The pro gun rallies have not been ignored. They have been going on since the NRA finally broke its long silence after the Newtown massacre.

This rally is reminiscent of the Million Mom March held in Washington, D.C., in 2000 that my mom and sister participated in.

We are with you, Newtown!

The Newtown residents are rational people who want reasonable gun laws. Who can blame them after what they have suffered?

Time for all of you who are hiding behind your stockpile of weapons to realize that the President is not trying to confiscate all your guns or force you to gay marry an illegal immigrant.

It happened at state capitols nationwide, on a weekend. I'm sure you could have made it, there is always a next time though.

Branxoz, more control by another institution is not what we need. Morals don't come from a book; a book is easy to set aside and forget. Morals come from a clear set of values that have been passed on through family ties and taught by example.

Not saying that Christian values are flawed, by any means. A lot of good works have been done by America's churches. But I don't want my country's policy dictated by any kind of entrenched dogma, even if it is basically sound.

People don't need to blindly follow an instruction manual to know the difference between right and wrong, and to teach it to our children.

I want a free-thinker running my country.

@Nick

We sure as heck ought to try.

@Sandy

I don't think you understand. We do not live in a fairytail land of gum drops and candy canes. There is evil in the world. It was there prior to guns being invented and it still remains today. You cannot regulate or legislate people to be happy and safe. You need strict laws for those people who infringe on the health and freedoms of their fellow citizens, but ultimately is the number 1 priority of the individual to protect his or her person and property.

You also forget that many of those same rights you speak of have been protected and saved by a firearm for thousands upon thousands of individuals. Why do you think our law enforcement officers carry guns?

Lastly, its not the gun thats evil, its the operator. Unless of course you think all of my guns are defective since they have gone on a killing spree all by themselves.

Here's an interesting observation from a Study on Guns and Crime Rates;

"The potential defensive nature of guns is indicated by the different rates of so-called "hot burglaries," where residents are at home when the criminals strike (e.g., Kopel, 1992, p. 155 and Lott, 1994). Almost half the burglaries in Canada and Britain, which have tough gun control laws, are "hot burglaries." By contrast, the U.S., with laxer restrictions, has a "hot burglary" rate of only 13 percent. Consistent with this, surveys of convicted felons in America reveals that they are much more worried about armed victims than they are about running into the police. This fear of potentially armed victims causes American burglars to spend more time than their foreign counterparts "casing" a house to ensure that nobody is home. Felons frequently comment in these interviews that they avoid late-night burglaries because "that's the way to get shot."[8]"

I would much prefer that someone thinking about breaking into my home be worried about the possibility of my being armed and try to do it when my family is NOT at home, rather than expose my family to possible terror from someone that knows I CAN'T be armed. Link below;

http://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/gunslott.html

Nick429xxxxx If your logic in 1.14 was valid, then it's a great argument for not having any laws at all.

I think however most of us realize that while some criminals will always manage to circumvent some laws, that's no reason to just give up on a maintaining a society based on law and order.

@Sandy - Well tell your Son-In-Law not to buy guns that he not trained to handle safely and you guys will be just fine. You see he is free to not purchase any gun of his choosing. Also, there are many other types of animals to hunt and with many different types of guns. But do not for one second assume that you know MY NEEDS as they pertain to firearms let alone the needs of every other person in the US.

@MountainLady - Just Jan 9th of this year a lady in Georgia (my home state) defended her kids and her home when an intruder broke into her house. Would you rather her not have a gun? Could you guarantee that the intruder would cause no harm to her or her children? Would you be willing to be held responsible if he did harm or even kill her or her children? This actually happens quite often, where a home owner defends themselves and thier property with firearms, but yeah its been debunked I heard Obama say so - so it must be true? Yeah right!

I am really looking forward to this - as soon as all the people in Organized Crime, burgulars, murderers, kidnappers, criminals, loonies, and crazies turn in their guns the better off and safer we will all be!

"I think it's because it was children, babies," she told the AP. "I was horrified by it."

Hmmmmmmm, it's interesting isn't it?

We now classify the "horrificness" of a tragedy, we grade it on who the victims are. It's sad that we can accept ANY criminal death and sensationalize others. The Newtown victims are no more or less dead than the Aurora victims or those in Columbine.

Since Newtown we have had 1,243 homicides, 73 of them are children under 16.

Are ANY of these more or less important than the others or the victims in Newtown?

Is 5 year old Jael Griego that was killed on 1/19/13 in N.M. less important?

Is 16 year old Alishia Colon that was killed on 1/17/13 in N.J. less important?

Is 69 year old David Marks that was killed on 1/11/13 in KY less important?

Is 47 year old Mary Escue that was killed on 12/18/12 in OK less important?

Most of us have never heard of these deaths. Why isn’t the media sensationalizing these deaths like they are the Newtown tragedy? These deaths affected families, friends and community just as those in Newtown.

According to a 2004 study from the University of Pennsylvania regarding the 1994 assault weapons ban, "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence," the study concluded. "And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence."

But the Liberals, in typical knee-jerk fashion will go through all the machinations to restrict our 2nd Amendment rights and totally neglect all the other issues such as education, safety, mental health concerns and social/moral collapse caused by Progressivism and political correctness.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

@Sandy said

Freedoom to worship

Freedom to assembly

These rights have been ended for some by a gun.

These rights were originally preserved for us by brave rebels with guns during the revolution

@Theo - My logic is completly valid. I am not suggesting we not have any laws. I am merely saying that laws do not prevent criminals from being criminals. They do however set forth a form of punishment for when the law is broken. If the punishment for these criminals was more severe then maybe they would think twice about breaking the law. But when you have people dying of old age on death row you have a problem. The punishment is clearly not severe enough to deter the criminal. I continually here the left say how we should reform these criminals while they are in prison and then they advocate for them to be paroled and let back out into the free world. We have Professor in Pennsylvania just this month being paroled after serving only 5 years for murdering his wife. FIVE YEARS!!! This lax punishment will not make anyone think twice before committing a crime.

Charle - I would argue that its the Democrats that are in love with money and guns. Clearly they are trying to infringe upon my 2nd Amendment Rights and make it more difficult for me to obtain guns. FYI, thats how Hitler got started gun control, the confiscation, then well you know the rest.

As for money, hell every other statement out of their mouth is WE NEED MORE TAXES!!

Stratocumulus - Please define "Assualt Weopon". I assume this will be relatively easy for you since you appear to be some sort of gun expert. Just how many firearms do you own? You also must be one hell of a shot, since we only need a couple of rounds for self defense. I guess it would be the homeowners fault if there are more intruders than she has bullets and god forbid she miss the intruder a couple of times and runs out of bullets. But thats okay the democrats have assured us that thats all we need and people like are willing to step up and be held accountable if god forbid you and the democrats are wrong.

If you really want to get technical. If the government can encroach upon the rights of its citizens about what type of firearms they can and cannot have. How long before they set their sight on SUV's, High performance German, English and Italian cars.

Think about it for a minute? I own a pickup truck to move my RV and Boat. But If Al Gore gets his way it would be on the banned list because of fuel economy ratings. (even though I only use it about 7000 miles a year ) If you chose to purchase a Porsche, Ferrari, or similar vehicle. Now you can own one if you so choose. But if Al Gore gets his way you would have to surrender your vehicle or have it confiscated by the government. Because they feel nobody needs the ability to go 200 plus mph, or they could just limit you to a 5 gallon gas purchase every time you stop for gas. This is the same argument we are having over a type of firearm.

Point is, if we as a country allow this type of limits to our freedom to start when and where will it end?

STOP the NRA! Wouldn't it be lovely if Americans didn't fear their government so much that they say they need guns to protect themselves from it? STOP the NRA! I FEAR those with guns more!

garcher,

Repeal the 2nd Amendment can't be done soon enough for of us!

Theo, OOps! I just sort of said it!

Hey guess what NBC, there were Newtown residents including parents of victims at the pro-2nd Amendment rally in Hartford Jan 19th on a cold winter day over 1000 people were there and other state capitals, where was that coverage? I for one and tired of the media as a whole being biased ...right or left....did they stop teaching ethics to reporters? Is it really just a matter of a paycheck, that you have to write stories accepted by the corporate owners or what? Quite simply guns are not the problem, it is people. Period. A gun is an inanimate object, it isn't capable of being good or evil. It doesn't matter what it looks like, the amount it can fire, the caliber, nothing. It can only do harm through negligence (improper handling) which is easily fixed with proper training, respect, and knowledge. Or it can do harm through malicious intent. Only two ways. Both involve people. Let us also not forget that the 2nd Amendment people...is not to have a small firearm to hunt with or plink cans in the back yard....it is to deter the GOVERNMENT from becoming tyrannical. So how can the government make rules limiting something that SAYS it isn't to ever be limited...these are the same people it is meant to protect citizens from! Look, free speech is great right, all of you have written here to exercise that, you all value your own opinion, but guess what...real world, talk doesn't always get it done...if talk was all that was required then their would be no wars, everything could be settled with diplomacy, yet we still see wars. Until there is a guarantee that the government wouldn't trample my other rights, guarantee that another nation couldn't invade, guarantee there won't in the future be a tyrant who comes to power, I say we keep the right that our founding fathers gave us BECAUSE they knew that they couldn't guarantee those things then, and no one can guarantee that still today. All the rights we value in America are protected by the 2nd Amendment. DO NOT allow the media and politicians use a tragedy to pry the last line of defense from you.

Silverton,

Sorry, but I just said that the 2nd Amendment should be eliminated! I mean it!

Theo - Only outlaws rape, murder and burn now! A gun can be used for good and for bad. Merely outlawing a few typs of so-called assualt rifles will do nothing to stop outlaws from rapping, murdering, and burning. It will take weapons out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Thats the point, this ban would do nothing to affect any criminal only the law abiding citizens. That is why I do not support it, as the so-called goal is prevent criminals from murduring people with guns and this suggested law would not accomplish your goal.

Repeal the 2nd Amendment can't be done soon enough for of us!

Go right ahead. Read the Constitution. There is a procedure to do just that. However, until then, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

"We must act, we must act, we must act," Duncan said

Yes, we must act, get rid of Duncan and Dumbama. That will bring some normal outlook at things. While at it, throw Biden into the same trash bin.

Charle, Your list wasn't complete about what republicans love. You left of POWER, GREED, and themselves!

I am going to put the definition of infringed because some people here do not understand what it means

Infringe as defined by Oxford Dictionaries.

• 1. actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.):making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright

• 2.act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on:such widespread surveillance could infringe personal liberties

Anyone get the key word? LIMIT. When you ban assault rifles you are limiting our rights as a citizen. So let's say you ban assault rifles, next mass murder happens with a pistol. We ban pistols. then Shot guns, etc.... So it's really just opening up the door for more and more un-constitutional acts.

Oh and by the way, way more murders are caused by pistols then assault rifles. All those calling for an "assault rifle ban" are pretty much saying "we don't care about those everyday murders, we only care about the big mass shootings that account for about 0.001 percent of murders.

"I like how the pro gun rallies were ignored....."

That would be the Harrisburg Gun Show that was gutted or finally canned. On the brighter side, there's nothing left to control - everybody from Cabela's on down gets ransacked daily by hoarders.

In 2008 about 12,000 [generous estimate] Americans were killed with guns.

How many do you think were killed in Japan that year? 11

--It is okay to own a gun. [it turns out that pistols can have 15 bullets per clip, so Nick, if you miss five burglars, you still have two bullets for each of them]. But these numbers should tell us something.

strato-

You are wrong. The 2nd Amendment does not quantify nor qualify the right to bear any type of arms. You can choose not to - that's your choice.

--- But I would like to see you try to stop a pack of wild hogs on the rampage with your cap guns...

The sheep march, NRA has less then 5 million members. or look at it this way 95 million gun owners that do not belong to the NRA. the AR15 that made the head lines was in the trunk of the car never used.

This protest is a joke. Look at how many kids were killed by drone strikes. Where is the protest? OH it is ok if it keeps us safe. That is BS

Holy Moses! Do wild hogs go on rampages all through the US? We definitely need assault guns.

Yea Garcher, you're right and before you know it we'll have "free speech zones" and........ Oh, sorry, that already happened under Bush.

@steve, You notice that there em to be more conservatives here then Liberals? I think it is because we are trying to show the Liberals who think that MSNBC is the unbiased completely fair news source that they are sadly mistaken. Course, you seem fine with the fact that they only tell half the truth. You are the reason Conservatives get on here. If you get all you information from NBC it is our jobs to put information on here that might actually be accurate. So because of you, I am going to set MSNBC as my home page.

ctviking, So why does the Second Amendment being with for a Militia?

clwyd,

I am confused by the wording of your question. But I will tell you that while we have not needed a militia to defend ourselves in quite a long time, the time may come again when the citizens must band together to protect ourselves from an invader. Just because we have had the luxury of relative peace here in the United States does not mean that situation will not occur again. That is why we have that second amendment right. And it should not be taken away because some crazy person in Newtown committed such a horrific act - an act that is already illegal.

While your at it check out Jon Stewart.

I think it is so funny to hear the poor NRA gun freaks crying because they won't be able to shoot an assault rifle soon. LOL, i'm enjoying watching them squirm. Reading their pathetic posts trying desperately to get someone to hear them. NOT! lol, too funny.

You are spot on President Obama, more power to you. You have my support. Anything to get the guns off the streets. Woot!

Hillary Clinton in 2016. God bless America.

Liberals try to polarize things to suit them as good and those that do not as evil.. Since the Constitution and the writers of it promoted gun ownership as a defense against a domineering government they must also think them and the Constitution evil.. That's why they put it in not for hunting so please do not be confused.. I like how they say restrictions on Constitutional rights and choice are not a restriction just like their socialist mesiha Obama.. Any way you twist it this is part of a larger agenda.. We have sent emails to our politicians warning them that infringements on the Constitution are treason and that they do not want to go there.. You want to see an angry population just mess with the Grand document we dare you..

So many new socialist programs like Obamacare that we can't pay for..

Oddly what the federal government doesn't want to address is that the majority of these guns that are used in violent crimes come from other criminals. They where illegally purchased and hard to track.

Why?

Because the liberals won't lock up criminals. Gun owners have a weapon in their house for protection. They shouldn't have to use trigger locks or gun safes. They have a high sense of security and responsibility.

There is no way of tracking these criminals guns from state to state or nationally, unless the criminal decides to register the gun with a licensed dealer. The NRA supports universal background checks and a national data base.

People running out buying every gun they see are very smart. The liberals think the current government is tyrannical and should be overthrown .

Obama and the liberalhomos are trying to take the 2nd amendment away. Your not allowed to own any weapon you like.

So bottom line... It doesn't matter to Odumb@!$%# and the liberals how responsible Gun owner are. They can use trigger locks and gun safes. The libs are still going to take them guns if you let them.

Stratocumulus - I encourage you to move to Japan then. Or maybe you would be better off to move to say Sweden or Isreal. They have many more guns per capita than even America, and require citizens to own or
train with pistols and fully automatic rifles. Yet these countries have less murder and violent crime than Japan, and almost no gun crime.

Fact is we as a country have many laws to protect the rights of the US citizens from improper search and seizure among others that Japan does not. Our system is setup more to give the benifit of doubt to the accussed to ensure they get a fair trail whereas in Japan if you do not confess to the crime they are accussing you off (95% confession rate) then you go before a judge - NOT A JURY. And the prosecution rate is around 98%. They also have strict punishment and consequences for not follow the rules while in prison. In the US, I believe they call it brutality and unfair punishment.

silverton.....The NRA has never been AGAINST Newtown. Every placard in the picture says to stop the NRA. This isn't a "gun conrtol" march. It's a an attack on the NRA. Period. NRA didn't kill anyone in Newtown, or anywhere else. They don't harbor illegal gun owners. It's membership consists of Democrats, Indpendent and Libertarians also. It is NOT a Republican organization. It's an American organization. Or maybe that's what bothers Obama. Just how has the NRA "bullied" YOU?

But Theo these gangs are in places that already have a ton of laws that prohibit possession of guns without a permit to carry.. Most are criminals and juveniles that are prohibited and thus are violating the laws on the books.. What will more laws accomplish if these are not enough??

Attacking the NRA seems like a desperate effort to discredit them.. They hate criminals who use guns or any other weapon to kill, injure or threaten and have pointed out many laws on the books that are not being enforced.. I even read on these post someone calling them terrorists and Taliban.. That is terrible propaganda from misinformed fools following Obama..

"Do wild hogs go on rampages all through the US?"

No. Real pigs don't go near the city. Those are called thugs - another reason to have a gun.

So, the limp-wristed Libbies are going to start another one of their "social wars".

The war on assault weapons!

Of course we all know how well all the other "wars" have done.

The war on crime is a failure and they want to take our guns away. This can only make sense to the illiterate cabal that identify as Liberals and Progressives.

The war on drugs is an abysmal failure. We spent half a trillion dollars on the war in Afghanistan and we conveniently forgot to carpet bomb the poppy fields that provide 80% of our heroin. Of course our own government has been complicit in aiding and abetting the drug lords, yet the Liberals want to disarm us even more.

The war on poverty costs us a TRILLION dollars a year and we still have as much poverty today as we did in 1965.

We don't need to say much more about our war on illiteracy, which is an embarrassment, as most Americans read at an 8th grade level. This is the most important "war" we should be engaging as it is the direct cause of all the other social ills. Crime, drugs, poverty, violence are all directly related to our pathetic government run public education system.

Of course this isn't even on Barrack Husseins agenda. This is the last thing the Statist-in-Chief wants to address. He knows that an educated populace will see right through his lies and corruption. The unwashed masses that sniff the chair he sits in are best kept stupid and mediocre. Education, the right education, is reserved only for Barracks comrades, his faculty-lounge elitists.

The rest are simply here to become middle class and work for the government determined Bourgeoisie. So now, the government will use their “assault” weapons to deny the Constitutionally protected People their right to arm themselves.

Only in the convoluted, delusional mind of a Liberal/progressive can any of this make sense.

Jim There is more poverty now then back then saying it is static admits some success so yep it is a failure.. The value of the dollar has fallen thus raising the bar for poverty level.. But the more dependent people meen more votes.. Both sides of the isle have robbed the only half was decent social programs of their money and are on the verge of causing economic collapse that seems irreversible.. So what is their solution? more free stuff.. We are doomed....

conservativelybiased14

Do you get paid to be hall news monitor? What makes you think me or anyone else doesn't find information else where.....I am seated at a computer and know how to use it. Hmmm. It suggests that I have the ability to think for myself.

If that is the only thing you can say about my post then you must fall into one of the categories I mentioned.

OK, it looks like it's time to lay down some factual information for all of the fact challenged gun control supporters. Now just so you know, these facts come from the FBIs website, and the U.S. Federal Census Bureau website. You don't get anymore factual or accurate than those guys.

First. Since the year 2000, there have been an approximate average of 9,500 gun MURDERS per year.

Of those, only an approx. average of 400 per year are with a rifle of any kind
7,500 by hand gun
the rest by others like shotguns and such.

