Jamie Lee Curtis: Gun Owners Should Have to Renew Their Licenses Like We Do With Cars

“I am vocal about common-sense gun safety and gun laws. For instance, I fully support an assault weapon ban, I fully support a bump stock ban.

“I fully support the Bill of Rights. And fully support the Second Amendment.

“And have absolutely no problem with people owning firearms if they have been trained, licensed, a background check has been conducted, a pause button has been pushed to give time for that process to take place. And they have to renew their license just like we do with automobiles – which are weapons also.” – Jamie Lee Curtis at USA Today in Jamie Lee Curtis Swings Back at Fox News on Guns

comments

  1. avatar bobinmi says:

    Well, she’s a guy so…

    1. avatar Bearpaw says:

      She’s absolutely right. We all know how much crime vehicle registration prevents. Especial the crime of not having your vehicle properly registered.

      Works for me. Now if we had to register our shoes as well we could double the effectiveness in crime prevention.

      1. avatar anonymoose says:

        Excuse me sir, but do you have a license for those Air Force 1s?

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        Steve Jobs didn’t want a license plate. He would simply get a new car once a particular amount of days passed by that would require him to register it with the state of California.

        Guess what California did about that?

        Even the Leftists’ God didn’t want no stinking license/registration to travel and own property. Now they have Elon as a replacement, but they have learned he isn’t exactly one of them.

  2. avatar Binder says:

    Simple, how does she feel about firarms training is high school. You have Drivers Ed, why not Firearms Ed. I’m sure we can maintain her “training requirements” but making it a law to muster up the militia (all able body citizens) every 4 years for firarms proficiency training. We could even use government funds to provide ammo and personaly owned AR-15s. Volunteers could undergo training for SAWs, light machine, anti armor and mortar training (weapons to be stored at a locally controled armory).

    That’s if she truly believes and what the 2nd Amendment stands for.

    1. avatar anonymoose says:

      Driver’s ed isn’t a thing anymore. You have to go to private driving classes, kinda like how you already have to go to private CCW classes. Also, you are totally going against the point of the unorganized militia. It’s not supposed to be the organized Reserves but spread out.

    2. avatar Perry says:

      I have a friend that did an essay entitled “if firearms were cars”.

      We would have government-built gun ranges [highways], an ammo store on every street corner [gas stations], and gun stores offering loans [auto dealers]. One would not need to fill out a BATFE 4473 when purchasing a firearm, but causing an accident would result in a lifetime ban of driving privileges.

      There are more comparisons.

      Jamie Lee Curtis denies reality. Because she appeared in movies or something.

      1. avatar Soylent Green says:

        Even better, anything I don’t use/carry in the public (private land/private range = racetrack), doesn’t have to be registered at all, and there are no restrictions on what I can own.

        1200hp drag car = machine gun/cannonry

        1. avatar Vance Jackson says:

          1200hp is probably in the top “gasser” territory, approximately machine gun equivalent. Top Alcohol (NHRA), 4,000-6,000hp, artillery equivalent? Top Fuel, 9,000-11,000hp estimated (as there is no way to measure it other than mathematical approximation), would presumably be the nuclear weapon equivalent. Regular people have these “military grade weapons of war (drag racing)”. The horror!!! People could get hurt! If it saves just one life, blah blah blah, it’s for the children, blah blah blah…

  3. avatar Sprocket says:

    Shockingly her position on restricting abortion “rights” is somewhat different. I also suspect she’s probably not so enthusiastic about voter ID laws. One thing the left is always consistent on is their belief rights and feels are the same thing.

  4. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Uh, hey clueless, we do in most states. If you don’t drive your car on the public roads you don’t have to license it. Same with g uns, if you don’t carry it in public, you don’t need a permit.

    God, people in Hollywood are stooopid.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Also, there’s no waiting periods or background checks on cars.

      1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        And then how about making said permit good for all 50 states. Like my drivers license. That I didn’t need a background check for.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Yep, my IA permit should be legal in NYC, DC, CA, etc. I’m sure she’d approve of that, since cars.

        2. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

          @ Gov Petomane

          I can’t get further than NH or VT with my Maine permit. Unless I stow away on some sketchy fishing trawler that takes me as far a Virginia.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Yep, Ansel, my IA permit isn’t recognized by MN or IL. Although I’ve heard that you’re OK in IL if you keep it in you vehicle, but I can’t vouch for that. I definitely have more friendly neighbors here than you do in the north-east though.

    2. avatar tdiinva says:

      I love the auto analogy. I think it’s a good idea. Other that the initial training requirement it would be much easier to buy and carry guns. Just think no more filling out a myriad of forns.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        If “they” want to treat guns like cars, how about we treat cars like guns?

