Fears of an Obama crackdown spurs local, state, national sales
Gun biz is booming
On Election Day, Thomas Brown cast his vote and bought a gun. An AR-15 military-style rifle, to be exact.
Brown had wanted the rifle for some time and figured he best get one while he could, before a new president took office.
"On the off-chance someone tries to put an assault-weapons ban in place, I prefer to own one now versus trying to buy it later," the 29-year-old Florence resident said Monday.
Video
Buying Guns
Are Charleston area residents buying more guns and bullets since the election of Barack Obama to be the President of the United States.
He's not alone.
Firearms and ammunition sales have surged in South Carolina and other states in recent months, driven in part by fears that a Barack Obama presidency and a Democratic-led Congress will usher in a new era of strict gun control laws.
Gun enthusiasts are worried that Obama will try to make the 1994 assault weapons ban a permanent fixture, as well as push for steep taxes on ammunition.
"That's everybody's fear right now, that you better buy it while you can," said Scott Hornsby, manager of Carolina Rod & Gun in West Ashley, which has seen gun sales climb 10 to 15 percent since the election.
Some gun-control advocates say such worries are unfounded, and that the run on the guns is largely the result of fear-mongering and industry hype. They argue that sudden changes in gun policy are unlikely, particularly since the new president will have his hands full with the economic crisis, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and other pressing issues.
"This is so silly and unnecessary," said Peter Hamm, communication director for the Washington-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
"If someone has $500 burning a hole in their pocket, they ought to go buy their child a present for the holiday, because they are not going to have any difficulty buying a gun in America any time soon."
Such assurances haven't stopped many people from stocking up on firepower before Obama takes office. Buying frenzies and backlogs have been reported from San Diego to Boston, despite a pricetag of $1,500 or more for an AR-15.
While these reports have largely been based on anecdotal evidence, some hard statistics also suggest a trend.
Nationally, background checks for gun purchases jumped nearly 49 percent during the week Obama was elected, compared with the same time period last year, according to the FBI's National Instant Background Check System.
In South Carolina, applications for concealed-weapons permits were running about 32 percent above last year's numbers through the end of October, according to the State Law Enforcement Division.
Arlyn Pendergast, owner of the ATP Gun Shop & Range in Summerville, said his sales are up at least 20 percent since the election.
"I would probably say 10 to 20 percent of the people who actually mention the reason why they're buying right now say it's because of the regime change," he said.
Customers stood in lines 10-people deep on Saturday at ATP. One regular described the scene as "like Wal-Mart at Christmas."
Hornsby of Carolina Rod & Gun said the demand from consumers is such that it's hard for stores to keep military-style rifles such as AR-15s and AK-47s in stock.
"I could call any distributor right now and they're all sold out. They're are basically waiting until they get more from the manufacturer. The wait can be from four weeks to who knows when," he said.
Obama's campaign said the president-elect "respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms" and pledges to "protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport and use guns."
Gun owners are wary of his record of voting for gun-control measures while serving as an Illinois state senator and his talk of "common sense measures," such as eliminating the loophole that allows firearms sales at gun shows without background checks.
The National Rifle Association spent millions during the campaign to push the message that Obama would be "the most anti-gun president in American history."
Such fears were stoked again in recent days by reports that prospective members of Obama's administration were asked about gun ownership in their families as part of a lengthy job questionnaire.
Obama's campaign said the move was simply designed to ensure proper registration of guns, but U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., called the question deeply disturbing and potentially discriminatory.
Ladd Everitt, communications director for the Washington-based Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said the gun lobby has worked hard to instill fear of Obama, but there is little movement, even among Democrats, for broad-based gun control reform.
"Is a gun ban possible? Not in anyone's wildest dreams," he said.
Still, gun dealers expect sales to remain steady in the weeks leading up to Obama's inauguration. South Carolina will be helping that effort with its first Second Amendment Sales Tax Holiday, a 48-hour period in which residents can buy handguns, rifles and shotguns tax-free.
The holiday, approved by the General Assembly this year, begins the day after Thanksgiving.
Some, like Charles McNeil of Moncks Corner, say they are not going to get caught up in the hype and start stockpiling out of fear that Obama will take their guns away.
"He's not going to do that," the lifelong hunter said. "Not in this Southern state. With all the hunting and stuff that goes on here, that's never going to change."
Reach Glenn Smith at gsmith@postandcourier.com or 937-5556.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
NikkiHubby (anonymous) says...
When is the reality going to set in around in South Carolina. Mr. Obama isn't going to take any of you right-winged weirdos firearms away from you. Why do you people constantly scare yourselves over and over again? John and Sarah lost...GET OVER IT already! There are far greater things to be concerned about than..."Bubba..daz gone take our gunz away!"
November 19, 2008 at 2:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Surfcaster (anonymous) says...
NikkiHubby, read question #59 of nObama's application for jobs within his administration. Firearm owners need not apply. I'll cling to my 50 round magazine and religion.
November 19, 2008 at 5:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
moonpie (anonymous) says...
Oh yeah Nikki? Washington DC did it. I bet he will try at some point in his second term. He's not a risk taker. He won't do anything that will keep him out the white house a second term!
November 19, 2008 at 6:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
islandbenzbc (anonymous) says...
Might not be a bad idea to stock up on ammunition...
November 19, 2008 at 6:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ColdBud (anonymous) says...
I plan on purchasing one or two handguns in the near future but it has nothing to do with politics. I'm just tired of the crime and no place in the low country is immune from that crime.
November 19, 2008 at 6:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mgre85 (anonymous) says...
I understand people having the right to own a gun, my father is a hunter and I lived with guns (shot guns) in my house for 20 years. Yes, the guns were locked, and then locked again in a vault, they were never left loaded. My question though is, in the article Mr.Brown states after the election he went and bought a AR-15 military-style rifle, WHAT IS THE NEED FOR THAT KIND OF GUN?
November 19, 2008 at 7:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Surfcaster (anonymous) says...
mgre85, Obviously you have never plinked. AR-15's are really fun. Readers are reminded that Thanksgiving weekend is a sales tax free weekend for firearm sales.
November 19, 2008 at 7:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ColdBud (anonymous) says...
Posted by Surfcaster on November 19, 2008 at 7:16 a.m.: Readers are reminded that Thanksgiving weekend is a sales tax free weekend for firearm sales.
That particular legislation was passed last year when the state SHOULD have been worrying about crime, education, immigration, roads and such... what a joke.
November 19, 2008 at 7:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
NativeSC (anonymous) says...
Surfcaster,thanks for that info. The lefties always go after the guns with ridiculous arguments. Cracks is illegal and it's easier to buy than a gun. Don't think that if there's a crackdown that there will be any fewer guns on the streets, they will just be in the hands of criminals. Some people shoot as a hobby or a stress reliever the same way some people play golf or collect crap from the Franklin Mint.
November 19, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
When I was a kid, I had an aunt and uncle who moved to Australia when Goldwater lost. They sent me this neat kangaroo hide that I kept on the wall until the hair started falling out of it about 10 years later.
