Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 200

Thread: GOP National Convention

  1. #51
    Master OptiBoarder karen's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rancho Cucamonga, Ca
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    1,325
    Chip, If I weren't already married ( and Darris wasn't next in line, just in case! :D ) I think I might have to ask you out on a date. Do you know how often you say out loud what I am thinking??
    Let the refining and improving of your own life keep you so busy that you have little time to criticize others. -H. Jackson Brown Jr.

    If the only tool you have is a hammer you will approach every problem as though it were a nail

  2. #52
    Master OptiBoarder chm2023's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Camp Hill/NYC
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,196

    Bush stands by his decision.....sorta..well no....

    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    MRBA: Liberals have leanings. They are incapable of learning.
    Another thoughtful insight from the right wing. Remember: never say anthing that won't fit on a bumper sticker.

    More news today: W's camp is trying to get the LWV to back off of 3 debates to 2. Perhaps they'll let Cheney come with him, 9/11 mtg redux? (This still tickles me, try to imagine a real president, say Truman or Teddy Roosevelt, only agreeing to testify before a special committee if they could take their VP with them.)

    Also, W claims he would sign legislation extending the assault weapons ban that is due to expire this month (which ban is supported across the board by law enforcement); of course, neither the Republican leadership in the house nor Senate will bring the bill forward so W can have his cake and eat it too. Of course if he really meant what he said, he could force the bill to a vote, but why ruffle feathers when you can stick to your story and hide behind Hastert's skirts?

    As always, the leadership of this guy takes my breathe away.


    http://www.freep.com/news/nw/guns12e_20040812.htm
    Last edited by chm2023; 09-08-2004 at 09:24 AM.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996
    CHM2023: What is an assault weapon? This has never been defined so no such bill could be enforced.

  4. #54
    That Boy Ain't Right Blake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Mobile, AL, USA
    Occupation
    Optical Laboratory Technician
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    CHM2023: What is an assault weapon? This has never been defined so no such bill could be enforced.
    People have been assaulted with all kinds of weapons... baseball bats, frying pans, you name it!

    :D

  5. #55

    The Chm Gestapo?

    Also, W claims he would sign legislation extending the assault weapons ban that is due to expire this month (which ban is supported across the board by law enforcement);
    All law enforcement? Really? And if that were true, is law enforcement's opinion holy? Do they get to determine our civil rights? Should law enforcement run the country?

    I thought libs were about power to the people...

    Power to law enforcement baby.


    Face it Chm, you have a thing for men in uniform, and you hate it.

  6. #56
    Master OptiBoarder chm2023's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Camp Hill/NYC
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,196
    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    CHM2023: What is an assault weapon? This has never been defined so no such bill could be enforced.
    Oh please. The gun lobby deliberately works to make the law rife with loopholes and nebulous definitions, then they point to these shortcomings as reasons why the bill is no good.

    You want a definition? How about any firearem deemed inappropriate for civilian use by federal and local law enforcement.

  7. #57
    That Boy Ain't Right Blake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Mobile, AL, USA
    Occupation
    Optical Laboratory Technician
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally Posted by chm2023
    ...
    You want a definition? How about any firearem deemed inappropriate for civilian use by federal and local law enforcement.
    So if the FBI says no to BB guns, millions of eight year old boys will never have to worry about shooting their eyes out.

  8. #58
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Blake
    People have been assaulted with all kinds of weapons... baseball bats, frying pans, you name it!

    :D
    Luckily, the collective conservative wit is not sharp enough to be lethal.;)

  9. #59
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Blake
    So if the FBI says no to BB guns, millions of eight year old boys will never have to worry about shooting their eyes out.
    Possibly millions of eyes saved - not bad. Or we could sell them plano poly lenses!
    Last edited by Spexvet; 09-11-2004 at 09:14 AM.

  10. #60
    Master OptiBoarder chm2023's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Camp Hill/NYC
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Blake
    So if the FBI says no to BB guns, millions of eight year old boys will never have to worry about shooting their eyes out.
    Your local fire department tells you how many people are legally allowed in public buildings--do they routinely rule only 3 people are allowed in the local cinema? Your local speed limits are set by local authorities--again, is the speed limit on your street 5 MPH?

    The assumption that all controls are unreasonable is absurd. Let's be adults shall we.

  11. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by chm2023
    Your local fire department tells you how many people are legally allowed in public buildings--do they routinely rule only 3 people are allowed in the local cinema? Your local speed limits are set by local authorities--again, is the speed limit on your street 5 MPH?

    The assumption that all controls are unreasonable is absurd. Let's be adults shall we.
    Instead of "all" what about "most"?

  12. #62
    That Boy Ain't Right Blake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Mobile, AL, USA
    Occupation
    Optical Laboratory Technician
    Posts
    543
    CHM: You haven't seen the traffic circles and "speed lumps" around here.

