ForumGarden

... And "Tude Dog" is 'tude as in you've got attitude, and dog as in you bark a lot.

tude dog;1405055 wrote: naw, not at all.

I ain't tough at all. That avatar looks much like my favorite target pistol.

In real life I avoid stupid places which may cause problems.

I knew eventually somebody would read to much in my avatar. But then, no skin off my nose.


I certainly don't want skin off your nose. Although you & I seem to represent opposing views, I view myself as a second amendment person too. I do want some limits. When I lived in a gun state (New Hampshire) we were gun owners. If I currently lived in a gun state I would own one again.

AnneBoleyn;1405137 wrote: [...] I view myself as a second amendment person too. I do want some limits. [...]
Write the amendment and let's vote.

AnneBoleyn;1405137 wrote: I certainly don't want skin off your nose. Although you & I seem to represent opposing views, I view myself as a second amendment person too. I do want some limits. When I lived in a gun state (New Hampshire) we were gun owners. If I currently lived in a gun state I would own one again.


I'm still waiting for SCOTUS do define membership in a well-regulated militia.

koan;1405108 wrote: Read too much? You're extreme right politics, which means pro gun,


Extreme??

I've felt my politics are well within mainstream political thought. You mention "pro gun" as if that were an extreme position, a position supported by majority of Americans. A Constitutional right affirmed by SCOTUS.

koan;1405108 wrote: and you post as if you've just shot a bullet that will kill your opponent. Not too scary because you're mostly firing blanks


I'd apologize my posts don't meet your high standards, but no doubt you would see through the insecurity.

koan;1405108 wrote: Please let me know if I've got anything wrong.

Perhaps you're a communist.


Gee, so its name calling now?:wah:

Romney is confused as to why passengers can't open the windows on a jet aircraft. At a fundraiser Saturday he was talking about the tiny electrical fire in his wife's campaign plane.

“I appreciate the fact that she is on the ground, safe and sound. And I don’t think she knows just how worried some of us were, Romney said. “When you have a fire in an aircraft, there’s no place to go, exactly, there’s no — and you can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem. So it’s very dangerous. And she was choking and rubbing her eyes. Fortunately, there was enough oxygen for the pilot and copilot to make a safe landing in Denver. But she’s safe and sound.


Jeepers! Apparently he failed high school science class if he thinks that there is enough oxygen outside at 35,000'.

I can't imagine Romney is this dense. He must simply be out of his element. He'll need to perhaps one day understand that politics might not be his game. I'm amazed at just how bad his campaign is.

Ahso!;1405454 wrote: I can't imagine Romney is this dense. He must simply be out of his element. He'll need to perhaps one day understand that politics might not be his game. I'm amazed at just how bad his campaign is.


I think that he is just not accustomed to dealing with the everyday factors of life, since he can just have his staff take care of them. I'm sure that he is very good at running his investment firm, but out of touch with the things faced by most voters.

Good point. I hadn't looked at it that way.

Can you imagine how his high school and college teachers feel when he says stuff like that? His sons must cringe at some of the things he says. It really would be funny if he was not running for high office.

Wandrin;1405452 wrote: Romney is confused as to why passengers can't open the windows on a jet aircraft. At a fundraiser Saturday he was talking about the tiny electrical fire in his wife's campaign plane.



Jeepers! Apparently he failed high school science class if he thinks that there is enough oxygen outside at 35,000'.




Anyone have a sense of humor here?



Romney mocked for joke about rolling down airplane windows

I love self deprecation humor, I do it all the time. Even seen President Obama engage in that sort of humor.

Oh, I guess he forgot the "LOL"! That's an important element in humor I'm told.

tude dog;1405568 wrote: [IMG]

Anyone have a sense of humor here?




I would later say that it was all I joke if I said something like that.

Ahso!;1405570 wrote: Oh, I guess he forgot the "LOL"! That's an important element in humor I'm told.


Fair enough.

It just happened when I did a search on this story, way to many people were taking this seriously.

My apologies for underestimating you.:yh_worshp

Hum, not really.:wah:

Accountable;1405171 wrote: Write the amendment and let's vote.
& Wandrin, re: Scotus & Armed Militias

Me? I would start by enforcing, with really strict penalties, the laws already on the books. I would also like to see the ban on assault weapons, that GW let slide be re-instated, although I have heard good arguments why I am wrong on that. So, while I'm mulling that over, ok, re-instate the ban for now. I don't think an amendment would pass, so would work through laws instead.

The idea of someone with a gun permit, a concealed weapons carry, being allowed to transport with the gun & have their local laws come with them to i.e., NYC, Boston, etc. I'm not happy with. Maybe your licensed in (A) but if you are going to (B) where this is not permitted, you should not be permitted to bring your weapon. People who want to expand gun rights this way are in contradiction as they want gun laws, etc (many laws) to be locally controlled but yet won't respect the local laws they are travelling to. Either it is full faith and credit & important laws are federalized, or it's not.

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: & Wandrin, re: Scotus & Armed Militias

Me? I would start by enforcing, with really strict penalties, the laws already on the books. I would also like to see the ban on assault weapons, that GW let slide be re-instated, although I have heard good arguments why I am wrong on that. So, while I'm mulling that over, ok, re-instate the ban for now. I don't think an amendment would pass, so would work through laws instead.