November 19, 2008 at 7:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
It is called the 2nd amend. IT IS A Individual right. Without it, you liberals precious 1rst amend, would be useless, as well as the rest.
If the man wanted an AR-15, he has the right to buy it, just like the many folks that buy huge trucks that they never use to hual anything more than their ego.
I think that Mr Brown, was wrong to do this article, now every dirtbag that wants an AR-15, without the back ground check, knows where to go find one!
November 19, 2008 at 7:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Riptide (anonymous) says...
mgre85...
It's not a question of a need, it a question of a right. Something liberals and socialists keep missing in the debate.
Democracy is Two Wolves and a Lamb Voting on What to have for Lunch. Liberty is a Well-Armed Lamb Contesting the Vote - Benjamin Franklin
November 19, 2008 at 7:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ccfirefighterchick (anonymous) says...
From everything that I've heard, Obama is against guns. Like Charlie Daniels has said before, I'll gladly give up my guns if you can get all of them from the criminals first. I carry at least one most of the time. I plan on buying a couple of more in the next few months. The best time I've found to do so is going to be the weekend after Thanksgiving. Second Amendment Tax Free Weekend, here we come!
November 19, 2008 at 7:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
5thGenerationLocal (anonymous) says...
Posted by moonpie on November 19, 2008 at 6:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh yeah Nikki? Washington DC did it. I bet he will try at some point in his second term. He's not a risk taker. He won't do anything that will keep him out the white house a second term!
SECOND TERM! I highly doubt that will happen. The people will be pissed when he fails to produce the change he promised.
November 19, 2008 at 8:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jeffyoung007 (anonymous) says...
The AR-15 uses a .223/5.56 cartridge, much smaller than the most common deer rifles. It is the same cartridge weather it is a regular plinking rifle or the "big, scary looking military rifle"; so, I do not see the reason Anti-Americans get so uptight when someone buys the military-style rifles. And yes, I said Anti-American! If you do not believe in the Second Amendment, move to China, they would be happy to have you!
November 19, 2008 at 8:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms. -- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87 (Pearce and Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)
Oppressors can tyrannize only when they achieve a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed populace. -- James Madison
Arms in the hands of citizens (may) be used at individual discretion...in private self defense... -- John Adams, A defense of the Constitutions of the Government of the USA, 471 (1788).
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. -- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8.
Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. ... The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be possible. -- Hubert H. Humphrey, Senator, Vice President, 22 October 1959
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. --- Thomas Jefferson in "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
It is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks. It is legal and lawful to own a shotgun or a rifle. We believe in obeying the law. -- Malcolm X, March 12, 1964
If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government --and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws. -- Edward Abbey in Abbey's Road, p.39 (Plume, 1979)
Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest. -- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
November 19, 2008 at 8:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Neponset (anonymous) says...
I don't care for the AR-15 - not very attractive with its plastic stock and non classic appearance. Much prefer guns/rifles with more traditional style and construction, such as my 12 gage Ithaca (double barrel) which has had the chock cut off (still a legal length) and now is cylinder and cylinder and should be devastating using buck on anyone who threatens me. Or my WW II Springfield (30 06) to bust the block of the thieves' car trying to run off with my goods.
November 19, 2008 at 8:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
IHATEINBEV (anonymous) says...
http://www.isra.org/
FOR A COPY OF THE QUESTIONAIRE
November 19, 2008 at 8:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigSargeofSC (anonymous) says...
"WHAT IS THE NEED FOR THAT KIND OF GUN?"
If I want to buy an AR-15 or AK-47, that is my right under the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution. What right is it of the government, at any level, to deprive me of my rights? We all know that the Democratic Party would prefer to limit the fire arms that the American people can purchase and own. That is a political fact. Scared of my own shadow? Never! Highly concerned that the Democractic Congress and President will begin to limit my 2nd Amendment rights. Yes.
November 19, 2008 at 9:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sc4peace (anonymous) says...
Last time I checked- it wasn't the crazy hunting rednecks I had to look out for while walking down the street- I'm pretty sure it was the lowlife- illegal gun toting moron with his pants down to his knees. Guns are neccesary for protection against the thugs our justice system lets out on a daily basis....
November 19, 2008 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
Newt - "And you gun toting freaks that think you are Rambo and will "get them before they get you"
Yep, those folks at Wako found out what the federal government is capable of!
Newt, what about our rights as gun owners? You are so worked up about your so called right to abortion, choice and all...what about our choice?
From the above article "...Buying frenzies and backlogs have been reported from San Diego to Boston..." Thats a lot of "rednecks"
Newt - "...but I have read on too many posts that there should be an IQ test to vote...."
do some research newt, that test for voting was abolished by the Fifteenth Amendment that was added to the Constitution in 1870 to protect Blacks' voting rights. Some states required people to pass a reading or writing test before voting.
An AR-15 is not "military assault weapon", you can buy a Ruger .223 at Wal-mart that can do the exact same thing as an AR-15. its a matter of LOOKING like a military style weapon.
November 19, 2008 at 9:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
Waco - before the post po po get me.
sc4peace - right on!
November 19, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sc4peace (anonymous) says...
I think whether or not we should be able to own guns is common sense- how in the world can you tell someone that they have no right to defend themselves against people trying to hurt them? How can you tell citizens who work hard every day, pay taxes and obey all the laws- that they can't rightfully defend what they work hard for,that they can't defend the family they love? GUNS DON'T KILL- PEOPLE DO!!! If someone invades my home or threatens me...pow. That's easy justice..no trial no pardons no parole...
November 19, 2008 at 9:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wjhamilton3 (anonymous) says...
So owning an AK-47 is American? I'll inform Stalin. He'll be so proud. If you really want to impress the girls drive by the gun shop and head to the gym and skip the six pack on the way home. If you don't want to impress the girls, but rather the boys, you have to do the exact same thing.
If you just want to avoid confronting your sense of inadequacy without all that sober sweat, you can join World of Warcraft. If you want to buy something as useless as an almost assault rifle, it's your money.
If you want to pile up an assault rifle collection and apply to work for the Obama administration, perhaps you don't understand American politics. Our side of the election was about creating an American that wasn't based on fear and hatred. We aren't itching to blow people away. You lost. Stock up your panic room with MREs and Ammo and spend your days trading right wing gossip on the web, while you await the "end times." Meanwhile, we'll try to figure out a way to make sure people have jobs paying a living wage and a way to see the doctor when they're sick.
November 19, 2008 at 9:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
Newt said, "Go rat-a-tat with a semi-automatic on a deer and there is not much left to eat, just a bunch of pulverized meat."
Even deer hunting rifles (in 30.06) can be semi-automatic. Then again, you probably wouldn't see anyone with a big caliber weapon at the range slinging brass like you would someone with an AR.
I own both bolt action and semi autos. I shoot to improve my aim and to relieve stress.....and because I enjoy disassembling and cleaning everything. I guess you could call it a hobby. With the cost of some of the weapons I'd like to own, it's an expensive hobby.
