Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Place An Ad | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Avoid rush to gun ban in Ohio

January 23, 2013

Surely liberals in the state Senate do not think Ohioans are gullible enough to accept ‘‘trust us’’ assurances their rights are not being violated. Buckeye State residents know better....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(39)

EarlyRiser

Jan-28-13 5:23 AM

My daughter is mentally ill, she refuses to get help. That is alot of the problem here, alot of these people think nothing is wrong with them, or they like the way they feel, bi-polar has highs and lows, I have been told the highs are very high adrenalin rushes which they love and don't want to give up. Gun control will not stop criminals from having guns, they have them now. If you keep all of your guns locked up you will not be able to get to them if someone breaks into your house. I think there should be some way to force people to get mental health help. My hands are tied with my daughter, she is now 26 can she be dangerous? Yes, but there is nothing that can be done about it.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Jan-27-13 9:42 AM

"answer the queation "

I'll answer any queAion you got when you ask, little lady.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Goneforgood

Jan-26-13 6:35 PM

reallytiredofit, Once angain I have not made one comment on this page but you feel the need to bring my name up.

The only person I have said anything bad about was you when you were logging on as dos, under that name YOU belittled and slandered everyone who even tried to have a discussion with you or had the nerve to prove you wrong.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-26-13 4:23 PM

Well then pull your big girl panties on and answer the queation liemistress.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Jan-26-13 3:12 PM

"YES it was a question LIEMONGER, if you had any ability YOU might try to answer it. "

IF YOU had even a rudimentary understand of English, you'd present it as such, but you don't.

I can answer anything you REGURGITATE, little lady.

Repeated drivel is all you post, bot.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ihateusblues

Jan-26-13 12:28 PM

A gun is a lousy investment in my opinion. The likely hood of ever using one for self defense is maybe .06% in a person's lifetime.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-26-13 10:44 AM

USBLUES asks in regard to the newtoen school slaughter-- "What Federal law would have prevented it?"-- No Federal law would have prevented it. Isn't that the point after all? Should there not be a way to prevent these kinds of senseless slaughters? If the next mass execution of people is in a Sunday Church service should the NRA then hold a news conference and suggest that every choir in the nation be armed? If the next incident is at a college basketball game should all referees be armed? The jest and dry ugly humor that you and your friends post in regard to school children being murdered is a disrespect to every young person who has been murdered. I wonder what choir YOU would sing in usblues if YOUR only child was among the children whose lives have been snuffed out by this particular American way of death.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-26-13 10:29 AM

It appears to me from usblues' comments that he believes that felons and mentally disturbed individuals should have the right to own and carry firearms. See usblues it is not the insane that we need to worry so much about. They are mostly institutionalized. It is the citizens that are functional but potentially dangerous.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-26-13 10:23 AM

I am always ammused by the posters of the ilk of usblues, liemonger, unitedfortruth, archnocapitalist, and goneforgood who always find the need to offer up new ways to belittle and slander people and to toe the Rush Limbaugh line BUT never NEVER, offer any reponse that adds to the discussion matter. Never answers any questions put to them, and never misses an opportunity to twist what other people post to suit their own needs.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-26-13 10:14 AM

familyguy, SAY WHAT? STATE ISSUE! How do you propose that the second amendment of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION is a state issue. Please tell me that you are not suggesting that a state could decide to ban handguns if they wanted to. You are argueing this issue backwards.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FamilyGuy

Jan-26-13 12:02 AM

Perhaps we should all demand that our Federal government also abide by the 10th amendment which would necessitate the Feds stepping aside in what is clearly a state and / or individual citizen issue.

Add attempts of unconstitutional gun grabbing to the growing list of Federal over reach which results in pitting neighbor against neighbor and family member against family member.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-25-13 9:27 PM

YES it was a question LIEMONGER, if you had any ability YOU might try to answer it. We know though that your incapable of normal thought by your overly intelligent posts. By the way if it wasn'y the 1968 Gun Control Act, then WHAT DOES PREVENT A FELON FROM OWNING A FIREARM DARLING ????? Look carefully, you can tell by the Question marks that it is indeed a question Take 6 or 7 days to try to think of an answer, little woman.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Jan-25-13 7:18 PM

"Why then would it not make sense to register any subsequent sale of a firearm to the new owner."

Is that a question that you're just to illiterate to phrase properly... lol????

"If the registration was not a violation of the second amendment for the initial sale it cannot be a violation for subsequent sales."

Why don't you ask the Jews how it worked under Hitler, libtard?

"I don't want the gooberment to decide who can own a gun."

You don't want anything that isn't spoon-fed to you.

"It was the 1968 Gun Control act that restricts felons from gun ownership."

You should be getting tired of showing how little you know and how dumb you are.

