crazy world

[68blue]

11:30 last night 3 guys try to kill neighbor in a home invasion. They shoot him twice he shoots one of them and they take off, like waking up in the OK corral. We live in the burbs of a small town in Indiana. I used to think stuff like this was only on TV but not any more. Pics from his home monitor camera.

[A383Wing]

we had a neighbor actually killed in his home in front of his kids & family....all over a stoopid ring that he listed on Craigslist....it was all over the news when it happened....all 4 people who were involved with the home invasion shooting have been caught

[Chargerrtforme]

we had a neighbor actually killed in his home in front of his kids & family....all over a stoopid ring that he listed on Craigslist....it was all over the news when it happened....all 4 people who were involved with the home invasion shooting have been caught

Yeah heard about it. That was stupid sad.

[Mike DC]

 
Well, at least this time the guy got some lead into one of the robbers before they left. 


Gunshot wounds need medical treatment.  Medical treatment leaves records.  Records lead to a suspect.  One suspect leads to the rest of them. 

[chargergirl]

Hang them! High and long! One should be safe in their own home. Great pictures...good for id and capture. Shooting one of them...priceless!

[68blue]

As an update they caught the guys who shot my neighbor. One 28 year old out on probation and two juveniles with extensive criminal records. No holes in them so I guess my neighbor missed.

[chargergirl]

No matter how you try to deal it. What they did is B&E with Attempted Murder. Make them go away.

[elacruze]

I'm replacing my good ol' Remington pump house gun with one of these, mostly because it will be easier to store and more maneuverable on the boat...but in any case, hard to miss with a 12ga.

[Mike DC]

No matter how you try to deal it. What they did is B&E with Attempted Murder. Make them go away.

Agreed.

[twodko]

These lowlifes are "throwaway" people......there's no gray area. Speaking of lowlifes, the politicians now want to ban 2nd amendment "open carry" rights because the "touchy-feelys" are scared of us awful "gun nuts". F'em!

elacruze, that's way nicer than a street sweeper and gotta be far more close quarter friendly...I want one.

Tom

[chargergirl]

There's a town in Texas where they all carry a side arm. There have been no robberies, murders, or idiots in 200 years. Everyone in town wears a side arm. So if law abiding citizens wearing a side arm causes problems they need to study this town. Seems like the "touchy-feelies" are seriously mistaken in their examination of the "problem".

[skip68]

We live in a open carry law town! Hehehe! I think its a good thing. My two cents!.  Mrs.skip68

[jeryst]

I read that Switzerland has one of the lowest crime rates, and they attribute it to the fact that every male gets issued a rifle at the age of sixteen so that they can be part of the defense force.
I dont know how true that is, and maybe someone from there can elaborate, but it only stands to reason.

The friggin politicians and gun control nuts are the nuts, not law abiding citizens that have the right to carry a firearm.
The first thing that every dictatorship in history has done, is disarm the population.

As soon as ANY politician starts to spout gun control, get your ass into the voting both and vote them out. Period.

[Mike DC]

  
I'm all in favor of free gun rights but I don't think it will do anything to protect us from our govt.  

IMHO the only reason we still have any gun rights at all is because handguns & small arms are not enough to hurt anyone but ourselves.  A militia of citizens armed with that stuff poses no threat to the US govt.
 

[TK73]

Speaking of lowlifes, the politicians now want to ban 2nd amendment "open carry" rights because the "touchy-feelys" are scared of us awful "gun nuts". F'em!

I read that second amendment thing.. where is the part about "open carry" being a right?

Just curious,

    TK:  Gun-totin Liberal

[chargergirl]

I read that Switzerland has one of the lowest crime rates, and they attribute it to the fact that every male gets issued a rifle at the age of sixteen so that they can be part of the defense force.
I dont know how true that is, and maybe someone from there can elaborate, but it only stands to reason.

The friggin politicians and gun control nuts are the nuts, not law abiding citizens that have the right to carry a firearm.
The first thing that every dictatorship in history has done, is disarm the population.

As soon as ANY politician starts to spout gun control, get your ass into the voting both and vote them out. Period.

From what my husband tells me that is VERY true. The young men are actually required to go into the military. The gun is issued for them the rest of their lives and they are to care for it and are accountable for this gun for the rest of their lives. They may neutral however they are armed...every last one of them. They also know how to use it.

[jeryst]

Speaking of lowlifes, the politicians now want to ban 2nd amendment "open carry" rights because the "touchy-feelys" are scared of us awful "gun nuts". F'em!