November 19, 2008 at 9:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
memare (anonymous) says...
wjhamilton3, I am sure the people enjoying my hard earned tax dollars for their "free health insurance" and their "share the wealth" program wont mind if I own a gun. If they do, at least I might see some of the money I work for come back to me.
November 19, 2008 at 9:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
guidedbystewart (anonymous) says...
Some of these post sounds like Early from the squidbllies...
If you are not familiar with it Squidbillies, just google it.
November 19, 2008 at 9:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
americanheretic (anonymous) says...
Hey,Hillbillies Grow up!
Bertrand Russell:
Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.
November 19, 2008 at 9:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pillsbury (anonymous) says...
Oh give me a break. Crime here is no worse than it is anywhere else.
Also, I love it when people use 18th Century words and then apply those words to present day situations. I'm sure Benjamin Franklin was alking around with his AK popping caps in people. Dear me, you people act like the gov't is going to come in and take your shotgun. They're not. And even if they did, do you think the government would really care if you're armed?
November 19, 2008 at 9:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
Pillsbury, love the visual. Ben's fat ass laying people out with an AK. That's great.
Newt said, "By the way the religious gun hording freaks at Waco are the ones that killed themselves. Hmmmm, let's horde guns, ammo, hand grenades and GAS all together and get in a shoot out with the feds. Yeah, that was smart!"
Agreed. Koresh and co were a bunch of tards.
November 19, 2008 at 10:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blondjes (anonymous) says...
sc4peace is right, whenever you watch the news its mostly the spruill avenue lowlifes threatening pizza drivers, stores, etc. with guns, not a whole bunch of rifle toting rednecks, i'm from NYC, my father owned a gun for protection and has NEVER shot himself, he grew up in a rough area and knew what he had to do to protect himself, he moved down south but still has a gun, i married a southern man and many of his friends do have guns, they are hard working people that do occasionally hunt deer or go to a shooting range, so to assume only "rednecks" have guns and don't know how to use them is ridiculous, if anybody knows how to use them they do since many of them have grown up around them, its apart of there culture and there is nothing wrong with that, my husband wants a gun for Christmas because Obama has supported laws against gun ownership and we know many democrats do as well, as long as there are violent criminals in this country i better keep my right to own a gun
November 19, 2008 at 10:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mkris (anonymous) says...
The second amendment is as important as all the rest.
IMHO Police and governments officials should be afraid of an armed citizentry when they knock on the door. Keeps them more honest.
But everyone forgets Jefferson in the debate: every once and a while there's a need for a revolution.
November 19, 2008 at 10:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
Wow, such complete drivel and out right hatred for law abiding Americans that want to practice their 2nd amend. right.
Insutls and weak minded crap.
Newt, i dont care about your nick name for me, your a nobody to me. You can insult gun owners all you want with your Deliverance, crap, but it would appear that it is young black males that are commiting the majority of handgun (stolen) crimes in the CharlieTown area. And that is not even close to being bigoted or racist or hateful then your hate filled rant that you just posted. Plus, it is what is seen everyday in the news...young black thugs commiting crimes against their own.
And those 18th century words come from men that knew tyranny and what led to it. They knew that they had to have the latest muskets (rifled barrels) to defend against the British. Thats why good ole ben went to France for more $$$ to help arm the young American troops.
Times change and technology changes, but the truth doesnt change. Unless you have been educated in a marxist institution like todays univesities. Then truth and facts are subjective.
And poverty is not the cause of crime, criminals are the cause of crime. You insult the poor when you try to say that poverty causes crime. 40 years & $5 trillion latter, the poor are still among us. All that money has bought is housing projects that breed government dependent groups. Some what like Obamas city Chicago, Cabrinni Green...
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
November 19, 2008 at 10:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
iceman1978 (anonymous) says...
Look at it this way. At least Christmas shopping won't be completely down this year.
November 19, 2008 at 10:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
The lefties continue to uphold the fine oratorical traditions of the infantile, immature, bedwetting Democrats. If you can't defeat them with ideas, break out the invectives.
November 19, 2008 at 10:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
Posted by ColBeer: "That particular legislation was passed last year when the state SHOULD have been worrying about crime, education, immigration, roads and such... what a joke."
Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens that know how to use will be a dterent to crime. Cutting the taxes on these firearms is good way to promote this.
November 19, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Cid95 (anonymous) says...
Yes, quaint 18th century phrases like "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" are SO outdated!
The authors of the Constitution never imagined such dangerous things as the internet, radio and TV could exist. Times have changed. What if King George III had a blog or a TV show! They would definitely want that changed now.
Also, human nature has demonstrably changed a lot since the 18th century. Tyranny and mis-government are things of the past that can never happen again. The lessons of the past should remain there, we should become unarmed citizens of a police state. It's silly to think that the government only governs with our consent, and that the people must maintain some means of being the final arbiter of liberty.
Heller vs The District of Columbia. We won, you lost. Deal with it.
November 19, 2008 at 10:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SC_Native_ElCid07 (anonymous) says...
Newt, your an idiot.
When you have YOUR home invaded by a violent thug you'll get yours...
You live in a fantasy and see the world through rose-colored glasses. Violence is real and these people don't give two bits about your do-gooder views. They will kill you for a pair of sneakers.
Just remember this, when seconds count, police are just minutes away...
Your a waste of space.
November 19, 2008 at 10:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
guidedbystewart (anonymous) says...
B_Fwank or RW can use a thesaurus,
You guys do not listen to ideals, just your conservative talk radio mouthpieces. Everything that you said has been said before on talk show radio, so get an original thought.
I personally could care less if you want to keep your guns, but assault rifles just make people look like paranoid backwoods wackos and Newt is just calling them out on it.
When I read these post, the sound of dueling banjos comes to mind.
November 19, 2008 at 10:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
desspec (anonymous) says...
The right of a law-abiding citizen of the U.S. to own an SK-47 (semi-automatic) is indeed American, but for how long? Then, what of our remaining rights?
November 19, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Neponset (anonymous) says...
Lets face it, every president from, I believe Lincoln, has be surrounded by body guards, some more successful than others, but they all were packing heat. What is wrong with the average joe/jane packing a little heat of his/her own.
November 19, 2008 at 11:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ChrisPia (anonymous) says...
Bulldog: I agree with you except I really don't understand why that philosophy hasn't taken effect down here in SC. This is the Most Violent State...We have many law abiding citizens that own fire arms.Why is Crime so high?
The answer: Too many criminals with guns..
I can think of many reasons why gun sales have increased since Pres-Elect O'Bama was elected.
Here are a few: Militias,Racism,Fear,Economy,Protection,Crime,reduction of services(police) etc.....It's not solely O'Bama's view on gun ownership and the 2nd ammendment.
November 19, 2008 at 11:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
"When you have no basis for an argument, abuse the plaintiff."
Cicero,
November 19, 2008 at 11:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
onesidedsquare (anonymous) says...
you know who else liked gun control?
