It doesn't surprise me that you hold these opinions. You're young, and when you grow a little older and hopefully a little wiser, you'll understand. These Lightning boards seem to be loaded with young (19-23) males whose daddy's bought them their truck and all their other toys. If you graduated from Penn State and bought those on your own, then more power to you. But somehow i doubt all the kids here did it that way. I'd bet a tank of gas that most of you boys had help from your daddy's. Never once heard a rich kid admit as much, so I won't hold my breath here.

 

ILL

You are just too darn funny!!! You are telling me that when I grow older I will be willing to give up my civil liberties, argue about topics that I know little about, call people names who disagree with me, and will become bitter? Damn!!! I hope I don't get old.

I know this can't be totally true though. I have met a number of the good people on this board, and they were all quite a bit older than me. Actually they made fun of me being a yungin. And they were not anything like you. In fact, I know lots of people that I highly respect, who are intelligent enough to understand that giving up our sport will do nothing to better this country.

And no...daddy didn't buy it for me. I bought it with my own money, that I get from my job. I am sorry if you are jealous that I make enough at this young age to purchase an 'L', but there is nothing that I can do about that. You seem relatively new to this board, according to your number of posts. So maybe, hopefully, someday...when you spend a little more time on the Lighting board you will grow up to realize that name calling gets you no where.

Then maybe you, my friend, will be a little wiser.



------------------
2000 Red Lightning
(no mods yet...just got it)
95 Saleen S-351 Convertible/Triple Black
97 Kawasaki Vulcan 800 Classic

 

Nah, i'm not jealous. Matter of fact, i said "more power to you". You're entitled to your opinion i guess. Yes, I am new to these boards. No, i have no desire to meet any of you. And i certainly am not lame enough to buy into the whole "brotherhood" that i've seen some of you call it. In the words of the immortal Groucho Marx; "I wouldn't join any group that would have me as a memeber." Anyways, this thread has about exhausted itself. Good luck to all of you.

 

Hey, did you guys get ILL_troll's comments that, "So my beliefs lie somewhere between Newt Gingrich and Al Sharpton".
Well, there is a unique combination for you. Newt a very accomplished, conservative politician, and Sharpton, a self-promoting, race-hustling, gasbag.

I think I will take on a unique and radical new belief system. It will range between the Pope and Pee Wee Herman. You all remember Pee Wee Herman? So, I have to warn you, if I assume my Pee Wee Herman personna, and you see me in a porno theater with a nervous newspaper in my lap, I recommend you sit behind me.

You will able to recognize me by my buck-toothed, squinty-eyed look.

 

Like the D.I. tells you,
"THIS IS YOUR RIFLE, THAT IS YOUR GUN!!!!!"

 

My, My, what a little mess Daddy's Boy has stirred up here.

It saddens me a bit that a lot of "us", and I guess I include myself, seem almost totally polarized on this issue. Neither side seems to want to budge, it is either almost total freedom to own virtually whatever type of weapon one wants or almost a total ban on the same range of weapons.

There is also the issue of "The right to bear arms" based on whichever way you interpret the Second Amendment and the concern about the "tyranny of the Government"
which I do not see as the issue.

Let me say that I am a Republican, by definition a Conservative, but a centrist one if I am to be categorized. My own personal opinion of the basis of the Constitution is that it was written by wise men facing a situation of having recently thrown off the yoke of British rule and they wished to establish a generally free and democratic nation and developed a philosophy and a document that they felt would lead to that end.

These same wise men were products of their time and the technology that existed at the time, which was vastly different than the time and technology that we deal with today.

My personal reading of the Second Amendment was that the bearing of arms was related to having available at short notice a militia that could deal with external threats, which existed at the time and for some years in the future. I do not interpret the Amendment as having to do with threats coming from our own government.

The issue gets a bit cloudy unfortunately as some of the Amendments, freedom of speech, freedom of religion for example, can be interpreted as things that might possibly be taken away by the Federal Government and they wanted to be sure that this would not
happen.