Something is seriously fishy about the idea that the libs are promoting, that repeating semi automatic rifles are to blame for this countries murder woes. What is the real reason behind wanting to ban THOSE firearms? Could it be that hand guns are actually only efficient to about 40 yards, and that that gives the advantage to those who would wield a rifle 2-300 yards out from those they are attempting to subjugate? After all, how would those who fought for our freedoms fared if they had to go up against the Kings armies with nothing more than pistols?
Just a little something to think about.

Second. The FBI states that over 48% of all crime in this country is committed by gangs, with over 90% committed by gangs being the case in many cities, regions, and communities. The actual percentage of violent crime committed by gangs is higher. When you take into consideration that the weapon of choice for the great majority of gang bangers is the hand gun, then it stand to reason that the gangs are responsible for the great majority of those 7,500 gun murders per year.
Rather than attempt to infringe upon the 2nd amendment rights of law abiding citizens, why don't we just kick all of the traffic offenders, and pot smokers, and petty offenders out of the jails and prisons? That way we could actually hand down sentences to these sociopathic menaces to the peace of the law abiding community that would effectively get them off the streets for good. You see, if we mandated laws that any crime committed by a gang member would automatically receive a life sentence, with any gun crimes receiving a mandatory death sentence. Then we channel mass amounts of resources to the agencies that would investigate and prosecute these pieces of societal waste, and pursue total eradication of these groups. And I mean TOTAL eradication, causing ALL gangs to cease to exist. They are a blight on our nation, and most deserve to die. We might see a much bigger result than taking any gun from the hands of a law abiding citizen. Right now there is no reason to respect or fear the consequences of their actions.

But you see, that will never happen, because it is too easy for one, and it would seriously reduce the influence of the fear and loathing over the easily cowed masses, which is the basis for much of the power that the politicians wield in this country. They have to have a villain to create fear and distraction. They can't tell the truth about the real numbers compiled on gun violence because it doesn't fit the agenda.

Third. 30 years ago 50 companies/corporations controlled 95% of all the media sources in this country. Today that same influence is controlled by 6. It makes it much easier to indoctrinate through media/government generated propaganda. Doesn't it concern any of you that so much influence is wielded by so few? It would be my guess that that is why the report given by NBC Chief Justice Correspondent - Pete Williams on the TODAY show with Matt Lauer was so easily wisked under the rug. In this report segment given directly to Matt Lauer by Pete Williams on national morning TV, he stated that NO rifles of any kind had been found at the site of the Sandy Hook tragedy. He states that the authorities found 4 hand guns. The one long gun that they found was locked in the trunk of the shooters car, and was reporedly a shotgun. Those facts were dismissed and got lost immediately. If you go the NBC website and attempt to pull up the report, it has been edited and scrubbed to meet the agenda. Kind of like the NBC producer who edited the Trayvon Martin 911 tape to indicate racial profiling and cause a national racial crisis. BUT, there are many sites where good concientious American citizens track all of that stuff and keep recordings that all of us are free to view. Again, there were no rifles found, just handguns. Add to that the fact that supposedly there was security footage that the cops wanted to review to help piece together what happened at sandy hook elementary. Now back when columbine happened that footage was all over the air, as has every other incident where footage was available. Hell, they even did live coverage of a suicide. Why haven't we seen any of the footage? Just one photo? Anything that can corroborate the assertion of a rifle of any kind?

Doesn't it make some of you go HMMM? I wonder why the current administration and the liberal leadership in the senate and house want so desperately to cram through a knee jerk fear driven piece of legislation to weaken our 2 amendment. Doesn't it make any of you liberal fear cowed gun control supporting masses wonder why so much fact based information contradicts EVERY last shred of what you are being spoon fed through the media? I mean forget the whole gun issue for just a second, and think about what you are being fed. Doesn't it make you angry to be lied to constantly?

NONE of the facts add up to back the assertions of the current administration or the radical gun control members of our congress. NOT ONE FACT backs up the desire to ban Semi automatic wanna be look alike fake assault weapons or rifles, and the high capacity magazines that they can hold.

But there are a sh-tload of facts that back up the idea of punishments of draconian severity for all gang bangers.

Again, what is the real agenda here?

ith the clean up of this country.

We Only Need
'One' Executive Action

Give the President a break he already got caught violating the Constitution once this week.

I saw some of that news video and it was odd that the police were more interested in keeping everyone including fire and ambulance resources as far away from the school as they could.. They went as far as transporting what looked like laundry sacks not body bags from the scene with 4 wheelers.. The coroner a quite goofy guy also said a specific weapon was used and he had not even visited the scene yet or preformed any autopsies.. Reminds me of the hole in the ground in PA that was claimed to be a crash site but not a shred of an airplane was found.. Same goes for the Pentagon and the mystery of the missing surveillance tapes.. The Pentagon has an insane number of cameras mounted outside but none were able to get an image.. Something stinks of false flag...

I'd like to address my comment to those who ask "Why does anybody need an assault rifle?"

In past years, you had to worry about 2-4 looters at a time, but if they are now organizing via twitter, you could have an Alamo situation on your hands if you live in the wrong place. People who live in neighborhoods may eventually need to organize and prepare their neighbors, too, when anarchy becomes a looming threat. No family of 2-4 is going to be able to fight off 10-40 armed looters.

Even though most looting is targeted at commercial districts without power (no police presence, no functional alarm systems, etc), I am concerned that these scumbags have started to use social media to organize home invasion style looting in residential neighborhoods that are still without power. If I have family in areas that still have no power and no phones (and no cell phone reception because the local towers are down), I would have to assume that an intelligent criminal would know this is an easy target.

Fortunately, most people (especially thugs) readily recognize AR-15 and AK-47 rifles. So, just the sight of those firearms in the hands of home owners probably would deter rioters, looters, and hooligans from home/store invasions. It’s a fact that such armed home and store owners successfully defended themselves and their property against rioters and looters during the Los Angeles riots (after Rodney King’s arrest), after Hurricane Andrew in Florida, and during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Unfortunately, more recently, after Hurricane Sandy in the New York City area, the citizens were not able to defend themselves and/or their property as effectively from roving bands of looters because the property owners essentially were thwarted by oppressive gun laws. Also, let’s not forget that during several of the named incidents, the police either refused to enter neighborhoods under siege (L.A. riots) or were spread so thin that they were not available to answer every call for help (assuming that at least SOME telephone lines and cell phone towers were still functional).

That being said, it’s better to have an “assault rifle” and not need it than to need an “assault rifle” and not have it.

