HIt This Paper Up!

[afmo]

LOL Paper = Owned

[Ruben705]

Auto Kill: On. Not everything responds to your voice like Sync does.

That should be a new commercial.

[mulletmaster]

My reply, even got posted

I disagree


I think that a law abiding citizen who passes a background check, training and a state license should be able to carry a concealed pistol to protect ones self or their family from eminent danger. No law abiding citizen is going to brandish their concealed pistol in the park for obvious reasons, being against the law would be one, criminals are looking for easy targets and if they cannot find any they will move on. The last thing a criminal wants is to not be in control, and being shot by an armed citizen protecting their self or family is about the farthest thing from being in control as you an get. As for "assault rifles" as you call them I would not consider them "weapons of mass destruction" and are no more dangerous than the person behind them, without that person they are just pieces of steel, wood, aluminum and plastic.

[Fish609]

Mine didn't get posted, but that paper sure did get their asses handed to them. Next step: Boycott the paper.

[Krackels]

Looks like some of the comments were posted.

I take credit for two comments. You can pm me if you're really interested.


First couple comments.

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 09:09 AM EST
Are You Kidding Me?
Are you kidding me? I mean seriously you want to ban concealed handguns from the park,the very place where we bring our kids our young ones? That is B.S. It is Our responsibility for our children's and our own safety.A law that keeps concealed handguns out of parks is not going to work and here is why. CRIMINALS DO NOT CARE ABOUT ANY LAWS! If you ban concealed carry in parks that means the only people that will have guns in your park is the criminals and you've taken away the chance of a legal ccw holder being able to stop a bad guy. "Oh but the cops will protect us" now this is by no means any disrespect to cops but yeah right even if the cops get to the scene within minutes in those few mins a criminal could hurt or kill all sorts of people before police finally showed up,now enter a ccw holder into the mix. This individual has placed his or herself at the scrutiny of law enforcement by getting the ccw in the first place,back round checks,fingerprinting,safety course,and having to prove to a firearms instructor that they can safely handle,clean,and fire a handgun. also keep in mind cops only have to qualify with their pistols generally 1-2 times a year and most don't go to the range or target practice in between qualifying which means that they only fire their weapons twice a year. Your average ccw holder goes to the range at least 2-3 times a month! some I know go twice a week. that is way more than any average cop shoots his weapon. If you want to be an easy target for a criminal by all means go ahead and don't get a ccw or keep a firearm for self defense but do not take away my legal right to protect me and my family by conceal and carry just because you do not like guns. I passed the back round checks,I passed the safely course,I demonstrated that I could safely shoot a firearm and I shoot generally 15 times more than most cops do in a year ,learning to be more and more accurate.It's time to wake up and smell the roses It is nobody's responsability but your own to protect your self and your family,the cops cannot always get there in time to save you in fact a lot of times sadly they show up way too late. Don't take away the legall ccw holders right to carry he he/or she might just save your life one day

chuck

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 08:48 AM EST
The Right to Protect Myself
I disagree with your rationale. I am not a fanatic that believes that everyone needs to be walking around with fully automatic weapons and hand grenades, I do believe that I have a right to defend myself with a hand gun (should the absolute need arise). Public Parks, in many places, are places where crime manifests itself quite frecuently, robbery, rape, etc. I don't want to be victimized. If the city bans concealed carry in the park then they need to assure your safetly by providing police officers in abundance to make certain that you will not be a victim. Your statment that bad guys carry guns into parks and that there is a need to ban law abiding responsible citizens who make use of their constitutional and God given right is contradictory.
Professor


Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 07:02 AM EST
concealed handguns and semi-automatic weapons
It is a proven fact that states that have more concealed carry permits issued, have a lower crime rate than those who restrict concealed carry. Why don't you cite some of those statistics, or are you afraid that they will prove you wrong? Criminals love places that people can't carry guns, it's easy work for them.
More people were killed by drunk drivers last year, but you didn't ban the sale of cars and alcohol, did you?
Perhaps, when you lose your freedom of speech, after the take away the right to KEEP AND BEAR arms, you'll change your tone.
After all, it is the 2nd amendment that protects the 1st.
James Abel, Milton DE

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 06:45 AM EST
YOU speak for YOURSELF!
Quote: "Yes, bad guys can carry guns into parks, but that doesn't mean we'll all be safer if everyone carries a gun in a park."

You're right. We won't all be more safe, but I'll be able to protect myself whereas you will be the disarmed victim of some thug. We, the law abiding concealed carry citizens, are all around you and you don't even know it!
Chris, Atlanta, GA

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 06:41 AM EST
Correction
I miss-spoke in my intial opinion. I said the automatic rifles were found in Cleveland and I meant Lorain. Those of you who think that the days of rogue governments are passed should talk to some people in Iran, North Korea, Tibet, and many African countries where governments and government forces are still today oppressing and even murdering their own citizens. I certainly don't think that any thing like that is immiment in our great country, but I'm not naive enough to believe it impossible. It would be easy for an unarmed populace to become subjects rather than citizens. Maybe you aren't even aware of the ever increasing government control over all aspects of personal life even in these United States. We live in the greatest country in the world and I'd like to see it stay that way.
Doug, Lorain, Ohio

