S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
256
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,458
Posts544,975
Members14,409
|
Most Online1,258 Mar 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 850 Likes: 33
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 850 Likes: 33 |
Informational additions to this thread that will help us preserve our 2nd Amendment rights are welcomed and appreciated.
I will move any post from this thread that does not appear to be headed toward that target.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Thank you,
Dave Weber doublegunshop.com DoubleGun Evangelist In Charge But Not Responsible
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 150
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 150 |
I have to say that after Sandy Hook, I was open to consideration of some type of gun control measure. I was shocked, as all were, at the violence on children. It struck a very sensitive chord in me. In the heat of the first calls for gun control I found this Harvard Law Study on whether gun restrictions are effective at controlling violence. It is a well written, cogent study that brought me around. Here it is: Harvard Study What I see as damaging to our debate is the use of inflammatory language and calls of anarchy. I don't think anyone in the gun control crowd will be swayed when we start off with proclamations that this is going to lead to a Stalinistic or Nazi-like state. Perhaps it would, but given the nature of our Republic, it isn't really likely. I'm hoping that this post is along the lines of what Dave is looking for, providing information that can be used in civil discourse on why gun control, however well intended, isn't likely to lead to the result of reduced violence. Rob.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,881
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,881 |
The links below will get you an email address or snail mail address for the senate & congress. I think the more pro-firearm messages they get the better. When I send messages to senators or congressmen (women) outside of my state I never get an answer so they may just delete them. Senate Congress
MP Sadly Deceased as of 2/17/2014
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,879 Likes: 15
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,879 Likes: 15 |
Last edited by Chuck H; 01/10/13 01:46 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 103
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 103 |
Please note this post is an example of what I don't want on this thread. It is comprised mainly of opinion and deemed by me to be not informational.
Unfortunately after reviewing my options I can’t move this post without effecting the posts that follow. Therefore; I will leave it here for now to serve as the example cited…my only other option would be to edit or delete it. Thank you, Dave Weber
Dave: Sorry to post off track! Kevin
Last edited by Hawaiian Uplands; 01/13/13 10:32 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,292
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,292 |
Doug
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,850
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,850 |
Yes writing letters and sending emails to your congressmen is a fine idea but I do one better. I live withing 35 miles of the Federal Building in Bismarck where our two senators and one representative have offices. I visit each office in person. True the senators and representative most likely won't be there but their secretaries are. By going in person you are showing real concern on the issue to these people and in my case I usually get a real letter from my congressman. What happens when you walk in the door is the secretary greets you an asks how he/she may help. Be very polite. She takes your name and address and writes down your views on the issue. Then you should watch how your congressman votes. You can see it in the Congressional Record. Now if they vote in accordance with your views you should go back to their office and personally thank them for voting your way. You will be surprised how many miles you get out of a thank you.
Practice safe eating. Always use a condiment.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 625 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 625 Likes: 1 |
Continued from another thread. Whilst agreeing whole hearted with Mr Eales, I think he may have got a date and fact wrong. I believe the first pistol / revolver regulations were brought in in 1917 following the Russian revolution. The upper class, amongst them the politicians were worried about something similar in the UK so passed a law making in necessary to get a licence for the above. Of course anyone who could afford one was of that class so all licences were granted, there was a minimal charge I believe, sorry for being a pedant, I did like that Thomas Jefferson quote, never heard it before, best, Mike.
Mike whilst I may be slightly out in date, the Gun Licence was available to anyone with Fifteen Shillings (About 3.00 US Dollars at that time) Even a relatively poor man could afford that. My Grandfather could, and he was a Poacher way back then, (aside from his day job). The local Policeman (Bobby) knew he was a poacher, but could never catch him at it.
He would hear my Grandfathers 0.410 go off, but when he went to investigate he only found my grandfather walking along the road. Unknown the the Policeman, my ancestor had metal biscuit boxes buried in nearly every field in the local area, and when he shot a Pheasant, Rabbit or Hare they were put into these tins for collection after dark. Had the Policeman looked closely at my Grandfathers walking Stick, he would have found that it was in fact, a walking stick shotgun. (Sneaky). However,the Policeman didn't lose out. The day before Christmas each year grandpa would hang a couple of Pheasants on the door knocker of the Policemans house. lol. He never did get caught. lol. Things were a lot different in 1900.
Harry
Last edited by Harry Eales; 01/10/13 01:58 PM.
Biology is the only science where multiplication can be achieved by division.
|
|
|
|
|