        Waiting periods on the purchase. Restrictions or bans on automatic transmissions. Limited capacity gas tanks (10 gallons ought to be enough for anyone). Restrictions on high performance cars. Bans on largely cosmetic features. Some vehicles cannot be taken interstate, at least without a license for that state.

        If the analogy works one way it should work in the other.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          Actually, there is a bunch of laws/regulations on vehicles and importation bans. Like restrictions on how a car is designed, it is required to pass safety tests and be ok’d by the government, etc. Once restrictions were put into law cars got ugly, weak and heavier than previous generations. Now they want to ban old/classic cars and replace them with all electric boxes that have all the government requirements to date.

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Good point CJ, my wife’s uncle was a Ford diesel mechanic for years and as he pointed out, look around your car, lift up the hood and look at every label. Every one of them is mandated by the federal government, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Considering how many firea rms enthusiasts gripe about the ‘Read owners manual’ labels…

  5. avatar New Continental Army says:

    Who cares what some random actress thinks? About anything? Celebrities are experts only in lying. Period.

    1. avatar Michael Buley says:

      Exactly. We know, aside from James Wood, what their ‘opinions’ are going to be … lol …

      ‘I fully support the 2nd Amendment’ …

      Um, gee, it says ‘shall not be infringed.’ What do you think those words mean, Jamie and others?

      Um, well … we know better than the founders of this country, because we’re entertainers.

    2. avatar billy-bob says:

      Well, she had nice boobs 35 years ago, so that means her opinion is relevant, right?

      1. avatar Bill Sadusk says:

        well of course, that goes without saying…

    3. avatar Herb Allen says:

      Jamie Lee is trying to avoid being labeled a hypocrite. Because she totes guns & shoots bad guys in a movie, she feels the need to appear knowledgeable about guns, gun rights, & gun legislation.

      She fails miserably. I would like to ask her if an “assault weapons” ban became law, how would those millions of scary black rifles in private hands be rounded up. And don’t say “we’ll do it just like in Australia!” Anyway, who cares what she thinks? Shut up and act, Ms. Curtis.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        Does she even know what happened in Australia? There was (the short version) a tax increase over several year to pay for the “but back”. The government offered above market rates for the firearms as an incentive for people to hand in the firearms as the carrot. But the stick was severe fines and jail time for being caught with a now prohibited firearm.

        This won’t work in the USA for several reasons. No one is going to approve a tax increase. The population of the US is 15-20x that of Australia and with much higher rates of firearm ownership. And the use of shock-and-awe tactics by militarized police that will make Ruby Ridge and Waco look like Sunday picnics.

        1. avatar Perry says:

          The USA also has a Constitutional limitation on ex post facto laws. Firearms cannot be retroactively banned. Buy your scary black “assault rifles” now, before Jamie Lee Curtis and her ilk ban them!

        2. avatar CarlosT says:

          Ex post facto is not an issue in these matters. The laws won’t be drafted to make previous ownership or purchase illegal. Instead, it will be continuing ownership and future purchases, all of which would be offenses committed in the present or future.

    4. avatar Denny Davis says:

      Are you calling Ted Nugent a liar? He’s a celebrity. Ha ha

  6. avatar Mad Max says:

    Well, she’s right that cars can be weapons too.

    When that crazy person’s firearms are confiscated under these new “red flag” laws but is allowed to remain free, the alternative weapon of choice will be a vehicle (probibly with more casualties than a firearm would have produced).

    I suppose she is not aware that many concealed carry permits require training and a background check and have to be renewed regularly.

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      Yep…. in France that Aloha Snackbar killed twice as many people in 10 seconds with one truck, than Paddock did in Las Vegas in 10 minutes with 12 AR15’s and thousands of rounds of ammo…. heck,… the other day, a driver accidentally killed half as many people in a fraction of a second in New York with his limo. Out of a population of 370 million it takes a whole year to accidentally kill that many people with 600 million available firearms! My God! And people are okay giving these things (cars) to children, violent criminals, and crazy people? And think of all the teachers who bring these things to school every day across America!!

  7. avatar Shire-man says:

    Once you get your drivers license it becomes useless to renew it except in that the fee goes to fund the state. You’ve shown you can drive safely and maybe we’ll check you out again on your 80th birthday. Other than that what’s the point of renewing it every 5 years? Kind of like getting a background check every time you buy a gun. I passes it last week and if I got caught doing anything that would cause me to fail I wouldn’t be out walking around and if I didn’t get caught it won’t show up in a check anyway so what’s the point?

    And note to fudds if you have a “but” you don’t “fully” support. Be honest and say you partially support the 2nd.

    1. avatar Special Ed says:

      She doesn’t even partially support the 2nd. Wants the government to approve what citizens are allowed, license everything, and ban whatever they want.

  8. avatar Bugs Nasty says:

    A failed attempt to “sit on a fence”. TIP FOR OTHER WOULD BE FENCE SITTERS: Choose a fence with a smooth continuous upper to straddle. NEVER straddle barbed wire or picket..there can be serious unintended consequences.

  9. avatar SouthernShooter says:

    Wow! The stupid is strong with this one!
    Someone needs to teach her what a right is.

  10. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    She is after all just another actress.
    What does she know about a constitutional right vs a state permission slip??
    Obviously nothing. Just another airhead with an opinion.

    1. avatar Michael Buley says:

      One of Saul Alinsky’s ‘rules for radicals’ — employed by the left with great success — is the use of, and appreciation for, the power of ridicule. They ridicule without end. Not Curtis in this case. But where ‘the right’ fails is that we play nice too much. We need to play by their rules — ridicule THEM. Trump does this to an extent I’ve never seen a politician, not at the national / international level.

      She’s an actress, for god’s sake. An entertainer. She knows nothing (so far as is indicated) about constitutional law, the history and purpose of the 2nd Amendment, etc. She’s one more ignorant leftist with ‘an opinion’ about the 2nd Amendment.

      We should give these ‘opinions’ no credence at all — and be very vocal about why. We must learn to use the tools that the left uses on us.

  11. avatar Tom Edwards says:

    Do you have to licence your Knife? Do you have to licence your Hammer? Do you have to renew your Drivers Licence? They all three kill more people than the GUN! I have owned guns since 1949! Not one of my guns have killed a human. That is 69 years that my guns are setting there loaded and have never shot anyone. I raised 4 kids. They have all been taught how to handle guns. They have been on their own for at least 15 years. Their guns have never killed anyone. My Father was worse of all. He had over 50 guns. He collected Black powder guns. None of his ever killed anyone! It is Thugs with un regestered guns that kill people! We need a mental evaluation before you have a gun! (Most are Democrats besides!) NO my knife, Hammer, or car has killed anyone either!
    Yes I fought a war. I shot people there. It was either them or me. We could not fire until fired up on! You damned well hoped that you were a better shot than them! Or you would been already dead!

  12. avatar Pg2 says:

    Stopped reading at “common sense”.

  13. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    You can always identify those who are inclined towards the anti-gun position… they don’t have the capacity to differentiate between a “right” and a “privilege”. Perhaps a basic civics class in order to graduate high school should be mandatory nationwide. That would at least eliminate the majority of the fence sitters who just don’t know any better.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      I was taught that the government gives you rights and can take them away, that judges can make new rules/laws for future issues that arise.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        The government doesn’t give us anything.

        It takes, always, and it provides, on occasion.

        1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          Either you missed the sarcasm and resentment in his comment or you’re expounding and affirming it. Not sure which. But I was generous enough to not jump to conclusions and graciously give you the pen to write your own ending. Perhaps this even allows you to reconsider and alter the direction you were initially heading towards.

  14. avatar Bob999 says:

    Does she have a government issued license to speak publically about political issues?

  15. avatar Mike Hawkizard says:

    Who the frick cares?

    Seriously this isn’t TMZ, why does this site give these anti’s the free space? I guarantee you that no one lives and dies by what an aging actress has to say about guns.

    I’d rather see Daily Digest again instead of crap like this.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Moms Against Gun Violence or Moms Demand Action.

      Mothers are more powerful at changing the culture as they spend the most time with the youth. You can underestimate them at your peril.

  16. avatar BLAMMO says:

    So, to illustrate her support for the 2nd Amendment, she uses a rifle from the 19th century. Oh how clever.

  17. avatar former water walker says:

    Duuuuuuude…you don’t support anything except your sagging man-boobs.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Both men and women have fake boobs these days. So, I don’t know if you are dissing or complimenting her.

      1. avatar Jay in Florida says:

        Hers are real and thats the only part of her that Id admire if given the chance………………..

  18. avatar Mark says:

    I love it when they do car analogies. However when people lose their license or commit a crime with a car they don’t have their car taken away. And they can buy a car even if they don’t have a license.
    And they wouldn’t really like it if we treated gun licenses like car licenses. Because that now means we’d have nationwide shall issue and national reciprocity.

    1. avatar Pg2 says:

      Reminds me of the duplicitous assholes who try to compare seatbelts and vaccines.

  19. avatar Anonymous says:

    By “right to keep and bear arms” she means we have a right to keep and bear “22-short” rifles after they have regulated away everything they don’t want on the basis of their opinion under the guise of “common sense.” In other words, the teeth will be removed from the 2A and she supports that.

  20. avatar Sora says:

    Lets do that to voters. We will be rid of 20% of Democrat votes.
    Background checks, mental checks, drug checks, violence checks, and 5 years renewals with $120 fee including $75 crash course and hands on exam on the Constitution of the USA.

  21. avatar Anonymous says:

    And they have to renew their license just like we do with automobiles – which are weapons also.” – Jamie Lee Curtis

    I need a license to drive a car on the public road. I don’t need a license, insurance, training, background checks, registration, or anything at all actually, to own them on my private property.

    The car analogy with firearms is total retardation. These people’s ignorance encompasses even the legal requirements surrounding automobiles. I don’t think they need to take their ignorance to the topic of firearms next.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      They think when the government “owns” something they can tell you what to do.

      Their argument is: the militia is owned and operated by the government, thus you can’t keep and bear arms unless the government says so. Therefore the government can decide what kind of “military style” firearms you can have and who can have them.

      Essentially their philosophy is: the government controls/owns everything and everyone. They will decide all matter of things and you must obey as it is a lawful order. Respect the will of the people and the officials.

      Individualism and liberty is not what the Democrats or Republicans offer. They offer you a nanny state or a military/police state, which you could say are the same damn thing.

  22. avatar Sal Chichon says:

    She is a moron.

  23. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

    I don’t need a license to own a car, nor to drive it around.

    Also, Constitutional rights are not subject to fees, thats called a poll tax and its unconstitutional.

    Also also, eff you JLC.

  24. avatar Special Ed says:

    This is actually the new, best thing in the liberal playbook on gun control. They floated the “ban the 2nd amendment” trial balloons after Parkland which failed completely, so they have done a 180 and now insist that they support the 2nd amendment, but don’t think that citizens should keep and bear arms. Because…”common sense gun safety”.

    1. avatar MyName says:

      I’ve never understood this approach. I support the Second Amendment but I would like to do it by violating the Second Amendment. To me saying you support the 2A while clearly calling for infringements is like saying: I believe wild animals should be allowed to thrive in their natural habitat so lets round them up and put them in realistic zoos.

      It is so disingenuous. Just say you support gun control because you do.

      1. avatar TX223 says:

        This is a new lefist tactic… and the pattern is becoming clear
        1. Come out as a strong supporter of the second amendment – infiltrate.
        2. Then start suggesting infringing on 2A rights.

        There’s a reason the Communist Chinese support gun control in America – because they covet the land in the US. They want our resources, and an unarmed country is easier to invade.
        Want to speak Chinese do ya?

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          People like me were/are already forced to speak English.

          What you find good for you might not be good for me, which is why I reject the things coming out of Alex Jones’ and Joe Rogan’s mouth.

  25. avatar Bigus Dickus says:

    I think it’s so cute that she thinks her opinion matters.

  26. She’s a dumb f*** Hollywood elitist! Who Gives a s*** what she thinks! I Hope her movie bombs at the box office!

  27. This is the same dumb f*** Hollywood elitist who was meddling around in British politics in the House of Lords in the UK! Now look what’s happened to our brothers and sisters across the sea! What little liberty they had is nearly completely gone! People of the UK now live in a 1984 orwellian Style authoritarian police state! With foreign Nationals pulling the strings along with the globalists!

  28. avatar Chris Morton says:

    There isn’t any “license” to OWN a gun in Ohio, nor will there be.

    Not everybody lives in New York or California honey.

  29. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    i’m thinkin’ since they have fully automatic cars these days, maybe we can work something out here.

  30. avatar Danie says:

    Driving a car isn’t a right. You shouldn’t need a license to exercise your rights. License for freedom of speech next? Dumb broad.

    1. avatar Salty Bear says:

      You absolutely do have the right to drive a car. It doesn’t infringe on anyone else’s rights, therefore you have the right to do it.

    2. avatar CZJay says:

      Let’s see what you have to say when they ban human drivable cars and require self driving vehicles or government transport. It’s not like they are not trying…

      Sooner than you think:

  31. avatar Jimmy james says:

    No problem with gun owner license if it is just like my state’s 10yr drivers license renewal which i did on line. And my states CCW license which renews for 5yrs by just showing up to sheriff’s office with paperwork and aforementioned DL. Does that make Hollywood warm and happy?

    1. avatar 2aguy says:

      If they charged you for that 10 year license, then it is unConstitutional…it is a Poll Tax on the Right to own a gun.

  32. avatar frankw says:

    I’m frankly tired of being lectured to by celebrities with more money than brains and too easy access to the media to spout their nonsense. We’re all entitled to our opinions, and mine (or yours) is just as good as some has been actress.

