Posted on 10/23/2015 2:05:05 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
First, full disclosure: I am a gun owner. I passed a background check and legally own a 20 gauge pump-action shotgun that I use to shoot clay pigeons at target ranges. I am not alone. According to a 2013 survey by the National Sporting Goods Association, women's participation in shooting sports increased by 51.5 percent, to just over 5 million women, for target shooting over the last decade. There are a lot of women like me who like to shoot skeet.
In case you are wondering, I am not a member of the NRA.
I believe that gun violence is a plague on our nation. I believe that all gun owners should have to pass a background check, and that a prior record of committing violent crimes is a very good reason for denying one's Constitutional right to own a gun. I have no problem with reasonable waiting periods. I don't understand why anyone needs to own military-style assault weapons, and I think they should be more difficult, if not nearly impossible, to obtain.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
Fully automatic weapons are only legal in this country to the general public....ummmm, you might want to take stock of what erroneously typed there
The author is an idiot.
The Federal Firearms License isn’t a license to carry though...It is a “business license” and will be denied unless you can provide proof of a firearms business and location to the BATF...
IOW, unless you are in the business, you can’t have a fully automatic weapon legally...
Its a term that liberals exploit.
Low information voters see the word “Assault” and magically tie it to domestic violence.
It isn’t that hard to see what the commies do.
How is it that a thug uses a 9mm firearm to “Assault” somebody yet the firearm is not an “Assault” weapon?
Thanks, I did...If you read just below my faux pas...I corrected this myself....
That's because statements like hers enable the NRA to say that "Democrats want to take your guns away." And the NRA would be right.
The author of the article is confused.
She should have said: "Democrats want to take your guns away. Hillary has said so. I believe her and everybody else should believe her."
I will leave it to others to address the author's confusion regarding the completely invented category of arms called "assault weapons".
She’s not confused at all. This is a specific and deliberate tactic that frames the “debate” on their terms.
She understands exactly what she’s doing.
Dint go that far. It wasn’t there. No foul.
I can tell, me and her are going to be on opposite sides of the barricade.
Take your Guns.. Tax you ammo!!!
” This is a specific and deliberate tactic that frames the “debate” on their terms.”
Good point!!
I think, rather, they fear the guillotine as used to rid the nation of its deposed ruling class PERMANENTLY.
We here in the U.S. have been surprisingly lenient in our treatment of counter-Revolutionaries.
“She is confused.. Trying to set an agenda for gun control while patronizing the 2nd Amendment.”
Yes, she has no idea of what she is talking about. She wants contradictory things.
She is for everything right up to confiscation. So she wants the state empowered to do everything, including confiscating guns she does not like, even though they are the guns least used in crime, and then expects the state to stop short of confiscating the rest...
What an idiot.
*Gun control is a tool to make innocents pay the price for the guilty* ~ W.LaPierre
It isn’t about more background checks: it’s about getting more information in your background to use to deny you a firearm.
That being said, when you have enough votes to void the 2nd Amendment, let us know. Until then.. keep you peace.
Not quite true. The most important part of being able to own a full auto weapon is to live in a free state that allows civilian ownership. If allowed,the next step is to fill your bank account, as the manufacture of transferable machine guns was prohibited by the FOPA of ‘86, which resulted in the price of transferable guns going through the roof, i.e. fixed supply and increasing demand.
Next you need to get fingerprinted, get a sign off by a Chief Law Enforcement Officer, write a check for $200 to the Treasury, send it and the proper paperwork to ATF, undergo that liberal sacrament, a background check, and then wait months before you get your tax stamp, which then allows you to pick up the weapon you paid for at the beginning of the process.
A variation of a concern troll.
....and be willing to settle for a 30+ year old weapon, at exorbitant prices, while your pubic serpents get to buy brand new.
[ She wants to stand in our camp, 2nd Amendment rights.
Yet she says, “I believe that all gun owners should have to pass a background check, .. I have no problem with reasonable waiting periods. I don’t understand why anyone needs to own military-style assault weapons, and I think they should be more difficult, if not nearly impossible, to obtain.”
She doesn’t understand what the 2nd Amendment is really for. ]
This little Liberal Piggy would squeal like a fat hog on bacon making day if she had to get a license to practice her free speech rights in the 1st.... Or would She?
Shut up, b****.
L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.