u May 17 Gatnos v No, they shouldn't Who said anything about banning "assault weapons"? An attempt to ban either is a direct assault on our Rights as protected by the 2nd Amendment. This is typical liberal crap, blame the gun instead of the criminal. When did bad behavior become the responsibility of society rather than the responsibility of the perpetrator. It is totally wrong-headed thinking that we should loose our right of self-defense, because some individuals break the law. Post
u May 16 beemerphill v No, they shouldn't A handgun ban would accomplish nothing, and would probably be unconstitutional. It would be a complete waste of time, and it would focus the attention of our law makers on this matter instead of issues that make sense. Post
u May 16 Btmoody v No, they shouldn't Considering firearms are specifically protected by the American constitution there's just no way the gov could LEGALLY pull that off. It would take an amendment to the constitution and there's no way their getting 38 states on board with that bad idea. Post
May 12 Bill2E v No, they shouldn't Ban the legislators that want to take away our freedoms, not the guns. Post
May 6 TFerg v No, they shouldn't I own a couple of firearms and am well trained in their use. I own spoons, knives, forks also. I know how to use those to, as my doctor can attest to. My point being I am responcible for the use of these items no one else. Check my background if you want. I'm as clean as our president. Uhm,on second thought maybe you shouldn't check to deeply.... You want to check my background out, go ahead. I'm clean, the local goverenment has my finger prints,as well as the federal gov,( used to have a secret clearance, USMC). No, you can't ban my firearms. The Constitution says so. Post
u May 17 Gatnos v No, they shouldn't Who said anything about banning "assault weapons"? An attempt to ban either is a direct assault on our Rights as protected by the 2nd Amendment. This is typical liberal crap, blame the gun instead of the criminal. When did bad behavior become the responsibility of society rather than the responsibility of the perpetrator. It is totally wrong-headed thinking that we should loose our right of self-defense, because some individuals break the law. Post
u May 16 beemerphill v No, they shouldn't A handgun ban would accomplish nothing, and would probably be unconstitutional. It would be a complete waste of time, and it would focus the attention of our law makers on this matter instead of issues that make sense. Post
u May 16 Btmoody v No, they shouldn't Considering firearms are specifically protected by the American constitution there's just no way the gov could LEGALLY pull that off. It would take an amendment to the constitution and there's no way their getting 38 states on board with that bad idea. Post
May 12 Bill2E v No, they shouldn't Ban the legislators that want to take away our freedoms, not the guns. Post
May 6 TFerg v No, they shouldn't I own a couple of firearms and am well trained in their use. I own spoons, knives, forks also. I know how to use those to, as my doctor can attest to. My point being I am responcible for the use of these items no one else. Check my background if you want. I'm as clean as our president. Uhm,on second thought maybe you shouldn't check to deeply.... You want to check my background out, go ahead. I'm clean, the local goverenment has my finger prints,as well as the federal gov,( used to have a secret clearance, USMC). No, you can't ban my firearms. The Constitution says so. Post
May 3 Prime_Meridian v No, they shouldn't Yes, let's ban knives, scissors, bows, crossbows, spears, pikes, javelins, ice picks, clubs, baseball bats, golf clubs (especially for the Kennedy family, lol) anything can be used as a weapon. Then we'll all be safe and sound with the government to look after every single need we have- NOT. Why even ask this question? You don't ban something owned by over 100 million + law-abiding homes because 11,000 people (some of which were justifiable homicides, and 8,900 of which were inner city criminal on criminal murders according to CDC&p) That's the worst kind of "profiling" there is and IT DOESN'T WORK. You'd just be creating one HUGE 'Gun Free Zone' for violen... Post
May 2 scotta v No, they shouldn't Neither should be banned. It is unconstitutional to ban either one. Sorry gun hating libs. Post
u Apr 28 fraps v No, they shouldn't No weapon should be banned. No automatic weapon, semi automatic, etc. Post
Apr 27 Firestorm v No, they shouldn't What's this "along with" crap? Neither should be banned! And yes, this is getting old. Post
