Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Tim Kaine on the right to bear arms


Destino

Recommended Posts

I didn't see this before the election (because I wasn't researching hand guns) but I found it and figured some of you may find it interesting. It seems some group called Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. puts out a survey for politicians to fill out. Tim Kaine did, Jerry Kilgore and Russ Potts, seemingly did not (and this group isn't happy about it).

Anyway here is the survey and Tim Kaine's answers.

I've never heard of this group myself so if they may turn out to be lunatics for all I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

his answers to questions 3, 6, 7, 10, 12, and 13 are really suprising to me. I dont blame him for dissenting to any question that involved a school any politician would run away from that one, except the one about instituting a fire arm education thing. Maybe theres more too that program, but they made it sound like all they teach is if you see a gun dont touch it get an adult.

Question 1 is the one I wish they pass. Just make the punishment for having just one drink real sever, I think letting the DD provide defense for the group is a good thing.

Over all if I read that survey right, I think we are going to be ok with kaine till the next election :silly: unless of course he just plain out lied you always have to suspect politicians.

As to the kilgore/dole ref I think thats dead on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

his answers to questions 3, 6, 7, 10, 12, and 13 are really suprising to me. I dont blame him for dissenting to any question that involved a school any politician would run away from that one, except the one about instituting a fire arm education thing. Maybe theres more too that program, but they made it sound like all they teach is if you see a gun dont touch it get an adult.

Question 1 is the one I wish they pass. Just make the punishment for having just one drink real sever, I think letting the DD provide defense for the group is a good thing.

Over all if I read that survey right, I think we are going to be ok with kaine till the next election :silly: unless of course he just plain out lied you always have to suspect politicians.

As to the kilgore/dole ref I think thats dead on.

you will love DC then one drink and you can be in jail

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I was saying was to let conceal carries into Va bars aslong as they dont have a single drink, not for the normal patrons.

oic :silly:

personally i don't think anyone should be concealing in public, i do not mind what they do at home, the range, or hunting, but not in public, there are to many that might see it and try and do something stupid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oic :silly:

personally i don't think anyone should be concealing in public, i do not mind what they do at home, the range, or hunting, but not in public, there are to many that might see it and try and do something stupid

If the gun is concealed how would anyone see it? The purpose of concealment is for others to not know you are carrying. Having carried in public I was very aware of the status of my concealment status at all times.

The majority of the people who feel a need to carry are not the ones you have to worry about in general... Usually the ones carrying concealed illegally are the ones you have to worry about.

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally i don't think anyone should be concealing in public, i do not mind what they do at home, the range, or hunting, but not in public, there are to many that might see it and try and do something stupid

I wish you would just shut up.

So you know, jb, the statistics and historical experiments provided by ACTUAL CCW states ( you may not know this but since 1980, MANY states have established 'shall-issue' laws) render your argument unfounded and ignorant.

The point of CONCEALING is so someone doesn't SEE it. And people should be free to defend themselves and carry. Open carry isn't a terrible thing, but concealed is far better because it creates doubt in the mind of those who might prey on others--who is carrying? Where on their person?

As usual. Your personal, EMOTIONALLY-based opinion is worth ZIP because the facts have vindicated the other side in that particular debate. Do yourself a favor and read a little Dave Kopel.

I wish not everyone had the right to vote or speak publicly. They may do or say something stupid. Obviously a right you have abused.

:doh:

I accuse you of projection--projecting the infantile and impulsive weakness of your character onto others. To be certain, there are many weak people in this nation, but they've been made weaker by men like you who embrace any law so long as it comports with your love of state control and your sentiments regarding your fellow citizen.

I leave you with Cesare Beccaria of Milan, a man who greatly influenced the Founders:

False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty — so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator — and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve to rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventative but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish you would just shut up.

So you know, jb, the statistics and historical experiments provided by ACTUAL CCW states ( you may not know this but since 1980, MANY states have established 'shall-issue' laws) render your argument unfounded and ignorant.

The point of CONCEALING is so someone doesn't SEE it. And people should be free to defend themselves and carry. Open carry isn't a terrible thing, but concealed is far better because it creates doubt in the mind of those who might prey on others--who is carrying? Where on their person?

As usual. Your personal, EMOTIONALLY-based opinion is worth ZIP because the facts have vindicated the other side in that particular debate. Do yourself a favor and read a little Dave Kopel.

I wish not everyone had the right to vote or speak publicly. They may do or say something stupid. Obviously a right you have abused.

:doh:

I accuse you of projection--projecting the infantile and impulsive weakness of your character onto others. To be certain, there are many weak people in this nation, but they've been made weaker by men like you who embrace any law so long as it comports with your love of state control and your sentiments regarding your fellow citizen.

I leave you with Cesare Beccaria of Milan, a man who greatly influenced the Founders:

False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty — so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator — and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve to rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventative but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree.

I know what the point of concealing is you fool, i worked at ffx sheriff office, i just do not agree with it thats all. Why do you need to conceal in public anyway this is not the wild wild west. I do not mind if others have guns just do not like it when they have them in public, concealed or not, what good is it if you have a gun in public.

Those that think you are going to get mugged or jumped all the time need to wake up.

Oh Ghost go blue :silly: :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing is I love how people talk about the admendments and laws that were created in the past. The right to bear arms was important back then because of the environment around us, today it is not the same. Remember back then we had slaves, now we don't. Things change, and our mentality should change as well. There is nothing good about guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing is I love how people talk about the admendments and laws that were created in the past. The right to bear arms was important back then because of the environment around us, today it is not the same. Remember back then we had slaves, now we don't. Things change, and our mentality should change as well. There is nothing good about guns.

