Hunters Are Silenced In Gun Debate

see dog can explain. No one's been silenced in The Gun Debate--it's all about "free speech." Tell em see dog.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

It's all the PC bull hockey that causes it.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

At least with Bush and all others I could say he was showing his true colors or his dark side. It's getting so I don't recognize my own country's language.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Neither prog. I watch your party.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

someone watched fox, and tucker carlson's lie about THE PRESIDENT and the ACLU. Check it out-"do some research." I just read that somewhere.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

For example, I can't say Maj Hassan is a terrorist? Or replacing the "posterity" in the preamble wwith "diversity" per your prog ideology? Oh, not literally, it would require an amendment. Just in reality. Your beloved ACLU is Obama's biggest tool. Or is it the other way around?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

How about the un-Patriot act signed into law by bush and then extended and made his by obama? Does that qualify?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Feb-14-13 8:21 PM Unbelievable.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Repeat-"will someone -soon- list rights taken away"--not issues under debate in Mo. or anywhere else, and not yet law or as is the case in health ins. not yet in affect.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Right to not buy health insurance is gone. Then we have Cuomo and Bloomberg restricting rights on guns and what we can drink. And Mo. democrats trying to pass a law forcing all guns to be turned in 60 days after (if) it passed. Calif. trying to restrict guns even more then Cuomo and his minions have. Lots of ones out the. All you need to do is look and read the news. And no not fox or msnbc.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

was someone -soon- going to list the rights taken away by leftists-or is this more of those baseless talking points that didn't work in november?

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

There is no need for a ban. Just the lefts way of taking rights away.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

The writer of this opinion post states that Cattaraugus and Chautauqua sportsman would never shoot a fireman SO then why they need for a ban?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I try when I can. :)

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

need i say more? nope.

but here i go anyways....

anyways riderrr thanks for clearing up the $3 misnomer. i'm just now realizing the armpiit has a new moniker. this is my fault. i've been looking for the caps locked rants.

anyways thanks for exposing another falsehood & continuing ignorance riderrr.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

continued: 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

“When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” - Thomas Jefferson

“Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property… Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.” –Thomas Paine

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Some quotes from a post in a related article in the Philly Inquirer:

02/11/2013 Some "pro-gun" People, and their Thoughts

“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.” – The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution

“A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” – George Washington

“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

“When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort,

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

February 12th @ Albany 2nd amendment rally to have New York repeal Cuomo's Safe Act , war on citizens gun rights.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Emelye, who do you think is responsible for these high costs which you infer does discriminate against the poor? Could it be those compassionate and progressive thinkers on the left? Does this mean the left is conducting a war on the poor? How can we reconcile this without condemning those on the left? Troubling times we are living in nowadays in more ways than a liberal/progressive could have ever imagined.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Emelye brings up an interesting and developing Constitutional matter. The Supreme Court has traditionally taken issue with having to pay discriminatory taxes and fees as a prerequisite to availing one's self of his Constitutional rights. A prime example would be the matter of collecting a poll tax or fee as a precondition to voting. The 24th Amendment banned the practice altogether. Could it likewise be argued that having to pay a tax or fee to the government in order to avail one's self of his 2nd Amendment rights might also be illegal? Maybe just maybe, the government is allowed to make people jump through hoops in order to own a gun, however should any resultant admistrative costs be borne by society as a whole, as is the case with voting, rather than just the people looking to exercise their Constitutional rights?

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I suppose the fees for a pistol permit in NYC are so high in order to keep the poor people from having legal handguns. When I consider the massive income and wealth inequality that exists in NYC, I'm not surprised. Only wealthy and politically connected people in NYC get handgun permits.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

And many voices were tried to be silenced by those idiots in Albany over this but as yet they have not been able to do that. "A Hamburg attorney has filed a class action lawsuit against the State of New York and the new SAFE Act.

James Tresmond has begun the legal process by filing the necessary paperwork at the State Supreme Court in Buffalo.

Tresmond and his clients believe the New York SAFE Act restricts the second amendment rights of gun owners.

“We want to strike the law. We want to make sure that the rights of 1.5 million gun owners in the State of New York are protected,” Tresmond says. “They’re not with the law. Their rights, I would say, are just thrown aside.” It's far from over yet.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Not a $3 fee either as you stated. That $3 is the smallest fee involved in a list of them. And that list does not include any possible fees from the new un-SAFE and anti-American bill passed in Albany. That is why a democrat(of all things) is introducing a bill that will stop any additional fees in the future so cuomo can not tack them on.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

"not" hidden after all-----

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

well I see that the "HIDDEN FEES" are no "hidden" after all--that will thankfully close the book on this item. Now as to the topic at hand, I would state that this forum gives credence to the fact that no one's voice has been "silenced" on this gun debate-that's good, isn't it?

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »