woodsmith, I think your misunderstanding, weirdscience's comment... I believe he is speaking in the US government's person. I don't know your age, you sound very young, but that is exactly what Socialist/Communist gov's do!! The people under those forms of gov, don't own anything!

Everything the people of the those nations have, can be taken by their government (SOCIALIST gov, make the ppl think what they have is their's, until they take it back ---- And the ppl under COMMUNIST CONTROLED governments know that everything they have belongs to their government!!)

So wordsmith, if we let out gov disarm us, it will be the last step towards a Socialist style gov which will soon become a Communist gov!! This has been the History of all the World's Nations who once free. When the ppl allow the gov to disarm them, so that the only ppl w/ firearms are the government and the criminals, all the ppl of that nation loose all freedom and liberty. You may not know this because our government controled Public Education, no longer teaches this to the youth in the US and so it's history forgotten! AND WHEN HISTORY IS FORGOTTEN...IT WILL REPEAT ITSELF!!!

Republicans are always worried about "socialism" and "communism". Nobody is talking about those things, even as your party pushes us farther and farther towards fascism.

Mass shootings, murder, gun violence is 4 times lower in countries with stricter gun control like the UK, Australia, and Japan.

^ Only someone with a true grip on reality could use the words socialism, communism, and fascism to describe our country's direction. Way to show your ignorance Eric.

I don't think the government is as worried about being outgunned in a confrontation with an individual homeowner, with that worry preventing them from taking political prisoners and destroying the state's high profile enemies. I firmly believe the order we have is upheld by the force and rule of law, respect for the constitutional principles the nation was founded on, writ of habeas corpus and so on.

Republicans would have us think that the end is near for US society, and they are near to accomplishing it. But I don't think that the middle class will let the wealthy exile them to the poorhouse without putting up some stiff political resistance. That's really what's at stake here. To brush up on apocalypse, the collapse of Cambodia in 1972 is a window on that reality. Think of it: the Khmer Rouge and Brother Number One in Year Zero.

Eric, you do fail to realize that there are multiple other variables to include in the why. They have a much different socio-economic structure that very must fosters a strong middle class and much less people getting stuck in the need to steal to survive. They also have a rehabilitation program rather than an incarseration program. The UK also has a rather large issue in regards to violent attacks.

Comparing countries on one topic will often produce skewed results.

Eric's right. Deal with it.

NO, Eric isn't right. It's bad logic and reasoning. Lets see if he can come up with a link that indicates that tougher gun laws actually lower crime.

Banning might not be the right path. If this person was under the care of a psychologist then I am sure in the doctor's file are notes that state this patient made violent comments in the past, as would be with any other insane person who commits these crimes. Can a doctor contact anybody if a patient makes such a remark? Is the doctor in a no win situation? If he does inform somebody of a problem which could help this person and prevent a horrible event, does the doctor lose his license by the medical board because he violated the doctor-patient relationship even though he saved lives?

Eric is right...if there are no guns...there are fewer "shootings". This is logical in the same way that confiscating all automobiles means nobody is driving anywhere. What he's missing is that an outright ban will not happen in the foreseeable future. The laws that the democratic party have the clout to enact, will do zero to affect crime or mass shootings. What they'll try to ban is high capacity magazines and maybe certain kinds of guns. The term "assault weapon" never did have a technical definition, so I'm not sure how they could word a ban on them that made any sense. They also have to deal with the fact that if they do anything drastic, they will be lose the next election as the majority of moderates swing back to the right. So, they'll enact a knee jerk law that makes it look like they're being tough, but it will do very little....count on it. Washington works like clockwork.

OK Here's my thoughts...Listen up NRA, as I'm a member.

• Do I enjoy shooting? Yes.
• Do I own a gun? Yes.
• Do I own more than one gun? Yes.
• Do I own an assault weapon? Yes.
• Do people who want to get behind the wheel of a car need a license to drive? Yes.
• Does a car kill people? No.
• Does the driver of the car kill people? Yes.
• Does a gun kill people? No.
• Does the person holding the gun kill people? Yes.
• Do people who want to own a gun need a license? No.

Then why can I (and others) operate/shoot a gun without a license? Hmmmmmmmmmm?

The only license that is require for a gun is when one wants to have a CWP (concealed Weapons permit) which is usually a day long class and passing a background check. Even though I'm pro-rights for gun ownership, then why do we let anyone who can pass a background check (and if bought from a private owner at a gun show with no background, as I have done for 2 of my guns) walk away with a weapon?

A simple licensing program, similar to one getting a driver's license, should be enacted. If you don't have a license, then you can't purchase a gun...period!. This would get rid of the Gun Show loop holes. Have the licensing process include an intensive background check that not only looks a law violations but mental confinement/hospital records!

Eric is right...if there are no guns...there are fewer "shootings".

@Z-933870
There would still be guns...lots of illegal guns...So as 'logical' as your argument is you're forgetting the most important part. Disarming citizens takes the fear factor away from criminals and not only does gun crime go up, other crimes as well, because criminals realize no one will be armed. Check the Harvard study - www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, (the) statement is, in fact, false and is substantially so. *WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE? by Don Kates & Gary Mauser

Julie - Driving a car is not a constitutional right, so the comparison is not valid. Let's compare two constitutional rights.

Do I have a right to free speech - Yes

Do I have to have a license to talk - No

President Barack Obama says his administration has received an outpouring of support for stricter gun laws following last week's elementary school massacre in Connecticut, telling respondents to an online petition: "We hear you."

I know he also got a flood of opposition to stricter gun control laws. Did he hear them?

Not only wil criminal still have guns, so will your gov't and they will use them on you when they come to take what little left you have and they will use them to contol your every move and you will have nothing to defend yourself with-just look at all the mass killings of gov't killing their people that have happened in other countries under these no gun laws. Our rights to own guns was for the reason of protecting ourselves against the gov't.

The main reason for the second amendment is, as was stated above, protection as much against the abuse of government as protection against criminals. The one thing I really respected about what was communicated in Mr Obama's statement-

Obama has directed Vice President Joe Biden and a team of Cabinet officials to offer concrete proposals by next month on how to tighten gun laws and improve Americans' access to mental healthcare, strengthen school safety and address a culture that glorifies guns and violence.

This more than anything else, to me, puts the White House position on gun control in a more reasonable perspective. Even the President is not calling for bans, or even increased control, just more reasonable controls on those with mental issues.

I, as a gun enthusiast, can stand behind that.
In addition, people who own guns need to be responsible for who has access to them. If I have kids around, I have three, teach them to be responsible around guns, and NOT to use them to solve arguements.

Here they come. The gun nuts and the anti-violence brigade. Each on opposite sides of the argument. Both are wrong in much of what they do and say.

Gun Nuts:

The gun nuts think that there should be no gun reform whatsoever. They believe that either they keep everything, or Bob Costas will show up at the door to take away all their guns. They don't seem to understand that gun reform does not mean taking away the second amendment, but simply being smarter about how we legislate it. I for one fully support the second amendment, and the right to own a gun. But back when the constitution was made, we didn't have all these fancy guns and ammo. We had longer muskets and shorter muskets. That was pretty much it. Now that we have a lot more newer and deadly types of guns, maybe it's time we take our legislation out of the 1700s?

I still haven't heard why civilians need an assault rifle with armor piercing rounds. And no it isn't hunting. An armor piercer isn't for defense, either. It'll go right through the intruders, through your house, through the neighbor's house, through the neighbor, and kill the person standing behind the neighbor. Why do civilians need that?

And if you are crazy enough to think you need all the available gun toys to stand up to oppressive governments, then good luck shooting down those pesky drones with an ak-47 when you lead your one man revolution against the government of the freest country (USA) on earth. If I don't show up in 2 seconds, start without me.

Anti-Violence Brigade

The anti-violence brigade believes that violent video games cause all the violence in the country. While they do often say the culture in general, they tend to hyper focus on just the video game part of it because... Well, I don't know why. First of all, they better talk to Hollywood about making movie after movie with gun violence, explosions, fast women, and no plot. Then they had better kill all our good television. Otherwise, they are hyper-focusing on a minor part of the spectrum and not addressing the issue they claim they are. We also have ratings for a reason. If the ratings are not followed and enforced by the parents, then there is no point to them.

Second, most people are taught to distinguish the difference between fiction and reality. The anti-violence brigade doesn't seem to understand this most of the time. (They often like to go after M rated video games which children should not be playing in the first place.) The exceptions to this are young children and the mentally unstable. Mentally sick people often have a hard time distinguishing fiction from reality or right from wrong. For them, those lines are blurred. Young children are still early in (brain) development and are far more susceptible to things like mimicking what they observe, as that is one way children learn. Young children are also often still learning right and wrong. Any mentally healthy child with decent parents is not the problem, as they are taught the difference between fiction and reality and the difference between right and wrong. It is the mentally unhealthy and the children without (good) parents who are the issue, and it is those that we should shelter from violent culture. Anything else is focusing on the wrong thing and a waste of time.

Third, you can't just undo an entire culture by snapping your fingers. You have to be realistic about not only what you can change, but what you should change. Far too often, these anti-violence brigades behave like a team of overprotective soccer moms who don't understand that violence has it's place in our culture to a certain extent. Just not with young children and the mentally ill, which again should be their true focus. Otherwise, it is just PR fluff.

Do a search on

Biden 2008: If Obama ‘tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem’

I guess Biden has "evolved" on this issue as well?

Same ones crying that the government is trying to take their guns applauded everytime Bush farted. No one is trying to disarm law abiding citizens so quit whining.

PHILLI -

you are spot on correct!

Obamma is not hearing a MAJORITY of the people who are using common sense and dont want these new gun bans pushed thru...

and Obamma is acting more and more like a dictator trying to push this thru without congress ( WHO MAKES THE LAWS)

pardon me while i cling for my gun and bible... lol

I have had to show my drivers license every time I've bought a gun. I also had to have approval from the FBI after running a background check. Why do gun haters who know nothing about a gun or the process of getting one always say we need the things that are already law?

Any reasonable research will show that countries that have bans on guns still have crime involving guns. Bans on guns will not stop these attacks. Executing every psychiatrist in the country will help tremendously. We should also jail every owner of a pharmaceutical company that creates deadly psych drugs and makes billions of dollars turning people into mass murdering/self-destructing zombies. What the hell, execute them too. You should also research the connection that Obama has to these same drug companies. "Yes, by all means let's blame the guns and sh....let's hope no one notices the psych drug connection" says our repulsive president.

Unleash the "good guys"*....the Zimmermans and let them keep their AR-15's in schools.

Put them in theaters.

In Malls.

In Universities.

In front of a grocery store.

.

.

*Wayne's World.... that's his "solution"

RI Mom,
Zimmerman is NOT a good example. He is nearly as loopy as the school shooter.

If there had been someone in the school with a gun, there may not have been as many killed. A security guard, a police officer...many high schools have police assigned to them. The expectation of someone walking into an elementary school or a middle school is far lower. This was completely out of the blue.

So phillipqb, let's just leave things as they are? Yea, because that's working so well. So you have a problem that to buy or own a gun one should have a license? My idea (in post #2.11 above) is not taking away any rights, limiting magazine capacity, or banning assault weapons. It's only licensing owners that can pass a simple firearms test and a background check (that should include mental hospital & psychological records).

Julie - Driving a car is not a constitutional right, so the comparison is not valid. Let's compare two constitutional rights.

Really? How old does one need to be to even purchase a gun? Can my 16 year old nephew purchase a gun? And don't come back with "Well he's still a kid" because the same constitutional right you proclaim/quote was written when 16 year olds were consider adults. Hell, they even fought in the Army. However now, that same 16 year old can't purchase a gun. I guess their constitutional right was taken away?

And Straight, ever been to a gun show and purchased one there? Yea, if the seller is an actual gun shop owner there's still the background check but from a private seller nope. And the last weapon I purchased was at a gun show (Spokane Gun Show) from a private seller that had more than 30 weapons for sell, all Winchesters. No background check.

Love the people who think we need more guns to defend ourselves from tragedies like the latest Connecticut school shooting.

Let's turn our schools into free-fire zones! That will stop them when our (mostly untrained) teachers are having shootouts in the elementary school to get the (more heavily armed and better trained) bad guys! I don't see what could possibly go wrong.

Hagg... read this column and educate yourself on the FACTS!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/12/18/invincible_ignorance__116451.html

Hagg...pls know what the hell you're talking about.

The NRA needs to be SUED just like the Cigarette Manufacturers and Lobbyists are sued for their IRRESPONSIBLE behaviour!!

Liberalism!

Hey, Hagg, just another tidbit...85 million legal gunowners killed NO ONE yesterday!

President Obama, you say you HEAR us on gun control. Do you HEAR us on Social Security?

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” Thomas Jefferson (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

@ Hagg, once again, go have your mommy read you a book and fix your dinner and take your MEDS!

Julie-401527

OK Here's my thoughts...Listen up NRA, as I'm a member.

• Do I enjoy shooting? Yes.
• Do I own a gun? Yes.
• Do I own more than one gun? Yes.
• Do I own an assault weapon? Yes.
• Do people who want to get behind the wheel of a car need a license to drive? Yes.
• Does a car kill people? No.
• Does the driver of the car kill people? Yes.
• Does a gun kill people? No.
• Does the person holding the gun kill people? Yes.
• Do people who want to own a gun need a license? No.

Then why can I (and others) operate/shoot a gun without a license? Hmmmmmmmmmm?

The only license that is require for a gun is when one wants to have a CWP (concealed Weapons permit) which is usually a day long class and passing a background check. Even though I'm pro-rights for gun ownership, then why do we let anyone who can pass a background check (and if bought from a private owner at a gun show with no background, as I have done for 2 of my guns) walk away with a weapon?

A simple licensing program, similar to one getting a driver's license, should be enacted. If you don't have a license, then you can't purchase a gun...period!. This would get rid of the Gun Show loop holes. Have the licensing process include an intensive background check that not only looks a law violations but mental confinement/hospital records!

• 4

• !

#2.11 -

And just exactly would that prevent these types of attacks? Lanza stole the guns he used. Would Holmes' Therapists visits shown up in this "background Check"? Would the time I spoke with a therapist about a girl friend who was having emotional problems show up? And suppose for a moment, I had talked to an Anti-Gun therapist, who is very prone to putting people on the "No Gun" list, how do I get off of it?

Having more than a little experience with Government Bureaucrats, from the FAA. I was in a car wreck 25 years ago, the admitting ER doc, marked check box "Concussion", I didn't have a concussion or at least a very severe one. Pilots who had a concussion aren't allowed to fly. So I jumped through the hoops and got it cleared up. About every other time I get my airman's physical it comes back "Concussion", I call, and get an "OH!, ok, we'll fix that"

Yeah you can trust a bureaucrat if you want, NOT ME.

Obama on immigration reform: "We HEAR YOU".....that was back in 2008.

Yep, Mr. Obama sure "HEARS" alot but sure doesn't take any action except for his special interest friends, Unions, and political supporters/fund raisers. Anything to get a vote.

And for the Fiscal Cliff....he could care less if America goes over the cliff. Just ask his surrogate, Peppermint Patrica (whats her name ?).

Just looking at his picture, looks like he has had too many "Obama beers".

So the President is ignoring all the anti gun control petitions and supporters because all he wants to see is the liberal side.. Can we say typical from the communist organizer.. He wants your freedoms and rights just like the pricks that wrote the Patriot act.. That is anything but patriotic so why should this be any different.. Those Constitutional rights just keep getting in the way and he has said he wants to rewrite/update it.. Since they control the mindless liberals what do you think he will try to do??

This whole thing wreaks of 911.. Use an event to further the agenda.. So many questions about those events remain unanswered and are just plain false.. WE are so screwed..............

Julie-401527, yes we need a license to drive a car. We do NOT need a license to own a car. It's the same thing for guns. We need a license to carry but we do NOT need a license to own. That's just as it should be.

I can own a car without having a license and drive it on my own property. I only need a license to drive it on public roads.

RI Mom

Unleash the "good guys"*....the Zimmermans and let them keep their AR-15's in schools.

Put them in theaters.

In Malls.

In Universities.

In front of a grocery store.

RI MOM your an idiot. Ive read most of your posts and I dont think your a mom at all. IF you were youd spend the 50 Cents per day per student that it would take to put a well trained and armed policeman on site and make schools safer. But this really isnt about safeguarding kids is it. You Liberal/Communists are using this in an effort to disarm America.

And while we're at it, Zimmerman is innocent. Thugs like Martin will think twice about attacking someone who's only objective was to see that his neighbors weren't being burglarized. All Martin had to do is explain why he was in a gated community in which he didnt live. If he tells Zimmerman that he's there to visit his dads girlfriend and gives her unit # then Zimmerman goes away and nothing happens. Policemen dont patrol gated communities. Residents have to ask strangers what they are doing there for their own protection. Period.

As a sportsman and growing up shooting all kinds of guns be it at targets, or animals I have talked to several other sportsman and they would not be opposed to doing away with assault weapons. I have a pistol permit and own several shotguns and riffles and will not now or anytime give them up. To spray out many pieces of lead in a croud at one time is not needed. None of us sportsman use this type of weapon when entering the woods. Our millitary and police should be the only ones that need this type of gun.

Michael, the 2nd Amendment was not created with hunting in mind. It was written so that we citizens would be on equal footing with the Federal government; so that we would have the means to defend ourselves from tyranny as well as invaders. What is the difference between an AR-15 and a Vepr-223 Pioneer, besides their looks? Just because the AR-15 looks like a military weapon does not make it any more dangerous. Both fire the same size ammunition, both have a detachable magazine and both are semi-automatic. (Most hunting rifles and shotguns are semi-automatic these days, as you are likely aware)

Also, besides the mechanics, what is the difference between a semi-auto handgun and a revolver? There really is no difference. A revolver will fire as quickly as you can squeeze the trigger, just like a semi-auto. John Hinkley used a revolver when he shot Reagan and others.

I like the AR-15. It's easy to zero and is very accurate without having to attach a scope. It's a good hunting weapon.

You don't speak for all sportsmen.

yeah, well Ron in 1791 whenever the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights was drafted and put into effect, there was only single-shot, muzzle loaders available. I don't believe for a moment they had today's available arsenal in mind. Use some common sense, along with your reasoning.

Michael: I do not know what supposed sportsman you are talking to but all of the hunters and sportsmen and sportswomen I know all love their AK's or AR's as well as their pistols, bows and all of their other weapons they use for fun and enjoyment. The fact is it is my right to own and use my weapons in a manner that I enjoy as long as I do it in a safe and secure manner and it is not your right or any other persons right to take that away from me. If you do not want to own an assault weapon then don't but, do not tell me what I can and cannot own, and in return I will not tell you what you can and cannot own.

More kids are killed with cars every year than guns so maybe you anti gun nuts should get rid of your car also!!! dorwning in swimming pools rank up there with gun deaths for kids so we should outlaw swimming pools, or kitchen knives, hammers, screwdrivers, rocks, etc etc etc...... Do a little research on deaths in America and you will be surprised.

Odumbo, Hitlery clinton, and the panther loving holder tried really hard to take away our rights by sending illegal weapons to Mexico and then blamed the law abiding gun owners of America. Hitlery clinton was on the news almost every day showing off all the weapons that were being confiscated in Mexico and blaming American's all so they could try and take away our 2nd amendment, unfortunately when Terri got killed by the Mexican drug Cartel the truth came out that it was odumbo, hitlery and the panther loving holder that were actually sending all the illegal weapons to Mexico. There has even been a few others killed by Odumbo, hitlery and panther holder's illegal gun running but that has been swept under the rug and now they are trying to use what happened to these kids to take away ourights. Their favorite saying is "Never let a tragedy go to wastewhen you can use to take away the rights of the people"!. Wake Up people this is not about what happened to those innocent kids it is about power and control and only those with no brains would fall for it, ANd do not try to say it started under bush because fast and furious was not started under bush it was all odumbo!! the one under bush was cancelled when they realized they could not keep track of the guns movements. Odumbo, hitlery, and panther holder knew full well they could not keep track and that is what they wanted, it was only about taking away our rights period!!!!!!! they got caught lying and even got people murdered when are they going to be charged??? I know they are to important to be punished for murder only the servants of the elite politicians, (American Citizens), get punished.

I am also curious if odumbo is planning on making sure that no one with an assault weapon is protecting him or his family, no guns allowed at the school where his kids go to school, no automatic weapons being carried by his SS teams for him and moochelle. In the history of the United States there has never been an attack on the prez where assault weapons were used so why do the SS carry automatic weapons? why does one of the SUV's that follow odumbo every where he goes, have a 7.62 mini gun that can fire more than 1000 rounds per minute that with the push of a button can wipe out hundreds of people???? That is not needed so ban it, ban armed gaurds for odumbos kids, ban arm gaurds for moochelle, ban armed gaurds for all politicians, why do they deserve security if I do not and my kids do not!!!!!!!

I find it amazing that no one thinks it is bad for armed gaurds to be at the school where odumbos kids go but they fly off the handle and freak out at the mention of them being at the schools for all of the other kids, I guess king odumbos kids are important than everyone elses kids!!!!

The Constitution gives me the right to bear arms to protect myself, my family, my friends, my home, and my country against all enemies both foreign and domestic and it does not give anyone the right to take it away from me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you do not like guns then do not own them but do not tell me I cannot!!!! If the laws that we currently have on the books were enforced the majority of the murders that go on with guns in the USA would not go on. The making of new laws will only affect law abiding citizens!!!! Remember on the day of the shooting this guy broke many laws when he did that so which law would have made it different? The assault weapons ban that was in affect during Columbine did not prevent it from happening!!!! In 1999 in California three Police officers were killed by a felon out on parole used his loaded hand gun to kill the officer who pulled him over and then ran home and got his AK47 and killed two more officers with it. In California at that time it was illegal for a parolee to won a firearm, it is illegal to carry a loaded handgun in your car, and assault weapons were banned from being owned in California, Murder is illegal and not one of those laws stopped the guy from killing all three of those officers, NOT ONE!!!!!! You people need to wake up and realize that if a person really wants to commit a crime like this they will, look at Oklahoma City, no guns were used and 168 people including children were killed. It is the person, it is the society we live in and the way our kids are raised, what is on tv, the games and the radio are all factors that lead up to these situations. the weapon is not what is causing this it is the mind set of who is doing it. Like I said look at Oklahoma city or Columbine, Gun laws only affect those that will abide by them not the criminals!!!!!!!!

"WHEN GUNS ARE OUTLAWED ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have a thought. Why did the Department of Homeland Security purchase 1,400,000 rounds of hollow tipped ammunition? Are they expecting an uprising? Are they going to use them against American citizens? I am 100% sure they don't use this type of ammunition for freaken target practice.

I'll give a possible senario. The country is broke and they confiscate all IRA, 401K and retirement accounts after disarming all citizens. They promise to pay a small retirement while they restrict health care that they now totally control for the seniors. Big win for the government. You march on Washington and they shot you. Might not happen but........................

@Eric-913730 Have you ever been to any of these countries like the UK, Australia, and Japan that you speak of? They are not exactly free countries! You cant ever believe anything they tell you in Japan! If you want to be like those countries then go ahead! Start giving up your freedoms and it wont take long once they have the guns they will be able to control us in any fashion of our lives. I'm not willing to give then an inch here because they will take a mile, one step at a time!

PRober

First off, you have no idea what types of firearms the founding fathers might have foreseen when they wrote the constitution.

However, using common sense, one can see that the founding fathers very well knew that firearm technology would PROGRESS as time went forward.

Prior to the American Revolution, the technology of firearms had progressed from the smooth bore musket to the rifled barrel. They also progressed from the flintlock to the percussion cap.

The founders were neither stupid nor were they ignorant. They were comprised of perhaps the finest minds of their time.

They had seen weapons technology progress throughout history. They would have to have known that it would continue to progress after they were gone.

They were aware of all types of weaponry for both land and naval warfare.

Technology has and will always advance. Human nature has and always will remain the same.

A murder in 1776 is the same as a murder in 2012.

I keep guns for protection, period. I try to have sufficient firepower to counter any foreseeable threat.

If you don't like or want firearms, I won't try to force you to have one. In return, stay the hell away from mine.

Fair enough?

PRober, the musket was the pinnacle of firearm technology at the time the Bill of Rights was written. They could have stated that a citizen could only use a bow and arrow, but they didn't. They could have stated that they could only use a pistol, which has a much shorter maximum effective range, but they didn't. They wanted the citizens to be on equal footing with the government, lest the government become too powerful and attempt to infringe the rights of it's citizens.

Do you think law abiding citizens should only have single shot firearms? What if China invaded? It is certainly not outside the realm of possibilty. It is inevitable that we will be invaded by a foreign power at some time in our future. The U.S.A. will not be here for eternity. Should we citizens be limited to firing single shots in defense of ourselves? Should we be limited to a single shot to defend ourselves from a tyrannical Federal government?

You think in short term reactionary thoughts. Think in a broader fashion. If you want to defend children then advocate for armed officers in schools.

I like this quote, as it pertains to the government. "If you give them an inch, they will make a ruler".

commonsense53,

You should practice with the same ammunition you would normally use. The DHS purchase of hollow points is not disconcerting.

well Kold and Ron, I guess I should shop around for my rocket and grenade launchers... oh wait, add a 20mm full auto to that list then. You pathetic, gun worshipping goons. For your info, I probably own more weapons than both of you put together, up to and including a Colt AR-15. But enough deaths involving children and innocent folks at the whim of crazies who have access to such is just that...ENOUGH. Based on your logic, or lack thereof I suppose no amount of children's deaths can negate your RIGHT to have large capacity firearms?

By the way Ron, were you aware that Columbine High School had an armed guard? And do you really want to spend money that we don't have putting them in every school in the country? You doubt me... check it out:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/12/21/columbine_armed_guard_colorado_shooting_shows_that_nra_s_shield_program.html

By the way, PRober, were you aware that the armed guard, a deputy sheriff I believe, was on lunch when the assault started? He exchanged gunfire outside the building but never went in to confront them. The responding officers never went in to confront them either. They remained outside the building for at least 2 hours after the shooting stopped. We need to make certain that we don't hire cowardly police to protect our schools. We also need to stop school faculty from telling our children that there is never a good reason to fight. Stop punishing children for defending themselves from attackers. The tired mantra "Let the proper authorities handle it" is what made the attacks on 9/11 so successful. It's also what kept people hiding under desks in the library of Columbine while Harris and Klebold calmly reloaded there weapons multiple times.