Are all of these comments REALLY collapsed by the community or by MSNBC and their agenda that continues with their bed fellow Obama?

The stage was set this week for ending Obama's "ABUSE OF POWER."

Whether he likes it or not, the Constitution is real and meaningful and the laws of the land WILL be upheld by Congress or if need be, by the Supreme Court of the USA.

Honest law abiding people don't kill people. Nuts and drug users kill people. It is drugs and mentally ill people so what will taking guns away from the rest of us do to help this problem? I believe if we allowed all people to carry guns openly some of these nuts would back down. If a school was armed (and I mean the teachers carrying them on their side in a holster not in a purse or brief case) few would want to go in shooting if they knew they might get return fire! We advertise "no gun zones" and the nuts know they can pick people off without worrying about getting harmed until they hear the police coming. If they knew a school had armed personal maybe they would drive to the parking lot and just kill their selves in the car.

Wow, the media really lies so much. It didn't look too crowded at that rally. The media tries to make it look like the majority of Americans want gun control and guns taken away, when in reality the real truth is the majority of Americans will not have their 2nd amendment rights taken away from them. For those of you who don't want guns, nobody is forcing you to have one and you don't like the fact that someone has one then go live in a country that doesn't allow it and see how you get treated there. All you people that call yourselves Americans, yet you can't stand America and want to take our rights away, please leave, get out of the country, go live somewhere else, because you are not Americans-why do you stay. You want us to live like 3rd world countries, yet I don't see any of you running to go live there yourselves. If Obama does not like this country and he doesn't, then he needs to leave too, go live with your muslim brothers. This idiot is sending 20 F-16s and 200 tanks to Egypt to the man who badmouths our country and calls people pigs and so forth, wanting to rethink the peace agreement between them and Israel and them Obama is GIVING them this equipment,$30,000,000 jets each. This is where the tax increases that are being put on us is going. He wants to disarm America and arm the rest of the world against us. First it is arming Mexican cartels , now it's these countries who hate us. What exactly does Egypt need all this military equipment for? And he wants to lessen out military while building up others. A whole lot wrong with this picture.

As usual Silverton knows not what he is talking about. He claims they are not after my guns and says it with conviction. But he is wrong again.

I own 30+ firearms. Out of the 30+, seven would be allowed to remain in my hands. And I only have 3 of what uninformed masses and media term assault weapons. Of the 7 that would remain, 2 are shotguns, 3 are revolvers, and 2 are early 1900's bolt action rifles.

The rest are semi auto rifles and handguns that I bought legally. Liberal are full of it, politicians are full of it and Silverton is full of it.

We're not trying to take away anyone's right to bear arms, we're only trying to take away certain types of arms that no one has any business with anyway.

We're not trying to take away anyone's right to free speech, we're only trying to take away certain types of speech that no has any business with anyway.

You know? It sounds really damn weird when you try to make these anti-second amendment arguments apply to the first.

So can anyone please tell me when the last shooting happened with a true Assault Rifle, not an "assault rifle", and if you don't know the difference between the two, then don't bother to respond.

Bottom line, Kanic, there's over a couple hundred million firearms within the US already. Who's gonna take them away? You? me, the boogeyman, politicians or the UN? No one. Too little too late. They're out there. Gun owners (legal or not) aren't stupid. They're smart enough to keep their hardware off-site of where they live. The storm troopers won't find a thing 'cept a cheapo sacrificial lamb for them to seize. Anyhow, the dough to do it ain't there. Not in budget. Even so, contrary to popular belief, it is now possible to get top shelf hardware cheaper from Mexighanistan than the lousy AR-junk here in the US. Gotta understand that Mexico's underworld bought no longer used hardware from the Balkan Wars. From Carl Gustav Rpgs to all Kalashnikov variants. Know any Neo-Nasties? Know any Canadian crooks? AUGs, Galils, FALs, HKs to Valmets can all be had across the invisible border wall in Mexico! That's where they get their tools of the trade. Cost them too much here in the US. They buy direct from Mexico! Even the magic that goes boom can be had. That's right, Mineria S.A. has got thousands of tons of unaccounted PETN/RDX since Calderon took office. When the Narcos' bullets begin to get ignored, BOOM will be heard. Down here along the Arizona/Mexighanistani border hardware is as easy to get as the dope the rest of this nation's druggies consume. The main reason the Narcos avoid homeowners here is because they know they're out-gunned and Americans are better shots. They'd rather shoot it out with the cops instead! Agent Terry's loss proves it. The Narcos also know that Rich Krantz's murder has got lots of folks along the border wanting payback. I don't much care for them, but a magazine fed semi-auto rifle is a needed tool out here! Call 911 and more often than not you're looking at a 30 minute wait. Folks just wanna be able to shoot back until the cops arrive. Maybe not in a big city but here it is. Bottom line is guns are here to stay and stay they will. Got decades of real working experience on the subject, got family on both sides of the issue, both sides of the border and both sides of the law. It is no wonder why every nation would not want to invade the US. That's because here everybody's got hardware! It's no wonder that nobody want's to be a dictator here in the US. That's because he/she has gotta convince everyone that's got access to hardware that they are the right person for the job! Quit listening to the bought-and-paid-for media! They got no real working experience on the subject. After all, gotta ask yourselves who owns the media? It ain't me or you. It's gotten to the point where if'n you ain't got hardware you ain't got a say! I guess it'll stay that way. Go figure...

Stratocumulus:

In 2008 about 12,000 [generous estimate] Americans were killed with guns.

How many do you think were killed in Japan that year? 11

Yes and in Japan when the tidal wave hit there was no looting at all. So what was the difference? Why are 90% of inmates black? Why do 95% of murders occur in black ghettos? Before you post some statistic you might actually think about it. How many black ghettos in Japan? What are the gun murders outside of ghetto neighborhoods across the US? Why is the violent crime rate in the UK 3.5 times the RATE in the us. There are more colored people in the US than there are people in the entire country of Japan. But the difference in the murder rate is because we have guns. And can you reference where you got that statistic? Along that logic, we have the most prosperous nation in the world, and also the most guns, so guns must bring prosperity. Probably a better argument than you made.

Where have I seen RED, White with BLACK before? ........

Sig Heil Obama, Sig Heil Feinstein, Sig Heil Biden.

Let's Convieniently Leave Out The Fact That The Killer In The Newtown School Killed His Own Mother To Get The Guns.

You are making your own children potential victims by doing this.

Rally against security guards IN schools? That IS what you are doing.

Thank VP Joe Biden to demand new guns laws that require 65 Cal weapons (12 gauge) and rid the streets of puny 223 Cal weapons and little tiny holes cannot bully us anymore.

Gotta love the stupid, love you silverton!

Sorry fool but this idiotic communist staff isn't going to get anything done. Esp anymore foolish laws that only affect Lawful Citizens.

Silverton - Just how has the NRA bullied you? They do not have forced membership and they promote responsible and safe firearm ownership.

Silverton's response: But that what the Media says, that's what Obama says so it has to be true.

Simpleton Silverton, Think for yourself. Stop being misled by others, the Media & our current Administration. Your being played, don't be so damned gullible. We have much bigger problems with our youth than what types of guns responsible, law abiding people own. Your being fed a line about how evil gun owners are. We are your friends, relatives, neighbors & coworkers. We have always had the guns & you never knew. We are the people that brought this Country to where we are. How do you think we broke away from England & declared independence? How do you think Men fed their families for the last 250 years when we didn't have Supermarkets. Be an adult & think for yourself.

Silverton - If you are seeking to keep guns away from the mentally challenged I applaud your efforts and strongly suggest you take the lead by staying away from gun stores.

Silverton - So by contributing to a political campaign in your view is a bribe. Get real. Also, I love how you say the NRA is in violation of 1st Amendment Right of Free Speech, all while completely ignoring your attack on my 2nd Amendment Right to bear arms. Finally, please provide ONE - JUST ONE example of the NRA bullying an American Citizen with a differnt view.

Silverton, you have been spouting off quite a bit. Look up where the highest crime rates are. They are in the areas and countries with the strictest gun control laws. The crime rate in Australia skyrocketed after guns were confiscated from law abiding citizens. You do not have a leg to stand on in your argument, but keep on spouting, that is your right, the second ammendment is mine.

"Thank goodness new guns laws are on the way and the NRA cannot bully us anymore."

Did they personally bully you silverton? If so, in what way? And I don't mean some made up BS story either. If they haven't bullied you, don't include yourself among those that you say have been bullied, because it only makes you look like an agenda shill, and a liar when you do.

What other basic rights do you wish to have taken away? Freedom of the press? Freedom to assemble? How about the women's right to vote? How about the rights of Blacks to vote? What about the Fifth amendment? We are slowly losing our rights. We have almost completely lost our 4th Amendment rights. If your in a car you realistically have no right to stop a search. Watch out for the right to privacy.

@ Silverton:The NRA has no more power than the construction labor union I am a member of. I own firearms, and I vote Green Party. You want to use the force of the Fascist gov't- which did not protect the kids in Newtown from mentally ill Adam Lanza nor his irresponsible parents- to confiscate/ limit production / impede in some way on lawful commerce of a product- firearms- you do not like. I is the Second Amendment you have a problem with, which pretty much makes you a police state fascist.

Silverton - I agree with you, but today it is a waste of time to try and say anything rational here . . . the RWNJ Trolls are out in full force, and none of them are interested in anything other than their own agenda.

The fact is, no "right" given us by the Constitution is unlimited . . . yes, you have the right to "free speech," but that doesn't mean you can spew hate speech or yell "fire" in a theatre. You have a right to believe in any religion you want, but that doesn't give you the right to sacrifice virgins, or burn 'witches' at the stake. We out-grew that.

Likewise, those of you who think you should be able to own ANY weapon you want? the 2nd A doesn't grant you that right. You cannot (legally) own a rocket launcher, a machine gun, a tank, or a hand-grenade.

So, this argument is about where civilized people draw a line to protect movie-goers and small children from being slaughtered in places which are supposed to be safe . . . so that THEY can exercise their RIGHT to LIFE, LIBERTY, and The Pursuit of Happiness.

No one is taking your precious guns away . . . we are redrawing a line to balance one right against another right.

GOP = Guns Over People.

@KC_NC - No need for name calling. But yes it would seem there are more conservatives and pro 2nd Amendment people on this thread. Thats because we typically work Monday thru Friday and well today is our day off.

The fact is, no "right" given us by the Constitution is unlimited

No, the fact is that the constitution does not give us rights. We have the rights because of our birth or citizenship in the US. The constitution and bill of rights only protects us from the government trying to take a right away.

Likewise, those of you who think you should be able to own ANY weapon you want? the 2nd A doesn't grant you that right. You cannot (legally) own a rocket launcher, a machine gun, a tank, or a hand-grenade.

This discussion is not about these weapons anyway. They are such a far cry from the guns that are on the potential chopping block right now.

brenda1964

I think it is so funny to hear the poor NRA gun freaks crying because they won't be able to shoot an assault rifle soon. LOL, i'm enjoying watching them squirm. Reading their pathetic posts trying desperately to get someone to hear them. NOT! lol, too funny.

You are spot on President Obama, more power to you. You have my support. Anything to get the guns off the streets. Woot!

Hillary Clinton in 2016. God bless America.

silverton-2953905 Comment collapsed by the community

The NRA has bribed politicians for decades and bullied every American citizen that has spoken out in favor orreasonable and rational gun laws.

This is in violation of our First Amendment Right of Free Speech.

Spot on Silverton, keep the faith. Notice how all the right wing wackos have to post on a left wing sight because Fox News couldn't handle the negativity to their articles? Yep, Democrats shut them down and now they come over here to try and tell us what time it is. Well we know what time it is and your time is done. Obama, you have my backing in whatever you do.

NRA = Nutty Republican Association

Thats just silly.

Simpleton Silverton, Think for yourself. Stop being misled by others, the Media & our current Administration. Your being played, don't be so damned gullible. We have much bigger problems with our youth than what types of guns responsible, law abiding people own. Your being fed a line about how evil gun owners are

You are amazingly paranoid. Talk about "reasonable gun control" and people like you decide that you are being painted as the Ultimate Evil.

What is staggering is that then YOU go on screed about how others are being misled.

Stop drinking the Koolaid. No one hates you. No one thinks you are evil. Obama isn't going to declare himself Grand Emperor and put you in a Gulag.

It is only the gun industry that is stoking your paranoia so that people like you will buy even more guns to "defend" yourself. Grow up.

Thank goodness new gun laws are coming and the NRA and its fanatic supporters (not to say all gun owners are fanatics because they are not!) cannot bully us anymore.

The NRA/GOP/TP/FOX crowd is in a downward spiral.

It's a good day in Washington!

Silverton, you have been spouting off quite a bit. Look up where the highest crime rates are. They are in the areas and countries with the strictest gun control laws.

Actually, no. There is absolutely no relationship between guns and crime, except where guns are used to COMMIT crimes.

It is a very rational argument, "I can use a gun to defend my home." The problem is pretty simple. If a criminal knows that you have a gun in your home, do you think he's more likely to bring a gun to commit the crime, or less likely?

Do you have windows? Do you turn on your lights? Your gun cannot stop a bullet fired at you when you walk by a window.

Think it through.

Silverton said:

Thank goodness new guns laws are on the way and the NRA cannot bully us anymore.

Don't bet the ranch on that Silverton.

Yes, the leftists with the cooperation of the media are doing everything they can to keep this unconstitutional gun grab alive, but considering a Gallop poll conducted a few days ago showed the NRA to be more popular than Obama, it's like beating a dead horse.

Don't rely on those in the senate or house to vote for any anti-gun measures because unlike Obama or Biden, they still have to go home to face their constituents.

Leftist codes:

Gun control – disarming of the American people, one gun, one magazine, one bullet at a time if necessary.

Immigration reform – amnesty for all illegals, a little bit at a time if necessary.

Brenda Are you a shallow thinker?? Obama is counting on people like you.. Guess you will be supporting him when he calls for the repeal of the 22nd amendment so he can be King for 20 years.. Whats not funny is all the people that think like you who are so willing to give up rights that were given to you.. Maybe that's the problem you can only learn the cost of freedom when you die earning it like the millions of people who died carrying firearms giving it to you.. With statements like you make you piss on their graves..

All the censoring by collapsing comments shows we have a lot more people like you around..

Liberals try to polarize things to suit them as good and those that do not as evil.. Since the Constitution and the writers of it promoted gun ownership as a defense against a domineering government they must also think them and the Constitution evil.. That's why they put it in not for hunting so please do not be confused.. I like how they say restrictions on Constitutional rights and choice are not a restriction just like their socialist messiha Obama.. Any way you twist it this is part of a larger agenda.. We have sent emails to our politicians warning them that infringements on the Constitution are treason and that they do not want to go there.. You want to see an angry population just mess with the Grand document we dare you..

So many new socialist programs like Obamacare that we can't pay for..

@Wet Willy

Did you forget one congress member was shot in the head by a consitituent?

People have a right to protest. None of the new laws are going to accomplish anything. It is totally "feel good" until another thing happens.

Silverton;

"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!"

Adolf Hitler,1935

Think about it. praise be to the republic. (agenda 21)

Sandy 2.29

I didn't forget. The guy did it with a handgun. What's your point?

heres a News Flash to all you liberals, We have Guns, you can Not take them away and the second Amendment States: 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, Do not the Shall not be Infringed, for all you libtards out there, look it up and by the way The NRA is More Powerful than you think, So heres another news Flash, the NRA And THE TEA PARTY ARE ONE. WE WILL NOT GIVE IN, unlike you liberal cowards, we are real americans and we will not let Pres Dumbo and his Socialist staff destroy our rights, if you dont want the same rights then move to europe. this is America and we will not let you idiots destroy it.

Don You need to read the letters of the people who wrote the Constitution as you are being misinformed and mislead.. Unless you think they did not know what they were writing.. I particularly like the letters of Jefferson and Franklin but I must warn you it does take effort.. The liberal propaganda machine is counting on you being lazy.. Excerpts have been posted from time to time and the entire collection can be read online through a visit to the library of Congress..

That is why collective citizens groups like the NRA are important.. It pools WE The Peoples resources to fight in the big boy arena.. Do you thing individual citizens carry the weight of a collective.. If you hate lobbyists then the NAACP and all the other special interest groups must be on that list as well.. But this is not about them, but they want you to think it is as a diversion.. This is about supporting the ideals of the people who founded this country and not those who want to hand out free stuff for votes..

Roady

We can certainly count on the NRA to spin any information towards their own point of view. Bear in mind that at the time the Constitution was written we had no standing army, no police departments, no national guard, no sheriffs ...... yet the founders believed it prudent to insert the phrase "well regulated" into the Second Amendment.

The NRA has routinely lied and exaggerated in order to stir up the fear that causes low information, gun-loving individuals to arm themselves to that they, the NRA can benefit from the money that flows in from the gun manufacturers and dealers. These lies and exaggerations include, but are in no way limited to,

• exaggerating the incidence of armed home invasions
• lies about the government's plans to take away guns from homeowners
• lies concerning the way government agencies use background check information
• lies about the causality relationship between video games & movies with gun violence

The NRA lies as much to its members as it does to the general public. The difference is that lots of the general public is too rational and informed to believe what they say.

Roadrunner0

Brenda Are you a shallow thinker?? Obama is counting on people like you.. Guess you will be supporting him when he calls for the repeal of the 22nd amendment so he can be King for 20 years

Guess you are not aware, maybe because of your age being only 15 or so, but the Constitution used to not have a limit as to how long a President could stay in office. Some have done more then the 2 terms before the Constitution was amended. And guess who pushed to limit the Constitution, Republicans so as to stop a Democratic President from doing more then 2 terms. So when you say Democrats want to do away with Constitutional rights, you first should look at your own party.

Oh and ps, by collapsing the person who started the thread, you collapse everyone and makes it harder to find your collapsed comment to check on.

If they instituted a mental exam and used ink blots shaped like AR-15's and AK-47's an .50 cal. Barrets the NRA members they would say "Oh! Look a target rifle." And people like Brenda and Silverton would become agitated start gnashing their teeth and wailing "DEATH, MURDER, DESTRUCTION,HAVOC!!!!"

It's a good thing that a lot of the people who should not have guns don't want them anyway.

LOL @ Silverton, Brenda, Sandy & you other gun grabbers

There isn't going to be a ban on black semi-automatic rifles. Keep wishing...

If Feinstein had her way she would ban all guns. She has been trying to ban guns for decades. You can go on YouTube & watch her in a 1995 interview with Dianne Sawyer (I believe) where Feinstein says & I quote:

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban picking up everyone of them, Mr. & Mrs. America turn them all in, I would have done it. I could not do that, the votes weren't here.

(just type in - feinstein gun ban 1995 - in the search box on YouTube)

So there you go. It's not about sensible gun control. If this old train wreck had her way she would have government goon squads kicking in doors to confiscate them, if they weren't turned in voluntarily, no doubt.

A complete ban is the ultimate goal of these gun grabbing, power hungry, egotistical, control freak, scum, who think they know how to run your life better than you do, when it comes to all topics under the sun.

