02-23-2008, 06:29 AM
| #41 |
| Senior Member  | Bravo to all who are against any more stupid laws, and also against placating the anti's. I'm done with the sorry I offended you stuff. Every time we bow, we get wacked. A gun is a gun, and if a youngster is trained, the gun is safe. I agree that laws should be passed to punish evildoers, and not to ban inanimate objects. Did I get everything? Hope so!!
__________________ Adapt, improvise, overcome.-Gysgt Highway, Heartbreak Ridge |
|  |
|
02-23-2008, 08:12 AM
| #42 | |
| Resident Armed Liberal   | Quote:
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France | |
|
| |
|
02-23-2008, 12:33 PM
| #44 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,087
| Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
02-23-2008, 01:45 PM
| #45 |
| Senior Member | I thought about getting my granddaughter a pink .22 rifle for her third birthday, but her mean ole Marine NCO daddy might give me a talkin' to!! He's really into camouflage colors these days, and would prob'ly just paint it green or something.
__________________ Adapt, improvise, overcome.-Gysgt Highway, Heartbreak Ridge |
|
| |
|
02-23-2008, 03:16 PM
| #46 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,313
| thats the whole problem few kids are being trained and exposed to fire arms in a positive way, all they know of guns is what they see in tv or some gang banger well you guys disagree and thats fine, I do see your point and its a shame our society has become this crazy. but i'm afraid this one will eventualy bite us and like usual some law maker will take this beyond the original grievance. I hope i'm wrong? Quote:
Last edited by mym1a; 02-23-2008 at 03:28 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |
|
| |
|
02-23-2008, 07:06 PM
| #47 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,087
| It isnt whether I disagree with you,it's whether I believe history.Every since the 1934 gun laws they have been chipping away at our rights.It just gets worse.There is nothing you can do to make these gun grabbers like you,they dont like themselves.Why should they like us? sam. |
|
| |
|
02-23-2008, 09:22 PM
| #49 | ||
| Resident Armed Liberal | Quote:
Nor do I believe that frantically trying to avoid anything that can be used as an excuse for more anti-gun legislation will stop the activists; they're offended by the mere existence of guns, period. So If my wife wanted a pink-stocked rifle with decals I'd give her one in a heartbeat, and screw what the Brady Campaign thinks. Quote:
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France Last edited by troy2000; 02-23-2008 at 11:02 PM. | ||
|
| |
|
02-23-2008, 10:38 PM
| #50 |
| Senior Member  | i think people should be able to paint there gun any color they want cuz they otta be in a safe or in the sight of a responsible person anyways, right?
__________________ Just LeDoux it |
|
| |
|
02-23-2008, 11:26 PM
| #51 | |
| Senior Member   Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 5,493
| I agree. I don't want any more STUPID laws. I also agree one should be able to paint their own firearm what ever color they want. Although, I believe with C&Rs it is illegal to do, as that would change its C&R status. In reading up on the rules, it said something about if it didn't come from the manufacturer with it or in that condition, it's been altered. Not those exact words, but to the point of what I got from it. But none the less, I agree one should be able to paint or finish their own firearm as they see fit. I mean it is theirs. It also isn't going to change the way it shoots or that it will shoot. I suppose another question could be, out of mere liability reasons that is, should or would a dealer or someone other then the actual owner be allowed to do it? I think if someone that does it to firearms they wish to sell should be allowed, as it is their business, a way they can make a stable living. Although they shouldn't be allowed to use those design or logos I mentioned. But I'm wondering if since there could be a liability issue, maybe it might not exactly be a good idea for someone to paint a firearm for someone else. I mean, let's face it. When a lawsuit is filed, lawyers and prosecutors tend to name anyone and everyone they can think of. However, In the instance of putting something on the paint job or finish, or in putting a design that could attract children, I honestly think should be prohibited. I say this and give this example, Their is an AK-47 in another thread of similar/same topic and the same one that was portrayed inn the news story that brought about this topic. It was/is a pink AK-47 but it also has the Hello Kitty logo on the butt stock. It is that which I feel could attract a child. Reason being, the Hello Kitty is aimed or marketed towards children. Thats who buys it things with that logo, or the parents of same. So in the instance of putting markings,logos or designs that could possibly attract a child, I have to say I feel should be illegal,prohibited and or banned. I mean come on people. All here would agree in a heart beat they're not only law-abiding but also a responsible gun owner. Yet 99% of the time were here of a child and a gun together on the news, one or more is dead, because it was found in a home or on a street or in an alley or wherever. Sure, it's usually the fault of the individual, or adult in the home. But why risk the possibility of attracting even more by having something on them, if not doing it is safer, and much more responsible. If it can be prevented, why not do what it takes to do just that. And I think having something that may attracts a child to a firearm other then the parents, is wrong. Remember, I'm speaking of something on them specifically aimed or marketed at children. Not just the color or colors of it. Personally, I love camo patterns, and not always in the A typical camo colors. Yes, we can and have the right (so far, shhhhhhhh, lol) to teach our own children about guns. Most gun owners do just that. But there are the children whose parents aren't gun owners, those who are and still don't teach their child/children about guns and children that don't have responsible enough parents to teach them about life let alone guns. You know what I mean. So please, remember I agree, we should be able to paint them how we want to. But not to put as I stated above something that is specifically aimed or marketed towards under the age children. I'm just thinking of the children. Yes it should be an individual right, but let's face it, people tend to take things in general to far. And if it came down to excepting a law like this over a law like serializing ammo or registering my guns, I'd much rather not be able to paint. I'm sure most would also. Besides, when a child picks one of them up and shoots themselves or someone else or others, then they'll ban them for sure anyhow. And probably not only the paint scheme,color whatever, but they'll just go for the entire guns as they are now anyhow. But that much faster if a child gets attracted to it because of how it was painted or what was on it and injures or kills themselves or others. All right, you can let me have it now. lol Quote:
__________________ I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6! Last edited by GlockMeister; 02-24-2008 at 12:01 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |
| |
|
02-24-2008, 03:41 AM
| #52 |
| Resident Armed Liberal | I think the whole issue is a red herring; I've never heard of anyone marketing guns to kids anyway, so why even worry about it? Every one I've seen online has been a custom job, done either for a specific woman or as a joke. And Glock, if you don't think grown women like Hello Kitty decals, ask around. You'll be surprised...
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France |
|
| |
|
02-24-2008, 08:56 AM
| #54 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 3,585
| Glockmeister I read your post and I have read enough of your other posts to feel that you really don't believe winning on a gun color would slow the anti-gunners push for serialized ammo or gun registration. I personally will concede nothing to the gun-grabbers. If my wife or granddaughter wants a pink rifle with or without decals I shall try to provide it.
__________________ America: Love it and protect it or leave it |
|
| |
|
02-24-2008, 02:31 PM
| #55 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,313
| well when the gun grabers pass into law another stupid edict that will go beyond the color pink you will no doubt whine and moan about your rights. I'll probably be here to tell you,(I TOLD YOU SO)!!!!!!!!!!!!!! again if you refuse to police your self some one else will and you won't like it!!!!! Quote:
Last edited by mym1a; 02-24-2008 at 03:06 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |
|
| |
|
02-24-2008, 05:47 PM
| #56 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,087
| "I" lack responsibility? I am running out of pink paint,do you have any to spare? sam. |
|
| |
|
02-24-2008, 06:21 PM
| #57 | ||
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,313
| Quote:
Quote:
yes it would appear so for one who claims to have sincere concern for a childs exposure to a woman in a bikini, one can only assume the same concern for a small child getting a hold of a firearm that resembles a childs toy????? Last edited by mym1a; 02-24-2008 at 06:41 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | ||
|
| |
|
02-24-2008, 06:29 PM
| #58 |
| Super Moderator   | banning a gun because of finish that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of, we have stupid bans placed on calibers around this country and to me any ban that is introduced should be shot down. okay are camo gun finishes next?
__________________ "Homeland Security is the responsibility of an armed citizen" ME http://webpages.charter.net/s.s.v/ |
|
| |
|
02-24-2008, 06:35 PM
| #59 | |||
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,313
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by mym1a; 02-24-2008 at 07:03 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |||
|
| |
|
02-24-2008, 09:17 PM
| #60 |
| Resident Armed Liberal | mym1a, are you seriously telling us we shouldn't give our ladies pink guns because it might give the anti-gun people an excuse to ban pink guns? Hello? If we do what they want so they won't pass laws making us do what they want, haven't they accomplished their purpose? let me say this again: absolutely no self-policing we engage in is going to stop the Brady Campaign from trying to take all our guns away. If we get rid of all the pink guns in the world, they'll go after the rest of them anyway. So why pander to them? Next you'll tell us not to own any black guns with scary-looking features, because it'll make them want to ban those...oh wait, they already did that, didn't they? And they're getting ready to do it again, and if we give them all up it won't even slow them down. They'll just move on to the next item on their agenda. They'll try to ban all semi-auto pistols, then all semi-auto rifles, then bolt-action rifles with magazines, then revolvers...right on down the line. And whether we paint our guns pink and chartreuse and stick decals of Tweety Bird on them or not won't make a damn bit of difference to their plans one way or another; they'll just seize on the next bs excuse, regardless. Anti-gun activists are like terrorists or any other kind of fanatics. Giving them part of what they want doesn't appease them; it just speeds up their agenda because it's one more step toward their goal.
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France |
|
| |