Keeping law abiding citizens from properly defending themselves is not going to deter criminals from doing what they choose to do; quite the opposite, in fact.

And, are you concerned about spending a few cents a day per student to protect them? Let's make sure our million dollar high school stadium press boxes are funded though.

Also, were you aware that there was an assault weapons ban in place when Columbine occurred? How did that not stop the carnage? Oh, because a ban won't stop a criminal.

Finally, PRober, you are correct. I would rather see a handful of tragedies than see the population effectively disarmed and vulnerable. A revolver or a bolt action rifle are not a match against an M16 or an M4, should the government declare martial law or the military leadership initiate a coup. Are these things likely to happen in our lifetime? No. Are they posibilities? Absolutely. To deny the possibility is idiocy and to not be prepared for it is folly.

Mr. President,

This Year, 2012, Over 15 People Have Died At The Hands Of Illegal Aliens Who Were Driving The Wrong Way On The Expressway In And Around Milwaukee Wisconsin. (They Cannot Read The Road Signs).

Nothing Is Done To Stop Them From Buying Cars In The Aftermarket, And Nothing Is Done To Stop Them From Entering The U.S.A. Illegally, And Giving Them Amnesty Will Not Be Acceptable.

This president is very similar to the last 3 or 4 we have had, so eager to unlawfully seize the people's rights and yet so loathe to return rights that never should have been restricted. If you look at the issues closely a pattern begins to develop and the outlook for the american people is not good. Unless of course you despise our rights and freedoms and enjoy being forced to do things against your will. Both of our traditional parties are beholden to special interests and if you lack the capital your concerns and well being are left by the wayside. If you can't make the connection between the second amendment and the rest of our rights then it may be too late for you.

WAKE UP. This is why no gun control laws will work, and this was in 1927 !!

I dare you to read this and watch the video and then tell me that new gun laws will stop the killings. It wont.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250765/Bath-Massacre-Survivors-Americas-deadliest-school-violence-solidarity-people-Newtown.html

Protecting himself and his 12 year old sister, a 15 year old boy uses his father's AR-15 to shoot a home invader.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-q2zHIovOE

An AR-15 used for defense? Say it isn't so.

Mary Jones-1616541

Any ban they put in won't change what happened. Unless they take away every gun. .... They better think this one out.

I would offer the same advice to you.

It's fine really. I'll be happy to get my licenses (been there, done that). I'll take (more) gun safety courses. I'll be legal all the way around the board. I've even taught my children AND grandchildren all the gun safety rules, and review them regularly. However, how does my doing all the right things, make anyone else do all the right things? Why should I be the one to bear the brunt of all the legislation, when I've already been doing everything that is required?

It's not about the people who are following all the rules (which is the vast, VAST majority), it's about the people who don't give a d*mn, and never will. We are seeing the fruits of the problem. If we want a fix to these issues, we need to get to the root of the problem. With all the smoke and mirrors about more gun legislation, we are wasting valuable time in fixing the violence that uses weapons to hurt others. Violence (and violent people) is the problem. Weapons are secondary.

History lesson: The first assault weapon was a rock.

I have no idea what you mean denver bill? What advice? They will never get every gun, if that's what you mean.

The president wants the legislation on his desk by January 10th. If we think this out we might figure out that you can't control every nut on the planet. The government mandated gun free school zone is also to blame

Obama wants this legislation quickly because he knows that as more time passes people are more likely to figure out what the real issues are and they have more to do with mental issues than gun control.

I think smart people look globally for countries that don't have this problem. What do they have in common?

The UK, Australia, and Japan are just a few that don't have mass shootings and they have controlled guns by limiting the type and buying back assault rifles. They haven't taken all guns, just the ones that can kill dozens in seconds.

Eric...you can give your rights up, but I will be keeping mine.

Guns and mental health. A wonderful species. I read about the findings of a study of human anatomy yesterday that concluded that the human hand, the grasp is perfectly constructed for dealing crushing blows in assaults and murders. And the mind - what a wonderful thing, a terrible thing to waste. And the hormones - just a beautiful mess.

Eric,

All the countries you give as an example by law are not gauaranteed the right to a firearm in their constitution. That's why they can FORCE people to turn in their guns and completely ban firearms or certain types.

Just an FYI.

Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people and wounded 17 others. He was armed with a .22 caliber Walther P22 and a 9mm Glock 19. How would an assault weapons ban stopped those 32 from being killed? How about the 40 plus rounds that Lanza fired from the two handguns he stole?

Sorry, but all of you shouting for a ban on assault weapons will do nothing to prevent or stop gun violence, school shootings, mall shootings, theatre shootings, church shootings, and certainly won't stop murders.

Should we legalize murder? You can't ban it totally either. Just like you can't bans guns, right?

Eric, do you honestly believe that the vast majority of semi-automatic gun owners will be willing to give them back on a buy back program? Jersey is having one, where they are offering up to $250.00 per gun. Semi-automatics can be very expensive,,into the thousands.

There are over 300mil weapons legally in the hands of US citizens today. Out of all those we have a handfull of tragedies that occur, such as what happened in CT. Does that mean that all the legal gun owners deserve to be penalized? Should their liberties and rights to own a weapon be stripped because of the actions of a few?

By the "gun controllers's" logic, Seung-Hui Cho is a reason for banning ALL guns. Guess what, guys, that's not going to happen in this country. You better pull a Boehner and come up with plan B. (Hopefully one that would work, not like Boehner's boner.)

"Should we legalize murder? You can't ban it totally either. Just like you can't bans guns, right?"

Nope, but do we need another law making it illegal or is the one already on the books enough? Do you think having TWO laws making murder illegal will prevent murder?

How about we have THREE laws making murder illegal, then more laws to legislate away all the reasons for conflict, then laws to make it illegal to have an argument that COULD result in murder, then laws to make it illegal to have anything that COULD be used to commit murder. Would you be satisfied then?

How about we really cut to the chase and have a law making it illegal to have an EMOTION that would lead to murder. Would you be law-happy enough by then?

When you guys figure out how to end murder, then we would be safe enough to give up our weapons of self-defense.

Eric,

You think this issue is simply gun control. It has nothing to do with our culture, crap education system, social inequality, mental health, poor parenting, etc, etc, etc? Take a look at how the US ranks on those issues before you draw your conclusions. How can you be so ignorant.

Obama demands gun control papers on his desk by January,But HIS Senate haven't been able to get a budged together in 4yrs...We know what his priority are don't we,they are not about a strong America,he wants to be King.And Taking guns from law abiding people is the fastest way to control the masses.He won't address the real problem,mental illness and our over violent videos,movies ect,but then he would have to take on his buddy's in Hollyweird and that won't happen,he thinks he is a star.

Reading all of these messages, I have never been called so many names and insulted so much in my life. I guess I am a "right wing gun nut" although I voted for Carter in 76, before most of you were born, and the President twice. Even read where I am an "uneducated gun nut" although I have two degrees speak 3 languages and travel all over the world for my work, oh one of those languages I picked up when I was a Peace Corp vollunteer in the 80s, neither am I poor and no my house doesn't have wheels on it. I did grow up in Montana and have had guns since I was 8 yrs. old and yes before you can hunt you to go for training. I remember pictures shown to us at 12 of bullet wounds taken during the Korean War and one human that got a shot gun blast full in the face. Hunters or ex military have respect for what a round can do to flesh and none of these shooters are military or former hunters. They are all young and all have some serious mental issues. A lot of dicussion about the 2nd ammendment and being able to defend ourselves against the tyranny of the govt, I think the govt is to incompetent to be a threat to me. They created a fiscal cliff and now they are going to push us off it, that is not competence. I fear most the extreme right, teaparty/KKK and the Christian/Taliban trying to shove their version of the Sharia down my throat and the extreme left whose political philosophy is their Sharia, the taliban of ideology. I hope this president does not let the nuts on the left take over this party like the GOP has done because nothing will get done if that is the case. Guin control will not pass and shouldn't, it is so American to think we can just pass a law and fix it all. If that is the case how are those immigration laws or drug laws working????? There are no quick fixes to the tragedies that have happened, it is societal and cultural and it will take the adults taking over the arguement from the extremists on both sides.

The NRA breaking news on December 21, 2012. Why do we need guns that can kill so many in second? Why do we need to show ID to get cold medication but not to have a data base of people that buy guns? We need a data base of people with mental problems to be in a data base and we need help for these mental disturbed individuals. We need strong legislation to control gun sales.The NRA spoken person Wayne Lapierre is crazy. They think that we need more guns on the street. We need to fight hard to get those nuts off the street. I prayed that they would talk about improving the gun laws but instead they talked about videos as the reason the incident happened in Newtown. Vice-president Biden needs to fight to protect our kids from these advocating guns that can kill so many children. I am not against guns for hunting but guns that would put 100 of bullets in an animal that nobody could eat after being shot by so many bullets.

Politicalwoman..... You're talking about a machine gun. If you were up to date on our laws you'd know machine guns have been banned since 1933!!! My Bushmaster Ar-15 fires one shot per trigger pull, just like all hunting rifles. The only exception being that my AR-15 is less than half the power of any hunting rifle because it was decigned to wound NOT KILL as was my hunting rifle.

The stupidity of the questions you list above is, if you can't control who has access to guns, you need a gun...

Why do we need guns that can kill so many in second?

This question, at least is aimed at automatic weapons, which are illegal in most states, and tightly controlled in all the others. You HAVE to have a license to own an automatic weapon. Weapons with high capacity magazines only hold a large amount of ammunition, but cannot rapid fire. It will only fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.
The weapon of choice in most crimes that use a weapon, is a hand gun. In most situations, a single shot pistol or rifle would serve the purpose. In many cases a "throw-away" or "Saturday Night Special" is the weapon of choice, and these are not automatic or Semi-Automatic. They are just a cheap way for a criminal to arm themselves to intimidate.

The weapon of choice for the people who have committed this kind of crime? Whatever they can get a hold of. Harris and Klebold, the shooters from Columbine High School in Littleton used an Intratec TEC-DC9 semiautomatic handgun, a HiPoint 9mm semiautomatic carbine and two sawed-off shotguns. Interesting enough, The Denver Post reported that the weapons were bought by Klebold's girlfriend at a gun show. Their rampage could have been prevented if someone had been concerned by their actions and the content of their web-site.
Holmes, the man who shot up the "Dark Knight" premier, had significant mental issues that should have been identified, just as in this shooting.

Zimmerman, who shot Trayvon Martin, had a legal background that should have kept him from accessing or carrying a weapon, but as with every system there are flaws. I firmly believe in the Second Amendment, and support what it represents, but we still need to tweak the system. We need to be able to block access to individuals like this.

rhaid

The president wants the legislation on his desk by January 10th.

SarcasmAnyone?

Obama wants this legislation quickly because he knows that as more time passes people are more likely to figure out what the real issues are and they have more to do with mental issues than gun control.

Haste in every business brings failure. Herodotus

I'm sorry Mr. President but doing something in haste, especially in direct response to something that has one pissed, is not the right time nor the right length of time to consider something that needs to be thought out by rational (not angry) minds.

People who fly into a rage always make a bad landing. Will Rogers

Please tell me why someone needs these assault weapons, and clips with 30 +??? I believe in the 2nd amendment, but in my opinion people should not have military type weapons, the only ones who need them are the military and police. For those of you have already own them, what do you use them for, can't really hunt with them, target practice(ok) but other wise their really is no need for them. Why not ban them?? The President does not want to take your guns away, he only wants to ban those that can kill lots of people in seconds, even if we had a good guy with a gun who is to say the bad guy won't take him out too, and most likely already done the damage before someone can get to him.

I stand with Obama on this one!!

Laura... spot on! I don't believe the authors of the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights had today's high-capacity firearms in mind. Single shot, muzzle loaders were a far-cry from where we are now. And the NRA's answer is more guns? Yeah, like a gun in every purse, every backpack and close to every nutsack is going to reduce our problems... good grief

Laura,

Nice thought, however, the second amendment has nothing to do with hunting. If we need to act on what it is intended for you'll want the 30 round clip.

The problem is ,and will be for a while, our own society. Put the theater shooter in "Time out" for a while and I'm sure he won't do it again.

We have worked so hard for 20+ years not to offend anyone or their rights that we have generations of people that have never had to suffer any consequences for their actions. I don't think it's movies or games, it's the fact that if there ARE 2 parents raising kids, they're both working and therefore less time with children and more time in day care and then more time to make poor choices.

Obviously I'm an avid gun owner, hunter, competition gun shooter. It is a great family sport. Go spend an afternoon shooting apples with a 10 22 with a big clip, It's a Blast.

Make a law change that will prohibit this from happening again, 100% guarentee, and I'm in. Until then it should be a public vote, not done by our leaders.

Or for a simpler route, Move west if you want guns and move east if you don't. I'm stayin west!

GOD GUNS and GUTS made this country GREAT! And I don't care if this offended anyone!

MERRY CHRISTmas!

A pump shotgun which is used for sporting, home protection and military is one of the most common firearms worldwide.. Since one buckshot shell {and most have capacities of 5 to 8} can unleash as much firepower as an entire clip of 9mm it is extremely deadly.. It would not be on the ban list for now but I am sure it would find its way to being banned.. This is their plan of gradually disarming the US and as Obama has said he would update that darn constitution if he could...

And what is america saying about the fiscal cliff? Oh that's right...they're blaming the right for not compromising. It's the right that's hard to take seriously (regarding the fiscal cliff). I do not agree that banning any type of guns will stop these things.

It's the right that can't compromise on anything. Most people want some sensible gun laws enacted and enforced. And for once, WE'RE not going to compromise. No assault (military) weapons for civilians, no high-capacity magazines for semi-automatics, nationwide registration and tracking of all weapons, along with allocating money for mental health reform.

It really is hard to take this guy seriously.

This coming from a person calling the POTUS Bambi.

Irony, thy name is Showshanda.

What else could we do well how about genetic screening and we can eliminate undesirable traits. That would certainly help. Somehow I do not think we will see a lot of people on that band wagon.

Mike, guit, and the other moron, the right has been trying to fix or prevent the fiscal cliff the left AKA odumbo refuses to work or try to compromise there for that is the problem. the only ones blaming the right are morons like you three aka a very small minority of ignorant morons who have no clue how the fiscal cliff or taxes work. The refusal to work with the tax hikes is the problem and odumbo is 100% at fault for that.

The Majority of Americnas want the gun laws we currently have enforced, they want as much security for our kids as odumbo gets for his, they also know that the Constitution gives us the right to bear arms and the smart ones even know that the gun did not do the crime the criminal did. a gun can do nothing without a human doing it. A gun would just lay around with out a human.

I always think it is so funny that a few leftwing nut jobs always try to make it sound like they speak for the majority of the people. I find it really funny when the paid leftwingers come out in groups to attack those who are trying to talk out things.

Just bring your own! You just need to be faster on the draw. Am I right, folks??

Nope, there's accuracy, and what about scene management, firing from cover, or being able to spot your opponent walking in from the parking lot. By the way, the reason he didnt use the "Assault Weapon" was that he knew he'd be seen with it walking from his car.

You people need to face the truth. Here take a look at this, this is nothing new. This happened in 1927 and was done without the use of one single gun. http://www.freep.com/article/20121219/NEWS06/121219039/1001/rss01

54% of Americans (in an average of polls) want federal legislation regulating guns. The 54% who are not in favor of their "rights" infringing on on others', more basic rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Guitarma

54% of Americans (in an average of polls) want federal legislation regulating guns. The 54% who are not in favor of their "rights" infringing on on others', more basic rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

• !

#7.1

It makes me wonder what percentage of the 54% are criminals who are fighting to disarm America.

Guitarma

54% of Americans (in an average of polls) want federal legislation regulating guns.

True. Also true: 60% of Americans do not favor stricter gun laws.

"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." ---Mark Twain

"Statistically speaking, the average American has one testicle and one ovary." --- Denver Bill

Guitarma, the poll I took 100% of those polled just wanted the laws we currently have enforced, 100% of those polled thought the politicians should not be trying to take away their rights, 100% think politicians should not have armed gaurds if they want to take away others rights to defend themselves with guns.

Polls are only good if you can gaurantee that those polled actually represent the people. A poll in San Francisco, or of antigunners is not an accurate poll!!!

The Next thing you Know, People will Need A License to Speak.

A license to own a gun is Unconstitutional.

What About Fast and Furious, and Benghazi?

The President And Attorney General are Responsible for the Murder Of A Border Patrol Agent, and the Deaths Of 4 Consulate Employees Including An Ambassador.

On the Ballot for President In this 2012 Election There Were Candidates For President Who Were In The "Party for Socialism and Liberation" ,Or The "Socialist Equality Party". among others.

Do not say that Socialism is Dead In America. A Lot Of The Voters Are Socialists And Do Not Even Realize That They Are.

you mean besides the crazies that actuallyt kill people? Like in some recent mass murders? You mean those crazies?? Actually, you DO find crazies there...because they know no one else is armed and can't fight back.

Schools are Places where you find Sexual Predators and Most Of them Are Teachers.(one was a Principal).

Start with Fast and Furious

LOL thanks for reminding me. 2004, wasn't Bush president then? oh yeah, he repealed the laws that Clinton signed cause bush knew he was cooler then Clinton. your probably right, any progress Obama makes will certainly be the republican target of repeal for the next 50 years or so.

And as republicans obstruct progress you can be sure that they will call the dems "obstructionists". but don't worry, eventually we all meet god and i hear he's really good at explaining things. so in the end, you will understand.

Bush didn't repeal the 1st assault weapons ban. It expired as was written in it from the beginning. All you anti gun folks should put a big sign in your yard saying THIS IS A GUN FREE HOME. Try that, and see how it works.

Apparently George needs to learn facts first before claiming divine will...lol

Mental health, sure. Morality - maybe we can legislate that. Sensible gun policy - absolutely. We won the election, and the sane people will win this issue. The tide is turning - better hug your gun while you can.

guitarma, the congress is still controlled by republicans! and the rights to own and bear arms is gauranteed by the Constitution not Odumbo!!! and the sensible are the ones who know that gun laws do not prevent these issues from happening. Remember Oklahoma City?? No guns used 168 dead!!!!! Remember Columbine??? There was an assault weapons ban in effect at the time and it did not stop that from happening!!! Wake up and realize that criminals do not follow the laws they do not care if the law says not guns, or that it is illegal to murder!!! If you were really sensible you would know that but you like most of your kind have no brain so you have no clue!!!

One other thing the election did not give the lunes on the left the right to destroy the Constitution!! All laws must be passed through the house as well, this is one of those where odumbo must follow the law and he can not just mandate it, to bad for your little dictator this time!!!! Moron!

Oh and if you think stricter gun control is going to help. Just look at the freak who started this discussion, he went to a store to buy a gun. He was turned down. So what did he do - he STOLE guns from his mom.

1. You don't know what the details of any new gun control legislation may be.

2. If she had not had those guns, what then? Oh, yes. He would have been forced to comply with the waiting period and background check.

3. If she had secured her weapons like a responsible gun owner, what then? See above.

Gun control appears to have helped in my city. Back in the 70s and early 80s it was bad. I wouldn't have been able to live in my central Brooklyn neighborhood without being a victim of crime. Now we are one of the safest large cities in the country. Not as many guns, you see.

Well, soon you'll need to go back to a regular bolt-action for your hunting, as AR-15s will be outlawed as will high-capacity magazines for semi-automatic pistols, plus we'll have a nationwide tracking system for all guns and everyone who owns one will have to undergo strict classroom training and strict tracking of them. As it should have always been.

Eric, quit using Japan as an example for low gun, low crime statistics. Japan is a very disciplined society. It is everything America is not. We are an insane asylum compared to their country. To put crime there in perspective, they have 600 murders a year, adjusted for population differences. We have 6,000 non-gun murders each year. Take away guns, and we still kill 10 times more often than do the Japanese. However, strict discipline has a price. The Japanese suicide rate is 24.1 per 100,000, while in the US it is 11 per 100,000. Since the murder rate in the US is around 4.2 per 100,000, our combined suicide/murder rate is less than Japan's suicide rate. Again, you can't look at just one aspect of an issue.

guitarma; I am wondering where you are getting all this knowledge of future gun regulations??? I am willing to bet that I will still own my AR and AK legally when this is all over and done with!!! I am also willing to bet that there will be no training required to purchase a weapon and I am also willing to bet that I will not be required to hunt with a bolt action rifle. I would bet as much money as you want on it!!!!! You have no clue what laws will and will not be passed and since the majority of people in this country are smart enough to know that gun laws do not prevent these things from happening the small minority of people who are not smart enough to figure this out are going to be real depressed when they find out that all of us gun owners are still allowed to own our firearms and use them as well. I would be willing to bet that you are about 19 or 20 and have no clue what life is really all about, you have never fired a firearm, you have never held a real job and you probalby still live with mommy and daddy!! You children need to grow up.

Hal,

NYC has had very strict gun control for 100 years. It has been, and still is, almost impossible to obtain and maintain a gun permit in NYC, unless you are a retired NYPD officer. You think NYC is safe? It just made national news that NYC had a murder free Monday. How bad does a place have to be to make national news when somebody is NOT murdered? Get a clue.

The criminals in NYC still get, have and use guns. You are correct about one thing though. There are not as many guns in NYC as there would be without a ban, but the law abiding citizens are defenseless.

Clint.

I agree. Banning any gun won't work. The emphasis has to be on keeping the mentally-ill from get their hands on any gun.

One way would be to stop this nonsense of private medical records. If someone is nuts, friends, family, and neighbors have a right to know. And if a parent or family member does not report a loony relative, then they can be charged with a crime.

ItsAboutTime - You argument is based on half-truths and distortions that always come from liberals, and I won't waste my time addressing all your comments-just a few. First, it is VERY clear what the drafter and subsequent approvers of the 2nd Amendment intended in terms of the "right to bear arms", and it is well evidenced if you take the time to go to the Nat Archives and look it up. The 2nd Amendment was first and foremost to ensure that American's have a means to defend the freedoms hard earned in the Revolution against ALL enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC. In simpleton's terminology: they wanted us to be able to defend our country against despots, dictators, or tyranny from WHEREVER it may come, Moscow or California - it didn't matter. They KNEW that out-of-control governments ALWAYS subjugate it's people when the people cannot resist. Want to know some dates where the US Government attacked it's own people? Here's a few: In 1932, the US Army in conjunction with the Chicago Police attacked around 43,000 people including 17,000 veterans of WW2; in 1992-Ruby Ridge Idaho, US Gov (FBI) attacked an innocent American, Randy Weaver, killing his wife and son. In 1993 the US Government (BATF) launched an attack in the middle of nowhere against the Davidians in Waco, Texas that resulted in the deaths of 76 men, women AND children, and the BATF, by arming Mexican criminals with illegal firearms, has so far contributed to the deaths of an estimared 6,000 mexicans and approximately 90 American citizens. The POTUS has also stated that the US Gov can kill americans with a drone without due process of law if the GOVERNMENT decides they are a threat! Americans have a need to be concerned and the ability to effectively defend themselves against any government that has the potential to turn this nation into a country "of the government, by the government, and for the government". The tragic part is that people like you don't get it and insist that anyone who doesn't' respond to a senseless act of mass murder by disarming themselves or watering down their constitutional rights is somehow scewed or don't get it. Were not!

An Open Letter to Our Elected Officials
I, like you, was devastated by the senseless tragedy that occurred at that elementary school in Newtown, Ct. last week. A mentally deranged individual committed an unthinkable act and 26 people, including 20 innocent young children, lost their lives. We are seeing these types of mass killings happening far too often. You will notice a pattern with these crimes. The weapons vary but they all have one thing in common. They are all committed by people with serious mental issues, every one.
Since this last tragedy we have been seeing many of you, our elected legislators, appearing on various news shows offering your solutions to these despicable crimes. In almost every instance your answer is to pass legislation banning certain weapons. Is that the best you can do? Are you not paying attention to what is happening? There are millions of those guns in this country owned by millions of responsible people. They depend on those guns for security and protection in areas where police protection is nonexistent or so far away as to be of no help. These guns are needed by these people for the same reasons that the police depend on them, because they are the best tool available to protect yourself from multiple unknown threats. They are not "weapons of war". They are highly efficient defensive weapons. That is why they are carried by the police and why they are needed by those that reside in areas where police protection is unreliable.
The answer to the problem of these mass killings is not the elimination of many peoples' means of protection. The problem is the criminally insane individuals that are committing these acts. I'm not suggesting that this is easy. It appears to be incredibly complicated but it is the real problem. Outlawing weapons and magazines is not addressing the real issue. If you cannot get these insane maniacs off the street we are going to need more guns, not less.
I'm asking you to do your jobs for a change. Stop looking for the easy answer and do something that will really make a difference. Address the real problem and stop putting added restrictions on the law-abiding citizens. We are not the problem but if you folks in Washington don't start addressing the real issue then you are part of the problem.
We citizens are getting tired of watching you vote yourselves super pay, retirement, and benefits while the rest of us struggle. You have overspent us into a massive debt that continues to grow and then continue to squabble over partisan politics. You haven't even passed a budget in four years! It's past time to get serious. Do your jobs and do it right. Forget passing further restrictions on us and do something that will really help. We are depending on you. You are not royalty, you can be replaced.
Sincerely, Your Voters

well Bobster, we might actually agree on something... as long as they head the public listing with your name on it.

Thank you, Wyatt Earp.

Unfortunately, you posted this letter on a forum that is so cluttered with nonsense that our elected officials will never be able to see it. They don't have the ability to concentrate long enough to sift through all the verbal diarrhea to get to the logical posts.

Having said that, I hope that our president is reasonable enough to understand that "knee-jerk" reactions like some on this forum are spouting won't fix the problem, and he will try to enact a broad range of effective changes, instead of half-a55ed laws that will just have us back in a year or two discussing how to further restrict our freedoms.

Exactly Bobster, the nuts need to be kept off the streets. I work in the medical field and I see it everyday. The psychos go into the hospital and claim they want to kill people, they are drugs addicts who are using their SSI to buy their drugs with, they are schizo's, they are risks to society, yet the docs give a little medication, calm them down and send them on their way until they come in again. I had one just this week that has been hospitalized 9 times for wanting to hurt people, a schizo who the day after the school killings went to a school and was banging on the windows and this nut was let go again and is th running loose. The ACLU is who is responsible for this because they are the ones who fight against keeping people like this locked up. Insanasyllums is where these people belong. They are useless to society, a danger to themselves and to us. Every mass killing has involved a psychotic individuals-so Mr. O is it the guns or the sicko's that are the problems.

Yes, Assault rifle fully loaded. No, I'm just trying to make sure people understand not everyone looks upon the world as they do and that there are real threats out there and that those threats can not be stopped with laws. I just don't get why people don't seem to get that.

True story HOTTICKET. I once witnessed a police officer showing up where two hispanic youths were attempting to break into a car with a hammer. Upon the officers arrival the youths started walking toward him but dropped the hammer. He drew his weapon and one kid took off, the other bigger kid kept walking at him and tried to get his gun away from him. It was everything he and I could do to keep that kid from getting that gun as twenty people stood silent watching this unfold. The rookie cop later quite the force so parden me if calling 911 scares the hell out of me and if I have a whole new appreciation fore being responsible for your own protection.

I agree, weirdscience. Once, several years ago, when I lived in a large city (1.1 million), they had a program in which plain ol' reg'lar citizens could ride with a police officer on his/her shift. I rode on the 11pm-7am shift with a cop who had an attitude like, the only good people were cops. Shortly after we were out on patrol, the cop got a call from the dispatcher about a man breaking into a house. We could hear a lady screaming in the background, "he's getting in! He said he's going to kill me! Hurry! Hurry!" The cop took the call, and started slowly driving toward the place, which was about 4 miles from where we were. On the way, he saw a man driving a car, and said he looked like he was drunk. So he stopped the guy, talked to him, and found out he was a local politician. So he had the guy park his car, and gave him a ride home. We then started toward the emergency call again. On the way, the cop saw a guy walking down the street. He stopped, put the guy in the car, got his ID, called for a background check. Then he spent 20 minutes lectruing him about safety, acting right, etc. Then he went a litle further, stopped another car, and ticketed the driver for improper left turn. Long before this, the screams were no longer heard on the radio. After nearly an hour we arrived at the scene of the emergency call. He called for backup, waited about 10 more minutes for the backup to arrive. They looked around the outside of the house, then finally walked in thru the doorway where the door had been demolished. They then called for a coroner and a body bag. After that it was about 3 am, and he went to a local park, turned off his radio and went to sleep until the end of his shift.

there are real threats out there and that those threats can not be stopped with laws

Should we legalize murder then? After all, murders will happen even if we have laws against them...

Exactly Weird, there are plenty of people out there who are mentally ill who will never become violent. There are people out there on meds for mental problems who again will never become violent. Then there's the one who is the rarity who slips through the cracks. They are the real threat. The threat we won't see until they attack.

JerryB, you seem to be contradicting all your buddies that accuse cops of being overbearing violent violators of everyone's civil rights. I sure wish you guys would get your stories straight. Of course I know you're making it up, but at least Weird's story was true... or at least credible.

Maxwell...no we shouldn't...should we add more laws making murder illegal? Will that make it stop? How about maybe 6-7 laws that make murder illegal? That should do it right?

There was no petition or public outcry. Saying something then would be deamed a knee jerl emotional response to a single attack and he's smart enough to know that the right would chastize him for that also. No matter what he does, he gets blamed by you people

Yours is just an example of more friggin' nonsense. Cars are not designed to kill, guns are.

On average for the last 10 years around 40,000 people were killed in auto accidents per year or about 110 people per day every day. It's kind of ironic that something that wasn't designed to kill ends up killing more people than something that is.

It is already illegal to murder people, Rick. Cars can be used as a weapon...that is why you will hear about police shooting someone trying to run them down.

The point Muskateer is making is that if you want to ban something because our children our not safe, you should ban the automobile.

Usage and ownership of cars is closely licensed, tested, taxed, and regulated. Cars kill when used incorrectly. This strawman argument does nothing to enhance the gun-rights argument because it highlights that you can't come up with anything actually relevant to the issue of how to prevent needless violence, of any kind, against our children.

Ransom, alcohol is closely licensed, taxed and regulated too, but DOES kill when used incorrectly.

Look how much good Prohibition did.

A ban on guns will work just as well.

Im definitely against banning guns but yea that car argument is weak, old, and plain tired. They are incomparable items

Rick-881466

-- Cars are not designed to kill, guns are.

Rick a car is a tool designed for transportation. Cars have only been in existence for roughly 100 years. Guns have been around for roughly 1000 years. The gun is a tool for protection as well as conquest. Your society has been created because of them. Neither are not going away you MUST live with them. Banning guns or a class of guns will give you less liberty. It was the private ownership of guns that actually made this country and it is and would not exist without it. And debatable if our country could exist without the private ownership in the future. You see Rick the 2nd amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting it is your ability to rebel against a tyrannical government. People fear guns and gun violence. Imagine what your fears would be if the private individual did not have access to them??

"Usage and ownership of cars is closely licensed, tested, taxed, and regulated."

WRONG. You are tested once to get a license to show you are PERMITTED to drive on public streets. All that's required after that is occasional renewals and eye tests. No close regulations there, buckaroo. The vehicle is licensed for taxation and proof of ownership for entitlement to sell, no safety regulations here either. The vehicle is inspected annually (not every state, though) for certain minimal safety requirements and environmental protection, but ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to regulate its safe, law-abiding, non-injurious operation. The auto manufacturing industry is regulated to meet certain guidelines for PASSENGER safety, ENVIRONMENTAL safety, and INDUSTRIAL safety.

NOTHING regulates the ongoing safe and non-violent usage of an automobile, except for the uniform traffic laws. IN SPITE of those laws, we loose more people every year on our highways than we lost in the whole Vietnam war, and this during the operation of a machine that WAS NOT DESIGNED for the purpose of killing. I think this speaks volumes to the credit of the safe, responsible gun owners in this country.

Muskateer's analogy is valid.

marputt says: Cars are not designed to kill, guns are.

And yet the automobile is more deadly, it kills more people! That is than the firearms in "civilian hands" We all know how prolific the government is at pulling the trigger...

Guns are more safe in civilians hands it seems.

Rick, it's not nonsense. Drunk drivers kill as many people as guns do. It's not the car that killed them, but yeah if somebody rams a car at you, I would say it is designed to killed. It's the drunk behind the wheel that kills-just like the psycho behind the gun that kills-the gun didn't get their by itself did it? So, let's ban cars to because they do kill, after all they just drive themselves don't they.

Rick,

No, guns are designed to shoot projectiles. They can be used to kill, purposely or accidentally. So can cars.

Anything can be abused.

POLICE IN EVERY SCHOOL!!!! We need to protect our children!! This is COMMON SEND LEGISTLATION!!! POLICE IN EVERY SCHOOL!!!! We send $$$BILLIONS in aid to HOSTILE countries... PROTECT OUR CHILDREN OBAMA!!!!

In Tokyo, which has an extensive subway/railway system, the traffic death rate is only 4.18, compared to 13.3 for the US and 8.77 overall for Japan. Clearly, public transportation saves lives. Since the interest of EVERYONE here is supposedly saving lives, you should ALL embrace the idea of going to a public transportation system and giving up your cars. The fact that some of you don't embrace the idea just proves your interest is not in saving lives, but in getting rid of something not important to you. I don't propose getting rid of cars for real, although I loved the fact that I could go anywhere in Tokyo without a car, I just propose it to show you guys don't really care about saving lives.

If you were truly worried about saving lives, you'd jump in to the real problems, which are mental health and drugs. You see, most of the murders in this country are not by criminals of innocent people, but by criminals of criminals. Research the number of murder victims who have criminal records and you'll see what I mean. In Baltimore, no one cared about the skyrocketing murder rate in 2007 because a whopping 91% of the victims were criminals.

And something no one has discussed here is that while the US murder rate is 4.2 per 100,000 the suicide rate is 11 per 100,000. Mental health reform needs to be a high priority issue in this country; that is, if we are truly interested in saving lives.

POLICE IN EVERY SCHOOL!!!! We need to protect our children!! This is COMMON SEND LEGISTLATION!!! POLICE IN EVERY SCHOOL!!!! We send $$$BILLIONS in aid to HOSTILE countries... PROTECT OUR CHILDREN OBAMA!!!!

He is not banning ALL weapons. The only thing on the table for a possible ban are what is considered assualt rifles. Our rights are still in tact...there is nothing in the constitution that doesn't say the process to ownership of a gun shouldn't be a little more strict. We wouldn't be headed to the cliff if the REPUBLICANS would compromise instead of shoot down every single legitimate plan while providing nearly nothing as far as a deal their "plan"

There is no need to ban any weapons. Once they ban assault weapons and the idiots continue to kill then what will be next? EXACTLY.

While you might think Mr. Obama has a legitimate plan he doesn't. His ONLY plan is to tax the rich but that will not solve our problems we also need to control our spending, something Democrats are not likely to do. And who gets to decide what "rich" is? After they tax those making $250k and our debt and problems continue then what is the next level of "rich"? Maybe $100k or $50k? Get it yet? THAT is not the problem with this country. Mr. Obama has a taxation plan not a job creation plan and THAT is the "real" problem. We are currently hovering around 8% unemployed and that will not be getting much better anytime soon. Oh well four more years of NOTHING. Forward!! Off the cliff!!!

I fully agree. Can you imagine today's kids watching TV shows like "Dennis the Menace", "Leave it to Beaver", "My Three Sons" The cynical, hyped-up on violence kids of today would ridicule those old family-oriented shows. Now in the shows, the "good guy" is a total jerk, who meets a woman this afternoon, spends the night in bed with her, then "blows her away" with a full-auto weapon in the morning because she disagrees with him about something. Then he goes out in public and "exterminates" the so-called bad guys while wearing a stupid-looking Rambo sneer on his face. He is then the "hero" of the show.

im sorry i must've missed this show...which one is it so i can start recording it right away?

POLICE IN EVERY SCHOOL!!!! We need to protect our children!! This is COMMON SEND LEGISTLATION!!! POLICE IN EVERY SCHOOL!!!! We send $$$BILLIONS in aid to HOSTILE countries... PROTECT OUR CHILDREN OBAMA!!!!

Gun control should happen, if you mean hitting what your aiming at. But there is no way they can take everyone's guns. Not going to happen.

Mary, do you reckon that's what the pre-WWII Germans said?

Mary -

The attempt to take the guns really would start a civil war.

@ prober If you mean when the Germans were asking for eveyones guns. They did that because they needed to arm their army. Not because they wanted to disarm the people.

Mary, I know you don't mean to be misinformed but have you ever heard of the FAMOUS gun manufacturers "Merkel", "Dreyse" or "MAUSER"? Get educated before you start posting drivel and making a fool of yourself and Tammy, I doubt very seriously there would be a civil war if it were legislated to Amend the Bill of Rights. Are you going to take up arms against a military your tax dollars has equipped? They would simply lob a mortar or fire a hellfire rocket through your home using a drone... game over!

I don't believe our Military would go against Americans,they are here to protect its citizens,Were talking about people's Moms,Dads,Kids,killing their own family and friends,I do believe there are some who would,They would be those that worship Obama,And I don't think the Military is where Obama's following is,and I would dare to say a large majority of his supporters have no guns,who do we think supports these bans and laws against guns to everything under the sun,like being offended by someone's religion,saying Merry Christmas to fighting for legal murder (abortion) these Obama supporters would be the other side of a civil war and they don't scare me much,they will be waiting for the Gov to ban civil war to protect them.

Mary Jones,

What? WHAT!?!?!? You have to be kidding, right? That was sarcasm on your part, right?

Hitler did not take and use the people's hunting weapons for the German Army of WW II. They used old and new military weapons.

Here is what Hitler did have to say about disarming the people:

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation
has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient,
and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
Adolph
Hitler
Chancellor, Germany, 1933

PRober

Mary, I know you don't mean to be misinformed but have you ever heard of the FAMOUS gun manufacturers "Merkel", "Dreyse" or "MAUSER"? Get educated before you start posting drivel and making a fool of yourself and Tammy, I doubt very seriously there would be a civil war if it were legislated to Amend the Bill of Rights. Are you going to take up arms against a military your tax dollars has equipped? They would simply lob a mortar or fire a hellfire rocket through your home using a drone... game over!

• 3

• !

#22.5

Evidently you are unaware of the Viet Cong, the Mujahideen, the Minute Man(Your Ancestors) besides, it is the law enforcement people I am more concerned about (ATF Waco, Ruby Ridge) most guys I know who are active duty would turn their guns on any superior who would order an attack on US citizens. (They might die doing it, but they would do it)

BUCK OFAMA , He hears what he wants to hear. He couldnt even tell the truth about Bengazi , and you pathetic little fools turn to the government to protect you?? Wake up you are sheep being led to slaughter. More government is not the answer , gun control is not the answer either. Protect you and yours fight to keep what youve earned and made with yourselves and family. Any man try to take that cut him down. Take pride in yourselves. Raise your kids dont expect government schools to do it , thats proven to be a MORAL FAILURE. Get involved in your childrens lives and what they are doing.

....to make some good change while not infringing out rights" thats how that finishes. Better than "Keep ignoring the problems and blame the left"

Mike
That is not What he said and you know it !
"Never let a serious crisis go to waste" to do things you never thought you could do before.
It's on Utube

Could some obama drone please tell me why the party of no God, no rights in the womb, and mandatory health care cut off dates pitting citizen against doctor with the state in between,grieve so much for children slain?

How many KIDS died from Obama's disdain of the infant born alive protection act????

TWICE in fact.

Can we ditch Saul Alinsky long enough for you to get off the campaign trail and listen to what people all over say and make an informed decision NOT based against God, Guns, and religion?

Can the president ever quit the politics as usual? Ever??? We are a little sick of the words HOPE and CHANGE and Forward.

Never let a good crisis go to waste indeed. Take a statistical anomaly and mold into form. Sad.

Hey Mikey - the actual quote is from Rahm Emanuel, former Congressman and White House Chief of Staff, now Mayor of Chicago:

"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before" not "make some good change while not infringing out rights".

You see, just because you don't choose to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights doesn't mean that I should be willing to accept the same limitations you will.

I would also invite you to examine Mayor Emanuel's Chicago and observe how a 28 year gun ban has led to law abiding citizens having to file a lawsuit to exercise those rights, while criminals, cops and politicians are the only ones carrying guns on the streets of Chicago.

BTW, did you know that last weekend Chicago surpassed their 2011 Murder Rate? Great example of how more "feel good, do nothing" laws make such a positive difference.

Ruger, you make some really good points, but it goes farther than that....if I don't LIKE it than you don't need it, and it is up to me to take it away from you for your own good. This mindset has become so prevasive in America that it makes you wonder if we will ever get our country back. Why is it that the ones in this country that want freedom and personal responsability are the ones that are called extremist and haters, and the ones that want to regulate and control every aspect of free peoples lives are called compassionate? go figure!

Sad but true, Rich

Amazing how so few can contol so many.

Unfortunately, we will never get our country back. The last election showed that we have passed the "tipping point". More people are now just interested in what they can get from the government than are concerned with working and producing.

It is just the way the world is. The inevitable rise and fall of civilizations. Look for a long gradual decay into nanny-state socialism until people wonder why we all became "equally poor".

the things people don't know but still repeat as facts.
1) Assault weapon ban. The ban only stopped the manufacturing of weapons and some clips in the US, not other nations. It did not prevent the sale or possession of these same items in the US. If you think that this lame law decreased any "violence" then you must be a faithful parrot of the antigun lobby that still says how great the law was.

2) assault weapons by civilians are the source of most killings and mass murder. Only up to 7% of gun related violence and 3.8% of mass murders are commented with assault weapons. On the other hand 10% of murders by police personal are commuted with them. Perhaps we should do more to ban the guns from the police? Source gun_control_gcassaul.html A very interesting article.
3) the number of assault weapons is a high % of the guns out there. From same source "Of 12,138 crime guns seized by New York City police ....., eighty were "assault-type" firearms." about 0.65%

Basically gun control is the poster child of those who fear guns and know nothing about the guns themselves, of facts about them. Not to say that there are problems, but you should know what you are doing before you try to fix the problem.. Or like Nancy Pelosky said "We must pass this law to find out what is in it"

Thank you.

Motoricker....check your facts. The most assistance money goes to RED STATES. Truth sucks huh? Looks like the ones that voted for him are the ones that actually work and see a better future with him instead of ROBME

Mike check your "facts" the assistance you speak of is in dollars spent on highways and watersheds and such, a large total because most of the red states are larger, the roads are longer. If you actually break down tax dollars spent on social welfare, food stamps, etc. etc. Blue states dominate, an interstate everyone drives on, money given to the "less fortunate" is taken from one group of people and given to another. Ya know, redistribution. Taking money from those greedy people who work for it and giving it to those who the gov. decides need it more, or unions, or who ever has a palm that needs greasing. But it's ok because it all comes from Obama's stash right, more correctly known as the pockets of tax payers.

mike,

Oops!. Wrong.....again.

Money given away, such as welfare, etc is mostly in BLUE states. The top 15 states in receipt of welfare in terms of numbers AND percentage of population are primarily BLUE (13). Red states account for two of them.

A couple of sources for you (there are more): http://www.cnbc.com/id/31910310/The_Biggest_US_Welfare_States

- and -

http://www.politisite.com/2011/06/13/the-moocher-index-states-with-the-most-welfare-recipients-and-the-least/

This petition gets attention because we're on the right side of history. The NRA will be as cool as NAMBLA when America settles this.

Still a member are ya?

And every other petition that is in contrast to Obama, Or the petition to free political prisoners, I love how the gov has totally turned its back on the Marine sitting in a Mexican jail.

I love how Pilot's mind keeps wandering off-topic.

Look, there's obviously something amiss with anyone's mind who believes we can go forward as we are - the shame of the world - a country where you can buy a weapon capable of mass-murder in a minute easier than a beer.