1 posted on
02/17/2003 5:43:46 AM PST by
SJackson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
To: SJackson
Guns don't mean more than life to me.I doubt that anything means more than life to this guy.
2 posted on
02/17/2003 5:47:30 AM PST by
niteowl77
To: SJackson; dd5339; cavtrooper21
So, this guy is a liberal gun-grabber in "hunter's clothing...Maybe we should boycott his program, or at least email him some friendly corrections!
3 posted on
02/17/2003 5:47:57 AM PST by
Vic3O3
(-47 below keeps the riffraff out!)
To: *bang_list; RedWing9; technochick99; CHICAGOFARMER; sistergoldenhair; Chi-townChief; BillyBoy; ...
Illinois ping list. If you'd like to be added or removed, please FRMail me.
===============================================
I'm trying to separate the Illinois from 2nd amendment. If you'd like only one or the other, or on/off alltogether, FRmail me.
===============================================
It's probably unfair to accuse Mr. Bowman of not understanding the 2nd amendment, since it apparently doesn't enter into his analysis of Daley's proposals.
His portrayal of non-hunting shooters as "crackpots" is absurd, but unfortunatly widespread. He fails to realize they'll be coming for his firearms just as soon as they've solved the "assault rife" and handgun problems. You'll note he writes a column and does a radio show, he's probably worth well thought our E Mail.
4 posted on
02/17/2003 5:48:39 AM PST by
SJackson
To: SJackson
But then, I am a hunter who owns guns, not a gun nut No dufus,you're just a plain nut!
I'm a hunter and I see no reason why others should not enjoy other shooting sports.It's not all about hunting you ignorant dweeb.In fact,I just purchased my first "assault rifle" this weekend.Had lots of fun shooting it,even though I wasn't "hunting" anything.Go figure.........
6 posted on
02/17/2003 5:49:24 AM PST by
quack
To: SJackson
Who is this POS? Sarah Brady in drag?
8 posted on
02/17/2003 5:51:43 AM PST by
11B3
(Liberalism is merely another form of mental retardation.)
To: SJackson
My first pistol was a cap & ball Colt, Shoot as fast as lightning, but he loads a mite slow ...
Loads a mite slow, loads a mite slow,
She'll get you into trouble that she can't get you out.
from the same song by Steve Earle.
9 posted on
02/17/2003 5:51:55 AM PST by
Pilsner
To: SJackson
This p*ss% is already a slave.
He has lost the will to be free.
11 posted on
02/17/2003 5:53:24 AM PST by
RKV
To: SJackson
As long as we're registering your guns, why not have a closer look at your tax return ? Nothing to hide, eh ?
To: SJackson
Glad to know the Second Amendment is all about hunting.
The militia, of course, must have been all about keeping the bear population down.
To: SJackson
As hunters, we must learn to separate ourselves from the gun nuts, those who would oppose every firearm restriction. Otherwise, we'll be lumped in the crackpot pile. What a nut.
Everybody knows that hunting is just practice for when we start using the 2nd amendment for why it was really written!
To: SJackson
Has anyone ever met a "gun nut"? The only ones i've ever seen are Hollwood and TV creations. Met plenty of gun owners in my life. Not one could ever be called a "gun nut".
16 posted on
02/17/2003 5:59:56 AM PST by
Hillarys Gate Cult
("Read Hillary's hips. I never had sex with that woman.")
To: SJackson
Everything in this article means absolutely nothing, since it is built off a false premise.
False Premise: The purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the right to use a gun to hunt.
Truth: The purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the right of the people to protect themselves from government.
17 posted on
02/17/2003 6:00:44 AM PST by
ez
(WHERE'S THE POLLING DATA ON THE ESTRADA FILIBUSTER???)
To: SJackson
*Restrict handgun purchases to one per person per month. For my money, you could ban handguns completely. That in no way affects my right to own a shotgun or rifle for hunting. Yeah, right.
Well, why not restrict shotgun or rifle purchase to one per person per month. For my money, you could ban shotguns/rifles completely. They're only made for slaughtering defenseless animals anyway. That in no way affects my right to own a handgun for protection.</sarcasm>
This guy's a complete dolt. Do you think he understands what he's saying?
C_E
To: SJackson
Guys like this are trying to prove what nice guys they are while fulfilling the gun grabbers dream of divide and conquer. We see this attitude a lot at the local gun club. The trapshooters insist they are the "good" guys and condemn the black rifle set and people coming in there with their Glocks. They could just as well shoot trap in a bar electronically.
21 posted on
02/17/2003 6:13:18 AM PST by
Ches
To: SJackson
"As hunters, we must learn to separate ourselves from the gun nuts, those who would oppose every firearm restriction. Otherwise, we'll be lumped in the crackpot pile."
You need to update your knowledge of gun control and the Bill of Rights. Every line of your article is the way gun control facist-neo-nazi America haters take away guns from people; that will include yours also.
"To hunt, I own guns."
"They are my most valued possessions."
"Daley's proposals make sense. But then, I am a hunter who owns guns, not a gun nut. Guns don't mean more than life to me."
Interesting. The significance of all gun control legislation is the removal of both the constitutional right to keep and bear arms and eventually the disarming of good citizens; it has been proven in other gun control nations and cities that violent gun incidents increase with gun control laws. More guns, less crime is a FACT! Criminals never voluntarily disarm, in fact, most felons keep their guns despite the law. By disarming good citizens homes are easy prey for criminals. Another fact is even more important, all dictatorships disarm good citizens to prevent them from rising up against them. Hitler is one example that comes to mind.Our Christian forefathers knew this and provided for it.
Do you vote democrat? Just curious....
22 posted on
02/17/2003 6:17:03 AM PST by
wgeorge2001
(One God, one faith, one baptism. The Father,Son and Holy Spirit!)
To: SJackson
Then he won't mind when they try to ban "sniper rifles" ans "street sweeper" shotguns. Who needs one of those anyway? As long as it doesn't interfere with my right. (/sarcasm)
What an idiot.(spit!)
23 posted on
02/17/2003 6:19:17 AM PST by
Blood of Tyrants
(Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave)
To: SJackson
*A ban on military-style, semi-automatic assault weapons. I absolutely agree. It should have been done years ago. The problem for hunters is the definition of assault rifles; otherwise, it in no way affects my right to own a shotgun or rifle for hunting.Okay, so a military-style, semi-automatic assault weapon will destroy its target more effciently than a long rifle chambered for .223 or .308 that is marketed for varmint hunting?
BREAKING NEWS: Shocking new evidence that says liberals are incapable of presenting a coherent argument for anything. Story at eleven.
To: SJackson
Steve Earle is a self-avowed communist.
To: SJackson
I own a pistol that I've never fired. Not once. I don't hunt. But there may come a day when we are forced to defend ourselves against an enemy. Could be a civil war. Maybe an incursion. Anarchy. That's what the 2nd Amendment means to me. That pistol is duct tape I hope I'll never need. It's my defense in case the worst happens. Why on earth would anyone be against it?
27 posted on
02/17/2003 6:24:33 AM PST by
Glenn
To: SJackson
I'll save them the trouble: Comment removed by Moderator.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson