Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Field & Stream Reader Exclusive: Ask the Vice President

Do you have a question for the Obama administration about guns? Now's your chance to get it answered!

On February 14, Field & Stream will conduct an in-person interview with Vice President Joe Biden about the Obama administration's proposals on guns—and we want readers to weigh in. What do you want to know about the administration's plans for and positions on making background checks universal? Limiting high capacity magazines? Banning so-called "assault" weapons? The importance of the Second Amendment? Any question is valid, as long as it pertains to guns.

Submit your questions to askbiden@fieldandstream.com. You must provide your name, address, and daytime contact information in order for your question to be considered. All questions must be submitted by 9 a.m. EST on Tuesday, February 12.--The Editors

 

Comments (34)

Top Rated
All Comments
from coachsjike wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

why are you so interested in funding and arming the muslim community in egypt yet bankrupting and diarming the united states citizens of america? noticed i said citizens, not the ones that your administration feels they are ENTITLED to be here!!!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 1ojolsen wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Coach: Yeah there you go. Why don't you just hold up a sign that says "I'm the reason we need gun control?"

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I suppose you could ask him what he has plagiarized lately.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CervusCanadensis wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Hey Editors, can you add the caveat that the questions should be free from bigotry, coherent, and must address legitimate (read: not paranoid) concerns?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from dukkillr wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Why bother? The message he'll try to sell us will be completely different than what he tells the Brady Campaign or any other anti-gun group, and we all know it.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from nehunter92 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Where to begin? I have so many questions to ask that I could practically write an entire book. Here is one that stands out (and that I can currently give intelligent phrasing to.)
Mr. Vice President
One of your well known stances regarding gun rights/ gun control is your view that you wish to “close the gun show loophole.” As in you wish to restrict the private transfer of firearms between private citizens that are not required (by federal law) to undergo a background check. This clause however does not just pertain to gun shows, as private sellers are not required to undergo background checks regardless of location. My question then, is how would the federal government possibly intend to enforce this law? How would you prevent two people from exchanging a firearm within their own homes an away from the public sphere? How could you stop me buying a firearm from a friend if I were to meet them at their own home and not in a public space? Is such a law even enforceable?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from woodpecker wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Dear editors, I have a concern, but I won't be asking my question if I have to submit my name and address. My fear is that I'll be one of the first ones that they'll come after, if this law does indeed happen. You see I'm in possession of an old military bolt action rifle that has a bayonet love and I don't plan on machining it off.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from coachsjike wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

hey 10jolsen,

whats the matter? truth hurt!!! we give egypt 1.5 billion dollars while our country is on the verge of a financial meltdown, hurricane sandy has devastated nj, ny, and conn and yet these people have yet to see a dime from FEMA. mine and everyone i know their paychecks are smaller, and my only vice besides hunting and fishing is going to the range to do some target shooting and i can't do that either because there is no ammo to find. why? because the obama adminstration says so. pi$$ off.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott Alexander wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. Vice-President,

Will the definition of assault weapon, which many quote as being semi-automatic, be set on a sliding scale that would one day include semi-automatic shotguns, semi-automatic pistols (regardless of clip capacity), and semi-automatic rifles that are modeled in the popular "AR-style" that are being maligned in the news cycle? It would seem that to include the definition of "semi-automatic" when used as a broad brush stroke in classifying assault weapons could also be used to one day include shotguns, rifles, and handguns that were purchased legally by law-abiding citizens with the intentions for hunting, sport shooting, and home defense. Should any legislation that is being considered for implementation have clear and concise definitions of what is an assault weapon and what is a sporting rifle, a shotgun for hunting, and a handgun for personal defense beyond the broad stroke of "semi-automatic" to prevent confusion not only in the discussion of the law but also in its enforcement?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from redfishunter wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I guess people didn't see the part where it said to email your questions. And another good requirement for submitting your questions is you have to be American. Fools like this cervus guy are always speaking their liberal views. But you aren't even American. Your opinion doesn't matter.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott Alexander wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I emailed my question. However, I also wanted to share my question with the Field and Stream community.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from badsmerf wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Why is this administration launching a clear assault against the 2nd Amendment? The wording is pretty clear that we have the right to bear arms, not the right to bear arms our government thinks is safe. What are you so concerned about.

