Gun Free Zones

[ImWithStupid]

You would get charged with the violation but at least you wouldn't get charged with murder. It would still be self defense by defending others. Hopefully it would be a land mark case and stop these insane laws.

 

There's a lot of variables, by state, by circumstance. The violation of the "gun free zone" law would be the lowest probable charge. You could have a prosecutor take into mind the totality of the circumstance and refuse to prosecute, but you could run into something like, the fact that if in your state, violating the "gun free zone" law may be a felony, that you could also be charged with something like, use of a weapon to commit a felony or somehting to that effect.

 

In all, it depends on the laws of your state first and foremost, second, the mentality of your state prosecutor, and lastly the mentality of the judge.

 

Kind of a "caveat emptor" situation, but with self defense.

[Guest Thor]

All guns should be made illegal. When Obama is elected he will put a crimp on guns you can count on it, he is a good man.

[ImWithStupid]

All guns should be made illegal. When Obama is elected he will put a crimp on guns you can count on it, he is a good man.

 

I prefer to have a means to oppose my government.

 

"A little rebellion now and then... is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

 

I have read the entire plan that Obama has for America. If you want that, plan, move to Sweden. Obama wants to reduce anyone with means to those that don't. He doesn't propose a plan to raise up the poor, he wants the people who are able to make it, to be reduced to a level that is even with the lowest level. I will not support someone who wants to take away from those who have enough, so they are equal to those who go without.

[Old Salt]

All guns should be made illegal. When Obama is elected he will put a crimp on guns you can count on it, he is a good man.

One of the great things about this country is that the President is not a dictator and cannot do everything (s)he wants without support from Congress. There are a few things (s)he can do by executive order, but banning guns is not one of them. He can direct that all FEDERAL firearms laws are fully enforced, but that's about it.

[wez]

One of the great things about this country is that the President is not a dictator and cannot do everything (s)he wants without support from Congress. There are a few things (s)he can do by executive order, but banning guns is not one of them.

 

 

Although I really dislike guns, I agree Old Salt.. A ban on guns from the federal government would scare me more than what we have..

 

 

But who in their right mind wouldn't feel safer if not a gun existed in the world? Not realistic but one can dream...

[Old Salt]

It never fails to amaze me that there are so many gullible people out there that actually believe all that campaign rhetoric. Politicians say what people want to hear in order to get elected. After that, it's all bets off and they'll do what's expedient. Doesn't matter if it's Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian, or what (IMO).

[hugo]

Here's a question for you legal-types.

 

Scenario: As a civilian, you're in a gun-free zone but you're carrying. Some punk decides to start shooting, but you take him (or her) out.

 

Question: Could you be charged with manslaughter because you were disobeying a law?

 

Nah, it is still a justifiable homicide. You could be charged with illegal possession of a weapon only.

[snafu]

All guns should be made illegal. When Obama is elected he will put a crimp on guns you can count on it, he is a good man.

 

Thats pretty funny. How dose Obama plan on puting a crimp on guns?

[snafu]

Global gun ban:

 

The Worldwide Gun Control Movement by Ron Paul

 

The UN claims to serve human freedom and dignity, but gun control often serves as a gateway to tyranny. Tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control. Our Founders, having just expelled the British army, knew that the right to bear arms serves as the guardian of every other right. This is the principle so often ignored by both sides in the gun control debate. Only armed citizens can resist tyrannical government.

[hugo]

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction.

 

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes....Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria in Chapter 40 of "On Crimes and Punishment", 1764

[timesjoke]

All guns should be made illegal. When Obama is elected he will put a crimp on guns you can count on it, he is a good man.

 

As old salt pointed out, the President has little real power on his own and something like a federal gun ban would be impossible for any President to pull off. The only way the socialists can pull this off is slowly take it state by state, if ever.

 

 

Banning guns will only help the criminals.

[Old Salt]

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction.

 

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes....Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria in Chapter 40 of "On Crimes and Punishment", 1764

This quote just about says it all.

[Old Salt]

Although I really dislike guns, I agree Old Salt.. A ban on guns from the federal government would scare me more than what we have..

 

 

But who in their right mind wouldn't feel safer if not a gun existed in the world? Not realistic but one can dream...

You'd just have to worry more about crossbows, spears, knives, rocks, and the sort. Anything can be used as a weapon if you're really innovative.

[wez]

You'd just have to worry more about crossbows, spears, knives, rocks, and the sort. Anything can be used as a weapon if you're really innovative.

 

 

True... a finger in the eye or hands around the neck can do the trick too.. But I think people are a bit more reserved for the most part if they have to get up close and personal to their killing.. Guns make it too easy.

[hugo]

This quote just about says it all.

 

The wisdom of our founding fathers never ceases to amaze me.

[ImWithStupid]

The wisdom of our founding fathers never ceases to amaze me.

 

They were much smarter men than we.

[hugo]

They were much smarter men than we.

 

Yes, we have been fundamentally mentally disabled by 75 years of Keynesian socialism.

[snafu]

New research on the Nazi confiscation

of registered guns--and execution of

gun owners--provides a poignant lesson

on why Americans have always opposed

the registration of peaceable firearms owners.

 

President Bill Clinton has come out in favor of the registration of all law-abiding American gun owners. "People ought to have to register guns like they register their cars," he said.1 Already, the Clinton-Gore administration is misusing the national instant check system to retain the identities of firearms purchasers. Government records on gun owners supposedly protect society.

 

It would be instructive at this time to recall why the American citizenry and Congress have historically opposed the registration of firearms. The reason is plain. Registration makes it easy for a tyrannical government to confiscate firearms and make prey of its subjects. Denying this historical fact is no more justified than denying that the Holocaust occurred or that the Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people.

 

 

 

After invading, Nazis used pre-war lists of gun owners to confiscate firearms and many gun owners simply disappeared. Following confiscation, the Nazis were free to wreak their evil on the disarmed populace, such as on these helpless Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto.

 

Hitler Gun Control

[snafu]

This is history in the making people....

 

The Supreme Court on Tuesday took up gun control, hearing arguments concerning a District of Columbia ban on handguns more than two centuries after the Second Amendment gave Americans the right to "keep and bear arms."

 

 

 

The right of a free nation to keep and bear arms is being decided as we speak.

Even if they could get all the guns off the streets would we still be secure in our homes? Could we rely on the police to intervene before our life or liberty is taken away?

 

 

Supreme Court hears arguments on gun ownership - CNN.com

Justices set to mull gun rights - Crime & courts - MSNBC.com

I will not give up my gun !

[snafu]

Militia:

 

 

Answer.com

1. An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

2. A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.

3. The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

[snafu]

Push to permit guns on campus.

 

Push to permit guns on campus - USATODAY.com

[Old Salt]

The court won't publish its ruling until June, or thereabouts. The talking heads were saying that, depending on how the court rules, that this decision may get rid of a lot of current gun laws. (Maybe even some gun-free zones?)

[snafu]

The court won't publish its ruling until June, or thereabouts. The talking heads were saying that, depending on how the court rules, that this decision may get rid of a lot of current gun laws. (Maybe even some gun-free zones?)

 

God I hope so. I think they're trying to go down the middle to though and might put some bans and restrictions on some guns but all in all it sounds good.

[ImWithStupid]

God I hope so. I think they're trying to go down the middle to though and might put some bans and restrictions on some guns but all in all it sounds good.

 

I predict that no great ripples will be made. Especially in an electon year. I know Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life but politics is politics.

 

I predict that nothing will change. They will rule that the 2A includes individual rights but they will also rule that practical limitations are allowed.

[wez]

I predict that no great ripples will be made. Especially in an electon year. I know Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life but politics is politics.

 

I predict that nothing will change. They will rule that the 2A includes individual rights but they will also rule that practical limitations are allowed.

 

I hope you're right.. Like I said, I really don't like guns but I trust them more in the hands of regular people than in the hands of not so regular people in governments. That would be scarey...