or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Positions on Guns in America
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Positions on Guns in America - Page 5

Poll Results: How do you feel about guns in the US? (click all that apply)

Poll expired: May 12, 2007 This is a multiple choice poll
  • 19% (38)
    It is too easy to buy a gun in the US.
  • 3% (6)
    The proper systems are in place to control guns.
  • 6% (12)
    Gun control laws already go too far.
  • 7% (15)
    Guns save lives.
  • 14% (28)
    Guns are dangerous and should be strictly controlled.
  • 10% (21)
    Guns are a menace and should be banned.
  • 4% (9)
    The 2nd Amendment is sacrosanct (assuming it allows possession).
  • 13% (26)
    The 2nd Amendment is out of touch with modern America (assuming the same)
  • 3% (7)
    College student should have the right to protect themselves with guns
  • 17% (34)
    College campuses are no place for weapons
196 Total Votes  
post #161 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

point....??? It was a CAR BOMB, not friendly fire or a gun battle.
We don't generally have car bombs as random acts in the US.

"Highly trained and well-armed US soldiers killed by Atomic Weapon. Atomic weapons to be banned. Film at 11... "


There is no point here. They were killed by a bomb in a war zone.


(Sorry, I meant to reply to the original. Good thing I was not firing a gun :-)
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #162 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

There is no point here. They were killed by a bomb in a war zone.

As opposed to the VT situation, where they were killed by a gun in a gun free zone. Or the other mass killings that always seem to take place in these ultra safe gun-free zones....

"Hey, wait a minute this is a gun free... " BLAM

"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #163 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

As opposed to the VT situation, where they were killed by a gun in a gun free zone. Or the other mass killings that always seem to take place in these ultra safe gun-free zones....

"Hey, wait a minute this is a gun free... " BLAM


I suspect your on commission or something. Didn't you say you instruct people how to kill their fellow citizens, I would say that classifies as a vested interest. ;-)..

"Guns for students Ra. .. Ra. National Guns for Students day, Give a poor student a gun, For his.or her own safety."

I can see it now...

"All we are saying.. Is give us some guns..." LOL
post #164 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by OfficerDigby View Post

I suspect your on commission or something. Didn't you say you instruct people how to kill their fellow citizens, I would say that classifies as a vested interest. ;-)..

"How to kill their fellow citizens..." Wow, you sound just like the clowns at IANSA.

Actually, I instruct law-abiding people on how to defend themselves when their fellow citizens try to harm or kill them. My "vested interest" is primarily in having the ability to defend myself and my family at work and at home. If I can transfer some of that knowledge to other "good guys," so be it. I do it gladly, and often free of charge because I BELIEVE in it. No one should be defenseless because of their government in the face of criminal attack, should they so choose.

At least here in the States we have the option. You nice folks in the UK have let your government take away your ability to resist the criminal element effectively.
Maybe it's a cultural difference... here it can take 10-20 minutes for police response. By that time they can collect bodies and do paperwork.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #165 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

A question:

Crime resolution increased dramatically in the UK after the installation of tons of surveillance cameras. What about any impact of the crime rate? What is the current situation with cams in the US? Modern cams are cheap and can be wireless, allowing for cheap installation and upkeep.

Wireless? But don't you know WiFi is KILLING US!! Oh, wait, wrong thread!


Seriously, extensive use of cameras may deter crime, but too many Americans would (rightly IMHO) associate it with this:

You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #166 of 367
Anti-war protester threatens GOP official with a gun...

Seems like something was lost in translation on that whole "opposing violence for political ends" thing...

Quote:
Zachary Moyle, executive director of the state GOP, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that Kramer invited him to look at something in the trunk of his Mercedes before pulling out a rifle, pointing it at his face and warning that he would be back if President Bush vetoed an emergency war spending bill being considered by Congress.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #167 of 367
Thread Starter 
Did you see the list of what was in the guy's car?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070425/...s/gop_threat_1

"A man accused of threatening a Nevada Republican Party official with a rifle was arrested Tuesday in a vehicle in which police found swords, knives, a shotgun, shells and a flare gun, authorities said."



Wacko

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #168 of 367
Yeah, all that and no handgun.

'still could have accomplished whatever he was committed to doing...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #169 of 367
Thread Starter 
Policing is dangerous work.


http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/25/tro....ap/index.html

New York troopers shot.

If these creeps didn't have guns, then the troopers wouldn't get shot.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #170 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Policing is dangerous work.


http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/25/tro....ap/index.html

New York troopers shot.

If these creeps didn't have guns, then the troopers wouldn't get shot.