  33. avatar TX223 says:

    There’s no constitutional ammendment for not infringing on automobiles.
    The Bill of Rights – First Ten Amendments are considered irrevocable.
    “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      The constitution can be amended.

      Your civil right to keep and bear arms can be modified or removed like it was in Mexico. Human rights can’t be removed, they can only be suppressed by force. Civil rights can be voted on.

  34. avatar Timothy K. Toroian says:

    To what end every year, to prove they are still alive or money for the gov’ment to spend?

  35. avatar 2aguy says:

    Any fee or tax on a Right is no different than the Poll Taxes on the Right to vote that democrats used to keep Black Americans from being able to vote. A license, with it’s fee, is nothing more than a Poll Tax on the Right to own a gun. If there is a test to get that license, a training class that is required to be passed to get the license or permit, that is no different from the Literacy Tests democrats used to keep Black Americans from exercising their Right to vote.

  36. avatar Queens says:

    And that republicans are now using to keep black people out of the voting booth.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Bullshit.

    2. avatar CZJay says:

      What would Malcolm X say about this?

      Well, we don’t have to guess what he might say. Not surprising why his own kind shot him down.

  37. avatar Chiefton says:

    It is a shame that these folks need to be reminded of this so many times but here it is. Car ownership/usage is not protected under the Constitution, guns are and shall not be infringed.

    1. avatar RMS1911 says:

      4th amendment says otherwise.

    2. avatar Salty Bear says:

      Say it with me: “Rights are not privileges granted by governments.”

      If you’re waiting for all of your rights to be spelled out on a piece of paper written over 240 years ago, then you may as well just consign yourself to being a slave. Words on paper written by government bureaucrats do not grant you rights. You have the right to keep and bear arms regardless of whether it’s written down in some constitution. You have the right to travel on public thoroughfares using the conventional means of the day (i.e. the right to drive a car). You have the right to marry whom you want, ingest what you want, build and grow things on your property, keep what you earn, and a whole host of other rights.

      If an action doesn’t violate someone else’s right to life, liberty, and property, you have a right to perform that action regardless of what muh constitution says.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        Nice~

        There shouldn’t be a need to write on a piece of paper that a woman has the liberty to choose whom to have sex with and marry. We shouldn’t have to write down that we have a right to drink out of a cup with a straw if we so choose. Why do we need to write into law that we have the right to choose between one-ply or two-ply toilet paper?

        In places like California, they think they can ban plastic bags and straws, raise fees on soda and so on. They believe they own you and the country, thus they can make any law they feel like because there is no such thing as liberty and justice for all in their minds.

  38. avatar Kyle says:

    Someday, the left will need to take a little peak at the definition of “constitutional rights”.

    It would really help the not look dumb.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      The right has a problem with that too.

      That’s not surprising considering historically most Europeans haven’t had experience being free. There was always someone ruling over them. They’re used to a small group taking control of life, liberty and property. So for them to revert/regress back is always a possibility.

    2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      It would also help if the Republicans remembered the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th Amendments.

      Remembering the Congressional mandate to declare war, that the Feds are limited to the privileges granted them by the people, and that the president is the employee of the people, not our leader would also be good.

  39. avatar ollie says:

    Remember to vote.
    No Excuses.
    Against the Party of Gun Confiscation.
    The GOP has many faults, but fewer than the gun grabbing jackasses..
    Hold you nose if you have to, but VOTE.
    Your guns will thank you.

  40. avatar CZJay says:

    -Please, sir, I want some more… liberty.
    -What!

    -Please, sir, I will have some more… liberty.
    -What!

  41. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Jamie Lee Curtis, her “expertise” amounts to pretending to be chased by a bad guy who pretends to want to stab her. Because of this we are suppose infer that she is a Constitutional and historical scholar who is also an expert in firearms and how they do and don’t operate. I can’t even pretend to care what she thinks. Most of the folks here are far more expert in what she wants us to infer that she is than she can ever hope to be.

    Vote for the GOP candidate because we all know the Democrats will damage our 2nd Amendment rights. Just imagine the leftist mobs hopping up and down in their anger and the idiot talking heads on CNN exploding or crying on camera, the entertainment factor alone should earn your vote!

  42. avatar IAmNotThehulk says:

    Fully support my arse, “shall not be infringed”, words too difficult to understand clearly, and Rights vs privileges, maybe Jamie needs some community college Constitutional Law class eh? So wish Michael got her…only movie she was ever ok in was True Lies.

    1. avatar MyName says:

      IDK, Trading Places was pretty good.

