Originally Posted by SStockDart (Post 637399)

The 9th Circuit ruled today that states CAN restrict people from carrying firearms outside their homes.

Well, the most liberal circuit made a ruling that should end up in the Supreme Court.

Do you think that the liberals are "Poking the bear"....I do....

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637415)

Here is the rest of the story: https://www.civilbeat.org/2021/03/9t...y-of-firearms/

Originally Posted by Grey Ghost (Post 637556)

Interesting read. The 9th court cites historical references from up to 700 years ago that limited weapons in public. None of those societies were established under our constitution yet used as arguments for their decision. No where did the article state why he was denied other than sheriff discretion. The decision is not based on OUR constitution's 2nd amendment but instead on their assine agenda.

Iowa was a sheriff discretion state when I got my carry permit many years ago. A few years back the legislature amended it to Shall Issue if the applicant passed the background check.

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637558)

Law is based on thousands of years of pragmatic experience telling us what's practical to administer and desirable for fairness are made by humans, and so the reasons behind them vary. Some laws are passed by bad people for bad reasons, as when a town councillor proposes a new zoning by-law that will help his brother’s business but that will generally be bad for other businesses. But ideally, laws should be based on ethics. Good laws are generally intended to do ethically good things, such as protecting individuals, safeguarding rights, or promoting the flourishing of communities. I can’t speak to what is in the mind of the law enforcement in Hawaii, I lived there for three years but not as a resident and never voted in state election but I will say this, the culture is different and I am not saying that in a good or bad way.

Originally Posted by Grey Ghost (Post 637568)

Excellent point Ed. The U.S. constitution was crafted to right the inequities that permeated through out the world for centuries. The 2nd amendment is unique to this country and has served us well. IT IS BASED ON CENTURIES OF PRAGMATIC EXPERIENCE AND OPPRESSION!!!

No one is invading the northern Mexican border to go through Mexico to get to Venezuela or any of the central/south american countries. Lenin was all for guns to over throw the czar then took them from everyone but his security force. Remember Germany pre WWII? Hitler?

Mental illness/religion beliefs have been behind most all the shootings in recent history. Dems/liberals say anyone who speaks out against their ideas are a threat and need to be silenced. Remember those in congress who questioned 2020 election? Get a liberal mental health "professional" to sign them off as a threat based on what they call "hate" speech (opposition to them) and wha la...good bye firearms. They won't touch radical mideast jihadists though.

Bottom line. Who gets to decide...Pelosi, harris, liberal justices?

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637575)

Originally Posted by Randy Wells (Post 637591)

Eddie, are you yelling at us? LOL

Randy

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637596)

That would be a caps. LMAO

Originally Posted by Randy Wells (Post 637598)

Your right Eddie, bold is pissed off. Sorry buddy. That TDS is going to wear you out, you need to chill, at least until California comes after your guns. I live in a 2nd addmendment sanctuary county, kind of like San Fran will not enforce turning over criminal illegal murders and rapist to Ice, we will not give our guns up, and the sheriff stands with us. like you Califonians wont give up your illegals. Oh our Sheriff will lock you up for taking a #1 or 2 on the side walk so we have that going for us to

Randy

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637609)

Randy, No one is coming to get anyone's gun's. TDS, that is laughable, he is just another man with no integrity, or a moral compass and the lack of common sense to pour piss out of a boot with the instructions on the bottom. He lost the House, then the Senate and then the Presidency...I don't like losers.

Originally Posted by Curt Rees (Post 637618)

No one is coming after OUR guns??? Let's evaluate 6 months from now after we have a look at the coming proposed legislation.

Does'nt matter to me. I have been carrying for 40 years being on the road during that time frame and will continue to do so. I was illegal as hell going thru Minnesnota and IIawacki on my way to and from the U S Nationals last year. Didn't care. At 75, what are you going to do to me? Disconnect the battery to my pacemaker???