    In all seriousness, I do agree that it is the government's proper role to make rules that protect us, without imposing undue or arbitrary restrictions. And honestly, I'm not sure how I feel about average citizens owning high powered rifles. Here in Alabama, they're still debating whether or not to allow folks to hunt deer with crossbows - I don't see the need for a semiautomatic, and most hunters don't either.

    My beef is with the "assault weapon" title these things are given, I suppose to make people think of Rambo jumping out of a helcopter spraying bullets everywhere. Of course. it makes good sound bites.

    My apologies for being childish...

  13. #63
    Master OptiBoarder chm2023's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Camp Hill/NYC
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Blake
    CHM: You haven't seen the traffic circles and "speed lumps" around here.

    In all seriousness, I do agree that it is the government's proper role to make rules that protect us, without imposing undue or arbitrary restrictions. And honestly, I'm not sure how I feel about average citizens owning high powered rifles. Here in Alabama, they're still debating whether or not to allow folks to hunt deer with crossbows - I don't see the need for a semiautomatic, and most hunters don't either.

    My beef is with the "assault weapon" title these things are given, I suppose to make people think of Rambo jumping out of a helcopter spraying bullets everywhere. Of course. it makes good sound bites.

    My apologies for being childish...
    My knowledge of weapons is pretty slim; I do know that you can now legally purchase an AK47 which is just nuts. (Crossbows??? How quaint! How about one of those round things covered with spikes--a mace? The deer will probably laugh themselves to death!!!:D )

  14. #64
    That Boy Ain't Right Blake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Mobile, AL, USA
    Occupation
    Optical Laboratory Technician
    Posts
    543
    Even under the ban you could purchase an AR-15, which is basically an M-16 without automatic capability - the AK47 just looks scarier I guess. It's still illegal to get a fully automatic.

    The deer around here probably have more to worry about from the SUV's trucking down the highways at night.

  15. #65
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Blake
    People have been assaulted with all kinds of weapons... baseball bats, frying pans, you name it!

    :D
    Ok, I choose the AK47, you get the frying pan, at twenty paces. You in?:bbg:

  16. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996
    What we need are not laws against weapons but laws against people too stupid to use them properly. How can you outlaw fools? Todays society is so permissive, it conciders them to be people (voters even).

  17. #67
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by chip anderson
    What we need are not laws against weapons but laws against people too stupid to use them properly. How can you outlaw fools? Todays society is so permissive, it conciders them to be people (voters even).
    So permissive it allows assault weapons?

    I believe that Republican bill HR2004-345-23A reads "and henceforth all fools, whether citizens of these United states or not, are heretofor outlawed post haste, notwithstanding blah blah blah" just kidding, I made that up.

    Just as you don't let a two year old get into the knife drawer, you shouldn't let fools have assault weapons. And let's face it: everybody is a fool in someone's eyes.

  18. #68
    Master OptiBoarder rep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Red State in The South
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    770

    Sorry Chm2023 but your posting bad information

    HTML Code:
    My knowledge of weapons is pretty slim; I do know that you can now legally purchase an AK47 which is just nuts.
    Your information on Ak-47's is wrong.

    Foreign rifles like the AK-47 and Uzi were prohibited in 1989 under the firearm importation law,26 which is more restrictive than the Clinton ban.27 "Assault pistols" were prohibited from importation in 1993. Street Sweeper and Striker-12 revolving cylinder shotguns, and the USAS-12 semi-auto shotgun, were restricted under the National Firearms Act28 six months before the Clinton ban. When the Clinton ban expired, all of those guns will remain prohibited under those other laws.

    26. 18 USC 925(d)(3).
    27. BATF prohibited such rifles having one attachment. The Clinton ban allowed comparable rifles to have one attachment. (Note 3.) ("Report and Recommendation of the ATF Working Group on the Importability of Certain Semiautomatic Rifles.") In 1998, BATF prohibited importation of any such rifle capable of using a military magazine over 10 rounds capacity (www.atf.gov/pub/treas_pub/assault_rifles/index.htm).
    28. 26 USC 5801-5872.


    Claiming people "can`t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles, President Bill Clinton championed the federal "assault weapon" and large ammunition magazine ban, and signed it into law on Sept. 13, 1994.

    I personally am glad it is gone. It should never have been enacted. It was written by the anti gun lobby as a step to eliminate all guns.


    Rep

  19. #69
    threadkiller? eromitlab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    the state of confusion
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    226
    what more firearms than hunting rifles or pistols do people need?? I mean, c'mon... who in their right mind needs a high-powered or automatic assault rifle outside of law enforcement or the military? They are weapons designed and made for those two groups, not the redneck gun nut down the street or the gang banger in the 'hood.

    My feeling is and always will be that if it isn't designed and intended for target shooting, hunting or piece of mind that it's not neccesary or protected by that blanket clause of the First Amendment.

    Furthermore, if there's one thing as far as firearms go, there should be a stiffer training, screening and control system in place to further assure that guns are not getting into the hands of the wrong people... and since it's bound to happen anyway, stronger penalties for crimes involving the use of a firearm. Guns don't kill people, no, it's the nutjobs that use them that do kill people.

