If Machine Guns are illegal

Warnings of that type only Apply in U.K.
Here in the U.S. not so much......

 

Pray tell what such efforts are being referred to? Conservative republicans and the NRA are both in support of a proposed bill to strengthen the NICS background check program and ensure that prohibited individuals are actually included in the data, but it is presently being opposed by the liberal democrat party.

 

Pray tell which question is being referred to by yourself?

 

I wondered that too.

 

Depends on where you live in the country. In some places the majority support opposing gun control. In others, they don't.

Yeah, it is, and the Founders' stated intent regarding that issue is clearly documented. The sight of firearms might offend the chronically spineless, and where they congregate they might have created laws in defiance of that intent, but that's their problem.

...And what other Constitutional rights do you think should be changed from rights to licensed privileges? Free Speech? Something else?

Yes, they do. I detest their existence and am personally offended by their rhetoric... but I recognize they still have the right to spout it.

No, people who think we DON'T have the right to be armed - especially when it's clearly enumerated in the Constitution - are the ones who are wrong.

Measures that actually keep guns out of the hands of bad guys are fine, provided they do not infringe upon the rights of honest citizens. When measures are proposed that attack the Constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens there is no choice but to stand up in opposition. Those who are against Constitutional rights resort to dishonest hyperbole and offensive rhetoric to push their agenda, and the gun rights have no choice but to stand up and push back. Gun rights people do NOT need to "tone it down"; they need to make it clear they are done being ridden roughshod over and they are ready to do whatever is necessary to protect their rights and freedoms under the Constitution.

I AM an American, and you are the one misjudging us. "Squashed like bugs" eh? Not likely. If the anti-constitutionalists keep pushing their anti-liberty agenda they will find themselves with a fight on their hands that will shock them deeply and fundamentally.

 

Like it or not, there are federal and state laws limiting the right of gun owners to carry firearms outside their home. For example,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990​

Well, in may be "inane" to you, but it wasn't to SCOTUS in District of Columbia v. Heller.

The NRA is.

 

Not so.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990

 

What does the UK have to do with it?

I doubt you've ever been involved in a political fight.

 

Already, conservative Senators are holding up legislation.

 

See above.

 

The highlighted portion pertained to a link to the Heller ruling. Thus making the statement on the part of yourself questionable as to just what it pertains to.

 

And exactly what does the legislation in question do, that would actually keep firearms out of the hands of prohibited individuals, that currently existing legislation is incapable of doing? Explain such. Demonstrate what the meaningful difference is.

 

You don't have a Constitutional right to either open or concealed carry. As well, I'm not sure many people care what the Founding Fathers intended. You're a vote of Congress away from losing some of what you think is your right. Maybe you don't care, but prudence would suggest you change the way you approach the issue.

You seem to confuse what you think is your right and what is in fact your right.

You're almost inviting people who might otherwise be sympathetic to your concerns to narrow their gaze and think in terms of putting you in your place.

You're not much of a student of our history. A lot of people have thought they could ignore the rule of law and found out the hard way Americans don't go for that stuff.

 

Did you even look at my cite?

 

Senator Gardner is holding up the legislation, preventing it from coming up for a vote.

 

Then you would be dead wrong.

I organized and worked at it a long time, 21 years worth of active Political fight.

 

If you're not BS, then you know how to assert the middle against the extremes. All this stuff about the UK is a red herring.

 

No, the Red Herrings are U.K. Blokes pretending to be Americans and advocating against.

 

This is irrelevant to what I posted. Try harder.

 

Since I was born and raised in California (graduate of Long Beach State), you're full of what the horse leaves behind.

 

Get a clue. I gave you an example of a federal law that limits open carry within 1000 feet of a public school. There goes your alleged right.

You keep blathering away about rights that are a figment of your imagination.

 

The same politics do not work scaled up.

What hand? I'm not playing anything, I'm stating an opinion. I think what you want will be part of what will trigger a civil warning this nation. I have, as already stated, no desire to see such a thing.

 

Well, I've operated in communities of 150,000 and at higher levels up to 4,000,000. You?

I'm not prepared to see bullies at either end of the political system pushing the rest of us around. If you want more gun rights, convince voters you should have them.

 

You worked at one that's 300 million plus? Because that's the national level.

More? At this point I'm opposing you taking what I've already got.

 

I proposed a free national firearms permit that would do away with background checks making life easier for responsible citizens who decide to own firearms. Gang members, felons, those guilty of midemeanour assault, the senile, mentally ill or challenged, and children don't get permits. Children of a certain age could get a permit that allows them to use firearms under the supervision of an adult petmit holder.

The license would allow open and/or concealed carry. Police would be able to determine quickly who is and isn't entitled to carry a firearm. Disarming the bad guys would be a priority.