What would you do with a state like Arizona, where anyone can go to a gun store and buy as many guns as they want (handguns, rifles, shotguns, assault rifles), with no permits needed or registration required. They can then sell those guns the same day and go back the next day and buy another hundred or two hundred guns, if they so choose. They can choose to drive south and sell the guns near the border without any paperwork.

Would you impose federal gun regulations on the individual states?

Wandrin;1405616 wrote: What would you do with a state like Arizona, where anyone can go to a gun store and buy as many guns as they want (handguns, rifles, shotguns, assault rifles), with no permits needed or registration required. They can then sell those guns the same day and go back the next day and buy another hundred or two hundred guns, if they so choose. They can choose to drive south and sell the guns near the border without any paperwork.

Would you impose federal gun regulations on the individual states?


I don't care for our nation having 50 different sets of rules & regs. and especially education standards. I think we have outgrown this.

In NH, where I lived, the gun dealer did not give you a background check. A background check was done by the police only if you wanted a concealed carry permit.

Honestly, I can't seem to agree with Arizona on anything. Although..........suppose it would have been possible for me to buy many guns in NH, file off the identifying #s, & sell to gangs in Boston & NY & I did not do this. I had friends who had arsenals & they were responsible too. It seems to rest on how responsible & mature you are. No, not comfortable with Arizona, yet see it lies with the individual.

We had a retail store in NH. When we registered to conceal, the officer told me that if I was ever robbed it would be legal for me, when the robber was leaving, to shoot him, even to death, even in his back. I couldn't see myself wanting to do that. Yet, this authority was given to me.

I would like to see license requirements for gun ownership---a state course that demands you know how to shoot & how to clean & keep your weapon. Many folks do damage even cleaning their guns.

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: & Wandrin, re: Scotus & Armed Militias

Me? I would start by enforcing, with really strict penalties, the laws already on the books.


I am also with enforcing laws on the books. Far as I know, most every gun law normally carries pretty strict penalties.

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: I would also like to see the ban on assault weapons, that GW let slide be re-instated, although I have heard good arguments why I am wrong on that. So, while I'm mulling that over, ok, re-instate the ban for now. I don't think an amendment would pass, so would work through laws instead.


I don't own a so called assault weapon, and see zero reason why I should not be able to go and buy one if I wanted

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: The idea of someone with a gun permit, a concealed weapons carry, being allowed to transport with the gun & have their local laws come with them to i.e., NYC, Boston, etc. I'm not happy with.


I been following the concept of National Recripocy and nowhere has anybody suggested local laws follow the license holder.

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: Maybe your licensed in (A) but if you are going to (B) where this is not permitted, you should not be permitted to bring your weapon.


Best of my knowledge Illinois is the only state which has zero license/permit system for conceal carry.

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: People who want to expand gun rights this way are in contradiction as they want gun laws, etc (many laws) to be locally controlled but yet won't respect the local laws they are travelling to. Either it is full faith and credit & important laws are federalized, or it's not.


You are mistaken. Right now what is sought is something similar to a drivers license. On the occasion I drive to a reciprocal CCH state, Nebraska from Kansas with my gun, I have to respect all local laws.

I don't think you're a bad guy. I have pretty good instincts. Love the new avatar, is he yours?

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: & Wandrin, re: Scotus & Armed Militias

Me? I would start by enforcing, with really strict penalties, the laws already on the books. I would also like to see the ban on assault weapons, that GW let slide be re-instated, although I have heard good arguments why I am wrong on that. So, while I'm mulling that over, ok, re-instate the ban for now. I don't think an amendment would pass, so would work through laws instead.But the laws are unconstitutional because each and every one of them infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms [text]. Rather than getting creative with a twisted and politically-spun interpretation, a well-worded amendment would settle the question.

AnneBoleyn;1405591 wrote: The idea of someone with a gun permit, a concealed weapons carry, being allowed to transport with the gun & have their local laws come with them to i.e., NYC, Boston, etc. I'm not happy with. Maybe your licensed in (A) but if you are going to (B) where this is not permitted, you should not be permitted to bring your weapon. People who want to expand gun rights this way are in contradiction as they want gun laws, etc (many laws) to be locally controlled but yet won't respect the local laws they are travelling to. Either it is full faith and credit & important laws are federalized, or it's not.1. We can't expand gun rights beyond the wide open text of the Constitution.

2. You're too quick to want to restrict everyone's rights simply because you personally don't want a thing for yourself. I guess that's to be expected, considering the "Progressive" incremental creep of centralizing political power and restricting individual liberty & self-determination that's been going on the last century or so.

Wandrin;1405616 wrote: What would you do with a state like Arizona, where anyone can go to a gun store and buy as many guns as they want (handguns, rifles, shotguns, assault rifles), with no permits needed or registration required. They can then sell those guns the same day and go back the next day and buy another hundred or two hundred guns, if they so choose. They can choose to drive south and sell the guns near the border without any paperwork.

Would you impose federal gun regulations on the individual states?


The hyperbole is strong in this one

AnneBoleyn;1405620 wrote: I don't care for our nation having 50 different sets of rules & regs. and especially education standards. I think we have outgrown this.

[...]

Honestly, I can't seem to agree with Arizona on anything.


Precisely why we should have 50 different sets of rules.

AnneBoleyn;1405628 wrote: I don't think you're a bad guy. I have pretty good instincts. Love the new avatar, is he yours?


Well thank you.

Yes, that is Sophie





Sasha