obamarama

Joel, At least they accept your pro Nautique views over at TheMalibuCrew.com.

I appraise real estate and I go through peoples houses every day. A lot of people keeps guns around and a perp would have a problem if they went into one of these houses.

I was in a big rambling house awhile back that was owned by an older guy. He had guns everywhere. Even a .22 rifle barrel first in the umbrella stand mixed in with a bunch of umbrellas by the front door.

Good for you, Sanity.

Obama is against CC laws and protecting yourself in your own home.

2 Points Sanity!!!   LOL

I went to a friend's house for the first time as a 12 yo kid. I saw a .22 propped in the corner and asked about it. His father only said "it's loaded" and then watched my face.

It never came up again.

My parents had tought me about guns and I'm guessing he could see that.

M3,
I am very surprised by your opinions. I am a female, with a carry permit (meaning that I do have a license to carry)and the reason I supplied on my application for desire to carry was personal protection. The sheriff and a police officer signed my application.
I am a single mom, a hunter, I belong to a hunting club and my children both hunt.
I am capable, willing and able to protect my children and myself if an intruder should enter our home. My fiance also has a carry permit. I am glad to know that if I did not have a man in the house to protect me, I would be able to protect myself.It's not a fantasy.In today's world it is an unfortunate reality. I would much rather have a "chance" of survival instead of none at all should a person break in or even attack me when I'm not at home while holding a barrel on me.

M3Fan wrote: Unless you and your wife both carry then you can check the "victim" box for every situation besides nighttime invasions. Perps only strike at night, in your home I suppose. How is a gun in my bedside table going to protect my family while I'm at work all day or we're out of the house? Just curious.

That's why many states have CC permits. I gives the person the choice to be able to defend themselves. That's a Right that will come under attack with an Obama administration.

Luchog wrote: I've just read some stuff about the Arizona state regarding inmigrants laws and regulations, it seemed more like the 40s Germany than the current US. what the deal there?

Where did you read about that, and what do you mean by 40's germany? Isn't Brian(nuttyskier) from arizona? Where he be?

M3-Carry liscense!

Riley wrote: You obviously do not live in a rural area.

Actually, I'll give you that- that is a good point. If I lived in a very rural area my views would change a bit as the risk of collateral damage goes down dramatically and the proximity of law enforcement and other help increases proportionally. My scenario focuses more on urban suburbia.

Riley wrote: M3, that's YOUR fantasy. I don't know anyone that thinks like that. Although I bet Obama would agree with you!

If that's the case, then tell me how you are going to defend your home from an intruder with your gun. Please.

Morfoot wrote: If burglar,thief, or rapist may have just a slight moment of sense in their head of the possibility of an Uzi or some other automatic weapon lighting their backside up should they proceed to invade my home then it is worth it.

This is a situation that I like to call the "home invasion fantasy". It's totally off-topic but I'll put my 2 cents in anyway. Every owner of a handgun or assult rifle who keeps it in their home dreams of this day. In the home invasion fantasy, the perp enters your home, but wakes the proud gun owner up. The proud gun owner grabs his pistol out of the safe, tells the wife everything will be OK. Then, he sneaks out of the room and has a nice wide-open shot at the perp. The home owner says something like "You feelin' LUCKY punk? Make my day!" or "Hasta la vista, baby" and pumps the perp with lead, blows the smoke out of the barrel, and hugs his family who all lovingly look at him, and the gun, and smile. I call it the home invasion fantasy because it would most likely never happen this way. You will probably not be woken up by the intruder. If you do, you will probably not get a clear shot at him. If you do, you have to be ready to pull the trigger. If you do, you have to be prepared for the consequences of that bullet from the time it leaves the barrel until the time it stops. That includes the bullet stopping in your neighbor's chest across the street. It also includes the bullet stopping in any of your kid's rooms if they are behind the perp. If you get into a hand-to-hand fight with the perp, be prepared to have your weapon used against you and your family. Also, you have to be prepared for your children to accidentally discharge the gun when you're not home. Basically, if you want to defend your home with a gun, that's great, but I would highly advise that you get professional indoor close-quarters tactical training with your weapon and forget about the home invasion fantasy.

Back on topic...

"BE VERY VERY AFRAID

There is really no possible way to overestimate the stupidity of some -- perhaps far too many -- of the American voters out there. There's a New York Times poll out there of early voters in Florida and Ohio -- two so-called "battleground states." Of the people who have ALREADY voted 6% in Florida and 3% in Ohio don't know who they voted for."

from Nealz Newz

MarineTech wrote: Things like that are why they continually try to legislate our guns rights away when as it was aptly put, common sense was not used at all. Such a sad thing to have happen, but a new law will never prevent things like that. .

I don't want this to turn into a thread jack as we're getting off topic a bit but how does regulating weapons like an Uzi sub machine gun violate your right to protect yourself? These are weapons of war and that's where they belong. That incident happened at some sort of public fair so a law preventing their discharge WOULD have saved that kids life or if it hadn't an adult would be going to jail. As it stands now the authorities are "not Sure" if any laws have been broken, you can't see something wrong with that? Melt them all down and turn them and your 8 mpg SUV's into toasters.

Well here is my take:

1. There is not an enviroment crisis. There is a re-use crisis. Look at all of the stuff we throw away. If all of that plastic was recycled we would not be filling the ground with trash.

I'm not a tree hugger but my wife and I recycle just about everything. We put about 1/2 of a 35 gallon trash can out every week.

2. Money crash..stock crash: We brought it on ourselves. Look at all of the 70K wakeboard boats out there. If you don't spend within your means, this is what happens. Same with the government. If people bought boats within their means (older boats still running) then ERIC would have more business.

3. Energy: That goes with the Enviroment thing....the need to recycle and improve efficiency. Everybody wants all of these electric cars but nobody has started talking about what happens at the end of their life cycle. Just wait...the electric car battery "crisis" will be about 5 years down the road.


I bought a saturn car in 2001 when I was in college, it got 40-45mpg. Try to find a saturn today that gets that mileage??? Something is wrong there.

Wow, I've been out all day and I hoped this topic wasn't turned around or dead. Thanks to Riley, Tim, Hollywood and others the common sense does prevail, though as others have said, none was exercised at that gun fair. Things like that are why they continually try to legislate our guns rights away when as it was aptly put, common sense was not used at all. Such a sad thing to have happen, but a new law will never prevent things like that.
On a better note, the cartoon above is so appropriate right now.

Boy....who you calling Boy?