Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Gun Owners Supporting Sensible Reform Must Speak Out

Gun Owners Supporting Sensible Reform Must Speak Out

Bob Barker, the retired game-show host, has no idea why he ended up on the National Rifle Association’s enemies list. I know exactly why the NRA cited me.

I’ve spent years pushing for sensible gun-safety laws, including universal background checks, a ban on assault-type weapons and a waiting period before firearms purchases. I wasn’t surprised to learn that my name was among those on a surprisingly long and eclectic list of corporations, Hollywood celebrities, medical groups and even sports teams that the NRA has declared “anti-gun.”

By contrast, the 89-year-old Barker keeps a handgun on his bedside table and has never demanded more stringent gun laws, he told Time magazine. He has, however, protested a live pigeon-shoot in Pennsylvania and doesn’t think civilians need assault weapons or high-capacity magazines.

Of course, if you know anything about the NRA, you know that’s enough. Its extremism is dangerous, absurd and viciously dogmatic — dismissing anyone who doesn’t think civilians should own their own shoulder-fired rocket launchers as an “enemy.” It is a radical organization of paranoid conspiracy theorists who believe they might have to fight off their government with their assault rifles. Think of that goofy 1984 movie, Red Dawn, wherein a group of high school kids fights off a Soviet invasion, and you’ll get some idea of its mindset.

It’s easy enough to mock the NRA; its representatives are parodies in motion. But a look across the political and civic landscape suggests that much of the gun lobby’s extremism has invaded the broader culture, creating a deeply polarized view of firearms use that relies on stock stereotypes, not reality.

Take the silly kerfuffle that followed President Obama’s recent disclosure that he enjoys skeet shooting at Camp David. While it struck me as revealing of next-to-nothing, it set off rounds of debate, derision and ridicule on the political left as well as the right. The Daily Show‘s Jon Stewart blasted Obama for pandering to gun owners, saying, “It’s not going to work.”

The Washington Post’s vaunted fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, even weighed in with this opinionated and oddly non-salient observation about Obama’s first campaign: “He certainly did not speak like a politician who had once used a firearm.” What kind of speaking would that have been?

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 306

225 responses to “Gun Owners Supporting Sensible Reform Must Speak Out”

  1. douglas says:

    Who cares if one ends up on the NRA’s enemy list. What are they going to do to you? Are
    they going to shoot you? We all have the right to our own beliefs in this country.

    • You Got That Right!! We Need Some Kind Of Control Over All These Guns Ending Up In The Wrong Hands!!! SCREW THE NRA!! THE NRA Just Out For Money And If Some People Get Killed Oh Well Buy More Guns??

      • lana ward says:

        Never happen! Criminals will ALWAYS have guns even if ours are confiscated!!

        • Betta says:

          Exactly right, lana. That’s what the BO lovers on here don’t get. They think that if guns are confiscated, banned, etc, the criminals are going to just waltz right up and hand theirs in. Now THAT is hilarious.

          • Considering how large and influential our arms industry is, and how readily available assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons are, I have to agree with you. Finding a way to keep guns away from criminals should be our top priority, infortunately, the chances of doing that in a society where a large segment of the population believes gun ownership is a subliminal right, are slim to none.
            Bear in mind that an armed population is not going to prevent criminals and mass murderers from killing people. They don’t issue warnings letting people know that they are planning to kill them and suggest they prepare themselves for a gunfight. They shoot first, and run!

          • onedonewong says:

            A subliminal right??? must have found new word and were dying to use and no its a CONSTITUTIONAL right just like tuckers right to write nonsense.
            If we want gun deaths to stop we 1st need to make sure those with mental defects are reported and placed on the federal firearms list. If your seeing a DR for any mental reason who have no business in buying a gun. 2nd colored and hispanards should be prevented from buying a gun. They just don’t have the mentality or morality to have one

          • Jim Myers says:

            Replying to onedonewong –

            Not that you are RACIST or anything…

          • A Racist And A Lying Troll!!!

          • onedonewong says:

            Nooo just looking at the crime data.And those 2 groups account for 80% of all gun deaths or homicides. Went to be FAIR don’t we?? Its the hall mark of the obama regime

          • Since the Constitution only grants the right to bear arms to those who are members of a well regulated militia, the term “subliminal”, which is only unusual in the eyes of an ignorant, seems appropriate to describe the twisted conclusions of those who need a crutch to cope with their childish fears.

          • idamag says:

            Dominick, that is well said. Placebos and childing fears – I like that.

          • onedonewong says:

            Thanks for the childish attempt to justify a childish post. The 2nd amendment says no such thing and the founders took that amendment from the british rights of men. That gun possession insures that the other amendments and the constitution rest entirely on the 2nd

          • TerryW says:

            What’s hilarious is you believe what you wrote.

          • Tell me Betta, when’s the last time that a mass killing spree in the U.S. was perpetrated by a ‘criminal”??? Was the kid that killed his mother and 26 other people in Newtown a ‘criminal’? Was the guy that openned fire in a movie theater recently a ‘criminal’? or the guy that killed 5 people in Texas a month or so ago a ‘criminal”??? or the guy that killed to sets of people in Alabama a couple months ago, a criminal?? NO!! NO!! NO!! and NO!!

            I can’t remember the last time I read an news article about a mass killing or even the killing of one or two people that was perpetrated by a ‘criminal’??? When are you going to wise up and realize THAT IT’S NOT CRIMINALS THAT ARE KILLING A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE U.S.!!!! By in large, most of the killings are being done by wackos that stalk people, or just abuse them, that think they have a right to push people around and have a history of bad behavior!! People who are not criminals BUT ARE SIMPLY PEOPLE WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO OWN A GUN!!!!

          • idamag says:

            You left out the firemen that were killed and the former policeman who killed officers and their families and is on the run. And, some less than intelligent people, want those types of people to have free access to assault rifles.

        • Your Guns Will Be Taken Cause You Have Mental Problems!!!

        • The Last Thing Your Airhead Need Is A Gun!! What So You Can Shoot Those Poor 33 Cats You’re Hoarding??

        • idamag says:

          Criminals will always have cocaine and meth, too.

      • InsideEye says:

        Ending up in wrong hands in Mexico …only awhile ago. NRA ???

      • Betta says:

        Maybe we should put a control on knives, forks, hammers, screwdrivers, bricks and plastic bags too. All have been used to kill.

        When was the last time a gun went to jail for murder? NEVER! It’s people like you, Fern, who shouldn’t own a gun. And that is going by the idiotic vitriol you spew on here. You appear to be a little…shall we say…unstable.

        As long as people like you own guns, all the more reason for people with some common sense to own one as well.

        • When was the last time you heard of a criminal killing a dozen or two innocent people with a knife, fork, hammer, screwdriver, bricks and plastic bags. Assault weapons and high capacity magazines are designed to be used in warfare. That is the reason former President Reagan, and now President Obama, want to ban them from the public, are calling for stricter background checks, and improved mental care.
          Reagan’s effort was so waterdown by the time it was implemented, it made absolutely no difference in the carnage that can be seen in every large city and town in the USA every single day. The same is likely to happen to President Obama’s efforts. Ideology and special interests are simply too powerful to let common sense prevail.

        • old_blu says:

          Yeah because someone can go into a school and kill 20 kids with a knife. You do know they could run from them then? Right?

          What a stupid argument.

        • docb says:

          Ridiculous diversion..People do NOT KILL 20 PEOPLE IN 25 SECONDS with a Hammer, screwdriver, knives or plastic bags..

          Go lobby for the Nra where they need to believe that claptrap!

        • InsideEye says:

          Kool Aid also…used in Mass Murders in Guyana. 1978 ?????? 900+ people died, Jim Jones….hence don’t drink the Kool Aid of course.

          Is Kool Aid still available ?

          • Rev Jones depleted the supplies of cyanide…

          • idamag says:

            inside, it is too bad you don’t have eyes that see the outside world. That is one incident. That was mass suicide and murder, with parents killing their own children. There are gun deaths every day. I haven’t heard of anymore mass poisonings with Kool Aid and have you. What you used is a false premise.

          • InsideEye says:

            No, my point was there are deaths every day from a host of other weapons, if you will, cars, , we are all guilty of the crimes also, by letting the self righteous , politically correct , to allow assimilating the mentally ill into the mainstream . There is not much effort made to keep these types engaged in a more productive way……it is most difficult to be sure…. Just try and teach normal?? Students for awhile. There are millions of gun owners of every breed, myself, Fern, Lana…thus far we seem to excercise control over emotions. Although these forums and others seem to create a little too much angst from getting our points across. some people are obviously satirical to get a reaction and others fall prey to it :))))

          • idamag says:

            inside, no one wants to guns away. I have a couple of guns. I am not obsessed with them. They are locked up and not loaded. I am not paranoid. I don’t think “they” are out to get me. The man who climbed the Texas tower and proceeded to shoot people below could not have killed anyone down there with a knife. You have a chance of taking a knife away from somenone. I don’t know anyone who bought a car with the thought of how many people he could kill with it.

            There is definately a need for research into mental health and mental health services in this country.

            I do believe we need a ban on assault rifles and multiple clips. I think we need stricter background checks. I think people who purchase a gun for a person who is not supposed to have one, should go to jail.

            What happens when dangrous felons and mentally ill people start crying that their second amendment rights are being infringed on?

        • Maybe We Put Control On Your Ignorant Ass Bitch Stop Fucking Talking To Me You And That Airhead Dumb Bitch lana ward=Anal Draw

          • RobertCHastings says:

            My dearest Fern, I am sure that you will agree with me that the best form of gun control is birth control. Of course, it would have to be focused toward certain groups that tend to procreate paranoids, morons, idiots, schizoids, liars, conservatives, etc.

          • Yes I Do Agree And I Pray That Lana With Her 33 Cats Never Have A Kids NEVER!! Same For That Airhead Binder Bitch Betta Also!!!

          • idamag says:

            Fern, Lana has kids. You and I had to help support them.

          • lana ward says:

            And your piece of black traitor, taking his 100 million dollar trip to Africa, you’re paying for that too : )

          • BDC_57 says:

            You got that right.

          • InsideEye says:

            It was mentioned that no conservatives thus far, ever committed these shootings , they were uh oh ……Tea Party or Democrats……. so says Soledad O brien. ……if there is a linking of this for the California cop shooter, Soledad and CNN will find the facts as usual

          • idamag says:

            inside, disagreeing with people because you believe different is one thing – but don’t resort to lying.

            I have followed all these cases closely and none of them said what political party these nuts belonged to, if any.

          • InsideEye says:

            Idamag, no lies from me. It was noted in other media about the possibility of tying these shooters to one political source or another. Even with the recent California shooter, some media outlets felt it necessary to expunge references to various personalities in the manifesto, so that these personalities would not be aligned with this shooter….tea party and Colorado shooter, California shooter and o’Bama supporters…..respectfully submitted.

          • idamag says:

            Inside, crazy is not political nor religious. Those are things that should not come into it.

          • idamag says:

            Fern, cowards and parnoids, like draw anal and betta, are people who should not have guns.

        • idamag says:

          Betta, do you ever think? I have never heard of 20 children being killed with a fork.

      • Robin Lee says:

        How hard is it to type like you do? I mean, come on, why the hell are you capitalizing the first letter of every single word? Do you have any idea how asinine that looks? It completely gets in the way of whatever it is you’re ranting about.
        You might also want to look into learning correct punctuation usage and sentence structure. In order to convey your message, correct language usage is essential. Otherwise, you come across as a moron.
        Yes, I know that my language skills are far from perfect. But at least I get my point across without looking as if I never passed fourth grade grammar.

        • Hey Robin What The Fuck Is Your Problem??? FUCK YOU!! You Ass Don’t Like It Don’t Read It Bitch Get A Job And Get You Stinking Ass A LIFE!!! You Get My Message Keep Talking To Me Bitch It’s Only Going To Get Worse!!!

      • lessthantolerant says:

        Fern please put the tube steak back in, your brains are running out of your mouth again.

      • lessthantolerant says:

        fernny, do you frequent the same alleys Cynthia does for her semen injections into the brain?

        You stupid liberals make all humanity sad when they see the likes of you two allowed to walk and breathe.

    • This reminds me of the Joe McCarthy era…
      The funniest part of this is that one of the justifications used by gun advocates is the need to arm themselves to prevent tyranny!

      • idamag says:

        And Joe McCarthy and the john birch society had communists everywhere. I was in the PTA and the PTA was branded as a communist organization. During their witch hunts they destroyed people’s jobs. My sister-in-law went to a meeting. She said it was scary. She said, “Do you know my next door neighbor might be a communist.” My answer was that I was glad I was not her next door neighbor. People like the john birch societh and the NRA sow these seeds of hate and distrust.

  2. AlfredSonny says:

    Guns are adults’ security blankets.

  3. middleclasstaxpayer says:

    Left wing crackpots are sick…..when one of their own “heroes” (like obama) is photoed holding a GUN(!!!) it’s a “silly kerfluffel”, but put that SAME gun in the hands of an NRA member or a responsible gun owner, and it becomes a whole DIFFERENT matter! Responsible gun owners are NOT the problem here….it’s psychopaths who create mayhem. But with the “political correctness” created ENTIRELY by left-wing” ideologs, no one can accuse another of psychosis or crazy acts without having someone (usually a liberal) accuse them of racism, bigotry or some other liberal label for ANYONE they don’t like, or anyone who doesn’t agree with them!

    • RobertCHastings says:

      Oh, did I hurt your feelings? Sorry about that – NOT! If you throw crap, you can expect it to splatter. As the article states, the NRA does not speak for ALL gun owners, especially as their membership is only about 4.5 million and there are over 300 million guns in this country. If all guns are in the control of only NRA members, that means each NRA member owns (I’ll let you figure that one out). That just doesn’t sound even close to reasonable. The next logical step is to assume,since so many guns are not in the control of NRA members, that, perhaps, a lot of gun owners do not necessarily support the positions of the NRA. I am really not concerned if that sounds reasonable to you or not, since you have demonstrated in other posts a total unwillingness to be reasonable. But all of those gun owners out there who are NOT NRA members definitely would benefit from becoming part of the discussion, as gun owners. And, since you have apparently NOT been paying attention to the discussion on gun control, liberals AND conservatives, in significant majorities, DO support reasonable gun control measures, DO support universal background checks on ALL gun sales, and doing whatever is necessary to keep guns out of the hands of those who have no business with them, INCLUDING the mentally ill, or did all that tread on your corrupted version of “political correctness”?

      • Inthenameofliberty says:

        So who determines who is mentally ill?

        Just asking. Because I for one do not want to see any more government organizations using taxpayer dollars for this.

        I, too, would like to see guns kept out of the hands of insane people.

        Give me a good scenario, that can be used in REAL LIFE, to do that.

        Any suggestions??????

        • RobertCHastings says:

          Unfortunately, Adam Lanza’s mother would not have been caught. However, most reasonable people understand that a child (young adult) with autism (even Aspergers)is not a safe choice for a gun user. The mental health resources in this country can already pretty readily identify those who should not have guns due to mental health issues. Ex-felons and others who do not necessarily have mental issues are prohibitied from gun ownership.

        • idamag says:

          I am wondering if we spent the amount of money on mental health research as we spent on AIDS research, if we could find some answers.

      • middleclasstaxpayer says:

        You don’t know what you are talking about. ALL the recent nat’l polls on gun control have demonstrated that nearly 80% of Americans (Dem, Rep, Ind) do NOT want the government interfering with their 2nd Amendment rights in ANY fashion. This is the ONLY subject that nearly everyone seems to agree upon. Put you head back in the sand, or wherever else it was.

        • RobertCHastings says:

          Where have you obtained your stats? I think I know, but I will let you explain that one, if you can. Legitimate polls are showing an overwhelming majority favor universal background checks. A smaller majority favor prohibiting the large-volume magazines. A comfortable majority favor a data base for the mentally ill, that would be shared by all agencies that would be issuing gun licenses and background checks. About the only item you were correct on is the distaste for interfering with 2nd Amendment rights, and NONE of the above-mentioned items does that. The government has the unequivocal right to do what is necessary to protect the citizens of this country, it is a responsibility bestowed upon the Federal government by the same Constitution that contains the 2nd Amendment. Perhaps you should include it in your reading.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            Again, you don’t know what you are talking about….contemplate these stats & facts:

            Several reports on gun ownership around the world clearly refute the assertion that the abundance of guns in the United States leads to a high rate of firearm homicides.

            Americans are the biggest gun owners by far, with an estimated 270 million civilian firearms, in addition to those used by law enforcement and the military. That’s according to the Small Arms Survey of 178 nations conducted by the Switzerland-based Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies.

            In sheer numbers of civilian firearms, the No. 2 nation, surprisingly, is India with 46 million, followed by China (40 million), Germany (25 million), Pakistan (18 million), and Mexico (15 million).

            The United States also leads in gun ownership rate, with about 88 firearms per 100 people, according to the most recent Small Arms Survey compiled in 2007.

            That is far ahead of No. 2 Yemen, which has 55 firearms per 100 people. Switzerland is third with 46 per 100 people, followed by Finland (45), Serbia (38), Cyprus (36), Saudi Arabia (35), and Iraq (34).

            But when it comes to the firearm homicide rate, the United States doesn’t even make the top 25.

            According to figures collected by the United Nations’ Office on Drugs and Crime through its annual crime survey, 9,146 Americans were victims of a firearm homicide in the most recent year. That translates to a rate of 2.97 firearm homicides per 100,000 population, only the 27th highest rate in the world.

            The highest rate by far can be found in Honduras, 68 homicides per 100,000, followed by El Salvador (40), Jamaica (39), Venezuela (38.9), Guatemala (34), and Colombia (27).

            For America’s neighbors, the rate in Mexico is 9.9 per 100,000, and in Canada, 0.5 per 100,000.

            It is interesting to note that not only does the United States have a relatively low homicide rate compared to its gun ownership rate, but Switzerland, which ranks third in the civilian gun ownership rate, has only the 46th highest homicide rate, and Finland, with the fourth highest ownership rate, is 63rd on the list.

            “The most obnoxious liberal talking points on guns involve the idea that guns, in and of themselves, cause gun violence,” writes CNS News commentator Stephen Gutowski. “In other words, more guns must mean more gun violence.”

            But in light of the ownership and homicide figures, he observes: “More guns do not, in fact, mean more gun violence. Guns can be, and commonly are, used in a responsible manner, especially here in the United States.”

          • RobertCHastings says:

            And your point is? I believe I was talking about reasonable restrictions on guns that had a reasonable chance of preventing gun violence, and your response is – what? – a diatribe on gun violence around the world. And how does that refute what I had to say? The latest poll, as reported on CNN, has 80% of Americans in favor of universal checks, which would do – what? With adequate data bases (which is another point) this would eliminate the possibility of guns getting into the hands of those who CANNOT use them responsibly, such as the shooter in Newtown, such as the shooter at the Aurora, CO theater, such as the shooter of Gabby Giffords, etc. The victims in these shootings were not merely statistics, although you apparently think otherwise. As far as gun control legislation and the support of such by the public, even 55% support a ban on military-style assault weapons and large capacity clips. CNN, for years, has been the most trusted and most reliable source for accurate and truthful news reporting. Pretty much the same statistics are found in the current issue of Time, an equally reliable source.
            Neither I nor the large majority of Democrats dispute your assertion guns are used, mostly, in a responsible manner. It is not the desire of Democrats to take your guns away or to in any way restrict the RESPONSIBLE use of firearms. Those ideas come from the NRA and others who want to stir up a firestorm against ANY reasonable legislation regarding firearms, arousing their base (apparently of which you are a member) and work against the public interest, which is to restrict the IRRESPONSIBLE use of firearms. If you want to quote the statistics above, get the whole story on them. I don’t even have to research to tell you, with certainty, that the countries listed above that have the better ownershipto gun violence rates do NOT allow unrestricted and unfettered ownership, such as Second Amendment proponents insist upon.

          • RobertCHastings says:

            I sincerely apologize. In my prior response, I had made the apparently mistaken assumption that you were reasonable. After having done some research on your guru, Stephen Gutowski,, I find it incumbent upon me to change that evaluation. Please don’t take it too hard, but I am sure that this bothers you not in the least.

          • RobertCHastings says:

            Sorry to pester you again, but I feel I must belabor the issue. I took the time to read the article from which you quoted, by Stephen Gutowski. While I admit I did not reserch his stats, I did read his quote of what Bob Costas had to say, and if anyone ever so blatantly misinterpreted and article, I have never read it. Gutowski would probably pervert the Sermon on the Mount to justify murder. And you have apparently not received any higher education that should have taught you some critical reading skills. It is reasonable to assume that if Gutowski so muddled Costa’s remarks,he quite probably did the same thing with his statistics.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            I suggest you research each of the stats, since they are footnoted as to original source. You will discover that they are accurate, regardless of whether you like the messenger or not. Inanimate objects are NOT our problem, psychotics & madmen are. As long as humans have free will, some very small minority may use their free will to harm or destroy. NO restriction, rule, law or requirement will stop a determined person with mailice is his/her heart.

          • RobertCHastings says:

            Perhaps you should do your own researching, especially the regulation of guns in countries like Switzerland and Finland. While gun ownerhip is allowed, it is not unrestrained in either country. In Switzerland, it is illegal to own an assault weapon, while in Finland it is legal, but with restriction. Both countries exercise the kind of reasonable gun control that the Obama administration is trying to put through Congress, and, as you seem to have missed,gun violence is much lower there than here. This search, and the one about Stephen Gutowski, took me less than twenty minutes. How much time did you take to bother to verify and clarify your claims? I thought so. Once again, being trained in critical thinking and research methods could probably bring you out of the dark and into the light. It’s very simple – just don’t take everything you read at face value, and don’t disallow it just because you don’t agree until you have proof for your position.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            OK, so you’ve referred to “critical thinking” twice now, so I want YOU to use critical thinking……Do you really know what an “assault weapon” is? Is it some “new” kind of terrible weapon? You would think so from reading media reports, but what liberals have dubbed “assault weapons” are simple rifle-designs that have been with us for over 110 years.
            In liberal terms, ANY gun with a hand grip up front is labeled an assault rifle, also ANY gun with a lug up front to attach a bayonet is an assault rifle??? Liberals have RENAMED common rifle designs available for over a CENTURY as assault rifles in order to start eliminating guns, on types of guns one at a time.
            Once liberals are allowed to NAME unacceptable guns, it’s a very easy matter to start naming MORE guns for extinction. It’s just like the magazine bans suggested. It started with 10 rounds, then someone suggested 7, and if this ttype of thinging is allowed to continue, it will be doun to ONE round before ALL guns are found to be objectionable.
            Fact is, “guns” save more lives than lose them….ask the poor doctor in Connecticut, whose home was invaded by two killers…even tho this poor family cooperated with the killers, they systematically tortured, raped & murdered both the doctors’ wife and two teenage daughters while to doctor himself sat helpless watching. Do you THINK this poor doctor might have benefitted from having a GUN to defend himself & his family?????

          • RobertCHastings says:

            Critical thinking – lesson one. If your opponent has to change the issue in order to respond, he knows he has no ground to stand on. Did you say anything at all about my previous post? No! What does the definition of “assault weapon” have to do with what I was talking about. You quoted Stephen Gutowski, even copied his article to your post, and I responded that your lack of critical thinking skills had prevented you from researching what he said. I assumed that responsibility for you, and found for myself that he (and you) misstated what Bob Costas had to say and then totally misinterpreted it, and further that there was no qualification of his remarks on HIS correlation between gun numbers and violence. His numbers, in fact, showed that where there are more guns AND more regulation there is less violence. The two examples YOU chose were Switzerland and Finland, both with relatively high gun ownership and relatively low rates of gun violence. However, Both Switzerland and Finland have much greater restrictions on gun ownership than we do, hence their reduced rate of gun violence. As far as Bob Costa’s remarks, he made no comment regarding any correlation between more guns = more violence – that interpretation was solely Stephen Gutowski’s. Costas was censured by his network, not for what he said, but for the fact that he said it, thereby injecting himself into the discussion, which his network did not want.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            YOU are the one who has mentioned Assault Weapons in nearly every communication…..Do YOU know what they are, or are you simply ‘accepting” someone else’s negative description of what they are. Since the guns have been around for over a Century, the only thing that has changed is the people…..negative & violent movies, video games & rap songs are what has changed our new generation. Wake up. NO inanimate object can operate itself!

          • Any dumcoff knows that in today’s world, an assault weapon is defined as one that can shoot more than 10 rounds without reloading and that is either automatic or semi-automatic. NO ONE TODAY considers those antiquated rifles you described as being an assualt rifle. Grow up will you!!!

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            The “repeating rifle” revolutionized warfare over 100 years ago. And magazines that held more than 10 rounds have been around just about as long. People have been enjoined since 1934 from owning “automatic weapons” without VERY arduous & very expensive hurdles being overcome. Now, simply ADD a front grip or a bayonete lug and presto, we have an “assault rifle.” Liberals and gun haters have proven very skillful at fooling the average person. I suggest YOU do your own research on arms….I think you will be surprised how out-of-touch you are, but then again you may simply “want” to believe what you stated above, although it’s wrong!

          • RobertCHastings says:

            I checked out your friend, Stephen Gutowski, and HIS friend, Will Leitch. I see where you get your notions. Both of them really have a knack for looking at something and seeing something entirely different. Gutowski’s “source” for gun violence,the UN Commission on Drugs and Crime is a very reputable source,and the statistics cannot be refuted. However, Gutowski’s conclusions can. While the UN stats show definitively what countries have the most guns per capita and what gun homicide rates per capita are in 207 countries, they do not reveal a thing about why countries (like Switzerland and Finland) have relatively high gun ownership rates and quite low gun homicide rates. Same thing with the UK and numerous other European countries, a few South American and Central American countries, and some Asian countries, even some African countries. In virtually ALL those countries EXCEPT the United States, there is one common factor. kALL those other countries have reasonable gun regulations, while we don’t. In order to find out the true story, it is necessary to go to another site, one that, appropriately, correlates gun homicide rates in countries with high gun ownership to gun control regulations. Several more reasonable journalists have apparently used this path to try to persuade this country’s government to put in place reasonable gun control regulations,NOT gun confiscation regulations. While what Costas had to say that, surprisingly, caused such an uproar, was a quote from another commentator, not even Costas’ own words, which was, essentially, if the football player had not had a gun, he and his girlfriend would still be alive. To be honest, it is an awfully long stretch to interpret that to mean he wants to repeal the Second Amendment.

          • idamag says:

            One of the most acurate polls, the Pew Poll, says 91% favor tighter background checks, 54% favor assault weapon ban, 61% want multiple round clips banned.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            Well then here is your answer….by banning “multiple-round” clips, we will be outlawing over 95% of ALL Guns! And you said “no one wants to ban guns.”
            You are wasting my time & yours, as you understand & know NOTHING about firearms.

          • idamag says:

            Don’t try to be a smart ass. You knew I meant 30 round clips. No, no one wants to ban guns. That is NRA propaganda that has been around for years.

            I was taught to shoot, responsibly, when I was 8 years old. I own guns. I am not a paranoid, coward who is afraid of the world. My guns are not loaded and they are locked up.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            Think of what’s being floated here….a determination that a capacity of “X” is Ok , but “X” plus is not. Once this type of law is in place, it’s VERY easy to decide, “X” WAS OK, but now it needs to be REDUCED to “X” minus. Once ANY law is written with a number in it, it’s EASY to change the number. Best example: Federal TAX rate…..when first proposed & enacted it was about 1%, but over time, it was VERY EASY to add small amounts, until today it tops out in the 50%+ range or higher.
            Once this “numbers game” starts, it will NOT end until all guns are history. WAKE UP!

      • InsideEye says:

        I used to be an NRA member, but not at the moment, dues are a bit high, but will return ….and have guns for one thing or another, sport, hunting, safety, insurrections ???? not yet. but in modern times in other countries yes. Even the USA …the first thing it does is arm rebels to fight their oppressors…interesting ??? Nor are guns phallic symbols for us weak kneed nerds. my personal barrel is much better than my 45. it is how use use it,…. not how much it shoots.
        It is a mental problem that has to be corrected we are guided by political correctness not to document anyone with a mental problem….but we can report child abuse and have the Dept of Youth services take the child to safety….the same should be for the mentally challenged.

        • RobertCHastings says:

          In Libya, just a year or so ago, there was great discussion as to whether or not to arm the rebels. I think we decided against that because we had no way of actually determining with whom we were dealing. As the civil war in Syria rages on for its second year, neither we nor our allies have armed the rebels, for much the same reason. As I said in a previous post, what you propose about documentation of the mentally ill and the sharing of such information is something most reasonable people can agree upon. However, the incident at Newtown, CT would have still occurred because the shooter’s mother would have still qualified to by guns legally. Her son, however, was not on the radar, not as someone with a mental illness nor as a violent threat to society. The mother made some definite errors in judgement, and she was the first one killed. Howeveer, what could have been done to make suresomeone like Adam Lanza never has access to firearms?

          • InsideEye says:

            True the son was not on the radar, because even employers are not aware of certain mental problems since records are not open for viewing. I Was teaching once and I asked about a student and was quietly told to watch for any situations. We were told that we have to mainstream individuals even at peril to staff and other students….a la ACLU as I recall. The mother of Lanza the Newtown killer , I believe tried to have her son over seen by better authority figures that may have been able to channel this persons mind more positively. Some of these students are most difficult to deal with and the teachers are left as custodians….and unknownst to some of them. they can not deal with this type of personality…it takes a lot of patience….maybe…

          • BDC_57 says:

            It is easer to buy a gun then to get mental help for a child.

  4. According to the supreme court decision United States vs Miller, military style weapons are specifically protected for citizens to form an “unregulated militia”. This means your attempts to limit the sales of said weapons are direct attacks upon the constitution of the United States of America, according to the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Cynthia Tucker’s lies about the NRA go beyond the absurd. I, and 4.5 million responsible gun owners, belong to the NRA because the NRA has safety classes for my children, because it has the legislative clout to keep the second amendment safe, because it provides spokespersons to counter the lies of those like Cynthia Tucker, and basically because it angers those who would attempt to destroy our country from within.
    Just in case her schooling was completely inadequate, I might remind Cynthia that our country was founded because the British overlords tried to confiscate our weapons. The battle of Bunker Hill, ( in actuality, Breed’s Hill) was fought to stop the British from confiscating the arms and powder stored in both Lexington and Concord.
    There have been several countries in the last 100 years that have succeeded in confiscating the weapons of their citizens, as Ms Tucker advocates. They were the Soviet Union after the Russian revolution, Nazi Germany in the 1930’s and Red China in the 1950’s. The whole world has been able to see the outcomes and none were pretty. This it the very outcome Ms Tucker wants for America. If that statement sounds extreme, it doesn’t sound any more extreme than what has been written in this article of lies and more lies.
    Yes, we responsible gun owners are speaking out and we are telling you lying liberals, enforce the laws we already have, punish severely those who use guns to harm others, as Florida does with its’ 2, 10 life law, and prosecute those who would sell to those who shouldn’t have guns. Make sentencing Federal and mandatory. Just leave the rest of us alone to enjoy our guns.

    • Jim Myers says:

      Replying to Todd Nelson –

      Where can I buy a rocket launcher and a sufficient supply of rockets to protect me against people like you?

      How about a few dozen RPG’s and maybe a Howitzer or two, along with a few Stingers?

      • Inthenameofliberty says:

        I feel sorry for you.
        Todd Nelson, whom I do not know, seems very reasonable to me.

        Ever heard of The Battle of Athens.?
        Most have not. I had not, until recently.

        Read about it. Then before you tell me that ‘the kind of thing doesn’t happen very often’ like I suspect you will, consider this: YES IT HAS and yes it will.

        It will, because unreasonable, power hungry men will always bully the little guy.

        When you can stop that from happening, then you can talk to me about gun restrictions.

        I have said this multiple times on this site and let me say it again and again and again – the human animal is AWFUL. We are a terrible, terrible species.

        Mr Nelson said nothing that was not true. Yet you want protection from him?

        Really? Bet you’d be the first person hiding behind his back, hiding behind his gun, when you needed to be protected.

        Am I wrong? Because I think you are a hypocrite.

        • Jim Myers says:

          Replying to Inthenameofliberty –

          If you have never encountered Road Rage.

          If you have never encountered a heated argument between friends, family members, co-workers or even complete strangers.


          However, if you have ever seen any of these take place, you should have the mental capacity to understand that nearly EVERYONE is capable of doing things that under normal conditions would SEEM irrational.

          Why is there so much debate over limiting semi-automatic and fully automatic rifles, 30 round, (or more), magazines, etc.

          Although I do not own firearms, does not mean I never used them. While in the military, I qualified in the top one third of my class on the M16, and scored the highest score out of about 120 who tested on the M-1. I scored 293 out of a possible 300 with the M-1. Next highest score of 291 went to two others who tested the same day.

          That was an accomplishment that I credit a gentleman named Mr. Zook. He was a proud member of the NRA who taught gun safety and marksmanship at the local Armory. He was easily into his late 60’s at the time, which was in the early 1960’s. Thankfully, he is no longer with us, and does not need to know what happened to his beloved organization.

          No, I would not hide behind anyones back in a gun attack.

          However, I feel strongly that REAL MEN don’t need guns to prove they are real men. BECAUSE, THEY ARE REAL MEN!

          And just so you know,I shot skeet, and did some hunting when I was younger. I do neither anymore. By choice.

          • Inthenameofliberty says:

            I apologize.
            I feel that you, as a veteran, do have more knowledge on the subject than I do.
            I suppose I reacted to the strong reaction you had to the original post. I did not find the post to be unreasonable.
            No – I have not dealt with a human displaying road rage.
            I only hope that when I do, I am calm enough and know enough to protect myself.

            Guess I’ll go back to my original argument – normal humans don’t permit themselves to allow anger to escalate to violence.
            Question is – how do we keep humans normal?

            I have never hit another human in anger. I probably will forget my hand – to -hand skills when it happens. The odds are not in my favor.

            I suppose my debate over gun control is that is taking focus away from where I think the problem is stemming from.

            And once the gun controls start, it starts a precedence to keep going. After all – more deaths are from hand guns than from automatic weapons. So once the ban is on automatic weapons, does that mean that the next will be handguns?

            Fern owns a gun (just read her post). And as unstable as I find her posts to be (IMO only) I still would not deny her the right to own a gun.

            She is full of hate and rage and makes no attempt to hide it. Yet – she gets tons of likes on this page. Go figure.

          • Jim Myers says:

            Replying to Inthenameofliberty –

            WOW! I appreciate your comments, and it seems that I owe you an apology also.

            I will never accept that the common man or woman has a need for weapons that can wipe out dozens of men, women and CHILDREN in less time than it takes to pour a soda.

            If you read my comments in a later post, you will find that I do not have a problem with revolvers, hunting rifles and shotguns. Only semi and fully automatic weapons and high capacity magazines.

            Unfortunately, there is no argument that will convince me that we will ever be able to keep humans “normal”.

            Or, maybe what we now consider normal is actually an aberration, and those we feel are over the edge are actually “normal”.

          • Betta says:

            “And as unstable as I find her posts to be (IMO only) I still would not deny her the right to own a gun.”

            I said the same thing on here, Inthenameofliberty. However, I do not support Fern’s right to own a gun.

            As you and I have both have said, Fern appears to be quite unstable and should not be allowed to own a gun.

            Now if one day she completely flips and hurts someone with her gun, the next thing we’ll hear is how we need more gun control. Almost freaking laughable.

          • Guess You Think I Might Blow Your Dumb Ass Away Huh??? Laugh Your Ass Off Bitch When Somebody Do Blast A Cap In Your Ass!!!

          • Sure you will . . . you know, people who make threats over teh interwebz are even funnier than people who just scream and yell. You are really one of the funniest losers I’ve ever run into on the net, though there have been a few who come close. But for stupidity combines with insanity, you hold the crown.

            Keep on keeping on . . . . I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time!

          • Maybe It’s Cause That Big Ass Head Of Yours Looking Like A Water Barrel Might Be The Thing You Find So Funny !! LMAO I Know Your Big Ass Head Is Funny To Me!!!LOL Nobody Screaming That All That Air Stirring Around In Your Big Ass Head!! LMAO!!

          • Ah, the Loon’s Lullaby . . .

          • Oh, good lord, it’s you AGAIN? I don’t recall having pulled your strings this time. What are you, obsessive compulsive? If you really want to dance for me some more, well, I suppose we can go Waltzing Matilda Again . . . I can only assume you enjoy being pwnished.

          • Awwww . . . flagging what you can’t stand? How juvenile . . .

          • Pathetic. You call this dancing? Get to work, subbie!

          • My, you ARE a whiney little girl aren’t you? Hmmm . . . perhaps I’ll run down some of these threads and flag everything you post repeatedly . . . or not, after all, I am a grownup.

          • robert says:

            LMFAO! A water head baloon boy!

          • InsideEye says:

            Nor are guns phallic symbols for us weak kneed nerds. my personal barrel is much better than my 45. it is how use use it,…. not how much it shoots.

            It is a mental problem that has to be corrected, we are guided by political correctness not to document anyone with a mental problem….but we can report child abuse and have the Dept of Youth services take the child to safety….the same should be for the mentally challenged.

          • robert says:

            When a boy, you did boyish things. Now that you’re a man, you do manly things. These people are so childish it isn’t funny.

      • lana ward says:

        Omuslim would shoot you before anyone form the NRA would!!

      • Betta says:

        Todd is not the threat. Your government is. Better get a clue.

      • Good for you Jim. Todd, I assume, hopefully correctly, that you are a gun owner and like to hunt. Tell me Todd, how many shots do you normally fire to bring down a deer? One, possibly two at the most! So why then does a hunter, need a AR-15 semi-automativ rifle to hunt deer. Fact of the matter , if one does not release the trigger of a semi-automatic, it just keeps firing until all the ammo is fired off, or the gun jams. Makes me wonder how much deer meat would be edible after 20, or 30 rounds were fired into that deer to bring it down.
        Todd, I spent 43 years of my life with the US Army, and nobody, I repeat nobody
        should have an assault weapon, designed and manufactured for MILITARY use
        Your argument to justify such weapons to protect you and your fellow American citizens from a Tyrannical Government, is totally false and without merit. We have
        three equal but separate branches in our government, which in itself would prevent any President from becoming a dictator. All the countries you mention in your article already were controlled by dictators and so-called peoples’ parties, except for England, which was controlled by an absolute monarch. Please, stop insulting our intelligence by spreading that nonsense.
        By the way, if, and that is a big “if” – the President with the consent of Congress and approval of the Supreme Court, decided to impose martial law, do you reaslly think you could defend yourself with a puny AR-15 against bazookas, tanks, artillery, jet fighters and bombers, etc, etc. No my good friend, you and others like
        you would be slaughtered. So please, stop blowing smoke.
        The First Amendment reflects our Right to Freedom of Speech. But there are limitations. Should one slander, or falsely accuse another person, one could end up being sued ina court of law. Likewise, the Second Amendment concerning the Right to Bear Arms also has limitations, being “common sense” and the safety of
        the general public. You my friend are supporting Wayne LaPierre’s propaganda, funded by the gun industry. So again, stop blowing smoke.

        An Oldf Soldier

        • Frank, your post is full of outright falsehoods. If you spent 43 years in the Army, then you should know a lot more about semi automatic rifles. They do NOT “fire off unall the ammo until empty”. That sounds like a sound bite taken from the anti-wackos. Did you spend 43 years in the PX or what?
          The propaganda comes from your side, and so is the smoke you speak of……

          • Like hell it is. Hold down on the trigger or just keep squeezing it repeatedly & it will fire off, and keep firing amd that’s exactly what happened in Newtown. As for where I spent my 43 years, just come and join me and I’ll gladly show you exactly where and what I did.

          • robert says:

            Hey, Frank Libbon, I hear you loud and clear, brother. these idiots have no real world experience. I remember in 1968, a friend of mine suspected that his girlfriend was sneaking a man in the house when he went to work early in the mornings. He was a good friend who taught me overhead welding in the ship yard we worked in, and I begged him to just leave the woman alone if he didn’t trust her. But, he was obsessed with this woman and wanted to catch her in the act. Well, he bought a fully automatic .45 pistol from another welder for 20 bucks at the time. The next morning, he left to wait with us for the shipyard bus to pick us up, but instead, he back tracked to the house where he found the man in the kitchen with the woman. He pulled the gun and ordered the man to get out of the house. The told the woman to come come with him, that they were in love and she didn’t have to be there. Out of rage, my friend attempted to fire a shot over the man’s head, but the woman screamed so loudly, his finger became frozen on the trigger and the .45 continued to fire, killing the woman and the man, and leaving bullet holes in the walls and ceiling until the clip was exhausted. My friend was charged with two counts of murder, and the fact that he had emptied the clip, he was charged with first-degree murder. He never made it to trial. The man went stark-raving mad and was admitted to the Louisiana Mental Instutute at Jackson, Louisiana. Nothing was ever heard from him again, and that was 45 years ago. Had he listened to me, had he never purchased that pistol, he may have had a productive life and had started a family with a more deserving woman. But it was three lives lost because of the availibilty of a lethal, automatic weapon that should not have been in the hands of an emotionally confused man.

          • Thank you Robert. You are absolutely right. Had your friend listened to you, and not bought a gun, he and two others might be alive today. Gene should read the Federalist Papers; the Genius of the People by Mee Jr & American Crisis-George Washington & the Dangerous Two Years after Yorktown by Wm Fowler Jr, and he will discover how frequently Washington & the other Founding
            Fathers used the word “Liberal” and what the true meaning of that word is. They scream like stuck pigs to keep their Tinker Toys, under a totally false claim to defend themselves against a tyrant,
            sucking up to the Bull —- put out by Wayne LaPierre, and could care less about the children and other who are gunned down.

          • MrStoneheep says:

            Frank, how many of these AR-15 or any semi-auto rifles that will fire until empty or jam were there INSIDE the school in CT? How many had 20 to 30 round clips?

          • He had a 223 cal. Bushmaster XM 15-EZS rifle with many, many clips with 30 rounds
            per clip, firing 100 to 150 rounds, usually firing 15 rounds at a time, then reloading a new full clip as he went room to room. All of the chldren killed hat multiple gun shot wounds. One 6 year old boy was shot 11 (eleven) times. He killed all these
            children & teachers in an estimated 15-20 minutes. He was also armed with a 10mm Glock handgun & a 9mm SIG Sauer P226 handgun. The police found a Ishmash Sarge 12 combat shotgun in his car & a 45 cal Henry Repeating Rifle, a 30 cal Enfield Rifle & a 22 Marlin Rifle in his home. His mother was a “Gun Collector”. He shot her
            in the face 4 times.
            I cannot help but think that IF he had only a single shot bolt action rifle (what a good
            hunter needs), & a 6 round revolver only, less children would have been killed.
            Why I ask, does anyone really need an assault type weapon with high capacity clips.? Why? And I don’t want any idiot telling me such weapons are needed to protect oneself from a Tyrant. That is nothing but a “Crock of B.S.”
            Sure, let little kids be ruthlessly murdered so a few can have their “Tinker Toys.”
            No one, especially me, wants to do away with the Right to Bear Arms, but there MUST be a common sense interpretation of the Second Amendment. Those States that allow their citizens to openly carry handguns or even concealed weapons, had better wake up and come on back down to this Planet.

          • Allow me to continue Gene. You will first off note that my original reply was to Tod Nelson – and not to you. Since you saw fit to stick your 2 cents into this discussion, let me just say that, if you want to protest against something, then protest against attempts that were made by the GOP to deny American citizens their right to vote; protest against the Supreme Court’s decision regarding Citizens United, which allows BIG MONEY to buy our elections; protest against subsidaries given to BIG OIL; protest against the low wages paid to our fellow Americans which prevent them from living decently while less than 1% get 46% of the wealth; protest against Fracking which will poison our ground water, but don’t protest because your fear that the government may bann semi & full automatic weapons and large capacity clips, like a child crying because someone might
            take away your Tinker Toys. We will never stop gun murders, nor will all the checks in the world allow us to identify all the wierdos, but banning the use of semi/full automatic weapons and large clips, will at least limit (hopefully) the number being killed. Twenty little children died because a mother with a wierdo son did not have brains enough to secure her weapons. She paid the ultimate price for her stupidity. The Second Amendment concerning the Right to Bear Arms my friend, is not sacrosant. A bolt action is all that a good hunter needs.

        • idamag says:

          We also have elections at this time. They might be tampered with in the future. When we elect someone, we elect them.

      • Mulligatonney says:

        Well…you certainly have your “big boy pants” on now… You can say RPG and Stinger as if you are quite the gun expert…

        The truth is more likely to be that you would piss your pants if you actually were confronted with a situation that would require some action on your part to protect yourself.

        That’s why you don’t understand the 2nd Amendment or the intent of the people who were very careful to put it into the Constitution… Most pussies don’t.

        Deterrence is (or used to be) the military’s primary mission statement. The theory is that bad people and bullies prey upon the weak and vulnerable. If you are stronger than them or present enough of a counterstrike capability to discourage them, they would at least think twice about attacking you.

        But they are CERTAIN to attack you sooner or later if you are unable to defend yourself. You know this, and therefore have no argument to make against my right and desire to defend myself.

        It is your right to be a pussy. Fair enough. But, just like a true liberal, now you want everyone to be pussies right alongside you because living a little longer as a coward somehow appeals to you more than standing up and confronting the threat and risking your well-being. This is why a “Big Brother” government appeals to you.

        The deterrent of an entire nation of gun owners should be obvious to anyone who is not a pussy. But you ARE a pussy. Therefore, it is not obvious to you, so you want to take my rights away from me so you feel better about being a pussy.


      • idamag says:

        Jim, I picked up a Popular Science magazine and they have invented personal size drones.


      Calling liberals liars is a pretty irresponsible statement for a “responsible” gun owner to issue. Use your vote to straighten out our government, not a gun. Reserve your gun for actual government attempts to take over. Gun regulation does not come under this heading. You don’t seem to realize what the gun extremists are opening up. I’ve lived in this country for 78 years and I’ve seen us go from a country who heeded President Washington’s admonition to stay out of the affairs of the other countries to a country that invades whatever country that doesn’t meet with their approval.

      Now I’m beginning to wonder if I shouldn’t procure some weapons to protect my family from the Neo Nazi extremists, the cowboys bolstering their egos by bragging about the size of their gun, and other nut cases. For the first time I find myself worried about the future of my country when such extreme behavior is so rampant. And, to be sure, it still is my country, too, the last I heard… or is an automatic weapon required to belong? RIP, civilized America.

    • robert says:

      Todd Nelson, man, you guys are amazing. Really? Have you read the Supreme Court case of United States v. Miller? If you have, you’d know the high court’s decision did recognize the 2nd Amendment, but not the interstate transportation of the illegal sawed-off shotgun Miller and his co-hort was in possession of. That argument might hold up in the white supremacist compiund you live in, but not in the real world. The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the lower court where the conviction of Miller and his co-hort were retried and sentenced for illegal transportation of a modified weapon, something the justices did not recognize under the 2nd Amendment. Miller and his cohort were criminals, members of a Oklahoma gang of bank robbers in 1934, seventy nine years ago, man. Seriously? Would you like to know the outcome? Miller turned state’s evidence against his gang members to save his own ass. When he was released from prison, he was found dead in the wastelands of Oklahoma, killed by a .38. He had a .45 in his hand that had been fired twice in the shoot out. His cohort was caught again transporting illegal weapons and was sent to federal penitentiary where he may have died as well. So much for your brilliant argument or rationalization that has nothing to do with military-styled weapons of mass destruction, military weapons that should be kept in the military. Child Protection Services should be all over you for teaching children how to assault and murder. You want to enjoy those types of guns, go to the WWII museum or something where you can get your rocks off big time.

    • idamag says:

      So then the homicidal paranoid schizophrenic is having his constitutional rights tampered with?

    • idamag says:

      Todd, check again. nazi Germany only took guns away from part of their citizens.

  5. Gun Deaths

    Tweeting every gun death in North America regardless of cause and without comment. Help us tell the story behind the statistics.


  6. The NRA does not condone shoulder fire rocket launchers as you stated. You are pleading with moderate gun owners (as you profess you are) to be heard. I am the target group you are pleading to. So if you do not want me to close my ears to you please keep your own comments truthful.

  7. The nra, through w. lapoop, beats it’s collective chest about 2nd amendment rights and confiscation while failing to acknowledge that we have a serious gun violence problem. They offer nothing in terms of solutions. They, and their wacko supporters, are the true anti-Americans.

    • Inthenameofliberty says:

      Seriously? Do you rail and vent at parents that aren’t being watched that beat and mentally assault their children [that create the monsters using the guns] and further destroy society? Or do you just complain about taking away the guns?

      hey – I have an idea – why don’t you take some of your anger and anti-American sentiments and do something about the adults that are ruining our children?

      How about that?

    • idamag says:

      And a nut with an assault rifle infringed on 26 peoples’ Constitutional rights. The preamble says they have the right to “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” He destroyed all those rights for those people.

  8. Nick559 says:

    Rocket launchers and other deadly devices used in war, really? The NRA doesn’t say anyone should have those. That’s total Bull@#$t. To purchase any type of weapon like that you have to apply for a special license, pay a special Federal tax and undergo an investigative record check for each item. That record check (carried out at the state and federal level) is so tough and stringent that most members of Congress wouldn’t pass it.

    If you buy stuff like that in private sales or on the street it’s either stolen or brought in illegally from over the border down south. It carries a minimum 10 year sentence in Federal prison.

    I may be a Democrat, a member of a minority and lean somewhat to the left but I’m not stupid and know enough laws from a career in the military and then law enforcement to recognize media lies when I see them.

