Do you think law makers should be able to protect themselves while they take your guns away and leave you nothing to protect your family?

A1C Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:11:49 -0400

Gabby Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, on the gun range. Kind of weird since both of them are anti-gun.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 8:13 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:13:47 -0400

So long as they follow the law, I see no issue here.
Rep Giffords is a poster for why we have a 2d Amendment, and why well-thought out regulations on the purchase and use of weapons are wise.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Mar 31 at 2016 8:24 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:24:42 -0400

I don't believe anyone is trying to take weapons away, but they are damn sure making it harder to get what you want when you want it. So they'll never get 2A off the books. In the meantime between time, they're protected by the same amendment they have issue with. Didn't her husband catch some flack over an AR-15 awhile back? In the pic, they're not so much anti-gun but anti lack of background checks. But I'm sure someone will have an issue with Snopes.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/markkelly.asp

Bullet Point

Mark Kelly purchased an AR-15 rifle the day after testifying to Colorado legislators about the need for additional gun control measures?

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Mar 31 at 2016 8:27 PM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:27:04 -0400

I'm going to vote you up and give you extra 2 points .

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 8:29 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:29:24 -0400

Which politicians have submitted legislation to take away your guns and leave you with nothing to protect your family? Which Americans have had guns taken away in the last 7 years? Which laws are you talking about? Please be specific. And please don't say that you were referring to background checks as taking your guns away. It isn't.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Mar 31 at 2016 8:32 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:32:21 -0400

We are a nation of laws. All should follow them equally and should not advocate for laws to which they would not submit.

Response by TSgt David L. made Mar 31 at 2016 8:37 PM

TSgt David L. — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:37:44 -0400

The double standard is why I get mad about this issue. First off, no other amendment takes the beating that the 2nd does. If the 1st amendment was under this kind of scrutiny everyone would be up in arms. Pun intended! LOL
Secondly, having their family protected with firearms while attempting to pass legislation to ban or curtail ownership of privately held weapons stinks of hypocrisy. If the implication is that their families are more important than yours, most of America should be protesting on the capital steps 24/7.

No matter why they are doing it, we all should be concerned as if it were ANY amendment being attacked.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 31 at 2016 8:45 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:45:32 -0400

Positions of Authority (Power) should not come with additional Privilege. When they do, our system is truly corrupt.

I do not believe the Giffords are looking for additional privilege, however, "Thinking they know what is best for others" and "Imposing their will on others," are steps they are willing to take... That is not corruption, but it is counter to the tenants of Freedom.

My problem is two-fold.

First is their willing to impose their will on others. I realize we are a Nation of Laws, and the Majority does that. That alone pisses me off to no end, but being a disgruntled member of polite society comes with having my personal freedoms being infringed on all the time. Doesn't mean I won't complain about it at every opportunity.

Second is the fact that what they are suggesting will do ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD. I'm opposed to it for pragmatic reasons. Their suggestion won't work. If they could come up with a suggestion that had a remote chance of working (and wasn't a complete violation of Civil Rights) I'd likely be on board. But as I mentioned in response to another... there has not been a "well-thought out regulation on the purchase or use of weapons" in the last 50 years.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Mar 31 at 2016 8:50 PM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:50:47 -0400

"A1C Robert Adams

"Gabby Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, on the gun range. Kind of weird since both of them are anti-gun."

They are "anti-gun" yet they both are gun owners. So either they aren't "anti-gun" and you are essentially parrotting NRA talking points or they called for some control which makes them "anti-gun" in a simplistic world view.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Mar 31 at 2016 9:10 PM

LCpl Mark Lefler — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:10:39 -0400

ooh major problem, no one is taking your guns away.

Response by PO2 Skip Kirkwood made Mar 31 at 2016 9:14 PM

PO2 Skip Kirkwood — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:14:31 -0400

Nope. We are supposed to be a society of equality. That means an equal right to self-protection. The rich or self-appointed "important" should not have access to any more protection than the rest of us do.

Response by SFC Everett Oliver made Mar 31 at 2016 9:29 PM

SFC Everett Oliver — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:29:22 -0400

I get a kick out of the uninformed, uneducated lawmakers who think they know what an assault rifle is....

Response by SFC Wade W. made Mar 31 at 2016 9:35 PM

SFC Wade W. — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:35:29 -0400

Of course not. In the USA we are all equal. No one person is greater than another because of wealth, position or education. That is a principle were founded and still operate under. We, the people, must constantly remind each other and our representatives of this. They are not our leaders or our masters, they, Congress people, presidents, governors, mayor's and law enforcement people, are our equals. Period!

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Mar 31 at 2016 9:39 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:39:02 -0400

Two points...

1. Everyone should be equal under the law. Everyone. That includes public officials. Celebrities. Hoi polloi. Mucka Mucks. Every race. Every gender. Every ethnicity. Every nationality. Everyone.

2. There are people who want to "take away our guns". Important people. Some in high office. Some with microphones and large audiences. They have put themselves on the record. Anyone who says "no one is trying to take guns away" is a liar, a fool, or both. And there is reason to believe that many who say "we only want reasonable restrictions" or "common sense gun control" ultimately want to take our guns away. You can be the farm on it.

Response by SSG Robert Webster made Mar 31 at 2016 10:27 PM

SSG Robert Webster — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:27:54 -0400

I have several problems with lawmakers and other public officials and figures, that are anti-gun, but allow themselves or their protective services carry and use arms of any kind.
1. The have broken their oath of office and should be removed from that office. As stated in the Constitution - The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3
2. I also have a problem with their stated rhetoric and their claims. Isn't the illustration of Gabby Giffords as used here in violation of the law as they want to implement it and in some cases is actually against the law? Does she not have a TBI, that impairs her cognitive and reasoning abilities?
3. There failure to enforce the laws currently in effect, is another reason that they should be removed from office during their next election cycle.

If they want to change the law of the land to reflect their ideology, then they need to do it properly through an amendment to the Constitution (which will not happen in the near future, I hope).

Response by PO1 Kerry French made Mar 31 at 2016 10:40 PM

PO1 Kerry French — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:40:52 -0400

Hell no and this idiot came to MY state and stuck her nose where it doesn't belong. I think any legislator who tries to take our guns should be recalled at a minimum... You don't want to know what I really would want to do with them but just think back to 1776...

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Mar 31 at 2016 10:59 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:59:01 -0400

Simply stated... NO!

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Mar 31 at 2016 11:04 PM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 23:04:43 -0400

What really irritates me is before the know anything. They blame a Rebublican and the tea party.

Response by SGT Aaron Atwood made Apr 28 at 2016 5:12 PM

SGT Aaron Atwood — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 17:12:06 -0400

No. Period. Then again there are many issues with Congress besides that; all of which point toward the fact that Congressmen and women are effectively part of a protected class within our social structure. I don't know many other positions where I could get drunk, get behind the wheel, crash somewhere, and get taken by a cop back to my home and not see one ticket out of the whole thing.