True. They need to be punished very severely, and in a way that does not punish those that did not do it.
I wonder if these "creeps" were already violating gun laws? Obviously, they have no respect for "laws" anyway.
In Texas, that is attempted capital murder.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #171 of 367
Ya know, if folks want to go the RTBA way I think we should just use the Swiss model.

Every male serves in the militia until 30 and gets a 5.56 assault rifle. Officers get a 9mm. Everyone gets trained. Everybody serves. Mandatory quals, range time and service.

It would have been nice if the founding fathers followed the Swiss model way back. A bit tougher to get socialized into our culture now.

Vinea
post #172 of 367
Kansas City Mall Shooting

I'm surprised nobody brought this up.
post #173 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Policing is dangerous work.


Grandmother's too.


"Two police officers pleaded guilty Thursday to manslaughter in the shooting death of a 92-year-old woman during a botched drug raid last fall. A third officer still faces charges.

Officer J.R. Smith told a state judge Thursday that he regretted what had happened.

'I'm sorry,' the 35-year-old said, his voice barely audible. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter, violation of oath, criminal solicitation, making false statements and perjury, which was based on claims in a warrant.

Former Officer Gregg Junnier, 40, who retired from the Atlanta police in January, pleaded guilty to manslaughter, violation of oath, criminal solicitation and making false statements. Both men are expected to face more than 10 years in prison.

In a hearing later in federal court, both pleaded guilty to a single charge of conspiracy to violate a person's civil rights, resulting in death. Their state and federal sentences would run concurrently.

The charges followed a Nov. 21 'no-knock' drug raid on the home of Kathryn Johnston, 92. An informant had described buying drugs from a dealer there, police said. When the officers burst in without warning, Johnston fired at them, and they fired back, killing her."
post #174 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post


Grandmother's too.


From the article:

Quote:
He said Johnston fired only once through her door and didn't hit any of the officers. That means the officers who were wounded likely were hit by their own colleagues, he said.

post #175 of 367
This, taken with the friendly-fire NY State Trooper shooting, I dunno. Maybe we should disarm the police instead?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #176 of 367
I can't believe people still debate this. The 2nd amendment is clear:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

translation:

"Because we don't want to have a large, standing army (because having one here in 1775 made the revolution really difficult), we want people to be in smaller militias. Because of this, people are free to KEEP arms in their homes. They are also free to BEAR (commonly misread as "carry," but it really means "endure") the keeping of those arms in their homes. And you don't get to shoot them, because we didn't say anything about that."
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #177 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I can't believe people still debate this. The 2nd amendment is clear:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

translation:

"Because we don't want to have a large, standing army (because having one here in 1775 made the revolution really difficult), we want people to be in smaller militias. Because of this, people are free to KEEP arms in their homes. They are also free to BEAR (commonly misread as "carry," but it really means "endure") the keeping of those arms in their homes. And you don't get to shoot them, because we didn't say anything about that."

Clear in your particular line of thinking... but quite the opposite in practice. Keep em means keep em. Bear em means carry em.

"endure"

Why does it say "right of the PEOPLE" and not "right of the MILITIA" ?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #178 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Clear in your particular line of thinking... but quite the opposite in practice. Keep em means keep em. Bear em means carry em.

"endure"

I'm just looking at what the owner's manual says. It says keep and bear. Doesn't say shoot. Doesn't say carry around.

Quote:
Why does it say "right of the PEOPLE" and not "right of the MILITIA" ?

Because militiae are made up of people, dummy! What do you think militiae are made of? Kittens? Robots? Zombies? Robot zombies?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #179 of 367
Thread Starter 
Killer Robot Kitten Zombies!

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #180 of 367
You just said it.. the militia are PEOPLE... THE PEOPLE.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #181 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

You just said it.. the militia are PEOPLE... THE PEOPLE.

No. A militia is made up of people, so you need people to be able to "keep" guns so that when they get together to go militia-ing, they have all the right props. But random groups of people do not constitute a militia. Maybe this is why so many people misread the 2nd amendment? Do they think that when they get into a group for beer on a Friday they constitute a militia?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #182 of 367
to keep and BEAR

bear- (bâr)


To hold up; support.
To carry from one place to another; transport.
To carry in the mind; harbor: bear a grudge.
To transmit at large; relate: bearing glad tidings.
To have as a visible characteristic: bore a scar on the left arm.
To have as a quality; exhibit: A thousand different shapes it bears (Abraham Cowley).
To carry (oneself) in a specified way; conduct: She bore herself with dignity.
To be accountable for; assume: bearing heavy responsibilities.
To have a tolerance for; endure: couldn't bear his lying.
To call for; warrant: This case bears investigation.
To give birth to: bore six children in five years.
To produce; yield: plants bearing flowers.
To offer; render: I will bear witness to the deed.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #183 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

No. A militia is made up of people, so you need people to be able to "keep" guns so that when they get together to go militia-ing, they have all the right props. But random groups of people do not constitute a militia. Maybe this is why so many people misread the 2nd amendment? Do they think that when they get into a group for beer on a Friday they constitute a militia?