    • Jim Myers says:

      Replying to Nick559 –

      Your response is the exact reason I mentioned RPG’s, Rocket Launchers, etc. THE POINT IS THIS. Where do we draw the line? I have no problem with hunting rifles, shotguns, or even revolvers.


      They are designed to MAIM AND KILL THE MOST AMOUNT OF PEOPLE in the shortest amount of time.

      And the targets are becoming, more increasingly, INNOCENT CHILDREN.



      Real men don’t need guns. BECAUSE THEY ARE REAL MEN!

      • Nick559 says:

        If you want gun owners to follow you’re frame of mind, then you need to talk sensible and stop the lies and deceit. It’s seen through every article, post and paragraph.

        You show you’re ignorance on the subject through a paper thin vail. Semiautomatics (which are still legal to own for the time being) or even full automatics are not what the real threat to corrupt government or it’s politicians or leaders are. It’s the common scoped deer rifle which is today better than any sniper rifle used in WWII, Korea or Vietnam and lethal beyond 500 meters. That’s what they are really after and their ultimate goal. The rest is all emotionally fired arguments used from horrible tragedies.

        If someone had a full automatic rifle with 30 rounds in the magazine, it would pail in comparison with what you’re average deer hunter could do with any modern scoped deer rifle with five rounds in the magazine and another 25 rounds in his or her pockets.

        Real men and women fought for this country so we could all be free. Those who talk the most, beat their drums loudly and try to shove their points of view down everyone else’s throats are the real cowards that shirttail their way along with those that earned the freedoms we all enjoy today.

        • Jim Myers says:

          I guess my 8 years of military service doesn’t count.

          • Nick559 says:

            I know exactly what you mean. After putting in just over 20 years of service and looking at our current Washington Political Atmosphere, I’m starting to feel that it was all for nothing (only as far as our country’s deteriorating political system and deteriorating freedoms). Of course, my friends and I do feel we made a difference everywhere we served, it’s just that we don’t feel that it made any difference here at home.

          • Exactly what deteriorating freedoms are you talking about?? I’m not aware of having lost any freedom to do what I want?? And for the increased animosity one sees today in the political system, guns are not the way to cure that, it’s voting that can fix that. Just like so many gun lovers, you’re comments make no sense.

          • Nick559 says:

            Read some of the last 900 executive orders and you’ll see about those freedoms and the elimination of due process. Also, unless you’re one of the fortunate receiving lots of federal and state monies, the rest are being transformed into tax slaves and taxed into the poor house (us middle class members). Add all the taxes up and then add in all of your sales and use taxes and see for yourself.

            By the way, I’m not a gun lover, NRA member or have a house full of guns. However, with what I’m seeing and hearing from politicians and idiots who want to take more rights away, maybe it’s time to go wait in line for a weapon so that when the money stops flowing, I can protect my family from those who will want to take everything my family built since slavery was abolished in the 1860’s. I just stated facts that people don’t want to hear. If you don’t want to own a gun, don’t buy one. If you get pregnant and don’t want the baby, it’s you’re choice what to do. If you want to vote and change things, then vote.

        • Hillbilly says:

          Have you ever had a mental check up? Because your arguments for guns shows that there needs to better background checks and mental check up done on all gun owners, especially you.

      • Jim Myers, if you want to be taken seriously? Stop ending your arguments with your intantile out burst.

      • AS far as I’m concerned, Myers is a true nut case

        • Jim Myers says:

          Replying to Gene Langelier –

          THANK YOU.

          Coming from the people who put the rights of the general populace to own and bear WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, EVEN AT THE EXPENSE OF INNOCENT CHILDREN, I consider it an HONOR to be the one classified as a “true nut case.”


    The NRA speaks for gun manufacturers and gun extremists. I grew up with kids, some of whose fathers would go hunting for recreation, but no one thought of guns as weapons to use against our government. It was only a sport and often, a chance for dads and sons to bond. I’m beginning to feel some of the tides that crested in Germany in the late thirties and early forties when they got rid of the government and put in Hitler to straighten out things and promote the whites using the code word Aryan Race. I speak as a white of central European heritage.

    Guns should never be banned in toto, but it is just as bad to have flaky individuals running around with weapons of war. I’m a city dweller who depends on the police for law and order. When the extremist gun advocates are running around better armed than the lawful peace officers, I begin to worry and I’m a US citizen just as much as they are. Do I now need to turn my home into an armed fortress to protect my family? I hope not!

    This article hit the nail on the head. There should be a rival group to speak for gun owners, who are good law abiding citizens with at least a modicum of common sense.

    Who makes laws ?
    Who manufactures guns?
    Who makes profits on gun sales?
    Who collects taxes on gun sales?
    Legislators, Gun makers, Gun dealers
    and Uncle Sam are only ones who can
    stop violence in the schools

  11. Brian says:

    You’re preaching to the choir, darlin’.

  12. AlfredSonny says:

    In response to those who claim that guns are not adults’ security blanket, it takes time for each child to become secure enough to release one’s security blanket.

    • It took 68 years to release my security blanket. When I realized the police nor any other government agency would or could protect me, I purchased a gun and am responsible for my protection. No longer do I need my security blanket (lawenforcement).

  13. Susan says:

    Like abortion haters, this writer is entitled to her opinion. That her opinion has been proved to be entirely wrong by millions of responsible gun owners and users makes no difference to her. She wants to control everyone’s lives, and she doesn’t care how many individual and civil rights she tramples to do that. Moreover, she ignores all of the major issues that have confounded the killings like the fact that 99% of all gun shootings are driven by individuals on drugs, psychotropic drugs and gang activity. She offers no ideas for how to deal with any of the root problems affecting violence. her quick and mindless fix is to suppress everyone else.

  14. Brian says:

    I challenge you all to speak up first. A 12 round or 13 round capacity magazine in a 9mm pistol is the norm. Sensible capacity laws would have said 20 rounds or more in a clip. THe only reason to say more than 10 was to effect most handguns. New York State actually said 7 rounds–and then found out all their cops had illegal guns than. SO when it comes to common sense and compromise—you first. Introduce commons sense high capacity–ie 20 rounds or more–instead of affecting all the current handguns.

  15. What the heck is it going to take to get you left wing anti-gun wackos to leave us alone.
    You people speak of NRA as if we are the reason behind the rise in crime, as if we directly supply the criminal element in the country, and support every crazy person out there in owning weapons
    Plainly and simply, we do NOT.
    On the other hand however, it is YOU who constantly harrass and lie to try and remove my legally owned weapons, and means of protection.
    The NRA stands up for and helps protect the rights of law abiding citizens.
    One of the posters refered to us as gun toting crazies running the streets with weapons of war…..are you kidding me?? Are you that deluded to believe the media wackos who promote that type of propaganda?
    You people can invent all the screwy statistics you want to support your agenda.
    All I have to do is look at how well gun control is working in our major cities, and if that’s not enough, just look at total gun control in the police state of Mexico.

  16. Thomas says:

    I think blaming guns for murders is like blaming pens and pencles for mistakes made in school !
    So the people got together and decided to take up all pens and pencles and by God there will be no more bad grades in school !
    yeah Douglas ! And so does the NRA have rights to their beliefs in this country! They are right in
    thinking gun laws will help because there are already 20,000 gun laws right now as I write this
    and you and Fern along with others follow these laws and others who use firearms in commiting crimes could not care less ! At least Lean Ward makes sense ! The rest of you ! Well I wounder if you … Oh well . Listning to more than your big mouths … !

  17. Thomas says:

    Betta and lana know that laws … well so far as I have learned in my 67 years of life , a gun law never stopped a person from killing his wife, robbing a bank or breaking into a home and murding thmen and raping and murding the women and childern . As was suggested by the NRA put trainned persons in our schools who know how to use firearms and let them on site pretect the people there . Why do the Chinese, and our President want to disarm U.S. citizens ? Oh and Fern . Why don’t you screw the NRA or as many as you can anyway . Might as well have some fun and enjoyment out of all this !

  18. The problem with the gun- fiasco, is the real reason for all the mass shootings is and won’t ever be exposed do to big money and a government agenda– Every School shooter was on Psychotropic drugs with side effects of suicide, homicide, and violence—- YES, every single one! Look it up yourself— no law proposed will stop this senseless violence-if not the gun, a car, a bomb, a knife, a baseball bat, a machete. But until we expose the real reason– there is no hope in sight! I am NRA—and penalizing law abiding citizens for the crimes of criminals is just plain ridiculous– I think ALL cars should have an interlock breathalizer system so you can’t start it until you blow in a tube— if it works for guns, why shouldn’t it work for all cars– after all, drunk drivers kill more per year than guns!

    • Inthenameofliberty says:

      Finally! An idea (interlock breathalizer system) that has merit !! (IMO)
      Sandy – why isn’t anyone going after the drug companies? I have been told that I am not keeping to topic when I talk about these things.
      But I think that I am. I agree with you. I want to know why no one goes after the people that are creating the problems in the first place?! You are very correct about the drugs – yet no one wants to hear about it. No one wants to talk about it. No one seems to worry about the fact that our society takes a pill to fix its problems, creating bigger problems.
      Drug companies are not here to get us OFF their drugs – they are here to make money. Conflict of interest, that’s what it is.
      I get so frustrated when people can’t (or won’t see) what it is that you are saying. We have a much bigger problem than semi-automatic weapons.
      How the hell do we combat the drug companies? Parents need to stand up to the doctors when they want to put the kids on drugs. I know of so many families where the doctors want to put the kids on drugs. It is not always the correct answer.

      • option31 says:

        I agree the drug are the problem. Ever notice how these mass shootings happen in the better parts of town and not the poorer. Yes the poorer have shooting but that is another problem – its the result of a turf war to sell ” illegal” drugs. The mass shootings happen in better parts of town and richer people are doing it because they can afford the phsychiatrist and their “legal” drugs. How many of the suicides are caused by these drugs?
        Good grief all you have to do is watch tv and you’ll see drug commercial after drug commercial and they state the side effects are depression and thoughts of suicide. The Dr’s and drug companies should be sued and held accountable. Guns are inanimate objects, drugs are mind altering. Of course taking on big pharma would be a death knell for any politician or media outlet because of the campaign contributions and advertising drug companies make spend.

