My right to bear arms is under fire right now.

We have a right to be armed in this country; not a privilege like driving, but an absolute right. I would support gun ownership for convicted felons, also. If you are deemed fit to be in society, you should be able to defend yourself (or overthrow a tyrannical government). The Hughes amendment and other atrocities have severely hurt the ability of the citizens to form a well armed militia, but the subject at hand is not "Should we bow down to the infrastructure?" It is the government deciding that the very fighting men and women it sent to carry guns and use them on other country's people might now be too fragile -after what they put them through -to have guns as private citizens.

Originally Posted by Nova_C

I get the feeling you're not debating in good faith.

All right then.

And I get the feeling that you just like to argue with me. No matter what the topic matter. I felt the smilie was sufficiently effective to show my feelings about your point of view.

Originally Posted by Chip

We have a right to be armed in this country; not a privilege like driving, but an absolute right. I would support gun ownership for convicted felons, also. If you are deemed fit to be in society, you should be able to defend yourself (or overthrow a tyrannical government). The Hughes amendment and other atrocities have severely hurt the ability of the citizens to form a well armed militia, but the subject at hand is not "Should we bow down to the infrastructure?" It is the government deciding that the very fighting men and women it sent to carry guns and use them on other country's people might now be too fragile -after what they put them through -to have guns as private citizens.

Actually I don't think that is the reason at all. If civil unrest were to become violent, for whatever reason, who would be better able to engage in an effective armed conflict with the government than troops who actually were IN combat?

If that is the motivation, then it is even scarier.

Originally Posted by Rich Z

Actually I don't think that is the reason at all. If civil unrest were to become violent, for whatever reason, who would be better able to engage in an effective armed conflict with the government than troops who actually were IN combat?

Interesting point Rich. When the gov oversteps to the point of pushback they would want young capable men like Outcast to be disarmed. And Chip is right if that indeed is the motivation, scary.

Honestly, That is what I was feeling from the start. Not only are they trying to allow the VA to tell law enforcement to come to my house and take my guns. But, they are allowing the UN dictate what guns Civilians are allowed to have. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz2DAdc1Goz

I got that from the FB page of the former Marine/current Law Enforcement officer who, every time I post something about Obama, calls me racist and tells me to move to Canada... It seems to be his only argument "if you don't like it, move to Canada. The US will be better for it."

I really don't see anyone "overthrowing" our Gov't. Nuclear weapons kill that fantasy. If they wanted us gone, we'd be dust. Plain and simply.

As far as this discussion goes, I think it's quite clear why you would not want psychologically compromised people having guns (PTSD sufferers, felons, etc..). And it would make little sense that they would train someone to kill, if they were so afraid that it would lead to an "overthrowing of the Gov't" by doing so.

I'm with you from a human to human standpoint, though, 100%. You fought for this country, and it's a shame that this country does so little to fight for you when you return home. You should be able to receive the proper treatment without any hesitation on the part of this country's leaders. And if this country feels that it's in our best interest to have people serving overseas with arms, than it's quite hypocritical of them to say that it's against our best interest here at home.

I do not think PTSD should be considered in the ownership of guns. Sure it might play a role but it shouldn't be the sole reason to be denied the right to bare arms.

The problem is Michael is the government is not taking care of its veterans. They keep taking away right after right from them. They make getting help from the VA sometimes impossible. They will fight you tooth and nail to pay as little as they can get away with. Our veterans are suffering, yet I don't see it on the front lines of the news. I see our President and current congress doing nothing to help Veterans but take away more money from the GI bill or from VA disability health care.

On the GI Bill note. The Montgomery GI bill will be going up in the monthly payments next year... again.... Yet, the Post 911 GI bill, the one the VA rep. talked me into using.. Has not seen a raise since I started using it in 2010...