      1. avatar LazrBeam says:

        So was True Lies.

  43. avatar jakee308 says:

    Owning a firearm is a right.

    A driver’s license is a privilege. So’s operating a vehicle.

    End of discussion.

    1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      A shame you ignore the 9th Amendment. You think the Founders would have considered traveling upon the public roads to be a “privilege”?

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        They wanted you stuck on your property until you submitted to the regulators.

        How dare you think you can travel by your horse and carriage without paying and getting permission to do so. Damn peasants! Just because you have some money now doesn’t mean you can do whatever it is you damn want. You are not a sovereign. To the cage you go!

    2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      The answer is to reclaim our rights under the 9th Amendment. Travel upon the public roads using common vehicles is a natural human right. Only a big government loving boot licker declares that driving is privilege.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        Being a cop is a privilege. Being a politician/representative is a privilege. Being a judge is a privilege.

        Traveling is not a privilege. Owning property is not a privilege. Hunting is not a privilege. Farming is not a privilege. Creating and using tools is not a privilege. Protecting your life, liberty and property is not a privilege. Consuming whatever you want is not a privilege. Freedom of thought is not a privilege.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          It’s silly to be required to write all your human rights down in law for them to “exist.” Apparently, we do have to write them down in an endless book or create a Youtube video that explains to everyone what human rights are because people are too lazy to think.

          Most grown ass adults are like a child who is scared of their dad beating them if they do anything without permission.

  44. avatar Hollyweird is evil says:

    “And I have absolutely no problems with people with firearms IF….”, so you have problems with the 2A and the Bill of Rights then, because it doesn’t say anywhere in the Bill of Rights a citizen must be licensed, pass a background check….

    I have absolutely no problems with your freedom of speech, if what you have to say or write has been approved by big brother…

    This is a dangerous game folks. These people are the “false prophets” of Freedom “I have no problem with…IF…..”, “I love America, BUT……”

  45. avatar George from Alaska says:

    Again, we visit the confusion between selective fire firearms and semiautomatic firearms with the term “assault weapons” which of course is a military weapon capable of full auto fire only or selective fire capability.
    Stop blaming the plastic and metal.

  46. avatar el Possum Guapo Standartenfuher " they think we're making pizza's Oberst von Burn says:

    Who eaze dis woman? Badges? We don’t need no steenking badges

  47. avatar CarlosT says:

    I fully support the Bill of Rights. And fully support the Second Amendment.

    No. You. Don’t. Stop lying. There are two rights the Second Amendment guarantees: the right to keep arms and the right to bear arms. Name a proposal that you support that would protect or enhance a citizen’s ability to access guns or other weapons, or protect or enhance a citizen’s ability to carry guns or other weapons in his daily life.

    This claim is like saying you fully support the First Amendment, but we just need to restrict speech, the press, exercise of religion, assembly, and redress of grievances. If you are opposed to the rights protected by the the Amendment, you are opposed to the Amendment.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      It’s funny how they use “spirit of the law” to argue something is a “loophole.”

      What’s the spirit of the law that is the 2nd Amendment?

      Let’s start with an imported Russian or Chinese made fully automatic short barreled AK-47, with folding stock, equipped with a sound suppressor, loaded with a 100 round drum magazine of armor piercing rounds.

  48. avatar Gerard says:

    Jamie, you’ve aged well, but stop trying to interpret the Bill of Rights. Keep acting and stop talking publicly.

  49. avatar GS650G says:

    Still has a decent rack. Still dumb as hell. Nice to see little changed.

  50. avatar James W Crawford says:

    When my men’s movie fellowship at church went to see TRUE LIES with Arnold, Jamie Lee Curtis’ dance scene inspired us all to go buy micro cassette recorders. No one will say if their wives went along with it.

  51. avatar LarryinTX says:

    All real fun, clearly unconstitutional, but hey! How about you tell us how any of that would change a damn thing so far as crime and violence are concerned, you stupid cow?

  52. avatar SoBe says:

    Wait a second, did I miss something here? Which amendment guarantees car use and ownership? I am old enough that I did take driver’s ed. We were taught that driving is a privilege. Firearm ownership on the other hand is a civil right, not a privilege.

  53. avatar Stredford says:

    Driving is a privilege, not a right. Bearing arms is a right not to be infringed. Two different things.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      It’s to be amended.

  54. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    Another elitist having to look out for us ignorant deplorables in flyover country, what would we ever do without them !

    1. avatar adverse5 says:

      Don’t know, would like to find out.

  55. avatar adverse5 says:

    I support my right to own a firearm, and a small army, bump the rest of you. No, really, i do not subscribe to the “here’s your firearm, go forth and be stupid” right either. Earn a right like you earn respect. Yeah, I know, outdated. God didn’t give us nothing, the Uzi hadn’t been invented at the time.