I read that second amendment thing.. where is the part about "open carry" being a right?

Just curious,

    TK:  Gun-totin Liberal

Of course the Constitution does not specifically say "open carry". The Constitution give us the right to bear arms. Period. NO RESTRICTIONS. That means open carry, concealed carry, whatever. No registration. No permits. No anything. The Second Amendment gives us unfettered and unrestricted rights. Its the gun control lobby and politicians that have imposed every restriction in existence today. Every state and local law that prohibits the ownership, and/or carry of firearms, in any way, or requires licensing, registration, taxes, stamps, or any other impediment to our Second Amendment right is unconstitutional. Period.

[chargergirl]

Speaking of lowlifes, the politicians now want to ban 2nd amendment "open carry" rights because the "touchy-feelys" are scared of us awful "gun nuts". F'em!

I read that second amendment thing.. where is the part about "open carry" being a right?

Just curious,

    TK:  Gun-totin Liberal

Of course the Constitution does not specifically say "open carry". The Constitution give us the right to bear arms. Period. NO RESTRICTIONS. That means open carry, concealed carry, whatever. No registration. No permits. No anything. The Second Amendment gives us unfettered and unrestricted rights. Its the gun control lobby and politicians that have imposed every restriction in existence today. Every state and local law that prohibits the ownership, and/or carry of firearms, in any way, or requires licensing, registration, taxes, stamps, or any other impediment to our Second Amendment right is unconstitutional. Period.

The constitution gave us those rights....it's just been so warped in the past few decades that it no longer states that as a given right. You cannot carry a concealed weapon unless you have a permit to do so.

[jeryst]

The constitution gave us those rights....it's just been so warped in the past few decades that it no longer states that as a given right. You cannot carry a concealed weapon unless you have a permit to do so.
[/quote]

Which is exactly my point. It gives us unrestricted rights. The states, counties, cities, etc do not have the right to overthrow a Constitutional Amendment, yet they do it all the time with the Second Amendment.

What I am talking about here is any entities right to limit or ignore the Constitution. We cant pick and choose how we view the Constitution. All of the amendments of the Constitution have to be given equal treatment, yet the Second Amendment gets stepped on all of the time. Imagine, for example, if some city or state decided that they will ignore the amendment that abolished slavery, and decides that within their limits, slavery is now okay. Or what if some state or city decides to ignore the amendment that gives women the right to vote, and decides that women can no longer vote there? Or what about if some entity decided that the amendment that protects us from illegal search and seizure is not worth the trouble, and just arrests whoever they want whenever they want? People would be appalled and rioting in the streets if something like that happened, yet it is deemed acceptable if it is done with the Second Amendment. We have to treat all of the amendments exactly the same. We cant pick and choose which ones we should uphold, and which ones we can ignore. Either they are all sacred, or they are all rubbish. And we cant say "Just because its not clearly specified, it doesnt exist".

[chargergirl]

Here's the strangeness...I have NEVER owned a gun however believe in the right to bear arms. Just never needed one or felt compelled to purchase one. Been through training. Hadn't fired a shot in years and yet...made one guy I used to date take the gun away from me...I did better than he did and he was a "gun nut". LOL  Of course with the kids being in ROTC there were enough guns in the house to keep a small army. 

[elacruze]

The constitution gave us those rights....it's just been so warped in the past few decades that it no longer states that as a given right. You cannot carry a concealed weapon unless you have a permit to do so.

Which is exactly my point. It gives us unrestricted rights. The states, counties, cities, etc do not have the right to overthrow a Constitutional Amendment, yet they do it all the time with the Second Amendment.
<snip>
[/quote]

The Constitution does not give rights. The Constitution is written to make clear that the rights it illuminates and defends are pre-existent and natural. That is an important distinction.
Unfortunately, those opposed to the Constitution have used this context for so long that even those who support it forget this, and then point to the absence as proof of failure.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

http://www.cato.org/

[68blue]

Heard more from my neighbor over the weekend. After taking one bullet in the gunfight he fell down and as the thugs left the house they stepped over him and shot him again. He is a really big guy, and according to the police that's what kept him alive although he is still in the hospital. His wife said he won't be home soon, he was 62 and not in good health before all this.

