Attention Detroit Area Left Wingers

[johnday]

Just got this news this morning. Not ALL Democrats belong to the Ultra left it seems.

MICHIGAN

Governor Jennifer Granholm (D) signed two pro-gun bills, both sponsored

by Representative Rick Jones (R-71). H.B. 4643 addresses a problem with

concealed pistol licenses (CPL) being renewed in a timely fashion.

Apparently, the Detroit area was taking 9 to 10 months to renew

concealed pistol licenses! HB 4643 corrects the renewal process by

requiring a proper renewal to be completed within 60 days or the license

is extended for 180 days or until the permit is renewed. H.B. 4642

allows a licensed spouse to carry or transport another licensed spouse's

inspected pistol. A thank you goes out to Governor Granholm for signing

these two important Right-to-Carry reform bills into law.​

 

[jdwilson44]

A few weeks back I took an NRA Basic Pistol course - first time in my life that I have ever actually held a loaded gun in my hand. After doing this I started reading up a lot on gun ownership and 2nd amendment issues. It is somewhat scary how much the Feds and state goverments have restricted the right to defend oneself in this country. From everything I have read there is more than ample evidence that allowing citizens to carry concealed actually reduces crime - by a significant margin. Florida apparently revised their permit to carry laws and crime went down across the board.

Maybe the democrats have actually started reading the studies instead of just running off at the mouth.

 

[Melensdad]

I think it is a mistake to paint all Democrats as anti-Gun. In every election the NRA endorses many Democratic candiates as pro-gun rights candidates in elections. There are Democrats who are on the NRA board of directors too. It is more of a 'liberal' Democrat issue than a Democrat issue, and as the radical liberals seem to be controlling much of the power within the party hiararchy their views are often the only views we hear.

But I will admit that the Democratic party platform, more often than not, calls for strict limits on gun ownership.

Also don't forget the Republicans have anti-gunners among their ranks, Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island is at the top of that list.

 

[Glink]

Honestly, for the life of me, I cannot understand the difficulty in interpreting the phrase "shall not be infringed". It was so darn important to those fellows that it was the second thing they said. In their view, any and all activity of government, to limit the freedom of people to arm themselves was and is not allowable.

 

[johnday]

It appears we're all on the same wave length here. It's true, crime has dropped, at least in Michigan according to the cops I know. Seems that no one knows if you've got a little equalizer under your shirt or jacket.

Since Michigan passed the "shall issue" law, Wayne County [Detroit area], has repeatedly sandbagged issuing those residents CCW permits. Eventually the residents do get them, months and months down the line though. I recall selling guns to some Wayne county residents before the law. It would take weeks for these guys to get a purchase permit, where as in Monroe County where I am, I could have a permit in less than 15 minutes, and the deputies would apologize for taking so long.

I don't claim to know what the lack of rational is in Wayne County, but I think Jenny did the right thing in this case. Ofcourse she may be thinking of reelection too.

 

[jdwilson44]

Honestly, for the life of me, I cannot understand the difficulty in interpreting the phrase "shall not be infringed". It was so darn important to those fellows that it was the second thing they said. In their view, any and all activity of government, to limit the freedom of people to arm themselves was and is not allowable.

I feel the same way - I just don't understand how people can reasonably mis-interpret the wording of the 2nd amendment. Furthermore the definition of militia is defined in the US Code as being all able bodied males between the ages of 16 and 45 ( I may be slightly off on the age range).
In addition pretty much all of the founding fathers laid out in explicit detail why the citizens of the country should be armed - and it was to defend themselves not only against their foreign invaders but the loss of liberties taken away by their own goverment. The intent of the 2nd amendment is not really open to interpretation in my mind - it was made very clear what the writers of the constitution intended when they wrote it.

Furthermore there is more than ample evidence in modern times that having an armed citizenry deters crime and contributes to the safety of the country. I found an interesting article yesterday while doing some reading online that referred to Kennesaw Georgia - where they apparently passed an ordinance that REQUIRES the ownership of a firearm in every household. It said that crime dropped 74% after the ordinance was passed and in the 16 years it has been in effect there have only been 3 murders - 2 by knife and 1 by gun. This pretty much totally debunks any of the arguments of the anti gun nazis.

http://www.worldnewsstand.net/2001/TwoCities.htm

The reasons for having an armed citizenry were amply demonstrated by the Swiss during WWII - Hitler decided not to invade because the entirety of the country was armed and ready to fight to the last bullet in the case of invasion. It also seems like common sense - to me anyway - that if one is in fear of the goverment they should be armed with weapons equivalent to what soldiers carry. The Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership also make the point that before every genocide in the 20th century the goverments in question first instituted firearms registration and then confiscated weapons. 170 million people were killed during the 20th century as a result of this.

http://www.jpfo.org

I haven't yet seen the anti gun people come up with a sufficient response to these facts.

 

[OkeeDon]

...and it was to defend themselves not only against their foreign invaders but the loss of liberties taken away by their own goverment....if one is in fear of the goverment they should be armed with weapons equivalent to what soldiers carry.

I'm in total agreement, here. Since GWB took over, I've been in total fear of the government -- now, where can us paranoids get some nukes?

 

[jdwilson44]

I'm in total agreement, here. Since GWB took over, I've been in total fear of the government -- now, where can us paranoids get some nukes?

I don't know if I want any nukes but a few nice quns would make me feel a bit better:

I'll take one of these:

http://www.sigarms.com/Products/ShowCatalogProductDetails.aspx?categoryid=35&productid=114

and one of these:

http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/weapons/lr-24v.asp


and then one of these for a backup:

http://www.springfield-armory.com/prod-rifles-socom-ii.shtml

 

[OkeeDon]

I'll see you those, and raise you this:

The Davey Crockett is a battfield tactical nuclear weapon, capable of reaching about 1-1/4 mile. If you plan on defending yourself against your government, you better have a supply. Otherwise, you're wasting your time and money.

 

[jdwilson44]

I'll check on Ebay - there are probably a few for sale

 

[bczoom]

jd,

I do like your selections but would probably put the sokom before the bushmaster myself.

Don,

I do gotta' get some of those. SWEET!!!!