What's your opinion of gun control?

[DarkbLue]

Gun control is not and never has been about safety, social problems, or workable solutions. It is a pure and simple attempt at people control. We have enumerated freedoms in the Constitution for a reason. We are free citizens, not subjects of a potentate who bow to his imperial will, and we plan to stay that way.

[1714762772]

1714762772

[1714762772]

1714762772

[1714762772]

1714762772

[1714762772]

1714762772

[1714762772]

1714762772

[1714762772]

1714762772

[BADecker]

Gun control is not and never has been about safety, social problems, or workable solutions. It is a pure and simple attempt at people control. We have enumerated freedoms in the Constitution for a reason. We are free citizens, not subjects of a potentate who bow to his imperial will, and we plan to stay that way.

And as free people, when all the States or cities make gun laws, we must do the following. And we must do it because the 2nd Amendment says they aren't supposed to control guns at all.

Individually file a claim against every man and woman that makes or upholds gun infringement in any way. File the claim person to person for personal threat of bodily harm = injury.

Amendments 6, 7, 9, and 10 allow us to do this, with a jury, outside of judges' opinions, with the judge as a court referee only.

There are several places in law that state that in a person to person claim in a court of record, the judge is not part of the tribunal. The tribunal is made up of the claimant, the claimee, and the jury. The judge is referee for order only, and has no judging authority, and should not give his opinions or instructions other than for order in the court.

If the judge injures you in your court battle by instructing the jury, or by disallowing pertinent evidence, or by limiting witnesses, or any other way, file a claim against the man/woman ACTING as a judge.

Time for us to stand up against the reduction of a whole lot of our rights. Time to do it by using their law against them outside of a court where they have control. Do it in a court of record, where they lose their governmental office, and where it is a man-to-man court in front of an impartial jury.

See Corpus Juris Secundum volume 25 section 344 which shows that a court of record is not a statute court, but proceeds under common law - law regarding personal injury man-to-man.

Peruse http://new.oregontrackers.com/.

[joebrook]

i supportit because i think only one must have gun is ARMY

At the moment it's not the army alone who have access to guns, criminals all have access to guns and weapons that causes numerous loss of lives, if they have these weapons, what about the law abiding citizens who is going to protect them when these goons attacks them.

[bdog1234]

i supportit because i think only one must have gun is ARMY

What about the Marines, Navy, and Air Force? They can't have guns too? 

[tvbcof]

i supportit because i think only one must have gun is ARMY

At the moment it's not the army alone who have access to guns, criminals all have access to guns and weapons that causes numerous loss of lives, if they have these weapons, what about the law abiding citizens who is going to protect them when these goons attacks them.

And it's not like the 'army' of any country has ever abused their power or anything like that.  That would be unthinkable.

[C10H15N]

i supportit because i think only one must have gun is ARMY

What about the Marines, Navy, and Air Force? They can't have guns too? 

Ironically enough, most US military installations are essentially gun free zones. That is in the process of being changed under the new commander in chief.

[Sithara007]

I definitely agree the US has a gun violence problem. I just don't know what the solution is. Banning guns or more gun laws won't help. The best thing to do is at least give law abiding people a chance to defend themselves.

The problem in the United States is that they have too many illegal guns. And these illegal weapons are used for crimes in most cases. Those who own the legal guns are more likely to use them to defend themselves, rather than using them to commit violent crimes and felonies such as home invasions, kidnappings, rape , murder or carjackings.

[LevshaK1]

Guns are made for one purpose, and that purpose is to kill.
I believe that guns are not weapons, they are tools. How they are used is up to the person holding it.
Guns are especially dangerous in the hands of people who don't know how to use them (i.e., kids and teenagers) as well as those who are mentally ill and/or have a temper problem.
Gun control will not stop violence because a violent person doesn’t need a gun to be violent.
After the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, support for gun control increased dramatically.

Generally in America, the support for gun control has outweighed the support for gun rights.
Are gun control laws constitutional?
What would be your ideal set of laws regarding firearms?

It is necessary to control both the weapon and the people owning it. Weapons can become an object of strength for every person and power, so its use must be controlled and it is so simple to give weapons to everyone that this is a gross blunder, the crime will increase.

[tushin4]

Gun control will not stop violence because a violent person doesn’t need a gun to be violent. Taking guns away from violent people will not make them less violent. It might make them more violent. Violent people can use anything to be violent. Taking guns away from violent people is no more than just taking one out of a thousand more ways to hurt, rob, or kill you.

[BADecker]

Gun control will not stop violence because a violent person doesn’t need a gun to be violent. Taking guns away from violent people will not make them less violent. It might make them more violent. Violent people can use anything to be violent. Taking guns away from violent people is no more than just taking one out of a thousand more ways to hurt, rob, or kill you.

Besides, if you want to take guns away from a violent person, how are you going to do it? The only way it works is through gun violence of your own. And when you use gun violence, you are acting against the thing you claim to believe in.

Guns might be a curse in some ways. But they are a blessing in other ways. For example. A 250 pound muscle man can easily overcome a 90 pound granny. But if they both have guns, granny has a chance.

Roughly 95% of people are good people. Good people don't use their guns except in self defense. It's the 5% bad people that use their guns for violence. Arm everybody so that like granny, we all have a chance to overcome the bad people when the need arises.

[Daniel 666]

so bad Because you must have gun to save your life and market from Niger

[coolcoinz]

It is necessary to control both the weapon and the people owning it. Weapons can become an object of strength for every person and power, so its use must be controlled and it is so simple to give weapons to everyone that this is a gross blunder, the crime will increase.

If you're so afraid of people owning guns then maybe we should start controlling all tools that can kill you, like knives, air guns, bows, slingshots. Gun laws are stupid. You can't buy a shotgun to protect your home, but you can buy a flamethrower, a chainsaw and many other potentially dangerous devices.

[tvbcof]

It is necessary to control both the weapon and the people owning it. Weapons can become an object of strength for every person and power, so its use must be controlled and it is so simple to give weapons to everyone that this is a gross blunder, the crime will increase.

If you're so afraid of people owning guns then maybe we should start controlling all tools that can kill you, like knives, air guns, bows, slingshots. Gun laws are stupid. You can't buy a shotgun to protect your home, but you can buy a flamethrower, a chainsaw and many other potentially dangerous devices.

Countless people every day could kill others by applying a few centimeters of movement to a steering wheel.  And many do in fact.

At the end of the day one has no choice but to put some confidence in one's fellow citizen.  Or be some sort of an isolated hermit because there is only so much that Big Brother can realistically do.  As technology improves BB can probably do more (like chipping and continuous AI monitoring) but most semi-normal humans will definable not like the ultimate results.  Fortunately confidence in one's fellow citizens is usually not terribly misplaced.

The ironic thing is that most areas in the U.S. (by surface area) are much safer for all people because of an armed population of civilians.  In most areas criminals don't have to much to worry about from the police who, even if they are competent and honest, are a long way from the scene of a potential crime.  Potential criminals are very aware of this.  They do have to worry about a home-owner blowing their head off which a shotgun, and that worried a lot of them quite a bit.

[Jasad]

No one can have a gun and use it. Sales of the gun should be done carefully. If possible, a store that sells such a thing must be a policeman. And also must be sold strictly. Retrieve the identity of the buyer and his identity card. I think it's important because if it's sold out haphazardly. All credentials must be sought in order to minimize gun misuse.

[tvbcof]

No one can have a gun and use it. Sales of the gun should be done carefully. If possible, a store that sells such a thing must be a policeman. And also must be sold strictly. Retrieve the identity of the buyer and his identity card. I think it's important because if it's sold out haphazardly. All credentials must be sought in order to minimize gun misuse.

Guns are stolen all the time in my area.  Probably the most targeted item.  All that hassle and and abuse of John/Jane Q. Citizen who just wants some protection for his/her family is for naught when they go on vacation and their home is broken into and their guns, tools, 4-wheelers, etc, are grabbed by some meth-head.

Your run-of-the-mill tweeker has no ability to pass a background check here in the U.S., and won't go to a gun store for their weapons.

All the policy of extreme harrassement does is bother the very people who should have guns.  It does nothing but possibly instill a false sense of confidence in the drooling idiots who get their thoughts from mainstream jnews, and makes it more likely that people who wish to have a gun to use appropriately are less likely to have the ability.  But the U.N. has mandated that no citizens in any country should have guns or the ability to provide for their own defense so the mainstream jnews and modern 'progressives' will keep hammering on the issue...to their political detriment here in the U.S...

[BADecker]

No one can have a gun and use it. Sales of the gun should be done carefully. If possible, a store that sells such a thing must be a policeman. And also must be sold strictly. Retrieve the identity of the buyer and his identity card. I think it's important because if it's sold out haphazardly. All credentials must be sought in order to minimize gun misuse.

Nobody is their identity card. It still boils down to man-to-man ideals and fights. Government is people. Gun owners are people. Man-to-man.

[Sithara007]

so bad Because you must have gun to save your life and market from Niger

Crime rate is high among the blacks, but that doesn't mean that you may never encounter a criminal from some other race. Hispanics are catching up with the African Americans pretty fast. And during his last year in office, Obama had imported more than 10,000 Syrians. Let's wait and watch how these people will behave once they get their American passports.

[alex 777]

Not agree , Because country can’t control all things happen so must people safe them selfie and use power then others try to kill them

[AmiranAbdul]

I believe that mentally healthy people need to allow weapons for self-defense. The police will not always be an near to protect someone from robbers, murderers or rapists.

[Thyaga]

I believe that mentally healthy people need to allow weapons for self-defense. The police will not always be an near to protect someone from robbers, murderers or rapists.

You are right because for our self-defense we need weapons because sharp weapons will not work against weapons using firearms and police are not always in our environment.