Apr 25 Aftermath v No, they shouldn't You have got me thinking. Maybe you should just declare any firearms illegal and begin taking them up door to door. But I predict that by doing that the shit would hit the fan and the pro gun people might actually take the opportunity to settle the gun debate once and for all. Either way matters not to me other than I am tired of hearing about it. Post
Mar '13 rcarder1lvu v No, they shouldn't I dont think any guns should be banned that fit under Hellers law. Also if you pass a background check you should be able to carry a concealed wepon in any state even when going to another state. Post
u Mar '13 southernman v No, they shouldn't whats funny is nobody in america thats a normal citizen owns an assault rifle unless the have a class three weapons card or they got it off the black market r2 replies Post
u Mar '13 PrintMediaGoon my friend I think you are confusing many common assault weapons with true machine guns Post @PrintMediaGoon
u Mar '13 southernman @PrintMediaGoon Listen to what your sayin assault weapons ! An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle jack an Ar 15 even some ak 47's that people have are just rifles they do not have a selector switch all I'm sayin is people need to quit being ignorant lol especially our stupid ass news media Post @southernman
u Mar '13 URBS v No, they shouldn't Assault rifles should not be banned, nor should handguns. This is simply another libtard attack on our rights. Post
Mar '13 GeorgiaSean7 v No, they shouldn't The Second Ammendment is simple. Giving citizens the right to bear arms keeps a balance of power between the government and the people. Post
Feb '13 MarkJM v No, they shouldn't Self Defense is a Human Right and we have the 2nd Amendment. Don't like pistols, don't buy one and keep to yourself. When the thug breaks into your home and is armed with a pistol or other firearm, it'll be you who's up the creek without a paddle. Average response time for 911 is six minutes. That's six minutes the thug has to jack you and then some... B3 r2 replies e44 endorsed Post
Feb '13 Jmotofreak72 v No, they shouldn't BANNING ANY GUN WILL NOT STOP CRIMINALS FROM GETTING THEM!!! Get a clue!! B2 e26 endorsed Post
Feb '13 Jamesa1019 v No, they shouldn't No weapon should be banned. People that are irresponsible and sick should be banned! Our government needs to step up with law enforcement and end these damn discussions of banning objects that are granted to us by our constitutional rights. Get to work Obama! The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun! B5 e15 endorsed Post
Feb '13 TDriver04 v No, they shouldn't A gun is a gun regardless of its size or amount of ammo it can hold. Any ban on any gun is against the 2nd amendment. The left just wants to break it down and ban it piece by piece. That's why questions like this even exist B4 r10 replies e7 endorsed Post
Feb '13 RedFloppyShoes v No, they shouldn't It is a 2nd Amendment right. An unarmed society is a vulnerable society. B1 e7 endorsed Post
Feb '13 PayThatCEO v I have mixed feelings Just a few weeks ago, I would have voted yes on this because I felt that taking away guns was the answer. Then I realized it's not the guns, it's the people using them. We need to get violent criminals off the street. First problem. We've allowed our police departments and legal system to become a business. Like any business, it must make money. Stopping crime does not make money. Police departments these days focus on petty infractions that bring in money through fines, bails, probation fees, etc, that come from minor drug offenses, traffic violations, and other non-violent "crimes". Jails are filled to capacity with non-violent offenders. This needs to stop. Jails ... B7 r7 replies Post
u Feb '13 YoungThinker2 Please learn about something before you go posting. You're referring to magazines, not a clip. A gun is an equalizer meant to expound the power of a single individual equal to several. A black powder musket does not do that anymore. Get with the times and please do some research before you start making ignorant comments about something you clearly know nothing about. B6 Post @YoungThinker2
Feb '13 bsking v No, they shouldn't No guns should be banned. mental patients should be restrained and institutionalized, not kept in a room in a house like a disobedient pet. We should stop forcing laws down peoples throats purely on emotional reaction. what should be banned are statist Republicans and Democrats. we the people hold the right to abolish this government when it stops working for the people... it has stopped working for the people. B2 r1 reply e3 endorsed Post