How is the ban on handguns working out in Chicago? The failure to control the violence in Chicago is evidence that creating laws for people that already breaks laws only puts the rest in more danger. Try to answer the actual question, not tiptoe around it.

Why does this administration feel that laws and penalties are more effective than education and real effort to stop violence?

Do you feel the amount of violence has anything to do with the current economic situation where it is taking place? Outside of horrible mass shootings, the violence is taking place in urban communities. Could finding ways to put these people to work reduce violence?

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from labrador12 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I think some one should ask the Administration if they really feel that the American Sporting Community needs new laws to prevent us from attacking 5 and 6 year old children and their teachers in public schools?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sanjuancb wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I yield all my questions to Petzal and insist that he conduct the interview...

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from HeidelbergJaeger wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

badsmerf, the reason why the administration is against the 2A? It's their party's platform. The Attorney General himself said that "we really need to brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way...What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that's not cool, that it's not acceptable, it's not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we changed our attitudes about cigarettes."

This is the party platform- Holder was speaking to the Women's National Democratic Club. This is their party's ideology, just like every socialist government, this one wants you unarmed and dependent on the state for your survival. Look at the mandated health care, the entitlement society they coddle and the anchor babies that they depend on for their next generation of voters.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from RJ Arena wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

My question would be " What are your proposals to control Gang violence? far more children are killed each year by gangbangers than by lone shooters, How are you going to get the guns away from the illegal gun users? So what is your plan?"

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from like2fishhave2hunt wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

So sick of people like coach complaining that there is no ammo or ammo is so expensive because of Obama. Think it through, it's supply and demand driven by paranoid fears, just one of the effects of a (somewhat) free market.

Also sick of people like redfishhunter labeling people as a liberal (like it's a bad thing) just because they show some signs of reason and logical thinking. Name calling does not help anyone.

As for a question to ask, I would ask what can be done to address all of these "slippery slope" concerns that people are rightfully worried about.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from aferraro wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

1) According to the FBI "Assault weapons" are used in @ 1% of homicides in the USA. Is the real purpose of your "assault weapons" ban political or practice?

2) What specific weapons are covered by the second amendment? Please give us 10 makes and model numbers of guns that are constitutionally protected.

3) How effective has Chicago's gun control and enforcement been? Do you think Chicago's gun laws would be more or less effective if they were applied nationwide?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from weswes088 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

redfishunter,

Cervus canadensis is the scientific name for elk. So the guy (or gal) isn't necessarily Canadian, (s)he just likes elk. So maybe take a little time to look into something before berating it (a Google search would've taken about 10 seconds)

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from aferraro wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

1) According to the FBI, "assault weapons" are used in approximately one percent of all homicides. Is the purpose of an "assault weapons" ban political or practical?

2) What specific weapons are covered by the second amendment? Please give us make and model numbers for 10 guns that are constitutionally protected.

3) How effective is Philadelphia's gun control and law enforcement? Do you think Philadelphia's gun laws would be more or less effective if they were applied nationwide?

4) In the US, the average wait time for an emergency response is about 20 minutes. Do citizens have a right to defend their lives and property with firearms, or must they wait for police to arrive?

5) Please give us an example of an American city where strict gun control has made that city safer than its suburbs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ohiosam wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Ask him that since he swore an oath: "and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” and now is doing the opposite will he resign?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from redfishunter wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

weswe - Cervus is on here quite frequently. It is well known he is Canadian. So maybe take a little time to look into something before berating it (a Google search would've taken about 10 seconds)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from DTOME wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. Vice President,

Why is Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians.?

