Former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords to visit Newtown, Conn.

What kind of a mock BS is this??? Oh yes, Democrats!!!

Maybe she just cares.

You trust someone stupid enough to be shipwrecked? I call that rwnj garbage washing up on your shore real BS. Maybe Shipwrecked should be cleaning up the plastic in the middle of the Pacific dead zone or the radioactive stuff floating out from Fukushima. Obviously Shipwrecked never went to school long enough to understand concepts like common cause and being supportive of a social issue in a community. Maybe Shipwrecked is on a desert island somewhere.

Said it before will say it again - when will gun enthusiasts start offering realistic and practical suggestions to keep assault rifles and extended magazines out of nut cases and criminals? I have posed this question about 10 times on the vine and on other posts and no one - NO ONE has responded. So I can only conclude that nobody in this facacta society gives a damned about any one or any thing but the almighty God the $$$$$$$$$. Pretty freaking sad.

If you don't suggest solutions don't bitch if your guns are taken out of your "Cold Dead Hands"!

BTW here in VA today there was a hunting accident where a kid and his grandfather went hunting and the kid mistook grandpa for a deer and shot him with his 50 CALIBER "DEER" RIFLE. Have any of you seen what a 50 cal shell can do to a piece of meat? They were used in WW2 to shoot down aircraft for God's sake!

Fed up Boomer thegun the kid used was a .50 caliber, but it was a black powder gun i.e. a modern day musket. Beyond 100yards the bullet looses power very quickly. An understandable mistake on your part people confuce the two all the time.

Heres a suggestion. Enforce the current laws and do not allow criminals to plea bargain out. 99% of the murders committed with guns are by criminals who can not own guns in the first place, yet DA in the major cities just run them through the system and plea down their jail terms.

The incident in VA was a 50 cal muzzle loader (single shot, pour in powder, lead ball ram rod etc...like the revolutionary/civil war, not WWII). I continue to be amazed by people who don't read the whole story or simplty can not grasp facts when they disagre with a perception

One really fed up boomer

Your another dumbass Leftard talking about things that they nothing about. The .50 caliber Muzzle Loader was the same thing Daniel Boone used. A .50 cal shell won't do anthing to you anyway. It stays in the gun. The bullet comes out the barrel & does the damage. Maybe you need to stick to Interior Decorating or Cooking Shows. Stop being such a Drama Queen.

One really fed up boomer

Gun enthusiasts want to lock up the nut jobs but you liberals keep letting them out saying they are "cured".

MSNBCMFE:

Maybe she just cares.

If she did, then she would stay away.

Oh how I wish she ("gabby") would just go away! I didnt like her before she was shot and I still do not like her. She was a horrible Rep for Tucson.

One Really Fed Up Boomer;

You just don't like any suggestions that don't include a ban of some sort. (How has that worked for immigration, drugs and alcohol?)

Anyone with a semi automatic 1911 and a pocket full of 7 round magazines could do as much damage as Lanza did in a school where no one can be stopped. Even a 6 shot revolver would be just as deadly because NO ONE could stop them. He could just reload again and again and again.......no one to stop him (ever seen a speed loader for a revolver?). A sawed off shotgun with a pocket full of shells could do just as much damage. Ever seen what a shotgun can do? They can shoot slugs or buckshot (probably pretty messy) and no one there to stop him.

See, you people are just using these deaths to beat your sick drum. You are all pathetic. You are all sick. Feinstein was talking legislation before the bodies were cold.

Put a cop in schools., maybe they would combat drug use, bullying and provide a true sense of security as well as protection. Hmmmmmm, there's a thought.

You people are uneducated idiots when it comes to guns, their use and abilities. You do not not what you are talking about. It's evident in your comments and the media every day.

FYI - there are many different types of 50 caliber projectiles. Most muzzle loaders ( if you know what that is) are 50 caliber, look it up. They shoot a lead ball the size of a small marble, which have been used for deer hunting for a least 200 years or more. Get your facts straight and quit stirring the pot.

How does the president guard his daughters at school?
How do we guard our air ports?
How do we protect our politicians?
How are federal buildings guarded?
How are armored cars guarded?

with what the uneducated call ASSAULT WEAPONS and HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES

Are they going to fore-go their security?
Will Feinstein give it up?
Will the president pull security from his daughters? Are his kids more important than mine? How about yours?

Why do we NEED "assault weapons" you ask. Simple, because our government is trying to take them away.......

Maybe she just cares.

Two words: Photo Op.

Rick: Spot on!

No matter how much data is out there proving the that criminals do not obey laws, liberal "progressives" {oxymoron} insist on letting the worst offenders out to continue their sprees. And the huge majority of these gun crimes ARE in the areas with the tightest gun control laws. Connecticut is currently number four (4) for having the tightest laws.

The anti-self defense crowd keeps crying about getting rid of so-called "assault rifles". That will never solve the problem because there have been gun crimes ever since the gun was invented.

There are two methods for significantly reducing gun crime. The first is called "Constitutional Carry". This has already been proven to work, because criminals have openly stated that they are much less likely to commit a crime against someone who might be carrying a firearm. The second is called "Capital Punishment". Bring back public hangings and I guarantee you'ld see the number of gun crimes bottom out REAL fast! Make those juvenile delinquents go to them and see how fast they straighten their acts up!

"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." -- Unknown

“Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.” -- attributed to Aristotle

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." -- Plato (423 BC – 348 BC)

"A civilization's future is inevitably doomed if its present-day glory rests squarely on the shoulders of an exalted past" - unknown

"As long as people believe in absurdities, they will continue to commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

Another exploitation of the bleeding heart Liberals/Progressives agenda. Dragging this poor woman around like a puppet instead of letting her further rehabilitate and enjoy what semblence of her life she has left.

Today we had a Senator who suffered an ischemic stroke last January walk up the 54 steps to the front door of the U.S. Capitol. In a bipartisan effort, 100 Senators applauded and encouraged him to as he walked up those steps. He wanted to be there for the swearing in ceremony.

Congratulations Senator Mark Kirk.

God Bless you and America.

Wait a minute - it has been over 2 weeks after this shooting! A law was passed that if families are still grieving after 2 weeks, then they are suffering from a mental illness! Our government can't be wrong! These people who still feel sadness over the loss of a loved one after 2 weeks have passed must be sick! It is the law!!!

I'm tired of hearing about Gabriel Giffords!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am an Arizona native and everyone I know is tired of hearing about Gabriel Giffords!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If she was so smart or heroic she would have gotton out of the way of the bullet instead of just standing there like a liberal retard while crazy man is shooting her buddies. Why can't that stupid c*nt just disapear and shut up. Her and Bloomburg.

If anything happens to you that can be used to promote a political agenda - as with Newtown - you have no hope of being left alone.

@One really fed up boomer, your ignorance is glaring, how can you blame an inanimate object for someones death or are you suggesting that we do not hold individuals accountable for their own actions? I hope you are not expecting the government to keep you safe, with the government SSI program providing money to parents who give mind altering meds to children you can expect it to get worse rather than better regardless of any ban. I would suggest you bark up the Pharmaceutical tree where thr real problem lies.

