<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Time to Get on Board with Gun Rationing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/</link>
	<description>The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State ...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:18:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Sebastian</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36173</link>
		<dc:creator>Sebastian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:09:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36173</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;But the NRA is throwing the gun-grabbers a bone by saying “no more laws; enforce the ones we have better&lt;/i&gt;

I think it&#039;s not so much a bone, because they aren&#039;t really interested in gun laws to enforce them against criminals.  They are interested in getting more laws that they can enforce against &lt;i&gt;us&lt;/i&gt;, on a large scale.  Most of the federal gun laws, and state gun laws, are actually, at least in theory, centered around keeping criminals from getting guns.  The last thing the gun control folks want is for those laws to reduce crime.  That might undermine their ultimate goal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>But the NRA is throwing the gun-grabbers a bone by saying “no more laws; enforce the ones we have better</i></p>
<p>I think it&#8217;s not so much a bone, because they aren&#8217;t really interested in gun laws to enforce them against criminals.  They are interested in getting more laws that they can enforce against <i>us</i>, on a large scale.  Most of the federal gun laws, and state gun laws, are actually, at least in theory, centered around keeping criminals from getting guns.  The last thing the gun control folks want is for those laws to reduce crime.  That might undermine their ultimate goal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sebastian</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36172</link>
		<dc:creator>Sebastian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36172</guid>
		<description>Hank and Tom:

I don&#039;t really disagree with you.  I would not object to repeal of the laws prohibiting felons from possessing guns because I don&#039;t believe they accomplish anything.  But I doubt even 20% of Americans agree with that.  I&#039;m open to changing their minds, but I&#039;ll burn that bridge when I come to it.

&lt;i&gt;Would it be right to deprive felons of their other constitutional rights? Limits on what they can say or write? No due process or trial by jury? Should we be allowed to quarter troops in their homes? No protection from unreasonable search and seizure, double jeopardy or self-incrimination?&lt;/i&gt;

The courts are mixed on it.  But under conditions of parole, we allow a lot of these restrictions on liberties, actually.  Would it be right to allow a sort of life time parole for certain offenders?  Ideally, we would keep them in prison, but given the cost of that, I don&#039;t think society is willing to pay for it.  You&#039;re going to have some form of violent people walking the streets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hank and Tom:</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t really disagree with you.  I would not object to repeal of the laws prohibiting felons from possessing guns because I don&#8217;t believe they accomplish anything.  But I doubt even 20% of Americans agree with that.  I&#8217;m open to changing their minds, but I&#8217;ll burn that bridge when I come to it.</p>
<p><i>Would it be right to deprive felons of their other constitutional rights? Limits on what they can say or write? No due process or trial by jury? Should we be allowed to quarter troops in their homes? No protection from unreasonable search and seizure, double jeopardy or self-incrimination?</i></p>
<p>The courts are mixed on it.  But under conditions of parole, we allow a lot of these restrictions on liberties, actually.  Would it be right to allow a sort of life time parole for certain offenders?  Ideally, we would keep them in prison, but given the cost of that, I don&#8217;t think society is willing to pay for it.  You&#8217;re going to have some form of violent people walking the streets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hank Archer</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36163</link>
		<dc:creator>Hank Archer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:41:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36163</guid>
		<description>Would it be right to deprive felons of their other constitutional rights?  Limits on what they can say or write?  No due process or trial by jury?  Should we be allowed to quarter troops in their homes? No protection from unreasonable search and seizure, double jeopardy or self-incrimination?

The 2nd amendment is just as important as any of the others and all rights should be restored when confinement ends.