Misreading. Yep. We've all been wrong for over 200 years.

Oops! We've been reading this wrong all this time!
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #184 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

to keep and BEAR

bear- (bâr)


To hold up; support.
To carry from one place to another; transport.
To carry in the mind; harbor: bear a grudge.
To transmit at large; relate: bearing glad tidings.
To have as a visible characteristic: bore a scar on the left arm.
To have as a quality; exhibit: A thousand different shapes it bears (Abraham Cowley).
To carry (oneself) in a specified way; conduct: She bore herself with dignity.
To be accountable for; assume: bearing heavy responsibilities.
To have a tolerance for; endure: couldn't bear his lying.
To call for; warrant: This case bears investigation.
To give birth to: bore six children in five years.
To produce; yield: plants bearing flowers.
To offer; render: I will bear witness to the deed.

Hrm. Some of those are very interesting. Maybe we're supposed to "endure" them? Or give birth to them? The right of the people to keep and invent arms shall not be infringed? The right of the people to keep and RENDER arms?

Why are you so selective in your interpretations, Jube?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #185 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Misreading. Yep. We've all been wrong for over 200 years.

Oops! We've been reading this wrong all this time!

You seem to think that such a notion is silly. Misreading the constitution! LUDICROUS! I mean, women have had the right to vote forever! And slavery! Isolated! Totally isolated!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #186 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

You seem to think that such a notion is silly. Misreading the constitution! LUDICROUS! I mean, women have had the right to vote forever! And slavery! Isolated! Totally isolated!

You're free to believe whatever deluded interpretation of the 2nd A that you want... just like the left "invents" new interpretations of the Constitution that serves their whacked-out ends. Abortion from 4th Amendment? Government into everything from the Commerce Clause?

Beyond all your thoughts on how we've been "reading wrong" for 200+ years, the reality is that you are going to have a hell of a time ever getting guns out of America. And if you do, a lot of law-abiding people are going to die to achieve your goal. That's the way it is. Sorry.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #187 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Hrm. Some of those are very interesting. Maybe we're supposed to "endure" them? Or give birth to them? The right of the people to keep and invent arms shall not be infringed? The right of the people to keep and RENDER arms?

Why are you so selective in your interpretations, Jube?

C'mon. You are being a silly, silly man.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #188 of 367
Thread Starter 
- deleted double post -

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #189 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

You're free to believe whatever deluded interpretation of the 2nd A that you want... just like the left "invents" new interpretations of the Constitution that serves their whacked-out ends. Abortion from 4th Amendment? Government into everything from the Commerce Clause?

The left? I thought it was Griswold v Connecticut, which ensures a right to privacy.

Quote:
Beyond all your thoughts on how we've been "reading wrong" for 200+ years, the reality is that you are going to have a hell of a time ever getting guns out of America. And if you do, a lot of law-abiding people are going to die to achieve your goal. That's the way it is. Sorry.

Indeed. The terrorists and their appeasers will, initially, put up a fight. But we will not be deterred.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #190 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Indeed. The terrorists and their appeasers will, initially, put up a fight. But we will not be deterred.

Terrorists? Please clarify..
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #191 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Terrorists? Please clarify..

You said

Quote:
the reality is that you are going to have a hell of a time ever getting guns out of America. And if you do, a lot of law-abiding people are going to die to achieve your goal. That's the way it is. Sorry.

You're suggesting that people will take up arms against a government that tries to take their guns away. I call those people terrorists.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #192 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

You said



You're suggesting that people will take up arms against a government that tries to take their guns away. I call those people terrorists.

I did no such thing. You are playing some Red-Dawn version of gun owners again. There are 300+ million guns in the country. No law or even house-to-house searches are going to get all of them, especially from criminals. In the mean time, Joe Law Abiding is going to be an easy target for these criminals. There is no real way to get guns out of this country without mass uprising from law abiding people and a crime wave from newly-empowered criminals.

Taking your misinterpretation as a mulligan... Those "terrorists" are people who believe in the Consitution of 1789, which we have already established should be re-written because it does not say what it really means.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #193 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

I did no such thing. You are playing some Red-Dawn version of gun owners again. There are 300+ million guns in the country. No law or even house-to-house searches are going to get all of them, especially from criminals. In the mean time, Joe Law Abiding is going to be an easy target for these criminals. There is no real way to get guns out of this country without mass uprising from law abiding people and a crime wave from newly-empowered criminals.

