Oregon Senators and gun RESTRICTIONS

[tvguy]

Exactly.


Ah crap never mind, That's what I hate about this face book style Meme that's an absolute lie. It fooled me for a second.
It quotes Obama with a sentence that Obama NEVER SAID.

[tvguy]

I said anyone voting democratic isn't a pro gun person.

That's simply not true and that's not my opinion. It's a fact. I may not agree with a democrats thinking on guns but that doesn't mean I will vote for a republican.

It's going to depend on a lot of factors. And since I don't believe for a second anyone is going to take my guns I could vote for someone who points to Australia as an example of gun control that works.

But this may be a moot point. From what I see so far I don't see anyone I want to vote for on either side.

[Wonky3]

I said anyone voting democratic isn't a pro gun person.

That's simply not true and that's not my opinion. It's a fact. I may not agree with a democrats thinking on guns but that doesn't mean I will vote for a republican.

It's going to depend on a lot of factors. And since I don't believe for a second anyone is going to take my guns I could vote for someone who points to Australia as an example of gun control that works.

But this may be a moot point. From what I see so far I don't see anyone I want to vote for on either side.

Good pont, because Australia didn't TAKE AWAY anyone's gun(s). The BOUGHT 'em, and it was not required to sell them to the government. There are still lot's of guns in Australia, but mostly in the "outback" where people hunt, and not a lot of people hunt with handguns. 

[Hugo]

I said anyone voting democratic isn't a pro gun person.

That's simply not true and that's not my opinion. It's a fact. I may not agree with a democrats thinking on guns but that doesn't mean I will vote for a republican.

It's going to depend on a lot of factors. And since I don't believe for a second anyone is going to take my guns I could vote for someone who points to Australia as an example of gun control that works.

But this may be a moot point. From what I see so far I don't see anyone I want to vote for on either side.

Good pont, because Australia didn't TAKE AWAY anyone's gun(s). The BOUGHT 'em, and it was not required to sell them to the government. There are still lot's of guns in Australia, but mostly in the "outback" where people hunt, and not a lot of people hunt with handguns. 

Do you research these things before you say them?

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index...645AA7ZiOu

Go ahead... knock the "source" ......  Yahoo News......

[Wonky3]

I said anyone voting democratic isn't a pro gun person.

That's simply not true and that's not my opinion. It's a fact. I may not agree with a democrats thinking on guns but that doesn't mean I will vote for a republican.

It's going to depend on a lot of factors. And since I don't believe for a second anyone is going to take my guns I could vote for someone who points to Australia as an example of gun control that works.

But this may be a moot point. From what I see so far I don't see anyone I want to vote for on either side.

Good pont, because Australia didn't TAKE AWAY anyone's gun(s). The BOUGHT 'em, and it was not required to sell them to the government. There are still lot's of guns in Australia, but mostly in the "outback" where people hunt, and not a lot of people hunt with handguns. 

Do you research these things before you say them?

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index...645AA7ZiOu

Go ahead... knock the "source" ......  Yahoo News......

Your question is legitimate and true as far as it goes. I was wrong in saying it was "not required" that citizens in Australia sell the guns to the government. "Some guns" (see following) were required to be turned in. I doubt we will ever agree about the type of guns ordinary citizens should be permitted to own. In fact I'm certain we won't agree. I know you hunt game and I can easily understand why you want hunting rifles. Why you (and others ) want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips evades me. But that's just me and it appears the 2nd amendment gives us the right to own and keep these weapons. I also don't think it's a good idea for ordinary citizens to "carry concealed", but again that is a personal opinion and I understand your right to think it proper, and to do it. 

So, I was wrong in what I posted about the Australian program. But, Im not so sure I am wrong in the positive effect it has had in society there. 

Still...point taken. I should be more careful about "facts" I post. I had read about this program a long time ago and simply did not understand it at the time or forgot the details. 

I don't have answers explaining the violence committed using guns in our country. And I've yet to read any compelling source suggesting a solution I can agree with. I do see it as a problem, and hope someone, somewhere, and soon, finds some way of dealing with what I see as a national tragedy. 

From WIKI: 


Unlike the voluntary buybacks in the United States, Australian buybacks of 1996 and 2003 were compulsory, compensated surrenders of particular types of firearms made illegal by new gun laws.

The 1996 "National Firearms Buyback Scheme" took 660,959[2] long guns, mostly semi-automatic rimfire rifles and shotguns as well as pump-action shotguns, and a smaller proportion of higher powered or military type semi-automatic rifles. Because the Australian Constitution requires that the Commonwealth may only take private property in return for "just compensation," the Government increased the Medicare Levy, from 1.5% to 1.7% of income, for one year to finance compensation. The buyback was predicted to cost A$500 million.[3] The payments from the Commonwealth were conditional on the States and Territories introducing firearms laws and regulations consistent with the National Firearms Agreement, though some inconsistencies remain. No licences for self-defense are allowed under these laws.
The 2003 handgun buyback took about 50,000 licensed target pistols. New handgun laws made illegal target pistols of greater than .38 calibre and handguns with barrels less than 120mm (semi-automatic) or 100mm (revolvers) such as pocket pistols. As a result of consultation with Australian peak sporting groups an exception was granted for pistols greater than .38 calibre used for Handgun Metallic Silhouette and Western Action competitions, but not for the popular sport of IPSC.[4]

[tvguy]

OK don't ask me why this stuff is freaking BLUE!!!!!











Wonky..."I know you hunt game and I can easily understand why you want hunting rifles. Why you (and others ) want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips evades me."

It evades me why you care. Rifles of ANY kind only account for a tiny fraction of gun deaths in this country. The simple fact of the matter is rifles are not a problem

 You like the New York times right? read this......


 OVER the past two decades, the majority of Americans in a country deeply divided over gun control have coalesced behind a single proposition: The sale of assault weapons should be banned.

Stories from Our Advertisers





That idea was one of the pillars of the Obama administration’s plan to curb gun violence, and it remains popular with the public. In a poll last December, 59 percent of likely voters said they favor a ban.
But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.
It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.
In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.
The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.


So anyway you ask WHY anyone would want a Why anyone want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips "

Well for one thing they are a lot of fun to shoot. And they are hardly any different than a hunting rifle. But what about self protection? What if some huge disaster befalls us like the earthquakes you spoke of? Why would I NOT want a weapon as good as the weapons that others might have to use against me?
Is this too inconceivable to you? When the founders of the constitution said I have the right to keep and bear arms... They did not say I only had the right to inferior weapons in the unlike event I might need to defend my home.

[Wonky3]

OK don't ask me why this stuff is freaking BLUE!!!!!











Wonky..."I know you hunt game and I can easily understand why you want hunting rifles. Why you (and others ) want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips evades me."

It evades me why you care. Rifles of ANY kind only account for a tiny fraction of gun deaths in this country. The simple fact of the matter is rifles are not a problem

 You like the New York times right? read this......


 OVER the past two decades, the majority of Americans in a country deeply divided over gun control have coalesced behind a single proposition: The sale of assault weapons should be banned.

Stories from Our Advertisers





That idea was one of the pillars of the Obama administration’s plan to curb gun violence, and it remains popular with the public. In a poll last December, 59 percent of likely voters said they favor a ban.
But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.
It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.
In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.
The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.


So anyway you ask WHY anyone would want a Why anyone want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips "

Well for one thing they are a lot of fun to shoot. And they are hardly any different than a hunting rifle. But what about self protection? What if some huge disaster befalls us like the earthquakes you spoke of? Why would I NOT want a weapon as good as the weapons that others might have to use against me?
Is this too inconceivable to you? When the founders of the constitution said I have the right to keep and bear arms... They did not say I only had the right to inferior weapons in the unlike event I might need to defend my home.

Okay. That explains that. You like them and have them, I don't think they are "necessary" and I don't have one. But, I get your point. Thank the gods we are allowed to have differing opinions here without throwing stones. 

[tvguy]

OK don't ask me why this stuff is freaking BLUE!!!!!











Wonky..."I know you hunt game and I can easily understand why you want hunting rifles. Why you (and others ) want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips evades me."

It evades me why you care. Rifles of ANY kind only account for a tiny fraction of gun deaths in this country. The simple fact of the matter is rifles are not a problem

 You like the New York times right? read this......


 OVER the past two decades, the majority of Americans in a country deeply divided over gun control have coalesced behind a single proposition: The sale of assault weapons should be banned.

Stories from Our Advertisers





That idea was one of the pillars of the Obama administration’s plan to curb gun violence, and it remains popular with the public. In a poll last December, 59 percent of likely voters said they favor a ban.
But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.
It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.
In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.
The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.


