Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

My blog is worth $238,235.88.
How much is your blog worth?

Technorati Profile Listed on BlogShares

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by

Blog Flux Directory

Subscribe with Bloglines


View blog authority


Monday, September 13, 2004

NASCAR’s new format is underway as the last points race was held Saturday night in Richmond. The last ten races will decide the champion. Only drivers that are in the top 10 in points are eligible to win. I am a NASCAR fan from way back, before the races were broadcast on TV. I do not see the point in the new format and have several questions that will be answered over the next 10 races. I will post something every week about this.
Football is back! I watched a couple games this weekend, both pro and college, and really enjoyed its return. My local college
UVA-Wise won its second game of the season. The Highland Cavs beat Cumberland TN 30-6. Go Cavs!!!
The presidential campaigns were almost silent this weekend. I guess the 9/11 anniversary was the reason. In the news was the Assault weapons ban that will end soon. I was never for this ban. I believe people kill, not guns. If we outlaw assault weapons then only criminals have them. When you ban something, I always wonder what is next. The law to me has not proven to be
effective at stopping crime. It has been effective at stopping law-abiding gun owners who want to shoot and hunt with these weapons. If we ban one gun, is my gun next? If we ban a book, is my book next? Where does it end?
CNN has lost all creditability to me. They have
two people on the pay roll who are also advisers to John Kerry. How does that work I wonder. If Fox news did that, the whole media empire would scream foul. I did notice that CNN’s polls did not show a bounce for Bush after the RNC. Every other major poll showed double digits. I think now I know why; don’t you.

Comments on ""


Blogger Brian Patton said ... (11:04 AM) : 

Well, I agree fully that the Gov't should not be banning most things. However, I believe that some things are so inherently dangerous, that they must be banned by all Gov'ts. For example, if nuclear technology was ever commercialized and sold in the market - that would warrant a ban, right? Otherwise, terror would run wild.

So, now look at why we would want to ban nuclear weapons. They are capable of killing far more people at one time than regular weapons. So, just carry that same justification over to an AK-47, Uzi, or Tec9's.

But, I understand your point about not wanting the Gov't to tell you what to do or not do. I would imagine I can think of at least one other area where you would allow the Gov't to prohibit an activity, right? (abortion) Or, prohibit the sell of something? (drugs, morning after pill, etc.)

Thanks Kilo. See ya.


Blogger kilo said ... (12:30 PM) : 

Thanks for the comment Brian! Well, here is my take on the ban. It bans weapons of the same caliber as I use to hunt deer with. The ban covers semi-automatics that LOOK like military issue weapons. Ok, as long as it does not look like a military weapon, it is ok. This makes no sense to me. Looks of a weapon do not kill, the person with the weapon does. I believe statistics show that most gun crimes are small caliber fire arms. .22, .38, 9mm, etc. that can still be purchased anyway. I believe that if I, or you, or our fathers want a .223 caliber rifle, which looks like a military M-16, and we pass the background check, what is the harm? If the anti gun lobby had its way, over half my guns would be outlawed; all of my semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and pistols. The right to bear arms intent was that every American can protect himself; not just the police, but all of us. Why should I be out gunned by thugs or terrorists’? The criminals will import their arms, just like drugs, and like I said, only they will be armed.


Blogger Brian Patton said ... (4:12 PM) : 

Ok, I see where we differ now. Correct me if I am wrong, but you take issue with a ban if it only limits weapons that "look" like military weapons, regardless of caliber size and function.

However, my support of the issue rests on the core of the law. What I feel is at the heart of the issue is the amount of shots that can be fired without out reloading and the speed at which they are fired. Under the 1994 ban, the maximum capacity of a magazine was set at 10 rounds. And, I think you will agree with me that if you or I cannot hit a deer with 10 shots, we need to turn in out stamps and leave the High Knob area hungry.

Also, I would submit that the best support of my side of the ban, is that Police Officers also supported re-newing the ban. Further, those people are most likely to be face to face with someone who can now legally buy a TEC9, Uzi, etc.


Blogger kilo said ... (7:04 PM) : 

Okay, 2% of all gun crimes are committed with these weapons. 20% of police are killed with these weapons. I ask if 20% are killed with this ban, how useful was it? as to clip size, any high school metal shop student can make clips, suppressers, etc. we differ on this: I think people kill people, you think a gun kills people. we can outlaw assault rifles, but they will still be sold on the black market. I bet the gun producers in other countries want us to ban them. I bet the mob does also so they can smuggle them in. To buy a gun you must pass a background check. The police are finally supporting this law after ten years of saying it does not work. That to me this is the point, Did it work? 20% of police shot? Now for the big fact: the guns used in these killings , 95% were bought illegally, not at gun shops. We can not stop it, just like drugs, it will always be available.


post a comment



THESE TWO BLOGGERS ARE Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket Contact Us

Image hosting by Photobucket

Contact Wise Girl Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting


Weather Forecast | Weather Maps Registered & Protected

    follow me on Twitter



    Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

    Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

    Skype Me - Carl Kilo