Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Sunday, January 20, 2019

Former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly marked the two-year anniversary of the shooting that nearly took her life by launching Americans for Responsible Solutions to take on the gun lobby in pursuit of new laws to reduce gun violence.

“Special interests purporting to represent gun owners but really advancing the interests of an ideological fringe have used big money and influence to cow Congress into submission,” Giffords and Kelly wrote in an op-ed that appeared in Tuesday’s USA Today.

Giffords was critically injured in a mass shooting that took six lives, including a federal judge and a 9-year-old girl. The assailant, Jared Loughner, pled guilty to the crime in 2012 and is serving seven consecutive life sentences.

Since the mass shooting at Sandy Hook school in Newtown, CT, the gun debate has been largely shaped by the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre, with CNN’s Piers Morgan playing the foil for gun lovers who petitioned the White House to have the TV host, a British citizen, deported.

Many expected the parents of Newtown to eventually play a role in calling for new gun safety laws, as social media efforts like The Million Kid March began online.

But few could be a better spokesperson against gun violence than a beloved public servant who can write these words: “I was shot in the head while meeting with constituents two years ago today.”

As 2013 began, Giffords and Kelly visited Newtown and met with New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has been demanding  a plan to fight gun violence through the group he helped form — Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

After the Newtown massacre, President Obama put Vice President Biden in charge of coming up with a series of solutions to prevent further mass shootings and reduce the 30,000 gun deaths in America each year, a number that will soon surpass auto accidents as a cause of death. Biden will be meeting the NRA and other gun rights groups later this week.

Giffords’ and Kelly’s strategy is to separate the extremely powerful and lucrative gun lobby from gun owners to promote new laws that protect responsible citizens from the illegal use of weapons.

“As a Western woman and a Persian Gulf War combat veteran who have exercised our Second Amendment rights, we don’t want to take away your guns any more than we want to give up the two guns we have locked in a safe at home,” they wrote. “What we do want is what the majority of NRA members and other Americans want: responsible changes in our laws to require responsible gun ownership and reduce gun violence.”

The former congresswoman and her husband did not call for any specific laws, such as a ban on assault weapons and high-volume magazines, as some Democrats in Congress have suggested. Their message is instead a wake-up call to those who oppose gun violence “to balance the influence of the gun lobby.”

“We have experienced too much death and hurt to remain idle.”

 Photo credit: AP Photo/Charles Dharapak

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 651

212 responses to “Gabrielle Giffords And Mark Kelly Take On The Gun Lobby”

  1. old_blu says:

    I hope they can come up with something that everyone can tolerate. I doubt they can come up with something everyone can agree on, but something has to be done.

    I still think we need a ban on high capacity magazines.

    • Doctor T says:

      What in the world do these people think they need to protect themselves? Unbelievable crazy BS!

      • montanabill says:

        You need to spend a few days on the wrong streets of a pretty large number of American cities. Your answer would become self-evident.

        • GOPWIPEOUT says:

          They aren’t using assault weapons on those streets nor are they using large magazines.

          • montanabill says:

            Hello clueless.

          • Well , I reckon one of three things take place for you.
            1- You have killed a lot of people on these streets!
            2- You are a bad ass that no one messes with LOL!
            3-You really haven’t walked any of those streets and you are just pure Chicken shit and like to hear your self talk!

          • montanabill says:

            Hello clueless.

          • neeceoooo says:

            You are so right, Louis. It is probably not a good idea to structure our life around a few “what if’s”. It makes us look paranoid.

          • idamag says:

            Neeceooo, this country has turned paranoid. The greatest country, in the world, is supposed to be a war zone where people cannot go outside their homes. I saw a gun advocate on Piers Morgan the other day who should not have been allowed to have a gun. He was nuts.

          • ONALIMB says:

            I can only have three shells in my shot gun, but you can have thirty rounds in your assault rifle. If you need thirty rounds to kill a deer, your a$$ need to be home in front of a television set.

          • montanabill says:

            I could have more than 30 rounds if I had the right magazine. I could also carry 3 ten round magazines. I could buy 2 16 oz soft drinks to get around the law banning 32oz drinks. You might wish you had more than 3 shells if your door gets kicked in. However, the real point is that whether you had 3 shells or 30 shells, your gun would be no more dangerous in your hands.

          • DurdyDawg says:

            Fact is, all you need is one shell.. You hit a mark, odds are anyone else nearby will rabbit so as not to become the second target.. one shot if you’re a real gun user.. thirty if you’re a psychotic maniac.

          • montanabill says:

            Theory. Let’s hope you never have to test it.

          • RobertCHastings says:

            They aren’t? I must be reading different newspapers.

          • FeFe Fox says:


          • ralphkr says:

            Hey, GOPWIPEOUT, the gangbangers ARE using assault weapon on our deadly streets and the worst thing about it is that they are such bum shots that they hit everything and everybody in the area and normally completely miss the other gangbangers they are trying to kill. I swear, some of those braindead jokers could not hit the side of a barn if they were inside the barn.

          • idamag says:

            I travelled all over the West coast in my job and never felt afraid on any city streets. Some streets I was told to stay away from and did, but you make it sound like we are living in a third world country.

          • ralphkr says:

            Naw, idamag, I think that in a third world country they might learn to aim but here they shoot as if they were watering the flower garden. Just indiscriminately spraying lead in the general direction of the target. We lived for a number of years in coastal San Diego county and I warned the family that by midnight Christmas and New Years they should be sure and be under a sturdy roof to avoid the hail of bullets raining down from the heavens. For some reason everyone seemed to go out on those nights and try and shoot down the moon or any passing choppers. One memorable New Years Eve I remember listening with my wife and identifying what was being fired at the moment when there was an overpowering BOOOOM followed by complete silence for well over a minute as everyone in that small town (population 192,000) considered what could have made that sound.

          • Plznnn says:

            And if a law abiding American Citizen was on those hellhole streets of America, they better hope thay have more firepower than the bad guys, don’t ya think?

          • sjensen6022 says:

            For those drug addicts that are whacked out on meth and attacking people, yes I want as many rounds as I can get my hands on. We have had two women jumped and pulled into the woods, then beaten and raped. The police response, “oh well, we know they are there and they’re dangerous, but we don’t have any place to put them.”

          • idamag says:

            I don’t know where you live, but put it out there so other people won’t move there.

          • DurdyDawg says:

            Two suggestions should end that chicken shit excuse .. (1) release all low risk marijuana users, you know, like you’re uncle, cousins and neighbors.. (2) pass ’em over to sheriff joe (arpaio).. I’m sure he would be thrilled to make more room.

          • DurdyDawg says:

            They’re using everything they can get their hands on.. Assault weapons and high capacity magazines not exempt.

          • idamag says:

            everything they can get their hands on.

          • They ARE using assault weapons on those streets, WITH large capacity magazines. Spend a Thursday evening watching A&E’s “The First 48” and see how many of the murders they investigate are perpetrated. By no means all are committed with assault weapons, but enough are to convey the message thattheose weapons have NO PLACE- PERIOD.

        • RobertCHastings says:

          Do you live on those streets that you fear to tread? I didn’t think so. And if you did, you would, like all the other folks who live on those streets, fear to tread them. And why? Because there are too many guns in the hands of those who have noearthly idea how to use them responsibly but, because of the NRA and others, are still able to obtain them.

          • montanabill says:

            Home break-ins are not uncommon. I do fear to tread on some nearby streets. Do you have any idea what drug turf or gang neighborhoods are like? Do you think those thugs get their guns legally?

          • idamag says:

            No, tell us. I don’t really know.

          • montanabill says:

            The daily newspaper of any major American city will provide you with all the information you need. Although many of them have stopped printing all the episodes for P.C. However, the police blotters are accessible and you can get a lot more information.

          • So what do we do? Leave those illegally obtained guns out there? Or do we arm EVERYONE else and send them out there after the ones with illegally obtained weapons? Neither solution sounds very bright. As for drug turf wars or gangs, every town or city over 50,000 has those problems, even most of the smaller towns around the country have drug-related gun violence. As a booking magistrate in a large southern city I used to walk those neighborhoods with police and ABC agents- even with backup, it was not a walk in the park, hence the current popularity of such “reality” programs as “The First 48”. Of course, the solution is to take all those guns out of the hands of people who have no business having them; but do we buy them, or do we forcibly take them? If we buy them, they will just go out and spend the money buying newer ones (from China or Russia): if we forcibly take them, the NRA will scream “foul” (along with the ACLU). It’s a Catch-22, we are screwed either way we go, and people refuse to sit down and arrive at reasonable solutions. The question of legality is not that important, anyway, for there are always ways to skirt that issue – Adam Lanza should not have been allowed any place near a gun, and yet his mother was allowed to legally obtain as many as she wanted. Even the gun Jared Loughner used to attempt to assasinate Gabby Giffords was legally obtained. There is no easy answer, and there will not be a solution until the NAR(and others)realize that GUNS ARE DANGEROUS and the Founding Fathers did not intend everyone in the country to possess something that could destroy neighborhoods.

          • montanabill says:

            Actually, the founding fathers did, even though they probably didn’t anticipate today’s world. Their words and quotes are easily found describing their intent that the people, all the people, had a right to be armed.

            Even if we could remove guns from the populace, other populations where guns are outlawed show remarkable resourcefulness in using other weapons. It is the weapon user who is the problem, not the weapon itself.

            However, there several of things that I think could help. 1) Severe and mandatory long prison time for using a gun in the commission of a crime. 2) Substantial emphasis on both short and long term treatment, training, counseling and support for those identified with a mental issue. 3) Better monitoring and support for those who are taking any kind of psychotropic medication.