So anyway you ask WHY anyone would want a Why anyone want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips "

Well for one thing they are a lot of fun to shoot. And they are hardly any different than a hunting rifle. But what about self protection? What if some huge disaster befalls us like the earthquakes you spoke of? Why would I NOT want a weapon as good as the weapons that others might have to use against me?
Is this too inconceivable to you? When the founders of the constitution said I have the right to keep and bear arms... They did not say I only had the right to inferior weapons in the unlike event I might need to defend my home.

Okay. That explains that. You like them and have them, I don't think they are "necessary" and I don't have one. But, I get your point. Thank the gods we are allowed to have differing opinions here without throwing stones. 

I personally don't think they are necessary. But I don't rule out the fact that one might be. I don't have any at this time but that doesn't mean I won't have one next week.

[Wonky3]

OK don't ask me why this stuff is freaking BLUE!!!!!











Wonky..."I know you hunt game and I can easily understand why you want hunting rifles. Why you (and others ) want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips evades me."

It evades me why you care. Rifles of ANY kind only account for a tiny fraction of gun deaths in this country. The simple fact of the matter is rifles are not a problem

 You like the New York times right? read this......


 OVER the past two decades, the majority of Americans in a country deeply divided over gun control have coalesced behind a single proposition: The sale of assault weapons should be banned.

Stories from Our Advertisers





That idea was one of the pillars of the Obama administration’s plan to curb gun violence, and it remains popular with the public. In a poll last December, 59 percent of likely voters said they favor a ban.
But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.
It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.
In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.
The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.


So anyway you ask WHY anyone would want a Why anyone want semiautomatic military type guns with large clips "

Well for one thing they are a lot of fun to shoot. And they are hardly any different than a hunting rifle. But what about self protection? What if some huge disaster befalls us like the earthquakes you spoke of? Why would I NOT want a weapon as good as the weapons that others might have to use against me?
Is this too inconceivable to you? When the founders of the constitution said I have the right to keep and bear arms... They did not say I only had the right to inferior weapons in the unlike event I might need to defend my home.

Okay. That explains that. You like them and have them, I don't think they are "necessary" and I don't have one. But, I get your point. Thank the gods we are allowed to have differing opinions here without throwing stones. 

I personally don't think they are necessary. But I don't rule out the fact that one might be. I don't have any at this time but that doesn't mean I won't have one next week.

And that's the wonder of living in the "home of the free and the land of the brave". We can have them if we want and we can voice negative opinions about them if we want. Is this a great country, or what! 

[Hugo]

Detroit pastor shoots, kills hammer-wielding church intruder

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/19/pas...cmp=hplnws

Good for him.

[tvguy]

Detroit pastor shoots, kills hammer-wielding church intruder

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/19/pas...cmp=hplnws

Good for him.

Preacher eh?

[Valuesize]

Some people needs shoot'n.

[tvguy]

Some people needs shoot'n.

[orygunluvr]

[tvguy]

I retied to tell that to what his face that used to post here.. C S somebody.. Oh yeah Rowen. For some reason he didn't think the point you are making mattered.

[Hugo]

Yup, no one trying to take anyone's guns... can't happen.... you're an idiot if you think so... right scrapper?

http://www.dailywire.com/news/544/court-...gn=dwbrand

[orygunluvr]

Yup, no one trying to take anyone's guns...  can't happen....  you're an idiot if you think so...  right scrapper?

http://www.dailywire.com/news/544/court-...gn=dwbrand

You're telling someone that would be happy to give them up.

[Scrapper]

Yup, no one trying to take anyone's guns...  can't happen....  you're an idiot if you think so...  right scrapper?

http://www.dailywire.com/news/544/court-...gn=dwbrand

From the  Editor-At-Large of Breitbart.  

[Scrapper]

Yup, no one trying to take anyone's guns...  can't happen....  you're an idiot if you think so...  right scrapper?

http://www.dailywire.com/news/544/court-...gn=dwbrand

From the  Editor-At-Large of Breitbart.  

He's a liar.  Here's more of his bullshit...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhoFNmMeO8k 

[Hugo]

Yup, no one trying to take anyone's guns...  can't happen....  you're an idiot if you think so...  right scrapper?

http://www.dailywire.com/news/544/court-...gn=dwbrand

From the  Editor-At-Large of Breitbart.  

OMG you complete fucking MORON!!!!  "THE SOURCE! THE SOURCE!"   What about the fucking truth??????

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circui...uit+COA%29