Any Pro-Gun Liberals?

[Dirty Penguin]

LOL, it's not because I fear them... just that they will ruin us as they advance.

I doubt they will ruin us. In the hands of those who wish to use them unlawfully can be dangerous. In the hands of those like myself who have one legally and who uses it in a manner according to the law they are not dangerous. I'd say chemical/biological terrorism/warfare may be the thing that will ruin us....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

If you don't have one to protect you then be aware because they just might.

[youtube]UBaGSOEcduE[/youtube]
Dangerous Criminals - Having guns doesn't mean you can rob everybody - YouTube

 

[jasonwill2]

LOL, it's not because I fear them... just that they will ruin us as they advance.

We have nukes, and those haven't ruined us yet. Maybe parts of Japan, but not the whole world...

...yet.

My point is that there are a lot easier ways to kill massive amounts of people other than guns.

 

[painted wolf]

Don't like guns..? It's OK..but take a day and go to the gun range. Get all the instructions and the go shoot a couple rounds. Once you get an understanding and appreciation for it your fear of them go right out the window. My wife was the same way until she went skeet shooting.

I've shot guns... I even learned how to take it apart, clean it and put it back together blindfolded (I have interesting friends).

But, I still don't "like" guns... I appreciate them as useful tools for certain things and as terrible implements for other things.

I know to much about what a bullet can do to a soft fleshy being.

wa:do

 

[The Sum of Awe]

We have nukes, and those haven't ruined us yet. Maybe parts of Japan, but not the whole world...

...yet.

My point is that there are a lot easier ways to kill massive amounts of people other than guns.

Agreed, and the knowledge that someone has nukes, someone could make something even bigger and more destructive to battle the nuke.

 

[JacobEzra.]

I don't like guns. But since criminals will always have one, and as long as there are evil people(or people who do evil) a gun is good defense. Almost like a necessary evil.

 

[McBell]

I don't like guns. But since criminals will always have one, and as long as there are evil people(or people who do evil) a gun is good defense. Almost like a necessary evil.

This is like blaming the matches for someone starting a fire.

 

[JacobEzra.]

This is like blaming the matches for someone starting a fire.

How? Im not blaming anyone or thing. Just saying if the bad guys have a gun, I should have one to.

 

[McBell]

How? Im not blaming anyone or thing. Just saying if the bad guys have a gun, I should have one to.

Perhaps I misunderstood what you mean by:

Almost like a necessary evil.

 

[Ruadri Canmore]

I don't have a gun but I would like to get one. Particularly a No. 4 Mk 1 Lee-Enfield rifle.

I suppose if I were to attach a political label to myself it would be liberal. Though I don't see anything wrong with people owning rifles for hunting or something like a revolver for home defence so long as you've taken a course and know how to handle it in a responsible manner. I don't believe in automatic weapons though, as the only reason one should carry an automatic is if you are fighting in a war. Civilians carrying automatics around in peacetime is just a tragedy waiting to happen.

 

[idea]

Ha! The criminals don't scare me, either ...

This was going around for awhile, kind of funny
Is Granny ready? | AccountingWeb

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I don't have a gun but I would like to get one. Particularly a No. 4 Mk 1 Lee-Enfield rifle.

I suppose if I were to attach a political label to myself it would be liberal. Though I don't see anything wrong with people owning rifles for hunting or something like a revolver for home defence so long as you've taken a course and know how to handle it in a responsible manner. I don't believe in automatic weapons though, as the only reason one should carry an automatic is if you are fighting in a war. Civilians carrying automatics around in peacetime is just a tragedy waiting to happen.

This I agree with. I am a liberal but don't you take my gun away from me...
I think there may be some misconception out there that liberals want to take guns away from people.

I don't mind gun laws require them to be secure from children/teenagers. I don't mind the waiting period.

There are more than enough high powered rifles to keep us busy. I don't have a problem with outlawing automatic weapons. Personally I don't see the point in harry homeowner having one.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

This was going around for awhile, kind of funny
Is Granny ready? | AccountingWeb

:biglaugh:...Granny get your gun...and get er done..!

 

[jasonwill2]

I don't have a gun but I would like to get one. Particularly a No. 4 Mk 1 Lee-Enfield rifle.

I suppose if I were to attach a political label to myself it would be liberal. Though I don't see anything wrong with people owning rifles for hunting or something like a revolver for home defence so long as you've taken a course and know how to handle it in a responsible manner. I don't believe in automatic weapons though, as the only reason one should carry an automatic is if you are fighting in a war. Civilians carrying automatics around in peacetime is just a tragedy waiting to happen.

What about semi-automatic carbines or assault rifles?

I think a civilian should be able to own a full auto gun so long as they take a course in safety, arn't crazy or prone to being emotionally unstable, and have a permit.

Now I don't think we should have say grenades and tanks... the 2nd Amendment applies more to "arms" hence firearms...

Actually the Militia talked about in the Constitution DOES exist, the National Guards that each State has is a militia filled with civllians. Sometimes the federal government borrows them, but should the federal government do something crazy with the federal forces we have the state militias who would oust the federal government out of power.

Therefore your average day joe redneck doesn't need to be armed to take on the federal government should tyranny come down on us... because obviously not all the states if any will comply, and will likely go to war against the federal government should democracy be over-turned.

And yes I am a liberal, at least socially, economically im a moderate with left leanings.

 

[Ruadri Canmore]

What about semi-automatic carbines or assault rifles?

I think a civilian should be able to own a full auto gun so long as they take a course in safety, arn't crazy or prone to being emotionally unstable, and have a permit.

Now I don't think we should have say grenades and tanks... the 2nd Amendment applies more to "arms" hence firearms...

Actually the Militia talked about in the Constitution DOES exist, the National Guards that each State has is a militia filled with civllians. Sometimes the federal government borrows them, but should the federal government do something crazy with the federal forces we have the state militias who would oust the federal government out of power.

Therefore your average day joe redneck doesn't need to be armed to take on the federal government should tyranny come down on us... because obviously not all the states if any will comply, and will likely go to war against the federal government should democracy be over-turned.

And yes I am a liberal, at least socially, economically im a moderate with left leanings.

I'm Canadian and so my views on firearms might be different than liberals living in the States, but here is what I think.

First of all I think that anyone who owns a gun should take a training course and have a license. This is to make sure that you know how to handle a weapon in a responsible manner, and to keep them out of dangerous hands such as the insane.

There are three main uses for a gun: hunting, home defence (against theives and such), and war.

For hunting all you would need are single shot rifles and shotguns (rifles for things like deer and shotguns for birds). I don't believe in using automatics to hunt, its un-sportsman like and is disrespectful to your quarry. Also single shot long guns are difficult to conceal and have a low rate of fire, which help prevent the crazy or the violent from going on a shooting spree.

For home defence a hand gun like a revolver or a semi-automatic rifle is sufficient protection, but it needs to stay in your house. Again this is to prevent gangsters and the insane from carrying around a concealble or high rate of fire weapon and causing a lot of deaths from a shooting spree.

You might also use a semi-automatic pistol or rifle if you were hunting something dangerous like a bear. But you should have a license to transport such a firearm to the woods and until you get there keep it in a locked case.

The only purpose of an automatic weapon (assault rifles included) is to kill a lot of people quickly and thus should not be carried by anyone unless a foreign enemy has invaded, (the exception to this being professional soldiers). In fact to this end every city in Canada has a government armoury stocked with automatic weapons and if Canada were ever invaded the government would hand out guns to everyone so we could fight a guerilla war. (At least untill you chaps arrived to save us )

I find this American idea that one day you are going to have to fight your own government to be a very strange one indeed. The government is your representative so wouldn't you be fighting yourself? Would it not just be easier to vote them out of office? And why would you have to fight your own military? I would think that if your government ever ordered your soldiers to gun down their own countrymen the soldiers would tell them that they were insane and to **** off.

 

[jasonwill2]

I'm Canadian and so my views on firearms might be different than liberals living in the States, but here is what I think.

