There are a few well funded anti-gun lobbiest. I know who funds them. Do you?Where is your evidence that a majority of Americans are pro-gun? There are many well-funded lobbies that represent minority views.
The Pharmaceutical Lobby (PL) is a completely different animal than the NRA. PL receives their funds from the sale of their products and don't require donations from groups for the sole purpose of lobbying congress for their benefit.So you think a majority of Americans supported prohibition?
Clearly a majority of americans were against the government negotiating drug prices for Medicare part D. Otherwise who would fund the PhRMA lobby? Clearly as they are a well funded lobby group they have broad support.
This is how we know the very broad support americans have for the teaching of creationism vs science in science classrooms. Look at the funding of say the discovery institute vs that National Center for Science Education.
Clearly skeptics need to shut up and listen to the will of the people.
Is that the evidence supporting your statement?There are a few well funded anti-gun lobbiest. I know who funds them. Do you?
This is just part of the regular cull of children that the US deems to be acceptable in order to maintain its violent addiction to weapons.
If you demand a gun culture you get dead children. In other words if you don't look after your children you shouldn't be allowed to have them. All gun owners should be sterilised by law and kept in a bullet proof container with other gun nuts for company - oh and plenty of bullets.
That would solve the problem very quickly. Happy days.
Joyce Foundation & George Soros is a good place to start. This fact has caused the anti-gun funders to change their donation strategy...they want to be hidden.Is that the evidence supporting your statement?
You stated that the majority of Americans are "pro-gun." For some reason you think that George Soros funding some gun control group is evidence for that fact. I fail to see the connection.Joyce Foundation & George Soros is a good place to start. This fact has caused the anti-gun funders to change their donation strategy...they want to be hidden.
I bet Ron Paul has raised more money in campaign funds in one quarter than the Brady Campaign "to take away everybodies guns" brings in donations every year. I'm sorry if you don't agree that anti-gun organizations are small time. It's a fact.
My understanding is that some states have no special requirements for concealed carry. This was an issue a few years ago with the idea of permitting someone with a concealed carry license in one state to carry concealed in any state that issues concealed carry permits.
The Pharmaceutical Lobby (PL) is a completely different animal than the NRA. PL receives their funds from the sale of their products and don't require donations from groups for the sole purpose of lobbying congress for their benefit.
It’s interesting that you mention the 18th amendment. I see similar thinking between its advocates, who were uneducated religious fanatics and the anti-gun lobby. I can’t comment how popular the 18th amendment was when it was passed because I’ve never researched that before. Can you comment on this? And if it wasn't popular how did it pass? I know that the political environment of today is different than that of some 100 years ago. That could be a major contributing factor.
I really hate this anti-gun owner nonsense. My parents had guns around when I was a child, and passed the age of 6 they didn't keep them hidden from me. I knew about them, and I knew they were dangerous. At age 12 I was taught on a .22 rifle, and I was a pretty good shot. Right now I don't own a gun, but I may one day purchase one (my fiance was raised to be afraid of them, and out of respect I don't keep them). I still find myself angry at the characterization of people like me as "gun nuts". Like I am some sort of knuckle dragging moron without an education who votes the big R 100% of the time. I especially find the idea that I should be sterilized to be sick.
You have to go through training (such as it is) to get your home license. Once you have that you can apply for others and proof you've been issued one is usually all you need (I have a New Hampshire license in addition to the SC one I went to class for. It increased the number of states I can carry in from 14 to 30).
It works on the principle of reciprocity, and sometimes it's weird. For instance, I couldn't carry in Georgia with my SC Permit because we don't have reciprocity with them, but they do with New Hampshire so now I'm legally strapped when I cross the border.
So as you know all state laws for guns could you make it clear what states require different levels of education for gun ownership and concealed carry?
I'm almost positive you need some training regardless of where you live. Even Florida, who has by far the least restrictive laws, at least requires you to have prior military experience or taken a hunter safety course prior to recieving a CWP if you don't take their class or one by a certified trainer.
I've been wrong before, so if someone can provide evidence of a state that will just hand one over without any training feel free. v[qimg]http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/shobon.gif[/qimg]v
And a basic hunting safety course is all you think people need for concealed carry?
This is just part of the regular cull of children that the US deems to be acceptable in order to maintain its violent addiction to weapons.
If you demand a gun culture you get dead children.
In other words if you don't look after your children you shouldn't be allowed to have them.
All gun owners should be sterilised by law and kept in a bullet proof container with other gun nuts for company - oh and plenty of bullets.
That would solve the problem very quickly. Happy days.
You also have to convince your local law enforcement agency you deserve one and have no criminal record as well as being fully aware of the laws of your state.
And you're still bound by the same laws as everyone else, it's not a license to kill or anything.
What the? When was the last major killing? V tech, and the killer was a nut. Oh, that must describe all gun enthusiasts and owners.![]()
No, you don't. In fact, most of the shootings have happened in gun free zones.
em, it wouldn't. It would just create tyranny. If you outlaw guns, only criminals and tyrants would have them.
No the one on the army base.
Like army bases.
And yet we find that unconvincing argument for bombs and such. Until I have a nuclear weapon to get into the mutually assured destruction game america is pure tyranny.