        • I have lived and traveled in many, many areas of the country and in foreign countries as well. I have been in rough parts of towns and in ghettos, and I have NEVER needed a gun in any situation — ever. I have hiked and camped in cougar and bear country, and I have fished in rattle snake country, and I have never needed a gun, but I have one. It was my dad’s, and he NEVER used it. If you believe Montanabill, then you have to carry 24-7 or you might miss your opportunity to blow someone away. This should be self-evident. Oh, yes, I do not hang out in bars, I do not do drugs, and I do not “party,” hence, no need to “carry.”

          • neeceoooo says:

            Thank you Gary, I like your thinking.

          • idamag says:

            Gary, I am like you. I have travelled this country and many foriegn countries and have never felt the need to carry a gun. I think the gun lobby has turned people into paranoids.

          • montanabill says:

            I, too, have spent considerable time in cougar and bear country. Although cougar attacks are on the rise, they generally pick on smaller targets. I have surprised a brown bear before. Fortunately, he bluff charged and left, but I was armed with both spray and large caliber pistol. I was glad I didn’t have to use either. I spend time hiking the high country and carefully follow the rules concerning bears.

          • idamag says:

            Montana, that is what is meant by experience. You didn’t shoot the bear with an AK-47. Now, give some examples of those dangerous streets and what cities?

          • montanabill says:

            There are streets in the Miami area, near the airport. Areas of Tampa like the outskirts of Ybor. Orlando’s Pine Hills area, a fair number of areas in St. Louis and East St. Louis, the southside of Chicago, east and south central LA.

            No, I didn’t shoot the bear with an AK-47 (don’t own one), but when I’m in bear country, which is frequently during the summer, I carry both bear (pepper) spray and a pistol capable of bringing down a bear. I don’t worry much about cougars, although incidents of attacks have been increasing in the past few years. The next biggest threat is a moose and in the early fall, bull Elk. You always want to avoid surprising any of these animals and give them wide berth if you see one. Chances are you will be ok, but every year a few people in the area (mostly tourists) are killed by the wildlife.

        • idamag says:


      • You do realize that both Gabby and her Hubby are both gun owners and have been for a long time . They are both supporting second amendment rights but want to see what the consesus is for some new advocacy . I suppport increased background checks and punishing those who let their crazy family members get a hold of guns . Usually that isnt an option because those people are dead . limiting mag size is stupid and an assualt rifle ban is as stupid as limiting baseball bats …should we just ban the black baseball bats because they look menacing ? I mean both bats do the same thing . why are you all so racist against Black guns . I like my black brothers . The next thing that should happen is if a felon is caught with a gun they should get an automatic 20 years no plea deals and no leeway from Liberal judges . How faast do you think most criminals would put them down knowing that ? Unfortunately it would take a few highly publicized sentencings for that message to get out .

        • johninPCFL says:

          All of those things are good except for tying the hands of judges. That kind of thinking is why 2/3 of all prisoners are non-violent drug offenders (at least non-violent when they go in.)

          Most states already have 10-20-life laws on the books. Adding a 20 year sentence to a felon just means he’s more likely to try to shoot his way out of a problem (killing innocents on the way) rather than surrender and try to strike a deal.

        • DurdyDawg says:

          No!.. Unfortunately 20 years is insignificant because lib or not, these criminals know that they will be released early because of space and or there are no more victims to protest parole.. I say put a tracer on their legs and make them care for the victim or their survivors for the rest of their lives or put them in work camps where they pay for their own trays, cot and security. Having the taxpayer cop the bill is no different than welfare except we pay ten times the amount to maintain inmates than for poor parents with children. What a screwed up (legal) society.

      • they should come to the Liberal Socialist Utopia known as Communist Occupied Chicago . We had a gun ban for decades . The city spent millions in tax dollars trying to defend this unconstitutional ban . We still have the toughest gun laws in the nation . Our Mayor Rahm ( the tiny dancer ) wont hire any Police officers to keep the citizens safe but cqan find money to hire 474 new teachers . Chicago DC and Detroit akll had gun bans . right after these bans were enacted all three saw spikes in the numbers of violenbt crime commited with guns . Gun bans dont work . It is just Liberal PR . By the way in every survey out there a majority of Americans side with the NRA position that it is time for armed Police officers in every school . Our hypocrite DEM mayor Dem President and Liberl Hollywood say this isnt the right approach . Rahm sends his kids to school with armed Police on every entrance . What they are saying is it isnt good for you buit it is for them . Let them lead by example ..let Rahm and Obama send their kids to Chicago Public School .

        • DEFENDER88 says:

          If they really believe in their position of no guns. They should post a sign in their yard – “THIS IS A GUN FREE HOUSE”.
          See how comfortable they are with that.

          • neeceoooo says:

            Okay, I will do that (because there is no gun in my house) when you put a sign on your yard that says “GUNS IN THIS HOME”.

          • DEFENDER88 says:

            I would advise you not too, but whatever.
            I have already fully advertised my capabilities around here.
            You may live in a protected area. But I dont.
            But prison interviews have shown that criminals fear armed home owners more than they do police. And will typically avoid same. And they know average police response times and they are unlikely to have to face them. Leroy is always scoping out most neighborhoods looking for the easiest targets. I already make it clear around here(put the word out) what they will be facing if they come here. Not because I want to shoot someone. But because I “DONT WANT TO” have too. And that would be an absolute last resort. But, It IS a factual deterrent.

            I could also add to my sign – Highly Trained “Tactical” Competitive Shooters – Husband(65), Wife(68), Son(45). We practice roughly 10x more than Police and sometimes with them. It is our preferred sport. Keeps us active, agile and sharp.
            However, unlike the woman in Conn – When not in use, our weapons ARE fully secured.

            We are too old to wrestle with them anymore so we have “equalizers”.
            And the cops are too far away to help us.

            Some of my neighbors have been burgled but they (Leroy) does not seem to want to come here(my house) for some unknown reason – its a mystery:)

            Good luck to you.
            Stay safe.

          • idamag says:

            If this is such a life-threatening, scary country whey not imigrate to a more peaceful country while some of us try to get a more peaceful country here.

          • DEFENDER88 says:

            Thats right – Attack me.
            Typical left wing-nut response.
            Is that your best effort to address the mass murders problem?
            Imply I am of low character instead of trying to discuss the problems and arrive at solutions that can work. Of course to your type anyone who owns a gun is dirt and does not want peace. Just the kind of thinking that will further polarize the sides of this issue. I have offered several, real, changes that can be done and can work to help with the problem of these murders.

            Further – implying that I dont want a peaceful country and am not contributing to same is, well, just ignorant on your part. I dont have time to explain why here, just that you are clearly ignorant of who I am and what I have tried to do.
            You might think about coming down a little from your lofty, arrogant, self-righteous position just a bit.
            ps I am not scared at all
            Not even worried
            It is plenty peaceful here at my house
            Has been for many years
            But there are a lot of dangerous people and places out there. Just because you are safe does not mean all of us are everywhere. It is a big country.
            I have been shot at 4 times out there so dont even try to tell me about life-threatening and scary out there.
            By the way F.U. too.

          • idamag says:

            defender, don’t be dippy. No one wants to take all the guns. They want stricter laws on background checks, assault weapon ban and multiple clip bans. Gabby Giffords has a right to say something about this. She has currency in the pot.

      • Debbie10 says:

        Well, the problem is, the guns that our Politicians ban will be the VERY ones that the Criminals will be using!

    • You Right My Friend But These Low Life Bastards Don’t Seem To Give A Damn About Nothing But MONEY!!! Even After All Those Babies Lost Their Lives What They Say Is We Need More Guns???

      • idamag says:

        Fern! Where have you been? As a nurse, your concern is to preserve life not to destroy it. Every day you face situations where your actions are vital to someone else’s life. You don’t have time to be cowering in a corner because someone is out to get you. God bless you for the person you are.

    • The problem seems to me 1st. we need to lock up our guns and in all thoes cases of shooting there was a psycotic drug involved. These people would use any means to do their job. As long as we don’t control these people the guns wont make a difference.

      • DEFENDER88 says:

        I agree.

        Columbine, VT, Ft Hood, Sike Temple, New Town, numerous churches:
        So we have a definitive pattern and common denominators here for these mass murders:
        (1) Gun Free Zones
        (2) 20 or so yr old male, intellingent but psycho
        (3) Psychotic Drugs

        So lets ban guns from responsible gun owners who want only to protect themselves, and are, in fact, a deterrent to criminals and crime – that is what you call Knee Jerk stupidity and ignorance.

        Stupid because it is just stupid.

        Like many new laws that are passed that end up hurting those they were meant to protect or help.

        Ignorant because it ignores the root problems and real solutions that can work to substantially lessen the problem.

        Like increased security, stronger requirements like psycho test for gun permit, permit and training required to buy or sell guns, etc. more.

  2. To Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly: This article says “Their message is instead a wake-up call to those who oppose gun violence “to balance the influence of the gun lobby.” We are already awake and want to counter the influence of the NRA. We already want REAL ban on all military assault weapons and a ban on large capacity ammunition delivery systems. What we need now are true leaders for getting this accomplished. We don’t need any more people just talking, we need people to lead a REAL hands-on, focused Congressional grassroots lobbying campaign. Will you be the real leaders that we need to stop just talking and get this legislation passed? We’re ready if you are. Thank you for listening.

    • Gifford and Kelly’s statement is a tacit acknowledgment of how powerful the arms industry and the NRA are, and how much we love our guns. I don’t expect much out of this exercise. Hopefully they will ban high capacity magazines and maybe, just maybe, assault weapons. I doubt they will touch semi-automatic weapons and nobody, and I mean nobody, will even propose taking handguns away from Americans.
      Guns are part of our culture, and so is the lethal violence that those guns facilitate.
      There will be many more Newtowns, Aurora’s, Virginia Tech’s, Sikh Temples, Tucson’s and all the other places where massacres have taken place. We will weep and pray for the victims when new massacres happen, and we will then go to the nearest gun shop to buy a few more weapons to assuage our fears and have a false sense of security.