Hitler,
November 19, 2008 at 11:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Neponset (anonymous) says...
I see we have some folks that are quick to put down SC. My question is: why are you here? I suspect that things have gotten so bad in NY, Conn or one of those other lefty states that you needed to come south to survive, but once you got here you started this BS about how backward things are here. My I suggest that you move on back to that wonderful state from which you escaped.
November 19, 2008 at 11:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigSargeofSC (anonymous) says...
I totally support gun control:
1. Proper Sight Picture.
2. Steady breathing.
3. Proper Target Identification.
4. Steady trigger squeeze.
Anyelse is a useless attempt to take away 2nd Amendment rights. Owning any weapon is not about "need", as some have put it. Most of the time, its just plain old "want".
Newt, no one has ever invaded my home. Have they been thinking about it? Yes, someone has been thinking about it, evidenced by the hand prints they left in two different locations on the sliding glass door. (And, yes, a police report was filed.) Come into my house if you want. The last thing you'll hear is the slide action of a 12-guage.
November 19, 2008 at 11:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
guidedbystewart (anonymous) says...
I am from SC, grew up here (actually a small town in SC), while many the ideals of the people in this state are backwards and backwoods, but there are many in this state that are not. BTW, there are stills rednecks idiots up north and out west, ever been to Bakersfield, CA or Central Penn, it is not just a regional.
November 19, 2008 at 11:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sheeple (anonymous) says...
Crime goes up when the economy sucks; Obama has promised to replay the Carter malaise, and he's fomenting class envy and giving people a sense of entitlement to other people's money. Expect home invasions and muggings to rise.
Restricting the ownership of guns by non-criminals doesn't hamper criminals--it only makes law-abiding citizens easier victims. People who don't care if they're breaking a law about armed robbery don't care if they're breaking a law about gun ownership (if you're really that much smarter and more sophisicated, you'd know this).
The police are usually good at what they do, but they can't get there until you're already dead. Even if you or a witness are in the position to make a call, it takes 5-30 minutes for a squad--and that's IF the dispatcher doesn't hang up on you. I already know too many people who were alive when the police were called and lying dead in a pool of their own blood when the police arrived.
Feel free to be a willing victim if guns make you feel icky, but you have no right to make the rest of us into easy-to-slaughter sheep like yourselves. You're not better than us, you're not smarter than us, and you don't get to control us.
That's the part that stings, right? It's not the icky guns, it's the fact that you don't get to force your choice on everyone else.
November 19, 2008 at 11:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BravesFan (anonymous) says...
newt, people like you are the reason this country is screwed up. i will gladly buy your gas or one-way ticket (first class, even) and help you pack if you leave south carolina...forever. someone called you a waste of space, i'd go one better and say you're a waste of sperm. i am a proud gun-toting redneck. so were the people who founded this country...you moron.
November 19, 2008 at 12:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
Who is the hypocrite newt?
Posted by B_Fwank on November 19, 2008 at 9:12 a.m.
"Newt, what about our rights as gun owners? You are so worked up about your so called right to abortion, choice and all...what about our choice?"
***********************************
You seem to be such angry and bitter person.
"When you have no basis for an argument, abuse the plaintiff." Cicero
Newt continue to uphold the fine oratorical traditions of the infantile, immature, bedwetting Democrats. If you can't defeat them with ideas, break out the invectives. - B_Fwank
Liberalism is a mental Disorder.
http://www.bumpertalk.com/bumpertalk/...
November 19, 2008 at 12:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
chucktonian (anonymous) says...
Liberals always think they know what we "need" when it comes to guns. WRONG. The second amendment tells us we can have whatever guns we want. And Democrats always try and take them away. With Obama having majorities in both houses of congress and potentially 60 votes in the Senate, he has the legislative capacity to not only confiscate your guns but confiscate all of your wealth to pay for his welfare state.
Tyranny is going to be the order of the day for at least the next 4 years. May as well stock up before the new rules take effect!
November 19, 2008 at 12:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ceecee (anonymous) says...
I see no problem having a background check before you purchase a weapon. That is not going to strip your second amendment, it will just prevent people with criminal pasts from legally purchasing a gun, Big deal (of course they will find a way to buy one anyway). As long as you are a law abiding citizen you will be able to purchase a gun to protect your home. Obama is not going to take that away. That is just a sales pitch to create a "run on guns".
Seriously, he won't even be president until next year. How long do think it will take to pass any type of gun control? This frenzy is just needlessly driving the prices skyward.
November 19, 2008 at 12:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UrGatorbait (anonymous) says...
Woo hoo tax free gun holiday!! yee haw.
If any one thinks the 2nd Amendment will be repealed anytime soon is on crack and needs a thicker tin foil hat.
People like Big rough tough Sarge always looking for a fight or being antagonistic and confrontational just helps perpetuate the violence. Great problem solving skills. Kudos. Keep that type of thinking up and it'll keep the gun sales up irregardless of who's in office.
Neoponset, it's great here, we can voice our likes and dislikes of the idiocy here, it's an opinion board, let me introduce you to the 1st amendment. If you like mediocrity then that's you. Some like to leave things better than they found it. If that upsets ya, than ya just answered your own question. I digress.
It's a great marketing plan for folks in the firearms industry, elect Ob and scream he's goona take yer guns away. Witness the effectiveness of the plan from the facts listed in the article. Good free advertising for Aryln(great guy BTW) and the other gun shop owners. Makes ya wonder if the NRA really truly supports the American people or the firearms industry and the politicians in their pockets.
Funny thing alot of the assault rifles, the AKs, AR-15/M-4 look a likes are manufactured up north in those bad ol' liberal states. Just an interesting tidbit of info.
So keep spreading the paranoia and fear, ya'll doin' reeeel gud.
November 19, 2008 at 12:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mkris (anonymous) says...
Newt,
Never said they should greet the police at the door with a gun. Just the police should be aware before they come to the door. The second amendment was to assure a population has the ability to overthrow its government. That was Jefferson. Once a population is disarmed its government has nothing to worry about, that was India and the British rajh. Someone who grows up in an urban enviornment sees guns in a different way than someone that grows up in the country. Gun violence in the cities is a problem, but eliminating guns in the hands of all citizens is wrong.
November 19, 2008 at 1 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
ceecee - A background check is already required for the purchase of a firearm. Criminals do care about how to purchase a gun legally.
November 19, 2008 at 1:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
hairy1663 (anonymous) says...
Newt nobody has been made easy-to-slaughter because of military style weapons. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/ta...
More people are killed with hands,fist and feet than rifles in general, much less assault weapons.
Obama did state that reinstating a permanent ban on "assault weapons" was his idea of "common sense" gun laws. Since "assault weapons" are only used about one tenth of one percent in all crimes why bother with it, why waist the tax payers dollars and time on trying to pass a bill. More people are killed in cars & by cancer, why not concentrate on on those two issues if they really want to save lives. I don't think it's about saving lives, it's about control and the last time I looked we were supposed to control the government, not the other way around.
November 19, 2008 at 1:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SC_Native_ElCid07 (anonymous) says...
Newt - I don't live in fear of the boggyman or of criminals. I live my life and go to sleep soundly every night. I'm not paranoid in the slightest way, I don't jump every time I hear a bump in the night.
However, it does make me feel pretty darn good to know that IF my home was invaded I have a Sig 9mm with in arms reach. It is loaded (I don't have kids) and holds 17 rds in the mag and 1 in the pipe. In the closet two feet away is a Remington 870 pump shotgun loaded with 5 rds of 3" 00 buckshot.
And since the article mentioned them, I also have an AR-15 with six 30rd mags (note: this would be my LAST choice for a home invasion weapon, I bought it bc it is fun to shoot paper with, that is it really, plus the investment aspect of course, what can I say, I like guns and I'm a law abiding citizen, get off me).
The tragic trick or treater story you tried to compare me to happened in Sumter, my hometown, and that lowlife was a felon with multiple arrests that was high on drugs at the time and ILLEGALLY possessed the firearm (felons are PROHIBITED by law to own ANY firearms). My heart goes out to that family and it makes me angry that our laws aren't stricter. That criminal should have been in prison the first time they caught his behind selling crack to kids. (If I had my way, after a speedy trial, the following day, he would have been hanged at dawn in front of the county court house, I would let him swing till the sun went down to make an example of him. Thats how you REALLY deter crime!)
So...
Live in fear? hardly, I'm just not naive, like I said earlier, violence is real, these things DO happen from time to time, chances are it will never happen to you but there is a chance it could. I think I can hold my own pretty good until help arrives in the odd chance that it did happen and that gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Now, if it were to happen to you, could you? Are you willing to bet your family's life on it?
Statistics show if a criminal invades your house while he knows you are home there is a very high percentage chance he is armed and has come to do violence. Someone is going to die, you or him!
I think General George S Patton said it best...
"As I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I will fear no evil 'cause I am the meanest mofo* in the whole d@mn valley!"
DON'T TREAD ON ME!
November 19, 2008 at 1:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ceecee (anonymous) says...
Bulldog -
I knew there was background check in place. I did not do a very good but I was trying to say that I think what Obama will do is make the restrictions tighter.
Also, Let us try and keep in mind that there are other considerations for people that advocate stonger restrictions on firearms other than just "trying to force their choice on everyone else".
Columbine comes to mind. The guns in that shooting were purchased from a friend who bought them at a gun show.
The guns in the Virginia Tech shootings were purchased by someone who was investigated for stalking, declared mentally unstable and forced to seek treatment.
Of course we cannot exclude Charles Whitman, who purchased two of his weapons the same day he went to the Universtity of Texas and killed 14 people.
These are just things that I think need to be included in the discussion.
November 19, 2008 at 1:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigSargeofSC (anonymous) says...
Newt, I see where you are going with your last post, but you're trying to argue apples with grapes. First of all, abortion is not covered by the Constitution. Second, if the Democrats want to keep it where a woman can have an abortion but tell lawful citizens they can't own or purchase specific types of weapons, have they not made themselves hypocrits too? You can't defend the rights of one and deny the rights of another.
November 19, 2008 at 1:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Surfcaster (anonymous) says...
newt, I have had three burgularies, three car breakins, a car stolen, and a gun stuck to my head. I have a CWP and practice gun control.
November 19, 2008 at 1:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
Hmmm, and yet newt, you advocate, and defend a woman's right to slaughter an un-born innocent child in the very womb that should be a safe harbor for a tiny defencless baby.
Amazing. Keep up the stereotypes, they are humerous. As is your only means of debate, name calling and worthless insults. The crap that spews from your mouth would indicate that your mouth would serve as a usefull buttplug.
LOL, and now its Bushes fault for not enacting the bailouts?
I am outraged that he signed the dang things in the first place.
November 19, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SC_Native_ElCid07 (anonymous) says...
Saying that guns cause murders is like saying pencils cause spelling mistakes.
November 19, 2008 at 1:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
B_Fwank (anonymous) says...
I think newt is just a lonely, attention needy and pathetic soul, seeking some affirmation or affriming her state of being. Which is a state of sel-loathing psychosis.
Sad.
November 19, 2008 at 1:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pillsbury (anonymous) says...
Look, I'm just saying that I think it's great if you want to own a gun. That's really nice and all, but do you have to have one that you could floor the entire starting line of the Atlanta Falcons in like 10 seconds?
Or that maybe, just maybe, if you walk into a store, and need a gun that very second, or even that very day, you probably don't need to have a gun that very day?
Regulating gun sales is not necessarily infringing on a fundamental right of the Constitution. We have a right to assemble peacefully, but we still must acquire a permit to do so; you have the right to free speech but you can't shout fire in a theatre . . . . I could go on and on.
And actually BigSarge, abortion, or the right to privacy which flows to abortion, has been acknowledged as a fundamental right of the Constitution by our Supreme Court. It's actually very interesting if you'd like to read the cases leading up to Roe v. Wade. But again, simply because the Constitution has been acknowledged to have that fundamental right does not mean that the fundamental right cannot be regulated for the good of all citizens.
November 19, 2008 at 1:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ChrisPia (anonymous) says...
Open Letter to Sarah Palin
Written by Cory Burnell
Governor Sarah Palin
Dear Governor Palin,
It's come to my attention that you're taking a political beating for addressing the 2008 Alaskan Independence Party convention via video. I'm writing to support you and to testify to the fact that the AIP has it correct. Whether or not you were ever a member of the AIP is irrelevant. They are correct on the issues of State sovereignty and Alaskan independence, so go to battle against the fascist Americans who don't like that fact. I hope you'll stick to your guns and defend the truth no matter what the short-term political costs. Here are the historical facts:
New York, Rhode Island and Virginia all included unilateral secession clauses in their ratifications of the U.S. Constitution. If they retained the right to secede, then EVERY State possesses that right too.
The 1783 Treaty of Paris lists the 13 colonies as sovereign, independent States. It does NOT list the "United States" anywhere.
Our sovereign, independent States VOLUNTARILY created the union by a vote of their citizens and may voluntarily and peacefully dissolve their bonds with the union by a vote of their citizens.
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 & 1799 implicitly claim the right of secession, though the States express their desire not to leave the union at that time.
President Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address in 1801 acknowledged the right of secession, though he deemed it unwise at that time.
The New England States claimed the right of secession on numerous occasions including in 1804, 1808, 1814 and the 1840s.
November 19, 2008 at 1:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ChrisPia (anonymous) says...
In 2008, 22% of Americans in a Zogby poll said they "believe any state or region has the right to peaceably secede and become an independent republic" (http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.db...).
The 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reserves the right of secession to the States because 1) it is not prohibited to them by the Constitution, and 2) no power is delegated to the federal government to deny or prevent secession as President Buchanan demonstrably proved in his December 3, 1860 State of the Union address.
And the capstone document that GUARANTEES the right of secession to all Americans is the Declaration of Independence which states that a people may "alter or abolish" their form of government at their own discretion.