  19. Hillbilly says:

    I have another theory why the NRA keeps feeding people’s paranoid about the government coming to take their guns and that is that the higher ups in the organization are being paid by some government or organization to start another civil war in this Country,so they can take this Country over and set up a dicatorship government where no American can own a gun or have wealth. That is the only thing that makes sense considering what comes out of the higher ups mouths in the NRA organization and the fact that they don’t listen to what most of their members say in regards to gun control

    • idamag says:

      Hill, that has been done in history. Teach people to fear a group and then you come in to save them from the group. You look up and your democracy is gone.

  20. dslocum says:

    Great article! It’s high time gun owners unite against the brainwashing and incendiary tactics of the NRA. The membership numbers of the NRA respresent a paltry 1.4% of America’s total population. That means that 98.6% pf Americans DO NOT support the NRA.

  21. dragons3 says:

    I guess I will become one of the criminals, I have already divided my guns into at least three different locations ( Just in case those nuts in Chicago think they can confiscate them).
    Just think, they scream about 300 deaths in the Chicago area last year— but NONE of them were
    done with an AR-15, nor any other “assult type rifle”. The folks like Cynthia need to admidt that they can’t think beyond the fear that the rifle is scarry! The AR-15 is a SEMI-AUTO, just like my
    shotgun and the small 22 rifle my Grandfather got for me as a kid.
    All of the fully automatics are illegal !
    I understand that the AR-15 is a darn good target rifle, and hey- they are used by our local police dept. But the anti -gun folks have made it more than double in price. I had to purchase a handgun just before they tried to make it illegal… Yes, it does shoot more than 10 rounds.

  22. onedonewong says:

    What a loon…Tucker you must be on crack again. want gun deaths to be reduced?? Then make sure those with a mental defect are reported and prevented from buying owning or possessing a gun

  23. robert says:

    It’s incredible how these people use the wording of the 2nd Amendment to misinterpret what the founding fathers meant by “well regulated militia”. They say “We need to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government”, and the rest of us wonder what these idiots are talking about. They say “Nothing makes me feel safer than the warm barrel of a gun.”, then say “We need to enforce the laws already on the books, make sure those with mental illness and criminal records don’t get them.” Yet, to hear them talk, they are the ones who sound mentally ill and criminal. They have a narrow view of America, as if America is a Third World nation where the people or the military can just up and one day take over this government. Unlike 1776, America has local and State governments, Congress, the Senate, and governmental departments to ensure that no such thing could ever happen. There is the Army, Navy, and Air Force that we pay taxes to our government to protect our freedoms. There’s the Reserves, the National Guards, and the Coast Guards. Then, there’s the CIA, FBI, DEA, and ATF that we pay through our taxes to protect our freedoms. Then, there’s the local Police Departments, Sheriff’s Departments, State Police, Highway Patrols, and Civil Sheriff’s departments. And lastly, there are regular, responsible, patriotic citizens, Americans, who would gladly sign up with the military to protect our freedoms. So what are these people talking about? Is this a case of us being our own worst enemy?

    • Most sensible gun owners are just that – sensible, responsible, and rational. However, there is an element of those who clutch their guns out of fear that SOMEONE is going to come get them. Without their guns, they are unmanned. They are emasculated. For them, their guns are less for protection than penile prostheses. Their guns make them feel strong, feel powerful, feel safe, and they dream of the day that there’s a shooting and they’re there with THEIR weapon to put the bad guy down and they can be a hero. Having their guns allows them to fantasize about being the good guy with a gun rather than an insecure, insignificant schmoo like the rest of us.

      These are grown up kids playing Rambo. It’s cowboys and indians with real guns. Their guns define them. Their guns, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, make them feel that they can overthrow the government if they disagree with it, and that this treasonous attitude makes them patriots.

      • Sad Real Sad I Think It’s Time For You To Get A New Hobby Like A Job And A Life!!!

        • Why? I’m a percussionist, and playing the bongoes on your empty little head is just too much fin for words! And the really funny thing is that you haven’t the foggiest notion of how much fun it is to slap you around like a ragdoll puppet. I notice that whenever I post, even if you’re not even on the thread, you have to jump in.

          Dance for me puppet! Every time I post, you pop up like a good little puppet and spew. I laugh at you, child, and your mewling, juvenile attempts to annoy me. I guess you’re really too stupid to understand that I think you’re a joke. A sad, pathetic child. And one who dances to my commands. You’re conditioned, now. You can’t NOT respond to me.

          Dance for me, puppet. You amuse me.

  24. Random thoughts from someone who isn’t a member of the NRA and who would never have a gun in his home:

    It seems that the farther away we get from the Sandy Hook massacre in time, the farther away we stray from a real solution.

    The entire discussion on “sensible” reform appears to have boiled down to mainly one idea: get rid of assault weapons.

    Go back just six years ago. 2007 is the year of our country’s deadliest shooting incident ever by a lone gunman – the Virginia Tech massacre, committed by mentally ill Seung-Hui Cho. His weapons? Just two handguns easily concealed: a .22-caliber Walther P22 semi-automatic handgun and a 9 mm semi-automatic Glock 19 handgun.

    Ban one weapon, and the determined mentally ill will choose another, including homemade firebombs.

    Guard one potential target (schools, theaters, etc.), and the deranged will choose another: in October 2002, the “Beltway sniper” killed 10 and wounded three in random places, going undetected for three weeks because he fired his stolen Bushmaster XM-15 semiautomatic .223 caliber rifle from the trunk of his car.

    If we banned the making and selling of assault weapons, virtually overnight a black market would spring up, fueled initially by drug dealers and the likely growing number of doomsday preppers who’ve been scared out of their wits by NatGeo’s show by that name.

    Tucker said nothing about mental illness, the underlying cause of the massacres that we’re trying to stop. And nothing about all the shooters being young males, who are/were mentally ill.

    Suppose they were females. The discussions would be very little about guns, I believe, but a lot about what drives these young women to such extremes. They would focus on what could be done to help these young women escape the despair that pushes them to such a disastrous end. Many liberals, especially feminists, might see a heavy focus on controlling guns as missing the point and sexist.

    P.S.: The 2007 massacre raises an important political issue: Between 2008 and 2010, the Democrats controlled the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate. While this massacre was still fresh in our minds, why didn’t the Democrats do something about gun violence then? If they couldn’t or wouldn’t, what makes them think they will do something now other than puffing and posturing to appease the masses who demand, “Do something!”?

    • I am a liberal Democrat gun owner. Excellent post, man your random thoughts make sense! Your P.S. summerizes this discussion, meaningless puffing and posturing on both sides.
      On Meet the Press this morning it was mentioned that President Obama and Dems. in Congress are ready to settle for stricter background checks. You get what you can and move on.

    • In response to your PS, the democrats did not have two years of filibuster proof control between 2008-10; a common misguided notion of so many. The Dems were voted a majority in the Senate IN 2008 which took effect in January 2009, but that ended in August of 2009 when Ted Kennedy died and was replaced by Republican Scott Brown. With the economic debable that took place in 2008, gun control was the furthest thing from people’s minds in the beginning of 2009; it was all about resolving America’s economic problems. To question why the Dems didn’t agressively pursue gun control then is an indication you have a pretty short memory.

      • idamag says:

        I guess he never watched the House in action on C-span. The first day of the session the house leader sets the vote and it had to be 61% to pass anything.

  25. montanabill says:

    Cynthia, you are pushing for changes to gun laws. Whether they are sensible or not is in the eye of the beholder. When you use such language, you are implying that anyone who doesn’t fully agree with your proposals, is not sensible and, therefore, you are demonizing them. You will not win converts with that type of language. You also demonize ‘assault-style’ weapons and then conveniently drop ‘-style’ later in your post. There is a huge difference between ‘assault-style’ weapons and ‘assault’ weapons. ‘Assault-style’ is a cosmetic look to standard semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns. If I duct tape a flashlight to my 1943 vintage M-1 instead having a rail to mount it on, have I now created an ‘assault-style’ weapon?

  26. robert says:

    Mulligatoney, so being a bully to keep from being bullied is your solution? If tyhat’s the case, who’s the pussy. Judging from what you are saying, you are eating a lot of the pussy the NRA and others like yourself are eating, so you are what you eat. You guys don’t get it. You’re going back and forth with people who own fire arms. I suspect that everyone posting on this site owns a gun for personal protection. The argument is about MILITARY STYLED ASSAULT WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION THAT SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO MILITARY USE, not disarming Americans. You want to feel the warm barrel of your assault weapon between the cheeks of your butt or you want to snuggle up to the warmth of a newly fired assault weapon and get off on the scent of the gun powder, have at it, buddy. But real Americans will not stand by and allow you, the NRA, white supremacists, or assholes like you to turn this great nation into a Third World country.

  27. robert says:

    Hey Hillbilly, if these idiots think that there will be another Civil War started in this country, they’d better take a lesson from Granada and the first Iraq wars. The Civil war had a patriotic (Confederate treason), economic (industrialization), and moral (abolition of slavery) reasons for its national conflict. America was strictly divided. That will never happen again. If these fools think we will be fighting on the streets of America, they have another thought coming.

  28. bchrista says:

    I cannot believe that grown people can come up with so many bullshit excuses pro and con and ignore the basic problem, to start with no one wants to take all guns away from responsible gun owners, (1 who needs an assualt weapon? remember all mass murders have been commited by someone armed with an assualt weapon and the person commiting the crime got the weapon from the home of a person legally impowered to own one,(2 the person commiting the crime was a young man who was one of the family, (3 someone or all in the family knew that that person had a mental problem and either ignored or dismissed it as nothing to worry about,(4in most cases the mother discussed the problem yet did little or nothing to get proper treatment for their ill son and if medication was recommended they left the responsibility to the person themselves to take the medication,(5 as was the case of Lanza, the Newtown shooter the guns were readily available because she was an avid target shooter and at times had encouraged him to go along with her to practice, even though she knew he had mental problems, so there is part of your problem the laxity in the home in keeping the weapons under safe conditions, and knowing that there is such a person living in their home not being especially vigilant about keeping the weapon in a safe place under lock and key. Then your conversation moves to street shootings, these are commited by gangs over drugs and usually their weapons are bough on the black markets and a little harder to trace but not impossible A while back I wrote a post about how that could be accomplished and appartently no one paid attention, it’s a little drawn out but it can be done, intergrate the different gangs with an undercover man, allow him/her to be an accepted part of the gang and have them find out who is furnishing the guns for the gang and then remove the supplier, cut off the head and the body will die. So far I haven’t advocated taking anyones gun that own them legally and I won’t but you must start some where, but the most crucial part is the family member watch them and everything will fall in place.