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Actually, if you support the Constitution, then you understand that citizens “earn” their rights at the moment they’re borne. Requiring anything further would expose those that support that policy as those that support tyranny and the subversion of the Constitution. In other words, anyone who subscribes to adding additional requirements that the Founders didn’t, makes one a “domestic enemy” and a legitimate target for elimination.

  56. avatar JW says:

    ‘Fully support’

    You keep using those words.

    I do not think they mean what you think they mean

  57. avatar sound awake says:

    what other rights guaranteed in the amendments to the constitution require training licensing and background checks

    definitely not the 14th

  58. avatar AaronW says:

    Sure, Jamie – I’ll be glad fill out a 20+ page application with notarized character references, and pay $135+ in fees, every 4-5 years just to own handguns here in NYS. GTFO, you jerk.

  59. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Can’t we all just get along? I could support her proposal, if she will support my call for harebrained actresses to be licensed at a cost of $100,000 per week, retroactive to the first day they received payment for their services, including the services performed on her knees for Harvey Weinstein, and to attend training for 50 weeks per year at their own expense. It’s just common sense! For the children! If it saves one life!

    And I have every bit as much qualifications to regulate actresses as she has to regulate gunowners.

  60. avatar Marshall Thompson says:

    I think she and all other actors should have to be registered and get a OYM permit (open your mouth) that is renewed every 3 years pending a review of their past acting performances and verbal opinions expressed in public. Cost should be at least $5,000 at each issuance. Making a major gaff or an offensive statement in public should result in immediate revocation of the OYM permit for at least 2 years. Seems fair to me to treat her first amendment rights like she wants to treat my second amendment rights.

  61. avatar dpk54 says:

    Wake up, Jamie!!!! WE ALREADY HAVE TO RENEW CONCEALED CARRY PERMITS AND (FOID) CARDS THAT ALLOW PURCHASE OF FIREARMS!! THE GUNS ARE REGISTERED AT BOTH THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL!!! You really are a dumb ass, aren’t you??? Why aren’t you just as insistent about people driving in this country WITHOUT driver’s licenses and insurance? You make me sick with your ignorance and your hypocrisy!!!

  62. avatar KyKPH says:

    Since actors/entertainers have such a large built in audience and access to the public and their influence is all out of proportion to their real importance, I suggest we should license them too! Some proper governmental training for the public good so as their opinions would not cause undue harm.

    After all, some have advocated violence against certain people and government officials and this could really be dangerous. Perhaps prior approval of statements is necessary as well as the training and background checks for them to speak out side of their acting duties. After all “IF IT SAVES JUST ONE LIFE!” (Dripping with sarcasm, of course!)

  63. How would licensing deter gangbangers from doing drive-bys?

  64. avatar Klaus Shadenfreude says:

    “I fully respect the Second AMendment, except for ‘assault rifles'” – Jamie Lee Curtis

    “I fully respect the Bill of Rights, except for Jews, Gyspies, and Russians.” – Adolph Hitler

  65. avatar glenn sammon says:

    the comments miss Curtis has made about guns is the reason why I don’t believe pot should be legal, she obviously has had way too much.

  66. avatar james says:

    I do not need a license for my Constitutional Right, driving is not a right but a privilege.
    In case Jamie has not noticed, the license is only good at the time it was issued, it is no guarantee that the individual will follow all driving rules and laws.
    Otherwise we’d never have and DUI DWI, speeders, red light runners, etc etc.

    I’ll take the bait…..If I need a license, then this license should be good in all 50 States so I can buy from any dealer or private party.

    Oh no they will cry out. So I’m out too.

  67. avatar Alan says:

    In plain English, such bullshit I have not recently heard. By the way, since when are Constitutional Rights subject to “licensing” or similar bureaucratic hogwash?

  68. avatar Alan says:

    Wine can improve with age, same with whisky. Sad to note, the same seems not to apply to Ms. Curtis.

  69. avatar BR says:

    The first claim here is that “I support the second amendment but I also support gun control”.

    Okay so you’re an idiot or a lier, maybe both. “Shall not be infringed” is in the second amendment so supporting it and gun control laws at the same time is literally impossible. That’s like saying I support speed limits on highways so people don’t speed but I support people speeding on highways. Kinda absurd right?

    Second claim is people need to renew gun licenses as we do with car licenses.

    Okay I’ve never heard of a car license so I’m assuming you mean driver’s license. You know the thing that shows you kinda sorta know how to drive and allows you use of PUBLIC roads. You don’t need a license for your farm house tractor, that work truck that never leaves the private land, your around the course golf cart, or sometimes not even your street daily driver moped. Just to drive on the public street in a car you need a license and have renewed.