      • johninPCFL says:

        Their message is more likely a realization that the semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines already in the countryside won’t evaporate and can’t be recalled or collected. A commonsense approach that recognizes the continuing presence of those devices is required, whether a ban of any kind is enacted or not.

      • Debbie10 says:

        LOL, there is nothing FALSE about my sense of security!!!!

    • Debbie10 says:

      Well, I don’t know who “WE” is but if the MAJORITY of “WE” wanted that, it would have been done already!! So, please don’t include “ME” in your “WE”!!! The gun laws that we already have simply need to be ENFORCED!! The laws are NOT the problem! ENFORCEMENT is.

  3. robertb says:

    Just like Drugs and Alcohol and most anything or anybody “ILLEGAL”…’ll only get worse when we try to ban, prohibit or regulate…..think prescription drugs, drugs period,…..alcohol ect….the “DRUG WAR”….failed and more people die from violence everyday because drugs are “ILLEGAL” than the people who abuse them, 20 million plus people are here “ILLEGALLY” and they will continue to do this, people “TEXT” while driving it’s “ILLEGAL” and people keep doing it even the POLICE……law breakers are just what they are and the solution should be “STIFFER PENALTIES” for breaking them.

  4. 1Crossland2 says:

    No one needs guns that pierce bullet proof jackets. That is what the police force wears ! Those automatic weapons for for killing our city cops!!! Hunting and Personal Protection guns and rifles should be adequate for US citizens.

    • DEFENDER88 says:

      You are mis-informed here.
      I am not going to ID here what police wear and what it will stop since there are probably some bad guys in here who would like to know more . But you need to do more study on guns, vests, bullet proof, hunting rifles, and “what is adequate” etc before you jump in here. But please do not quote specs on police armor if you do find out.

  5. 76Per76 says:

    This will be a very tough battle because as yet no one has defined exactly what the issue is besides the generic “gun control,” which emits everything from apoplexy from the NRA to a shrug of the shoulders from great masses of the population. We are so accustomed to gun violence it’s difficult to garner support. And Congress, where backbones are in short supply, most members cringe even though they know the NRA has only 4 million members in a country of 310 million people. Every time there is a massacre the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre shuttles forward with microphone in hand to give the “We’re sorry, but we really need MORE guns” speech while alluding to greater control over the mentally ill while avoiding reference to psychological testing as part of gun ownership. He would panic if someone suggested taking guns away from those with mental illness. Now the NRA’s perennial message is that more guns mean less crime with the usual reference to “freedom” as if sitting in a restaurant wondering if the cantakerous drunk down the end of the bar is packing a Glock really has anything whatever to do with freedom. Or safety. It will be a tough fight. It would be less so were the NRA more inclined to compromise although admittedly I know I’m whistling in the wind. And here I am an FFL dealer.

  6. tobewan says:

    The Prospects set forth in this paragraph:
    ““As a Western woman and a Persian Gulf War combat veteran who have exercised our Second Amendment rights, we don’t want to take away your guns any more than we want to give up the two guns we have locked in a safe at home,” they wrote. “What we do want is what the majority of NRA members and other Americans want: responsible changes in our laws to require responsible gun ownership and reduce gun violence.”” – of a common desire to regulate, without eliminate, should prove helpful to get SOMETHING done!

    We also need to regulate Gun Dealers, so they don’t sell those clips or those guns! And make it illegal for private citizens to possess them, and take efforts to enforce it.

    Glad to see “Gabby” speaking out on this.

  7. dslocum says:

    Thank you, Gabby and Mark! You are the perfect folks to spearhead this effort. Please keep in mind that the NRA membership represents only 1.4% of our population, a very small number of people when you consider the enormity of the influence the group has. Of course this can mean only one thing. Monied and biased interests are heavily funding the efforts to sway Congress. 98.6 % of our population does not belong to the NRA. We also need representation!!!!!!

    • montanabill says:

      But 50% of our population own guns. So when you think about trying to demean the organizations that claim to protect their rights to own those guns, you are not dealing with an ‘ideological fringe’.

      • old_blu says:

        I’m part of that 50% and I don’t need any organization to help protect my rights to own guns I know I have that right, and I don’t think anyone is going to take that right away, that is how those organizations that you speak of try to scare people into buying more guns. (i’m more afraid of my wife than i am someone taking my guns) No one is going to take our guns a few restrictions maybe, and I’ll bet they aren’t much.

        • montanabill says:

          I know you mean well, but the people out there sermonizing now really do want to take your guns, if they could. So first, get rid of those who stand in their way. If that were not their goal, they would be concentrating on the real problem. As the FBI noted a couple of days ago, more people were killed with hammers than rifles. Mass shootings, or for that matter, most shootings, are mental health issues, as are killings by hammer.

          • AdamMos says:

            What kind of nonsense is that. More people are killed with hammers than with guns? You cannot possibly have a reliable source for that! I have not heard anybody (of importance) wanting to to ban all guns- it is not realistic or constitutional.
            Now you are correct in the assumption that people kill people not guns. However guns sure make it easy to kill people. Killing spomeone with a hammer is extremely difficult not to mention messy. With a scope I can kill someone from 1/2 mile away with a gun. I am a good shot. Quit playing us for fools.

          • old_blu says:

            Actually it was just a play on words he said “rifles” in real life gun deaths are going to exceed auto deaths at this rate in 2015.

            Edit: You are right if you want to kill people, there is nothing more efficient at killing than a gun.

          • montanabill says:

            Apparently you don’t consider the FBI to be a reliable source, nor apparently, do you get your news from various sources.

            Of course you haven’t heard too many people purporting to want to ban all guns, but you know that is their ultimate goal and to say otherwise is simply ignorant. A foot in the door is the order of the day.

            You may be a good shot, but unless you have practiced considerably, I would definitely bet against you hitting a human sized target from more than 300 yards even with a good scope.

          • metrognome3830 says:

            Bill, from your comments I would rank you just as paranoid as the folks who want to ban all guns. As for the FBI comment regarding hammers, I haven’t heard who said it nor have I heard that it was accurate. Unless, of course, you actually believe that an FBI agent would never make an off-hand comment or tell a fib. When was the last time someone entered a school and killed 26 people with a hammer?

          • montanabill says:

            washington dot cbslocal dot com/2013/01/03/fbi-hammers-clubs-kill-more-people-than-rifles-shotguns/

            Also Google mass school killings in China..


          • johninPCFL says:

            And if you have practiced? Look up the history of the 1918 Battle of Belleau Wood. In thos days, the marines were held in low esteem by the army. The army decided they couldn’t hold Belleau Wood, so they sent the marines in to be slaughtered instead. When the Germans began to take fatalities from the marine riflemen at 600yds, they realized they were going to fail.

          • montanabill says:

            If you have practiced, you can hit a buffalo sized target at 1000 yards with an 1873 Sharps rifle using black powder and open sights. But if you haven’t practiced, you will be hard pressed to hit a human sized target from 300 yards with modern rifle and a scope. One would have to assume those infantry men in Europe has some familiarity with their Springfields. Infantry men could also be effective with 1873 or 1911 Colt pistols with practice, but if you haven’t practiced a lot, you would be hard pressed to hit a human sized target at 50 yards with either one.

          • AdamMos says:

            Thanks for proving my point.

            #1 if you could produce link backing up your nonsense that more people are killed with hammers than guns you would (but you cant)

            #2 I go with what people say and do as opposed to what I think they may be thinking.

            #3 I bet nobody can kill anyone with a hammer form 300 feet or 30 feet or even 10 feet.

          • montanabill says:

            Hey lazy,

            washington dot cbslocal dot com/2013/01/03/fbi-hammers-clubs-kill-more-people-than-rifles-shotguns/

          • Debbie10 says:

            Don’t LIE! You probably don’t even OWN a gun. If you knew even a little bit about guns you would KNOW that unless you are VERY practiced YOU could not hit a target 1/2 mile away EVEN with a scope. AND, if you WERE very practiced, YOU would be on the side of the NRA!! So, I call BULLSHIT!

          • AdamMos says:

            Actually I can wing a moth from 1200 yards just like Jed Clampett (no scope). F-ck the NRA!

          • idamag says:

            Adam, Montana actually makes a point. How many people could hit a moving target. People would need the same training as law enforcement. I enjoyed your post.

          • old_blu says:

            No one has even said anything to me about my guns and they are not going to, I think you have fallen for the same scare tactics gun lobbyist use and have been using for years and it works so I don’t blame them it sells guns just look at lately after those children were shot, gun, ammo, and CWP sales have rocketed.

          • montanabill says:

            Suppose, instead of knee jerk statements about gun control and the size of magazines, responsible people had first starting asking questions about what could be done to better identify and help those with mental issues? Do you think for one minute gun sales would have gone through the roof or that gun shows would be having record attendance? Those hundreds of thousands of people are reacting to people whom they know would like to curtail more of their freedoms. To think otherwise would be somewhat naive.

          • johninPCFL says:

            Gun sales went through the roof when the black bogeyman was re-elected. He has done NOT ONE THING about gun ownership except expand it, but the jackasses continue to react in fear.

          • montanabill says:

            He’s your black bogeyman, not mine. He’s just a gas bag to me. And that gas bag immediately started talking about ‘gun control’ instead of addressing the real causes of mass killings.

          • neeceoooo says:

            No the hundreds of thousands of people you are referring to is the audiance of Fox news and they hear what the talking heads are telling them, which is get a gun now before the government takes them all away. Such a stupid remark. The government does NOT want to take away your gun.

          • montanabill says:

            I’ve not heard one commentator at Fox News telling anyone to get a gun now. Perhaps you would be so kind as to back up your charge by telling me who, when and what they said.

          • idamag says:

            Montana, that you listen to faux news is not surprising. The drugster got right on it, directly after the shooting. His heart was not with the children who had to be in enormous fear while being shot. He didn’t think about what it would look like while a six-year old was being pumped full of 11 bullets. He didn’t think about the 20 homes where the trees were up and the presents were probably already bought and hidden.

          • montanabill says:

            I not only watch Fox, I watch CBS and CNN, and occasionally ABC and NBC just to see if they are still skipping stories not to their liking. Yes, it is a horrible event, but you didn’t tell me who at Fox was telling people to get guns.

          • idamag says:

            Montana, the mental health issues need to be addressed, also.

          • montanabill says:

            That was my very first comment. This shooting and all the other mass killings are mental health problems, first and foremost.

          • neeceoooo says:

            Good morning old-blu, you are right. No one wants to takes any guns from the American People. I think what they would like to see is the ban on assault weapons or high capacity clips but no one wants to take their lawful gun.

      • AdamMos says:

        BS the NRA speaks for the gun manufacturers not gun owners. The answer is simple.

        A complete ban on all semi automatic weapons. If you own one now you are grandfathered and can keep it as long as you register it , take a safety course and secure it. Just like s drivers license you need to renew your permit every 3 years which includes a psychiatric examination. Possessing one of these killing machines without a permit is a felony.

        High cpacity magazines are banned and if found in posession of one – it is a felony.

        All gun sales must have a background check and 72 hour waiting period. Failure to perform a background check is a felony with a minimum 5 year sentence (no parole or probation).

        As a nation we must invest more in our ability to identify and treat people with mental illnesses.

        Problem solved! Next issue, please

        • montanabill says:

          Would you please identify and define ‘semi-automatic’ weapons? Why don’t you classify a pen knife as a ‘killing machine’ or a hammer as a ‘killing machine’ or an automobile as a ‘killing machine’?

          Do you know exactly how long it takes for a practiced owner to change clips in most semi-auto rifles or pistols, or to reload a revolver or even to reload an 1860’s Spencer?

          Have you done the slightest investigation as to the impact and/or unintended consequences of requiring all gun sales to have a background check and 72 hour waiting period?

          Problem solved? Not at the expense of ignorance.

      • dslocum says:

        We have no reason to believe that the 50% who own guns believe that ownership of assualt weapons is important. Normal people have no desire to own military style weapons. The NRA membership, a paltry 1.4% of the population, appear to represent extremists. We own guns for hunting and protection, as do many Americans. We have no need for military weapons.

        • montanabill says:

          What is an ‘assault weapon’? Is it the semi-automatic gun your grandfather owned to hunt rabbits? It is the semi-automatic shotgun used by many for upland game? Is it a gun capable of rapid fire like a 1860’s Spencer rifle or a 1860’s Winchester or 1870’s Colt revolver? Is it a single shot Sharps like the 6th Cavalry used in battle or 1903 Springfield bolt action like our troops used in WW I or a semi-automatic Garand like those used in WW II and in wide use for deer hunting today. Or is it simply a modern semi-automatic rifle or pistol that ‘looks’ like a military weapon? Military assault weapons have a fully automatic mode. Guns you can buy at a local gun shop do not have a fully automatic capability, so in that respect, assault rifles are not available to your average gun owner. Any gun, in the wrong hands, is an assault weapon’, as is a club, knife or automobile.
          As you so sure that 4.3 million people, including many politicians, actors, community leaders, etc. are ‘extremists’?

          • dslocum says:

            So your best defense of the mass slaughter of innocent, unarmed children and adults is semantic games? Shame on you!!!!!!! The NRA’s position is extremist and indefensible.

          • montanabill says:

            And yours is a position of ignorance.

          • dslocum says:

            Yet another conservative who can’t handle the truth.

          • dslocum says:

            Not only are you close minded, you appear to have little ability to analyze information. And whatever happened to your conscience?

          • montanabill says:

            Apparently you are confusing conscience with control. It seems your conscience says you should have the ability to dictate to others what they should like and how they should lead their lives.

          • dslocum says:

            On the contrary, the confusion is all yours. My conscience makes me speak out on issues that harm society. Assault weapons in the wrong hands, harm society. There’s no acceptable reason for them to be available to the public.

          • montanabill says:

            Perhaps you would be so kind as to define what is an assault rifle and why it is unique enough to warrant such attention.

          • dslocum says:

            Back to semantic games? You know exactly what I mean by assault weapon – one that allows for mass murders of innocents, in the current context, in just a few seconds. Don’t play dumb when the news is innundated with the issues surrounding assault weapons.

          • montanabill says:

            An assault gun is a gun capable of fully automatic operation. It can be bought and sold only by those with Class III ATF licenses. Holders of those licenses have their picture, fingerprints, background check and approval by an authorized authority on file.

            There was recently a mass murder of school children in China by a person with a knife. Would you describe that as an ‘assault weapon’? Your answer should be yes. Any item capable of killing, in the wrong hands, is an assault weapon. Our goal should be to keep all such items (guns, knives, cars, clubs, hammers, screwdrivers) from those ‘wrong hands’ by identifying ‘wrong hands’ and offering treatment and assistance.

            The problem with ‘the news’, is that it is rarely complete, rarely accurate and rarely just news as it should be reported.

          • dslocum says:

            Unfortunately, as we’ve seen the licensed individuals do not always prevent the mentally ill from having access to their assault weapons. One of Reagan’s biggest mistakes was emptying the mental institutions into the streets in the mid 80’s. Look what’s happened since with mass shootings.

            I believe the knife attack in China, which was tragic, resulted in no deaths. But you are correct in stating that weapons should be kept from the wrong hands.

            And you are also correct that today’s version of journalism is sadly lacking.

          • montanabill says:

            There have been many knife attacks in China, resulting in mass deaths, schools included.

            How about creating and enforcing national law that using a gun in the commission of a crime will result in long and mandatory jail time.

            A lot of the mental health problems today are the result of drugs, including alcohol (e.g. fetal alcohol syndrome) both legal and illegal. For example, we have very sparse and not well coordinated help for young autism spectrum victims, but as they age, even that disappears. While the vast majority will never be a threat to anyone, it just takes one who is on the wrong track, as we saw in New Town. It appears his mother had simply run out of places to turn for help.

          • dslocum says:

            Reportedly, the mother of the culprit in Newtown was trying to have him institutionalized because he’d gotten so much worse as he matured. There’s little help for parents. I do feel she was grossly remiss in keeping the weapons where he could get at them, as well as teaching him to shoot them.

            I agree with you regarding incarceration of those who commit a crime using a gun. With the mass slaughters, the shooters often kill themselves. I’d prefer institutionalization for the mentally ill who can be identified as potentially dangerous.

          • montanabill says:

            There has been virtually no reporting of the circumstances of the mother and son so we are left to guess and make assumptions. Not usually productive. He may have gotten worse because there were no life skills therapists available to the mother or Adam, leaving him to retreat further within himself. Asperger’s people can show a lot of ‘normal’ traits and the mother may have included him in her shooting activities in the hopes that it would give him a wider world. It, however, is something not recommended for Asperger’s.

          • dslocum says:

            I’m hoping there will eventually be a comprehensive report on the circumstances. You seem well informed on Asperger’s symptoms. My current knowledge is limited. When I began my teaching career in special education (6 yrs.), autism was a new diagnosis. It included only children who didn’t speak at that time. The lack of help for parents of mentally ill individuals is really sad, but circumstances for the homeless MI is dreadful.

          • montanabill says:

            I’m certainly not an expert on it, but I’ve been involved with kids (many now grown to adults) who had one form of the autism spectrum or another, including fetal alcohol syndrome which has similar effects to Aspergers. No two of them were alike, so it is hard to create any more than individualized strategies. Many of the traits are similar, but while one child may be a whiz at math and another may not be able to a lick of math, but is phenomenal at history. One may be obsessed with natural disasters, while the next obsesses over flowers. Keeping Asperger children moving from subject to subject is a real hurdle, but can have enormous benefit as they grow older. However, once a child reaches high school age, educational facilities diminish greatly. And, beyond that, the life skills programs for such people is extremely scarce. By now they are legally adults but with few skills to cope with the world.

        • idamag says:

          dsl, What you said bears repeating, “Normal people have no desire to own military style weapons.”

    • Debbie10 says:

      ROFLMAO!!! That is SO funny!!! The NRA membership may only represent 1.4% of the population but, THAT is a VERY large number of VOTING population (since your figures include infants to nursing home residents). And while “only” 1.4% of our population holds MEMBERSHIP to the NRA, does NOT represent supporting NON Members!!! LMFAO

      • dslocum says:

        Sorry, Debbie. !.4% of the population is a tiny portion of the voting population too. And there’s nothing funny about mass slaughter!!!! you are grossly mistaken.

        • Debbie10 says:

          You must have missed the part about the NON members support!! Also, I NEVER said OR implied that mass slaughter was funny so I do NOT need YOU to be my mouthpiece and make up words that I NEVER said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • dslocum says:

            You cite no evidence of non member support. And clearly you have nothing of substance to say on the issue. You made ignorant remarks about my comments which were backed by statistics. Are you drunk?

          • Debbie10 says:

            There is NO reference available to cite. But I am a NON member and CLEARLY I support the NRA AND I am a registered voter AND I VOTE!!

          • dslocum says:

            Learn how to use the many fact check websites and Google. You’ll be surprised at how much evidence you can find.

          • Debbie10 says:

            Well, go ahead, “Mr. Factchecker” enlighten us all. Go ahead and tell us how many NON NRA members support the NRA!! I can hardly wait!!!! Don’t forget to cite your source!!!

          • dslocum says:

            Read the papers. The NRA is being deserted in droves by non member supporters. By the way, I’m a 71 year old woman, former editor, and a reading specialist. I taught critical thinking skills. I’m still working because my retirement is small.

          • Debbie10 says:

            Wow! Someone that appears to be an educated woman suggests that I use News Media as Source? Really?? The media writes what they WANT people to BELIEVE! I live in South Carolina where just about everyone owns guns of ALL types. I have a classroom full of 3rd graders , both girls and boys that are already out hunting with their OWN guns with their fathers. So, maybe in your liberal State (where they have been opposed to guns FOREVER, but not in the REAL area where RESPONSIBLE

          • dslocum says:

            CNN is a reliable source. FOX News is not. Obviously, you have to consider the source of all news media.
            I live in a conservative state and we own several guns. Nearly everyone in my family, including children, hunts everything from birds to big game. We are strong on gun safety. Because of my age, I’m taking a refresher safety course this month.
            I am not opposed to guns. I am opposed to assault weapons like the one used in the recent mass slaughter of unarmed children and adults. I sincerely believe no individual has a need for such a weapon.

          • Debbie10 says:

            By the way, there was a school shooting today in California where the gun of choice was a shotgun. Are you now if favor of banning shotguns?

          • dslocum says:

            Obviously, Debbie, the single loss of life from a shotgun, vs. mass slaughters with automatic weapons, just validates the great need to ban assault weapons. For a teacher, you do not appear to be a very deep thinker. You need to take some classes to improve your critical thinking skills!!!!

          • Debbie10 says:

            What in the WORLD would make you think that one pull of a shotgun trigger is only capable of killing one person?

          • dslocum says:

            Stop putting words in my mouth. The point is that not being an assault weapon, only one person was killed. Thank goodness the shooter lacked access to an assault weapon.

            My family owns and shoots a wide variety of guns. I never said we shoot shotguns, you did. You don’t know what guns I’ve shot.

            You obviously need to broaden your horizons and I’m disappointed that someone with your limited thinking skills is teaching children.

          • Debbie10 says:

            And, By the way…..NO ONE was KILLED!!! So, UNINFORMED!!!!!

          • idamag says:

            dsl, i have a friend who quit the NRA. He thinks they are radical.

          • Inthenameofliberty says:

            More than care to be known about. If you want to know.

          • Debbie10 says:

            Prove it! Give me your source site.

          • Inthenameofliberty says:

            Sorry to disappoint, but all I have for sources are not going to be good enough for you. They are friends and family, and other people who I have met, who are trying valiantly to have rationale discussions in the wake of this tragedy. They are my source.
            That’s all I have for you. I did not perform a double blinded study on this.
            Just because most of the people I know don’t want to own a gun, and don’t own a gun, well that doesn’t mean we believe that ANY kind of gun control will fix this.

            Most of the people I have spoken to want to fix the PEOPLE that are in desperate need of help.

            Taking away the guns is too late. It’s reactionary. More than half of the people I have spoken with about this want the following: #1 – Identify those with mental problems and intervene early to help them; #2 Utilize the psychotropic drugs that are ruining lives with more caution. These drugs are, in some instances, making mental illness worse.

            Our society keeps developing children that are ill-equipped to function in society. In so many cases, we could do better. We need to stop ‘throwing pills’ at the problems. We need to fix ‘us’. We need to do better for our children.

            More prohibition in our society will not work. History will just keep repeating itself.

            And it seems we don’t like learning from history. Do we?

          • Debbie10 says:

            Thank you. Not disappointed. It is the same for me here with the discussions. I am pro gun. I do not think that the gun is the problem. I agree with you in Identifying those with mental illness and early intervention. And, OMG don’t even get me started on the over prescribing for children. I do however notice the trend that all of these “massacres” are taking place in designated gun free zones. That is almost an invitation for crazy to come on it. It is just too easy to walk in with a gun when you know that you are not at risk of being shot yourself. Maybe we should post signs that say Armed Guards on Duty. At least that might be a deterrent,

          • Inthenameofliberty says:


          • idamag says:

            The shooter with the shotgun did not kill 28 people.

  8. We have gun laws,they are mostly ignored in favor of the almighty dollar,as are many things. There is a HUGE difference between adhering and applying existing gun safety laws and banning gun ownership. The lunatic fringe are the ones that want the gun ban! This will serve no purpose at all other than to put guns in the hands of criminals and non-compliant gun owners who will NOT register a gun for fear of government confiscation and punishment. If new laws need to be enacted due to new situations and events, then so be it, but it should go through our executive bodies as mandated by our constitution..NOT owned by one man that sits in the office of president.That is NOT his place, nor ever has been.

    • AdamMos says:

      Last I checked our President is not a king. Only Congress can pass new laws. Obama can recommend and sign legislation only. Save us your BS. If there are new laws they will be passed by Congress but probably not until 2014 when the Dems retake the House and regain their supermajority in the Senate.

  9. Bob Williams says:

    They have real strict gun laws in Chicago. How’s that working out?

    What? There were over 500 gun murders there last year? I guess that the criminals are not obeying the laws. Imagine that!

    • Are they killing people in Chicago with rock, sticks, bricks, bows n arrows, clubs, swords, cars, baseball bats, salt shakers or a knife (as in china on the same day as New Town) 22-23 slash not one dead. Most right wingers believe they have some rights in the constitution for anyone for any reason, anywhere to own a gun. Until 2008 Heller vs D C no such thing existed, thanks to some right winger on the supreme court. One third of U S house hold own guns, the rest of us have the right to not be shot are kill for your simple minded madness. We have the largest military by 10 fold in the world, we are well protected. Your other loooony idea is that you are protecting yourselves form and a over reaching GOV-MENT, no group or groups of fools will or can defeat your local police, the national guard, a regiment of Marine or any army. PERIOD!!!!!!!!

    • AdamMos says:

      The laws in Chicago are not strict enough! Even if it only saved one life – it was worth it. What is a life worth?

  10. I am supportive of all interventions that will limit peoples abilities to obtain the means to kill others. This includes all guns.
    The right of individuals to live is a god given right. No man, not even the constitution of the US has a right to deprive others the right to live. The right to bear arms is no longer a realistic right because there are no invaders. Our Government is voted into power even if it does not do what we want it to do we have to support it because it is majority rule.
    All developed economies with gun control legislation have lower crime rates than the USA. Guns kill.
    The constitution of the US needs to be ammended to protect the right to life, a god given right. Do we really trust in god when we provide guns to kill others.

    • Inthenameofliberty says:

      “All developed economies with gun control legislation have lower crime rates than the USA. ”

      That is not actually true.

      Right now, online, you can discover that the crime rate in Britain is higher than the USA when looking at crime per 100,000 people. Then look at Ireland and others.

      It’s on the net. Doesn’t take much to find it, if you choose to.

      You need to watch your exaggerations of ‘ALL’ when you are making a point. In this instance, you are most certainly incorrect.

  11. I want to say thank you to Ms. Giffords and Mr. Kelly for having the courage to stand up for a less violent society. And to those who say it can’t be done — think again. Nothing ever is accomplished by people sitting around and saying it can’t be done. Stand up for what you believe and do what’s right.

  12. Clay says:

    Amazing that the gun used to shoot Gabrielle, and the gun used to kill and wound the elementary school students at Sandy Hook, acted on their own with nobody pulling the trigger. What makes anybody think “more laws” will stop gun killing? People kill, not guns. Anyone setting out to kill another with a gun never thinks about whether the gun is legal or not – laws won’t work!

    • AdamMos says:

      BS Guns sure make it easy to kill people. Have you ever heard of a mass killing with knife? You are a fool!

      • Inthenameofliberty says:

        Adam – they are not fools.
        Banning assault weapons is not going to fix the problem.
        I wish it would – then I would be all for it.
        But logically – it just won’t. It didn’t work before. It won’t fix the problem now.

        Time to think outside the box.

        • AdamMos says:

          Yes it did work. Since the assualt weapons expired half of all mass killings in our nations history have taken place. It is a complex problem so many things need to implemented. We can start with a stronger assault weapons ban. We can also ban the sale of high capacity magazines. Universal background checks are a no brainer. Major investments in our mental health care systems are in order and a change in how we approach those individuals.

          Keep your hunting rifles, handguns and shot guns. I am not in favor of repealing the 2nd amendment or confiscating peoples weapons (unless they are mentally unbalanced or have a criminal record of violence). But lets start with some common sense gun safety and lets start keeping tabs on people that are buying 6,000 rounds of ammunition. If you own a assualt rifle ( purchased before the coming ban) lets make sure you understand how to secure it and that these individuals have permits go through background and mental health checks every so often like a 65 year old would when renewing his/her drivers license. I am also in favor in beefing up our police prescence at least in our schools and other soft target locations until we can get this out of control gun culture under control. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts with you.

  13. blueclouds123 says:

    Everyone speaks to appease the gun owners. They keep saying we are not trying to take away your righst or your guns. We believe in the constitution as you do. Well, well, what about THE RIGHT FOR US TO BE ABLE TO LIVE FREE OF FEAR OF THE NEXT GUNMAN. Come on, gun owers are not the only people who have rights, WE HAVE RIGHTS ALSO. It is getting to the point where people fear going shopping, to theaters, sending children to school. going to church, just liv ing. Have you ever thought what other countries think of the U.S? Maybe it is time to smarten up and stand up for our rights.

    • thebunt says:

      A friend of mine recently married an Australian. Maybe because over a half of the grooms family refused to attend the US ceremony because they were afraid to come to the USA, they had a duplicate ceremony in Australia (which all of the brides US family attended).

      Think of living in a country that tourists are afraid to visit. Not exactly great for the economy.

      With the current level of gun violence the chances of the USA ever hosting another Olympic Games is zero.

      The opinions of the rest of the world DOES matter.

  14. Folks:
    It is simply high time we put these money grubbing ammo weapons manufacturing toads out of the business of making profits by selling to and and all citizens guns and ammunition originally designed for use BY THE UNITED STATES MILITARY. Otherwise, our country will be the U.S.A. (United States of Ammo). Hugh Buckingham

  15. MerrilyRay says:

    How simple it is to neutralize the words of the NRA who say that it’s because of

    Violent video Games
    Violent movies
    Mental Illness
    The Press

    The rest of the world has all of the above and
    How many deaths do they have from gun violence??

    The sole difference is that they do not have GUNS

    And the mother ??

    Here is a woman, middle class – educated probably – sane – no criminal record – etc
    These were HER guns

  16. thebunt says:

    I don’t have a doubt in the world that the vast amjority of Americans are in favor of much stricter gun control. A politician should know that gun control would be a big attraction to voters.

    The IRA is actually a very small group. Is their lobby money really that important to politicians? I guess it is. Money talks. 91% of all elections are won by the candidate spending the most money. The fact that the IRA money influences politicians highlights an even bigger problem. Get the big money out of election campaigns and the influence of IRA (and other lobby groups) would disappear.

  17. stcroixcarp says:

    Ban assault weapons, armor piercing ammo and large capacity clips. But take LePierre up on the mental health thing. We need more mental health facilities, especially in rural areas, we need to make it easier for relatives and guardians to hospitalize mentally ill people who are a threat to themselves and others, and we need to track where weapons are going. Our community has lost three young men to depression and self inflicted gunshot wounds in the last three years. Clearly affordable and accessible mental health services are needed.

  18. cemab4y says:

    I am glad that we have a first amendment, so that newspapers like theUSA today will inform us of this ex-congressperson’s assault on the second amendment.

  19. cemab4y says:

    One suggestion: Pass a law making it illegal to kill other people. I believe such a law will have an effect on crime.

  20. GOPWIPEOUT says:

    Tried to donate using AmEx – wouldn’t take that card – asked for a different card even though AMEX is shown there as being available. Hope somebody corrects this.

  21. kay says:

    This is not about those children, because the dems love to abort and kill children by the thousands, but it is about disarming law abiding Americans. People, these anti-Americans are doing EXACTLY the same thing that Lenin,Stalin, Hitler and Mao did, so don’t ever think its about saving children. Just ask Great Britain and Australia about the commie gun grabbing and the extremely negative impact its had in their countries. Honestly, the law abiding American citizen gun owner cares deeply about your children and their’s and wants only to be able to protect all if it becomes necessary. The criminals, deranged and evil people that kill in mass and commit these crimes are not abiding by our laws now, so why would all the gun bans in the world stop them. The criminal will always have the gun or some other weapon to use against a defenseless law abiding citizen. This is complete communist propaganda and just as history tells us time again, this isn’t about the children. Also, really look hard and read about the recent rash of killing somewhere other than the typical far left newspapers and sites and don’t even bother with the mainstream media, because we all know they lie, distort and spew Obama’s propaganda 24/7.Go find the TRUTH!

    • thebunt says:

      You can talk to a million Aussies and a million Brits and you will not find ONE who will say ‘commie gun grabbing’ has had a negative impact on their countries.

      Ironic that your blog would end with ‘Go find the TRUTH’.

    • I’m from the UK (but have split my time between the USA and the UK for the last 23 years for business) and the gun ban has been the best thing possible! No mass school shootings since the Scottish one in 1996; the USA has had dozens and dozens in that time, with a MASSIVE death toll.

      The UK is one of the safest countries in the World, it has 4 x fewer murders than the USA overall, it had 14 gun murders last year, compared to the USA having over 9,000 gun murders !!! So the USA is FAR, FAR more dangerous than the UK; the USA has an overall murder rate of 4.8 per 100,00 the UK has a 1.2 rate, Denmark has a 0.9 rate, Australia has a 1.0 rate. See a pattern here?

      The population of the UK is 61 million vs the USA at 300 million, so lets equalize for population: That brings the UK to 70 gun murders vs. the USA at more than 9,000, so allowing for population, the USA has 134 X the murder rate by guns.

      So explain to me again how more guns = less crime? Explain to me how more guns = less murder by guns? The figures and facts prove the complete opposite.

      P.S. I can walk anywhere I want in the UK without fear that some small disagreement will escalate into some idiot grabbing a gun and shooting me. At worst, he might try and stab me which has a far higher chance of me living, or I can run away, or I can grab a baseball bat and stop him; with a gun, I’m DEAD. Usually these disagreements end up in a bit of fisticuffs and it’s done.

      Face it, the USA has a gun problem. Anyone that can’t see that is delusional, crazy, in denial and not in possession of actual facts. No one want to BAN guns, we just want some sensible attempt at stopping guns getting into the hands of lunatics and gun fetishists that think that 100 round mags are “cool” to own.

      By the way, I own a Mossberg 930 SPX, so I’m NOT ant-gun, I’m anti sociopaths, mentally deranged, overly fetishized lovers of guns.

      • Inthenameofliberty says:

        Ok – here we go. Taken off the FBI webpage:

        ** We have a 50% reduction in the crime rate in the United States over the last 20 years.
        **Metropolitan areas of the US have twice the crime rate as the national average.

        When comparing the FBI stats to the stats from the UK:

        **The UK has a higher rate of violent crime than the US……but a slightly lower murder rate.

        YOUR COUNTRY has a higher violent crime rate than MINE. So where do you get your claim that your country is safer?

        I’ll take mine, thanks.

        Many gun-related crimes occur in the US in the heavily populated cities that have gun control laws (New York City is a wonderful example). So the gangs have access to all the guns they want and the regular people live in fear.

        If you dislike my country so much, then perhaps you should not travel to it.

        • As usual you change the subject and spout sheer nonsense. You are claiming that it’s better to be shot and killed than to be punched in the mouth???? Are you deranged?

          Violent crime is NOT DEATH BY GUN !!! Violent crime is classified in completely different ways in the UK than in the USA, so that rather then Apples to Apples, you are trying to compare Apples to Wildebeest!

          Not a “Slightly” lower murder rate… USA is 4.8 per 100,000, UK is 1.2 per 100,000; why do you just lie about these things? Is your position so tenuous that you have to resort to changing subjects, lying and then claiming that a 400% higher murder rate in UK, vs.the USA is “slightly lower” Seriously 400% higher is OK with you on the general murder rate.

          Still no answer about why the USA has a 134 X higher incidence of GUN murder I see… More guns = less gun murders in your perverse and twisted World…

          Why do all the statistics prove otherwise? Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Germany, Spain, Portugal, France, UK, Belgium, Switzerland, Ireland, Greece, Turkey, Austria, Luxembourg, Monaco, Norway, Holland, ALL of them have MASSIVELY lower rates of MURDER via GUN than the USA. Switzerland has TIGHT, COMPREHENSIVE and heavily REGULATED gun laws and all their Men get MILITARY training and they mostly own RIFLES, not handguns or wannabe Rambo pretend Military style rifles that Americans want to own because they want to look “cool” .

          Face it, with the number of alcoholics, wife beaters, conspiracy nuts, racists, people on multiple medications and general stupidity, there’s problem with SOME gun owners; that has to be addressed, unless a “genius” like you has the answers to the Apocalyptic gun murder rate in the USA… Go on, tell us how to solve the fact that the USA had 9,000 plus gun murders vs the rest of the civilized World… I DARE you to come up with factual, logical and concrete solutions to the problem rather than bleating out the tried and debunked NRA Powerpoint presentation.

          Be a part of a solution, rather than having a tantrum.

          • Inthenameofliberty says:

            Will you please tell why no one discusses WHERE the crimes are being committed in the US? The FBI website has the stats – and you have quoted them accurately.

            Yet, overall in the USA, it can be determined that there has been 50% reduction in violent crimes and a 54% reduction in the murder rate over the last 20 years. There is a gentleman who has gone so far to post this all on you tube. And he quotes the aforementioned stats correctly. He goes on further to say that the murder rate is DOUBLE in metropolitan areas [> 250,000] as compared to more rural areas of the US. So, I would venture a guess that gang bangers and drug cartels are upping our numbers in the death rate (which I don’t have accurate stats on this so don’t scalp me here). But I want to know HOW many deaths are because of them. Because they don’t have permits for their guns. They are above the gun laws and they will always find a way to get their guns.

            So if the murder rate in the US overall is 4.8%, then 1/2 of that is 2.4% in the more rural areas. Which puts us at double the murder rate of the UK [seen on their ‘Home Office’ crime stat page’] if you take out the metropolitan areas. It’s interesting to me…….for, many metropolitan areas have strict guns laws. And we have FAR more metropolitan areas in the US than does the UK.

            Let’s take Chicago, for example. I have checked different sources on the internet, and many are consistent with what I am quoting to you:

            Chicago’s murder rate of 19.4 per 100,000 is more than three times that of New York’s (6 per 100,000) and more than two and a half times of Los Angeles’ (7.5 per 100,000), its closest American competitors.
            Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. That, too, is all over the internet.

            So, strict gun laws in a metropolitan area seem to make it easier for you to be killed.
            So, I think I will just stay right where I am, out of the cities. Thank you very much.

            The only thing I will agree on is that I was ranting and raving, and not being part of the solution. Because until we fix we stupid humans, NOTHING is going to change for the better.

            Do YOU have any legitimate ideas? Because unless you have a magic wand to take guns away from people who are willing to use them on other people to steal, rape and murder, I fervently hope that not one single gun law is passed. Ever.

          • Just quickly; London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Glasgow, Edinburgh… All large Metropolitan areas that skew the data in the same way that large cities in the USA skew the data. The murder rate is ALWAYS higher in large Metropolitan areas, be they here or in the UK, or in Europe.

            Packing people together in tight like sardines ALWAYS leads to higher crime rates. If you want to point to Chicago, I will point to Birmingham (England).. same issues as Chicago… Far higher incidence of crime and therefore murder, yet same exact laws, rules etc as the rest of the UK and still less likely to be murdered there than in the USA; FAR, FAR less likely to be murdered in Birmingham by a gun than anywhere in the USA.