It will be a cold day in hell when I will turn over my "sporting rifles, shotguns and pistols" or register them. If I have to add "felon" after my name, so be it!


I don't normally post when politics are involved. But decided to do so after a serious discussion with my youngest son, a Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran, about our constitutional rights. He and I will defend those with our life, if need be.


We, and you, Eddie, both swore to uphold the constitution when we signed up. And, I thank you for your service. You obviously served our country well, and have every right to be proud of it. You certianly have earned the right to express your opnion.

#5458

Curt Rees

Proud member of the NRA

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637664)

Thank you for your kind words and yes I took an oath to defend the Constitution of this great nation and I take that seriously. I have previously posted about what I believe background checks should look for with regards to mental health. I just don't see any changes to the 2nd Amendment, the numbers are just not there, as you know it takes a 2/3 majority to change the Constitution. I just moved from an open carry state, with range laws and people do some really strange things i.e a woman carrying an AK-47 on her back shopping at Target in Carson City. I get a little confused as to who is the threat, me, the box boy, the checkers or this young lady. I just left the store, my military training has made this situation for me a little confusing, I don't want to be in a target rich environment. I have owned a gun or guns since I was 11 years old, having been raised on a ranch in Arizona, at the age of 12 I received an NRA safety certificate. I received no less than 80 hours a year for 24 years on just my service weapons and numerous hours on crew serve weapons. My weapons are purpose type weapons, I have no use for an AR15, M16, M4, M60, M2, M198, M777.

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637664)

Thank you for your kind words and yes I took an oath to defend the Constitution of this great nation and I take that seriously. I have previously posted about what I believe background checks should look for with regards to mental health. I just don't see any changes to the 2nd Amendment, the numbers are just not there, as you know it takes a 2/3 majority to change the Constitution. I just moved from an open carry state, with range laws and people do some really strange things i.e a woman carrying an AK-47 on her back shopping at Target in Carson City. I get a little confused as to who is the threat, me, the box boy, the checkers or this young lady. I just left the store, my military training has made this situation for me a little confusing, I don't want to be in a target rich environment. I have owned a gun or guns since I was 11 years old, having been raised on a ranch in Arizona, at the age of 12 I received an NRA safety certificate. I received no less than 80 hours a year for 24 years on just my service weapons and numerous hours on crew serve weapons. My weapons are purpose type weapons, I have no use for an AR15, M16, M4, M60, M2, M198, M777.

Originally Posted by Glenn Briglio (Post 637684)

So is my M1 garand an assault rifle?

Originally Posted by Randy Wells (Post 637680)

Eddie,

You do know that a target rich environment is a gun free zone I hope.

Randy

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637696)

As always, the burden for proving the accuracy of a claim is on you. You got this from a speech that your dear leader made claiming 98% of mass shooting are conducted in gun free. Trump lunged for a dramatic statistic without including necessary context. The FBI considers a mass shooting as 4 or more people killed and that does not include the shooter. 63% of the mass shooting in this country are conducted at home in a domestic violence incident. This does not include drive-by shootings. Military bases are considered gun free zones, you can not carry personal weapons on any base. Does this make the base a soft target? The only people that have loaded weapons on base are MP’s, those on duty or people on the range for qualification. So why no mass shooting on base, it’s the perception that all military people are armed.

Originally Posted by Randy Wells (Post 637697)

As always you are wrong again Eddie I got this from common sense. I guess the Fort Hood shooting was not considered a mass shooting by a jihadist colonel.

Randy

Originally Posted by Eddies66 (Post 637698)

Common sense tells you that if something is hot not to touch it. I will go with FBI stats that date back to the 50's. I already provided you with what is considered a mass shooting.

Originally Posted by Randy Wells (Post 637699)

Common sense tells me not to walk into a Wal-Mart or any gun free zone with out packing.

Randy

Originally Posted by Dan Fahey (Post 637800)

See a lot of NRA - No Lives Matter