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 06:28 AM EST
Check your facts
The fully automatic rifle with the 90 round magazine found in Cleveland has been essentially illegal to own anywhere in the United States since before the repeal of Prohibition in the 1930's. You've just provided additional proof of your ignorance on guns, existing gun laws and the fact that guns laws don't work on criminals. How long before you understand that? By the way, Charleston Heston, the voice of and past president of the NRA just passed away and despite his advocacy of legal gun ownership and the fact that he lived a long 83 years, he amazingly never shot anyone.
Doug, Lorain, Ohio

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 05:31 AM EST
Emotional appeals...
Whoever modified the AR-15 to fire automatically has already committed a federal felony, so what is the point of even bringing it up except to cause an emotional response?

The assertion that the "more guns per square foot anywhere" etc is also an emotional appeal that has no basis in reality. At least you acknowledge that bad guys will ignore whatever laws are made, but how can you realize that that is exactly why we don't need more restrictions on law-abiding citizens? Keep tugging at your readers heart-strings though, because that is the only leg that these kind of arguments have to stand on.

Your view of a so-called "civilized society" is much different from much of the country, who realize that an armed society is a polite society.


Brian, Orlando, FL

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 05:22 AM EST
Break With Conservatives
Here is where my liberal "friends" will be astounded to learn that I do not support the conservative/NRA position on guns. I believe there should be reasonable controls on the possession of firearms despite the Constitution. Everyone dos not have the right to keep an Uzi under his bed or a tank parked in his driveway, in my humble opinion.
Thomas H. Higgason, North Ridgeville, OH

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 02:58 AM EST
silly article
Whoever wrote this article is living in a fantasy world. So it's ok for criminals to carry in parks, but as a legal concealed hand gun license holder, I can not. More guns equals a levela playing field. Why should I not be able to protect myself or my family in a public park? Do you really think criminals read ot care about thise little "no guns" signs? Get a clue.

Again. Do you think banning so called assault weapons actually keeps criminals from possesing them? Criminals don't obey laws. Because you enact a ban, do you think the gang bangers will suddenly rush to turn their guns at the local police department? Yes, I do own an AR15 for home preotection. Why? Because now home envaders are working in groups and wearing body armor.
Alan, cleveland, OH

These two are my favorites though.

Added: Monday April 07, 2008 at 06:41 PM EST
A civilized society needs guns every day...
In a civilized society people are entitled to at least two rights: a right to life and and a right to liberty, so when one tries to deprive another of one of those rights by confining one to only being able to defend oneself from a vicious animal or a ruthless criminal that person is not much better than either the latter or the former.

We need to start treating the 2nd Amendment like we treat the 1st Amendment. You might not agree with how others choose to express that right, but you'll never dare take it away from them.

As for me, I'll keep both my life and liberty and guard them for myself and others with my guns if necessary.
Allen, Telford, PA

Seems your logic is faulty
If "The more guns per square foot anywhere, the chances are someone innocent will be hurt or killed." is true then where are the thousands of thousands of people that are killed by the mere presence of firearms in police stations; gunshows; and military bases.

Thank you for confirming why I don't subscribe,

Todd
Todd, Wellington, OH

[jtkratzer]

If the current law forbids guns in public spaces such as government buildings, then that ban should equally apply to other public spaces such as parks. Yes, bad guys can carry guns into parks, but that doesn't mean we'll all be safer if everyone carries a gun in a park. The more guns per square foot anywhere, the chances are someone innocent will be hurt or killed.

Right, because guns just go off by themselves and law-abiding citizens with carry permits are out shooting the place up everywhere else concealed carry is allowed.

Also, it is hard to imagine anyone needing a 90-shot machine gun for self-protection -- or even its semi-automatic cousin which is nearly as deadly. On a neighborhood scale, that's a weapon of mass destruction, and common sense dictates that a city has a right to protect its citizens from such guns, even if state legislators lack the sense to do so.

It's hard to imagine anyone needing 200 channels of high definition and a 50" TV, with all the immoral garbage you see on TV, that's a weapon of mass destruction against humanity, civility, and morality.

Since the city can't protect me against criminals, why should they have the right to take my gun in order to "protect" someone else when that other person is the criminal?

A civilized society does not need or want handguns in its parks or assault rifles on its streets.

And a civilized society doesn't have the crime we do...







I'm so farking tired of people thinking it's a good idea to try to solve a problem by infringing on someone else's rights. It's never a good idea to give someone else a "right" by taking a right away from someone else. In an effort to provide safety, they want to take my right to protection away...the sad part is, stupid people who write this crap can't comprehend that it doesn't work to begin with.

[I_Route]

To add to the "The more guns per square foot anywhere, the chances are someone innocent will be hurt or killed" comment.

Then the SHOT Show must be a killing field....

[jtkratzer]

Originally Posted by I_Route

To add to the "The more guns per square foot anywhere, the chances are someone innocent will be hurt or killed" comment.

Then the SHOT Show must be a killing field....

Didn't you hear about all the casualties? There are countless deaths in police stations and gun manufacturer facilities nationwide everyday.