A General Service Administration request for proposal on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security and member components such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) seeking over 7,000 AR-15’s and matching 30 round magazines. The request for proposal describes these weapons as “personal defense weapons” and states they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”

Why is it suitable for personal defense use in close quarters by Homeland Security, But it NOT SUITABLE FOR CIVILIANS?

Is it a fact that our Police, Military and Government have ASSAULT WEAPONS with select-fire? The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons correct?

So how could our Police officer be out gun since civilians can not obtain the same kinds of weapons?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from redtbird wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

1. Why is my government, a government I served four years in the US Army Security Agency in the late 60s, including a tour in Viet Nam, a government whose Constitution I defended, whose laws I upheld, whose Citizens I protected, trying to make me a criminal? I have committed no crimes. I have not taken a life. My friends think I am a pretty decent person. I have three children and six grandkids. So why, if certain weapons or magazines or accessories are banned, and I happen to own one or more of them, am I then a criminal?

2. Big question here: Why is the United Nations, and other countries around the world, trying to disarm the United States? This refers to the Arms Trade Treaty and its long-reaching implications. An unarmed country, and its unarmed citizens, are ripe for invasion and/or take over by a foreign power, either internally or externally. There is always mention of “sleeper cells” here in America that could be activated by a foreign power, and cause great havoc on my fellow citizens.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from redtbird wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

It would be nice if we were still able to get through the email link and ask our questions. I tried one path and ran into tons of red tape. Then I tried to use askbiden@fieldandstream.com and the email was returned "This gmail address does not exist".

What gives F&S????

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

how do i ask my ? when the link is not working, not sure if f&s is aware of this, thought i would bring this up, also tried to use the link in my yahoo email and it gets returned, any help f&s so we can get our ? in thanks

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. V.P

I have two ?'s if allowed,
1- Why did David Gregory not get punishment for the crime he committed by using a real AR magazine that is illegal in the city he was broadcasting in after the police told him and/or his bosses that it is illegal to posses that magazine? I am asking this ? due to the fact that if the laws already on the books are not being used to the full extent then why do we need new laws when u will not enforce the ones u have.

2-I would like to know what the facts behind your answer is that a shotgun is all u need for self defense of your home?

Thank You
Dennis Miezio

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

askbiden@fieldandstream.com. looked this link up and it says it is not a valid link or email

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dave_Maccar wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Folks,
I've looked into the problems you've been having with the email address. I assure you, the email address is functioning. If clicking the link doesn't open a new email for you, please copy and paste or type the address into your email client/program.

Be sure NOT TO INCLUDE a period after the address if you copy and paste:

askbiden@fieldandstream.com

--DM

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from coachsjike wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

like2fishhave2hunt,
so let me get this straight...you honestly believe obama has nothing to do with our economy being the way that it is? or his hidden agenda on guns now coming out of the closet not an issue? you better wake up son and smell the coffee! when we no longer have ANY free rights in owning whatever firearm we choose and half of your paycheck goes to the government like britain, it would be because of people like you that are responsible for it. i work my a$$ off the have the life i have and yet our government wants everyone who is poor, jobless, or illegal to have those same rights. i will say to you what i said to 10jolsen...PI$$ OFF!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from coosabass2012 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. Biden, how can you justify taking an oath to defend the Constitution and then trying to dismantle it one freedom at a time? The 2nd Amendment was added to prevent the type of tyranny so many people have experienced in other countries after they were stripped of most or all of their gun rights.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from g.i.John wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

i would ask the field and stream team to clear up the misconceptions about the "Assault Weapons" that shoot out of "magazine clips" and ask him what his knowledge of basic guns is. i highly doubt that he knows very much.

the father of a girl i know got an AR chambered in .223 and i told her to look one up because she is away at college. she said it looked like a machine gun. i politely explained that the media says it is a machine gun. i told her to look at it without the quad rail and pistol grip and she said it looked like a normal rifle. i believe if the media saw a standard semi auto rifle (one like a 10/22 ruger) and watched someone put a quad rail and grip on then they would see they are no different then regular rifles.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from g.i.John wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

also if certain guns aren't covered by the 2nd amendment because they weren't around, then why do networks and news studios have a right to the first? they obviously weren't around when they wrote the first amendment so they should have a right to it, same as guns.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 9 weeks ago

when do we get to see the answers of this interview?

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from dukkillr wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Why bother? The message he'll try to sell us will be completely different than what he tells the Brady Campaign or any other anti-gun group, and we all know it.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from badsmerf wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Why is this administration launching a clear assault against the 2nd Amendment? The wording is pretty clear that we have the right to bear arms, not the right to bear arms our government thinks is safe. What are you so concerned about.

How is the ban on handguns working out in Chicago? The failure to control the violence in Chicago is evidence that creating laws for people that already breaks laws only puts the rest in more danger. Try to answer the actual question, not tiptoe around it.

Why does this administration feel that laws and penalties are more effective than education and real effort to stop violence?

Do you feel the amount of violence has anything to do with the current economic situation where it is taking place? Outside of horrible mass shootings, the violence is taking place in urban communities. Could finding ways to put these people to work reduce violence?

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from aferraro wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

1) According to the FBI "Assault weapons" are used in @ 1% of homicides in the USA. Is the real purpose of your "assault weapons" ban political or practice?

2) What specific weapons are covered by the second amendment? Please give us 10 makes and model numbers of guns that are constitutionally protected.

3) How effective has Chicago's gun control and enforcement been? Do you think Chicago's gun laws would be more or less effective if they were applied nationwide?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from nehunter92 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Where to begin? I have so many questions to ask that I could practically write an entire book. Here is one that stands out (and that I can currently give intelligent phrasing to.)
Mr. Vice President
One of your well known stances regarding gun rights/ gun control is your view that you wish to “close the gun show loophole.” As in you wish to restrict the private transfer of firearms between private citizens that are not required (by federal law) to undergo a background check. This clause however does not just pertain to gun shows, as private sellers are not required to undergo background checks regardless of location. My question then, is how would the federal government possibly intend to enforce this law? How would you prevent two people from exchanging a firearm within their own homes an away from the public sphere? How could you stop me buying a firearm from a friend if I were to meet them at their own home and not in a public space? Is such a law even enforceable?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from CervusCanadensis wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Hey Editors, can you add the caveat that the questions should be free from bigotry, coherent, and must address legitimate (read: not paranoid) concerns?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from labrador12 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I think some one should ask the Administration if they really feel that the American Sporting Community needs new laws to prevent us from attacking 5 and 6 year old children and their teachers in public schools?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from weswes088 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

redfishunter,

Cervus canadensis is the scientific name for elk. So the guy (or gal) isn't necessarily Canadian, (s)he just likes elk. So maybe take a little time to look into something before berating it (a Google search would've taken about 10 seconds)

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sanjuancb wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I yield all my questions to Petzal and insist that he conduct the interview...

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from aferraro wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

1) According to the FBI, "assault weapons" are used in approximately one percent of all homicides. Is the purpose of an "assault weapons" ban political or practical?

2) What specific weapons are covered by the second amendment? Please give us make and model numbers for 10 guns that are constitutionally protected.

3) How effective is Philadelphia's gun control and law enforcement? Do you think Philadelphia's gun laws would be more or less effective if they were applied nationwide?

4) In the US, the average wait time for an emergency response is about 20 minutes. Do citizens have a right to defend their lives and property with firearms, or must they wait for police to arrive?

5) Please give us an example of an American city where strict gun control has made that city safer than its suburbs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from HeidelbergJaeger wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

badsmerf, the reason why the administration is against the 2A? It's their party's platform. The Attorney General himself said that "we really need to brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way...What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that's not cool, that it's not acceptable, it's not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we changed our attitudes about cigarettes."

This is the party platform- Holder was speaking to the Women's National Democratic Club. This is their party's ideology, just like every socialist government, this one wants you unarmed and dependent on the state for your survival. Look at the mandated health care, the entitlement society they coddle and the anchor babies that they depend on for their next generation of voters.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from coachsjike wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

why are you so interested in funding and arming the muslim community in egypt yet bankrupting and diarming the united states citizens of america? noticed i said citizens, not the ones that your administration feels they are ENTITLED to be here!!!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from coachsjike wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

hey 10jolsen,

whats the matter? truth hurt!!! we give egypt 1.5 billion dollars while our country is on the verge of a financial meltdown, hurricane sandy has devastated nj, ny, and conn and yet these people have yet to see a dime from FEMA. mine and everyone i know their paychecks are smaller, and my only vice besides hunting and fishing is going to the range to do some target shooting and i can't do that either because there is no ammo to find. why? because the obama adminstration says so. pi$$ off.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott Alexander wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I emailed my question. However, I also wanted to share my question with the Field and Stream community.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from DTOME wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. Vice President,

Why is Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians.?

A General Service Administration request for proposal on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security and member components such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) seeking over 7,000 AR-15’s and matching 30 round magazines. The request for proposal describes these weapons as “personal defense weapons” and states they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”

Why is it suitable for personal defense use in close quarters by Homeland Security, But it NOT SUITABLE FOR CIVILIANS?

Is it a fact that our Police, Military and Government have ASSAULT WEAPONS with select-fire? The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons correct?

So how could our Police officer be out gun since civilians can not obtain the same kinds of weapons?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from redtbird wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

1. Why is my government, a government I served four years in the US Army Security Agency in the late 60s, including a tour in Viet Nam, a government whose Constitution I defended, whose laws I upheld, whose Citizens I protected, trying to make me a criminal? I have committed no crimes. I have not taken a life. My friends think I am a pretty decent person. I have three children and six grandkids. So why, if certain weapons or magazines or accessories are banned, and I happen to own one or more of them, am I then a criminal?

2. Big question here: Why is the United Nations, and other countries around the world, trying to disarm the United States? This refers to the Arms Trade Treaty and its long-reaching implications. An unarmed country, and its unarmed citizens, are ripe for invasion and/or take over by a foreign power, either internally or externally. There is always mention of “sleeper cells” here in America that could be activated by a foreign power, and cause great havoc on my fellow citizens.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from RJ Arena wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

My question would be " What are your proposals to control Gang violence? far more children are killed each year by gangbangers than by lone shooters, How are you going to get the guns away from the illegal gun users? So what is your plan?"

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ohiosam wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Ask him that since he swore an oath: "and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” and now is doing the opposite will he resign?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dave_Maccar wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Folks,
I've looked into the problems you've been having with the email address. I assure you, the email address is functioning. If clicking the link doesn't open a new email for you, please copy and paste or type the address into your email client/program.

Be sure NOT TO INCLUDE a period after the address if you copy and paste:

askbiden@fieldandstream.com

--DM

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from coachsjike wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

like2fishhave2hunt,
so let me get this straight...you honestly believe obama has nothing to do with our economy being the way that it is? or his hidden agenda on guns now coming out of the closet not an issue? you better wake up son and smell the coffee! when we no longer have ANY free rights in owning whatever firearm we choose and half of your paycheck goes to the government like britain, it would be because of people like you that are responsible for it. i work my a$$ off the have the life i have and yet our government wants everyone who is poor, jobless, or illegal to have those same rights. i will say to you what i said to 10jolsen...PI$$ OFF!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Scott Alexander wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. Vice-President,

Will the definition of assault weapon, which many quote as being semi-automatic, be set on a sliding scale that would one day include semi-automatic shotguns, semi-automatic pistols (regardless of clip capacity), and semi-automatic rifles that are modeled in the popular "AR-style" that are being maligned in the news cycle? It would seem that to include the definition of "semi-automatic" when used as a broad brush stroke in classifying assault weapons could also be used to one day include shotguns, rifles, and handguns that were purchased legally by law-abiding citizens with the intentions for hunting, sport shooting, and home defense. Should any legislation that is being considered for implementation have clear and concise definitions of what is an assault weapon and what is a sporting rifle, a shotgun for hunting, and a handgun for personal defense beyond the broad stroke of "semi-automatic" to prevent confusion not only in the discussion of the law but also in its enforcement?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from g.i.John wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

i would ask the field and stream team to clear up the misconceptions about the "Assault Weapons" that shoot out of "magazine clips" and ask him what his knowledge of basic guns is. i highly doubt that he knows very much.

the father of a girl i know got an AR chambered in .223 and i told her to look one up because she is away at college. she said it looked like a machine gun. i politely explained that the media says it is a machine gun. i told her to look at it without the quad rail and pistol grip and she said it looked like a normal rifle. i believe if the media saw a standard semi auto rifle (one like a 10/22 ruger) and watched someone put a quad rail and grip on then they would see they are no different then regular rifles.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from g.i.John wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

also if certain guns aren't covered by the 2nd amendment because they weren't around, then why do networks and news studios have a right to the first? they obviously weren't around when they wrote the first amendment so they should have a right to it, same as guns.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 1ojolsen wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Coach: Yeah there you go. Why don't you just hold up a sign that says "I'm the reason we need gun control?"

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from coosabass2012 wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. Biden, how can you justify taking an oath to defend the Constitution and then trying to dismantle it one freedom at a time? The 2nd Amendment was added to prevent the type of tyranny so many people have experienced in other countries after they were stripped of most or all of their gun rights.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from redtbird wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

It would be nice if we were still able to get through the email link and ask our questions. I tried one path and ran into tons of red tape. Then I tried to use askbiden@fieldandstream.com and the email was returned "This gmail address does not exist".

What gives F&S????

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Mr. V.P

I have two ?'s if allowed,
1- Why did David Gregory not get punishment for the crime he committed by using a real AR magazine that is illegal in the city he was broadcasting in after the police told him and/or his bosses that it is illegal to posses that magazine? I am asking this ? due to the fact that if the laws already on the books are not being used to the full extent then why do we need new laws when u will not enforce the ones u have.

2-I would like to know what the facts behind your answer is that a shotgun is all u need for self defense of your home?

Thank You
Dennis Miezio

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I suppose you could ask him what he has plagiarized lately.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from redfishunter wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

weswe - Cervus is on here quite frequently. It is well known he is Canadian. So maybe take a little time to look into something before berating it (a Google search would've taken about 10 seconds)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

how do i ask my ? when the link is not working, not sure if f&s is aware of this, thought i would bring this up, also tried to use the link in my yahoo email and it gets returned, any help f&s so we can get our ? in thanks

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

askbiden@fieldandstream.com. looked this link up and it says it is not a valid link or email

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jiggn wrote 1 year 9 weeks ago

when do we get to see the answers of this interview?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from woodpecker wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

Dear editors, I have a concern, but I won't be asking my question if I have to submit my name and address. My fear is that I'll be one of the first ones that they'll come after, if this law does indeed happen. You see I'm in possession of an old military bolt action rifle that has a bayonet love and I don't plan on machining it off.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from like2fishhave2hunt wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

So sick of people like coach complaining that there is no ammo or ammo is so expensive because of Obama. Think it through, it's supply and demand driven by paranoid fears, just one of the effects of a (somewhat) free market.

Also sick of people like redfishhunter labeling people as a liberal (like it's a bad thing) just because they show some signs of reason and logical thinking. Name calling does not help anyone.

As for a question to ask, I would ask what can be done to address all of these "slippery slope" concerns that people are rightfully worried about.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from redfishunter wrote 1 year 10 weeks ago

I guess people didn't see the part where it said to email your questions. And another good requirement for submitting your questions is you have to be American. Fools like this cervus guy are always speaking their liberal views. But you aren't even American. Your opinion doesn't matter.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

bmxbiz-fs