"Toy/Fake" Gun Legislation?

[standtrooper]

Gun Control can be a touchy subject. As a member of the NRA and a former Security Police for the Air Force, I know it can be hard to tell if a weapon is real or fake.

Agreed. I can tell you from experiences in Iraq that I almost shot many kids on various occasions because they would point weapons at us. I would tell them that they should not point weapons at soldiers, those soldiers could shoot back. When soldiers go by wave, but point their toys at the ground so they don't risk getting hurt.

It's still hard. To think of the number of kids that I almost shot and most of them were under 6.

I would like to have comfort in knowing that if I shot someone it was because they were truly a threat. At the same time, I still have to go back and say as parents think about what you're doing and think about what your kids are doing.

I don't let my kids play with my blaster nor my resin BSG pistols, nor my airsoft BSG pistols. Not because I don't think they shouldn't be allowed to play with them, but because I want them to think about gun safety before they do anything. We don't aim guns at each other only light sabre battles. For me, it has nothing to do with the potential of another mistaking her for an armed killer, but that she will respect guns and treat all guns as if they are loaded (except for the two toy jango pistols she has). I have my bullets in a different area than the pistols and rifles, all of which are locked up.

The only thing I couldn't live with more than someone else killing my kids is if I did something to aid in them killing themselves.

I'm not saying this all goes back to parents, but I will say a lot of it has to do with complacency. Parents not being proactive in their childs lives and teaching them that they shouldn't do certain things... My mother was the same way... "just get outside and play" hell, I'm surprised I still have all of my body parts from bb gun wars, bottle rocket wars and other stupid stuff.

I don't want to be that way, I want my kids to know why things are done and why things aren't done.

stepping down now, and remember I'm in no way implying it's all parental faults, but it is still ultimately the parents responsibility for the safety of their children.

[timbremer]

i would like to know how a government of the people and for the people became at the people and for the high paying lobbiest and radicals with any crazy agenda on the wall. i am afraid to talk to the female students at the university i work at for fear of being sued or fired for what might be taken the wrong way, i can understand there being laws to protect people from mental and physical harm, but has it all gone too far. viva la revolution

[standtrooper]

I personally think that the ability to form a militia is still necessary. people should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people. they should be warry that if they get too much power we can form up and do something about it. that's part of why I'm against bans on assault weapons. if we need to go up against a government with an army at its disposal we should have rights to the same weapons that give us a fighting chance. I'm always playing the what ifs.

(and this post is why I'll never be allowed in the army :P )

Which part of this post would keep you out of the Army? The secessionist view and uprising notes? I fully believe it the right of the people to do so... the civil war is a prime example. If the people are not heard they have every right to say so. Do they have the right to revolt and take a state by force, no. Do they have the right to expect their elected members listen to them, yes.

If you mean compounds and separatist militias... I don't know about that. Everyone has the right to act as they wish under the laws that govern them. Militias are not illegal unless they do something illegal.

The people are what make this country, not the politicians, not the government. The people. The people drafted the constitution so that they would not fall under a tyrannical rule such as that of the English monarchy.

Making changes to the constitution that push us into a monarchy, chancellorship, dictatorship, facist state, communist state, socialist or marxist state are NOT what we the people want. If it were then we should give up and let everyone do what they want, robin hood all that there is... take from one to give to another. I firmly believe that this country is founded on democracy and the republic. I have always been taught that I can be anything that I want to be. I tell my kids that as well. In socialism, no matter how hard you work, you're always going to be giving it away to those that don't work as hard.

We are responsible for our future. By giving power to the government we are saying that we no longer want to be responsible, but lemmings ready to run off the cliff in any direction.

If we are to remain free and keep the freedoms we have we absolutely MUST stand up for ourselves and let the government do our bidding not the other way around.

To that end, do I think it's a bad thing for restrictions on toy guns... I think it violates my number one rule of don't be stupid. It seems to me that there has been a shift in state where people say I can do that because the govt didn't say I couldn't... it should be, instead, I shouldn't do that because it isn't right and the govt shouldn't HAVE to push a law for those that violate the "don't be stupid" rule.

So, finally, is it better to create a law that says hey don't do it... or is it better to push out awareness on a grand scale through advertisements, etc... "if you have a toy gun, you might get shot" and [devils advocate] how would a ruling in favor of this then lead to self defense shootings where a toy gun is there instead of a real one...

common sense, it's something we should use more.

(ok, I'm ready for my beating)

[standtrooper]

i would like to know how a government of the people and for the people became at the people and for the high paying lobbiest and radicals with any crazy agenda on the wall. i am afraid to talk to the female students at the university i work at for fear of being sued or fired for what might be taken the wrong way, i can understand there being laws to protect people from mental and physical harm, but has it all gone too far. viva la revolution

I agree. It is my firm belief that I went to Iraq because I signed a piece of paper... the reason does not matter to me... this not mine to ask why, simply to do or die. I didn't enlist for money, for gi bill, for student loans... I enlisted because I had wanted to since I was 5.

We have become so litigious in our society... that's why there are labels on everything. Instead of taking care of ourselves, we expect someone else to tell us when it's unsafe. I'm allergic to onions, I expect they'll be in a lot of things... I don't sue to ask that a giant sign be posted that this place uses onions. I have to take care of myself.

Litigation has become more and more where people don't accept responsibility for doing something wrong, but rather they believe because they did something stupid that they are owed.

Then there are other times where laws are designed to protect us from those idiots that think they can abuse the system by placing cyanide in tylenol bottles and therefore all rx from now on must have a tamperproof seal to be sold.

(ok, I'm done)

[Darth Fox]

To lighten the mood...

I was trooping on the corner of 135th and Antioch in Overland Park right next to the sign that said, "Star Wars Episode III NOW PLAYING" and the police showed up because someone said that there was a "terrorist" "waving guns at people."

FYI, I was just standing there in typical Stormtrooper pose. I wasn't waving a gun at anybody.

But, the police came, saw what I was doing, laughed, posed for some pictures, and left.

I won't make any Kansas jokes, but it is tempting...

[standtrooper]

That's what happened to the dealer at the ramada inn that I posted about. Lol... still funny

[rebelbuttkicker]

Well, the Civil War happened because the government infringed on state rights (one of the main ones, not the only one). What happens when you take away everyone's teddy bear ? They help some of us to go to sleep at night. Keeps the neighbors on their toes.

[standtrooper]

Well, the Civil War happened because the government infringed on state rights (one of the main ones, not the only one).

That's correct. Now for my evil phase -- What happens when the people of the country don't like those in power and those in power are leading us to a role of a dictatorship or full blown socialism? Should we then resort to asking for secession, revolt, riot or even terrorist tactics taking us to another Civil War?

What happens when you take away everyone's teddy bear :twisted: ? They help some of us to go to sleep at night. ;) Keeps the neighbors on their toes. :lol:

WTF! someone is taking away a teddy bear... I can't live with out them. Let's declare them an endangered species!

[Dwootan]

... taking us to another Civil War?

I think it is possbile that something like this could happen. I can only hope that our leaders either civilian or military will take the necessary legal actions to prevent such an event from occuring.

[TK2774]

Remember the amendment says well regulated malitia. Guess who gets to regulate the malitia? When the constitution was written the States were still young and there was no military. Thus the malitia was needed. Malitia's now would fall under the regulations of the United States Government who represents the people;) Except for some reason be it smart or dumb the government has not stepped in to regulate the malitias. As for the toy guns. Being an officer if I end up killing someone with a toy gun that looks like a real one, I did not make that decision. They did. I am going home. Suicide is not illegal. By pointing a toy gun at an officer you are committing suicide. I just hope that never happens to any officer, but hopes usually don't hold up long.

[TK565]

The 2nd amendment was Ratified in 1791 and language used has taken on different meanings since then.

in 1791 "Regulated" meant the ability to operate properly, today it has the additional definition of "to control or direct". So "Well Regulated" meant well supplied or well armed with the latest weapon technologies so they could operate properly on the battlefield.

Militias at the time were also inherently different than Armies and Mercenaries (Regulars). They were composed of private citizens and operated independently with little or no funding and support from governments. Simply men taking up arms to defend a cause. The founding father's recognized the importance of inviduals to own the proper equipment to form a "well regulated" militia. Thus the right to keep and bear arms was protected.

[rebelbuttkicker]

Sweet, when do we get the stingers?

[TK565]

Sweet, when do we get the stingers?

When people stop voting in Politicians that buy rolls of toilet paper with the Constitution printed on it by the crateload.

[standtrooper]

Sweet, when do we get the stingers? :lol:

When people stop voting in Politicians that buy rolls of toilet paper with the Constitution printed on it by the crateload. ;)

At least the toilet seats are worth $2000 :D

[rebelbuttkicker]

True, and they are pretty up-to-date.