            None of your arguments to date have given one single shred of an answer as to why the murder rate in the USA is so high compared to all other civilized places on this planet! It’s guns.

            If guns are available and easily to hand, they get used; simple. As I have said; if a bar fight erupts in the UK, punches are thrown, a few glasses get chucked, someone gets kicked… damage is done, but they all go home… In the USA, a fight erupts and someone gets his gun and shoots someone… there’s a death and that’s why the murder by gun rate is so high in the USA.. In the UK, you CANNOT use a gun, because you don’t have a gun to use and there isn’t one nearby for you to pick up in your rage.. Again, this is simple logic.

            Recap: No guns to grab when you’re pissed off, angry or mad = no murder by gun, maybe use fists or a knife, but FAR, FAR less lethal. Gun right there? Grab gun, pull trigger, kill someone = lethal and deaths. Ergo USA 9,000+ murders by gun, UK 70 (population equivalent)..

            My answer is that a good place to start is by removing loopholes that allow un-named individuals to buy guns at gunshows; huge fines and incarceration for private sale of guns to people with no ID; mandatory, YEARLY training; MANDATORY insurance coverage, no guns allowed to be sold with higher capacity mags (30 or 100 rounds is insane).

            Doctors HAVE to ask whether you have a gun (allows them to forward suspect lunatics information to local Police). continue gun registration; MUST register, MUST re-register when you move; if you move to a new State, then training class and certification in THAT STATE.

            Limits on how much ammunition you can buy at a single place or time. NO Internet sales of ammunition; must buy from a local store where they can check ID and gun license and whether your training is up to date.

            Link a national database of people with mental problems, issues with violence, domestic abuse to gun ownership. No gun for you, if you are a wife-beater, or a severe alcoholic, or schizophrenic.

            Most of all, we need people like YOU to help frame the new rules; responsible gun owners have to be part of this solution; I don’t understand why the majority of law abiding, smart gun owners aren’t RUSHING to get there FIRST! Wouldn’t YOU want to write the best set of legislation on your own behalf and not wait until the people who are less inclined to be on your side write them instead?

          • Inthenameofliberty says:

            I agree that responsible gun owners need to be part of the solution.
            So I can’t help, then.
            You will need to go seek them out.

    • AdamMos says:

      Nancy Lanza was a law abiding citizen but lacked commom sense and failed to consider the fact that she lived with a nutcase and she tought him how to shoot. She failed to secure her weapons. Had she not had the abilty to purchase those weapons we would not have 27 grieving families including her own. You are a fool! These are our children. F.U.

      • Inthenameofliberty says:

        But she had some really good points.

        Once again I will ask – why is it ok for drug companies to encourage doctors to put children on mind altering medications that have been documented now to lead to suicide and irrational behaviors…..

        But the answer is to control gun sales in the US?

        Maybe WE – you and I arguing over this – are the bigger fools. Maybe we need to be looking elsewhere for the answers.

        Maybe we need to be the ‘somebodies’ that ask the ‘WHY’ and hold accountable a different set of players in this game.

    • ExPAVIC says:


      The majority is merely asking for a reasonable amount of control for those weapons which have no useful purpose, either in the field or on the range, other than killing PEOPLE and we have recently witnessed how well they do their job.

      • DEFENDER88 says:

        There are a lot of things that can and should be done to keep them out of the hands of they bad guys and crazies. But a “ban” will only serve to dis-arm the good guys “at this time”. I could argue that could actually make things worse.
        The bad guys already have them a lot of them and will not turn them in.
        We need to find a way/s to dis-arm the bad guys 1st. Then we can talk about banning them totally. There are already just too many of them in the wrong hands at this time to dis-arm the good guys.
        SHORT TERM-Increased security is the one most sure defense.
        MEDIUM TERM – Must have a Permit/License to buy, sell, give away any gun. All sales in State data base.
        Phych test required to get a permit.
        LONG TERM – (after most guns are out of hands of bad guys) ban certain guns.

    • Inthenameofliberty says:

      ” “This is not about those children, because the dems love to abort and kill children by the thousands, but it is about disarming law abiding Americans.”

      THANK YOU!!!!!! For pointing out the obvious to those who advocate controlling guns. [they’ll start at one and say they’re done, but then they would go after the next one and the next one and so on…….]

      But they aren’t going to listen to you. Which is most unfortunate. They are chomping at the bit now to get those restrictions. Even though prohibition of anything in this country has a real good history of backfiring.

  22. DEFENDER88 says:

    You gun ban people dont seem to want real solutions that can actually reduce the murders.
    Which should be the ultimate, real objective here ie Reducing the murders.

    You just want guns banned. I see how you are already all geared up for it. You are so paranoid about and focused on “guns” you dont even want to discuss or consider what will actually work to reduce the murders.

    You just demonize gun owners and want bans on guns. Another ill-considered, paraonoid Knee Jerk.

    In fact you are all worked up to do some things that may indeed make the problem worse.
    Like you have done in the past.

    And are proposing again – Like the Fienstein Bill Proposed in Congress to ban guns – which, by the way includes confication of guns from responsible owners.

    For example – you(gun ban people) created these Gun Free Zones which have become the new Preferred Killing Fields of the nuts. How is that working out for you? Another ill-concieved, actually and factually ignorant, move proposed by people who dont understand or dont want to understand that simply banning guns will not work in this country.

    There were several Theaters near the one in Aurora but he sought out the “Only One!” that was a “Gun Free Zone”. These people are not stupid, they know where to go to be “Free” to do the most damage. Most of them are, in fact, quite intelligent. Total wackos but intelligent ones.

    Before you created these new Gun Free Zones we did not have these mass murders.

    And yes there are a lot of us(About 55 million last I heard) who own guns responsibly for protection and deterrence and dont want to have to shoot “anyone”. And we do serve as a deterrent to criminals. And a lot of us actually do need them. All of us are not as safe and protected as some of you apparently are.

    As the saying goes “55 million responsible gun owners shot no-one today”.

    Columbine, VT, Ft Hood, Aurora Theater, Sike Temple, New Town – all “false” “Gun Free Zones”.
    And several “Gun Free” churches across the country that have experienced the same thing.
    The new American Killing Fields.

    Point is – your solutions are not working – in fact they have made the problem worse.
    And your move now to ban guns will likely have the same effect.

    • ExPAVIC says:

      Simple Fact

      I haven’t met or even heard of one mentally deranged individual who could fire a bullet WITHOUT the use of a firearm. Control the ownership of these “assault-type, kiddie killer weapons” and you have addressed a major portion of the problem.

      This writer has been shooting and hunting for nearly 60 years and has yet to find a rational purpose for the level of fire power these weapons provide. And, left the radical NRA and its twisted leadership because of their faulty rationale and BS arguments.

  23. emadis41 says:

    It is about time that the victims speak up. Guns meant to protect people, but like any other weapon guns are also the choice murder weapon in the USA.
    They argue that guns in the good hands will protect people! how many good guys, such as police officer, law enforcers get killed in the line of duty? and even if you arm people to the teeth, the bad guys with their guns ready have the advatage, no doubt about it.
    I think that people should be held responsible for the guns they own, and that we should outlaw high capacity magazines and auto. guns, like AK47, Kalishnikov, and similar guns, especially when good people can not keep them from falling in the hands of the bad ones or those with mental problems.

  24. Who paid her trip from AZ to CT to grandstand for something a mojority of USAers do not agree with? Can I also have a free trip to AZ to protest the anti-gun lobby?
    Is she married to Kelly, so why is she still called Giffords. Michelle Obama is not called Michelle Robinson.

    • Who cares you A–H—!!!! YOU GOT A BETTER IDEA??? BESIDES BEING AN ASS—-!

      • ExPAVIC says:

        Only A Sample

        Witness a sample of the type of reasoning used by the gun- toting public. If you want a real scare, go to a gun show and get a good look and listen to for those disillusioned assault weapons owners who think you need that level of fire power to enjoy recreational shooting and hunting for food and sport.

    • idamag says:

      John, what a petty person you are.

  25. Hate to be the bearer of bad news for GOPWIPEOUT, but yes, they are using high capacity clips in very powerful REAL assault weapons in American streets. I capitalized “REAL” because the drug cartels, gangs, and more have AUTOMATIC ASSAULT RIFLES, not Semi Automatic like the average American citizen can buy such as the AR 15. When you have time, if you are white, take a ride through south central LA at about 2 AM and stop in a local quick mart. Then play the popular game of “Can I make it back to my car before I am beaten, shot, or/and killed?” Same goes for being Black in an all white inner city neighborhood. But then a white and a black together in a Latino inner city neighborhood would not fair well either. There is a lot of common sense in the old saying, “Before you criticize someone you had better walk a mile in their shoes.”

  26. GARYS says:

    the government needs to come up with something to find the root cause of why kids are doing these mass shootings. no new gun laws is going to stop the mass shootings until they do. this government can not protect our borders so how are they going to stop the flow of guns coming into this country illegally, they aren’t. we should not give up any of our rights so why punish the law biding citizen with more gun control the criminals are not going to register there guns or give them up, so people you need to get real you have to protect yourself and family because the government can’t

  27. quasm says:

    Mr. Sattler;

    It is too bad Mrs. Kelly wasn’t armed with a gun she knew how to use. She could have saved some lives and would still be in congress.

    Dik Thurston
    Colorado Springs

    • DEFENDER88 says:

      I agree with your sentiment. One should have the right to meet force with equal force ie allowed to carry a “permitted” gun for protection. Unfortunately I think she was shot 1st and from behind. But if someone in the crowd had been armed and willing to help some of the others might have been saved.

      The Common Baseline for all these killings is LACK OF SECURITY.