When determing sentence length and/or parole one of the most important factors to consider should be -- &quot;When will this person be rehabiliated enough to have their rights, including RKBA, restored to them.&quot;

Think about that you&#039;ll soon realize that crime would be greatly reduced.  Liberals would be on the side of longer sentences if they had to face the fact that RKBA would be restored after confinement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Would it be right to deprive felons of their other constitutional rights?  Limits on what they can say or write?  No due process or trial by jury?  Should we be allowed to quarter troops in their homes? No protection from unreasonable search and seizure, double jeopardy or self-incrimination?</p>
<p>The 2nd amendment is just as important as any of the others and all rights should be restored when confinement ends.</p>
<p>When determing sentence length and/or parole one of the most important factors to consider should be &#8212; &#8220;When will this person be rehabiliated enough to have their rights, including RKBA, restored to them.&#8221;</p>
<p>Think about that you&#8217;ll soon realize that crime would be greatly reduced.  Liberals would be on the side of longer sentences if they had to face the fact that RKBA would be restored after confinement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Crotalus</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36161</link>
		<dc:creator>Crotalus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:04:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36161</guid>
		<description>I think we&#039;re a lot closer to agreement than we thought, Sebastian. I can live with violent felons being denied, which necessitates background checks. I&#039;m just saying that almost all the other gun control laws afflict the law-abiding without doing any good. Those laws should not be enforced, but repealed. But the NRA is throwing the gun-grabbers a bone by saying &quot;no more laws; enforcethe oneswe have better.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think we&#8217;re a lot closer to agreement than we thought, Sebastian. I can live with violent felons being denied, which necessitates background checks. I&#8217;m just saying that almost all the other gun control laws afflict the law-abiding without doing any good. Those laws should not be enforced, but repealed. But the NRA is throwing the gun-grabbers a bone by saying &#8220;no more laws; enforcethe oneswe have better.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36157</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36157</guid>
		<description>If they&#039;re VIOLENT felons why are they out on the streets?  Also, using that logic leads down that path we&#039;re supposed to be fighting against.

If they&#039;re violent felons do you think a law is going to stop them from getting a gun or any other dangerous weapon?

&quot;I suspect the prohibitions on felons having guns is probably here to stay. I doubt they actually work all that well, but they are among the laws the Supreme Court said were “presumptively constitutional”&quot;


OK then, we need to infiltrate newspapers and start calling the sentence what they are.  Life.  You have lost all chance at basic human rights forever.  If they can&#039;t be trusted to defend their own life strip them of the right to elect scum who seek to restrict my rights, taxes, and everything else that can be done by vote.  Wire their jaws shut so they cannot speak, quarter troops in their homes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If they&#8217;re VIOLENT felons why are they out on the streets?  Also, using that logic leads down that path we&#8217;re supposed to be fighting against.</p>
<p>If they&#8217;re violent felons do you think a law is going to stop them from getting a gun or any other dangerous weapon?</p>
<p>&#8220;I suspect the prohibitions on felons having guns is probably here to stay. I doubt they actually work all that well, but they are among the laws the Supreme Court said were “presumptively constitutional”&#8221;</p>
<p>OK then, we need to infiltrate newspapers and start calling the sentence what they are.  Life.  You have lost all chance at basic human rights forever.  If they can&#8217;t be trusted to defend their own life strip them of the right to elect scum who seek to restrict my rights, taxes, and everything else that can be done by vote.  Wire their jaws shut so they cannot speak, quarter troops in their homes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1m 34s worth of Activism &#171; Cemetery&#8217;s Gun Blob</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36146</link>
		<dc:creator>1m 34s worth of Activism &#171; Cemetery&#8217;s Gun Blob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36146</guid>
		<description>[...] 1m 34s worth of&#160;Activism  Sebastian mentions: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 1m 34s worth of&nbsp;Activism  Sebastian mentions: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sebastian</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36141</link>
		<dc:creator>Sebastian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:48:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36141</guid>
		<description>Robert:

