Originally Posted by Crompsin

THIS JUST IN: There are more important things in life than firearms... like having a President under 80 years of age with an IQ above 80.

The bullshit political system in the country gave us two viable options on election day.

If I just voted on the issue of who was pro-gun... it would go against my other beliefs and common sense. I can't do that. I've seen 8 years of bullshit. I can't do it anymore.

There are a lot more important issues in the country than who can own an AR-15 clone.

...

I'd trade some of my guns for a country that made my military service mean something.

...

Hey, you wouldn't understand this, would you? Nah, guns solve all your life problems, apparently.

Originally Posted by Derwood

I love me some single-issue voters. Nothing boosts Republican voting numbers like gun owners and pro-lifers. Seriously, where would the GOP be without them?

I've been in a lot of gun control debates recently and I've yet to hear a reasonable explanation of where the line is drawn in terms of legally arming oneself. The 2nd Amendment does not mention the word "gun" anywhere in it's text; it says the right to "arm" oneself. So does the 2nd Amendment protect my right to own a flamethrower? C-4? Weapons grade uranium? Gatling guns? Surface-to-Air missiles? "No, of course not, that's unreasonable" is usually the response, yet any suggestion to limit the types of guns that can be owned suddenly becomes this anti-American cluster hump.

I think gun owners should be treated the same as car owners. Your guns (cars) need to be registered in your state, you should be legally required to have gun (car) related insurance, and you should need to pass a practical test to receive a state issued gun (driver's) license.