Best
324 Comments
Post
  • #5
    !
    Just remember, when he says "nobody", he does NOT mean his own officers. Or SWAT. Or DEA. Or ..........I think you get the picture.
    Remember, next time someone's trying to break down your door, 911 is just a mere 8-15 minutes away. Holler through the door for them to wait. Use the word "Please"........
  • #46
    !
    @HoraceGreely Since when does what he thinks amount to much? It' not his decision to make what you own, and it says a lot about him personally that he made such a remark, there is a lot of words to describe such thinking
  • #96
    !
    EXACTLY. No cop is going to hand in their weapon when it comes to firearm sweeps; just look at New Orleans.
  • R Load more replies

  • #23
    !
    I own firearms because I trust humans to act like they always have...animals. The only thing that keeps people "nice" is food/water/electricity you take any of those away for 24 hours and you have a pretty nasty animal that will do anything to you and your family.
  • #105
    !
    It takes a cat 7 days to become feral
    It takes a dog up to 14 days to become feral
    It takes a pig 6 weeks to become feral
    Humans have been know to become uncivilized and violent (feral) in as little as 4 hours (NYC 1977 blackout)
  • #126
    !
    Imagine a catastrophic failure in the electric grid that sends society instantly back to the 1800's....we nearly had just that in 2012. No electricity...no welfare dept. All the people who rely on taking things from the govt would instantly take things from everyone not able to repel them.
  • R Load more replies

  • #18
    !
    Oh but the Boston police can have all the military weapons and armor they'd like. Just look at what happened when the Boston police were trying to find the marathon bombers, they disregarded the bill of rights in the name of safety.

    Now we're told that if people had no guns we'd be safer. If that is the case then why do they insist police should have them? Don't we face the same threats they do? If you look at history, gun control has always preceded government tyranny.
  • #75
    !
    I certainly agree that Boston looked like a police state after the Boston bombing...and it still took the cops days to find the people responsible...during that time the suspects could have easily entered any citizens house....so, I think it's a terrible idea not to allow shotguns or rifles in cities...or anywhere else for that matter....I'm liberal on some gun issues....but.....this guy just sounds whacked....having a shotgun for home protection....makes complete sense
  • #186
    !
    @NormalFlora

    Feel free to explain why a law abiding citizens shouldn't be allowed to own an assault rifle or any other rifle for that matter... for self defense or other purposes.
  • R Load more replies

  • #92
    !
    Just because I live in the city doesn't mean I intend to go hunting there. I take my shotgun for A short drive to the country to hunt. Why does he care where its stored?
  • #100
    !
    @arisocto
    Because if you have it in HIS city, you might use it in HIS city. Unfortunately, he seems to have forgotten that the right to keep and bear arms wasn't crafted so people could hunt!
  • #110
    !
    It is not his job to decide if citizens need a weapon. He job is to inforce the law. TO SERVE AND.PROTECT.
  • #152
    !
    @Rocker
    Never liked Barney, so I seldom watch Mayberry. Don Knots was pretty good in a few movies though. Ever watched: The Incredible Mr. Limped?
  • R Load more replies

  • #7
    !
    @politixmary"How you feel about these remarks will totally depend on your gun rights views. Gun safety advocates will welcome Police Commissioner William Evans's comments, whereas gun rights supporters will shake their heads in disbelief." Gun safety advocates? So what is being implied is gun rights supporters are anti gun safety?
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    !
    But actually, perhaps even gun control advocates might criticize Commissioner Evans for saying something so prohibitive to owning legitimate hunting guns.

    The constitution does not say " legitimate hunting guns"
    It says Arms. In fact the constitution does not address hunting at all.

    We have a right to bear arms his opinion is wrong and that sentence is misleading. Nowhere is need mentioned in the constitution or do citizens have to show need or explain why they own their firearms. It's our right.
  • #24
    !
    Actually the 2nd DOES speak to needs. The needs of the "militia" not saying I agree with this dude but I think some parts are not as clear as some suggest.

    My question is why the "militia part" included insted of just saying the "rights of the people to keep and bare arms....." I think the full contex is important when talking about the 2nd. Not what we would lije it to say to fit our coulture.

    Also I wonder if the constitution should remain the same as we grow and things chage. Slavery was ok when tge constitution was written but later it was changed to fit with how America had changed.
  • #26
    !
    @Waynestew the militia was considered the people when that was written. As well regulated meant well maintained. The confusion is easily understood if you get a dictionary from that period.
  • #48
    !
    @HoraceGreely Good tip. Think I will do that! So you are saying the first part of the second is "A well maintained people being necessary for a free state...." I am even more confused. What is a well maintained people? What woukd that mean in layman's terms? What woukd it mean in this modern day?
  • #49
    !
    @Waynestew Also if militia just meant people, then why in the next line does it say the right of the "people" instead of the right of the militia?
  • R Load more replies

  • #2
    !
    It's ridiculous. Why in the world would you go after these types of weapons? Seems there are much bigger things to worry about...
  • #16
    !
    @HoraceGreely I draw the line In a different place than you probably, but I am good with most guns...as yes, it is our right as Americans.
  • #148
    !
    But Joe said to shoot it off your balcony or through a door if you hear someone outside. No one should ever attempt to quote Biden in a positive manner.
  • #272
    !
    @MadAmerican The deputy sheriffs in our county always told us that they had to be inside the home before you could legally shoot them..If you shot them outside to drag them in the house..
  • R Load more replies

  • #306
    !
    May 3, 1994
    To Members of the U.S. House of Representatives:
    We are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military-style assault weapons. This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety. Although assualt weapons account for less than 1% of the guns in circulation, they account for nearly 10% of the guns traced to crime.

    Every major law enforcement organization in America and dozens of leading labor, medical, religious, civil rights and civic groups support such a ban. Most importantly, poll after poll shows that the American public overwhelmingly support a ban on assault weapons. A 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 77% of Americans support a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of semi-automatic assault guns, such as the AK-47.

    The 1989 import ban resulted in an impressive 40% drop in imported assault weapons traced to crime between 1989 and 1991, but the killing continues. Last year, a killer armed with two TEC9s killed eight people at a San Francisco law firm and wounded several others. During the past five years, more than 40 law enforcement officers have been killed or wounded in the line of duty by an assault weapon.

    While we recognize that assault weapon legislation will not stop all assault weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals. We urge you to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons.

    Sincerely,

    Gerald R. Ford

    Jimmy Carter

    Ronald Reagan
  • #25
    !
    Just as soon as he gets rid of his and all his officers then make that statement if you're still in office be it laughed out our forced out when all the criminals take over. What an idiot.
  • #17
    !
    The commissioner is obviously in favor of a blanket ban; I say this because he would prohibit Boston citizens from owning any kind of firearm whether they are for self defense, hunting or historical collection. Furthermore, why is it so far outside the realm of reason a boston native would head to a rural area to deer or bird hunt? Would you have these people store the firearms off-site?
  • #52
    !
    typical Massachusetts attitude, they have had restrictive gun laws to keep the Kennedy clan safe for decades.
  • #58
    !
    I have heard from a family member that he is "out of touch" with the people of Boston. This sound bite is not a good bit of proof, but from what is here I now agree.
  • R Load more comments...
Post