[lisiecki1]

Here's the strangeness...I have NEVER owned a gun however believe in the right to bear arms. Just never needed one or felt compelled to purchase one. Been through training. Hadn't fired a shot in years and yet...made one guy I used to date take the gun away from me...I did better than he did and he was a "gun nut". LOL  Of course with the kids being in ROTC there were enough guns in the house to keep a small army. 

women are historically better shooters than most men.....Im a very accomplished pistol/rifle/shotgun shooter and my wife, who I taught to shoot a pistol, can occasionally outshoot me, even though she practices half as much as I do.  I don't mind as long as I'm on the same team with her. 

[chargergirl]

Heard more from my neighbor over the weekend. After taking one bullet in the gunfight he fell down and as the thugs left the house they stepped over him and shot him again. He is a really big guy, and according to the police that's what kept him alive although he is still in the hospital. His wife said he won't be home soon, he was 62 and not in good health before all this.

scum, scum, scum, scum, SCUM...they would never have attempted that unless the owners were older. Sociopathic behavior in these ... ... ... Where are their parents and what was their upbringing? Didn't seem to be hurting for money...dressed fairly well. May they throw away the keys.

[69rtse4spd]

They will probably get a slap on the wrist or some other light sentence. If one of them had been shot outside of the house, he or his family would have sued the poor homeowner. So if you ever catch someone in your house, its your word against a dead man, just make sure they are in your house, even if you have to have them walk back in. . 

[TK73]

The constitution gave us those rights....it's just been so warped in the past few decades that it no longer states that as a given right. You cannot carry a concealed weapon unless you have a permit to do so.

Which is exactly my point. It gives us unrestricted rights. The states, counties, cities, etc do not have the right to overthrow a Constitutional Amendment, yet they do it all the time with the Second Amendment.
<snip>

The Constitution does not give rights. The Constitution is written to make clear that the rights it illuminates and defends are pre-existent and natural. That is an important distinction.
Unfortunately, those opposed to the Constitution have used this context for so long that even those who support it forget this, and then point to the absence as proof of failure.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

http://www.cato.org/


[/quote]

Interesting, I was under the impression that the US Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that gun control laws were the jurisdiction of the States.  

[elacruze]

The constitution gave us those rights....it's just been so warped in the past few decades that it no longer states that as a given right. You cannot carry a concealed weapon unless you have a permit to do so.

Which is exactly my point. It gives us unrestricted rights. The states, counties, cities, etc do not have the right to overthrow a Constitutional Amendment, yet they do it all the time with the Second Amendment.
<snip>

The Constitution does not give rights. The Constitution is written to make clear that the rights it illuminates and defends are pre-existent and natural. That is an important distinction.
Unfortunately, those opposed to the Constitution have used this context for so long that even those who support it forget this, and then point to the absence as proof of failure.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

http://www.cato.org/

Interesting, I was under the impression that the US Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that gun control laws were the jurisdiction of the States.  
[/quote]

They have. The U.S. Judicial branch ceased to function as defenders of the Constitution under the bullying of FDR. He threatened to dilute the Supreme Court by adding members until he got what he wanted. That is the only way the 'New Deal' (Communist Platform) ever became law.

[TK73]

So, every Us citizen has the right to "open carry"?

[elacruze]

So, every Us citizen has the right to "open carry"?

Yes.

"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"

Necessary.
Bear arms.
Not infringed.

What's not clear?

[lisiecki1]

So, every Us citizen has the right to "open carry"?

Yes.

"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"

Necessary.
Bear arms.
Not infringed.

What's not clear?

AMEN!

The problem is (in Texas atleast) they don't get you for the actual carrying of the weapon, they'll call it inciting a riot, or creating a hostile environment, blah blah blah, so now you've broken the law, oh and you have a gun?  Now it's 10 times worse.  Nevermind that the gun was what started the charges in the first place.  I hate how broken the system has become 

[elacruze]

Hm.

Maybe we could start a movement. It would have to start in small towns and grow, plant the seed in the right places...

"Open Carry Day". Everybody goes out with their weapon. Civil Disobedience. Police can't arrest everybody...or will not.
Maybe get the local government involved, stick it to the man, yeah!

[jeryst]

[/quote]

Interesting, I was under the impression that the US Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that gun control laws were the jurisdiction of the States.  

[/quote]

That's also my point. If the Supreme Court can do that to one amendment, then they can do it to ANY amendment. So, in those terms, any state could
reinstate slavery, repeal voting rights, etc. We should not let them pick and choose how the amendments are defined, treated, interpreted, whatever.
In my opinion, an amendment is an amendment, and what holds true for one, should hold true for all. I just dont think anyone has ever defended it that
way before. The Constitution is the supreme law of this country, and the Supreme Court justices have no right to defer the liberties provided by it,
to any lesser government.

[TK73]

So, every Us citizen has the right to "open carry"?

Yes.

"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"

Necessary.
Bear arms.
Not infringed.

What's not clear?

So, convicted felons are allowed to "open carry" according to the 2nd?

[lisiecki1]

Hm.

Maybe we could start a movement. It would have to start in small towns and grow, plant the seed in the right places...

"Open Carry Day". Everybody goes out with their weapon. Civil Disobedience. Police can't arrest everybody...or will not.
Maybe get the local government involved, stick it to the man, yeah!

I would relish the ability to open carry....drop-leg holsters FTW!

[jeryst]

So, every Us citizen has the right to "open carry"?

Yes.

"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"

Necessary.
Bear arms.
Not infringed.

What's not clear?

So, convicted felons are allowed to "open carry" according to the 2nd?

Okay, first of all, everyone is allowed to "open carry". You need a license, or permit, for concealed carry.

Now, as far as felons go, technically, they are allowed by the Constitution to carry a weapon, because the Constitution makes no disctinctions. It doesn say "People in good standing" or "People who have not committed crimes". It says "The People". No distinctions. It was meant to be that way.

Personally, I'm on the fence. I dont particularly relish the idea of felons owning weapons, but then again, it really doesnt make much difference. If a felon wants to get a gun, he can get one, one way or another. Look at the countries that have banned gun ownership. Bad guys still use guns. It's just the law abiding citizens who are now defenseless. We've been fighting a war on drugs for 20 years, without being able to stop their flow into this country. If guns are banned, the smugglers will just throw a few weapons into the crates with the drugs, and the bad guys will get them anyways. Its only the law abiding citizens who will pay the price.

Then, you have to think about the term "felon". Murders and rapists are felons. So are embezzlers, who have never committed a violent crime. Right now, the way it stands in PA, if you and your wife get into an argument, and she says you hit her, you automatically lose all of your firearms, on just her word. I think that goes way too far.

[tricky lugnuts]

If it wasn't so tragic, it'd almost be comical.

I love how they are so afraid of guns. I carry my bow and arrow (certainly a lethal weapon) a number of places on my way to shoot. You get some weird looks from the city slickers, but . . .

And what about knives?

Hell, walk around with a baseball bat and most times nobody will care.

But ooh, those guns . . .

I like the idea of a national open carry day. I think that could have legs.  

Especially if Chicago's ban on handguns is overturned by the US Supreme Court:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/0614/If-Chicago-s-gun-control-law-is-overturned-what-next

[Mike DC]

In the last few decades we have gotten busy creating a 2nd-class citizenship with all the restrictions on convicted felons.  I don't agree with it at all. 

Once someone has done their time in jail, they have paid their debt to society.  It's against the principles of the country to have lifelong "naughty" and "nice" lists about free US citizens.  I agree with few permanent things (like convicted child molesters not working with kids for example) but IMHO taking it all the way to legal firearm ownership is too far.

[TK73]

So, every Us citizen has the right to "open carry"?

Yes.

"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"

Necessary.
Bear arms.
Not infringed.

What's not clear?

So, convicted felons are allowed to "open carry" according to the 2nd?

Okay, first of all, everyone is allowed to "open carry". You need a license, or permit, for concealed carry.

Why a license to conceal?  Doesn't say anything about that in the 2nd...

[lisiecki1]

So, every Us citizen has the right to "open carry"?

Yes.

"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"

Necessary.
Bear arms.
Not infringed.

What's not clear?

So, convicted felons are allowed to "open carry" according to the 2nd?

Okay, first of all, everyone is allowed to "open carry". You need a license, or permit, for concealed carry.

Why a license to conceal?  Doesn't say anything about that in the 2nd...

which is why it's crap that you have to get the license.  I believe a large part of it has to do with the removal of certain rights given in the constitution and the states saying "no, you can't do that.....but if you pay us then you can"

[Brock Samson]

 There have been many open carry days herein the bay area,..
here's the latest article on the subject, but by doing a search of "open carry" on the sfgate website there must be at least 50 more on the subject.

  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/19/EDS81DG7O4.DTL

"that's 30"

[chargergirl]

The right to bear arms was given when our forefathers, and if you live here they are yours too, carried long rifles. All sidearms were open carry. Now with the way of the world each individual goes through a safety course; unless they are former military then it's a given in FL. Also Florida law has changed the rules as to convicted felons. If you are NOT convicted of a violent crime you are given back your right to bear arms. All felons are given back their right to vote.