First of all I think that anyone who owns a gun should take a training course and have a license. This is to make sure that you know how to handle a weapon in a responsible manner, and to keep them out of dangerous hands such as the insane.

There are three main uses for a gun: hunting, home defence (against theives and such), and war.

For hunting all you would need are single shot rifles and shotguns (rifles for things like deer and shotguns for birds). I don't believe in using automatics to hunt, its un-sportsman like and is disrespectful to your quarry. Also single shot long guns are difficult to conceal and have a low rate of fire, which help prevent the crazy or the violent from going on a shooting spree.

For home defence a hand gun like a revolver or a semi-automatic rifle is sufficient protection, but it needs to stay in your house. Again this is to prevent gangsters and the insane from carrying around a concealble or high rate of fire weapon and causing a lot of deaths from a shooting spree.

You might also use a semi-automatic pistol or rifle if you were hunting something dangerous like a bear. But you should have a license to transport such a firearm to the woods and until you get there keep it in a locked case.

The only purpose of an automatic weapon (assault rifles included) is to kill a lot of people quickly and thus should not be carried by anyone unless a foreign enemy has invaded, (the exception to this being professional soldiers). In fact to this end every city in Canada has a government armoury stocked with automatic weapons and if Canada were ever invaded the government would hand out guns to everyone so we could fight a guerilla war. (At least untill you chaps arrived to save us )

I find this American idea that one day you are going to have to fight your own government to be a very strange one indeed. The government is your representative so wouldn't you be fighting yourself? Would it not just be easier to vote them out of office? And why would you have to fight your own military? I would think that if your government ever ordered your soldiers to gun down their own countrymen the soldiers would tell them that they were insane and to **** off.

Not if they some how abolished freedom... which is the case i was talking about. also america has had a civil war before, not that i think it will happen again but part of the reason for the constitution calling for an organized civillian militia is to make sure that no one pulls a fast one. but my point was that the state militias would respond if that happened as they are now that militia. i do however think that perhaps some kind of autos might be able to be given to civillians that have permits and such, not sure though, at least semi-auto carbines and rifles though.

most liberals in the united states dont like guns at all... but the thing is that guns do not effect crime for the most part, but only seem to decrease it somewhat in lower population densities.

but after a threshold of poor economic and population density ... it doesnt make a diffrence anymore. it doesnt stop or add to crime... so it makes sense to try and get guns out of those areas, because then teh gangs will be forced to more close range stuff which is generally less deadly. hence less people are killed overall. but somewhere that is not infested with crime, stricken with poverty or really dense populations? Nah, the guns if they have any effect mostly lower crime in those areas.

I believe the national academy of science did a report on it that didnt show any real corrolation between violent crime and gun restriction laws, at least no positive "more guns equals more violence" nonsense.

Guns don't make people violent after all, they don't have any magical effect to turn people crazy any more than a lead pipe, a knife, or a car... all can kill. its a matter of keeping them away from areas already prone to violent crime. but then the argument that people need to defend themselves in those places.

its all a kind of hairy issue to a degree.

 

[brambleberry]

I consider myself in the liberal-leaning field, but I do not own a gun or wish to ever own one, but my partner is in the military.

 

[MD]

I am pretty liberal and have always been anti gun. However, I live in Canada and the legal system here is so incredibly weak and lax that most criminals are back on the street in no time. And by criminal I don't mean your run of the mill gangster, I'm talking about serial killers. Stuff like this makes me wonder if guns should be less heavily regulated, atleast in Canada.

 

[SteveGrayFTW]

I believe in gun control is some way, shape, or form...but guns should not be banned outright.

I don't own a gun, but love to shoot.

 

[Wirey]

I am pretty liberal and have always been anti gun. However, I live in Canada and the legal system here is so incredibly weak and lax that most criminals are back on the street in no time. And by criminal I don't mean your run of the mill gangster, I'm talking about serial killers. Stuff like this makes me wonder if guns should be less heavily regulated, atleast in Canada.

Filthy Canadians, with your hockey pucks and Brian Adams tee shirts. No wonder they won't let you have guns.

I'm Canadian, and own guns. I'd also describe myself as liberal, in the US sense of the word.