  20. #70
    That Boy Ain't Right Blake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Mobile, AL, USA
    Occupation
    Optical Laboratory Technician
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally Posted by Spexvet
    Ok, I choose the AK47, you get the frying pan, at twenty paces. You in?:bbg:
    I thought only Zell Miller was still challenging people to duels. But if we must, I'd rather have the AR-15 (see my previous post).

  21. #71

    eromitlab, please eloborate.

    They are weapons designed and made for those two groups, not the redneck gun nut down the street or the gang banger in the 'hood.
    Are you suggesting that passing more laws would take guns out of the hands of these people you have stereotypically described?

    My feeling is and always will be that if it isn't designed and intended for target shooting, hunting or piece of mind that it's not neccesary or protected by that blanket clause of the First Amendment.
    How does one determine the intention of a gun design? I can put riot shot in a hunting shot gun and cut you in half at close range, or make sure I hit a deer at a distance. Which activity was this gun desighned for?
    Furthermore, if there's one thing as far as firearms go, there should be a stiffer training, screening and control system in place to further assure that guns are not getting into the hands of the wrong people...
    Such as rednecks and gang bangers? Do gang bangers aquire guns by legal means? Just curious how you would end illegal gun dealing?

    Perhaps pass another law, to make illicit guns more illegal?

  22. #72
    My knowledge of weapons is pretty slim; I do know that you can now legally purchase an AK47 which is just nuts.
    Your knowledge of weapons is slimmer than you admit to.

  23. #73
    Just something more to add to the discussion. it is unconstitutional for the military to act as a police force within the US boarders. Even under martial law that falls to the national guard.

    I heard a reporter on the radio telling about asking a room full of 50 military personel, if ordered to fire on civilians would they? 1/3 said YES!

    I look at history, and argue that it is important to have private ownership of automatic weapons. The constitution was not writen solely to protect hunters. Our military would fire on us. No question.

  24. #74
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Blake
    I thought only Zell Miller was still challenging people to duels. But if we must, I'd rather have the AR-15 (see my previous post).
    Ok, I'll choose the deadly, dreaded spoon, the most lethal of all so-called "weapons".

  25. #75
    Master OptiBoarder chm2023's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Camp Hill/NYC
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,196
    Quote Originally Posted by rep
    HTML Code:
    My knowledge of weapons is pretty slim; I do know that you can now legally purchase an AK47 which is just nuts.
    Your information on Ak-47's is wrong.

    Foreign rifles like the AK-47 and Uzi were prohibited in 1989 under the firearm importation law,26 which is more restrictive than the Clinton ban.27 "Assault pistols" were prohibited from importation in 1993. Street Sweeper and Striker-12 revolving cylinder shotguns, and the USAS-12 semi-auto shotgun, were restricted under the National Firearms Act28 six months before the Clinton ban. When the Clinton ban expired, all of those guns will remain prohibited under those other laws.

    26. 18 USC 925(d)(3).
    27. BATF prohibited such rifles having one attachment. The Clinton ban allowed comparable rifles to have one attachment. (Note 3.) ("Report and Recommendation of the ATF Working Group on the Importability of Certain Semiautomatic Rifles.") In 1998, BATF prohibited importation of any such rifle capable of using a military magazine over 10 rounds capacity (www.atf.gov/pub/treas_pub/assault_rifles/index.htm).
    28. 26 USC 5801-5872.


    Claiming people "can`t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles, President Bill Clinton championed the federal "assault weapon" and large ammunition magazine ban, and signed it into law on Sept. 13, 1994.

    I personally am glad it is gone. It should never have been enacted. It was written by the anti gun lobby as a step to eliminate all guns.


    Rep
    There is a "civilian" version of the AK 47, manufactured domestically, that is now legal to sell. (Check the internet, the sellers call it an AK 47). Though your point is a good one, I'm sure the people killed by this weapon will find comfort in the fact that it's not the original military weapon.

    I don't know why you think this is a plot to eliminate all guns. I believe I am with the majority of citizens who want a reasonable amount of gun control, without eliminating guns entirely. This notion of no restrictions is absurd on its face: shall we begin to allow people to own tanks? Rocket launchers? How about an Apache?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Cole National Board Votes For Luxottica Merger .....................
    By Chris Ryser in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-07-2004, 06:43 PM
  2. Cole National Update On Moulin Proposal ...............
    By Chris Ryser in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05-14-2004, 07:09 PM
  3. Luxottica Deal On Hold....New Offer For Cole National
    By Chris Ryser in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-19-2004, 12:01 PM
  4. Cole National Stockholders Meeting ...............
    By Chris Ryser in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-03-2004, 05:16 AM
  5. OAA National Opticians Convention to be held at
    By Newsroom in forum Optical Industry News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-01-2003, 01:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •