Maybe... on the Peoria.com Forums

Romney ain't that bad...

@Pock:

All he has to say to get my vote is that he will leave my guns alone.

* This message has been revised.

@meanjarhead:

No one is talking about guns, certainly not Obama.

Romney is the only candidte who has signed a gun control law.

Someone has hijacked pock's account.

Why is it when Obama was speaking about Gun Ownership, he mentions Hunting and Sport Shooting, but doesn't mention it as a deterrent to tyrannical Government, how can he speak of tradition and NOT mention that core aspect of Gun ownership?

So you think a current head of state should encourage an overthrow of the government?

@joepyeweed:

You need the military behind you for that. Their close just not to that point yet.

@joepyeweed:

I think, he is an American first and foremost, should acknowledge, that any government, no matter how idealistically started, can become despotic. Furthermore, that the historical link between the English Bill of Rights and ours is paramount; that arms are in place so that no "king" can rule without consent. That it is the responsibility of the people to ensure government is kept in check , that the drafters of our Constitution knew the importance of this, thus securing those rights in the second amendment, then he should of touched on the importance cultural and traditional value of Hunting and sport.

@Pock:

And duels.

None of those activities require an assault weapon with a huge magazine. Doesn't take a cannon either!

@Ramble On:

Which activities do you speak of?

There are a lot of 2nd Amendment advocates who use the 1st Amendment as the standard by which they defend their right to their arsenals. And I just don't get it....sure, the 1st Amendment protects jerks like that church that protests military funerals and tasteless pornography. As a society, we have established that the 1st Amendment does not protect pictures of kiddie porn, rape porn, or the right to scream "fire" in the middle of a theater.

It's time we, as a society, hold those 2nd Amendment supporters to the same standard....the standard of reasonableness. And what is reasonable? Well, that's should be part of the public discourse.

@anonymous:

How are we not held to that standard now? The limitations on free speech you mentioned are appropriate, but they don't limit the ownership of a camera, a 32 gb digital card, a reproductive organ or a set of vocal chords. What they DO limit is activity. You cant use the camera to film child porn. You can't use your Johnson to rape a girl. You can't use your vocal chords to shout fire in a crowded theater.

Gun owners cannot use their firearms to commit criminal acts. The fact that some people do film child porn should not prevent the remainder of society from owning cameras. And if you know my wife, then you also know that they can have her camera when they pry it from her cold, dead fingers. And no, she does not photograph porn of any kind.

@AV8R:

Well Said.

"Gun owners cannot use their firearms to commit criminal acts."

Says who?

I come from hard core country folk. My kin all hunted to keep their family fed. My father has several shotguns and pistols..I grew up at his knee watching him oil and maintain them.

We have no firearms in our home...nor will we ever. And that's a conscious, discussed decision on the part of my husband and myself. We don't live in fear...and actually we rarely lock our doors. Someone wants to come in and take our stuff...have at it.

It's a fool who thinks those types of firearms are what this public discourse is about.