Governor, your duty as an Alaskan and as an American is to defend the right of The People of every State in this union to choose their own destinies. We possess a right to self-determination and a right to government of our own choosing. NO ONE but The People of Alaska may institute government for The People of Alaska. Know this for certain: someday the Union is going to dissolve and Alaska is going to have a President, not a governor. Perhaps the Presidency you seek should be an Alaskan Presidency!
Sincerely,
Cory R. Burnell, MBA
Founder, Christian Exodus
November 19, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pillsbury (anonymous) says...
Also, I get out of the lowcountry all the time, and I see the same crime all over the place.
Moreover, Washington D.C.'s regulation of guns was deemed to infringe on the fundamental rights of the Second Amendment, i.e., you can't own guns. There is a marked difference between acknowledging that guns should be regulated and saying that they should be outlawed.
Using words from the 18th Century and then applying our (in most cases dumbed down) own definitions to those words is language unfair. Words have meanings which flow both from the user and his environment. It is unfair to assert that because our founders recognized that we should be allowed to keep arms in our house that that allows us now to keep guns in our house that are capable of mass death.
November 19, 2008 at 1:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SeaSaw (anonymous) says...
johnnyholmes,
Welcome to the lowcountry. The traffic and crime is a bummer. You will learn which places to avoid and the best times to travel in due time. I left there with the base closure years back, so I know first hand how hard moving to a new area can be. Charleston really is a beautiful place, but my has it grown and with growth you get the crime and traffic. Go to the fun and pretty places such as the beaches in the summer time, go browse around the battery, the market place, be sure to take a carriage ride, check out the festival of lights on James Island during the holidays, go to angel oaks, ask the locals for the best places to go and best places to eat. They are proud of their home, they can be very helpful and friendly. There are lots of good places to eat, check out Brecks, Trotters Restaurant, Angel Fish, Time Well Spent, Bowens Island when it gets reopened, Oriental Cuisine, Olde Towne Resturant, there are so many good places, I would never be able to name them all.
OK, sorry to all for getting off topic. Everyone have a great day!
November 19, 2008 at 1:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
Well it started with NikkiHubby attempting to marginalize the real threat to the guarantees provided in the 2nd amendment.
Newt and GetSerious as expected, have joined the chorus displaying once again a total lack of historical knowledge pertaining to the issue of gun ownership and the threat to that right posed by governments.
The tolerance on the left is so gratifying. To call a black ni==er, a homosexual fa==ot or a Puerto Rican sp=c is racist,bigoted,etc.
However, white conservative gun owners are always labeled redneck or something else with a conation to negativity by these same hypocritical phonies.
I am proud to be a redneck and don't need anymore guns or ammo, I've had a good supply for years.
Newt asked if somebody's home had ever been invaded.
Newt, my home has never been invaded. My home has never burned down either but I carry extensive home owners insurance.
Anymore stupid questions?
November 19, 2008 at 2:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigSargeofSC (anonymous) says...
Pillsbury, are you saying that the government has the right to tell me what guns/rifles I can and cannot own?
And what if I want to own something, as you put, that can take down the Falcon's starting line? I fully understand that the rights under the Constitution are not without limitations. You can open a whole can of worms on most any point with that argument. I guess there are two basic questions that form the dividing line here:
1. What are reasonable limitations that do not constitute infringment?
2. Is there really a limitation that will be viewed by all for the "good of all citizens"?
Newt, I stated in a round-about way in an earlier post that one of the Democratic platforms is the limitation on what types of guns and rifles citizens can own. Its been a raging debate between conservitives and liberals for decades. Don't take my word for it. Do you own research and see for yourself. Further more, did I not say in my post that "lawful citizens" have the right to gun ownership? Keresh and his group were a bunch of fruit loops in old milk. Yes, I think the law should, and I believe it does, limit the ability of criminal's and mental patient's ability to own firearms. Then again, since when do criminals purchase weapons through legal channels?
November 19, 2008 at 2:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
Newt, have you had your gag reflex checked lately, you seems to be vomiting all over the place today?
November 19, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
Newt, so often I agree and disagree with a lot you have to say. This is one of those times I have to disagree with you. That being said, I don't think your constant infatuation with posters' penis sizes is very becoming of you. I mean...they disagree with you...so what? You resort to personal attacks every time someone says something you don't like? Your flaming nonsense has nothing to do with this article and neither does my current post to you.
------------------------------------------------
Now that's off of my chest, I seriously doubt anything to do with guns is very high on O's list. Think about it. He's in a mess on a global scale right now. I don't think his first order of business is going to be "no more guns for you. I am supreme commander."
November 19, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
Posted by Newt on November 19, 2008 at 2:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yird - have you measured your penis lately - I think it is getting smaller by the minute!
============================================================
Poor pathetic thing, is that the best you could do?
I don't need to measure it to know it's considerably larger than your brain.
November 19, 2008 at 2:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
BTW, Newt, since "you're" so high on posters' spelling. It's KORESH.....not "Keresh".
November 19, 2008 at 2:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
Newt, ANYMORE stupid questions?
November 19, 2008 at 2:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pillsbury (anonymous) says...
BigSarge, you may disagree with me, but, yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Just because there is a Second Amendment right to own guns does not mean that the gov't cannot regulate which guns can be owned.
And that line must be drawn by the legislature. Many people (myself for instance) view assault weapons in a negative light. I believe they are of little practical use to the normal citizen, but are of great use to criminals, especially those who are members of gangs and in the drug trade. And that might be seem dumb to you for me to make that distinction, but when the Supreme Court looks to determine whether a statute, such as banning assault weapons, is Constitutional, it will look to determine the effect of the statute and its relation to our fundamental right to own guns. In this instance, I believe that the sacrifice of not being able to own guns that our Founding Father's never even dreamed possible is small compared to the overwhelming good that can be derived.
Again, I do not, and nor do most Democrats, support abolishing the Second Amendment.
November 19, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mosinfan (anonymous) says...
South Carolina Law, Code Section 12-36-2120. 2nd Amendment Sales Tax Holiday beginning 12:01 AM on the Friday after Thanksgiving and ending at twelve midnight on Saturday. Law abiding citizens of the great state of South Carolina can purchase firearms tax free!
In the words of Denny Crane..."Sweet land of Liberty Valance"!
oh...and Newt needs pshchiatric help.
November 19, 2008 at 2:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SCPDBLUE (anonymous) says...
Well my Colt CAR AR-15,Russian SVD Sniper Rifle,WW2 Russian Mosin Nagant Sniper Rifle,SKSx2, Ak-47x2 and my AK-74x2 went up in value so i made a good investments. Ammo Well lets just say I have enuff plus I reload my own. Will President Obama ban these items I dont think so but for those who are worried gets yours now I've been had mine.Think of them as investments.I made out great when we had the assualt weapon ban. Some advice: BUY HI CAP MAGS. Take a non shooter to the range,make it fun but most of all make it safe. GOD bless you all and GOD bless the U.S.A.