I hear that a lot. As if Joe Law-Abiding isn't already an easy target for them. As if there's some polling data out there about how many criminals are deterred by the possibility of gun ownership.

Quote:
Taking your misinterpretation as a mulligan... Those "terrorists" are people who believe in the Consitution of 1789, which we have already established should be re-written because it does not say what it really means.

Indeed. I feel kind of sad for those people who believe in the Constitution of 1789. Because—runs and checks calendar...yup. Thought so—IT'S NOT 1789. Any other things from 1789 you believe in? The absence of a professional, regulated police force? Slavery? Public hangings?

And frankly, you know, Jefferson thought that every generation ought to stage a revolution and forge a new social contract, since the various needs of each successive generation change over time. Not my fault so many people were cowards and fell down on the job. Probably too busy deifying the constitution of 1789 or something. Maybe playing games on the Wii.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #194 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I hear that a lot. As if Joe Law-Abiding isn't already an easy target for them. As if there's some polling data out there about how many criminals are deterred by the possibility of gun ownership.

Great. Let's make average people EASIER targets. And... polling data? What are you going to ask...
"Mr. Would Be Murderer Rapist Robber Guy, thanks for your time. Now that you've admitted that you want to victimize other citizens, please tell me if a gun would make a difference in the hands of your prey." Maybe we can find a criminal opinion here...


Quote:
Indeed. I feel kind of sad for those people who believe in the Constitution of 1789. Because—runs and checks calendar...yup. Thought so—IT'S NOT 1789. Any other things from 1789 you believe in? The absence of a professional, regulated police force? Slavery? Public hangings?

Strawman. You crack me up. Support for the "real" 2nd A now means support of slavery and public hangings. Nice leap.

Do you advocate a ConCon?
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #195 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Great. Let's make average people EASIER targets. And... polling data? What are you going to ask...
"Mr. Would Be Murderer Rapist Robber Guy, thanks for your time. Now that you've admitted that you want to victimize other citizens, please tell me if a gun would make a difference in the hands of your prey."

Sure. I mean, if people are going to talk about the deterrent effects of guns, I'd like to know they're not just making it up. I mean, does a meth-head considering breaking into my house worry that I have a .38 in my closet? Does a meth-head downtown considering mugging me worry that I have a 9mm? Enquiring minds want to know!

Quote:
Strawman. You crack me up. Support for the "real" 2nd A now means support of slavery and public hangings. Nice leap.

Waitaminute. So you say you believe in the constitution of 1789 and me saying a) it's not 1789 anymore and b) asking if there's anything else from 1789 you believe in is all of a sudden a strawman?

Ugh.

I'm so confused. Either you want the 1789 constitution or not. You don't get to pick and choose which bits of it you want to keep. It's not like it's Leviticus or anything! Now THERE'S an old document you can pick and choose from!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #196 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Sure. I mean, if people are going to talk about the deterrent effects of guns, I'd like to know they're not just making it up. I mean, does a meth-head considering breaking into my house worry that I have a .38 in my closet? Does a meth-head downtown considering mugging me worry that I have a 9mm? Enquiring minds want to know!

I want the 1789 Constitution as Amended. Simple enough? That gets it all in there, the RKBA, prohibitions on slavery, addition of suffrage, all those nice things.

To answer your criminal question, please print and place on your car and front door:



"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #197 of 367
Thread Starter 
You said it yourself... with the Amendments. That shows you believe the Constitution can be changed and therefore is not sacrosanct as you have said before. (or only those bits that you care about?)

Sorry, but I just don't buy your line, and you can keep your t-shirt.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #198 of 367
How about this compromise, which allows for the potential deterrent effect:

only 100 people in the country get to carry guns at any time. For a year. Then they give their guns up and another 100 people get them. The criminals would never know who has the guns! It's brilliant!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #199 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

How about this compromise, which allows for the potential deterrent effect:

only 100 people in the country get to carry guns at any time. For a year. Then they give their guns up and another 100 people get them. The criminals would never know who has the guns! It's brilliant!

Heck, I'd be a violent criminal if I could play those odds...

Increase that number to 10 million handguns, maybe we can make a deal.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #200 of 367
One more time... the BILL OF RIGHTS are not government-given rights. They are inherent.
They are not "open to repeal."

Why not wear that sign proudly if you feel so safe without a gun?
Why not advertise? If MY gun is not keeping you safer...?
Be anti-gun, anti-carry, and post it for the world to see. Be PROUD of not having a means of defense!
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Positions on Guns in America