I dont get it either.......why gun owners dont see the light that is...

[mike bell]

Below is a quote from another thread I started. This is not directed at the person, but is just an observation of gun owners in general who I believe are the reson we have the gun laws we have today.

i just don't get it, why does someone have a need to have a fully automatic weapon? are people paranoid enough that they don't feel safe in their homes with or without semi-automatic weapons? and i would put money on it that america will never see the day when people "come after your guns". sounds like typical paranoia to me.

I just dont get it, what will it take for people to see whats going on. They repetedly deny the fact that confiscation is happening right now today in America! Restrictions are made almost with out notice by American gun owners.

We are on a very slippery slope here and its not going to get any better.

Here is something you should see regaurdless of how you feel about "assault" style guns.


Opponents of gun restrictions often argue that even seemingly modest restrictions are the first step towards total bans on all guns or all handguns.


Some proponents of gun restrictions mock this: No-one is talking about gun bans, they say -- the slippery slope concern is groundless. In the words of Martin Dyckman, associate editor of the St. Petersburg Times (Dec. 12, 1993, at 3D), "no one is seriously proposing to ban or confiscate all guns. You hear that only from the gun lobby itself, which whistles up this bogeyman whenever some reasonable regulation is proposed."


Who is right here? Is it true that no-one is seriously proposing broad gun bans? Is it true that the slippery slope concern is just a bogeyman? Here are a few relevant quotes on this point. (All of them have been verified by me, Eugene Volokh, Professor of Law, UCLA Law School, with help from our excellent law library.)


1. Quotes from gun control proponents praising the slippery slope, and urging mild restrictions as steps
toward a total ban.

2. Citations to laws that in fact ban all guns or all handguns.

3. Quotes from politicians urging gun bans.

4. Quotes from leading media figures and institutions urging gun bans.

5. Quotes from advocacy groups urging gun bans.



These are of course only a subset of all the material that's available.


This one is one for you gun owners who think the NRA is just tring to scare us into giving them more money...............

[Stockton, California] Mayor [Barbara] Fass: I think you have to do it a step at a time and I think that is what the NRA is most concerned about, is that it will happen one very small step at a time, so that by the time people have "woken up" -- quote -- to what's happened, it's gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be. But it does have to go one step at a time and the beginning of the banning of semi-assault military weapons, that are military weapons, not "household" weapons, is the first step."


ABC News Special, Peter Jennings Reporting: Guns, April 11, 1991, available on LEXIS, NEWS database, SCRIPT file (boldface added).

[JagMagMan]

Mike, it is a very slippery slope!
We need look no further than our northern neighbor, Canada!
While they have not completely banned guns, many have been banned, and many legal guns CANNOT be kept at home (you must pay to have them "safely "stored for you at a "qualified" gun range) and you must account for every round of ammo you buy!
All this, plus expensive licencing too!
They actually don't have to ban anything, they can just make it too expensive for the average person to own!

[pointerDixie214]

mike bell... in the last day a lot has changed in my beliefs for the AWB and gun control in general. no one has ever explained to me what this was all about, and i have also never been told that this was going on. i was also not aware of our neighbors in canada and their laws. let me give you my background though as it might help you to understand where i am coming from... i grew up in a family where my father was completely opposed to guns ( he thinks americans should have the right to bear arms, but not concealed weapons or autos or assault weapns). i wasn't even allowed to own a pellet gun until i moved out! since then, i have accumulated some guns and introduced my dad to skeet shooting. although he doesn't like to participate, at least his eyes were opened to the point he actually helped pay for my first shotgun! we also compete together at target shooting with a pellet gun, and although he will never hunt, his eyes and mind have been opened all in the last couple years. so, for the first 19 years of my life i was told that guns were bad. now i am a college student with a very challenging major, so i really don't have much time to do research outside of my own for my degree such as for the AWB. I also, being a student, cannot afford NRA dues yet, so i do not get to keep up on things from them. this is why i may seem uneducated about gun control. if you will review my posts, even though i eluded to it, i never actually said i was for the AWB. I have never made up my mind yet completely, and also if you read my posts i was merely asking for information to help my with my decision. thank you for helping and i just wanted you to know that i was simply not aware of the fact that canada was in its situation, and the fact that some more common firearms were on that list! this has just been the first time when anyone has ever explained the logic behind their reasoning. usually when i say i am not sure if i am for or against the AWB, i just catch crud about how everyone wants their guns, and people get deffensive, so again i want to thank everyone, especially mike bell for helping me do my research. sorry this was so long, but i just finished a stupid lab report and now i feel like rambling!