I'm not sure Gabby knows what she thinks yet....he husband and associates seem to know however what she would be saying if she could. What happened to her is trajic but she may never be able to form an opinion or verbalize it on her own again. What we read here is a prime example of putting words in someones mouth and using her injury for someone elses agenga. I am not interested in what her husband thinks she thinks or what her assistants say she would say. I would be intrested to actuall hear her comments if she could make them but I don't think that is possible yet.

It's interesting that all the liberal politicians (the Prez, Vice-Prez, Major Bloomberg, Gabby, etc., etc.) who are screaming that guns are a threat to public safety and should be taken out of the hands of "private" U.S. citizens, are all RICH and have ARMED BODYGUARDS who protect them 24 hrs a day. Hum-m-m, maybe they feel that what's good for them is not important for us poor folks. When the Govt assigns me a bodyguard I'll turn in my gun. Until then, they need to shut TFU about gun control.

Never let a good crisis go to waste. Exploitation of the Liberal agenda at it's finest! Sad, but true.

Bloomberg doesn't give a hoot about gun control. This is just a photo op for his run for the President in 2016.

Boy does the "milk of human hatred" run deep on the vine!

All of your posts taken in the agregate send one message. There is a whole lot of hate in the uneducated masses that compose the NRA RWNJ's. Go ahead and call me a libtard or any other names you want - I don't want to read about your children being gunned down by one of your own kind. But to you I get the feeling you would stand over the grave of your son/daughter with the gun that did the deed in your hand. What sane people are trying to do is to find out what can be done without taking your precious but distorted right to bear arms (you can roll up your damned sleeves and go to work anytime you please) from your cold brain dead carcasses.

Call me any damned thing you want but I can not abide the callous murdering mentality of you people.

And with attitudes such as seen on the vine I think the 2nd amendment should be repealed. Why - no solutions - just hate - and a level of psychoses that would eliminate all of you from owning guns due to a mental deficiency.

• you start imposing gun restrictions far beyond whats there and you're gonna rule guns out completely. We can't go out and willy nilly pick up a full auto gun... I don't know where you get this idea but it isn't true. the same as an assualt rifle being a plain rifle. A civil ar15 is a semi auto just like pistols and certain rifles. you have to go through a process to get full auto privileges and then its expensive. even at these shows that trade all Ive seen dont have full autos. just show pieces that do nothing. To legally own a full auto or burst is a lot of work.

psychosis... Sir Fed Up... and you always flag the un=educated as those with guns yet it's pretty much all of the populous and then when it isn't cause there is a sudden rush on guns from celebs. its those willing and able to pay for protection... armed protection... the whole point behind guns is protection. guns have gotten stronger, we need stronger protection. I dont haul around a rocket launcher but a gun will due since thats "LAW"

@ One Really Fed Up Boomer - After carefully reading your posts and guessing at your age from your name tag .... I bet you were a big Timothy Leary fan. He probably meets with your approval for being "educated".

OOBuck you are an example of what I am driving at - while Leary was spouting his @!$%# I was in the Navy doing my duty as a citizen of this nation. You could not be more wrong in your "assumptions" about me as a matter of fact considering the fact that I am perhaps the only boomer that has NEVER tried any illegal substance in my life (it would have killed all my security clearances faster than you can spell RWNJ) I do however thank you for a really good laugh at your paltry expense. :-)

Flop over what are you so scared about? All of those guns you believers purchased that found their way into the hands of gang members to be used against you - so your cure is to buy bigger and badder bang sticks - sound like an arms race to me. Goes something like this. "Me BMOC by .22. To small sell to car thief, by 45 colt acp to small sell to drug pusher by RPG not big enough sell to drug cartel, buy abrams tank oh big enough BOOM! Drone from USAF finds tank end of arms race" The end.

Damn if that doesn't sound like the Cold War now, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Fed up: I feel sorry for you. You spout off and state that you're going to get called names, yet you call others names, (through the use of acronyms), from the very start. And rather than provide any facts, (which is typical for the anti-gun crowd), you supply only delusional conjecture. You say that kids brought up around guns will die, but many in my family have guns, and kids, and there have been no problems. And as children, we had no problems, nor did our parents, and their parents.

IF what you have posted is what you truly believe, you really are one sad, gullible, misinformed person... I'll not contribute to your pity-party.

I posted this elsewhere for someone of a similar mindset. It's appropriate for you as well:

News Flash: Utopia does NOT exist! Never has, and NEVER will!
Now take your thinking and apply it to areas where children are dying because of starvation, disease, war, abuse, etc. Nobody lives forever. And yes, loosing even one young life is a tragedy. It was devastating for my wife and I when we lost our first child... And he/she never made it to even being born. But it wasn't the end of the world. {That was a couple weeks ago!} We ended up having four more. So put things in their proper perspective and lets do the best we can keeping the ones we can, as safe as we can. Evil people will ALWAYS be there, and we MUST have the NECESSARY TOOLS to protect our children, and ourselves with. "Respect the tool" applies everywhere. I did not fully respect a band-saw and almost lost a thumb to it. {Ban band-saws! sarcasm} The same thing goes with a gun... Be it Nail GUN, Staple GUN, and Hand GUN. Rifles and shotguns, too...

No matter how you break it down, violence against humanity has been around for thousands of years.

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." -- Plato (423 BC – 348 BC)

I'll leave you with two quotes from two people who were about as diametrically opposed as you could get...

"What luck for rulers that men do not logically think." -- Adolf Hitler

"By calling attention to ‘a well regulated militia,’ ‘the security of the nation,’ and The RIGHT OF EACH CITIZEN ‘to keep and bear arms,’ our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy... The Second Amendment STILL remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships in which EVERY CITIZEN MUST BE READY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEFENSE OF HIS COUNTRY. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will ALWAYS be important." -- John F. Kennedy

Spiddas, great posts. I like the quotes, keep em' coming. Unfortunately they will fall on deaf liberal ears, just as any other logic does....lol.

MSNBC,

Maybe you should be the one to try to take LaPierre in. Go ahead; I dare you.

MSNBCMFE - "Murder is evil." And, that is a very true statement. But to link that together with people trying to protect their Constitutional Rights is also an evil thing. The group-hate directed at the NRA is ugly and says ugly things about those consumed by it. Over the last 20 years, the firearm crime rate has dropped, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, from 6 victims per 1,000 residents in 1994 to 1.4 victims per 1,000 residents in 2009. This decline took place in an era where gun sales increased and carry permit laws were liberalized. Before we set off to infringe on the rights of tens of millions of Americans in an effort to prevent the unpreventable and demonize those who oppose that push, perhaps we should take a look at the data to see if it supports the assumption that we’re in the middle of an ever-increasing bloodbath. If not — and the data seems pretty clear about that — then perhaps the solution to preventing a few mentally/emotionally/spiritually twisted individuals from wreaking mass murder lies somewhere else than disarming everyone who abides by the law.

And your point is?

Yes, she learned to walk again over a year ago, it's been such a long time I cannot believe she can even remember.