      If armed security had been there the killing would at least have been lessened.
      And for me – even if one can be saved – it is worth it.

  28. AdamMos says:

    Any weapon that allows the shooter to shoot more than one round per second. A life saved is worth any unintended consequences.

    Problem solved!

  29. Kurt CPI says:

    I have great respect for Gabrielle Giffords and the hardship she overcame as the victim of a crazed individual with a gun. There definitely needs to be more control over who can and cannot own a gun. However we must consider that the Journal News is now employing people with guns to “protect” them from other (potential) people with guns. This is testament to the NRA’s statement that “The only one who can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”. Our Constitution was created giving Americans the means to remove their government should it become too oppressive – the very premise that founded the American Revolution in the first place. Those well-to-do fellows could have continued life as usual and retired in comfort. Instead, they risked it all, pledging “Our lives, or fortunes, and our sacred honor” to create a unique system whereby the people ruled supreme. The most likely outcome was that they would be stripped of their wealth, become fugitives and when caught hanged as traitors, which is the way history would have recorded them. Before we all go jumping on the “take away all the guns” bandwagon, let’s remember where the bill of rights was born and why it remains one of the most crucial documents of the American dream. Making gun ownership illegal will instantly turn 40 to 50% of law abiding Americans into criminals, cause I promis you they won’t give them up (I don’t own a gun or have a concealed permit BTW). “Homeland security”, Internet censorship, gun bans. They’re all designed to take YOUR rights away from you and give them to the already too powerful.

  30. S-3 says:

    America simply doesn’t need the 2nd Amendment anymre – any gun nut who tries to take on gov’t will suffer the consequences as is… With never being hard from again.

  31. Jim Myers says:

    Best of luck to Gabby and Mark. You have a very rough road ahead of you.

  32. Plznnn says:

    If only Gabby or some good citizen at that event had a weapon, they could have saved all those lives and maybe stopped the maniac from shooting Gabby in the head.

    • idamag says:

      plz, I watched the news right after the shooting, there was still mass chaos. The reporter was interviewing people at the scene. There was a man with a gun. He had been in the Walgreen store and heard gun shots. He took the safety off his pistol and ran outside and pointed at a man with a gun. Someone yelled in his ear. “That is not the shooter.” He nearly shot the hero who had disarmed the shooter when the shooter stopped to insert another clip.

  33. A national registry and national armory, the time for talk is over. We need to spend money to protect ourselves from the so called “Patriots” and NRA who abuse the Second Amendment for their own irrational fears.

  34. I think all agree on mayors against illegal guns. I think all the LAW ABIDING gun owners are against illegal guns. I think all citizens that are law abiding are against illegal guns. Banning high cap mags will not solve the problem. We had a ban from 1994-2004. 10 years worth and when this was Columbine happened. Then we forget about the shooting in Jonesboro AR.?? that was in 1998 and these 2 boys at the time had semiauto pistols with high cap mags. these 2 kids killed many children then when they turned 21 they walked the streets and guess what? One of them was arrested again for gun possesion and the other applied for a concealed weapons permit. He was denied. However, does this tell you somthing? It tells me that once again criminals will get guns if they want them and that LAW abiding citizens should have the means to out gun the criminal. if i’m home and want to use an assault rifle to fend off a home invasion by a mobb of guys. Then I should have the right to fend them off with a AR-15 with a 30 round mag. Do we want somthing done? I say yes but to rush in to some legislation that has not worked in the past would be foolish. I think we need to slow it down instead of rushing in and passing somthing and either being the same or worse then what it is now. The united states gov’t never rushes into anything. They always take there time to do things. right or wrong. wasteful spending or economical spending. The gov’t now is trying to pass this while emotion is high and moral is low. This being siad I think the situation is still hot out the oven and still needs time to cool. No doubt. Then when the situation has cooled down a bit everybody including myself that wants somthing done can base there thoughts, ideas and concepts on the heart of the situation the real meet and potatos of logical, sensible gun legislation and not just fly by night bans on assault style weapons and high cap. mag bans that did not work in the past. Remember there are millons of high cap mags and assault weapons already on the streets and in homes right now as we speak. If this ban goes into affect that does not mean those weapons are going anywhere it just means these weapons can’t be made and distributed anymore by gun manufactures here in the USA.

  35. Donna says:

    Only the NRA would suggest fighting gun violence with more guns… and why not… more money for them. It is unbelievable to me that so many people can then stand behind that logic. What is wrong with Americans??? I’m worried.

  36. The need more control and background checks on Automatic weapons which can only be used for target practice, armed forces a must. Most I know reload shell because of the cost mainly for hunting. If you need a semi-auto that fires 40 rounds per minute or auto 100 rounds per minute then you have to be rich to buy the ammo. More of these guns get sold on the streets than in gun shops. Concentrate on Illegal Gun Tasks Forces while trying to stop drug runners that usually carry these weapons. Using a single action pistol that you need to pull the hammer back if you are quick you can fire six shots in less than 30 seconds.

  37. Well, good luck is all I can say. They have never before listened with an open mind, and I doubt that they will start now.

    Every time I see Mark And Gabby, I just think God put these two together, and that the are such a beautiful and adoring couple.

    God Bless both of you.

  38. I agree with Montanabill ,given the right time and place you’ll change and then wonder why we don’t have equal rights to protect our
    self right down to the very words in the constitution to feed our self and protection from a bad government as well as from idiots .Why should I be less armed that the governement that is around me .

  39. It will all happen a step at a time just like the nation wide smoking ban If they get any sort of ban in place using everyones sympathys it will contiue a piece at a time until we are a non gun country

  40. Dukester says:

    The criminals have guns because the gun lobby has made it so easy for them to get them! All so that the gun manufacturers can make more dough. Follow the money folks.

  41. SGG says:

    no more large mags, no more assault rifles or hi capacity mags handguns,
    you must take a multi week course and qualify to own a weapon and must register it, if you sell it, you and buyer must document it, we do this stuff for cars and trucks, do it for weapons
    if someone wants to shoot an assault rifle join the armed forces or the military or go to shooting range which rents the gun to you for use only on the range,
    the Second Amendment does give anyone the right to own an assault rifle, when it was written they had one shot muskets, big difference!!!

  42. norman says:

    Just for this ONE time, I must say that Gabby Giffords, and Mark Kelly, are FOOLS.

    Sure, it was reprehensible, that Congresswoman Giffords was shot, two years ago, BUT,

    the PROBLEM is NOT the GUNS. It is our healthcare, and enforcement, which are the problem.

    I have written this, before, and I will write it, again: GUNS do NOT kill! PEOPLE Kill!

    A gun does NOT care if it is NEVER fired, never cleaned, never moved. Guns are NOT alive. They have no will of their own.

    It is the HUMAN, behind the trigger, who makes the decision to fire!

    As to HOW the mentally un-balanced have gotten such access to guns, one, MAJOR, fault MUST rest with the government.

    If the government were not so overly concerned, with cutting social spending, just to reduce taxation, of the super-rich, then I believe that most of these gun-persons would have
    been, safely, restricted to “Controlled Settings”, such as nursing homes.

    It is because of cries, such as “Balancing the budget MUST be our main focus”, that many such shelters are losing funds, and staff, and must cut back, on patient capacity.

    If we, truly, want to bring gun violence under control, tougher laws are NOT the answer. The only REAL answer is to STOP reducing federal spending, on “controlled care facilities”, and bringing the mentally un-stable BACK under the protective care, of trained staffers.

    The longer Republicans continue to say “We MUST reduce services, in order to reduce the deficit. We must NOT tax the super-rich, just to keep the un-stable off the streets”, the more of these shootings, I believe, will be filling the headlines.

    And ALL of this, just so the rich dont have to pay as much, in taxes.

  43. Charles2051 says:


  44. tobewan says:

    Hmmm…couldn’t find my previous comment here anywhere in the 134….wonder why???

    Having read many here, and hearing current news, it is no wonder the President will have to take an executive order to overcome all fanatically fearful gun owners and nuts around the country.

  45. tobewan says:

    Obviously, it not really the GUNS, it’s hearts and minds that must be changed. Although that has begun, it will take the a Higher Power’s complete influence world-wide to secure peace in and for each.

    Pray for it! It’s coming!

  46. William says:

    I’m afraid this will never be solved, people on both sides are unwilling to give an inch. The solutions being discussed have been tried before and failed. I don’t claim to have the answer, I would just like to hear something new on the subject.

  47. Debbie10 says:

    I respectfully agree to disagree with you. I do not agree with you that their is really ANY reliable news source though I do agree with you that CNN is more so than FOX (which I wouldn’t watch on a bet). While I respect your OPINION regarding assault weapons, I disagree. I am a law abiding citizen and a responsible gun owner. I have owned and enjoyed shooting an AR-15 as well as an AK-47. My husband and I were members of a gun club and enjoyed shooting them. That did/does not make us EVIL or dangerous it was just fun. Those guns do not shoot bullets any faster than a semi automatic hand gun. 1 bullet per pull of the trigger. The difference is, they LOOK scarier.

  48. AdamMos says:

    My daughter is autistic and severe ADHD. I was hesitant to put her meds due to the side effects but she would not be able function without them. She would literally walk around in circles and speak jibberish. At least now she has chance to be a productive member in society. she gets psychiatric counseling as well . She is a wonderful person but should not and does not need access to tools of death. Mentally unbalanced people with access to weapons is a terrible combination. See Adam Lanza. Will we ever eliminate the whole problem? No. Can we curb it with some common sense? Absoulutely!

  49. Debbie10 says:

    Well, I think that you are just too old to relate to current day situations. Best of luck to you.

  50. shermanbobby says:

    it is shamefull that in the last month since sandy hook where 26 died, 900 total this month . shame on you gun sellers. we need deep back ground checks at gun shows meaning you may not walk out with that gun that day. and if used in ashooting owners are prosecuted.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.