+buying+g ..."
The results of a web search via Google that returns results that merely make the same unsubstantiated assertion that you have made does not constitute a substantiation of your assertion. - inactive, on 04/09/2009, -0/+10Same reason the government can't just lock citizens up, and yet we still have prisons. Some people have demonstrated that they cannot follow the rules, either because they have no respect for society or because mental illness prevents them from being able to do so. When you do that, you forfeit your rights.
- sigmaman2, on 04/09/2009, -8/+18I almost agreed with you. The right to bear arms is constitutionally protected. It is not God-given.
- browwiw, on 04/09/2009, -4/+14Except for your incredible spike in home invasions after the gun ban.
- theonlywizdum, on 04/09/2009, -1/+11Ever heard of the Yakuza?
- tgc1, on 04/09/2009, -3/+13Yeah, didn't happen in New Orleans either during Katrina right? Don't kid yourself. The government has and will take away your guns if it can.
- stix213, on 04/09/2009, -1/+10Other than he says he will on whitehouse.gov, but no other reason
http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/urban_policy/
"...also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent." - which means ban semi-automatic guns - Logrusmage, on 04/09/2009, -3/+12They certainly want to try. What exactly is an assault weapon BAN if not the government taking away my guns?
- spritom, on 04/09/2009, -3/+12No...it was the floor that you hit that made you stupid.
Focus on the inanimate objects. Not the act or the person committing the act.
/s - richmomz, on 04/09/2009, -5/+14The PA shootings had nothing to do with Alex Jones, media "fear-mongering" or any of that crap. The guy had a history of violence, threatened to kill his girlfriend, was an active Neo-Nazi (complete with full body tatoos), was pissed about losing his job and got kicked out of the military. The cops were responding to a domestic abuse call (put in by the guy's own MOTHER). I guess you didn't consider any of these things as a factor?
- Cloned, on 04/09/2009, -2/+11So they come here, go to the local sporting goods store and buy full auto AK 47s and RPGs?
- lostpunisher, on 04/09/2009, -2/+11I have a gun, and I have ammo. This is my right, and you will never take it.
- Trekhawk, on 04/08/2009, -9/+17Ron Paul, the guy who was right about most everything that's happened in the economy recently, he's the insane conspiracy nut? Uhhu.
- Brassbud, on 04/09/2009, -3/+11NoLiberty, that's exactly what people said decades ago about registration, that "no one was going to take away your guns". Lo and behold, later when they passed new restrictions the police went around to everyone who had registered and took their guns away.
- ionelementz112, on 04/09/2009, -0/+8I just bought 4 bricks of .22 LR online. It took 2 weeks to be stocked and delivered. =(
-
Show 51 - 100 of 330 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is