LOL.

PATHETIC.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-25-13 4:23 PM

The issue of the mentally impared is a very thorny issue indeed. I posted following the NRA's LaPeire stated that mental health issues is where the government should look to curb gun violence. WHO makes the decision about sanity? If he is talking about restricting gun sales to the mentally disterbed then WHO is going to establish the rules? It has to be the government because the Constitution is silent on this subject. No one said the issues surrounding gun rights were easy. They are not, but from my point of view we absolutely MUST be part of the discussion. If we are not the discussions will still take place, but we gun owners will have no one at the table to look out for our needs. Neither party cares about the issue in any way except how to milk it for votes. If the gun owners put all their eggs in John Boehner's basket we will end up with an omelette, my friend.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-25-13 4:08 PM

Be careful,billdog, with the approach that I don't want the gooberment to decide who can own a gun. Who, for example, do you think decided that a felon could not own a gun? Was it the constitution? Well no, in fact the Constitution makes no ownership requirements at all. It was the 1968 Gun Control act that restricts felons from gun ownership. If we as gun owners try to convince the general population that we think felons should be able to own and carry a gun then they will think we are nuts ourselves. There are people who should not own guns it is just that simple. Felons are one for sure in my book.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Billdog

Jan-25-13 1:33 PM

23 hours Samantha and you still haven't answered the question.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FamilyGuy

Jan-25-13 1:24 PM

What part of

"shall not be infringed"

do you not understand?

As a law abiding American who has not ever been accused any crime what so ever, I resent each and every person who attempts to limit any of my Constitutional rights.

If you would focus your efforts on the mental health issues that cause these nut jobs to go off the rails rather than on punishing law abiding Americans by going after our liberty and freedoms by promoting an ever expanding government, we might be able to make some headway with this culture of evil.

By taking a morally superior attitude that you know better than the founders of our nation will win you no willing converts to your cause.

Just driving another wedge into the culture of our nation.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Billdog

Jan-25-13 1:00 PM

reallytiredofit, your right but those like Timothy McVay and the uni-bomber didn't even use a gun. I'm not advocating for anything but the idea that no matter how we limit gun owner ship these limits will do nothing but grow to include more and more people until the there is no need for a list because it will eventually expand to limit everyone. I'm not a fan of looking at the guns as much as a fan of looking at making mental health services more easily available. Our country has been cutting the availability of these services since the early 80's.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-25-13 10:12 AM

Thats not true BIlldog, the shooter at Virginia Tech purchased the guns he used there. However in two of the worst school shootings Columbine and Newtown the shooter used guns from their homes that were readily available. The Newtown shooting are particularily onerous because the mother KNEW that her son was disturbed yet she still had firearms on the property that should have been unavailable to him. Her error cost both her and her son their lives. The real tragedy lies with the other 25 people who dies most of them in kindergarten. This one for sure could have been prevented.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-25-13 10:03 AM

Then the only waya criminal or a mentally unbalanced person could get a firearm would be to steal it. That is where WE the firearm owners of America must do our part. A firearm should not be laying around the house when the owner is not at home, they should be locked up securely to prevent their theft.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-25-13 9:58 AM

Think of how many firearms have been sold new in this country in the last 45 years. Now consider how many of those guns have been sold or given to another owner in those 45 years. Millions apon millions. That is how many unregistered guns are out there. This is the major flaw in the 1968 gun control act. There is no need to limit magazine size or define a charactertic of a firearm for an honest firearms owner. Just put in place the system to prevent the criminal from buying a firearm period.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Jan-25-13 9:46 AM

For the past 45 years every firearm sold new in the United States had to be registered from the manufacturer all the way through the sales chain to the buyer of the firearm. This requirement has not infringed anyones right to buy a gun. This system has worked remarkably well in enabling police to track a gun used in a crime. Today that initial registration is supported by gun owners and gun haters alike. Why then would it not make sense to register any subsequent sale of a firearm to the new owner. If the registration was not a violation of the second amendment for the initial sale it cannot be a violation for subsequent sales. Yes it would add a little additional cost to the sale of a used firearm but it should eliminate the argument about what is and what isn't a sporting weapon, and would help keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Very few people are stupid enough to buy a gun new if the intended purpose of that gun is crime oriented.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Billdog

Jan-25-13 9:04 AM

Sam just more rant. You didn't answer my question.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Jan-25-13 7:41 AM

"Sorry went golfing "

You're sorry all right and no one is buying your internet lies, darling.

"but allowing a known nut case to own a gun, is not a real smart choice... "

Hopefully, you're denied when they do the background check.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SueEllen

Jan-24-13 5:20 PM

Gun Control is not about guns.....it's about control

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 39 comments Show More Comments
 
 
 

 

I am looking for: