Gun Control Debate - Florissant, MO

Discuss the national Gun Control debate in Florissant, MO.

Would you support a ban on handguns?

Florissant opposes
Oppose
 
42
Support
 
3

Vote now in Florissant:

Comments
21 - 40 of 64 Comments Last updated -

“Common Sense Is -”

Since: Mar 10

Not So Common"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Oct 15, 2010
 
AhHa wrote:
Guns should be limited to rifles only.
Please explain what difference that would make, do you think it would reduce violent crimes?

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Oct 15, 2010
 
Then gangbangers would just have .300 Win Mags....GREAT IDEA!
I prefer that they keep their little Walmart .380 chinese made Jammers...
Armed Citizen

Florissant, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Oct 15, 2010
 
No explanation needed

“Common Sense Is -”

Since: Mar 10

Not So Common"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Oct 15, 2010
 
Armed Citizen wrote:
No explanation needed
Well that's spacific, who or what are you commenting on?

Since: Mar 10

Florissant, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Oct 17, 2010
 
Ownership of firearms is one thing that separated us culturally from British rule when this country was founded. It IS a right guaranteed in the Constitution; if liberals read the Second Amendment the way they read the rest of the Bill of Rights, gun ownership would be mandatory in this country. Gun control has historically always been a way for the ruling class to keep the populace in subjugation. In England, there are laws of this sort that can be dated all the way back BEFORE the invention of firearms.(It was illegal for people under a certain social status to own steel broadhead arrow tips, even while it was legally required that all citizens own a bow and arrow and practice daily to maintain proficiency.) The concept of a disarmed citizenry was something that was flatly rejected by the founders of this country.

“Common Sense Is -”

Since: Mar 10

Not So Common"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Oct 17, 2010
 
redneck_politics wrote:
It IS a right guaranteed in the Constitution; if liberals read the Second Amendment the way they read the rest of the Bill of Rights, gun ownership would be mandatory in this country.
He's back!

Unfortunately it's been a long debate over the interpretation of the second amendment. The fact is that well armed citizens reduces the chance of anyone taking over our country, be it from the inside or outside, somewhat like in the movie "Red Dawn".
It amazes me how people can take such a simple statement and skew it to meet there needs.
Irregardless of the interpretation it seems that history shows that it is common sense for the general public to own guns to protect themselves from the government and individuals that wish to do them harm.
waskley wabbit

Saint Ann, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Oct 17, 2010
 
AhHa wrote:
Guns should be limited to rifles only.
i as a gun owner could go along with that as long as i knew no one was hideing a pistol

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Oct 18, 2010
 
Would that mean I can keep an AK47 in my truck?

“Common Sense Is -”

Since: Mar 10

Not So Common"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Oct 18, 2010
 
Poo Taco wrote:
Would that mean I can keep an AK47 in my truck?
Just so long as it didn't have provisions for a bayonet.:>)
waskley wabbit

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Oct 19, 2010
 
and it was semi

Since: Mar 10

Florissant, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Oct 20, 2010
 
SolitaryCanid wrote:
<quoted text>
He's back!
Unfortunately it's been a long debate over the interpretation of the second amendment. The fact is that well armed citizens reduces the chance of anyone taking over our country, be it from the inside or outside, somewhat like in the movie "Red Dawn".
It amazes me how people can take such a simple statement and skew it to meet there needs.
Irregardless of the interpretation it seems that history shows that it is common sense for the general public to own guns to protect themselves from the government and individuals that wish to do them harm.
I'm back (temporarily...it's hunting season. you will notice that my absences correspond to spring turkey season and the onset of archery deer season. been too hot to fish much this summer, yet i digress...)
As is often so, SC, you are right on all counts. Historically, gun control has always been a vehicle of subjugation of the masses. It is no coincidence that the United States has never been invaded by a foreign country attempting a military occupation. And, the debate on the Second Amendment is only a debate to those who are annoyed at the protection it gives rednecks like me from them as they try to legislate my guns out of my hands.

I can appreciate the emotional response of those who do not understand the God-given right of all of us who choose to bear arms (and yes it is "God-given", please reference the Declaration of Independence, paying special attention to the phrase "endowed by their Creator"). Unfortunately, the appeals to safety and the betterment of society are just that...emotional. There is not one shred of empirical evidence to suggest that "gun control" will make us "safer".
ammunition control

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Oct 20, 2010
 
they will regulate the ammunition if they can't get the guns

Since: Mar 10

Florissant, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Oct 20, 2010
 
ammunition control wrote:
they will regulate the ammunition if they can't get the guns
It has already been proposed in several different forms. Unfortunately, that would probably not be practical. The American citizenry in general (not just us crazy backwoods uneducated paranoid clingers to our God and our guns) is very "funny" when it comes to their rights. If the gun control crowd made a serious attempt at that, you would see a dramatic (dare I say "unbelievable"?) increase in the sale of reloading equipment, including smelting cauldrons, bullet molds, lead bars, etc.

Since: Mar 10

Florissant, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Oct 20, 2010
 
Poo Taco wrote:
Would that mean I can keep an AK47 in my truck?
No, you can't because an AK is illegal to own. An AR-10/AR-15/mini-14, would be perfectly acceptable though.

“Common Sense Is -”

Since: Mar 10

Not So Common"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Oct 20, 2010
 
redneck_politics wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you can't because an AK is illegal to own. An AR-10/AR-15/mini-14, would be perfectly acceptable though.
Where did you hear that AK-47's are illegal to own? Only fully automatic AK's are illegal unless you have the proper license, granted there are certain areas in the country that don't allow ownership of assault rifles. The Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004 and the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008 never passed.
http://ak47forsale.net/

Oh wait, was that an attempt at sarcasm? Welcome back.
By the way I love deer jerky, hint hint.
concerned citizen

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Oct 21, 2010
 
Everybody should get guns to protect themselves from the damm thugs breaking into the homes in florissant. protect your family and your rights

Since: Mar 10

Florissant, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Oct 24, 2010
 
SolitaryCanid wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did you hear that AK-47's are illegal to own? Only fully automatic AK's are illegal unless you have the proper license,
Where did you hear that an individual needed to know what they were talking about to post on topix?
ammo

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Oct 24, 2010
 
There have been proposals to require that they mark each round of ammo so that the spent shell or the bullit can be traced back to the buyer. This will make the cost to high that nobody could affort to buy it.
They can't get the guns, so they will try to get the ammo. Stock up now.

“Common Sense Is -”

Since: Mar 10

Not So Common"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Oct 24, 2010
 
redneck_politics wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did you hear that an individual needed to know what they were talking about to post on topix?
I forgot if you read it in Topix it must be the truth, sorry.

“Common Sense Is -”

Since: Mar 10

Not So Common"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Oct 24, 2010
 
ammo wrote:
There have been proposals to require that they mark each round of ammo so that the spent shell or the bullit can be traced back to the buyer. This will make the cost to high that nobody could affort to buy it.
They can't get the guns, so they will try to get the ammo. Stock up now.
If someone can mark every bullet bought, someone else will come up with a way to remove the markings, it would only hurt the law abiding citizen.

This is old but it gives you a good idea what was trying to be done, and just a few of the flaws with such an idea.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php...

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/01/ammunition-a...

This bill went nowhere:
http://www.senate.mo.gov/08info/BTS_Web/Bill....

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Florissant Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
MO Ferguson Police Are Being Relieved Of Their Dut... 52 min cRaP cLeAnEr 1,713
Councilman Jones paves Lindsay Lane 4 hr puppet master 5
New fear: What happens in Ferguson if no charges? 5 hr Colbert 226
MO Powerful Photos Blast The Media's Portrayal Of ... 6 hr White Knight 222
MO Ferguson Police Chief Just Shocked Everyone Wit... 6 hr i kno 327
Al Sharpeton 8 hr Rocky Balboner 18
Video From a Black's Perspective 8 hr Cometstorm 2

Related Topics

Florissant Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]