Which is why we should get rid of the freedom of speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why we should get rid of the freedom of speech.

No that is still important today. I didn't say all the laws are not applicable in todays world, just some may not be needed.

Remember it is the gun laws that gave the criminals in gangs to arm themselves as well, so yes it is great to have guns, but now others have them as well.

A lot of the crooks we arrested told us they got their guns from people that didn't know how to handle or use them correctly. The main problem with guns is everyone is not trained the same to use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing is I love how people talk about the admendments and laws that were created in the past. The right to bear arms was important back then because of the environment around us, today it is not the same. Remember back then we had slaves, now we don't. Things change, and our mentality should change as well. There is nothing good about guns.

We were also in fear of England trying to come back and take over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing is I love how people talk about the admendments and laws that were created in the past. The right to bear arms was important back then because of the environment around us, today it is not the same. Remember back then we had slaves, now we don't. Things change, and our mentality should change as well. There is nothing good about guns.

Slaves had nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment... England attacking us had little to do with the 2nd Amendment... The 2nd Amendment was put in place to help keep the Feds in check and to help with defense of this country.

I don't remember in my school history books reading about how often people had to defend themselves from home invasions, car jackings (horse and buggy jackings), rape, murder, break-ins... Heck when I was a kid we could leave our doors unlocked with little to worry about. I live in a very low crime area out in the sticks and by the time the cops get here I would be dead more than likely if I didn't have access to firearms.

jbooma you can live in your urban utopia if you like and let keep the guns out of your own hands. Talking about taking guns out of the hands of those of us who choose to keep them to defend our families and property is short sighted. If you don't like guns fine... Don't own one.

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Less than .5 of a percent of CCW holdrs have been involved in a gun crime.

The facts speak for themselves Jbooma.

Your question as to what good are guns in the public arena is ignorant at best. Imagine a place where criminals are actually afraid to commit a crime based on an armed populous?

Give us one cogent argument against CCW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slaves had nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment... England attacking us had little to do with the 2nd Amendment... The 2nd Amendment was put in place to help keep the Feds in check and to help with defense of this country.

I don't remember in my school history books reading about how often people had to defend themselves from home invasions, car jackings (horse and buggy jackings), rape, murder, break-ins... Heck when I was a kid we could leave our doors unlocked with little to worry about. I live in a very low crime area out in the sticks and by the time the cops get here I would be dead more than likely if I didn't have access to firearms.

jbooma you can live in your urban utopia if you like and let keep the guns out of your own hands. Talking about taking guns out of the hands of those of us who choose to keep them to defend our families and property is short sighted. If you don't like guns fine... Don't own one.

Peace

I guess you do not understand history then. Look back in the 1800's and 1900's and you might learn something. The fact you think I said the 2nd amendment has anything to do with slavery makes me wonder how you even have a gun :doh: I was comparing a law to another that in time we could change because of the environment, not that they are related :doh:

I understand the use of guns to protect, which that is fine, i just do not like carrying them or concealing them in public, you are not protecting anything then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess you do not understand history then. Look back in the 1800's and 1900's and you might learn something. The fact you think I said the 2nd amendment has anything to do with slavery makes me wonder how you even have a gun :doh: I was comparing a law to another that in time we could change because of the environment, not that they are related :doh:

I understand the use of guns to protect, which that is fine, i just do not like carrying them or concealing them in public, you are not protecting anything then.

I concede I misread your purpose for the slavery reference, however we had guns back then and still have a need for them now, for similar purposes, so I think it was a bad comparison.

Concealing in public can still allow you to protect your life, liberty, property and family. Someone approaches you with a knife and threatens your wife if you don't give him your money... you have a gun and he has a knife which one is most likely going to win? I mentioned car jacking (property and potential loss of life), Again you appear to be a little short sighted on your reasoning on this subject.

As I mentioned in an earlier post if I carry concealed you would never know it unless I tell you I have it on me. That is the proper way of carrying concealed.

What scares you about law abiding people carrying concealed? Why do they not deserve to protect themselves away from their homes?

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concede I misread your purpose for the slavery reference, however we had guns back then and still have a need for them now, for similar purposes, so I think it was a bad comparison.

Concealing in public can still allow you to protect your life, liberty, property and family. Someone approaches you with a knife and threatens your wife if you don't give him your money... you have a gun and he has a knife which one is most likely going to win? I mentioned car jacking (property and potential loss of life), Again you appear to be a little short sighted on your reasoning on this subject.

As I mentioned in an earlier post if I carry concealed you would never know it unless I tell you I have it on me. That is the proper way of carrying concealed.

What scares you about law abiding people carrying concealed? Why do they not deserve to protect themselves away from their homes?

Peace

Is that others can take advantage of them, since a lot can tell when they are concealing and do not do it properly. The gangs in NOVA have been trained on how to spot them and how to take from them.

My whole issue with guns is yes there are many that know how to handle them, have been trained and can conceal, but there are many others that do not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jbooma,

Isnt there hard facts about Washington D.C. vs. Virginia in crimes and how inmates profiled said they preferred D.C. as it was fish in a barrel?

We understand your personal belief.. I have one on immigration that is not being enforced either.. now we both feel better :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jbooma,

Isnt there hard facts about Washington D.C. vs. Virginia in crimes and how inmates profiled said they preferred D.C. as it was fish in a barrel?

We understand your personal belief.. I have one on immigration that is not being enforced either.. now we both feel better :).

I am curious with all the gun owners here have you ever needed it for protection?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...