    Guns are the same, albeit more regulated for the owner frequently. I still have to have a renewable permit in most places to have a gun in public. It’s called a CCW permit. It still has to be renewed like a driver license and usually requires a shooting test or training course to pass just like a car. Basically we do do have gun licenses that must be renewed. So you are still clearly an idiot or a lier, likely both.

    Also like a car generally you can have a gun on you on your personal private property without a license or registration, but unlike a car sometimes that’s still a felony. Unlike a car there are restrictions on what you can have for in private non-public use like no machine guns (let’s ban automatic transmissions shall we). Unlike a car, the license is far, far more expensive (in my area 14$ for a DL and 132$ for a CCW) and is not acknowledged everywhere in the nation, and some places say no you can’t have one at all or use any other, though not usually outright. Unlike a car, the permit may restrict you to listed devices (what if you weren’t allowed to rent or borrow a car because it isn’t listed on your license). Unlike a car, sometimes letting a friend use it without going through a dealer (ffl for guns), paying costly fees, several hours of paperwork, a background check, and/or waiting a year or more. Unlike a car, sometimes only dealers (ffl for guns) or yourself can fix a broken one, as if Billy down the street was to fix it for you he committed a felony. Unlike a car, you usually can’t cross a national border with it and sometimes not even state borders. Unlike a car, reasonable cause my be required to be presented to have some guns let alone a permit (think if we had to prove public transportation in any form lacked so much that we need a car for use otherwise we couldn’t use one).Unlike a car, you can’t get to use one in public alone at 16. Unlike a car, there is “sporting purposes” (no more cool hubcaps or window stickers). Unlike a car, sometimes there is limits on its duration of immediate capacity such as magazine limits (what about banning cars with gas tanks over 10 gallons). Unlike a car, you gotta pass a background check. Unlike a car, if you used a gun in a crime you get a more severe punishment. Unlike a car, no drivers license is a ticket but no ccw permit is a felony. Unlike a car, it’s specifically stated in this nation’s founding documents that it’s inappropriate for a government to regulate.

    I could go on and on and on and on… but unless you’re an idiot or a lier you get it by now.

    1. avatar Alan says:

      Some things improve with age. Sad to note, this is not the case with Jamie.

    2. Not to mention- even people convicted of DUI are not prohibited from owning automobiles.

      1. avatar BR says:

        Yeah. The list goes on and on. Guns are far more regulated than anything else. I’d say even more so than drugs. If you did something wrong with drugs and have the misfortune to get caught there is still a reasonable chance it’ll get dropped (seen it at least a dozen times in my short life), but if you do something wrong with a gun you’re crucified forever without hesitation.

        1. I wonder why there is more leniency towards drug users than gun users.

        2. avatar BR says:

          I don’t know. Especially since last year 72000 or so died of an overdose with only a handful of drug classes, not to mention some drug suicides or accidental overdoses with drugs such as acetaminophen or deaths as result of drug use such as dwi/dui wrecks that aren’t counted in that number. And alcohol and tobacco, arguably the worst ones long term, aren’t included either. Gun deaths at its worst is about 33000, so clearly guns are discriminated upon exclusively because they are guns, or freedom, or lack of government control. Take your pick.

          Stat for overdose from CDC and National Institute of Drug Abuse: https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/overdose-death-rates

  70. avatar simon geiger says:

    I am licensed in Virginia for concealed carry.I am required to renew that license every 5 years. The same as my drivers license.

  71. avatar Jim says:

    All well thought out ideas. Chicago has all these laws in effect. And, isn’t murder and assault illegal? I’ll never understand why the Left thinks they can outlaw the outlaws. If laws could fix the problem, Chicago wouldn’t be know as Chiraq or Beirut by the Lake.

    1. avatar Alan says:

      Idle curiousity leads me to pose the following question. Regarding Jamie’s stated support for the banning of “assault weapons” has anyone ever had the alleged benefit of exactly how she would define that which she would ban? Her actual thinking might be interesting to hear.

    2. Prohibition did not stop Al Capone.

      Of course, you are assuming that the municipal leadership of Chiraq wants to solve the problem.

      1. avatar Alan says:

        I find myself curious as to the following items.

        1 What did the lady do of accomplish that warrants the band width she is getting?
        2. If she is still performing, her press agent might be worth a bonus.

  72. avatar DaveW says:

    You can “fully support” the Bill of Rights and the 2nd Amendment if you are in favor of restricting what the public may have, especially when the restrictions are based on lies and disinformation.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email