Type to search

This Week In Crazy: The Stupidity Of A Free State

Featured Post Memo Pad This Week In Crazy Top News

This Week In Crazy: The Stupidity Of A Free State

Share

A well-regulated militia — which consists predominantly of disturbed white men who retch at the mere mention of “regulation” — being necessary to the stupidity of a free state, we can always look forward to hearing more pro-gun idiocy after a tragedy, such as the one that took place last week in Oregon.

Welcome to “This Week In Crazy,” The National Memo’s weekly update on the loony, bigoted, and hateful behavior of the increasingly unhinged right wing. Starting with number five:

5. Michele Bachmann

Michele BachmannOh good, Michele Bachmann is still posting every crass, cold-blooded, idiotic thought that pops into her head on social media.

You may recall that back in April the former congresswoman protested the Iran nuclear deal by likening President Obama’s leadership to the Germanwings pilot who deliberately steered his plane into the Alps, calling the president “a deranged pilot flying his entire nation into the rocks.”

She’s gotten less creative with the metaphors, but no less insipid with her remarks, telling her Twitter followers on Sunday that the catastrophic flooding in South Carolina is God’s punishment for our pursuit of diplomacy in the Middle East. The United States, she tweeted, “turns it back on Israel, disasters following [sic].”

Cause and effect aren’t Bachmann’s strong suits, if she has any. This isn’t the first time Bachmann has coarsely invoked divine wrath as our comeuppance for foreign policy decisions she doesn’t agree with. Right Wing Watch notes that she had suggested back in April that natural and economic disasters would befall the nation if we, as she characterized it then and now, turned our back on Israel.

And this has been a recurring motif for Bachmann, who shortly before she left office told the president (to his face) to bomb Iran, and she did it at a holiday party. Ho ho ho.

Next: Tucker Carlson

Tags:
Sam Reisman

Sam Reisman is the former managing editor at The National Memo, where he still writes the weekly "This Week In Crazy" column. His writing has appeared in Flavorpill, The Huffington Post, Columbia Daily Spectator, and Bwog. He was the publisher of the 2010 edition of Inside New York, an annual guidebook to the city for students and young professionals.

Since 2011, he has co-curated and hosted Peculiar Streams, a showcase for NYC-based writers, musicians, comedians, and filmmakers. He is a staff writer at Mediaite, and blogs at SamReisman.com.

  • 1

315 Comments

  1. Dominick Vila October 9, 2015

    What people like Michelle Robertson, sorry, I almost forgot Bachmann was talking about heathens in the USA, not Haiti; Nugent; the Republican rants about homosexuals, guns, and just about everything else they say, is not stupidity, it is evidence of mental illness, with a heavy dose of intolerance, lack of compassion, personal and social irresponsibility, and out of control hatred of anything and anyone that does not share their beliefs and political goals. No wonder they are considering Rep. Paul Ryan as a replacement for Boehner. Their agenda is to turn the USA into the Fourth Reich!

    Reply
    1. itsfun October 9, 2015

      Seems to me you have a very heavy dose of intolerance. If someone doesn’t agree with you they are automatically stupid, hate America and want to destroy our country. You have been lumping every Republican as a woman hater, racist, bigot and hating the poor. You used to be against that kind of intolerance.

      Reply
      1. Dominick Vila October 9, 2015

        Not all Republicans are like that. Unfortunately, the days of moderate Republicans willing to seek compromise and find middle ground for the benefit of the country, are becoming are elusive as live dinosaurs. BTW, my daughter and her family are conservative Republicans, and so are my two best friends. They don’t hate women, they are not racist, and they are not trying to destroy the USA. I do despise the actions and rhetoric of the far right, especially those consumed by ethnic/cultural hatred, those who can’t accept the fact that women can do as good – or a better – job than men, and those willing to compromise our economy, our infrastructure, and our national security for political gain.

        Reply
        1. itsfun October 9, 2015

          Dom: I believe you feel that way, I probably took what you said wrong. I apologize for that. Whats neat is, in my usual golf foursome, 2 of us are Democrats, one far left and then me. We play golf together at least twice a week in the summer and get along great. The bottom line is we all want the same kinds of things, we want our families to be healthy, have nice things, live in nice homes, be safe, enjoy life etc. We just have different ideas on how to get there.

          Reply
          1. Dominick Vila October 9, 2015

            That is the way it was for most of us. Unfortunately, the political climate is so poisoned that even the idea of talking to each other and trying to find middle ground is considered appeasement or treason. Not surprisingly, most of the candidates running for the nomination of their respective parties are more determined to outdo each other by making the most bizarre statements or proposals, than proposing viable ideas on how to pursue common goals. The only exceptions I can think of are Kasich and Sanders.

            Reply
      2. Otto Greif October 9, 2015

        That’s how liberal “tolerance” works, it’s one way. You have to tolerate what liberals want, they don’t have to tolerate you.

        Reply
        1. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

          No, that’s how empirical evidence works.

          Reply
    2. RED October 9, 2015

      It’s the Con sickness!!!

      Reply
  2. FOXMSNBC Fear Hillary ✓ October 9, 2015

    Ben Carson is an idiot savant.. no wonder he ranks high in gop polls..

    Reply
    1. itsfun October 9, 2015

      He sure is. How can anyone suggest saving lives, instead of just standing in line waiting to get shot. Wait for the police to come and capture the murderer so he can be put in prison or a mental health facility for 5 years. Then the murderer can be released to kill again. The dead will still be dead though.

      Reply
      1. latebloomingrandma October 9, 2015

        Seems to me that rushing toward a guy with a loaded gets you dead sooner.

        Reply
        1. itsfun October 9, 2015

          Yep just stand there and get shot. Why rush the murderer and stop him from killing more? I have a concealed carry license and will not be afraid to use it, if confronted by someone that is a mass murderer.

          Reply
          1. kentallard October 9, 2015

            Are you concerned that your gun might misfire because it is sticky with jism?

            Reply
          2. itsfun October 9, 2015

            nope, I would just be concerned that you would be there helping the murderer kill more.

            Reply
          3. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            Fortunately, as an untrained amateur blazing away at random, you are far more likely to gun down anyone BUT the murderer, so you can discount the possibility of the murderer being assisted by the bystanders, as you will have accidentally killed them all.

            Reply
          4. itsfun October 10, 2015

            I know I could discount the possibility of you doing anything except to stand there and get shot.

            Reply
          5. Looner October 9, 2015

            it’s fun, I long for the day that you are confronted by a gunman and whip out your tool … I mean gun.

            Reply
          6. itsfun October 9, 2015

            Why? Do you like killings?

            Reply
          7. idamag October 9, 2015

            Ok I would like to see a couple of these gun nuts corralled and forced to a shootout.

            Reply
          8. plc97477 October 10, 2015

            It might be fun behind a bullet proof glass. I wouldn’t trust them to shoot straight.

            Reply
          9. RED October 9, 2015

            Or like most of those with the Cons sickness do, just try to blame someone else and get them killed, just like Carson proved he would.

            Reply
          10. itsfun October 9, 2015

            For the first 6 years of Obama all I heard from people like you that all the problems are the fault of George Bush. Next you will be saying the victims are at fault and deserved to be killed.

            Now you say, we should bow down to murderers and let them shot us. Then you find a way to let the murder be free because of some kind of BS liberal thinking.

            Carson said he would get killed, but somebody would get the killer.

            Reply
          11. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            You might not be afraid to use it, but you won’t do any good. Almost no crimes are stopped by someone with a firearm where that person is not a LEO or military.

            Reply
          12. itsfun October 10, 2015

            How many crimes are stopped by someone just standing there waiting to get shot?

            Reply
          13. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            If you think the only two options are dying in a blaze of glory (while killing dozens of bystanders) or passively waiting to die, then you are even more ridiculous than your previous statements would appear to indicate.

            Reply
          14. itsfun October 11, 2015

            Who said anything about dying in a blaze of glory? How many bullets do you think a person legally carrying a gun has with them? You talk about a person legally carrying a gun has dozens of bullets. What makes you think a person legally carrying a gun would just start shooting and kill innocent people? The murderer doesn’t see bystanders, he just sees targets. Just how many options do you think one has when trapped by a mass murderer?

            Reply
          15. Mr Corrections October 11, 2015

            It must be weird, only able to see the world in terms of OK CORRAL SHOOTOUT or DEATH BY SCARY CRIMINAL. What is wrong with you?

            Reply
          16. itsfun October 11, 2015

            What is wrong with you? You say a person should just get murdered and not try to save their life. In 1941 you would have given Pearl Harbor to the Japaneses after they attacked us. Every body has the right to defend themselves. If you choose to just get shot if you ever get into a terrible situation like those folks were in, its ok with me.

            Reply
          17. Mr Corrections October 11, 2015

            Sorry, I didn’t actually say the crazy strawman bullshit you are arguing against!

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
  3. dtgraham October 9, 2015

    I think just having a Michelle Bachmann, period, is “God’s punishment” on any nation. That’s enough by itself. Actually, rumour has it that there’s a recent audio recording out of Michelle Bachmann predicting the end of the world, and I’m taking this one seriously let me tell you. I think her exact words on it are: “I’m going to run and win the Presidency in 2020.”

    Don’t believe Tucker Carlson when he says that you can be jailed for expressing unpopular views in Australia, Europe, and Canada. Not sure about the others, but you can express some unpopular views in Canada. I mean…some. Sure, I just did a stretch for comparing Moosehead beer to weasel pee, but I did go over the line on that one I’ll admit. I had it coming. It’s very popular up here.

    I made it through by following the advice and training of Bryan Fischer’s P90X angry whip Jesus. By the time my sentence was up I was Crossfit and tough as nails. The only thing that scares me now are gay guys.

    Reply
    1. RED October 9, 2015

      Hilarious!!! Brilliant!!! Very impressive comment!!

      Reply
      1. dtgraham October 10, 2015

        Thanks very much RED. When you post something that you hope might give people a few chuckles, you never really know how they’re going to react (especially after the tragedy of Oregon). You just hope for the best. Thank you RED.

        Reply
  4. The lucky one October 9, 2015

    Actually Carson’s advice can be the best course of action in some cases but of course we know Ben will be at the back of the line of attackers urging the others on and Nugent would pee his pants if confronted by an armed assailant.

    Reply
    1. Grannysmovin October 9, 2015

      On SiriusXM radio, Carson explained he was in a Popeye’s Chicken in Baltimore many years ago when a gunman entered.
      “The guy comes in, put the gun in my ribs. And I just said, ‘I believe that you want the guy behind the counter.’” http://www.inquisitr.com/2482302/ben-carson-told-popeyes-gunman-you-want-the-guy-behind-the-counter/#69CFykOgSPBAzF2H.99

      Reply
      1. Looner October 9, 2015

        I keep getting a craving for Popeye’s chicken every time this is mentioned …. Oh, and Carson is a big chickenshit.

        Reply
  5. FireBaron October 9, 2015

    Fischer needs to be reminded that Jesus did use a whip – against Bankers and Money Exchangers in the Temple!

    Reply
  6. Karen Bille-Golden October 9, 2015

    I wish I hadn’t read this…

    Reply
  7. David October 9, 2015

    The author of this article is either a liar or icredibly stupid. “The proliferation of military grade weapons..” he writes about. Please. “Military grade weapons” would have fully automatic capability. Apparently, he believes that civilian semi-automatic rifles are “military grade”. Clearly the bleatings of an uneducated clown.

    Reply
    1. dtgraham October 9, 2015

      I know what you mean David. Can you believe this guy? Instead of taking 10 seconds with a fully automatic, it would probably take a whole 20 seconds to wipe out a classroom with a semi. Twice as long. What a clown eh?

      Reply
      1. David October 9, 2015

        That doesn’t address the transparent effort by the author to somehow demonize firearms by calling them “military grade” when, in fact, they are not.

        Reply
        1. kentallard October 9, 2015

          Criticize military weaponry easily reaching the hands of lunatics or worship guns as if they were religious icons? I’ll take door number one, thank you.

          Gun onanists never quote “the well regulated militia” part of the 2nd amendment. Why is that?

          Reply
          1. plc97477 October 9, 2015

            “regulated militia” has 16 letters. Way more than gun nuts can pronounce.

            Reply
          2. idamag October 9, 2015

            Good observation.

            Reply
          3. jamesowens October 9, 2015

            true dat

            Reply
          4. David October 9, 2015

            The term “militia”, as used in the late 1700’s, meant able bodied men. The 2nd Amendment, like the rest of the Bill of Rights, is an individual right — not a collective right.

            Reply
          5. RED October 9, 2015

            So “milita” mean able bodied men? Is English your first language? I guess it probably is but thinking isn’t something you’ve mastered. Militia may have been made up of able bodied men but you’ve got to be eaten up with the Con sickness to think that that’s what the word militia means

            Reply
          6. David October 9, 2015

            As a matter of fact, English is my first language. Do you get some masochistic pleasure out of displaying your ignorance? Check out 10 USC 311(b)(2) to see what the Federal Government defines it as. Following what the Framers wrote and meant. After you look it up, will you have the intellectual honesty to come back on this site and tell what you found?

            Reply
          7. kentallard October 10, 2015

            Just read your reference – 10 USC 311(b)(2). How you have determined from the text that a militia is an individual is really a marvel. Using your logic, I just read a bazooka bubble gum comic and determined that dogs understand math.

            Reply
          8. David October 10, 2015

            Well, if you can understand what you read, what do you think “all able bodied males aged 17 – 45” means? And that is current law. It meant able bodied men in the late 1700’s. Maybe you ought chew on that piece of bazooka bubble gum.
            Going further, the Bill of Rights are not about “colllective” rights, but “individual” rights.
            Your idiocy amuses me.

            Reply
          9. kentallard October 10, 2015

            The text “all able bodied males aged 17 – 45” does not eliminate the “well-regulated militia” part of your holy 2nd Amendment. It is not ala carte, regardless of the prurient excitement you get from fondling guns.

            10 USC 311(b)(2) and it’s “all able bodied males aged 17 – 45” means they will be a part of a well regulated collective militia to protect the interests of the state. If we were to define idiocy we might start with your interpretation that this statement somehow allows people to own battlefield weaponry with no oversight.

            Good day sir.

            Reply
          10. David October 10, 2015

            Well dumba…, 17 to 45 defines “militia”. Our Supreme Court agrees that it is an individual right.
            Of course, you are probably the product of Common Core, so your lack of ability to read and understand is expected.

            Reply
          11. kentallard October 10, 2015

            I see. You are checking your echo chamber talking points. Why not blame Obamacare while you are at it? Or Benghazi? Or the trilateral commission? Or the muslims/communists under your bed?

            One last time. The well-regulated part of the amendment negates your argument regardless of your insistence on staying on the other side of the Lookingglass.

            Home schooled?

            Reply
          12. David October 10, 2015

            Unfortunately no. But, went to the same kind of school the Supreme Court Justices went to. What law school did you go to?

            Reply
          13. kentallard October 10, 2015

            I apologize. I didn’t realize that you were a performance artist making a satirical point that words no longer have meaning.

            You aren’t?

            Goodness.

            Militia, as used in the late 1700’s, meant a state organized military unit utilized to protect the interests of the state – but it is impressive that you could suggest that militia meant an individual. The exceptionally literate Founding Fathers would never had included the “well regulated militia” phrase to denote an individual because, A-it doesn’t, and B- it would have been unnecessary to add a qualifier to something already noted.

            A non gun Onanist couldn’t have made that statement without their nose growing and their head exploding.

            But let’s pretend for a moment that the word militia means individual (I know. It’s almost to bizarre to even pretend) Then we are still faced with “well regulated”. SO EVEN IF YOUR LUNATIC EXPLANATION WERE CORRECT THE CONSTITUTION WOULD DEMAND YOUR ONE MAN MILITIA BE REGULATED YOU OBLIVIOUS IDEOLOGUE BONEHEAD!

            Reply
        2. Looner October 9, 2015

          Yeah, we all know that the phrase “military grade” is such a horrible slur.

          Reply
          1. David October 9, 2015

            Why else would he use it?

            Reply
        3. jamesowens October 9, 2015

          yep these sportsmen need 15 shot to go squirrel hunting

          Reply
          1. David October 9, 2015

            Some of those ‘squirrels’ run pretty fast!

            Reply
          2. jamesowens October 9, 2015

            the nra authorizes m79 grenade launcher for the speedy ones

            Reply
          3. paulyz October 9, 2015

            Guess you need to be reminded AGAIN, that the 2nd. Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting.

            Reply
      2. KDJ54 October 9, 2015

        Caution: use of sarcasm can lead to inflammation of the thought process, causing irrational conservative syndrome.

        Reply
      3. DEFENDER88 October 9, 2015

        I would think, as Progressives, you might want to consider ways of resolving the gun problems in a progressive way.
        exa – Changing violent behaviors that drive the gun violence.
        The biggest(by far), every day, gun violence problems are the drug gang shootings in the larger US cities.
        This also skews all the gun crime data for a state and the US as a whole.
        On Illegal drugs and gang violence – another way to solve this problem might be to just legalize all of them except the psychotropics that drive young men to commit mass murder. Tax it. Ensuring the quality would help with the OD problems. Empty 1/2 the jail population. Reduce the number of police needed. We did it with Alcohol and it worked. Quality was insured and the killing stopped.
        At one time most all the illegal drugs were legal in the US .
        Drug control, as it is now, is Not working.
        Legalizing drugs would cut the legs from under the Cartels and the Bigger City Gangs.
        And hopefully stop the gang shootings that inflate the US gun violence rates.
        But we would still be left with what to do with the young underprivledged men in the cities who depend on the drug trade to make a decent living. But rather work on solving that than just putting them in jail, like now – what a tragic waste of money and lives.
        With this, the level of violence(ie drug gangs)(gun crime) in the large cities would drop drastically and guns would become a non issue like they are out in the country side.
        Go back to 1950’s levels of gun violence and mass murder ie a non issue. Even though gun ownership was high then also compared to other countries.
        As for the mass school shootings – Also drug related but in a different way. I have ideas here also.

        Reply
      4. jamesowens October 9, 2015

        well he needed armor piercing some of th kindergarden art tablesare hard to shoot ough

        Reply
    2. MemoEditors October 9, 2015

      Fixed. Thanks for reading!

      Reply
      1. David October 9, 2015

        Thank you. But, you screwed up again. Look up what the definition of a “assault rifle” is. An assault rifle is a weapon that is capable of both full and semi automatic fire. The AR-15s, and their progeny that civilians use, are NOT ‘assault rifles”.

        Reply
    3. RED October 9, 2015

      Ahh, the usual Con bingo! “You don’t knwo anything about guns because this gun is not the same as this similar gun.” Typical Con sickness bagger idiocy.

      Reply
    4. JPHALL October 9, 2015

      Many semi’s can be converted to full auto. Just check the internet for the conversion kits.

      Reply
      1. David October 9, 2015

        And there is a law against doing so UNLESS you have registered it and paid your tax.

        Reply
        1. JPHALL October 9, 2015

          When has a law stopped the criminally minded? People are buying the kits just in case. Subject: Re: Comment on This Week In Crazy: The Stupidity Of A Free State

          Reply
          1. David October 9, 2015

            What an absolutely perfect answer!!! Indeed, when has a law stopped the criminally minded? And, with that same analogy, what gun control law will stop the criminally minded? None! We don’t need more gun control laws, we need more people able to deal with the criminal element.

            Reply
          2. JPHALL October 9, 2015

            No, we need to enforce the laws we have and stop glorifying violence as a solution to our problems. Every one of these morons, who did a mass killing, used a gun to solve their problem. Unfortunately they did not just kill themselves but involved others. Subject: Re: Comment on This Week In Crazy: The Stupidity Of A Free State

            Reply
          3. idamag October 11, 2015

            There is a lwaw against going into a theater and killing people, too.

            Reply
      2. idamag October 11, 2015

        Yammering about whether they are automatic or semi automatic, is not addressing the question. It is like the question, “How many angels fit on the head of a pin.”

        Reply
  8. DEFENDER88 October 9, 2015

    For Schools – Attacking the Attacker IS on the list of viable options that should be taught.
    A team of Defense industry experts studying school shootings recommend other things 1st but that(Active Resistance) should be considered if the passive efforts fail.
    Options to consider(not the full list):
    – Security personnel
    – Awareness
    – Safe Rooms
    – Lock Down
    – Hide
    – Active resistance – Attack the attacker as a group, throw objects in mass

    Reply
    1. dtgraham October 9, 2015

      Nah, just use Ben Carson’s tactics. If the shooter ‘puts the gun in your ribs’ you just say to him, “I believe that you want the guy behind the counter.” That’s right; use the buddy system. If you think that the shooter is eyeing you up….give him your buddy.

      Reply
      1. latebloomingrandma October 9, 2015

        Wonder what he would do if he was in a room full of children?
        The Sandy Hook teachers put themselves in front of the children.

        Reply
        1. jamesowens October 9, 2015

          h would hide under desk and send out the children – cowardly wimp

          Reply
    2. itsfun October 9, 2015

      All good suggestions.

      Reply
    3. jamesowens October 9, 2015

      noting more fierce than a classroom of kindergarders on the attack

      Reply
      1. DEFENDER88 October 9, 2015

        Experts in the field would(of course) consider that and recommend different strategies.

        Reply
        1. jamesowens October 9, 2015

          Huckabee-Carlson – trump-bush draft dodging cowards all

          Reply
          1. itsfun October 9, 2015

            You forgot to mention Bill Clinton along with the draft dodging cowards.

            Reply
          2. Mr Corrections October 9, 2015

            Bill Clinton, after initially protesting the war, registered for the draft in 1969, his number, 311, was never called up. He’s made no secret of the fact that he initially tried to join the National Guard and ROTC, but withdrew his application after he decided it wouldn’t be honourable to avoid the war like that (according to the text of the letter he sent them).

            In other words, he was not a draft dodger like so many of the Republicans were, and your statement is false.

            Reply
          3. paulyz October 9, 2015

            Bill Clinton’s uncle tried to have Bill avoid danger by trying to get him in the Naval Reserve. He joined the ROTC to avoid combat for 4 years, but getting a high draft number, then knowing he wanted a political career, signed. All political.

            Quite a few Republican Presidents had military experience, such as GWB, GHWB, Ronald Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Eisenhower, Lincoln, etc., while Democrats such as Obama, Clinton, FDR, Woodrow Wilson, etc., weren’t.

            Reply
          4. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            So, exactly what I said. He did not dodge the draft in any way, shape, or means – unlike most of the chickenshits in the GOP. Nor is he responsible for the actions of his uncle.

            You’re also wrong – he did not join the ROTC for four years, or indeed at all.

            He was against the war from the start, but registered for the draft anyway – this is the exact opposite of most conservative cowards, who were for the war but desperately avoided going. Calling him a draft dodger is not only completely false, but does him a disservice.

            Reply
          5. paulyz October 13, 2015

            I just was giving facts to your false & biased comment about Republicans being draft dodgers when I clearly showed t is just the opposite, Democrats not serving in our Military.

            Reply
          6. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            No, you were trying to smear someone you don’t like with a totally untrue claim. Also untrue: the post you initially replied to did not say all Republicans are draft-dodging cowards (although obv. they are).

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          7. paulyz October 15, 2015

            Yes, that helps prove what I said about you & to you was true.
            Thanks for the verication!

            Reply
          8. Mr Corrections October 15, 2015

            Oh no!

            Reply
          9. itsfun October 10, 2015

            Not true. He actually got drafted while going to school in England. He then got the draft board to not draft him if he joined ROTC while attending law school in Arkansas. He then went back to England for another year of school. Then the draft lottery happened and he did get number 311. He then withdrew his application to ROTC.

            Reply
          10. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            Yes, he got a deferment because he was in a different country. He never joined the ROTC – he applied to join, then withdrew and registered for the draft. This is not really in question. He was not a draft dodger like some craven Republican or something, so your statement remains complete bullshit.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          11. itsfun October 11, 2015

            He got the deferment by promising to join the ROTC after he was drafted. He then withdrew after he got the number 311. He did dodge the draft. He played the system. He was a CO. My best friend was a CO, but still went into the Army when drafted. He was a medic in Vietnam. A hero in my mind.

            Reply
          12. Mr Corrections October 11, 2015

            Why are you still arguing about this? Clinton – unlike the common Republican – did not dodge the draft, no matter how much you squint at his record. You were totally wrong, and no amount of doubling down on this will make your attempt to smear him right.

            Reply
          13. David October 11, 2015

            Oh, he just went on vacation for a while.

            Reply
          14. Mr Corrections October 11, 2015

            REALLY WANTING something to be true is not the same as it being true.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
      2. idamag October 11, 2015

        Imagine those little kids at Sandy Hook all carrying loaded and aimed assault rifles.

        Reply
  9. paulyz October 9, 2015

    The author of this article lost all credibility with his first sentence stating that, “A well-regulated militia, which consists predominately of disturbed White men……”

    He pushed your Liberal buttons to influence your comments, leading to more biased opinions. The more I read comments on the Memo, the more obvious it is mostly a hateful, anti-White, rag like most leftist publications. They don’t care about differing viewpoints, only theirs, but claim it is the people that differ that is intolerant, a common leftist tactic.

    Reply
    1. KDJ54 October 9, 2015

      Just because it might be biased doesn’t mean its not true.

      Reply
      1. paulyz October 9, 2015

        It is biased as you say, which makes it untrue.

        Reply
    2. itsfun October 9, 2015

      right you are. Did you ever read Animal Farm? Some leftists are using those tactics.

      Reply
      1. RED October 9, 2015

        Come on, we know you ignorant Cons can’t read, you’re not fooling anyone!

        Reply
        1. itsfun October 9, 2015

          I was just wondering who read this to you, must be your mommy. Did she write your responses too?

          Reply
      2. JPHALL October 9, 2015

        While some leftists might use some, all Rightists use them!

        Reply
        1. itsfun October 9, 2015

          I think all the far left and right use them. They want to intimate all that don’t agree with them. One thing I like about McCarthy with drawing is, we are starting to see the establishment can be beaten.

          Reply
      3. paulyz October 9, 2015

        Some of it long ago. But that is their tactics.

        Reply
    3. jamesowens October 9, 2015

      if all the gun nuts were ex military it might hold some credence but any wack job with the money can buy machine guns without any training – most ex military people are against the ability of any and everyone being able to arm themselves with military grade weapons

      Reply
      1. paulyz October 9, 2015

        Machine guns are fully automatic & so strictly regulated that they are quite hard to get. But many school shootings are not from these weapons anyway. Just as if the government bans magazines over 10 rounds, the psycos can get several magazines.

        Historically kids were using guns at a young age & grew up knowing how to use them, and there was very little crime. It is the change for the worse of our society that is the cause, not guns, that had been available for many decades.

        Reply
        1. JPHALL October 11, 2015

          So you disagree with your frontier ancestors? They got tired of gunfights every time some cowboy got drunk. They are the ones, like in Tombstone, Az. and throughout the West, who restricted the open carrying of firearms.

          Reply
          1. paulyz October 13, 2015

            Duri g the wild west, these ‘territories’ were basically lawless, & some Sheriffs told people entering saloons to leave guns at door, because of alchohol served.

            Reply
      2. plc97477 October 10, 2015

        That explains why most of the repugs have no military history.

        Reply
    4. RED October 9, 2015

      Hilarious, the ignorant bigoted Con morons suggest others are intolerant!!! Sure, just like the Earth is round and Jeebus is punishing South Carolina!! Share some more of the fevered Con sickness paranoid fantasies. Your morons never seem to get that intolerance of your bigoted intolerance is not that same thing. But false equivalencies are what the Con sick trade in, they certainly don’t have any intellect or facts or reality to back them up.

      Reply
    5. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

      That first sentence is entirely credible.

      I hope that helps!

      Reply
  10. itsfun October 9, 2015

    Dr. Carson is wrong. We should all just stand in line and wait to get murdered. How dare he suggest someone should try to stop a murderer. How many lives were saved on 9/11 when the passengers on the airplane fought back? We will never know which target the terrorist intended. How many lives were saved by 3 Americans in France when they refused to be murdered.

    Reply
    1. johninPCFL October 9, 2015

      Yes. Suggesting that all of the students were cowards because they didn’t charge the deranged gunman instead of trying to escape was wrong. Given the shooting this morning in AZ (and the other 294 mass shootings in 274 days), maybe that needs to be a college 101 course now, or perhaps even high school.

      Reply
      1. itsfun October 9, 2015

        I didn’t mean by any means that the students were cowards. They were a group of 18-22 year old kids and I am sure were confused, scared and had no idea of what to do. Maybe we do need some kind of training for potential victims. Armed security may help. I don’t know the answer to stop these crazy people. Taking away my gun and your gun will not do anything to solve this.

        Reply
        1. RED October 9, 2015

          Na, what you really meant or at least communicated is that as usual you’re a total moron, too damaged by the Con sickness to have the capacity for intellect much less empathy or concern for other human beings. It’s pointless to communicate or debate with morons like you. Actually it’s quite impossible, like trying to discuss physics with my dog, only my dog is smarter and more caring. Just simply your failure to comprehend that no politician from the President down to Congress has actually proposed taking away guns. Of course, I can understand your confusion because when they talk about keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, clearly that does mean you. It’s truly so sad that America has created so many sick deranged morons like you and your Con sick comrades.

          Reply
          1. itsfun October 9, 2015

            You are one sick piece of work. Talk about a moron you say its pointless to communicate with me, but you communicate with me. What would you know about physics. I imagine your dog knows more. Where did I say anyone in Congress or the President has proposed to take my gun? You just love to make things up or change a persons words. You follow all the rules of being a Marxist and aren’t smart enough to realize it.

            Reply
          2. RED October 9, 2015

            “Taking away my gun or your gun will do nothing to solve this” That would be a direct quote from the Con sick “its fun.” But hey I’ve never surprised by the lying or astounding stupidity of those who gave up their souls to follow an ideology bent on maintaining gun massacres, denying people healthcare, arguing in favor of allowing children in the wealthiest country in Tue world to go hungry, defending police murdering unarmed civilians, endless war. Name a problem and the Cons are on the evil side of it. And they do their best to lie and equivocate to defend their soulless beliefs.

            Reply
        2. BillP October 9, 2015

          Your training idea sounds good but who are the potential victims? Children in elementary school, people in a church, people in a movie theater, people in a community college, people in a TV station and on and on. Who will pay for the armed security, what will be their training and background, how many will be in a school, movie theater, church, college room tv station and on and on. No is asking for your gun, every time some new mass killing happens gun owners scream that no one is taking their gun. In the Oregon shooting there was a student who was a veteran on the campus with a gun but he stayed away from the shooting area. He stated “He was concerned that police would view him as a “bad guy” and target him, so he quickly retreated into the classroom.”
          I agree there is no simple answer but things like better background checks, outlawing bullet magazines that contain 15 or more bullets could help. Any hunter I know has never had the need for these magazines.

          Reply
          1. itsfun October 9, 2015

            We have background checks in my state. They are done by the State Police. I had to pass that and a class before I could get my concealed license. We have to register our guns when we buy one and we have to give a copy of that to our local police. I’ve only hunted small game and used a single shot 16 gauge. The city I used to live in had one city policeman in every middle and high school. They were unarmed. Now they don’t even have the unarmed officer in them. Maybe local policemen should be assigned to the schools and be armed. The kids could maybe get training for their safety like they get for fires or storms. Teachers and school officials could get training on what to do also. Maybe the church members would be open to hiring a trained security guard. Most large universities have their own police forces. There are no easy answers for this terrible problem.

            Reply
          2. DEFENDER88 October 10, 2015

            On schools.
            There are Defense Experts who have studied the particular problem of school shootings.
            They have established protocols for systems, methods, responses etc based on studies of past shootings, actions, results, etc.
            They go into schools and make recommendations for systems, training, etc and provide the training.
            Most churches around here have security teams now often members who are Police.
            Some use our Gun Club for training.
            We(me included) teach Defensive Combat Pistol there.
            Getting the psychotropic drugs off the market, that drive young white men to shoot up schools would go a long way in mitigating this problem. Or commit them until they can be certified as safe.

            Reply
          3. JPHALL October 11, 2015

            See my reply to Itsfun. JPHall

            Reply
          4. JPHALL October 11, 2015

            Yeah, that worked real well in the universities lately. Using police or security guards in schools and hospitals has been tried, but costs too much. Just like in most states, people do not want to pay taxes for these services. They would rather let the roads and bridges collapse, and schools and hospitals close before during anything.

            Reply
          5. plc97477 October 10, 2015

            A very funny comic once said that if you need 100 rounds to bring down a deer you are in the wrong sport.

            Reply
          6. BillP October 10, 2015

            That’s funny and true

            Reply
        3. johninPCFL October 10, 2015

          They had SWAT training on campus in VA, with trainees and trainers. Didn’t help. They had a mass shooting in Oregon, Mississippi, and Texas courthouses (full of armed police.) Didn’t stop it.

          So long as anyone can get a gun who wants one, this won’t stop. Mentally ill or have a criminal background? No problem. Head to AZ, VA, or AL on any weekend, find a gunshow and buy whatever you want. Live in Chicago and want a gun? No problem. Illinois, Ohio, and Wisconsin are just an hour away.

          No one (with any power to do anything) has even suggested remotely that they want your guns or mine. What they’d like to do is to keep you or me from selling them to a criminal or mentally unstable person. However, while criminal records are public, mental health records are not, meaning that the “mentally ill” will always be able to get a gun and ammo whenever they want. They just need a car or bus ticket.

          Reply
      2. idamag October 11, 2015

        What these nuts do not realize is that the maniac with a gun is not afraid because he might get shot. Many of them cap their spree off with killing themselves. So if everyone is carrying a gun it doesn’t mean that much to them.

        Reply
    2. jamesowens October 9, 2015

      he didn’t say not attack the terrorist he said others should but not him

      Reply
  11. idamag October 9, 2015

    Many WAI awards (what an idiot.)

    Michelle Bauchmann, did you just say that Israel is a giant protection racket? Give them money and arms or they will send disasters. WAI.
    Tucker. It is true that guns are not the problem. Nuts with guns are and there are so many nuts with guns.They need guns to feel safe. What about mu right to feel safe in malls, movie theaters, schools, restaurants and on my city streets? WAI
    Bryan Fisher, I have never heard of a gay killing 20 kindergarten kids in school. WAI
    Carson, civilized people do not want to live in a kill or be killed world. WAI
    Poopy Pants, between bouts of diarrhea in your knickers, there are bouts of diarrhea from your mouth. Do you think nugent will invent a gun that utilizes b.m.for ammunition? Oh wait, he already has. He never went to the service. The enemy shoots back. WAI

    Reply
  12. jamesowens October 9, 2015

    the flooding in sc is god striking out at the red neck state and its suppression of the people

    Reply
  13. stuart21 October 9, 2015

    Guns vs knives; the same day as the Sandy Hook massacre, a Chinese guy went crazy in a school, & stabbed 26 kids.

    Not one died.

    Reply
  14. Larry Gagnon October 9, 2015

    Does God cause flooding or is that the devil? Do different Christians have different answers?

    Reply
    1. 2ThinkN_Do2 October 9, 2015

      Neither . . .

      Reply
  15. 2ThinkN_Do2 October 9, 2015

    I guess Idiocy has no boundaries, from the White House to the Out House and everywhere in-between. Good thing there are those who speak truth and sense; too bad very few are willing to listen to and act upon that which truly needs to take place. There is common ground for change, but the nation is divided and not just by party lines.

    Reply
  16. Otto Greif October 9, 2015

    The Oregon shooter was a disturbed black man.

    Reply
    1. Michael Ross October 9, 2015

      Whose mother was sure to espouse to him the all-American love of guns.

      And what point do you blockheads stop yammering about the color of the killer’s skin and take note of the fact that the one thing they all have in common is a belief that all of life’s problems can be solved with guns?

      A kid in South Carolina was mad because being white was no longer a job requirement. His solution? Get a gun.

      A kid in Oregon was mad because he was still a virgin. His solution? Get a gun.

      A kid in Tennessee was mad because his eight-year-old neighbor wouldn’t show him her puppy. His solution? Get a gun.

      I’m willing to concede that guns are not the problem, provided that you and your ilk are finally willing to man up to the fact that the real problem is people who think guns are the solution.

      Reply
      1. Otto Greif October 9, 2015

        His black mother.

        Reply
        1. jamcrky October 9, 2015

          That is exactly the NRA stance on guns…..good guy can stop a bad guy etc etc…..my opinion is simple, no lobby should have that kind of power that can buy and sell elected officials and thus control the government

          Reply
          1. Otto Greif October 9, 2015

            The government shouldn’t be allowed to act unconstitutionally.

            Reply
          2. highpckts October 9, 2015

            It hasn’t done so yet!!!! No fears!!! Twit!

            Reply
          3. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

            While technically legal look at how Governor Cuomo passed the Safe Act, at midnight by Message of Necessity. He did this because he knew the Legislature would not pass this on it’s own merits. He has used this for gambling and other things he knew the people would oppose. This is how dictators get to power.

            Reply
          4. Mr Corrections October 9, 2015

            It isn’t allowed to, and hasn’t. Did you have anything resembling a point?

            Reply
          5. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

            You are correct, look up We the People of New York.

            Reply
          6. JPHALL October 11, 2015

            So when has the government acted unconstitutional with guns?

            Reply
      2. Otto Greif October 9, 2015

        The article brought race up.

        Reply
        1. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

          Sad isn’t it?

          Reply
      3. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

        Guns may not e a cure all but they sure help when someone invades your house and tries to rob you or hurt your loved ones. Don’t count on the police, they won’t be there in time.

        Reply
        1. Independent1 October 10, 2015

          They only help if you’re fairly expert at using that gun – fact is, that studies show, that when someone breaks in, almost 5 out of 6 times, its the homeowner that gets shot and not the guy breaking in. For the vast majority of Americans, owning a gun is by far a bigger liability and probability of getting killed, that it will ever be a means of self defense.

          See this excerpt from the ‘Firearms Tutorial’ compiled by the medical department of the State of Utah:

          The issue of “home defense” or protection against intruders or
          assailants may well be misrepresented. A study of 626 shootings in or around a residence in three U.S. cities revealed that, for every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides (Kellermann et al, 1998). Over 50% of all households in the U.S. admit to having firearms (Nelson et al, 1987). In another study, regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and suicide in the home (Dahlberg, Ikeda and Kresnow, 2004). Persons who own a gun and who engage in abuse of intimate partners such as a spouse are more likely to use a gun to threaten their intimate partner. (Rothman et al, 2005). Individuals in possession of a gun at the time of an assault are 4.46 times more likely to be shot in the assault than persons not in possession (Branas et al, 2009). It would appear that, rather than being used for defense, most of these weapons inflict injuries on the owners and their families.

          For more important stuff on using guns, go here:

          http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html

          Reply
          1. idamag October 11, 2015

            Unless they post round-the -clock guards how can they sleep at night?

            Reply
          2. paulyz October 18, 2015

            Your (new) stats don’t jive with your old stats? Hard to remember the bullshit, huh?

            Reply
        2. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

          Statistically, that never actually happens. Something like a tenth of a percent of violent crimes are stopped with guns, even including dubious Stand Your Ground claims, but having one in the house enormously increases the chance of accidental death, homicide by a family member, and suicide.

          Reply
        3. idamag October 10, 2015

          There are many more deaths from guns, accidentally and otherwise, than from home invasions.

          Reply
          1. Independent1 October 10, 2015

            And when some clueless gun owner tries to use a gun to prevent a home invasion, according to some studies, 4.46% of the time, it’s the homeowner that gets shot and possibly killed, rather than the intruder. (Possessing a gun in a home invasion is nothing more than an invitation to get shot.)

            Reply
          2. paulyz October 18, 2015

            I’ll take the 95.54% odds that the homeowner shoots the home intruder! Dummy!

            Reply
          3. Independent1 October 18, 2015

            No No. No!!! That’s not 4.46% dummy!! That’s 4.46 TIMES!!

            So lets say there are 10 gun related violent incidents where the victim had a gun.. if out of those ten 2 people were successful in defending themselves with their gun, on average 8-9 of them would have been shot and according to even this other article, 2 of them may have died.

            See this from Penn Medicine News:

            What Penn researchers found was alarming – almost five Philadelphians were shot every day over the course of the study and about 1 of these 5 people died. The research team concluded that, although successful defensive gun uses are possible and do occur each year, the chances of success are low. People should rethink their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures, write the authors. Suggestions to the contrary, especially for urban residents who may see gun possession as a defense against a dangerous environment should be discussed and thoughtfully reconsidered.

            http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/news/News_Releases/2009/09/gun-possession-safety/

            Reply
        4. Independent1 October 10, 2015

          And when Ida says there’s many more deaths from guns accidentally, she really means it – according to that Firearms Tutorial from the red state of Utah, there are 200,000 accidental shootings a year which send people to the hospital with injuries that average over $14,000 to fix and which cost billions in lost time and money to people and companies.

          Reply
      4. Independent1 October 10, 2015

        Not sure why you’re willing to concede that guns are not the problem, when study after study shows that where guns are more prevalent, so are homicides and violence. Just ignoring homicides for a moment, packing a gun turns a wimp into a would be super hero. People will do things like threatening others with a gun, that they’d never think of doing without one. That’s why GOP governed states which by far lead the nation in guns per capita, also lead the nation in violence, homicides per 100,000 population and even just being dangerous places to be – 9 of the 10 most dangerous states to live in are GOP-run states. The only blue state in the list being Maryland because of how dangerous Baltimore is.

        And also how can you say that, when England which bans guns, has an average of 50 homicides per year, which when adjusted for its smaller population means comparing England’s 250 average gun homicides per year (where guns are banned) to America’s 10,000 homicides plus which has almost 1 gun for every man, women and child in the nation.

        Reply
      5. Independent1 October 10, 2015

        I don’t mean to beat a dead horse, but here’s an article about police dying more often in states that have more guns, which is another reason you shouldn’t concede that ‘ guns are not the problem.”:

        See this excerpt from Vox:

        In states with more guns, more police officers are killed on duty

        The study, published in the American Journal of Public Health, looked at federal data for firearm ownership and homicides of police officers across the US over 15 years. It found that states with more gun ownership had more cops killed in homicides: Every 10 percent increase in firearm ownership correlated with 10 additional officers killed in homicides over the 15-year study period.

        And were more guns are, police tend to use more deadly force in dealing with people because they expect more people to be carrying guns: See this excerpt:

        But the findings could help explain why US police officers appear to kill more people than cops in other developed countries. America has more guns in general, and it has more gun violence than its developed peers. For US police officers, this means they not only will encounter more guns and deadly violence, but they can expect to encounter more guns and deadly violence, making them more likely to anticipate and perceive a threat and use deadly force as a result.

        Perhaps some Americans think that guns should still remain easily accessible, because the right to bear arms is too important to limit or lose. But an increasing amount of research shows that this comes with a grim downside: more homicides

        Reply
    2. highpckts October 9, 2015

      Your point??????

      Reply
      1. Independent1 October 9, 2015

        Otto just can’t seem to hold that racism down. I’m starting to wonder if he’s the member or leader of a white supremacist group.

        Reply
        1. idamag October 10, 2015

          Obvious. Since a person does not engineer the race they were born into, it is a useless POS that has only that tio brag about.

          Reply
    3. Independent1 October 9, 2015

      And there comes that outright racism rearing its ugly head again. I see you’re totally ignoring the fact that the shooter was as much white as black. His father is a white man from England. And he certainly was not brought up in anything similar to what most blacks in America face. Are you the head of a white supremecist group?? Huh?? You’re certainly fixated on blacks!!

      Reply
      1. idamag October 10, 2015

        am reading a book abvout the active spy ring, in America, during WWII. They actually copied the plans for a bombsight and sent them to the nazis. It seems like one of their names was otto greif.

        Reply
        1. Independent1 October 10, 2015

          Yeah! I wouldn’t be surprised if the Otto on this blog is a Nazi sympathizer. This Otto works race into about every blog thread.

          Reply
          1. idamag October 10, 2015

            Sympathizer? He’s probably a member of the nazi party.

            Reply
      2. Otto Greif October 10, 2015

        No one ever says Obama is as much white as he is black.

        Reply
  17. David October 9, 2015

    You can’t blame everyone for Nugent, he has always been violent and stupid, and probably mentally ill. He might just be a dick, but it is difficult to tell

    Reply
  18. Joe Rossman October 9, 2015

    Ben Carson clarifies his statements seemingly everyday. He’s a cowardly lion!

    Reply
    1. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

      Hope he gets elected!

      Reply
      1. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

        Not a chance.

        Reply
  19. Michael Ross October 9, 2015

    Nugent is the same man who promised he would be “dead or in jail” within a year of Obama’s reelection, yet also once encouraged his readers to murder ex-convicts (which, by his own word, he would have one day been).

    Nothing even remotely resembling coherent thought is ever going to come out of that heaping mound of fertilizer clumsily disguised as a human being named Ted Nugent. All it knows how to do is get angry, get crazy, and start threatening to kill somebody.

    Reply
    1. jamcrky October 9, 2015

      he also knew how to beat the draft and get out of Vietnam by crapping his pants

      Reply
      1. ps0rjl October 9, 2015

        Amen Michael. He also sits on the board of the NRA which says a lot about the NRA. Daft dodger, convicted poacher, and pedophile, what a piece of human excrement!

        Reply
        1. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

          I ask you the same thing I asked jamcrky, can you document anything you say? People that don’t know what they are talking about usually resort to name calling.

          Reply
          1. ps0rjl October 9, 2015

            Its all on the internet so look it up yourself..

            Reply
          2. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

            And the Internet never lies?

            Reply
          3. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            The claims about Nugent crapping his pants at a physical exam in order to avoid the draft come from… Nugent himself, in at least two magazine interviews. More recently he claimed to have got a student deferment and that he’d lied during the interviews, but his Selective Service record shows that he did indeed fail a physical exam and was classed as medically unfit.

            Reply
          4. idamag October 13, 2015

            He did say that in an interview to Rolling Stone and later claimed he was just having fun.

            Reply
          5. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            He told the story a couple of other magazines too – High Times and Creem, if I remember right. Personally I think he was exaggerating what he did to get out of the draft, but that there’s some grain of truth in there (his Selective Service record contradicts his current story of having a student deferment).

            Reply
          6. Independent1 October 10, 2015

            Not as profusely, provided you’re not on a right-wing propaganda website.

            Reply
      2. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

        Can you document that?

        Reply
        1. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

          See my answer below; the source for these claims is Nugent himself, in multiple interviews.

          Reply
        2. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

          Who cares?? I beat the Vietnam draft and I am glad I did.

          Reply
  20. Michael Ross October 9, 2015

    Guns are not the problem.

    Don’t start cheering for me yet tea-baggers, because the REAL problem is gun CULTURE. It’s angry low-IQ blockheads like Ted Nugent who think the solution to every single problem on the planet is “Get a gun!”

    A kid in South Carolina was mad because the South lost the Civil War. His solution was to get a gun.

    A kid in Oregon was mad because he was a virgin. His solution was to get a gun.

    And a kid in Tennessee was mad because his eight-year-old neighbor wouldn’t show him her puppy. His solution was to get a gun.

    And when all three of these dumb kids grabbed a gun and murdered their peers, you said the solution was for everybody to get a gun.

    At what point, 2nd Amendment fanatics, do you stop and realize that these schoolyard murderers have all just been taking yours and the NRA’s advice?

    Reply
    1. leadvillexp October 9, 2015

      I will only use one example but look to Timothy McVeigh. You can blame guns if you want but people will kill people any way they can. Who thought fertilizer could bring down a building? How to kill, stabbing automobile, bomb, plane (Towers in NY), gas and the list goes on. Don’t blame the means, blame the person or people.

      Reply
      1. Independent1 October 10, 2015

        Yeah! but in England where guns are banned; an average of 700 people per year are murdered by all means (about 50 by guns); adjusting that to 3500 because of the differences in our populations results in comparing 3,500 being killed in England per year to over 14,000 in America. And the entire difference is almost totally related to the fact that England tries to ban guns, while there’s about 1 gun for every man, woman and child in America!!!!!!!!!

        Reply
      2. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

        Countries with strict gun control have a far lower homicide rate than the US. Your reasoning is faulty.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

        Reply
        1. DEFENDER88 October 10, 2015

          Every day gun crime:
          Most(some 80%) of our gun crime comes from inner city gang drug trade.
          Those other countries don’t have the many large cities like we do with the gang drug problems we have.
          Which inflates our national average.
          Mass Murder and School Shootings:
          Starting in the late 70’s we started treating mental cases with designer psychotropic drugs and sending them home.
          vs Holding them in facilities where they could not get out in public(like before).
          And that is about when the school shooting problems started.
          These new drugs drive them crazy and they go to school and kill everyone.
          Look at Wikepedia school data:
          Profile – Age 16-26yo, white men, being treated with psychotropic drugs at home.
          Columbine, VT, Aurora, Sandy Hook, San Jose, Ft Hood#2, …….

          Returning Vets:

          ps Our returning vets are now being treated the same way, same drugs and – guess what – vet suicide rates are at all time highs.

          Coincidence? I don’t think so.

          Reply
          1. idamag October 10, 2015

            I have been in some huge cities across the water. Bad argument. What those other countries do have is good education systems.

            Reply
          2. Independent1 October 10, 2015

            Yeah! Defender is another one of those right-wing, NRA loving bloggers who just loves to twist facts and distort reality. His posts are full of misleading, disingenuous rhetoric.

            Reply
          3. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            How would you know?

            Reply
          4. Independent1 October 10, 2015

            Because I know enough about reality to identify propaganda from a mile off when I hear it. And all Defender88 posts is NRA sponsored propaganda.

            Reply
          5. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            You know because you said so…………..?

            Reply
          6. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            Another one of your frequent missives.
            I don’t recall using “any” NRA sponsored data.
            But I might if I see it as credible.
            I do my own research, except, unlike you, I have had formal training/study in Statistics and don’t violate the math rules like you to twist the data to suit your agenda. You really DO need to be more careful about that.
            Ultimately, I think you “care” and mean well,(otherwise I would not waste my time on you) but you need to be more careful about transposing data between sets to support your arguments.
            And less “personally critical” in an angry, confrontational way.

            Reply
          7. idamag October 13, 2015

            His “Harvard” was probably done by the same people who wrote a bunch of quotes supposedly by Thomas Jefferson. Having studied Jefferson extensively, it wasn’t hard to see by the vernacular and contradictions that it was phony.

            Reply
          8. DEFENDER88 October 10, 2015

            And what country would that be that:
            Has 300 mil people in over 60 cities of 1million population.
            290 cities over 100k population.
            All filled with young men with a history of discrimination, lack of good schools and good jobs, lack of father figures in the home, etc
            So they turn to the drug trade for a good living. Which accounts for some 75-80% of gun crime in the US.
            Note: I did not say/ie blame Black men, although Black on Black gun crime IS an issue/problem.
            The school shootings are bad, but:
            This(Inner City drug gun crime) is one if not the worst Great American Tragedy that has to be addressed if you want the overall gun crime rates and killing to come down significantly.
            The Oregon School shooting was bad, but the equivalent thing happens in “ALL” our large cities “every day”.
            A country with history of:
            A bloody revolution war to cast off an oppressive Govt.
            A N/S divided Civil War history.

            VIOLENCE
            The “Level of Violence”(Violent Behavior) in a society is what determines the murder rate. Not the number of guns.
            exa
            Hundreds of guns and people and thousands of shots are fired every weekend at my gun club, been that way for years, but no one ever gets shot.
            How is that possible if “guns” are the problem??

            The “Level of Violence” / “Violent behavior”, in a society, is what must be looked at/dealt with/changed/reduced for the better.
            Just removing “guns” will not change that.

            Reply
          9. idamag October 11, 2015

            France, Paris 2.34 million people. Their suburb Versailles 790,000.
            Germany, Frankfurt 3 million
            London, England, 8.8 million
            Brisbane, Australia 2.3 million
            Th world’s largest city is Mumbai, India 125 million
            Guanghou, China 45 million
            New York City 8 million
            Las Angeles 9 million

            When I was in Frankfurt, I felt perfectly safe walking about the city alone at night. I don’t even do that in my own community of 80,000.

            Reply
          10. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            Sure you did. You should have stayed there. Then you could help welcome the million plus Muslims , make sure they all have prayer rugs and detonators.

            Reply
          11. idamag October 12, 2015

            No, I should not have stayed there. I love my country and relaize it needs all the intelligent people it can get to offset bumpkins like you. You are not well read. You are quarrelsome. You resort to ignorant rhetoric and should have stayed silent as you have removed all doubt. There is a difference in argumentation and quarreling. Debating cows and sheep, and I am not sure which end, has not honed your debate skills. I will not read nor respond to any of your low intellect posts again. It wastes my time.

            Reply
          12. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            You forgot my eye color and shoe size. I compose my comments to fit the comprehension abilities of the posters. It depends on if they have been taught what to think instead of how to think. By the way what is a bumpkin?? Is that a traditional nick name in your ancestral tree.

            Reply
          13. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            DON’T FORGET, YOU’RE TOTALLY NOT RACIST

            Reply
          14. paulyz October 18, 2015

            FACTS are a bitch.

            Reply
          15. Mr Corrections October 18, 2015

            While your stirring and incoherent defence of a racist is sure something, I’m mostly just laughing because it took you a week to come up with that weak sauce.

            Reply
          16. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            I don’t have much time so I will summarize.
            I saw a large Harvard study last year that showed where the Level of Violence in a Society determines the murder rate.
            Not the number of or availability of guns.
            I did not save it so I will have to summarize some key results:
            It was a world-wide study that included countries in Africa where:
            1) Countries that were full of guns and then had them removed – the murder “rate” did not go down.
            They just used machetties.
            2) Countries that had low/no guns and guns were introduced – the murder “rate” did not go up.

            Their conclusions:
            They found/determined that the “Level of Violence” present in a society determines the murder rate not the presence or absence of guns.

            Some other examples – Switzerland has the most guns per capita(I think) but one of the lowest murder rates.
            Also my own example of our gun club(1000 members) with a hell of a lot of guns around and shooting every day (way more than in any city) but no one has ever been shot, for many years, literally millions of rounds. If guns are so dangerous(per se), looks like at least one person would have at least been accidentally shot. But no.
            If it is just “Guns” – how is that possible?

            “For me” the primary contributors to high levels of US violence – Inner City Drug Trade and Psychotropic Drugs being issued more and more.
            With the underlying driver of (A significant population of long term underprivileged and discriminated youth who have poor schools, no real job opportunities and no real hope of making a good living. So they turn to the drug trade to make a good living. And end up shooting each other at an alarming rate. Thus raising the national gun crime rate to high levels.)

            We have always had high levels of gun ownership – one reason why Japan did not even attempt a raid in the 1940’s.
            The advent of these Psychotropic drugs that drive young men to murder is “relatively””30yrs” new.
            The drug trade accounts for a large portion of our gun “crime”. Which accounts, far a huge portion of the gun crime here.
            Psychotropic drugs account for near 100% of the driving force for the “Mass” Killings(Schools, theaters, etal).

            Reply
          17. idamag October 12, 2015

            FYI (excerpts from the Harvard study,)

            1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review).

            Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of
            evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide,
            both in the United States and across high-income countries.
            Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies
            indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where
            there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide,
            particularly firearm homicide.

            Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.

            2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.

            We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability
            using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found
            that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there
            are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States
            is excluded.

            Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.

            3. Across states, more guns = more homicide

            Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the
            relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states
            over a ten year period (1988-1997).

            After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group,
            people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide,
            particularly firearm homicide.

            Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.

            4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)

            Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined
            the association between gun availability and homicide across states,
            2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun
            ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide.
            This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after
            accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment,
            urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g.,
            poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and
            non-firearm homicide.

            Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64.

            inShare5

            Harvard School of Public Health

            677 Huntington Avenue
            Boston,
            MA
            02115

            +1 (617) 495-1000

            Learn More
            News & Feature

            Reply
          18. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            Is this the same study that basically said the number and availability of guns in a society does not affect the homicide rate?
            But the level of violence present does?

            Reply
          19. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            You must really be bored to try and explain anything to these hacks.

            Reply
          20. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            I respond to them only for the reason of:
            “When you are lied to and don’t respond, you are encouraging more lies”. A lie – told enough times become the truth.

            Reply
          21. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            Oh, is that why you keep lying? I was wondering!

            Reply
          22. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            Oh yeah ! sure you have. Giant, huge ,mammoth , gargantuan and they were all across the water and you have been there. They are much better places to live than here . I wonder why so many want to live here??? I am sure they are not to bright and don’t realize the mistake they are making. You need to explain to them how bad America is and they should stay home.

            Reply
          23. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            Like I said about the US:
            290 cities over 100k population.
            All filled with young men with a history of discrimination, lack of good schools and good jobs, lack of father figures in the home, etc
            So they turn to the drug trade for a good living. Which accounts for some 75-80% of gun crime in the US.

            Reply
          24. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            Now you have done it. You are going to be accused of being a bigot a racist a homophobic a gun crazy confederate sympathizer a member of the Aryan brotherhood a pedophile and a misogynist and even a pretty fair cook on the side. You better pray for forgiveness or you will forfeit your allotment of 72 virgins. .

            Reply
          25. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            You left out Bigot, although I don’t mention any race.
            Since I am white and most of my problems have been with Red Necks tying to kill me, its going to be hard to accuse me of that.

            Reply
          26. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            All these liars have an agenda and what ever you say to them is pointless. They don’t care about anything except to write they are told.

            Reply
          27. Insinnergy October 13, 2015

            Displacement. You’re talking about yourself again.

            Reply
          28. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            Absolutely 100% false. Every Western nation has inner city crime and drugs, and also outer city and rural crime and drugs. The only difference is that the US has almost no gun regulation

            There is no connection between psychiatric treatment and mass murder, and the very suggestion shows that you should probably opt not to have an opinion on gun control, or indeed anything else, in public.

            Reply
          29. DEFENDER88 October 10, 2015

            All the data, facts, and evidence say otherwise.

            Reply
          30. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            No, they really, really don’t. I get that you want to play cowboy dressups, but there’s no compelling reason that the rest of us should have to pretend it’s good for the country somehow.

            Reply
          31. DEFENDER88 October 11, 2015

            I respond to you only for the reason of:
            “When you are lied to and don’t respond, you are encouraging more lies”.

            Your statement:
            “There is no connection between psychiatric treatment and mass murder,…”

            Now I am wondering what your real agenda is(maybe personal), since the data is quite overwhelming concerning the connection between psychiatric treatment and mass murder. Don’t blame me, its not “my” data, its a National problem with national data sets.

            On a fundamental level – seems to me you have to be mentally ill(in some way)(or “brain washed”) to commit mass murder.

            Trying to denigrate “me” is not constructive and will not help with this issue either.

            Your approach – If you don’t have good argument try to discredit your opponent.
            A better approach would be to concentrate on presenting “good, fact based argument” for your position.

            Reply
          32. Mr Corrections October 11, 2015

            I’m sorry, I didn’t understand which imaginary justification for owning overpowered firearms you were “defending” with … whatever point it was you thought you were making.

            There is absolutely no connection – ZERO, ZIP, NADA – between psychiatric medication and mass shootings, which is why they do not occur in other Western nations that use the same medications at anywhere near the same frequency. You claim the data is “quite overwhelming”, but that assertion, like every other one you’ve made, simply is not true – you will not find a single peer-reviewed paper that makes any such claim in any reputable journal.

            It’s also laughable that you, after the posts you’ve made above, are insisting that other people stick to facts – literally nothing you’ve said has had the slightest basis in reality.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          33. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            .Their you go again The over powered firearms trick again. Please explain what an overpowered fire arm is. I bet you don’t have any idea. Your anti gun people don’t give any real explanations they just tell you what to say.

            Reply
          34. Mr Corrections October 12, 2015

            Anything more than a .22 rifle, which is the most powerful firearm I can see any justification for a civilian owning unless they literally live in a cougar den.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          35. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            So, since I try to obey all the laws of this land, you are going to restrict me to a 22 while the Hoodlums out there will have high power weapons. Always have always will. That makes no sense at all. Just, “in reality”, fundamentally ignorant. Just because you don’t ever have the need to defend yourself does not mean that others do not. You must live a sheltered life, live, work, play where you are protected by others, etc. I have long posts on other threads in here about how I have been attacked by gangs, and single perps, Red Necks usually, and would have been killed if not for being armed.

            Reply
          36. Mr Corrections October 12, 2015

            Sorry you’re scared of “inner city crime” (black people), but let’s face it – you never go to the inner city. If you would like to protect your house from this imaginary threat, buy a dog, which is statistically far more effective – you won’t end up using it to kill yourself or your family, and the odds of it killing your children are also pretty remote.

            Reply
          37. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            I may have been to more “inner cities” than you, all over this country, but actually its ignorant Red Necks that have caused me more trouble. And your “imagination” has been my reality.
            Where was it I mention “black people”?
            Inner city can mean black, white, Hispanic, Asian, etal

            Reply
          38. Mr Corrections October 12, 2015

            What is weird is that you probably think that you’re making a lick of sense, somehow.

            Reply
          39. idamag October 13, 2015

            Remember the incident where high school kids were on a scavenger hunt and one approached a house to see if he could get an item on his list? The scared nut with a gun shot and killed the kid.

            Reply
          40. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            You are as ignorant of dogs as you are of guns.

            Reply
          41. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            So not ignorant at all. Thanks!

            Sorry you hate your family and are willing to risk their lives to compensate for your subaverage genital dimensions!

            Reply
          42. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            The AR 15 is a .22 caliber so I guess we on the same page. Have you ever checked with your handlers about what cal. has caused the most deaths in the US??

            Reply
          43. Mr Corrections October 12, 2015

            I did in fact leave out single shot. The gun calibre that kills the most people in the US is in fact “the shotgun”, but you do have a point – there’s no reason you deluded lunatics should even get to keep those rifles, no matter how terrified you are of black people.

            Reply
          44. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            No it is not, it is the lowly .22 long rifle cartridge. There is a reason for that but I will let you do the research.

            Reply
          45. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            You’re right, all guns ought to confiscated.

            Reply
          46. idamag October 13, 2015

            There are certain people who should not own guns. Scared people with guns is a very bad mix.

            Reply
          47. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            That’s true. Its usually scared people who use them. I was in fear of losing my life is called justified homicide.

            Reply
          48. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            I am right and you are left. I do not care what you think is that Okay with you?

            Reply
          49. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            I am right and you are wrong. There’s no excuse for anyone – especially unhinged people like you – to own a firearm, and President Hillary is going to take them away from you.

            http://40.media.tumblr.com/c96ede4ea28217e61fa5f5f41ccb5396/tumblr_nw15xkmc551qep5zro1_1280.jpg

            Reply
          50. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            She will try and take a lot more than guns. You may not be real pleased with the end result. She is mean and incompetent. I might just vote for her so I can watch her sink your society.

            Reply
          51. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            Oh no!

            Reply
          52. paulyz October 18, 2015

            Take away their Secret Service protection too, must ALL live by the same rules!
            Your Loony Leftist Socialism showed through the BS, just like Obama getting caught with his true goals.

            Reply
          53. Mr Corrections October 18, 2015

            Sorry that the word “civilian” confused you, there. I can see now that it had too many syllables for you.

            Reply
          54. paulyz October 18, 2015

            See, with a little debating, the truth comes out with you anti-2nd. Amendment wackos, you try to act like we “just need sensible solutions”, but your goal is gun confiscation.

            Why we must “cling” to our guns even more. Thanks for verifying what all of us Conservative Patriots already know!

            Reply
          55. Mr Corrections October 18, 2015

            You’re not a patriot. You’re not even close.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          56. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            .ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P {
            padding:0px;
            }

            .ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage {
            font-size:12pt;
            font-family:Calibri;
            }

            Here is a video explaining why there are no “peer reviewed” studies.
            The drug companies have successfully suppressed studies on this issue due to HIPPA etc laws.
            You have to go to the raw data and look at it, which is arduous.
            And posting all the raw data here is not really possible.
            Here is a video explaining this.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KeM0W9duWPg

            Reply
          57. Mr Corrections October 12, 2015

            Sorry, youtube videos are not science.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          58. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            This simple minded person has some kind of agenda. It gets it information from anti gun people who are most likely ultra socialists. Usually people like it are frightened easily and think they can control violence against themselves by banning tools that can be used for violence. In a decaying violent society [ USA ] they are referred to as moving targets.

            Reply
          59. Mr Corrections October 11, 2015

            My agenda is tens of thousands of people not dying every year. Unlike you – who has to resort to personal attacks – I’m quite comfortable letting the facts speak for themselves: there’s not one advanced nation with gun control you can name that has a homicide rate higher than, or even remotely comparable to, the United States. Prove me wrong – I just linked to the raw data before, so unless you’re positing some sort of global conspiracy, surely you can find a counter-example (hint: you cannot).

            Gun control works. If you weren’t terminally insecure and markedly paranoid, you would have no problem with – at the very least – simple and effective measures like background checks, mandatory government-inspected gun safes, and a total ban on overpowered weapons, outsize magazines, and other things that have no possible civilian use.

            Reply
          60. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            Over powered weapons, you are a regular ballistics expert. What is your idea of an overpowered weapon?????????? What weapons should civilians be allowed to have? Out sized magazines, I give up, please decipher.

            Reply
          61. Mr Corrections October 12, 2015

            I’m sorry you don’t understand words, or the correct usage of punctuation. It must be socially crippling.

            Reply
          62. Insinnergy October 13, 2015

            Avoidance. Answer the points.

            Reply
          63. JPHALL October 11, 2015

            Wow, So much BS in so little space. Your mother must be proud!

            Reply
          64. Willy Healer October 12, 2015

            That comment was a journalistic masterpiece.

            Reply
          65. JPHALL October 11, 2015

            So show us your so called data and its source.

            Reply
          66. Independent1 October 13, 2015

            That too is A FLAT OUT LIE!!!!!!!!

            Reply
          67. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            Your words: – “The only difference is that the US has almost no gun regulation”
            This is “factually” and “totally” false.
            The US has thousands upon thousands of gun regulation laws.
            From Federal down thru State, County, to municipalities, to individual businesses, organizations, schools, etal.
            We, should, I believe, strengthen access to mental health records in the NICS system.
            And some other things.
            But to say “almost no gun regulation” is just blatantly/totally false.
            Implies you don’t really know much about the actual facts of this issue.
            Or just trying to deceive some.
            I say this only because:
            This issue is difficult enough without blatant lies/false info distorting things.
            And to quote you – “..the very suggestion shows that you should probably opt not to have an opinion on gun control, or indeed anything else, in public.”

            Reply
          68. Mr Corrections October 12, 2015

            I don’t really care what idiotic things you think, though. Sorry!

            Reply
          69. Independent1 October 13, 2015

            For someone who claims to be such an expert, you’re clearly either NRA biased or willfully ignorant of reality. There are virtually NO NATIONWIDE GUN CONTROLS. The fact there are states like Indiana where gun shows can happen every night of the week and people can sell their arsenals with virtually no background checks; such that people in Chicago where there are supposedly tons of controls can get any gun they want within an hour’s drive, completely negates all of Chicago’s controls. And your comment about 80% of homicides are related to some kind of drug trafficing is a flat out lie. More than 60% of gun homicide victims are killed by relatives, friends, neighbors or some other person they know not necessarily involved in any drug dealing.

            And your characterization of most homicides occur in city areas is just one more factual ploy of the NRA – sure more homicides occur their because far more people live there. But the fact is that on a homicide rate basis, far fewer homicides per 100,000 people occur in the areas you’re implying like New York, Conn, New Jersey and even DC, than in areas like Alaska, Louisiana, Arkansas, Wyoming and other very sparsely populated areas because of the lack of gun controls.

            Fact is that in those densely populated areas the rates of homicides per year are around 3-6 people per 100,000 while in those sparsely populated areas I mentioned the rates are more like 16-20 people per 100,000. Making it clear that those areas are in fact, far more dangerous. Which is why when 24/7 Wall street did an analysis, they found that all 10 of the states they would rank as the most dangerous places to live, are in fact, none other than 10 GOP-governed state which are far less populated than those areas you clearly constantly try to demonize.

            You sir, are nothing but an NRA shill!

            Reply
          70. JPHALL October 11, 2015

            The othercountries have many of the same drug problems we do. Look it up instead of offering your opinion.

            Reply
          71. DEFENDER88 October 11, 2015

            And what country would that be that has 300 mil people in over 60 cities of 1million population.
            290 cities over 100k population.
            2 Major mountain systems, a Great Plaines, deserts, 4k miles of coastline.
            Thousands of miles of navigable rivers.
            A bloody revolution war to cast off an oppressive Govt.
            A N/S divided Civil War history.

            A significant population of long term underprivileged and discriminated youth who have poor schools, no real job opportunities and no real hope of making a good living. So they turn to the drug trade to make a good living. And end up shooting each other at an alarming rate. Thus raising the national gun crime rate to high levels.
            No one wants to admit or discuss this, you want to blame guns.
            Blame the level of violence the drug trade brings but don’t blame guns.

            Guns alone do not affect the level of violence in a society.

            Reply
          72. JPHALL October 12, 2015

            Are you dense or just an ideologue? The European Union matches your criteria, yet suffers a lot lless gun violence. Why that is important to you is is pathetic. The only countries in the world that match our level of gun violence are involved in wars, like in Syria, Afghanistan or Somalia.
            Subject: Re: Comment on This Week In Crazy: The Stupidity Of A Free State

            Reply
        2. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

          No they don’t.

          Reply
          1. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            I just linked to a table that unequivocally shows they do. Sorry if that offends your firearm boner.

            Reply
          2. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            No they don’t. I am not into guns except how to use the one I have for my personal defense. The USA is rated 110 out of 200 countries for homicide rates. Why are you so concerned with guns? Do guns frighten you? I do not believe anything you say. You have some sort of problem with society and it really does not interest me. The information you have quoted was written by people with an agenda. You have some kind of an agenda or are you merely a simpleton.

            Reply
          3. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            OK, so just because every nation in the fucking world with strict gun controls rates lower than the US doesn’t mean that gun control works, somehow. I see.

            This has nothing to do with my opinion on guns, or my opinion of the kind of insecure loser who loves them – this is just straight up raw fact.

            I hope that helps!

            Reply
          4. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            My opinion of a person who has to resort to foul language in trying to communicate is extremely low.

            Reply
          5. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            Oh no!

            Fortunately, my opinion of the kind of person who insists up is down in order to defend a childish hobby is far, far lower.

            Reply
          6. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            Like law enforcement, military and people who want to protect what is their yardstick of success and life from people who want to take it from them. Your knowledge and experience is immature.

            Reply
          7. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            Oh no! Now I’m immature! That sure is a good reason – perhaps even better than me using a swear word! – to ignore undeniable facts, like that a lack of gun regulation in the United States contributes to an enormous increase in homicides, suicides and accidental deaths when compared to every other Western nation.

            Reply
          8. Willy Healer October 10, 2015

            Go away.

            Reply
          9. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

            Stop lying and I will.

            Reply
          10. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            No you won’t, people like you always stop up the plumbing.

            Reply
          11. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            Sorry you hate the truth. Have you considered not believing sheer nonsense?

            Reply
          12. Sand_Cat October 11, 2015

            Why should he? He’s not a delusional nut-case like you. He deals in those very unpleasant facts, which we all know are offensive to people like you.
            He’s welcome, but so are you: it’s always good to have a reminder of the kind of batshit insanity and bone-headed willful ignorance we’re up against.

            Reply
          13. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            They are unpleasant facts they smell like dog crap.

            Reply
          14. Sand_Cat October 13, 2015

            Thanks for confirming your dishonesty and refusal to acknowledge the truth. I shall waste no more time on you.

            Reply
          15. Independent1 October 13, 2015

            It’s got nothing to do with guns frightening people, it’s all about the fact that thousands of people in America are dying every year (82 per day) mainly because there are too many guns in this country in the hands of people who not only don’t have a clue on how to use or store them safely and in time to self-protect themselves, but also because of the lack of background checks, t here are too many in the hands of wackos.

            So the only solution is increased background checks, and controls over the type of guns that people can own – no military style weapons which no non military person NEEDS TO OWN!!

            And GUN CONTROLS DO WORK. Here are some statistics that prove that from an article which shows in numerous ways that the NRA lies when it says guns will protect you and that everyone should have a gun.

            See this excerpt:

            For example, the six states with the lowest gun death rates from lowest to highest are Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. Those states have rates ranging from 2.5 to 5.7 deaths per 100,000 people. The six states with the highest gun death rates, starting with the highest are Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Wyoming. Those states have rates ranging from 16.7 to 19.8 gun deaths per 100,000. We are not talking about small differences here.

            The numbers also confound the (incorrect) stereo type that urban areas are more dangerous to live in than non-urban ones, as the six states with the lowest rates were all significantly more urbanized than the average state. Meanwhile, the six states with the highest rates were among the least urbanized, according to census data. One other point: The District of Columbia—a 100% urban “state” that conservatives love to cite (again, incorrectly) as evidence that gun control doesn’t work, actually has a lower gun death rate than 38 out of 50 states.

            http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/11/1415991/-Forget-Ben-Carson-s-gunslinger-fantasy-The-best-gun-safety-strategy-is-not-owning-a-gun-period?detail=email

            Reply
          16. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            More of your factoids. I really don’t care. Birth control would be a lot more effective………….Wait a second that is a form of birth control. Wow ,talk about killing two birds with one stone.

            Reply
          17. Insinnergy October 13, 2015

            Stop counting third world countries and known warzones.
            The US is number one in gun-related deaths amongst western 1st world countries by almost double I believe.

            Reply
          18. Willy Healer October 13, 2015

            Their are about a billion people who believe that a man brought himself back from the dead but that does not make it true. Why are you so concerned about how people die? They do it on a regular basis without any coaching from you.

            Reply
          19. Insinnergy October 13, 2015

            The first honest answer from an NRA nut.
            “Why are you so concerned about how people die? They do it on a regular basis…”
            Bravo.
            Exactly. Why have any laws that prevent death?
            Just ridiculous really.

            Reply
          20. Willy Healer October 14, 2015

            You mean we have laws on the books that make it against the law to die??? There sure seem to be a lot of law breakers, we need to bury their kind under the jail.

            Reply
    2. paulyz October 9, 2015

      These weren’t just “dumb” kids, they were kids with serious mental problems. Gun control Laws didn’t stop them, just as gun-free Australia didn’t stop the 15 year old from shooting & killing a police officer. When will Obama head to Chicago, his hometown, & find out why there are hundreds of murders every year in a city with strict gun control Laws!

      Reply
      1. Mr Corrections October 10, 2015

        Gun homicides per year in Australia are measured in single digits.

        Reply
      2. Independent1 October 10, 2015

        What good is strict gun control in Chicago when any crook in the city can run to Gary Indiana and back in less than an hour while bringing back as many guns as they want??/ When are you going to get off this fabrication of the truth bit??? You lying pack of crap!!

        Reply
        1. paulyz October 18, 2015

          ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, excuses for your failed Socialist ideology, just like your idol, Barack.

          Reply
      3. Independent1 October 10, 2015

        And Pauly, I’ve got something on a different topic.

        Republicans are supposedly supposed to create a political environment which is fiscally responsible right? If so, why is it that CheatSheet just came out with a list of states where the citizens are the most broke, and all 10 of those states have been governed by the GOP for at least the past 5-6 years. Which means the politicians in those states have done virtually nothing to help their constituents prosper.

        Now using, the color-coded map in that article, I’ve extended the top 10 to the top 30, and found that of the top 30, at least 90% of the top 30 are also GOP-governed states.

        Now why would a supposedly ‘fiscally conservative political party’ allow that to happen??

        See this list from CheatSheet.com (note that 11-31 may not be in the right precise order but are close using the map):

        Top 10 States Where Americans are Broke
        By Money & Career CheatSheat

        1-Mississippi
        2-West Virginia
        3-Alabama
        4-South Carolina
        5-New Mexico
        6-Kentucky
        7-Idaho
        8-Arkansas
        9-Montana
        10-Maine
        11-Tennessee
        12-Oklahoma
        13-North Carolina
        14-Florida
        15-Arizona
        16-Michigan
        17-Indiana
        18-Missouri
        19-Nevada
        20-Louisiana
        21-South Dakota
        22-Ohio
        23-Wisconsin
        24-Pennsylvania
        25-Rhode Island
        26-Georgia
        27-Kansas
        28-Oregon
        29-New Hampshire
        30-Nebraska
        31-Utah

        So not only are GOP-governed states the most dangerous states to live in with the worst quality of life and places that will make you the most miserable and possibly be killed; They’re also states that will most likely make you go broke.

        http://www.cheatsheet.com/personal-finance/top-10-states-where-americans-are-broke.html/?utm_source=yahoo_native&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=yahoo_native&ref=YN

        http://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Screen-Shot-2014-10-09-at-9.47.55-AM.png?ddd6c3

        Reply
        1. idamag October 14, 2015

          I knew Idaho would be on that list. It is one of the reddest states. it has more people making minimum wage than any other. Our school system is sixth from the bottom.

          Reply
        2. paulyz October 18, 2015

          Check out the States with the 20 worst & broke cities. Here’s a hint, many are in Calif., N.Y., N.J., Michigan, etc. More useless stats by you.

          Reply
      4. Sand_Cat October 12, 2015

        When will people like you put your money where your mouth is and try to DO SOMETHING about mental health in this country, rather than using it as a convenient rationalization for continued mass murder? The problem goes beyond the guns, sure, but with so many around and such governmental indifference and inaction, it’s guaranteed many will fall into the wrong hands.
        In addition, why other countries have lots of guns but little or no violence highlights the general insanity of this one, a prominent manifestation of which is the paranoid assumption that every one concerned about it wants to collect all guns and tyrannize their former owners out of a sheer lust for power, with the resulting assembly by individuals of arsenals sufficient to equip battalions and complete refusal of any discussion concerning how to keep guns away from the mass murderers and other criminals.

        Reply
        1. paulyz October 15, 2015

          Like to hear your suggestions on how to accomplish that. The big problem of more gun control is that when it fails, anti-2nd. Amendment activists push hard for more.

          Reply
          1. Sand_Cat October 15, 2015

            First suggestion: people like you try to think rationally. I know it’s hard, but even you can do it.

            Reply
          2. paulyz October 18, 2015

            Another non-answer. You spout talking points but don’t understand any solutions, or the repercussions of your gullible brainwashing.

            Reply
          3. Sand_Cat October 19, 2015

            When did you EVER do anything but parrot talking points, you moron. The solution I proposed is certainly an impossible one, asking delusional morons like you to think rationally, but it would work if you did.

            Reply
      5. Insinnergy October 13, 2015

        Apparently some of them are. But the general stats are less than 3% of mass shooters are mentally unwell in the committable sense.
        Obviously they aren’t perfectly sane or they wouldn’t be shooting people, but neither are they “mental” to the point where you could pick them out of the general populace.

        Or to put it another way: Millions of people are depressed, angry and demonstrate the same mental issues as these gunmen… yet only 0.001% go on to commit a mass shooting.

        So what would you like to do? Lock up 30-40 million Americans on the basis they “may be demonstrating the symptoms of a mass shooter”… or put some sensible rules around how people obtain the tools needed for mass murder?

        Reply
        1. Independent1 October 14, 2015

          Good points!!

          Reply
        2. paulyz October 15, 2015

          Same with taking guns from law-abiding Citizens, or more gun control on them, when 99% use guns responsibly. So why don’t you go after stricter control of psychiatrists, mental facilities, medical prescriptions for unstable people then?

          Reply
    3. Michael Ross October 10, 2015

      Thank you, every single tea-bagger NRA whore who replied to this post, for so blatantly overlooking the very first sentence.

      No, this was neither an endorsement nor a condemnation of gun-free zones. This was a condemnation of the very thing all of you subhuman whores just sufficed to illustrate: the fanaticism of the pro-gun crowd.

      You pricks are so gay for your guns that you reflexively lashed out, even at someone whose opening sentence was “Guns are not the problem.”

      I am not saying we need to ban guns. I am also not suggesting that we need more guns.

      What we need is for you low-IQ subhuman bastards to stop encouraging our children to think that all of life’s problems can be solved by picking up a gun and shooting someone.

      Reply
      1. idamag October 10, 2015

        Brava

        Reply
    4. idamag October 10, 2015

      You are absolutely right. Guns are not the problem. The crazy gun culture is the problem. These gun nuts want to force everybody into their mold. I have guns. They are locked up. I don’t sleep with a loaded gun and I don’t carry a loaded gun. You don’t have to worry about my gun accidentally going off and killing your child. If those nut jobs get their way, our streets will be war zones.

      Reply
      1. Independent1 October 10, 2015

        The problem is too many guns in the hands of Americans who don’t have a clue as to how to really use them or store them properly because of the lies they hear from the NRA and gun nuts who are way over the top in believing that JUST OWNING A GUN, will somehow magically protect them in virtually any situation. The knee jerk response to virtually every situation for a gun nut, is grab my gun and I’m safe.

        And that comes from decades of NRA lies that guns will just magically protect you even though you may never go to any classes to learn how to really use and store one. And in addition, just their presence in so many people’s homes, people who have no other purpose for the gun than what the NRA lie has told them about that magical self-protection ability of one; just opens up the probability that that otherwise useless gun to them will end up being used to kill or injure someone in the family or a friend that is visiting.

        I think one of the saddest incidents I’ve read is the story of a couple who was moving into a condo with their 2-year old son; they left him in their car as their were moving belongings into the condo and while doing so heard a gunshot. Can you just imagine the panic that they must have felt as they raced back to find their 2-year old on the front seat of the car – he had found one of those otherwise worthless guns in the center console of their car and while apparently playing with it had killed himself.

        Although I’m clearly not against people owning guns for a worthwhile purpose like hunting, or if you’re really that fanatical about them becoming an expert with one for target shooting fine; to if your not going to be reasonably expert at using one like a police officer would be – the TOO MANY GUNS ARE THE PROBLEM, because there are far too many of them in the homes people who will misuse them in one way or another and end up killing themselves with the gun they own, or because they own a gun when an intruder enters their home or confronts them on the street, or they’ll kill someone else with it in a rage:

        Another story was the two drivers who got into a road rage incident and both were conceal carry guys and came out of their cars shooting to end up killing each other – two dead from road rage – ONLY BECAUSE they had guns in their possession.

        Another fact is that despite what Idiots like many right-wing bloggers like to claim, the level of violence in America is no different than the level of violence in a lot of foreign countries, the big difference is that when violence happens in foreign countries, a lot of people may end up in the hospital while in America when there’s violence, more often than not because of too many guns, a number of people usually end up dead.

        Reply
        1. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

          Glad you mentioned you don’t mind guns in the hands of responsible people who know how to handle them safely.
          I agree.
          Too many “guns in the wrong hands” I also agree.
          “I” think you should have to get a Permit to even “Buy” a gun. That would include the training necessary for conceal carry, safe storage, handling, etc. The accidental self and shooting of children would virtually disappear.
          Including the training etc before you even buy one. The NRA disagrees but that is politics. ps all that training is NRA programs.
          FYI
          I am a retired Engineer but also A State Certified Firearms and Personal Defense Instructor.
          I teach only as a volunteer and community service.
          I teach State Certified Conceal Carry classes.
          I teach people how to handle them safely.
          Also I shoot at the competitive level – IDPA(Defensive Combat Pistol) and 3Gun.
          I help teach police to shoot. The average Cop shoots maybe 25rds/mo.
          I shoot, in practice, 1,000 rds/mo.
          So, I teach your “experts”(Police).
          I “really do” know how to use and store them safely.
          I also know how to not shoot people who are just pissed off but are not a “threat”.
          Hell I teach that.

          On the NRA, say what you will about their “political stands”(Some of which I don’t agree with)
          I “get” that it is popular in here to demonize them.
          But FYI:
          In the US you have to 1st get the training, pass the tests, etc
          and get NRA Certified to become a Firearms Instructor.
          Then and only then can you get State Certified.
          They, the NRA, have ALL the training programs and standards for storage, handling, shooting, safety, etc
          Including Police Training and Certifications.

          Reply
          1. Insinnergy October 13, 2015

            I don’t think anyone minds guns in the hands of responsible people. I live in NZ and have several friends who own numerous firearms. You can still get them, but you need to go through a reasonably lengthy vetting process, and demonstrate you can use them and store them safely.

            Reply
          2. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

            And all three of those things – background checks, safety training, and safe storage – they are refusing to even think about, because FREEDOM!!!1

            Reply
      2. DEFENDER88 October 10, 2015

        The “streets” were not “war zones” before we emptied the Sanitariums to treat disturbed people at home with maddening, mind bending drugs.
        And the US had more guns than any country back then also. That has not changed. The treatment of the mentally ill “has” changed. And coincides with the start of School mass killings.
        Of course we did not have “gun free”-“kill zones” back then either.

        Reply
        1. Sand_Cat October 11, 2015

          I believe a certain Saint whose name begins with “R” did a great deal of mental-hospital emptying, and what have his ideological heirs done to help mental health treatment other than provide themselves as frequent and unmistakable examples of the need?

          How are you? Don’t see you here very often.

          Reply
          1. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            CAT!!
            Good to see you. Im still here, off and on.
            Especially after a shooting.
            Have not seen you that much lately either.
            Im doing ok, already been told I should shut up, leave and not have an opinion in here. An NRA shill, etc:)
            Must be doing something right:)
            Shot a 3Gun match Sat, showed several young guys an old man “can” shoot straight:)
            Got a round of applause:)
            And you are right about the “R” – triple R in fact.
            Repub Ronald Reagan.
            ps my offer still stands if/when you are ready.
            Maybe when this thread plays out I will try 2 send you my info?
            Will u b in here today(Monday)?

            Reply
          2. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            Are u on line ?

            Reply
          3. Sand_Cat October 12, 2015

            very sporadically.
            Around noon (EDT) weekdays may be good. I’m usually on my email, and get notifications of replies here, but never can tell what will come up (at work), plus the employer would probably frown on this site.

            Reply
          4. DEFENDER88 October 12, 2015

            ok, look 4 me at noon sharp, if u can
            or mail me now at millerw2000 at m*s*n dot cm

            Reply
        2. idamag October 14, 2015

          We never used to need gun free zones. This fear that our current school kids face is only going to produce more nuts.

          Reply
          1. DEFENDER88 October 14, 2015

            I went to H.S. ’61-’65. 1/2 the pickups in the parking lot had a rifle in a rack in the back window.
            I could have walked down the hall with one and no one would have been concerned, curious maybe about what kind of gun I had but not worried. In college ’65-’70 I could have done the same thing. Fact all males had to take ROTC. And drill with an M1 Battle Rifle. And qualify in shooting. 2,000 men on parade on campus, full military dress, all carrying M1 Battle Rifles – 2 full Batallions. It was a common sight. They were preparing us for Vietnam.
            Kids who were disturbed ie mental cases were put in institutions until they could be certified safe to be out in public. It was not a good and very flawed draconian system but worked.
            What has changed?
            If you look at the school mass killing data, it started in the late 1970’s about the same time we came out with these new designer psychotropic drugs(Prozac, Zoloft, Effexor, Paxil, etal) for treating young men for depression, etc. at home.
            And if you look at data you see trends and profiles developing. Virtually, ALL of the school killing has been done by a Young White Male on a psychotropic drug. Columbine, Red Lake, VT, Aurora, FT Hood #2, Sandy Hook, et al.

            Coincidental to this in the late 70’s we emptied the institutions in favor of treating these disturbed kids at home with these new drugs. In short, it drives them crazy and they return to school and kill everyone they can.
            I don’t know an easy solution, but think defining/recognizing the root causes is important.
            After a school shooting it takes a while(there is a time lag)(due to HIPPA/Privacy laws etc) in finding out what drug they were on.
            But the standard behavior is kill all you can then yourself.
            This same trend can be seen in our returning VETS having the highest and troubling suicide rates in history. Treated the same way now with the same drugs.

            Reply
    5. DEFENDER88 October 10, 2015

      ALL the school killers were on Psychotropic drugs. Including the kid in Oregon.

      Reply
      1. Insinnergy October 13, 2015

        Delusional.

        Reply
        1. Mr Corrections October 13, 2015

          This is the new line the NRA is pushing on behalf of its owners. There’s not one scrap of evidence to support it (if you don’t include youtube tinfoil-hat conspiracy videos, of course), the claims about individual killers are outright false, and there’s no corresponding increase in massacres anywhere else that uses these drugs (i.e. the entire rest of the world). In other words, it’s a classic, albeit incompetent, attempt at misdirection.

          Reply
  21. idamag October 11, 2015

    The picture looks like it might be the next lynching, cross burning, church and house burning bomber, et al.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

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.