Most of them have that effect, and I have no doubt that a lot of gun control folks do wish to end that culture.  But we will probably have to live with some gun control, even if we are outstandingly successful at getting a lot of the current laws removed or changed.  I suspect the prohibitions on felons having guns is probably here to stay.  I doubt they actually work all that well, but they are among the laws the Supreme Court said were &quot;presumptively constitutional&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robert:</p>
<p>Most of them have that effect, and I have no doubt that a lot of gun control folks do wish to end that culture.  But we will probably have to live with some gun control, even if we are outstandingly successful at getting a lot of the current laws removed or changed.  I suspect the prohibitions on felons having guns is probably here to stay.  I doubt they actually work all that well, but they are among the laws the Supreme Court said were &#8220;presumptively constitutional&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Navy Vet from Jersey</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36140</link>
		<dc:creator>Navy Vet from Jersey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:43:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36140</guid>
		<description>Wow, if we were to believe these gun grabber types, all that would have been needed to repel the Japanese aerial attack at Pearl Harbor in 1941 would have been a whole bunch of .50 caliber &quot;sniper&quot; rifles, since they&#039;re &quot;capable of targeting a plane&quot; so well, that is.

These politicians in New Jersey are nothing but a bunch of disingenuous dopes. I&#039;d love to round them all up and strap them down in order to force them to watch an hour or two of film footage from WWII, to show just how many hundreds of rounds of .50 caliber ammunition, being fired from mounted and belt-fed M2 Browning machine guns mind you, that it took to shoot down fighter planes back then. This was also back when most aircraft were propeller-driven and had a lower airspeed, too, unlike the jet aircraft of today. 

Then I&#039;d tell them to go out and find any evidence of any aircraft being shot down by &quot;.50-caliber sniper rifles&quot; anywhere in the world. They would have to fabricate said evidence of course, because such a thing has never actually happened.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, if we were to believe these gun grabber types, all that would have been needed to repel the Japanese aerial attack at Pearl Harbor in 1941 would have been a whole bunch of .50 caliber &#8220;sniper&#8221; rifles, since they&#8217;re &#8220;capable of targeting a plane&#8221; so well, that is.</p>
<p>These politicians in New Jersey are nothing but a bunch of disingenuous dopes. I&#8217;d love to round them all up and strap them down in order to force them to watch an hour or two of film footage from WWII, to show just how many hundreds of rounds of .50 caliber ammunition, being fired from mounted and belt-fed M2 Browning machine guns mind you, that it took to shoot down fighter planes back then. This was also back when most aircraft were propeller-driven and had a lower airspeed, too, unlike the jet aircraft of today. </p>
<p>Then I&#8217;d tell them to go out and find any evidence of any aircraft being shot down by &#8220;.50-caliber sniper rifles&#8221; anywhere in the world. They would have to fabricate said evidence of course, because such a thing has never actually happened.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wolfwood</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36139</link>
		<dc:creator>Wolfwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:37:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36139</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s give them a little credit: at least they&#039;re not claiming folks are running around Philadelphia with Barretts and AR-50s, terrorizing the rich folk.  On the other hand, minus an awful lot of points for implying that folks are trying to shoot down airplanes with rifles.  

Besides, since when is New Jersey anyone&#039;s role model?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s give them a little credit: at least they&#8217;re not claiming folks are running around Philadelphia with Barretts and AR-50s, terrorizing the rich folk.  On the other hand, minus an awful lot of points for implying that folks are trying to shoot down airplanes with rifles.  </p>
<p>Besides, since when is New Jersey anyone&#8217;s role model?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BadIdeaGuy</title>
		<link>http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/01/06/time-to-get-on-board-with-gun-rationing/#comment-36137</link>
		<dc:creator>BadIdeaGuy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:29:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=7536#comment-36137</guid>
		<description>&quot;The Inky should send one of their reporters to a range to shoot, and it could be shown that even some .22 caliber rounds easily penetrate aircraft aluminum.&quot;

I&#039;m calling &quot;Bad Idea&quot; on you here, Sebastian. Next thing they&#039;ll be seeking to ban my 10/22 &quot;rapid-fire-anti-aircraft artillery&quot;! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Inky should send one of their reporters to a range to shoot, and it could be shown that even some .22 caliber rounds easily penetrate aircraft aluminum.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m calling &#8220;Bad Idea&#8221; on you here, Sebastian. Next thing they&#8217;ll be seeking to ban my 10/22 &#8220;rapid-fire-anti-aircraft artillery&#8221;! :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

