In response to:

Obama's Little Red Phrase

dhellew3 Wrote: Jul 29, 2012 9:57 AM
Gun control, just like prohibition and government attempted drug control, it does not work, in fact it makes matters worse. A simple solution for drugs is to take the money out of it, no money, no dealers and pushers. You cannot stop drug use but you can curtail drug use by reducing exposure ie no dealers and pushers and the less government says no the less the appeal to young people in particular. I can speak for myself and nearly all my neighbors, family, friends, most veterans and probably most active military will stop Government in any attempt to confiscate guns. Laws destroying the second amendment will not be tolerated by the working Americans that pay government salary and Unfunded entitlements.
Mhc Wrote: Jul 29, 2012 10:08 AM
Which is why the right to bear arms is guaranteed. To keep keep the federal government from infringing on the rights of state's citizens. Gun regs are not even relegated to the Feds; and as such all this gun restriction blather is rather unconstitutional...
Robert548 Wrote: Jul 29, 2012 10:25 AM
I bvelieve that the writings stated that the purpose of the 2nd amendment was for "protection from a tyrannical government".
evie10 Wrote: Jul 29, 2012 11:32 AM

Steve of CA wrote: Personally I do not own a gun and would not feel safer if I had one, but I do not have a problem with law abiding people buying guns. That being the case, I have to ask of Mr. Ransom and others here, what controls, if any, do you favor over the purchase and use of weapons, including semi-automatic weapons such as the one used by the killer in Aurora? Or do you think we have too much gun control with the laws we have now? - The American Solution: Reach for the Guns

Dear Steve,...