As an individual living in the year 2000 and living with the technology we have, I try to take some sort of middle ground. The need for us to have the right to bear arms because of the need for a militia to be available at short notice seems to me to have not passed the test of time.

On the other hand, we have the right, in some form or another, so how do we deal with it?

My personal wish is that we generally deal with it as we do with some other issues in that if you are a citizen in good standing, ie not a convicted felon, a non citizen, and perhaps a few issues I cannot think of just now, you should have the right to own a firearm.

Someone on the thread mentioned the flintlock rifles and pistols the authors of the Constitution dealt with at the time and that was the limit of their horizon. They could not have imagined that some 200 years later that Uzis and AK47's and God knows what else would be available for purchase by their heirs.

To cut my response down a bit, my personal opinion is that I do not object in principle to the ownership of a firearm/firearms by the general populace that should legally have the right to do so. I do think that it is reasonable to require people who wish to purchase/own/collect firearms that they register them and also submit them to a ballistics "exam" that will fingerprint weapons in such a way that we can at least start to get a handle on what weapon shot what person, mostly outside the law, who sold it, who bought it and in some way reduce the absolutely horrendous number of deaths caused by our current interpretation of the Second Amendment.

I have stated my opinions honestly. I hope you will respect them.

------------------
99.5 Lightning
Build #247
PSP Chip/Filter
Bassani full system
White/normal options
Tamiya 1/10 scale Bolt
Several old trucks/cars
Thunder & Lightning
Rag Doll Cats
E-mail MOSTOYSINC@AOL.com
Kennesaw, Ga. (Atlanta)

 

I couldn't have articulated that any better if i was sober!! I don't really have a problem with people who'd like to own guns for recreation, but I'm hard pressed to buy into the NRA lobbyists and their puppet (Charlton Heston) argument about it's every citizen's constitutional right to own an assault rifle. I think a more pragmatic approach would be to:
A. If you're a hunter, you must join a hunting club and have your weapons checked in and held at the club.

B. If you're a target shooter, have your gun stored at target range and you can check your weapon out whenever you'd like to shoot.

I'm not about taking anyone's freedoms away. I just think that their are far too many guns and far too easy to own one. I see a lot of handle's coming out of the South and Midwest here. And in those parts of the country, hunting is much more prevalent. The majority of gun owners i see are young street thugs who deal drugs. I've lived in areas where guns are waved around like they were sticks. If it means taking your guns, or at the very least, regulating your use to take them out their hands......i'm all for it. It makes me sick to my stomach to turn on the news and hear about innocent children getting caught in the crossfire of gang shootouts.

It's my humble opinion that if just one of those children (maybe yours) could be saved by revoking your "right", this would be a better place. But you all go ahead and cheer lustily as Chuck Heston raises a musket and screams like a moron "FROM MY COLD DEAD HAND!!"

 

Bill

I can appreciate your opinion...even if I can't agree with it. Thanks for not resorting to childish name calling...like other certain individuals who love to call everyone a moron.

ILL...once again you feel that you cannot get through a post without insulting someone. Whatever.

The problems with registration of all firearms and ballistic tests and the like are twofold. First...If you look at Great Britain and Australia as examples...you will see the problem with "just registering" all firearms. What happened in those countries is likely to happen here. The government promised that they would not take away citizens guns. They simply wanted registration to "control crime". The legislation passed and all guns had to be registered. What happened next? Well now that the government knows exactly where all the guns are, they swept in with new lesgislation banning firearms. It was easy to enforce...because they had a record of all the (legal) firearms in the countries. It didn't matter if it was an antique worth tens of thousands of dollars. Or a family heirloom. They all went to the big melting pot in the sky. It's truly sad.

And as far as forcing owners to keep the guns at a range. That poses a similar problem. Not to mention the fact that it renders self-defense obsolete. When someone breaks into your home, what do you do? Tell them to wait a few minutes so you can run down to the club and get your gun. I don't think that will work well.

Ill you seem to be under the misconception that crime is committed with legal guns. That simply is not true. Do you think that your average gang member is going to register his glock at the target club? I don't think so. These sorts of laws will do nothing more than disarm the law-abiding citizens and empower the criminals.

I would love to stay and debate but I will be out of computer contact for a while. Feel free to call me and set up a time to debate this if anyone is interested? Or if you just wanna get together for some target shootin, lightning racing, beer drinking fun!

It's been fun.



------------------
2000 Red Lightning
(no mods yet...just got it)
95 Saleen S-351 Convertible/Triple Black
97 Kawasaki Vulcan 800 Classic

 

i'm not much of a gun guy. but i saw that movie "Red Dawn" and bought a crate of machine guns, that were legal to buy then, but are not now. my brother convienced me to buy them and he bought a crate too, saying we could make big money on the deal. so even if we don't make a lot of money and get stuck with them, we might luck out with a communist invasion or something. so please don't skydive near my house or my brothers house, as we have had these things for a while now.

 

Daddy take away your computer priveleges? LOL, bye now

 

MRBBQMAN

Remember that fog lamp you sent me. I was wanting to send you a little thank you gift for all your trouble; and, since you have all those illegal cool firearms, I feel I should send the gift quickly. Was that business address that was on the box one that you would recieve the package? If not, would you email me your address. I think this stuff is right up your alley.

SnoPickle@aol.com

 

Ill, your inferences are unwarranted. I will match my intellectual credentials against yours any day. I am 63 years old, and I graduated from UCLA in 1963 Summa *** Laude. The only one in my graduating class with a higher GPA was the valedictorian. I am probably farther left on the political spectrum than anyone on this board, and until last year I blindly accepted the propaganda spewed out by the gun control wienies. Then I went to a presentation at my Freethinker's meeting by a learned attorney well versed in the issue. He completely changed my mind about gun control. You might too, if you take the time to study some even handed research on the topic. In addition to the books I previously cited ("That Every Man be Armed:The Evolution of a Constitutional Right" by Stephen Hallbrook, and "More Guns, Less Crime:Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws" by John R. Lott, Jr.) I also recommend that you read "The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy:Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies" by David Kopel, as well as "Guns:Who Should Have Them?" by the same author. Do your research by reading a couple of these and you may eschew your fulminations in favor of the muddle headed approaches to gun control that the liberals are spouting. (BTW, the above does not mean that I think that every yo-yo who feels like it should be able to go into Big 5 and walk out with a .44 Mag. I do favor rigorous background checks and demonstrations of competency and knowledge of relevant statutes and liability issues before someone can purchase such a deadly tool. I also favor much more rigorous automobile licensing procedures, such as they have in Germany, since is is clear that many if most drivers don't know what the hell they are doing, but that will never happen here due to the strength of the automobile lobby.

 

Judging by your last post and your handle, it would appear as though you've got something to prove. I never presented myself as an intellectual. I never graduated from college, though i think a degree from UCLA or any other college hardly qualifies you as an intellectual. OJ Simpson has a degree from a more prestigious University, though i don't think he's smarter than you.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, as am i. And i'm also entitled to express myself in a way that you may not like. If that means calling Charlton Heston a moron, so be it. I didn't form my opinions in a classroom full of part time underage beer swillers. I formed mine after living on both sides of the gun, as it were. I will take a look at the books you mentioned however.

Also, I would like to clear up one point. I understand that if you have your weapon checked in at a target shooting facility that it reduces your options for self defense. I think it's time that you face facts and look at the statistics. You're 5 times more likely to have a weapon in the home used against you than you are to use it against anyone else. Think about that for a minute. How brave and tough are ya gonna feel when your wife is raped with your gun to her head? How "Clint Eastwood" are ya gonna feel when your teenage son or daughter takes their own life with your gun? Guns at home = trouble. Period. I own plenty of guns, don't get me wrong. I am not a "gun control weenie". I just don't see a place for them anymore in my life and i think that America would be a much better place to live without them. You can disagree with me if you like, you have my permission, LOL

 

It would seem that the whole issue of gun control has two schools of thought.

One school believes that fewer guns in the hands of citizens makes for a safer society and no guns makes for a very safe society.

The second school believes just the opposite. That is bascially part of the thrust of Prof. John Lott's book, "More Guns, Less Crime". I think he proved his point.

I do not think the first school can prove its
point, which is much less than the horror show of trying to implement it. With an estimated 220 million to 240 million guns in the country, it would be absolute folly to try and round them up, or try and control them in some draconian manner. It has the potential to get very nasty.

Some interesting examples of gun control at work is in my area. Washington D.C. annually competes as the murder capital of the nation. Right across the Potomac river is Arlington, Virginia, which has a very low crime rate. Washington has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country for decades and Virgina has much less. Virgina also has non-discretionary "shall issue" concealed weapons permits.

You would think Washington's strict laws would have made some difference. But apparently not. It is much worse now than before the laws where enacted.

My state of Maryland also has some pretty strict gun control laws compared to most states. And the laws are getting stricter. And, guess what, Maryland lately has crept from number being number six in the country in high crime rates to number four.

Maryland also has concealed weapons permits, but apparently only the well connnected can get one. Very discriminatory.

To compare, the state of Vermont has virtually no state gun control laws and has very low crime rate. Maybe the lowest.

And, although I do not like to use other countries as examples because of the differences with the US, it would be interesting to look at crime and gun control in Great Britain.

Since the 1920's Britain started gun control starting with handgun registration. Lately the gun control laws have gotten so strick that it is virtually impossible to own any gun except a few and under the strictest controls subject to police inspection.

Well, I just read that Great Britain now leads the industrial world in all categories of crimes except murder. And, there are about half dozen countries that lead Britain in that category.

50% of all break-ins in Britain are "hot" break-ins. That is, the home invaders know somebody is home, but they do not care. They apparently have no fear. The rate in the US is 13%.

Remember, we are talking about a country that not that long ago had a police force that carried nothing more than truncheons as weapons.

Finally, if you want to live in a "free" society, you have to expect to take the bad with the good. But, I think our good far out weighs our bad (so far).

This is my .02 and one half cents. Have a safe and nice week-end.

 

"I think it's time that you face facts and look at the statistics. You're 5 times more likely to have a weapon in the home used against you than you are to use it against anyone else."

People that don't know what they're getting into when they purchase a firearm for home defence and get into trouble by not having the ability to use their firearm effectively to stop an intruder, for whatever reason, need to reconsider ownership for home defence. But, that's not a reason to take that right away from those who know FULL WELL how to protect themselves, their family and property.

"Think about that for a minute. How brave and tough are ya gonna feel when your wife is raped with your gun to her head? How "Clint Eastwood" are ya gonna feel when your teenage son or daughter takes their own life with your gun? Guns at home = trouble."

Maybe this would happen to you...and maybe you should sell your guns for all you've been saying; if you indeed have these fears, your responsible to fix the problem. As for me, I don't have a problem defending my domain. I'm gonna' be real brave and feel really pissed off if an intruder enters my home. I'm gonna' try not to use my firearm and end a situation without a firefight. If this is not possible, I'm gonna' shoot and ask questions later. I feel that Mr. Nasty signs away his right to life at the point that he enters my home; because, he's putting me in fear of loosing my rigth to life by making that choice to come in and threaten my personal liberty. Sorry, just the way I feel. Families that have someone use a firearm to end their life is most tragic. I can't speak for anyone elses situation, except to say that my family is top priority to firearms. If I felt any hint of a danger of this situation, I would lock up the gun instead of having it in my daily hiding place. If I felt there was not a problem, then I would have it in my normal hiding place. Guns at home = one's ability to discourage those with bad intentions. Guns in home = a chance to fight back against those that would seek to get away with their evil deeds at ANY cost. Check my guns in at a club.....HA.....HA....HA What a joke.


[This message has been edited by BadBolt (edited 10-27-2000).]