[trapper T]

The AWB is just that a small step, they are attempting to continue a faulted law that bascially bans weapons soley on their apperance ie: bayonet holder or a folding stock that functions. The only reason they went this way in the first place was using fear to get their way,most of those guns look ominus but weren't altogether banned for what they can do. A lot use the "I don't need an full automatic for hunting" excuse. My thoughts, I heard a few years back somewhere and it made some sense: The main reason that our Forefathers put in the second ammendment was to protect us from our own Government(we all know that) so in that case if our government has the capabilties to have fully automatic weapons, then so should we? Right? SO to ban any weapon from us less nukes or other super weapons are reasonable, but not a hand held firearm. And if you research almost any of the anti gun zealots they almost all say it's the first of many steps and that they beleive that only military and other government agencies should posess guns,NOT individuals[:@]

[Coastie]

Mike, Perhaps our own Zel Miller expressed it best about gun ownership, he said. "I own more guns than I need but not all that I want"
Those that see no "Need" for anybody to own a fully automatic weapon or an assault type weapon (a manufactured term) just don't understand much at all. Logic has no effect upon them, they will not be persuaded by any amount of proof that gun laws don't reduce crime.
I could not ever afford to buy, much less use, a fully automatic weapon but I have no problem with someone that can afford it owning one (or ten) if they wish. I see no need for any individual to own a multi-million dollar home either, but if they can afford it and that is what they want, more power to them. The same goes for a Rolls Royce or a personal jet aircraft. The thing is, we are, or should be, free to indulge in these things as long as we pay the freight with funds honestly earned in whatever manner. Those that wish to restrict the ownership of firearms, in my mind, come in two distinct forms. Those that have some political agenda aimed over a number of years to make us subjects rather than citizens, and the mislead myrmidons following blindly in the wake of those same politicians.
There are many here in the U.S. like pointerDixie, that have never bothered to find out for themselves what the truth is. pointerDixie, at least, seems to have found the truth and has started to make up for lost time. Most won't.

[kevin1]

I prefer to err to the side of the conservative when it comes to Constitutional rights .

Those who would seek to abridge any of your rights in any way never have your best interest at heart , and usually have an agenda of their own . I've never trusted anyone who wanted to take anything away from me and I never will .

[PABuck_HNTR]

cannot afford NRA dues yet, so i do not get to keep up on things from them.

It won't cost you anything to keep up with info on gun control issues. NRA has a free website to go to and they have a Daily NEws Program at

www.NRANews.com from 2-5 pm, if you can't watch it then they have a playback feature. You can also sign up for email alerts FREE

www.NRAhq.org

[soarkrebel]

Ignorance is a terrible disease!

[Aught Six]

I intend to keep all of my guns, and I intend to use them if I'm ordered by an unconstitutional authority to hand them over. Inalienable rights, and their protection under our Bill of Rights, are nothing to take casually, ever. There is no room for compromise.

Like the bumper sticker says, "Ignore your rights and they'll disappear".

[n4deer]

I dont have much time to type what is going thru my mind but quickly

Do you want to "get it", or

Do you want "everyone to agree with you", or

Do you EXPECT everyone to agree with you, and if they dont, they must obviously be dumber than you?


I tend to think of the whole of society as filling a bell curve, there are two extremes, 2 groups close to each extreme, and a large middle. If one extreme wants to group all who dont fit into thier little sliver into the "other" group, they will always be in short company. Its much easier to get something changed if the large middle is not against you.