People love a simple cause and effect, it makes it much easier for us to digest these types of things. "If only..."

The fact is, there are mentally ill, ignorant, angry, and just plain stupid people that should not own guns. That doesn't mean that everyone shouldn't. If you remember back to before concealed carry laws gathered steam people used to drive their cars into restaurants killing people. I imagine that people find a way to hurt and injure other people regardless of the tools available.

Agreed yaRight. I personally am FOR gun ownership, but think people should have to pass a "mental stability" test before they get one. That, in itself, would weed out the people with control and anger issues as they'd be mad they have to take a test.

But then again, that'll never happen. Until then, I'll keep buying guns for the one day that the government decides to stop letting them be sold.

Doesn't everyone bring a gun to Cracker Barrel? Seems normal in the US. You have to protect your family.

Very well stated, FatCat.

It's a toss up, at Cracker Barrel,

You take your chances...

which'll get ya first,

sausage & gravy or a gunfight....

If you ban grits and gravy, only criminals will have grits and gravy. The madness must stop

LOL...

How about we drop all the "Ban guns" vs "everyone should carry" rhetoric and just say how we feel about these poor victims. Another moron can't control his anger issues intelligently, and kills innocents. I, for one, am glad he didn't surrender, and the cops took him out.

Ban everything, It seems the solution for everything is to simply get rid of it right?

Get rid of everything and you will have to grow your own food. Walking to work or school. Be responsible for your own security.

Who needs any of it right, we will all be better off without anyway. I have never owned a gun in my life and would never tell someone they can't or shouldn't have one. The same way I won't tell responsibility dodgers they can't have an abortion.

@Denver Bill 2

If they ever ban my grits and gravy....this killing will look like an accidental discharge...lol

Us rednecks love our grits...gravy...sausage...eggs...toast...bacon

what a breakfast

Step 1: Unconstitutionally ban guns.

Step 2: No human interaction allowed, to prevent violence.

Step 3: Place GPS locators on everyone.

Step 4: If human interaction is unavoidable, make them wear padded clothing, a helmet and super soft mittens. The padded clothing must be pink to reduce aggressiveness and the helmet must have bunny ears on it.

Have I missed something the cracker barrel that i used to go to was a store that sold fancy cheeses and summer sausage and those cheese and cracker gift boxes you might get at Christmas time. Do they serve cooked food now or is a different cracker barrel.

If you can come up with a billion or so dollars then you can fight the NRA about promoting guns at any cost of life.

zuksam, the Cracker Barrel in Ohio is a chain of restaurants who claim to cook southern style meals. Nothing like the food my Granny used to cook, but it isn't bad.

"If everyone at the Cracker Barrel had a gun on them then they could have taken out the gunman before he had a chance to shoot anybody"

duh huh huh huh ... duh huh huh huh!!

Another good reason to stay out of "Oh-High-Oh"

The GPS locator/identifier was in the last flu shot you received. Just saying!

The guy could get off if he lived in Florida as he can certainly claim self defense. "...but officer, she was breaking my heart..."

No telling where that will end.

it's a known fact: getting married can kill you

Where are the pink panthers when you need them?

Another LEGAL gun owner going nuts.

Even water is scary. That's why I only drink Mountain Dew. When I take a shower I wear a scuba diving mask with an oxygen supply hooked up.

Dihydrogen...H2....monoxide....O....you're so clever....funny, but your point is well taken.

Was he a criminal? I mean the moment before he started shooting, was he a criminal?

The problem, of course, is hand guns. #1 murder weapon in the US, by far, year after year. And hand guns are so easy to get and carry around.

There are a lot of people who have hand guns that should not have hand guns, due to their unstable minds. When some little thing in their lives go wrong, they act out by putting on the ring, er, I mean they take out their hand guns.

Would be nice people if we could think of a way to reduce the number of hand guns. The more hand guns there are, the more hand gun violence there will be.

The damage that is done by whackos with hand guns is so great that doing something about it is more important that allowing sane, law-abiding citizens to have hand guns.

always break up at K.F.C....the chicks there are so hot...he will be glad you did...

Okay, how many hanguns should there be? If you claim the current number is "too many", you must have some number in mind that isn't "too many". How many is just the right number?

Honestly - do you expect us to believe that you'd ever be satisfied with some number other than "zero"? That at some point, you'd say, "Okay, that's good. There are exactly as many handguns as there should be"?

350 million, one for each of us. They should be supplied by the government when you file your taxes.

You no pay taxes, you no have gun.

I do not believe in banning handguns. I believe in extended waits on permits to own handguns and a complete psychological evaluation prior to being issued the permit.

If it takes 2 weeks to 2 months to get a permit, so be it.

one in each hand...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqoO9pQk2o

takenaka, if there's anything that should be banned, it would be you.

To everyone here who supports banning handguns,

You can't ban CRAZY!!!

You might be able to pass laws making handguns against the law....

But you can't stop CRAZY people from having handguns. CRAZY people don't care about the LAW!!!

There are already laws against heroin and cocaine, but people seem to still be able to get there hands on those, don't they?

There are already laws against SHOOTING PEOPLE but this guy apparently disregarded that law too, didn't he?

WHAT LOGIC ON EARTH MAKES YOU BELIEVE HE WOULD RESPECT A LAW PREVENTING HIM FROM HAVING A HANDGUN WHEN HE DOESN'T RESPECT THE LAW AGAINST SHOOTING PEOPLE???

She should have texted him will driving away.

You can't ban CRAZY!!!

You have that right.

He was 'circling the parking lot in his car.' If he'd run them down as they as they walked out, would you be pushing to have cars banned?

The NRA shills have to work a lot harder when there is so much guns violence. Their answer: more guns.

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

President Dwight D Eisenhower

I´ve always preferred Shoneys, but I think Cracker Barrel is better than Denny´s

Hmmm, I've never Shoneys or a Cracker Barrel here in the SF Bay area. We do have Denny's which apparently sucks equally wherever you go. IHOP isn't bad however.

He was 'circling the parking lot in his car.' If he'd run them down as they as they walked out, would you be pushing to have cars banned?

Reminds me of the scene in "All in the Family" where Gloria quotes some number of people killed by guns each year, and Archie says, "Would it make you feel any better, little girl, if they was pushed out of windows?"

To everyone here who supports banning handguns,

You can't ban CRAZY!!!

You might be able to pass laws making handguns against the law....

But you can't stop CRAZY people from having handguns. CRAZY people don't care about the LAW!!!

There are already laws against heroin and cocaine, but people seem to still be able to get there hands on those, don't they?

There are already laws against SHOOTING PEOPLE but this guy apparently disregarded that law too, didn't he?

WHAT LOGIC ON EARTH MAKES YOU BELIEVE HE WOULD RESPECT A LAW PREVENTING HIM FROM HAVING A HANDGUN WHEN HE DOESN'T RESPECT THE LAW AGAINST SHOOTING PEOPLE???