    • robert says:

      bchrista, I never saw your post inquiring how assault weapons got into the hands of street gangs (particularly African youths), but it is a well documented fact that it happened during the Reagan administration in the Iran-Contra weapons for guns incident with Oliver North, the CIA, and the ATF when cocaine and guns were infused into South-Central L.A. that jump started the crack-cocaine pandemic in African communities beginning in 1988. That pandemic is still an ongoing process with no let up in the black market sale of assault weapons, straw purchares at gun-shows to be resold in African communities by gun-runners (white supremacists, Palestinian merchants, Latino/mexican gangs, or crooked police officers who steal them from evidence rooms etc.), to be used in terf wars and petty power-plays on the street. Unfortunately, many children and innocent people have fallen in the process due to the irresponsible use of these weapons. Another scenario is that many of the guns are burgled from the homes of people owning these assault weapons; from people who are robbed of their weapons; or people who are surprised and their weapons being taken away from them and used to commit more crimes or sold on the black market. Despite the argument that bad guys with guns are stopped by good guys with guns, bad guys surprise good guys with guns and are made to beg for their lives or crap their pants in front of their families. That makes a scenario of a bunch of jumpy, itchy trigger fingers going around on the streets or in shopping centers reaching for their guns at the slightest loud noise or focusing on someone who they profile as “criminal” while the real criminals are sneaking up behind them. It’s a hell of a way to live, man, all because some mentally ill sucker wants the right to walk around wearing ammo belts to feed the assault weapon in his sweaty hands while some criminal sneaks up behind him, puts a barrel to the back of his head, and makes him give up his issue.

    • Re: “remember all mass murders have been committed by someone armed with an assault weapon”

      An excerpt from my earlier comment:

      Go back just six years ago. 2007 is the year of our country’s deadliest shooting incident ever by a lone gunman – the Virginia Tech massacre, committed by mentally ill Seung-Hui Cho. His weapons? Just two handguns easily concealed: a .22-caliber Walther P22 semi-automatic handgun and a 9 mm semi-automatic Glock 19 handgun.

  29. option31 says:

    Sensible is in the eye of the beholder, same as reasonable. Those words mean NOTHING on their own. How about sensible or reasonable when we talk of the 1st amendment. To some sensible/reasonable would entail a permit or license to use the internet or to post to these forums. Would a permit to travel be sensible? Just because somebody writes and declares something sensible does not make it so. Leave those terms out and talk specifics as they are polarizing. I am a reasonable/sensible person but do not agree with govt restricting my rights in anyway. When in this process do we move from free person to slave? Once you are bestowed rights or privileges by government or anybody you have moved from free to slave. Free people do not need permission or privileges as they inherently have them.

  30. What does it matter whether one is on the NRA list of enemies or not? That is just a scare tactic to intimitatic those who are may be scared into submission. Do they intend to commit crime by shooting those who support gun control? Will they finish all those they have listed in their enemy list or they will pick a few? Wayne Lapierre is a complete lunatic who should not be walking freely in the streets of Washington. He should be locked up for promoting and abeting crime.

    • robert says:

      The NRA won’t do anything, but they will instigate lunatic members to do their bidding for them, such as the idiots posting on this web site. They will sic their crazies on us and say, “See, mentally ill people should not possess weapons, only good guys.”

  31. I left the NRA in the mid 70’s when the leaders started acting like crazed rednecks and the quiet gun owners were pushed aside. I still have my guns (target) but I strongly support responsible gun ownership. The Constitution doesn’t guarantee everyone the right to carry a gun…white men ready to fight in the home-grown army against foreign invaders, yes. Black men & Indians .no.

  32. It is not the NRA extremists that are a problem. IT IS THE LIBERAL EXTREMISTS. These anti-constitution communists want you disarmed so they will be your slave driving masters. The constitution clearly states the right of the individual to keep and bare arms. Gun control laws are for control. If the liberals control your guns they control you.

  33. option31 says:

    Why is their only 1 person out of all the posts on this subject on this article and others calling out the elephant in the room – phsychiatrist and phsychotropic drugs? That is the real driver in these shootings not a inanimate object. Its a very easy answer, Big pharma massively contributes to campaigns – both parties and their advertising budgets are astronomical. So the politicians are going to do nothing and don’t expect the media or these writers of National Memo to point out the elephant either, they depend upon ad dollars. You’ve all seen the tv ads for these drugs and their side effects of depression and suicidal thoughts, YOU think POSSIBLY these are the problem. The politicians and media have sold their souls and sold us out by not calling big pharma out. They are more interested in promoting their anti freedom agenda then putting the spot light on their masters.

    Wonder when the “leaders” of National Memo will take the lead on these drugs and their side effects— won’t be holding my breath.

  34. No citizens were allowed to have guns to shoot the terrorists on the planes who flew into the World Trade Center. No citizens were allowed to have guns to shoot the nut at Sandy Hook Elementary or nuts at any other school or theater. Most citizens in New York and Chicago aren’t allowed weapons allowing criminals to know law abiding citizens are disarmed and helpless so they are free to make the crime rates in those cities the highest in the country. In the last two centuries 200 million innocent people have died in genocides that all started with gun registration followed by confiscation. I’m curious, if 200 million dead are not yet enough for you to think gun control is a bad idea, how many hundred million will it take?

    • idamag says:

      Kerry, and you think someone with a gun could have killed the terrorists in those airplanes? Like a lot ot things, by the time people realized what was happening, it was over.

  35. I don’t care about any enemy list. What concerns me is that we are expecting to stop a tornado by hiding in the car. The guy that shot those poor little kids in Conn. had a mother school teacher with a housefull of guns. How is more gun laws going to stop that? There was no ex-con involved in this, and they are fixing to raid every ex-con’s house in the nation. A guy makes a mistake 20 years ago and he can’t even get a gun and his house will soon be raided and if there’s a legal gun(one bought by a loved one to protect his family, he’s going to jail, saw this on tv, they are starting in California). Out of all these shootings, I haven’t seen one killing that was blamed on someone that’s been in jail. 1/4 of Americans have been in jail sometime in their life.
    This is like the Castro(Cuba) policy in Cuba in slow motion. In time they will have to have a license and know the wherabouts of all BB guns and Pellet guns. The government gets involved in something and they don’t know where to stop. Even Vice President Biden said just the other day that all the gun laws we have and the new ones we make is not going to stop massacres. Say you stop almost all gun sales to honest people, do you really think that gangs, crooked cops, professional killars won’t be able to get a gun? It’s just a matter of time ( 40yrs) and honest people won’t be able to get guns either. it might have helped if the schoolteacher hadn’t had any. It will be time for dictatorship by then I guess.
    If they can take some of the violence off tv maybe some of the crazy stuff might slow down, Id guess that 60% of tv stuff has a strong blend of violence. But there’s just too much money there to stop this. Stuff they had on when I was growing up, they laugh at now and I can see why.
    Take your other games they have, same thing(video etc.). But don’t grow these kids up on this crap then make the whole country pay for it.
    I was in grade school and had a Mossberg 22, I used to go out in the woods and really loved it, I practiced with it, shot a few snakes, never dreamed of harming anyone, some of my best memoires

  36. Nonsense. A responsible gun owner should buy whatever they like. Its the same as a car, why should i allow you to buy a Maserati when a Kia can get you down the highway just as well? If you want to ban guns, ban cars higher than 70hp, i mean, you dont NEED a 500hp Camaro do you? Of course not. For what?? How about a nice old YUGO? Its all you NEED, right? Ohh, your freedom is at stake then? You want free choice of cars? Cars which kill more people than any guns? Get the criminals and mentals out of guns and the problem is solved. Ive been shooting for 50 years and never hurt anyone or used a gun in any act of aggression so what do you want with me? Dont stop guns, stop the mentals and bad guys. Reopen mental hospitals, get people off of drugs, throw criminals out of airplanes. Gun owners for gun control? Are you out of your mind? Ok you know what, i’ll believe you when you open a site now to force people to give up any car higher than 50hp. When people are out of “assault cars” we can talk about my gun. Until then, you can drop dead.

  37. I’ll repeat that because i wasnt being sarcastic. Sensible Car Owners Should Speak Out. If you own a 500hp Viper, Camaro, Mustang or the like, especially in black color, that IS an evil, sinister looking thing to me and you shouldnt have it. Those are too powerful and capable of fantastic damage, especially at the high speeds they can attain. I want you to post your address because im coming to take it from you. In generosity i’ll replace it with a Ford Pinto because thats all you really need. If you dont wish to give it up voluntarily, i want to know why. Im not making a joke here at all. Those are nothing but assault cars and there is no good reason for anyone to have one. Whats your address, please?

    • I do believe Congress can walk and chew gum at the same time.

      While you let the Democrats off easy for not wanting to do that, why do I think that if the Republicans had been in control at the time, you would be holding their feet to the fire as I did with the Democrats.

      After the ’07 massacre, the worst to date, apparently the Democrats chose to do nothing — especially regarding mental health — in the wake of the “Do something!” cry from the public. As a result, the Democrats may very well have given birth to the Sandy Hook massacre, which they now blame mostly on the NRA and conservatives’ “love of guns,” instead of mostly on mental illness.

      Please tell me: With less power than in ’08-’10, what will President Obama and the Democrats do about massacres?

  38. I do have to commend the operators of this site for their tolerant forbearance in allowing so obviously an unbalanced and mentally afflicted person as Fern to post . . . Though it does point out the need for increased funding for mental health programs so that she could receive the treatment she so obviously needs.

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.