November 19, 2008 at 2:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eyfigueroa (anonymous) says...
Gosh...
This pandering to the lowest common denominator by BOTH sides of this argument has become just plain ridiculous.
If you people could only see yourselves as those of us with a modicum of common sense and intelligence see you.
Some of you are just silly, but many of you are just plain ignorant of constitutional and state law. A few of you even deigned to TRY to explain Supreme Court decisions.
A joke!
For those of you who fear that President-Elect Obama is somehow this SPECTRE that is going to change your way of life and take away your guns and somehow destroy the America that you are so fond of, I have only one thing to say to you.
PULEEEEZE!!!
For those of you who believe that it is okay for the Federal government to supersede and/or arbitrarily ignore the constitution and the inherent rights protected therein: to include but not limited to the right to bear arms, I have only one thing to say to you.
PULEEEEZE!!!
All I've seen on this thread today are two sides of the same coin of extremism & ignorance.
November 19, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
I swear on my Ruger mini 30 that I did not suggest removing Newt but it looks like someone has.
I hope she gets back soon because she is such a great source of amusement to me.
Please folks, let's show some tolerance for those that would never reciprocate.
I'm not a Christian but all of a sudden I feel like an honorary member.
November 19, 2008 at 2:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eyfigueroa (anonymous) says...
"In the words of Denny Crane..."Sweet land of Liberty Valance"!"
NO YOU DIDN'T PULL OUT A DENNY REFERENCE!!!!
lololololol
November 19, 2008 at 2:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
Always wanted one of those SVDs. The Romanian knock offs are expensive as hell.
I have three Mosins. :)
November 19, 2008 at 2:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ironhorse (anonymous) says...
I think Newt removed herself after having a change of heart. I saw her at the gun range, she was sobbing of how she made a mistake voting for Obama and was seen with "Palin 2012" yard signs.
November 19, 2008 at 2:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nappyd (anonymous) says...
Proof once again that rednecks have to overcompensate for other areas.
Nothing wrong with owning a gun for home/personal protection since 911 won't save you if someone breaks in during the night, but seriously an AR-15 is a bit of overkill. If you want to have fun shooting a large weapon, just play video games instead. It's a lot cheaper.
November 19, 2008 at 2:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SpiderJohn (anonymous) says...
I think Newt has a point.....and a Palin 2012 sign seems like the last thing Newt would be holding.
JMHO
November 19, 2008 at 3:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SimplyMad (anonymous) says...
Wow. Hot topic.
Pillsbury, the founders insisted that the people (militia) have the latest and greatest weapons, at the time, they were muskets. Now is no different, I am not saying we should be able to own full auto weapons (but with several hundred dollars and a licence you can own one). But, just because a rifle is a military style weapon, doesnt make it an assualt weapon. I believe the Ruger mini 14 fires a .223 just as the AR-15, in semi-auto mode only of course.
Do you still want to drive around in a horse and carriage or a car? The founders were not prophets, but they did understand government and the road to government abuse and control. They knew an armed people had a chance to protect their property, and life as well as their liberty and the liberty of their perspective state and nation.
November 19, 2008 at 3:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigSargeofSC (anonymous) says...
Philsbury, I never said that the Democrats wont to abolish the 2nd Amendment. But they do, however, want to put limits on my rights under the 2nd Amendment. With respect, I think you and I have come to the point where we must agree to disagree. But I have enjoyed the debate.
nappyd, Americans are glued to their T.V. sets way too much already. I don't see where playing a video game can compare with actually firing a weapon. As an Army veteran, I know that for a fact. With logic like that, you'll be suggesting that we all have cyber sex in order to practice safe sex.
November 19, 2008 at 3:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SimplyMad (anonymous) says...
nappyd - it is called my individual right. If I want an AR-15, then I will buy one, however, I prefer the Warsaw PAC AK-47, that I have. Its a great more fun to shoot, although the ammo (7.62x39) can be a bit dirty.
Anyway nappyd, if you want to restrict someones rights, feel free to stop posting your opinion.
November 19, 2008 at 3:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
kontact (anonymous) says...
TO ALL: South Carolina ranks at the bottom in education for all states and yall think this is an important issue right now?? They just approved the murder DUI lawyer to practice law again in our state. All employers are laying off. Guess I need to run out and get a gun too.
Message: WHO THE HELL CARES IF WE CANT FIND A JOB TO PAY FOR THE GUNS??
November 19, 2008 at 3:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigSargeofSC (anonymous) says...
TO KONTACT: The People of South Carolina did not approve the lawyer getting his license back, the Supreme Court made that ruling.
If you see these posting and think they're just about gun control, then you are indeed a shallow person. Standing up for our rights under the Constitution is always important.
November 19, 2008 at 3:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pillsbury (anonymous) says...
BigSarge, I respect your opinion. And we'll have to disagree.
Also, everyone stop attacking South Carolina. It's unfair. This is an argument that could happen anywhere. Simply because people believe in gun rights does not make then ignorant rubes.
November 19, 2008 at 3:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ceecee (anonymous) says...
Just realize that your unfettered right to bear arms (any arms) will have consequences. Assuming the most stringent gun bans are in place they still will not stop an otherwise "normal" person who snaps one day and takes their legally purchased assault rifle to a park and starts mowing people down. Obviously I hope something that terrible never happens but realistically it probably will, it is just a matter of when.
I understand the implications of restricting the right to bear arms I just think there are unintended consequences on either side. I guess you just have to decide which one you can live with. I can still remember the looks on the faces of the kids and parents after the shooting at Columbine. In this day and age I think it is more realistic that something like that will happen before you will need a weapon to defend yourself against the government of the U.S. and a hand gun (or two) would surely suffice in a home invasion scenario
November 19, 2008 at 3:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
Let's assume that the home invasion involves four or five poor, disadvantaged, sexually abused as children, low self esteem individuals with little or no regard for human life.
Comforting to have a semi auto capable of making Swiss cheese look a likes out of these dirt bags in contrast to fooling around with a less "inclusive' handgun or slower firing shotgun or long gun.
November 19, 2008 at 4:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigSargeofSC (anonymous) says...
We all know that having rights also affords the chance that someone will abuse those rights. We have the right to drink, and we see people getting killed by DUI crashes all the time. There have been cases where private airplanes were used as weapons, but we still have the right to pilot our aircraft. We have the right to bear arms, and you have those people who would abuse that right. However, the abuse of rights by some does not warrant the punishment of all by limiting individual rights. Gang bangers and drug trafficers are not buying their guns in accordance with any law. No Supreme Court ruling will ever have an impact on that fact. To limit the rights of law-abiding citizens in an attempt to restrict criminals is fairy tale that will never come true, no matter how many laws and rulings the Congress and courts make. There will never be a compromise to this debate that will be accepted by all. We are too diverse in our culture for such a thing to ever happen. What gun and rifles I choose to own is my right, and the government has business infringing upon that right.
November 19, 2008 at 4:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
onesidedsquare (anonymous) says...
A smart man once said "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
If that's the cause does that mean those people who are scared of gun and who want gun control are retarded?
I think so, enjoy your straight jacket and electro shock government sponsored therapy.
Also, Penn and Teller did a good documentary on gun control, look it up
November 19, 2008 at 4:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ceecee (anonymous) says...
I know this is hypothetical but I am curious. If the only way to keep guns away from criminals was to destroy them all (again this is just for sh**s and giggles) and be assured that no more were made, would you give up yours?
November 19, 2008 at 5:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
no
November 19, 2008 at 5:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
Hell no! Killers don't need guns to kill but guns can stop killers from killing.
November 19, 2008 at 5:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ceecee (anonymous) says...
Fair enough Yird
Bulldog. What is your reason?
November 19, 2008 at 6:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
kontact (anonymous) says...
Ok , so yall wanna protect yall houses with ak-47s like the idiot on haloween who shot up the family trick or treating. Sounds like him protecting his home is ok in yall eyes. Give it a rest. hy is this so important. I have always wanted to know this. If it aint about guns then cant we find another violation of our rights that gov't is trying to regulate except justifying having uzis.
November 19, 2008 at 7:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SCPDBLUE (anonymous) says...
The Ruger Mini-14 does fire the .223/5.56 but yird's Ruger Mimi-30 Fires the 7.62x39 which is the same round that the SKS and AK-47 shoots. Power is about the same as the 30-30 Winchester or Marlin Deer rifle. I've hunted with my SKS before ,Good for shooting deer out to 75 - 100 yards.I handload the 7.62x39 round with 125grain Nosler BallisticTip,Good expansion with clean kills. Now if I'am over looking a Corn or soybean field I us my Russian SVD Sniper rifle or my Russian Mosin Nagant Sniper. Cal. 7.62X54r power is about the same as a 30-06.Loaded with 150gr or 165gr.Nosler BallisticTip,Flat shooting out to 250-300yards but most shots are 100-150 yards,they go no more than 10 yards most are DRT (Dead Right There). In the end Military firearms do have a place not only for collecting and shooting but for hunting as well.Remember its not the handgun that kills its the hand. truth in sentencing not gun control is the answer. Be safe out there and have a Happy Thanksgiving:}
November 19, 2008 at 7:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
GetSerious, If you knew anything at all about the history of those countries that incrementally disarmed their population by first making the gun owners register their guns, then turn them into armories for"safe keeping" and once having accomplished that proceeded to jail,torture,and murder those who disagreed with the government policies,you might not have such an undeserved and condescending attitude toward those who value the right to keep and bear arms.
Switzerland requires all males between 18 and 55 to be in the militia. They keep their weapons, ammunition and other assorted military gear in their homes enabling the country to mobilize in about eight hours if need be.
Murder rate is very low and nobody screws with Switzerland.
Might have something to do with the reason so many people choose to keep their monetary assets in that country.
Pretty safe not in spite of all the guns but because of them.
Before you jump on google or snopes I'll confess, my information is old and may have changed over the years.
If you discover me to be wrong I'm sure you'll be gracious enough to point that out to me.
November 19, 2008 at 9:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Surfcaster (anonymous) says...
A well armed society is a polite society.
November 19, 2008 at 9:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mgre85 (anonymous) says...
Yay now with all you right minded redneck fools buying guns now, looks like we will have more Columbines! SAD
November 19, 2008 at 11:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
onesidedsquare (anonymous) says...
mgre85,
kid, that one of the most illogical statements made by either side, please put down the Micheal Moore tape and pick up a reasonable brain that enjoys a moderate amount of alcohol
November 20, 2008 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mgre85 (anonymous) says...
awetsweitpwupotiaowirtgoihartshgslrhtowrhtowhertoihswrohtowsrhtaorihwtaowraowtuosyutosiytoasiytoisyo;tsyoyso;yosdy;rosyrosyrosdyrosdyroasdyrosydorasydouyrosduyrosdyroasdyroisurisuwr4taaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar654rt5a4r65tg5ar4t65e46t54r6e54t654asre5t4ae645t6s6e4t65sd4rt654s6e4t6s5re4t654er546t45er6t54se6r54t6sre54t6s5er46t54er654654ts65er4t4e4tsre54ts5er4t54er6t4s6er54t65er4654er64t6ser54t6s54er64te6r54t6e5r4t65e4r6t54se6r54t65e4r65t4er654t65er4t654sre654t654ret654er654t65er4t654er4t65er4t654er654ter4t654er654t65er4t654er54t65s4re64t65er4t654et646re54t65 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
November 20, 2008 at 12:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
relicsofwar (anonymous) says...
All of you gun enthusiasts in the Low Country should take full advantage of the 2nd Amendment Tax Free holiday on firearm purchases on Saturday, Nov. 29 at the gun show in Ladson. They always have a good selection of firearms and ammo and all the major gun dealers from around the state are usually there. What a great way to show our support of the 2nd Amendment and save some significant bucks on a new gun purchase! It's not very often that our government wants to help us purchase a firearm!
November 21, 2008 at 3:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SCPDBLUE (anonymous) says...
relicsofwar I would like to add to that. I worked at a gunshop in the tri-county area and of all the shows the Ladson one is the worse. What i mean by worst is, To many tire kickers,to many stories about granddady's shotgun or "you have $250 on that shotgun,thats too much,I'll give you $100 right now". That is not what gunshops want to hear they have to make a living too,the tables are not free,nor is gas or over time pay. The Mt. Pleasant show or in Columbia at the fair grounds are the shows dealers like.Buyer comes up to the table says,"do you have a GLOCK 22.Dealer,Yes I do it's $585. Buyer says I'll take. Thats what dealers want to hear.At the Ladson show the only one who makes out good is the promoter and the snack bar.If you want to support the 2nd Amendment at the Ladson show,BUY,BUY,BUY. Leave stories at home,Dont dribble on the guns for a quick fix and walk away and bring more than beer money.
November 22, 2008 at 7:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
relicsofwar (anonymous) says...
I appreciate the comment SCPDBLUE and can understand your thoughts from a gun dealers standpoint. I was trying to get the point across to the typical gun show attendees and those individuals THINKING about buying a gun that the show next weekend in Ladson would be a great opportunity. If everyone went and bought, the dealers would be happy and would continue to support the show. I might point out that the Ladson show is "the only game in town" as there has not been a show in Mt. Pleasant for over 8 years now. The next closest show is in Columbia at the Fairgrounds and is coming up on December 13-14. I have watched the Ladson show grow over the years and it is filled to absolute capacity with dealers everytime I attend. The same big gun and pawn shops are there every time the show comes to town, so they must be making money. Attendance at gun shows throughout SC has more than doubled in the past few weeks and I expect Ladson will do the same. Hope to see you at the show!
November 23, 2008 at 2:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SCPDBLUE (anonymous) says...
relicsofwar,See you there I'll be behind a table hoping for more buyers and less tire kickers.
November 25, 2008 at 8:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.