Is that Chris or Chirs. Or is it Chris spelled backwards? Ever hear of the Golden Rule? Connecting dots? Karma? Gosh, ever wonder how YOU would FEEL if that one bad thing happened to YOU, or even more so, what it would be like to YOU and how YOU would handle it, if it ever happens? Comfortably numb somewhat?

Anonymously Insightful,

It's not that many of us don't feel sorry for Rep. Giffords. It's the bad taste that we get from you exploiting the tragedy that turns our stomach.

"accomplished citizens?" Who? Where?? Do they speak English??? They sure as hell can't be democrats.

Must be talking about the Chicago & Detroit gang bangers.

The "accomplished citizens" are trying to take it back from the liberals who messed it up.

Liberals make excuses for criminals. Liberals let criminals back into society.

Liberals worry more about criminals rights then victims or law abiding citizens

Liberals tell people its ok to not be responsible someone else with do it for you / someone else is to blame

The liberal president allowed fast and furious to dump illegal guns that killed people - at the same time saying guns are bad?????????????????

Liberals say we don't need prayer in school, we don't need civics - let people do as they please..

Don't get me started on Giffords and Bloomburg.

I feel sorry for Giffords, she is obviously being used to push an agenda by the liberals - that is just WRONG

Bloomburg rather tell you how big a soda you can have (not big gulps now) then fix the city. Is he my mom or a Mayor?

So I hope the country is taken back from the liberals who are messing it up.

Karmaaina,

Giiffords and Bloomberg need to "lead the charge to take back America!"? Yes, America has fallen into the hands of those rowdy revolutionaries who have no regard for the rule of the rich and the privileged and who (gasp!) have been so bold as to claim they have a right to arm themselves. Certainly, these radicals need to be quashed so that we can move forward to a country where the citizens show proper respect for their government by divesting themselves of all dangerous weapons. After all, the intellectual elite who run our govt know what's best for us and its obvious that they realize that we need their guidance since we are really incapable of taking care of ourselves.

I actually used 2007 numbers for my finial total, firearms related deaths hace droped a bit from there. We have a really low murder rate compared to where we were at 20 years ago or even 40 years ago. This is largley thanks to New York City, whose draconian gun control laws and racial profiling have slashed their crime. The fact is if we don't get a handle on gun issues in this country people are going to want to use NYC as a model, which distrubs me to no end.

75684 gun related deaths in one year???? There weren't that many in 10 years during Viet Nam. Are you nuts, or just a crazy socialist gun phobe? The same weekend the 20 kids in Ct. were killed, 55 were killed in Chicago...who, btw, has one of the strictest gun laws in the country.

how many have abortion clinics killed ?

applejacks...me thinks you fabricate too suit your needs...... This is sort of the rational that the people who do things like what happened at this school. The over rationalize to thier own way of things to the point they act. until we address the root cause we will have sensless deaths like this. That root cause is mental illness and quite frankly IMO family leadership and control. We can't just give birth to kids and let them raise themselves in front of a television or video game and expect them to be 100% sain. They need guidence and real parents not soomeone who just throws money at them so they go away.

avenger , the problem w/ statistics is that you can & will twist them to make your point look valid ... you are spot on imo when you say family leadership & lack of help for the mentally ill .... i wish more people would take a step back & really try to figure out what to do about the problems we as a nation are facing do to the lack of health care & leadership .... too many have & are using the connecticut tragedy to move their agenda forward & that sir makes me sick .... i think it should be a crime to try to take advantage of the innocent at a time of crisis to push your political agenda forward .... gun laws in connecticut are very strict but the laws were broken & many perished ... knee jerk legislation never works out the way all want it to (if you need an example look at airport security before & after 9/11) ....

Bravo, Anonymous. Well said.

Always amused by limousine liberals who mask their greed, their weaknesses, fear and hate as 'enlightenment."

"Guess what, LIBERAL is a commendable quality of intelligence and compassion in humanitarian affairs."

So true but what is profiled as a liberal in this political atmosphere mirrors nothing in comparison to the definition of what a liberal was originally defined to be. In this national atmosphere,a liberal is one who thinks everyone but they should do more. They sit in their lofty perches theorizing without ever risking anything more than their winded ideology or irrationality. Many fail to apply logic, reason or the four elements of rhetoric to their arguments. in this politically charged atmosphere those who are referred to as liberals are close mined, bigoted, hypocrites (Nietzsche must be their messiah). Prime examples, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Nancy Pelosi, Warren Buffet, Michael Bloomberg and obama. The embrace this utopian idea of social communism, as long as it applies to everyone but them. They denounce others as Nazis when they feed from the trough like the former Nazi collaborator George Soros. They are quick to point the sin in others but deny that any exists within them. No my friend, all lie, but American Liberals are such and contradiction t the the terms liberalism and enlightenment. They lack any sense of moral courage. So scope locked on one chaotic idea they are unable to embrace a much alrger picture or address a myriad of issues at one time.

Today it is about seizing weapons, tomorrow legalizing all drugs, next week it wil be seizure and redistribution of property ( except theirs of course).

So in the future, when you once again take such a narcissistic view of yourself as to demand the right to sit in a judgement seat please be "liberally enlightened" enough to realize that the decay of our society does not stem from guns, drugs, or sex. It stems from people like you who walk by a problem and simply say "Tsk.. Tsk." Who think that things like personal responsibility and accountability are archaic principles better determined by the State that the individual. For American Liberalism is a direct threat to individualism. They cannot understand the concept of the "sum of the whole is greater than the individual parts."

What a tragedy it must be to be you. A biological entity that exists without a soul or the ability esoteric concepts like life, love, compassion, or even joy. I am certain when your mortal life ends so wil your pain. Until then, I pray that in this journey of life that hopefully you will be freed of the chains that seem to extremely limit you scope and reason.

BTW.. thanks for reposting the NYT talking points. I am certain they are happy to know they one or two readers left. Also.. your mom said your Chicken Pot Pie is ready.

Mmmmm.....chicken pot pie. Good call.

Made the preceding irrelevancies in Paragraphs 1 through 6 worth the wait.

Speaking of irrelevant.. I see you are still here.

Right wing , Left wing, Bull $hit. From 1993 until now, 40% of gun owners are self described Democrats, 43% are women. So trying to pin everthing on Republicans is about as stupid as it gets. If you don't like guns, don't get one. Until guns are outlawed (never) don't worry about what other people own. I have between 30 & 40 guns, all locked up in a $1,000.00, 900lb safe in my bedroom. As the Left likes to say, stay out of my bedroom.

Anonymous Insight:

I'm not a Republican or a Demaocrat & I have been reading your posts & I think you are CRAZY!

At what point will you stop giving away rights and liberties to feel safe? I can tell you, when it's too late to do anything about it.

anonymous insight : read through the link you provided ... ummmm did you miss this statement ??? {"Congress have no right to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American."} or did you conveniently forget about it ???

Forgive him, he belongs to a cult that believes the gun comes before anything else,

I'm damned surprised they haven't tried to have guns declared people like corporations !

The worship of guns is a manifestation of an inner weakness that cannot be dealt with unless they are in s of something that can kill another human, they cannot wait for the opportunity, they fantasize about the moment !

They also CLAIM to be supporters of "justice" until they can mete it out, then they love being cop prosecutor judge & executioner .

In their fantasies they are better shooters than professionals & they never miss or hit innocents in the pursuit of the ultimate thrill for them....killing another human .

GIffords had her 9mm Glock in her purse the day she was shot, there were people within 30 ft of her that were carrying & to have shot Laughner you would have had to aim at innocent bystanders who were surrounding Gabby .

Every person carrying that day in that situation was a eunuch, Laughner was taken down by unarmed Liberals, there to see "their gal" .

"They lack any sense of moral courage. So scope locked on one chaotic idea they are unable to embrace a much larger picture or address a myriad of issues at one time."

Sorry, but this is just not true, most is not backed up by fact. President Obama has accomplished a lot over his first term, he has addressed a myriad of issues, made courageous decisions and has lead successfully.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/

Thank goodness for Al Gore, an intelligent leader, or we would not get news like this from someone who knows what he is talking about when it comes to future solutions for our survival.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/feb/18/al-gore/al-gore-optimistic-about-solar-energy-and-pretty-a/

johnny, let us specify this more clearly...yes, here is the statement in context...

"Note Coxe says it is the “militia” that is to be secured against disarmament by Congress.

Coxe writing in 1787 as “An American Citizen,” pointed out the people are the militia and because of this, troops would be rendered unnecessary: “The militia, who are in fact the effective part of the people at large, will render many troops quite unnecessary. They will form a powerful check upon the regular troops, and will generally be sufficient to over-awe them — for our detached situation will seldom give occasion to raise an army.”

Because Coxe makes clear it is the people in the capacity of soldiers in service of the militia who are “entitled and accustomed to their arms,” the Second Amendments right to bear arms can only mean those arms born by the people in service of the militia for the purpose of making standing armies during peace “unnecessary.”

Sophomoric gun rights enthusiasts usually argue erroneously the Second Amendment recognizes a right of all persons to have weapons in order to facilitate resistance to a tyrannical government. To the contrary, the aim wasn’t for people to use their private guns to resist their own government but to put the military power of the State in the hands of the citizens themselves in order to prevent a tyrant from imposing his rule through use of an already existing army.

One might argue the Second Amendment says nothing about standing armies but neither does the Third Amendment and historians agree it is rooted in the practice of maintaining a standing army during times of peace where law required people to quarter those troops on their property. One of the things that made standing armies so odious was they lived among the people.

New Hampshire Governor John Page in June of 1841 explains the bearing of arms as part of the military power of the State through an armed citizenry:

The “right of the people to keep and bear arms,” is a right dear to every freeman; arms should be in the hands of every citizen of the Republic, who is able to wield them, and it is the duty of Government to prescribe such rules of organization and discipline, as will give those arms the greatest possible efficiency.

Pennsylvania Governor John Andrew Shulze said in 1829, the “right to bear arms is another important right guaranteed to all our citizens by the [Pennsylvania] constitution.” This right says he, imposes on the “legislature the duty of so organizing and disciplining the whole body of the citizens, that they shall be able, not only to bear arms, but to use them with confidence and skill, ‘in defense of themselves and the States, ‘ if such a necessity shall arise.”

Louisiana Governor Francis Nicholls was more explicit: “Every citizen of this state has a right to keep and bear arms in conformity with our militia laws.”

The above quotes illustrate the military connection with the right to “bear arms.” How can we be sure? States never used the phrase “bear arms” in their civil codes when addressing private gun ownership and usage but only when speaking of their military use through organized militias of the people for purpose of defense of homes, communities and State.

The court has never found a single exception of state statutory laws treating “bear arms” as anything other than arms belonging to the militia.

The Heller court attempted to get around this damaging fact by trying to find laws that used the phrase “bear arms” outside of a military context. However, they utterly failed, offering only three obscure examples from early colonial times by declaring, “these purposive qualifying phrases positively establish that ‘to bear arms’ is not limited to military use.” Example by the Heller court:

For example, an early colonial statute in Massachusetts required every “freeman or other inhabitant” to provide arms for himself and anyone else in his household able to “beare armes”. . .

If the majority had quoted the entire above statute it would had destroyed their false assertion because it specifically said the purpose of bearing arms was “for war,” i.e., military deployment and not personal self-defense. The majority brings up an early Virginia code requiring “all men that are fittinge to beare armes” to “bring their pieces” to church. This was a militia act due to war with the Indians at the time and not anything that could be construed to mean “bear arms” in a non-military context.

Suffice to say the majority was unable to find any relevant civil codes referring to “bear arms” outside of service in the military, though they found an un-enacted phrase from Madison in Virginia of “bear a gun” for deer preservation. Bearing a gun (singular) and bear arms (plurality) is two different things.

Additionally, there was a Pennsylvania minority Second Amendment proposal that included the additional qualifier of “killing game” along with the right to bear arms, but this was not adopted nor did any future Pennsylvania game laws use the term “bear arms.” It was likely intended to be an additional security against disarmament of the people’s militias through the pretense of preserving game.

History shows all the States required by law those capable of bearing arms to do so, whether they were required by law to supply their own private arms or given public arms to use when the US begun supplying the States with US arms. Eventually all the States did away with compelling citizens to provide their own arms and instead armed their militias with public arms. When Tench Coxe once spoke of “private arms” he was referring to his own State of Pennsylvania law that militia members provide themselves with their own musket (“private arms”) at the time, else the fines for missing muster days would be used to purchase a musket for those unable to provide their own.

This early Pennsylvania requirement was not for keeping private arms for game or home defense but to bear in service of the Pennsylvania militia.

It is difficult to conceive how a mandatory duty to keep and bear arms by law for which a person could be fined or jailed for refusing can be elevated to an individual freedom beyond the regulation of law.

Armed militias of the citizens served the vital function in providing communities with an armed police force when needed since there were no established police forces in early America that could respond to such events as rioting. This is why we find many State constitutional provisions for citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves (aggregate/community) or the State.

Framer James Wilson speaking of the constitutional right of the citizens to bear arms in the defense of themselves shall not be questioned under the Pennsylvania Constitution, said, “[t]his is one of our many renewals of the Saxon regulations,” and that “one may assemble people together in order to protect and defend his house.” No question Wilson was speaking from personal experience after having in the year 1779 to collectively defend his home along with 34 others from 200 angry protesters who opened fire, killing two who were inside.

Wilson and his fellow defenders were only able to hold off the mob long enough for the militia to be called out the next morning through resupplying themselves with lead and gunpowder kept at a nearby public armory they managed to visit during the night.

Thus, Wilson is talking about the renewal of Assize of Arms as established under King Alfred, where his subjects were compelled to become united under sword for the common defense of their family, neighbors, parish and realm. Without such a united defense, no single man with a musket could have been able to defend either themselves or home against a mob of 200 people.

The bearing of arms was never considered a fundamental right of individuals to personally keep and use firearms but rather viewed as a civic duty, an obligation of citizenship in the same breath as casting a ballot or jury duty. One of the early arguments against granting suffrage to woman was it could lead to the obligation of them bearing arms. Proof of the civic function of bearing arms can be found in such things as the application for citizenship that asks, “are you willing to bear arms on behalf of the United States?”

Judge Advocate General of the Army (C. 1169, May 27, 1910) held the word “arms” under the Second Amendment “refers to the arms of the militia or soldier and does not authorize the carrying of weapons not adapted to use for military purposes.”

The United States in July of 1863 issued orders forbidding citizens of the city of Baltimore and County to keep arms except those with the “constitutional right” to keep arms in being members of a militia.

The court calls “explicit evidence” the words “constitutional right to bear arms” under §14 of the Freedmen’s Bureau Act they assert the 39th Congress viewed as a “fundamental right.” However, the insertion of these words was in response to the arming of all white militias within former Mississippi that excluded blacks. In other words, §14 of the Freedmen’s Bureau Act actually supports arms of the citizenry under a well-regulated militia rather than an individual right to arms outside of the service of a militia.

It is important to note the Freedmen’s Bureau Act was limited only to former rebel States that were then under United States military jurisdiction which in return made the Second Amendment applicable under any law made by Congress while administering these former States.

This fact became very apparent with an act of Congress on March 2, 1867 that disbanded all the armed militias within former rebel States, leading to the charge Congress was infringing citizen’s right to keep and bear arms. President Johnson called the disbanding of the militias as “contrary to the express declaration of the Constitution, that ‘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.’”

The majority makes a bizarre claim that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 “similarly sought to protect the right of all citizens to keep and bear arms” as the Freedmen’s Bureau Act did, even though the Civil Rights Act made no mention of bearing arms. The majority tries to slink around this inconvenience by suggesting the words “the right … to have full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings concerning personal liberty, personal security, and the acquisition, enjoyment, and disposition of estate, real and personal” was understood by some to include bearing arms.

How did the majority come to this wild conclusion with the Civil Rights Act having nothing to do with any personal rights outside of the administration of justice?

They think Sen. Lyman Trumbull suggested the Freedmen’s Bureau Act would have protected the right to bear arms without the words “constitutional right to bear arms” inserted. In reality, all he said was the insertion of the “constitutional right to bear arms” would had no “material effect” to the already existing section.

So then, the majority unwisely jumps to the conclusion the Civil Rights Act of 1866 must also had been intended to secure the “constitutional right to bear arms” even though it made no mention of the right.

Trumbull said his Civil Rights Act of 1866 “neither confers nor abridges the rights of any one, but simply declares that in civil rights there shall be an equality among all classes of citizens, and that all alike shall be subject to the same punishments.” This remark effectively demolishes the majorities assertion.

Another bizarre claim the Heller court makes that is worth mentioning was with asserting the provision of the English Bill of Rights that read, “the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense, suitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law,” was “clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia.”

Actually it had everything to do with service in the militia. The Duke of Ormond had formed an all Irish Militia and provided Protestants who served in his militia with arms. James II moved to selectively disarm Ormond’s militia under rumor of another rebellion similar to that of 1641. Meanwhile, Papists were allowed to remain armed and employed in militias contrary to the law of the time.

The Manuscripts of the Marquess of Ormonde, 1678, shows the proposal of arming Protestants was to “enable Protestants to withstand and defend themselves against any Papists whatsoever that should come with commission and bear arms in any military employment, and to dispense with those laws that at present made it rebellion so to do.”

Conclusion

With all the States compelling people by law to keep and bear arms and imposing penalties for failure to do so, proves beyond any doubt the bearing of arms under the Second Amendment is indeed connected to service in the militia. The additional fact that there were no demands for new amendments to the federal Constitution for any private right of individuals to have weapons but only demands for security against standing armies is further proof the Second Amendment was adopted for the sole purpose of securing citizens right to bear arms in service of well-regulated militias in order to make standing armies unnecessary.

The Second Amendment acknowledges the ancient principal that says a free people can only remain free when people are able to collectively provide for their own defense instead of professional armies that could become a tool of despotic rulers. The “right of the people” in the federal Constitution is used only in a collective recognition sense due to the fact the federal Bill of Rights had no force of law upon individuals themselves within their own sovereign States.

Did the Fourteenth Amendment incorporate the Second Amendment?

The Second Amendment or right to own, carry or use a gun was never part of the Fourteenth Amendment debates. Senator Howard quickly summarized some of the first eight amendments including “right to keep and to bear arms” when speaking of privileges and immunities of U.S. citizens when introducing the amendment to the Senate in 1866 but here he was only drawing attention to the Bill of Rights as a whole where “personal rights” were “secured by the first eight amendments” can be found. He followed up by qualifying the rights to be those recognized by “present settled doctrine” to belong to a “citizen solely as a citizen of the United States and as a party in their courts.” The Second Amendment was never a personal right citizens could claim as a party in federal court.

And not once did Howard suggest the Fourteenth Amendment would change this settled doctrine – only that States would be compelled to respect these rights of U.S. citizens (read, emancipated blacks) before state courts of law.

As for due process there is no “history, legal traditions, and practices” of treating “bear arms” as a fundamental right of individuals unconnected to service in the militia thereby making the Second Amendment a bad candidate for incorporating private gun ownership under the judicial theory of substantive due process.

And finally, this declaratory principal found under the Second Amendment lies today in a dormant state due to the fact States no longer compel their citizens by law to bear kept arms in State organized militias for security of a Free State."

kamaaina when did they modify the second amendment to say that? I have only seen the proper version that says the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

The Supereme Court has defined the Second Amendment for us. If you have a different view, by all means call them on it.

I read the entire article and it is just one individuals interpretation of selected pieces of information. There are just as many counter references that state the opposite.

The miltia consists of PRIVATE CITIZENS WITH THEIR OWN GUNS...

It is true. Gun nuts really can't read (or think or care)!

Kamaaina,

Militias are the people.

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the
people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George
Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention
to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to
infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to
prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from
keeping their own arms; …"
Samuel Adams
quoted in the Philadelphia
Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the
Convention of this State"

Maybe you need to be able to read more before spewing.

NC, you still don't get it, consider the context that the law was made in please.

"The Federal Second Amendment reaffirms the right of the States to maintain well-regulated militias for security of a Free State for which is the reason the people are to keep and bear arms for the sole purpose of rendering standing armies unnecessary during peace... Owning a gun for personal purposes is different to the purpose of bearing arms as part of the military power of a State which was compelled by State law and punished for refusal."

http://www.federalistblog.us/2010/09/second_amendment_fallacies/

Your comments and quotes are incomplete and not qualified or specified in the legal sense.

naval,

Judging by the acrimonious sentiment of your comment, it would appear that any SELF-respect you may have had surely has been missing for years....so forsaking the remainder relative to Giffords is no great achievement.

It's a good thing that you're retired....we don't want you disgracing those who continue to serve.

MSNBC Hypocrite. When four Americans were abandoned and murdered in Benghazi you wanted the issue swept away. You claim it was simply a political attack just like Fast and Furious ( white washed), the 'green energy kickbacks ( white washed) and other issues like national debt (white washed). See bigot? Not all thing "white" are good or all "black" things bad. Being a loyal MSNBC troll you probably never heard of the incident. So where was Giffords in Aurora, Portland?

When i served my oath was to the constitution of the Untied States. Now that you and your ilk are so ready to scrap that ideal which has unified us for over 200 years.. where then should my loyalty lie. These tragedies and atrocities are not being committed by old men. They are being committed by the youth of this nation, all by mentally deranged souls like you who think they are enlightened. maybe the greater question should be is why are all of these enlightened liberals becoming murderers?

These are issues are with this generation... not mine.

Navyvet98,

Dude, time for your meds. Really!!!

Silly rant, navy.

Interesting juxtaposition of letters, though, regarding to whom your oath was given. Got some secession on your mind, there, waterboy?

The military swears an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.

I understand that you would not know that, MCNBCMFE, having never served nor having ever contributed to the country in any way.

Navyvet and NC... that is fine, we love our country, but you had damned well better be sure you understand just actually what it is you are defending when you mow down another American with your big guns over your notions, have you studied and do you know the Constitution because it seems you have not read the article I have been refering to on the Second and Fourteenth Amendment.

http://www.federalistblog.us/2010/09/second_amendment_fallacies/

I see a lot of warped confusion and reasoning on this thread. Some who are coming from a very recognizable right wing point of view are so misinformed that they do not know what they are on about at all, even carrying contradictory notions that cross party lines or wrong headed notions and lack of knowledge of the topic here. Some seem to be parroting someone who has been feeding them nonsense. They offer no references to anything solid. They offer no valid statistical facts to back them up. Evidently they never took a methodology class or a class on empirical inquiry, and they have no understanding of proper debate or proper protocol or proper formatting or proper statistics.

These folks are not credible and need to go get a real education not "bible college" like the wild eyed Bachmann doing her creepy preachy god talk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcyqzWCTWEM

NC-492358

The military swears an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.

I understand that you would not know that, MCNBCMFE, having never served nor having ever contributed to the country in any way.

The thing that these socialists fear the most, and thus the reason they want to see citizens disarmed, is that part about "...enemies...domestic." There are innumerable patriots in this country who have sworn that oath to protect and defend our Constitution from those of this ilk who seek to destroy it. And I, and I'm sure most others like me, will hold true to that oath! They should be afraid!

Thank you for your service NavyVet98 (and NC-492358, if that be the case)!

Navyvet.....don't pay attention to the likes of MSNBCMFE and Kamaa....after you listed all of those facts, the only thing they could come back with were insults. They gave no mention to anything else in your post because they know you are right, they, like other liberals, just like to ignore facts and anything negative about the POTUS.

You squashed them and since they were humiliated they feel the need to personally attack you (another liberal trait).

Hats off to you sir.

"these socialists"? There has not been a socialist in our government since Eugene Debs who was elected in Indiana in 1884 and he did not have anything to do with the American Railroad Union yet. It was not until the 1890's Pullman Strike that he changed from being a Democrat to a Socialist, after his time in the Indiana General Assembly.

Why don't you define just what it is that you mean by the word Socialist that you are using in such an accusatory way, as if it is something criminal. Then you go on and on with your assumptions not showing that you know either the Constitution or history or what is social, socialism, socialistic, or what is so good or bad about people sharing, caring, and helping each other or respecting other people's lives and property as they respect their own.

Things like our postal, our police, our schools, our paramedics, our fire departments, our street repair crews, officials, record keepers and more are social organizations. This is an already existing and organized society that you were born into. And whay of that very social organization for our defense, the military? Whatever we have voted on, issues and candidates for the offices they serve, is socially determined. Then here we go again, "liberals", not knowing facts, what is the definition of liberal and who does not know the facts? Who does not know facts? You won't even address the topic and carry on an intelligent conversation about the specifications of the second amendment as spoken and meant by the framers themselves. The issues here have to do with making sure arms are in the hands of those licensed and capable to use them properly, law enforcement, military, or other security professionals. Again, no one is taking all the guns away.

Having Mrs. Kelly visit Newtown, herself a gunshot victim, will just remind those kids of what they had to endure. There is very little that can benefit those kids by having Mrs. Gabrielle Kelly visit and talk about her tragedy with them.

No, Gorge and Navy vet...you are wrong. The Giffords have been welcomed and invited by fellow professional doctors, educators, and psychologists in Newtown on behalf of the victims and their families in grief and ongoing Post Traumatic Stress Disorder counseling.

To not face the issue is denial, denial brings mental stagnation, amnesia, introversion, depression and character armor. It also creates in turn, more post traumatic fear inside oneself over the years because of one's intrinsic feelings of confusion, no control, no power to heal it or do anything to cure the problem that brought the traumatic injuries. One continues silently suffering things like nightmares or flashbacks alone and may become suddenly or increasingly overly enraged, abusive, or violent in ones behavior around family or friends. One may become suicidal as well.
Making sense of the trauma and gaining some self empowerment, learning to trust others, learning how to avoid problems from it in the future, getting one's feelings out about it, understanding the features of one's own particular emotional symptoms, like sudden moodswings... helps to avoid or lessen the severity of PTSD episodes.
Good psychotherapy, like transpersonal, depth, or cognitive talk therapy, or family systems therapy which invites the whole family in and meeting with a good counselor regularly about it helps everyone know what to do to help their loved one. This all helps one cope with and heal from PTSD, NOT DENIAL! Sheesh, I can see that neither of you "experts" even took Psych 101! READ THIS:

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Some-Sandy-Hook-kids-may-experience-PTSD-4160027.php

http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/trauma-depression-cognitive-therapy-1224121

And especially for you Navy Vet, from Defense Centers of Excellence:
"As a new generation of service members returns from deployment, the Department of Defense (DoD) is faced with the challenge of identifying the most effective methods of treatment to address post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Prevalence estimates of PTSD symptoms based on self-report surveys among warriors in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan vary, but it has clearly been shown to be a significant problem, especially for those exposed to sustained ground combat.^1-4

There are several treatment options that health professionals and clinicians can use to effectively treat service members with PTSD. Since there are a number of factors to consider in treating PTSD (e.g., access to services, availability, safety, patient preferences, etc.), it is important to understand the different types of treatments available to service members." cont. link below...

http://www.dcoe.health.mil/PsychologicalHealth/PTSD_Treatment_Options.aspx

The number of suicides by returning vets this year has surpassed the number killed this year in Afghanistan. Not dealing with the trauma one has lived and experienced is indeed harmful to the human psyche.

Precisely.

You certainly got the twisted part right. You really are a pathetic and twisted individual. Gabby Giffords has always been a very nice woman, much loved by the majority of her constituents. It seems to me that what you hate about her is that she is a perfect illustration for why better gun control is imperative. When there are haters like you loose in the world, the rest of us need to know that your firepower is limited. You sound very much like that angry, unbalanced kind of person capable of doing the kind of thing that mass murderers do.

Before they RUB out?

Yes, more IS better!!!!!!

"Rub out"????

Another gun control advocate that makes no sense. Seems to be a trend.

So you are saying you never leave your house? How many times have you been shot or shot at? Remember fear is a feeling not a fact.

Really...more guns = more violence? more murders? WRONG.....where does the USA rank in murder per capita (per 100,000)...not even in the top 20....

Taking away guns from the law abiding, which is what the current gun discussion will do, will not keep the guns out of most criminal hands.....

gun control advocates try to placate gun rights with statements of we just want to outlaw the certain weapons (assault rifles...large capacity magazines)....Giffords was shot with a glock 19 which is a handgun....so try telling me that starting with "assault rifles" isn't just a way of greasing the wheels to try to take all firearms away from citizens....

Anonymous,

Tell us about YOUR military experience.....

Change the headline, You're right. In places like Somalia, Syria, Uganda, the death rate is even higher. The difference being, they're at war. In theory, we aren't, at least not in this country.

Where does the USA rank in murder per capita (per 100,000)...not even in the top 20....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

Check out the European countries and then below the border. All there on column three.

Griphen et al. Your logic is lacking, the thing is to give peace a chance. If that happened to me I would not be here to offer any information. This is not about me, I could tell you I am Kagyu and you would have to look it up. underemployed is correct, there are other nations that have higher numbers and they are at war. Do you want war? Who is CRAZY? There is a good movie, King of Hearts. I suggest you watch it.

Just for you NC, Griphen, Nancy, Ken et al. The movie King of Hearts, Le Roi de Coeur

USA 2.97 per 100,000 population, rate of murder by firearms

France 0.06

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

Yes, we all saw how the French handled their guns in WWII. I believe you can still buy their surplus guns since they've only been dropped once.

And will the idiot on here who keeps referencing the federalist blog site stop using opinion pieces as pure fact.

And to set things straight - according to the CDC in 2010 firearms related deaths, which include all types of firearms not just rifles or just handguns or just murder or just suicide were a bit over 11,000.

Now, Chicago has a great shot - no pun intended - at accounting for a significant number on their own again this year. But if you notice who is committing the acts it is NOT by and large you average law abiding citizen. They do commit them certainly. But not to the tune most of the anti self defense crowd likes to portray.

So, now, let's look at the number of total firearms LEGALLY possessed in the U.S. -- most estimates are at about 300 million. So you have 11,000 total deaths according to the CDC and for fun let's more than double it to 25,000 - at 25,000 deaths using a firearm that would be .0000833333% of legally owned firearms are used in some way to cause a death. And for the anti-self defense crowd I GAVE them 2 times the actual number.

As well, according to law enforcement numbers (for 2006 I believe) the number of times a crime was stopped or prevented by a person legally permitted to own a firearm was over 2.5 million times. but for the sake of giving the anti-self defense crowd their bone.. We'll cut that in half.

Even cut in half you have 1000 times MORE DOCUMENTED instances of a positive outcome (except for the from the criminal's perspective) when a civilian uses a firearm in self defense than the negative outcome when the criminal uses one. (I would say if the criminal is armed and you are not the outcome is going to be pretty close to a 100% negative outcome for you)

As for you, Anonymous insight - peace is wanted by all. But we all know that is a perfect world scenario. Where you have folks who want peace you have the others who want to take what the peaceful have by force.

I know the anti-self defense people like to paint self-defense supporters and "Gun nuts" , "Wing Nut" and every other kind of "Nut" they can think of but the people in the Clackmas, Oregon mall are sure glad that there was one of those "nuts" in the mall that day because his draw down immediately stopped the real nut doing the shooting.

I'm also pretty sure that what really is nuts is ending up in any fight completely defenseless.

Not one of the guns I own has ever shot another person. I hope I never have to use one for that purpose. As do every one of the people i know who own guns. but we're all damn glad we have that option should we need it.

Maybe Bloomberg should have to go to just one person's house and explain to them why their loved one was raped and murdered and won't be coming home because in his city, people are not allowed the freedom to defend themselves with the same thing his bodyguards and the police use to defend him.

Anonymous Insight

Navyvet98??? Really?
Where is your understanding as a sailor, were you below swab, grunt or potato peeler? You are truly an elitist, anonymous.

Anonymous......are you off your meds??? Zoinks.

Jay, your figures are spurious because you are lacking a per.

JPJP The entire military is totally built on rank! Navyvet98 tells me absolutely nothing. What was his rank? What qualifies his statements? Nothing. It is just his opinion. He is retired anyway. If you were in the military you would immediately know someones rank. Ive never seen anything more elitist than the officers club, anyone want a shoe shine with a salute? Guess what? You earn your rank. Part of that is learning a few things. Fair enough and no disrespect intended.

CM So according to your words, you think everyone should be on meds. if they don't agree with you on a topic? Cute. Just like your title, cute. And you, Mr. Mafia, telling me we all need bigger badder machine guns for the kids and people forced to take those psychotropic affect numbing meds.? So now if put away, they have been defined, stuck in stone, damned and stigmatized forever as something or other. Eugenics much? It may make the Pharma guy and the doctor lotsa money but it doesn't make any sense for the addicted zombifried patient and is not very credible at all. Humane curative therapy and nutrition makes more sense. People do get well after getting sick. Some are terminal, but not all. It is not easy. We must be careful to prevent. Not all guns are to be banned. Many things must be done, and getting multi-murder machines off the streets and the magazines that go with is not taking away all guns for self defense. All of this needs to be considered.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDlH9sV0lHU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryzIeTFu2IM&feature=player_embedded#!

A 22 would've killed her stone dead, ricocheting around......

You have a point Capt Chaos, what kind of a gun did the person who stopped Loughener have? Was it a rapid fire multi kill machine? Again, no one has proposed a ban on all guns here! Everyone who is a gun lover here is all freaked out about losing individual rights and keeps confusing the issues.However, if you are dead you have no rights at all, no family, no country, no home, no sky, no legs, no eyes, no nothing. No one here mentions that the second amendment comes after the first for a logical reason. No one mentions thou shalt not kill as a primary commandment either. But God forbid with over eight thousand murders by guns last year not counting suicides, that you should get your shootem up cowboy toys taken away in the city streets, the schools, the parks, the stores, the public places where other citizens assemble. Nor have I heard about this...

http://rt.com/usa/news/gun-car-fatalities-people-516/

Underemployed is right ... "The right to own a gun is limited by the rights of others not to be shot. When there are so many high-powered, mega magazine weapons in circulation it is inevitable that some of them will fall into the hands of those who will use them to do harm. Thus, we limit the number of those weapons, those magazines, that ammunition, in order to protect the rights of innocent people to live out their lives without being shot full of holes." And all those who suffer should appeal to the Supreme Court to change their mistaken judgement about how "militia" is defined historically in cases McDonald v. Chicago and District of Columbia v. Heller.

http://www.federalistblog.us/2010/09/second_amendment_fallacies/

Insight? - The republic cannot be protected from a modern-day tyrannical government using pistols, which are a close-combat weapon. The "militia" is made up of citizen-defenders using their own firearms. That would include rifles of the semi-automatic persuasion that you insist on referring to as "assault weapons" (whatever that is!). Is it your contention that we should disarm the citizen-defenders in this country? It’s worked so well in other countries after all (sarc)!

And by the way, I also use one of those semi-automatic rifles for hunting and shooting sports. Do you want to ban those activities as well?

Here is the elitist, anonymous, telling us that, "Again, no one has proposed a ban on all guns here!" The word "here" being very important. Saving the total ban on guns for another time period. Small steps. CONSIDER:
In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From
1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
That places total victims who lost their lives because of gun control at approximately 56 million in the last century. Since we should learn from the mistakes of history, the next time someone talks in favor of gun control, find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated.

Yes JPJP, those were all at war. They were not free societies that practiced democracy. So you want to have a war? Not a peaceful society of the people, by the people, for the people? Who is taking all of your guns away? You are calling me an elitist? Ha, you sure assume a lot about people you do not even know. I have written against the power elite for years. I support a broad based middle class and keeping it that way is good for the country as a whole by keeping it so that your middle class citizens can afford, as consumers, to purchase products and services. Oh yes, the whole is equal to and greater than the sum of its parts...Gestalt theory - and the Gestaltists sure were not elitists. They were cognitive perceptionists and how did they reach the conclusion that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts? Ever read Kohler? NO more, that's it, will not do your homework for you. Go do it yourself.

Real logic here. You should run for Congress.

Wow...the NRA has what? 5 million sick people by your count....but anybody who agrees with you is well and good.

What would be the cure ,doctor,more of your last medicine that didn't work,just a lot stronger dose?

bs

Where do you get 750,000 people dreaming of killing kids? Yours & some of the others foaming at the mouth views about firearms are in the minority in this Country. Something needs to be done & the answer is not simple & needs to be addressed in multiple ways but disarming of law abiding people isn't going to happen. Going bat $hit crazy about firearms is not going to right the wrongs.

I do not know about any three quarters of a million people dreaming, or where that comes from? What is that in reference to? A study of some kind? Can you provide a link? Put it in some clear context?

However, I can certainly agree with the biased judgement of a conservative Supreme Court, also not accurate, based on a lack of understanding and knowledge about the context of the historical definition of "militia" in the recent precedent setting cases McDonald v. Chicago and District of Columbia v. Heller. As has been summarized already, with reference to the article & link above, Second Amendment Fallacies, The right to bear arms in the Second Amendment refers to militias organized by the state NOT individual gun ownership and this must be reformed, adjusted, amended or repealed.

The fact you actually think people who are supportive of their inherent right of self defense really sit there with a smile on their faces after ANYONE, let alone children, are murdered tells me YOU are the one who needs to seek some serious professional help.

"Murder is evil." And, that is a very true statement. But to link that together with people trying to protect their Constitutional Rights is also an evil thing. The group-hate directed at the NRA is ugly and says ugly things about those consumed by it. Over the last 20 years, the firearm crime rate has dropped, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, from 6 victims per 1,000 residents in 1994 to 1.4 victims per 1,000 residents in 2009. This decline took place in an era where gun sales increased and carry permit laws were liberalized. Before we set off to infringe on the rights of tens of millions of Americans in an effort to prevent the unpreventable and demonize those who oppose that push, perhaps we should take a look at the data to see if it supports the assumption that we’re in the middle of an ever-increasing bloodbath. If not — and the data seems pretty clear about that — then perhaps the solution to preventing a few mentally/emotionally/spiritually twisted individuals from wreaking mass murder lies somewhere else than disarming everyone who abides by the law.

If you can't even spell Judaism, then you probably haven't studied it much. Your obvious anti-Semitic ramblings qualify you for a tin foil hat.

Gun homicides Per 100,000 population in 2007...

USA 2.97 (approx. 30 times higher than others.)

Isreal 0.09

England and Wales 0.07

Um, I don't think so.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

You are correct. The jews are the biggest financial theives in the country. Just look who is commiting all the fraud on wall st.They steal billions and the corrupt bought and paid for judges sentence them to less time than a shoplifter or any other citzen. Research the lenient sentencing history for crimes committed by greedy jews verses the sentencings for any body else.They soon will be out numbered in Israel so they think they will take control of the U.S. The jews in the congress and senate are probably sending military secrets and confidential information to Israel. Israel is supposed to be an ally but they wont extradite theives and criminals who run from here to hide over there. They will be the first ones to cry anti-semite etc. They are the biggest racists and biggots in the world.Their only religion is greed and money. I thought true jews were supposed to return to their "Homeland". That seems to be true only after the bloodsuckers steal billions in fraudulent deals and need to hide. Instead of the billions the U.S sends to a country that cant be trusted we should spend it on shipping them out of here and use the savings on us programs.

Underemployed, I am not anti-semitic, I am anti-zionist, are you a zionist devil worshiping tool? Is that all you got is to insult me with a tin foil hat comment? Debunk me!

Second hand smoke kills a lot of people every single year. So the rights of smokers are limited by the rights of those whose exposure to second hand smoke puts their lives at risk. It is called "the common good", and people who are willing to do others harm because they are too selfish to take their smoke someplace where it won't hurt someone else don't understand anything about "rights". Your rights are limited by the rights of others. In a more civil society, maybe we wouldn't need to tell others to be considerate, but you clearly need to be told.

The right to own a gun is limited by the rights of others not to be shot. When there are so many high-powered, mega magazine weapons in circulation it is inevitable that some of them will fall into the hands of those who will use them to do harm. Thus, we limit the number of those weapons, those magazines, that ammunition, in order to protect the rights of innocent people to live out their lives without being shot full of holes.

Mark,

I am 55 years old & I have NEVER seen the races more divided in my life. Not just the races either. The whole Nation is in a state of Civil unrest. It seems that Obama has succeeded in dividing races, class & everything else that could have a wedge driven in it. Don't know how or why but just an observation. The whole Character of our Nation is on the edge.

Something, not somebody is behind this...........to quote the rolling stones "Pleased to meet ya, hope ya guess my name...."

The divisiveness and civil unrest has been created by the right wing and the hate filled rhetoric of people like Limbaugh, Beck and O' Reilly. They keep telling you who to hate and you decide the person you are told to hate is the problem. Perfectly logical. Hitler did the same thing to the Jews. Told the Germans everything was the fault of the Jews and 6 million Jews ended up dead. Just because you're told Obama is the problem doesn't make it true. It just makes you dumb enough to believe it.

The Divider in Chief has been and still is the most divisive Prez ever using every means possible to divide this country.

You peeps need to take a history lesson. We already had a Civil War, we had Viet Nam, the march on Washington, we had the civil rights movement and the industrial revolution too. Where have you been? Again, underemployed is right. Nazi persecution sucks. Banksters come in all races, creeds and colors. Its pretty simple who is doing what. Visit google or your library. Keep up with current events. READ MANY REFERENCES to check sources and stories, not just one.