If handguns were illegal, then the numbers of handguns available would dwindle, which is important. It means that criminals can no longer steal legal guns from legal gun owners. A black market would open for guns, however. I think it would prevent a certain type of violence. If a man owns a gun, and snaps, he might use it in the heat of passion. If a man does not own a gun, and snaps, he would need to then set out to find a black market dealer of arms, make the deal, and then return to use it. By that time, his heat of passion may be waning, and he might have second thoughts. On the other hand, criminals might be more emboldened to use guns, if they know most people don't have guns.

I believe in extended waits on permits to own handguns and a complete psychological evaluation prior to being issued the permit.

If it takes 2 weeks to 2 months to get a permit, so be it.

I don't believe psychological testing can identify accurately which people will commit crimes. Many are thought of as normal guys that just snapped suddenly. It is not constitutional for the government to profile a person, then deny him a constitutional right because he's deemed, by the government, to be inappropriate.

Dihydrogen...H2....monoxide....O....you're so clever....funny, but your point is well taken.

Actually, that was a fake campaign done by Penn and Teller I believe, to demonstrate the ignorance of the general population. Anyone that needs additional proof Americans are generally ignorant, beyond Jersey Shore, is witted dimly. I believe Penn and Teller also had a fake campaign to get women to object to "women's suffrage." Suffrage gave women the right to vote. So objecting to it, means some women were objecting to their own right to vote.

Finally, I am here unveiling my 32 year research project which culminates in the solution to some of the world's most perplexing problems, including: a cure for cancer, baldness, aids, diabetes, ice cream headache and mange; peace in the middle east, abundant energy with zero pollution, an explanation of women that makes sense to men, exact coordinates for Amelia Earhart, solution for faster than light travel, and a fix for the economy that will last 1000 years. All this can be found at the link below:

If handguns were illegal, then the numbers of handguns available would dwindle. ...On the other hand, criminals might be more emboldened to use guns, if they know most people don't have guns.

Restrictions on hand gun ownership, whatever form they take, does not mean that people will not have guns (it doesn't even mean that some/many will not have hand guns). They can still have rifles and shotguns.

Given the high cost that we pay when hand guns fall into the wrong hands, I think that we need to look a little closer for ways to reduce the number of people who can have a hand gun. This will, I think, reduce the number of hand guns.

You'd think the people who push for laws allowing anyone and everyone to carry guns anywhere and everywhere would at least stop and think when things like this happen over and over and over.

But, no - they just deny any possible connection. Just like they deny global warming, evolution and the fact that cigarettes cause cancer.

Now my question is - is doublethink inherited or learned? Inquiring minds want to know.

guns don't kill people.....people with guns kill people!!!!

Hey Sean,

Since you are obviously comedically challenged, allow me to introduce you to a comedy term:

A buffoon is someone who is ridiculous and amusing, such as a clown, or a court jester. You almost qualify. As soon as you learn to be amusing, you'll be there.

Guns are illegal in S Korea, and for good reason. Its cuz they know not to trust each other with one. When will the US learn? The 2nd amendment was written way back after the Revolution, when we didn't know when the Red Coats would be back. lol.

I don't see that many people anymore ever saying to outright "ban" all handguns. But what I do see are a lot of folks complaining about the people supposedly saying to ban the handguns. Some of you are way too defensive and paranoid about your guns being taken away. I am a liberal, which many conservatives would automatically believe pegs me as a tree-hugging gun-hater. While I do consider myself to be a moderate tree-hugger, I am definitely not a gun-hater. Nor are a lot of liberals. I actually know plenty of liberals who believe in gun rights and legal gun ownership. My husband is a police officer and a hunter. There will always be guns in our house. My father - a Democrat - always kept a handgun in his nightstand when I was growing up. I'm really tired of the divisive "us vs. them" crap when it comes to guns. I think what most people honestly want is just a little more control about whose hands the guns wind up in. And like some others have said, perhaps it would be good to do some more background checking and some psychological profile sort of stuff before just letting anyone have a gun. I totally understand when people say that any whacko who wants to kill someone is going to find a way, whether it be a knife or a stick or whatever. Yeah, I get that. But while some of those other items have multiple purposes and uses, a gun is created for one reason only - to kill. So, no, I don't think the answer is to "ban all guns." And I think most liberals would agree with me on that. But there does need to be a better sense of control when it comes to firearms, particularly handguns, semi-automatics, etc. And yes, I also understand the argument about how if you take all the guns away from the regular citizens, then criminals will be the only ones with guns and how will the rest of us protect ourselves? Yeah, yeah...I get that one too. It's not rocket science. All most of us are saying is there just needs to be better control, not necessarily a ban on all guns. Oh, and at least with a knife or something, you pretty much have to be right on your victim to harm them. It can't exactly release a spray like a gun can, nor can it really reach people who may be just in the vicinity. That's what makes me so sick about stories like this one in Ohio. How many innocent bystanders have to be affected in people's personal conflicts like this before we start doing something??

guns don't kill people.....people with guns kill people!!!!

New evidence suggests neither is to blame. It's the bullets.

Under my proposed legislation, called the Fife Law, nobody is allowed to have more than one bullet at a time.

denver bill 2

More lives would be saved by banning grits and gravy.

Don't mess with my grits and gravy, I'm packin'! HA!

Sean-336944

To those who say that guns don't kill people but people do, I'd like to ask if all of you were on vacation a couple of weeks ago when we were told that hoodies were responsible for homicides.

Hoodies, like guns, are inanimate objects. Hoodies can and are used to hide by people doing bad things. Guns can and are used to threaten, kill, etc by people doing bad things. So? Again, the problem is people, not guns, not hoodies. I believe most reasonable people can and do accept that premise. It is not reasonable to ban either inanimate object. Those knee jerk irrational banners as well as the knee jerk, shoot on site, kill at all costs for any reason pros, also need to be banned, as do pot stirring trolls.

Well as a gun owner I was glad I had mine about 2 years ago. I went out to ask a group of 4 men who had parked im my lot to please move their car since it was blocking entrance to my business. I did not yell or say I would have them towed. They started to curse at me and 2 of them went to the car and came out with bats telling me they are going to show me they canpark anywhere. I had my cell and when I went to call 911 they saw my weapon in the holster with my hand on it. The bats were dropped and they ran off. Police arrived all 4 were rounded up drunk and 1 of the 4 had a warrent out for his arrest. So dont tell me I cant have a gun.

Sean,

A quick search of the CDC (because that's all the time I intend to waste on this) shows that slightly more than 30,000 people died from gun violence in the US in 2003, while slightly over 450,000 died from coronary heart disease in 2008. Whether or not you can understand (or take) a joke, I rest my case.

Re Dihydrogen monoxide, That missive at #1.30 calling for banning water may be a joke and even viewed as a hoax, but considering the problems some people are having with fracking affecting their water supply, it may yet come to a point in time when water from certain areas are indeed banned.

It is possible that in the near future that water from taps may be banned because it is flammable and if ingested can cause burns in the mouth etc and cause illnesses as some people are already complaining that they are getting sick drinking water from their wells etc in the areas where there is fracking.

So what may have been a hoax and an attempt at showing folks ignorance to chemistry back when this other use of the chemical terms for water was posted, in present times the side effects of water in certain areas are certainly becoming a fact as we now have seen with the various problems with contaminated water in some areas around the country.

Odd how fiction can become provable fact after a while......

Peace....

Sean,

On a serious note I could kill more people with food than a gun easily. Just add poison.

If he didn't have a hand gun, he could have used a Cracker Barrel dish. Those things must be made of cement. Heavy? I wanna tell ya..... Those are skull busters!

Denver Bill ,It might be news to you but everybody dies from something , a statement like yours just shows ignorance.

You gun banners really need to take a look at Switzerland. Every Swiss male that is over 18 is LEGALLY REQUIRED to own a gun. Even though every Swiss male owns a gun, Switzerland has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Now let's take a look at Britain. They banned all guns, yet crimes are still commited there. Infact, more crimes are commited in Britain with the gun ban, than without the gun ban.

What should be looked into is the fact both men and women are getting into relationships with people that are mentally and emotionally unstable. If you know someone has an anger issue it's best to stay clear of the person. You see this woman thought she was safe saying she wants a divorce from this guy in public and that is far from safe. More than likely he was a jealous person who though along the lines what is mine IS MINE. So when she decided to reject him he flipped out and started shooting people.

Yup, only diabolical criminals with guns kill people, never gun toting Joe Schmoe who suffers a mental breakdown when his wife leaves him. Never Bob from next door who loses his temper when you take his parking spot. Never your friend Jim who caught someone else hitting on his girlfriend at the bar.

Ask the NRA, it's impossible. Background checks work. Only evil people ever kill people.

robbopaloobop

it's a known fact: getting married can kill you

That's why they always say "Till death do you part" You're trying to set a record on how long it takes for the other to croak.

Gun barrel, cracker barrel.

He probably saw the word barrel, saw all of the colorful carnival type items hung about, and thought he was at the carnival shooting gallery. He was probably mad that he did not win the large vintage tricycle.

How many of us wouldn't go crazy if we got left at a Cracker Barrel in Ohio? I would lose my freakin mind

Like shootin' fish in a Cracker Barrel. And then he died and went to Hell because the police showed up with evil handguns and kilt him.

Every time an event like this happens (all too frequently) the gun rights people start whining about having their rights infringed by liberals who want to take away guns. The anti-gun people start banging their fists on the table scaring the hell out of the gun rights people and everybody starts screaming. But nothing gets done.

So here's an idea. To stay within the bounds of the second amendment and allow responsible people to bear arms without fearing the wrath of liberal abolitionists, let's consider this. The second amendment clearly states that gun ownership should not be infringed by the government in order to have a well-armed militia. Sounds like a good idea.

Every gun owner should be required to register for military service. That would not require any added bureaucracy as legal guns are supposed to be registered anyway. Gun owners would commit themselves to be available for call up at any time. Call it a Patriot Card. If you can't declare yourself ready to defend this country in time of war, then why should you be demanding the right to carry a gun? That is the essence of the second amendment.

Of course there are some gun owners who would not be suitable for combat duty but there are lots of jobs in the military that don't require steely eyes and steady hands. Logistical support and clerical duties that don't necessarily put one in harms way, for instance.

A Patriot Card would not necessarily mean shipping off to war. However, it would mean submitting to a background check for psychiatric and emotional fitness. If you are a responsible person ready to do your part to defend this country, you are allowed to own guns. If you are a criminal, a psychopath, a mental deranged idiot then no Patriot Card for you, and no gun allowed.

If you do not have a Patriot Card declaring your willingness to support the military effort, then your illegal gun(s) will be taken away. Now, I don't see any reason a responsible gun owner would object to carrying a Patriot Card. In fact, I would carry one even without owning a gun. Does that seem fair?

Just another day in the republic of the NRA.

Sean,

You dropped the G, was that on purpose? Nice attempt, but unnecessary. Try to be civil and have a discussion.

That's assinine. Carhart jackets can are used to hide by people doing bad things too - people where clothes. I can't kill someone with a hoodie, and no one ever committed a crime by using one, unless they were also hiding a gun which, as already stated, can be done with any piece of clothing.

It is not asinine. How many banks have been robbed without a weapon but only a note? If they used a gun it might not have killed anyone. How many tried to hide their faces while robbing said banks? I wasn't saying that anything should be banned, just that people do bad things. You could easily be killed with a hoodie. Just stop and think about it for a minute. Again, I was not talking about banning anything. Yes, that same note works in the liquor store. You just have to word it right while wearing your Carhart jacket. Why Carhart? They're good, they're warm, but are more suited to work than to robbing or killing.

Robbing and killing can be done lots of different ways with lots of different items. You seem to be quite defensive. Is that why you've resorted to name calling?

How do you come to the idea that I am part of the problem? And why do you show such disrespect? I don't believe I was disrespectful to you. If so it was unintended. Please point out where so that I can make a correction.

Sean- The Swiss must serve in the militia, not the military (There is a difference between the 2). They only issue handguns to officers, but not the average citizen. I think it's a good idea that the Swiss makes its citizens train with guns and have a little bit of the "Soldier experience". Everyone should know what it is like to be a soldier.

These crackers and their guns at Cracker Barrel .... They gotta use them's guns for something! Seems domestic disputes, killing cops and innocents is where they's a being used most, not defending violent crime.... Who woulda thunk it, Gomer???

Sean,

I have never owned a gun and will probably never get one. I also don't feel a need to pretend guns are evil and should be banned. The anti gun argument is based entirely on emotion and the pure lack of understanding of human nature.

I love being in the NRA and GOP! I love even more the fact that they made it legal for me to be able to pack my gun at the local Cracker Barrel. And if they serve me a bad meal I confront them, when they try to throw me out I stand my ground and shoot the place up. What, you don't like it - tough it is totally legal. Thank you NRA!!!

Marv Leit,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but males are required to register for the draft now at the age of 18. My son recently registered. I don't disagree with your idea but wonder if it should not be included with draft registration at age 18. Whoops. Because you said gun owners and females are also gun owners but not required to register for the draft.

Ok, I agree with your idea. Matter of fact, I like it.

Not to blame the victim, but she waits until the kids birthday party to call off the marriage. To the rest of you, if you intend to leave your violent gun toting spouse don't do it anywhere that I might be. At least the guy aimed his shots it could have been worse.

So many brain-dead idiots here... The man did not use a handgun to kill anyone -- he used a LONG GUN. That means it was a rifle, or maybe a shotgun. NOT a handgun.

Sean,

I never said I was posting with a straight face :()

Sean-336944, making it "shameful" to even talk about guns will NOT solve anything. The people who use guns illegally are the same people who ultimately don't give a rat's fart about the law anyway. The people who are getting guns illegally are the same people who are not supposed to have guns, too, but they still get the guns.

People also use knives to kill other people, including their own families. Should we "stigmatize" knives, too (and not just "combat" or "hunting" knives - but kitchen knives, pocket knives, steak knives, etc, etc, etc)? How about steel/lead/copper pipes? Or maybe bricks? Or how about cars? Or........ You can "stigmatize" the tool all you want, but it's still only a tool -- and it REQUIRES a person to use it.

i fail to see any humor in this situation. those of us with a degree of compassion and respect are abhorred by the comments of many unable to comprehend the tragedy of a murdered child. maybe these posters could find something funny when the child is lowered to her resting place. an innocent child is dead-murdered by her own father. my response is tears for the loss of this child and condolences for the family left to deal with their loss.

Hey, tyler! How about doing your job and suspending this guy:

G-Man-804405, in post ##1.83 - Fri Apr 13, 2012 5:29 PM EDT

And if they serve me a bad meal I confront them, when they try to throw me out I stand my ground and shoot the place up.

The Quacked One is right, according NewsNet5 from Cleveland it was a shotgun, he been in trouble for domestic violance before.

Sean- All the gangbangers from L.A. that kill each other all wear hoodies. They don't care who they kill even if it's a small child. Most of these punks are too young to even know what they are doing. They have been told just kill something. I would kill one of these punks in a heartbeat with my automatics if I knew I could save one innocent person on the street. Hoodies or not.

The US government thinks the solution to every problem is to use force - it only stands to reason that those who support the tactics of the USA, resort to the same mentality.

The rifles smuggled from the USA to Mexico are no better than hand guns. Funny how the pro gun people say it's the drug users who blindly support Mexican cartels - yet won't whisper a peep about the role their gun advocacy plays. 99.999% of the guns going to Mexico were/are not part of Fast and Furious - but try and get that through the head of gun owners - half the guns sold at every Arizona gun show are headed to Mexico... guess who is doing the buying and reselling?

What kind of idiot tells their spouse that they are leaving them - at the same time they are celebrating one of their child's birth days... this lady was clueless.

Do gun advocates realize the tone they use in defending guns? Their angry responses just add fuel to the fire... I'll do this and that and everything else if you try to take my guns - lmfao, what Tools, and not the sharpest ones at that.

ive got a great idea give everyone a gun and make them carry it. that way people can shoot back

I would guess -

White conservative strong gun advocate loves his Bible and God strong family values and anti abortion and that means free choice for women. Loves Limbaugh, Ha-gee, Beck and Fox noise especially Hannity. Only a guess but I forgot strong church influence in childhood: I could be wrong but the profile still stands.

Lol...

having a gun changes a person's attitude. the "need" for guns is proving to be deadly.

Yup - just plain a matter of not enough guns in the hands of inDUHviduals

I'm SURE once the gangs understand that guns are illegal, they'll turn them all in. I'm sure of it. Aren't you?

Oh, wait, the Easter Bunny's at the door, I'll be back....

Anyone who believes guns are responsible for violence should be in favor of confiscating Rosie O'Donnell's silverware.

Sorry Denver, but I think Rosie O'Donnell only knows how to eat with her bare hands.

Irish - I am sure he probably possessed a Democrat voter registration card. And even with this obviously stupid person doing exceptionally stupid things, I would bet his IQ exceeded yours.

Is a catch 22. We all wish the guy in the story didn't have a gun and that violence just didn't happen. Doesn't mean I wouldn't park a tank in the driveway of my mom, sister, wife, girlfriend, female friends and their female friends to protect them. Anti-gun people aren't "really" anti gun, they just want to put that right in the hands of some magical group that decides who gets a gun.

nosferatu-499026

"I'm SURE once the gangs understand that guns are illegal, they'll turn them all in. I'm sure of it. Aren't you?

Oh, wait, the Easter Bunny's at the door, I'll be back...."

The real problem is that nearly every gun currently owned by a criminal was once legally sold in this country. So clearly we have a ton of irresponsible gun owners and purchasers. But of course nothing will be done. Instead we make it easier to obtain and carry weapons. Then people end up dealing with some life altering situations like a divorce by simply killing either the person with whom they have a grievance or someone who got in the way. Sure the gun is just the device but is certainly the preferred method. No other device carries that power. Sure you can kill someone with a car or a toaster for that matter but that is not what they were designed for as an end use.

And of course by nature most of these sick individuals hide from getting treatment. Treatment that might disqualify them from gun ownership. But even then in many states they could just head for the local gun show. We polluted this country with firearms and there is no turning back but we should have some reasonable restriction. The NRA serves to insure that will never happen.

voxrationis says, "The real problem is that nearly every gun owned by a criminal was once legally sold in this country. So clearly we have a ton of irresponsible gun owners and purchasers."

Using that logic, if you get mugged outside a restaurant it is your fault that the mugger has your watch.

i just woke up and read all this crazy crap. with so many being shot i just wonder if their should be a mental stability evaluation along with a ten day wait before the purchase of ANY firearm . i do not support a ban of firearms but i do suggest that our government/bigbrother do something about our well being.

I am more worried about people being tested for mental stability and the capacity for responsibility in order to have a kid.

The need for guns is the NRA business and congress controls the laws that keep them in business.

Try to take away the congress men and the NRA control and you may find yourself losing your shirt.

The need for guns is the NRA business and congress controls the laws that keep them in business.

Try to take away the congress men and the NRA control and you may find yourself losing your shirt.

@Nosferatu,

If the Easter Bunny is at your back door, may I suggest that you GO GET YOUR GUN before you go see what he wants.

Why's he at your BACK door? He's probably not even the REAL Easter Bunny---and you might have to ventilate his cotton tail.

@ Jim and Bobby, why stop there? Any person with a physical disability that impairs movement (including less than 20/20 vision) should be denied a drivers license. That should also include an age limit for the elderly. Couples should be genetically tested in order to apply for a license to have a kid as well as meet geographic and financial requirements. People who don't meet that criteria and become pregnant should have mandatory abortions. Children should have IQ tests early in school and separated into ability groups, no reason for the slow students to hold the smart ones back. Obese people should be required to go to fat camp. LOL I could go on and on in the name of "public safety". Our government is already doing such a wonderful job keeping track of people, I read recently that citizens in my state that apply for the medical marijuana registry are no longer legally allowed to own a firearm (not that I am advocating marijuana).

The minute we allow legislation that creates special classes of citizens with different rights and liberties our country as we know it is done.

All you need to do is compare the murder rate in England to the US. No guns in England, and fewer murders.

UK = 1.23 per 100,000

US = 4.8 per 100,000

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

If you add another 300 million to the UK population do you think that rate would rise?

Eric, the UK has always had a lower homicide rate than the US, way before they instituted their handgun ban.

I don't think you can chalk that up to the availability of guns.

Eric, you should move to the UK so that you can be safe from guns.

The NRA is a terrorist organization.

"Using that logic, if you get mugged outside a restaurant it is your fault that the mugger has your watch"

None of you are using anything approaching "logic". From a rational point of view your statement is illogical. Watches are not registered items and there purpose is to tell time, not to kill and maim. And of course you don't even attempt to explain how legal weapons end up in the possession of criminals. Apparently you believe they were all simply stolen? LOL!

And we see the mentally ill now depicted as a unfortunates because they are excluded from gun ownership. And because modern medicine didn't come until well more than century after the Constitution of course the founders did not account for this. So far common sense has prevailed. But many current Republicans appear to have none of this attribute either. Reagan put them out on the streets and now you want to arm them. Perfect GOP "logic"!

Your sort of "logic" only fits in some parallel dimension where everything is reversed. Or as we know of such thinking on this planet, it is Tea Party "logic", a term which is in and of itself an oxymoron.

Out of curiosity.....why do people always seem to think that banning a specific type of gun is a violation of the 2nd Amendment? For that matter, why do people think Amendments can't be...."amended"? I have read all the Amendments a hundred times and have yet to see the one that states that ratifications are not allowed. Nor does the 2nd Amendment say "all current and future types of fireams".

It does say that you have the right to own a fiream........saying that you can own rifles and shotguns, but not handguns or assault rifles still allows you to own a firearm. If you want to hardcore about it and say that we should be strict Constitution types then that means we should based the weapons you can own based on the ones available at the time the Amendment was created....if so, I hope you all know how to pack powder and balls. ;)

@ Really?-1739510

Really? You are going to use those numbers as your arguement? 1,760 people in the UK were either injured or killed by a gun in a two year period? How does that even remotely compare to the 30,000 KILLED by a gun in the US each year? And each year more than 70,000 people in the US are non-fatal victims of gun violence. I may not have gone to MIT, but I am pretty sure you can not compare 1,760 victims to 200,000+ victims (based on the two year average).

In regards to firearms ownership, I sleep with a handgun under my pillow just in case an armed large two legged cockroach decides to enter my home by kicking my front door in. I also have a sign outside that reads "Home Invasions Can Be Hazardous to Your Health and Lead Posioning Can be Fatal."

Better to have than to not have and need it.

I sleep with a handgun under my pillow

A move that someone totally unfamiliar with a handgun would do. A sure way to shoot yourself or a family member. Get some training. Simple possession of a firearm doesn't make you competent.

Once again...Guns don't kill people....People kill people!

It's a MAD WORLD out there!!

Prayers...for the innocent!

Eric, I know that wikipedia comes up first when you google, but a user edited site is not the best for quoting. Try this one: They are an official source. It is odd that in England, it almost seems that there is a preference for the quieter, more personal use of a knife. But that is just my observation and opinion which may or may not be upheld by further study of fact!

Also, here is another article from 2009 and the link is included at the end. This article reports on the dramatic increase in criminal activity and firearms:

Gun crime has almost doubled since Labour came to power as a culture of extreme gang violence has taken hold.

The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year - a rise of 89 per cent.

In some parts of the country, the number of offences has increased more than five-fold.

In eighteen police areas, gun crime at least doubled.

The statistic will fuel fears that the police are struggling to contain gang-related violence, in which the carrying of a firearm has become increasingly common place.

Last week, police in London revealed they had begun carrying out armed patrols on some streets.

The move means officers armed with sub-machine guns are engaged in routine policing for the first time.

Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Grayling, said last night: 'In areas dominated by gang culture, we're now seeing guns used to settle scores between rivals as well as turf wars between rival drug dealers.

'We need to redouble our efforts to deal with the challenge.'

He added: 'These figures are all the more alarming given that it is only a week since the Metropolitan Police said it was increasing regular armed patrols in some areas of the capital'.

Read more: #ixzz1rw8bovzi

And this is from a country that had a culture that was not based on the same amount of individual freedoms as the US even though they did originally have the Magna Carta in which our Constitution has its roots.

Just be careful citing statistics without researching the background data.

Try arming US Cops on routine patrols with sub-machine guns and wait for the screaming.

Eric, I have to wonder why my links were removed when I posted my comment.

On the other hand, google gun violence in Switzerland where every male participates in military service and after completion of that service is given his weapon, including automatic weapons, to keep at home. Women are also encouraged to own firearms.

The main perpetrators of gun violence in Switzerland come from what the Swiss term "Criminal Foreigners".

Ivan, I haven't heard anyone say the Constitution can't be amended, that certain amendments can't be repealed. However, given the arduous process an amendment must go through in order to be ratified (to be proposed, never mind ratified, 2/3 of the state legislatures have to request that a proposed amendment come up for a ratification vote. After that, 3/4 of the state legislatures have to ratify the amendment), and the fact that a growing majority of voters want to either maintain or curtail current gun control laws, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Nor does the 2nd Amendment say "all current and future types of fireams".

No, but it does say "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It does say that you have the right to own a fiream........saying that you can own rifles and shotguns, but not handguns or assault rifles still allows you to own a firearm.

Let me get this straight: you're saying that handguns (which they had in the late 1700s, btw) and assault rifles aren't firearms? With all due respect, that is one of the most ignorant things I've ever read on Newsvine, almost as dumb as that guy I saw who said that there was no good American beer.

Here's a really interesting article by Cecil Adams, a man no one would mistake for a "Teahadi Republifart" as the more ideological of us would call them, of the Straight Dope on the Second Amendment.

The NRA is a terrorist freedom fighter organization.

Fixed that for ya!

Bobby Jones ,, Do you not grasp the concept of Gun Deaths per 100 000 , it means per capita so your statement is just dumb

I'd be pissed too if I got left at a Cracker Barrel.

SUXME,

Do you understand how averages work? Now I will ask you again since you must be an expert in the field. If you add 300 million more variables do you think that average may go up?

Search "knife related crime in the UK" and you will see knife related crime increased 50% a year for the last 4 years (since 2008). The number was over 38,000 knife crimes for 2008. This is how it works when personal ownership of firearms is illegal, a replacement weapon is quickly found. Otherwise the perp in the article could do like Simon Peter Nelson did in Rockford IL in the late 1970's, wait for your soon to be ex-family to go to sleep and kill them with a claw hammer in their beds. Handguns may be expedient, but they are not the only way to kill if your mind is set to kill. How many mothers drown their children to "get back" at their father or someone else? Killers kill, that's what they do. And we cannot stop it.

Hey, England has banned the private ownership of handguns, therefor their crime rate is lower than in the U.S.A. -- YET IT IS STILL EASY ENOUGH TO GET A HANDGUN IN ENGLAND IF YOU ARE DESPERATE/VIOLENT ENOUGH AND DO NOT CARE ABOUT OBEYING THE LAW. Even in England, where "there are no guns", CRIMINALS STILL HAVE GUNS.

violent crime always spikes during a depression/recession as people are stretched to the limit. It doesn't help when half this country is needlessly armed to the teeth...

Just one more example of men who think that the marriage license is a paper of ownership.

Ladies beware -- if an intuitive alarm bell goes off while dating pay attention, steer clear and run as fast as you can!

Then what did Lorena Bobbit think a marriage license was?

They don't. The vast majority of male suicides are not "murder suicides."

Yes Topcat only in america wars guns killings. If you people want to stop the shootings in resturants,

Then, LEARN TO COOK

Topcat50, stay out of Mexican/US border towns unless you want to chance getting shot with a US BATFE supplied weapon to a Mexican Cartel member.

Please, parents--when rearing your children, teach them that violence is not an acceptable form of "communication."

Right on. You can talk to them right after you turn off CSI, if you can get them to stop listening to the rap music long enough.

In my experience, children are the best b.s. detectors in the world. You'll have a hard time teaching them black is white, especially when they spend hours every day watching and listening to acts of depraved violence.

How many Americans eat dinner while watching a woman being raped and murdered on television for entertainment? This is a sick society and telling kids that violence isn't the answer, isn't the answer.

So many people want to deflect and talk about thinks like black on black violence when the real problem in the world - all over the world - is male violence (male on male and male on female). It's the males of all races committing 95% of the world's violence.

I know; it's "politically incorrect" to say so. Too bad. Something has to be done.

@bonos_rama:

I know; it's "politically incorrect" to say so. Too bad. Something has to be done.

You are not only "politically correct" but blaming men for everything is quite popular. Even though according to the CDC, American women kill more of their own children than any other mothers in the industrialized world. But let's not talk about that kind of "domestic violence." It makes people uncomfortable.

@bonos_rama

You are wrong; it's politically correct to blame males for everything. That's what society and the media do all the time. Just being male means you're a violent criminal. Never mind personal responsibility. Let's just vilify all males. Oh yeah, and when a woman commits a crime, it's some man's fault. Let her go or give her a shorter sentence than a man would receive. You say something has to be done. Well, what exactly? Just ditch personal responsibility; involve the government some more and lock up all men? Castration?

PMS is a defense against murder charges. Testosterone is an aggravating factor.

Bonos@arama - if Males, armed or unarmed commit 95% of the worlds violence, should we ban males now?

I don't know the stats, but I have seen women do some serious damage to their families, their partners, etc. People don't always need a gun to commit violence.

I had a friend years ago who was almost killed by his g/f when she attacked him with a knife. Stabbed him a # of times. We almost lost him.

Susan Smith killed her two little boys by driving her car into a lake, with her sons strapped in their car seats. That wack job down in TX who drowned 5-6 of her kids in the bath tub. It happens all the time.

Lizzie Borden did it with an ax.

Now it's easy and probably very PC to blame it all on the men. But as a woman I can tell you honestly, that's not always the case.

People doing violence to other people is wrong. Where do we start to make it stop? I'm not picking on men or on women, both can do violence. We simply must insist that communication is a very viable option instead of harming one another. (We can agree to disagree without killing one another over the point of contention.) It's a process that must the taught and learned. Obviously, the world as a whole is not making much progress toward peaceful interactions. We must learn to step back from the edge of the abyss and consider calmer, less destructive options. This can be taught and learned. We need not escalate a dangerous situation.

Many condolences to the families of those who were killed. May the injured recover quickly.

"It's the males of all races committing 95% of the world's violence."

Amusing to see people get defensive and take the attitude, "but women can be bad too!!" it doesn't take a rocket science to see the majority of the world's violent crimes are committed by males. Just watch the evening news. Look at crime statistics in virtually any city in the world.

Of course there will be bad seeds, but to point out the few cases of female violence seems like an attempt to place it on the same parity of male violence. It's an attempt to deflect guilt and avoid looking at the glaring and obvious truth.

I know in HS the girls sure had the most violent fights, whew let me tell ya. My ex-wife was violent, she tossed a frying pan at my head, crazy woman I just walked in the house. My friend told me he had a girlfriend who tried to piss him off and then got even more upset when he wouldn't hit her!? So she went back to a previous man who was abusive, freakin nut case. I guess for the most part men are usually the violent ones, but you know, I would never turn my back to an angry female.

@world_observer:

"...but to point out the few cases of female violence seems like an attempt to place it on the same parity of male violence."

Actually when it comes to child murder women are on the same parity as men. Between four and seven children die a day at the hands of their mothers in America. According to the CDC American women kill more of their own children than any other mothers in the industrialized world, a 25% increase since 1985.

That's much more than "a few cases."

And what about women selecting "bad boys" and rating men sexually by their potential for violence...??

Its a shame to hear about the dogs...

Three dogs? What a waste!

Lol, Exactly! The irony? His wife moved into the house, repaired it, and brought the lover with her. :(

The poor dogs! What did they do to deserve that? Too bad the idiot didn't slowly burn to death instead of shooting himself, or whatever method he used to make it quick and painless.

I will ask you, bonos_rama, and others. Why do women have such fickle hearts?

Why do you feel the need to have your butts kissed or else you leave?

Why are there not more marriages that last in the U.S.?

What has happened to our families?

What has happened to our kids?

Why can women not leave the man they are with before finding their NEXT lover? Why is there never a gap?

Seems like men CARE more then women do, LOVE is just some B.S. you use to get what you want. Sorry, but I have stopped listening to the words that come out of your mouth since I cannot trust it. You do not want partners you want dogs.

Example: A man kills himself and not a single one of you cares, some even find it funny, WTF? Three posts about the poor dogs...the man was getting cheated on or else the term "lover" would not have been used now would it. LOL that is so funny...fing b****es. You wonder where all the good men went? The F*ck away from all of you. The only men that will have you now are fat desperate ones, that would sleep with a whore, but find it is cheaper/easier just to lie, and say that they love you.

Why did she marry the guy in the first place if he was crazy? Maybe it was something she did to make him go crazy. Maybe she cheated on him or drove him nuts slowly. If it was a man that cheated on a wife then you would be all for her going crazy with a gun, feminist hypocrites (Liliths).

Tired, you sound hurt and angry. If you have had negative experiences with women, I can sympathize with your feelings. However, you have jumped to so many wrong conclusions and made so many ridiculous accusations it is dificult to take your screed seriously. I suggest you honestly think about your role in your experiences, and why you seem to repeatedly have bad experiences. Perhaps after honest reflection you can find healthy ways to relate to women and find happiness. But if you continue on your present path, I doubt you will ever overcome the anger that is making you so unhappy.

Hmmm, it seems Tired has real anger issues. Perhaps we will see a new headline soon regarding another domestic shooting??? Get a grip, Tired. You sound as if you're one sandwich short of a picnic.

Tired, I have no doubt you're alone. And for good reason.

@mrgagl: If I could rain confetti down upon your post, I would.

Tired, with the parents we have nowdays I wouldn't be surprised by much, very few people have a stable loving home to raise children in. Yet everybody is doing it. If one of the parents isn't being selfish and cheating on the family, you got someone thats hitting, doing drugs, yelling, ignoring, spending all the money, always working, never working, not helping, and a list of things that can drive somebody ape s&^t crazy. Me me me, that's the generation we live in, that's the generation the kids are learning from. Scary stuff.

Wow, Tired. Maybe you should move out of that little town of whores that you live in. And for the safety of the next woman that cheats on you, please GET HELP.

You people are so naive, criminals are criminals, they'll get guns, how exactly are laws (which criminals flout by the way) going to change criminals getting guns?

Don't you realize you're only affecting LAW ABIDING citizens?

People are making assumptions not in evidence. Where in the article does it say that she told him in public because she was afraid to tell him privately? That's not necessarily the case.

My ex took me to lunch one day, and over the lunch he asked me what was wrong. That's when I told him I wanted out of our marriage. It wasn't planned. It wasn't because I was afraid to tell him at home. It just seemed like the right time to tell him.

The NRA didn't write the second Amendment, The founding fathers did.

Right you are- they didn't write it, they just perverted the meaning of it.

..

To those who claim the NRA perverted the second amendment, not so.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Now, let us go over this. A well regulated militia

Definition of MILITIA

1
a: a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency b: a body of citizens organized for military service

2
: the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service

being necessary for the security

Definition of SECURITY

1
: the quality or state of being secure: as a: freedom from danger : safety b: freedom from fear or anxiety c: freedom from the prospect of being laid off <job security>

2
a: something given, deposited, or pledged to make certain the fulfillment of an obligation b: surety

3
: an instrument of investment in the form of a document (as a stock certificate or bond) providing evidence of its ownership

4
a: something that secures : protection b (1): measures taken to guard against espionage or sabotage, crime, attack, or escape (2): an organization or department whose task is security

of a free

Definition of FREE

1
a: having the legal and political rights of a citizen b: enjoying civil and political liberty <free citizens> c: enjoying political independence or freedom from outside domination d: enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another

2
a: not determined by anything beyond its own nature or being : choosing or capable of choosing for itself b: determined by the choice of the actor or performer <free actions> c: made, done, or given voluntarily or spontaneously

3
a: relieved from or lacking something and especially something unpleasant or burdensome <free from pain> <a speech free of political rhetoric> —often used in combination <error-free> b: not bound, confined, or detained by force

4
a: having no trade restrictions b: not subject to government regulation cof foreign exchange: not subject to restriction or official control

State
5
a: a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory; especially: one that is sovereign b: the political organization of such a body of people c: a government or politically organized society having a particular character <a police state> <the welfare state>

6
: the operations or concerns of the government of a country

7
a: one of the constituent units of a nation having a federal government <the fifty states>

the right

Definition of RIGHT

1
: qualities (as adherence to duty or obedience to lawful authority) that together constitute the ideal of moral propriety or merit moral approval

2
: something to which one has a just claim: as a: the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled <voting rights> <his right to decide> b (1): the interest that one has in a piece of property —often used in plural <mineral rights> (2)plural: the property interest possessed under law or custom and agreement in an intangible thing especially of a literary and artistic nature <film rights of the novel>

3
: something that one may properly claim as due <knowing the truth is her right>

4
: the cause of truth or justice

of the people to keep and bear

Definition of BEAR

transitive verb

1
a: to move while holding up and supporting (something) b: to be equipped or furnished with (something) c: behave, conduct <bearing himself well> d: to have as a feature or characteristic <bears a likeness to her grandmother>

arms shall not be infringed.

Definition of INFRINGE

transitive verb

1
: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <infringe a patent>

2
obsolete: defeat, frustrate

intransitive verb

: encroach —used with on or upon <infringe

I hope this helps to clear it up for some of you. It's written in plain English and means exactly what it says. The Second Amendment was copied from the Constitution at the U.S. Archives and the definitions are copied from the Merriam - Webster Dictionary.

The NRA is a tool of the gun lobby- they get enormous donations from manufacturers, to promote local "carry" laws, like "stand your ground", which in turn drives up gun sales. Working through ALEC, they are trying to change the local gun ordinances in every state.

I don't think they'll be satisfied till this country is like Afghanistan, with 6 year olds toting AK-47's around.

The NRA DOES concentrate on gun safety. They have a basic safety course for adults, with an instructor certification program, and the "Eddie Eagle" program for kids, which is their, granted, overly simplistic "Don't Touch!" campaign. And yet, Eddie Eagle is vilified as "promoting" guns to kids. Tell me: What have Sarah Brady and Handgun Control, Inc. done directly with kids in the way of a safety program?

Guns should be as easy to buy as bubble gum if you have no history of mental illness. Why should the responsible people and those that can put up with boring paperwork and classes be only allowed to buy guns. Irresponsible non-bookworms need protection too.

Horrible reply. According to the UN, the US has about 10 gun-related deaths per 100k people per year. Australia has about 3. That puts us in such good company as Philipines, Argentina, Panama, et al. Not exactly in the company of the truly enlightened societies there (due respect to the specified countries).

Yeah, yeah, most of them are suicides. We are still on par with Australia but Australia has banned guns so what does that tell you?

Also, we have more Filipinos, Latin Americans, and other Third Worldians than Australia does. And they comprise larger percentages of our population than they do of Australia's. I reckon if you send them back and close up our borders, then we would really be on par with the Aussies. I think this has more to do with the liberals' diversity crap than with guns being legal.

What about other kinds of death, though? Seems like even without guns, people find brutal ways to kill each other. How do we rank for just murder, with or without guns? I once heard that a lot of European countries have more murders than we do, they're just done without guns. I don't know if that statistic still holds true, though.

To Antiochus, a responsible person would ensure that they know how to PROPERLY and SAFELY handle and use a firearm before they owned one. Not wanting to put up with "boring paperwork and classes" is not a good enough reason to endanger people. While you are at it why don't we just get rid of driving tests for driver's licenses? After all, you shouldn't have to prove you can operate a vehicle safely and responsibly before you are legally allowed to drive one, right?

To Shugar Daddy, if you want to use statistics to defend your argument, you should also note that MORE THAN HALF of gun deaths in the US are suicide. My point is clear: that even if you spend a ton of money to get people to turn in their firearms in a "gun buy-back" program, there will still be plenty out there. These are two deaths within one week in the same city in Australia. You can ban, collect, and destroy guns all you want, but criminals will still have them, and still use them. There is absolutely no way to keep guns away from dangerous people that want to use them. Accept that.

or he really shouldn't bang his wife in public...like that...

If not a gun a knife. If not a knife a sword. If not a sword a bow and arrow. If not a bow and arrow a vehicle. If not a vehicle a crude weapon. If not a crude weapon some device. If not a device some other method.

There are so many tools in which one can use to kill them-self and others, that it's pointless to try to remove one of them. I'm not a fan of people walking and driving around with weapons of any sort, because their availability increases the likely-hood of murders and suicides. There is no doubt, that having a weapon in the grasp of an emotionally charged person could be deadly. It would be fair to say that crimes of passion are as common as robbery, yet they are quickly forgotten and avoided until the next one rears-up and reminds us that it's prevalent in our society. Many suicides are committed over love, something that most people can't define. This desire to fall in love with another being is not natural, but we have this belief that it is. As I was saying, investing your heart into someone else is not required to be with them, but this is the tradition on men. Our hearts and love should be given to God only and if we enter into a relationship with someone we must only honor them. Now, if you dishonor your other half, the very act itself is penalized by God because this is his commandment.

Think about in this wise. When you join the military you must serve them honorably, during the length of your contract. If you do anything to discredit your union, they will terminate you and give a dishonorable discharge. Consider that your letter of divorce. Therefore, if you have grounds for a divorce you should issue your partner a letter of divorcement. If you enter a union under such a contract, it's unlikely to result to violence.

Finally, a voice of sanity!

swords murdered people before guns. lets take a step back if you wish and go to the roman days... people will still be murdered, infact, at a higher rate then today.

Some would say guns are needed now more than ever considering our government as of late is pretty much on par with Third World tinpot dictatorships. Also, do keep in mind that I am not saying this. Other are. I like my government. Sure do. Nothing wrong with America becoming a banana republic.

Funny nobody that has your mindset was complaining when the Bush crew was trampling on the Constitution with their actions and spying on US Citizens. That was okay because it fell under National Security, which is a BS way around the Constitution. You Right wing Mofos are so 2 faced. "Facce Dua"

Some would say guns are needed now more than ever considering our government as of late is pretty much on par with Third World tinpot dictatorships

Comments like that, in the hands of mentally crazed, racist, gun carrying fools, is irresponsible! It empowers their foolishness!

Didn't say anything about Obama or said that W. had no hand in this. Sheesh, liberals are so sensitive. But now that you brought it up, Obama did spend a lot of years in a banana republic so perhaps this is to his liking.

We have a standing army, and citizens can vote if they want changes in government.

Your trust in the government, given its behavior over the past ten years, is quite charming.

Funny nobody that has your mindset was complaining when the Bush crew was trampling on the Constitution with their actions and spying on US Citizens. That was okay because it fell under National Security, which is a BS way around the Constitution.

Wait, wouldn't that be an argument for purchasing guns during the Bush Administration?

Neither reason is truly relevant today. We have a standing army, and citizens can vote if they want changes in government.

You're kidding, right? This is meant as a joke? Vote? Do you honestly feel represented in our government today? Millionaires who make their own rules, their own laws, ignore the laws already on the books that don't suit their purpose (i.e., illegal immigration).....you are kidding, are you not?

Antiochus, you are to ignorant for words so I won't waste them on you.

I have yet to meet a cop or ex-cop that wasn't a control freak with a hot temper and and exaggerated sense of self-importance. They truly feel they ARE the law, and as such, above it. So when they make statements that they would do this or that if their spouse offended or left them, it has a lot more credibility than an non-cop's assertions would. I think the worst possible scenario would be to live next door to a cop or ex-cop, and I know people who did, and had nothing but trouble with their cop neighbors, including threats of harm and bogus arrests. Another friend of mine and his wife were murdered by a cop in South Jersey merely for being a character witness for a man on trial for allegedly exposing himself to the cop's daughter, which was a trumped-up charge to begin with. So yeah, if anyone is most likely to take the law into their own hands, it's cops.

Mymom...would you like to have lunch sometime? I would like to introduce you to a good deal of the cops I work with that are nothing like you describe. My guess is you don't know very many cops.

hmmm, I dunno. Don't really agree with that statement. Then again if the guy was faced with financial disaster, losing everything he cared about and publicly facing his replacement while she rejected him.... That could make a man crack. Either way, I think the world is overpopulated with emotionally unstable people.

Ann -Your comment is unbelievable! She was there and she was his wife, so she must be guilty too. How dare she leave him - especially knowing how dangerous he can be! Let's all stay with our volatile spouses, "just in case".

Ann,

she should share some of the guilt (if not some of the blame, also) in causing the situation.

Really?? That is UNBELIEVABLE!

You could not possibly sound more mentally imbalanced if you tried.

Ann you are part of the problem, blame the victim because what she made him mad? Are you for real? Men always say well she pushed my buttons, she knows what sets me off, in other words he is so immature he cannot handle being told no so he cannot control himself like a 10 year old boy. She had a right to leave this man and of course he wanted to control her one last time. Women loose their lives most of the time not while they are in the situation still being abused and controlled but after they leave and stand up for themselves. She was probably tired of trying to not make him mad. You need to grow up.

gramgigi--I'd vote you up twice if I could. You took the words right out of my mouth.

Ann, sounds like you are in the "abused wife syndrome." -- aka known as he lost his temper and became violent, so it must be my fault

Ann was simply pointing out that the wife, knowing the husband was potentially violent, told him in a crowded restaurant where he ended up killing people with NO connection to either one. I see her point, and I agree with her. I thought that myself before she posted.

The wife should have just LEFT without telling the guy. Not drag innocent people in to be harmed. Obviously she realized his capacity to harm people.

The only place that infers she told him at the restaurant is the headline, he was circling the place when she called 911 he could have followed her there. He killed his wife and child and injured his other child before the police killed him. No other people were killed. Don't blame the victims for how they chose to get out of a situation, blame the coward.

He didn't kill his wife and child. His wife was the one calling 9-1-1. The article states that the police don't know the relation, if any, of the dead woman and child to the killer.

1. The woman should have gone to the police department, not lured her husband to a restaurant where other innocent people had no idea of any threat. If I'm eating at a restaurant, I don't want to eat next to anyone who decides to bring their drama to a table near me.

2. If she had the ability to get to a restaurant, she had the ability to get to, or call, the police. She surely was able AFTER he started shooting. Obviously, living with him, she knew he had guns. So nice to drag innocent people into their ordeal. That's just as cowardly as the shooter. Ask the family of the dead. I bet they are asking, why did this woman drag her family problems to a restaurant and not the police department? Did she want security, or did she want an audience?

OK Lou the loser, one more time for morons like you, HE killed his wife and child and injured his other child, she did not lure him there, she was their with her children celebrating one of their birthdays and he walked in and killed his daughter on her birthday. She called 911 when she saw him circling the place. Please don't make up a story to blame the victims it really makes you sound like the a@@ you probably are.

LOL...Lou77777777,

You and Ann married?

I hope you are just a troll.....

Well come to think of it, what I said does sound a bit insensitive. Believe me I feel bad for the innocents but keep in mind that more innocents would die if guns were outlawed. I mean, the crooks and government goons would slaughter us at will.

You are a fruitcake.

They say an armed society is a polite society. And since there are no ways to use firearms on the internet, then the internet is the most unpolite place ever.

I agree with you 100% Rob. I blame the guy and only the guy.

I am a firm believer of the 2nd amendment, and NO I do not own a gun. Never have. I also believe that people should meet a certain criteria in order to purchase a gun. Now some are saying that they should go through not only a criminal evaluation but also an emotional one. In thinking on that, how often should that be renewed? Should it be like a drivers license which is renewed every 4-5yrs? Or maybe like your car registration? Who can say when your mind may change, and what things may cause it to change?

A divorce, a death can cause extreme changes for some. Not much for others. How do we determine when/how a persons emotional state should be re-evaluated?

Yea, and I live on Mars and we don't have guns either. We have no crime and we eat gold cakes.