It disappoints people like Feinstein that they can't do a complete gun ban all at once. So instead they try to take small steps & chip away at the 2nd Amendment until nothing will be left. But I have confidence that gun owners in this country won't let that happen.

Your odds of getting killed by a firearm (all types combined) in the U.S. is a small fraction of 1%. You have a greater chance of getting struck by lightening. That tiny small risk is one I'm willing to live with in order to preserve one of our basic freedoms in this country.

That doesn't mean I'm against sensible gun laws, ones that would actually keeps guns out of the hands of criminals/mentally ill. Nothing Feinstein is trying to push through addresses either of those issues, so I'm still waiting (nothing wrong with background checks for all but that won't stop the majority of the criminals/mentally ill).

Thanks goodness President Obama will see to the ban on black semi -automatic rifles. That is one item down, next is any kind of mass killing weapon. Soon it will be safe to walk the streets again without worrying about a mass killer. This is about sensible gun control, not the NRA goon squads allowing innocent people to be killed. Those against sensible gun control like Oneslackr are of the past. We look forward to the future where people like that are no more.

Congratulations President Obama, may these 4 years be as prosperous as the last 4 years.

Welcome soon to be President Hillary Clinton, may you further the cause and bring about the end of an era of the Republican Army.

For the record, the diameter, in inches, of number 12 bore, (12 gauge) is .73, not counting the constriction for the choke near the muzzle unless it is a 'cylinder bore' or sawed-off shotgun. In such a gun, where you could safely fire a projectile that was full bore diameter with no reduction in size or other provisions necessary to ensure it could safely pass through a tight (full or extra full) choke, that projectile would weigh 583 grains, which is an ounce and a third, if it was a true spherical ball cast from pure lead.

Theoreticals aside, figure that a normal 12 gauge slug is about .70 caliber and weighs an ounce, leaving the muzzle at 1200-1400 feet per second. Or, you can choose buckshot, which will be a number of hard lead balls ranging from .24 caliber to .33 caliber and leaving the muzzle at the same speed but spread out a bit in their flight. One pull of the trigger on a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with 3" shells containing No. 1 buckshot (.30 caliber) will have a similar effect on a nearby person or close group of people as emptying the magazine of a Kalashnikov (Ak-47 type) rifle in their direction. In fact, it will probably be more effective as no one would have time to duck after the shooting starts and muzzle climb during rapid fire is hardly an issue with a shotgun!

Actually, the .223 is quite devastating when all the correct elements are in place. A light bullet that is barely stabilized but traveling very fast does a lot of damage when it hits someone. However, this was left behind when NATO standardized the 5.56x45mm cartridge. Instead, it launches a heavier bullet at slightly slower speed from a barrel featuring a very fast rate of twist. The net result is that it does, more or less, punch nice little 1/4" holes...

Well, at least the NRA cannot bully us anymore.

They should all march against the parents that are not properly raising their children. That is the cause. The NRA did absolutely nothing to cause this or any other shooting. Sorry to tell you all but I tell my representatives what I want backed or not, not the NRA. The NRA did not elect my representatives, I did. They are there to do what the people that elected them put them there for. The gun, the size of the round, the amount the magazine can hold, the speed that one can pull the trigger and reload, means nothing in the hands of someone who does not know how to effectively engage the weapon system when there is someone available to put them down. Thus, concealed carry legal citizens can and do stop these incidences from happening. Has happened recently at a mall in Oregon if I am not mistaken. The perp took his own life when he saw a person with a weapon on him. Didn't get that one in the news did ya? Spend more time raising your children and less time worrying about things that will do no good to outlaw. A revolver with skill can do just as much. You are all barking up the wrong tree as usual.

Why are the pro gun comments collapsed at the beginning of the comments list. I read them and a lot of them throw no insults at anyone, are on topic with the article and abuse no privilages here. MSNBC should be looking into this.

Lets give those folks of Newtown a thumbs up for standing up for what they believe in.

silverton.....WhereEVER did you get the notion that The NRA is AGAINST Newtown? That's is just an uniformed, hysterical, nonsensical statement. Every placard in the picture says to stop the NRA. This isn't a "gun conrtol" march. It's a an attack on the NRA. Period. NRA didn't kill anyone in Newtown, or anywhere else. They don't harbor illegal gun owners. And they don't run them over to Mexico to promote any agenda and where they can be used to kill an American border guard. Or to terrorize Arizonians. Obama resorted to that in an attempt to discredit and attack the NRA and legal American gun owners. NRA membership includes many Democrats, it is NOT "Republican" organization. It's members come from every or no political party or affiliations. It's an American organization. Or maybe that's what bothers Obama.

Just how has the NRA "bullied" YOU?

Sure they want to attack the NRA for having over 4 million citizens who are against their agenda.. Add all the people who are family and friends and those who are not members and you have a whole lot of citizens bucking the socialist agenda.. They want to paint gun owners as crazy dangerous non citizens and will dance around the words of real patriots like Jefferson and Franklin calling their ideas outdated..

Anyone know if there is a website organizing marches supporting the Constitution?? I have a whole bunch of people ready and willing to attend.. A quick call to the VFW will net thousands of sign carrying citizens.. The propaganda that the majority of people support this perversion of our rights is a false flag..

I will be blunt.I will not give up my guns because some nutcase did something terrible with guns that were not even his.I am not a criminal.I am not a trigger happy blood and guts crazed gun owner.I am a law abiding American citizen with no felony rap sheet and i have the same rights as everyone else.

If you think Obama is right, you should listen to what htis Holocause surviver said:

Gunner. You couldn't be more wrong. We do not have a Representative government sense they started allowing Lobbying. We use to call it bribery, but they change the name and call it lobbying now, but it is the same thing. Many of our congress people could never get elected with the NRA rating. Its not just the NRA, there are something like 6 think tanks sponsored by the Koch brothers and others like them. Together they spent over $1 billion on the last election, both state wide and nationally. Don't it seem funny that say a state like Michigan where I live is totally run by Rep's. But always vote Dem. for President. Our Senators are Dem. also. I think they call that gerrymandering. Someone should file suite and get that outlawed along with Lobbying. I say to the all these new gun control groups. We need to all come together under one flag, if we have hundreds of little groups around the Country we will not get Noticed the way we need to. This weekends rally should have had millions not thousands. Mayor Bloomburg is willing to put up a lot of his money. We need someone like Gabby Gilford and her husband as a front person's. Everyone knows who Gabby is. We can have thousands of little groups but under the one flag, to get organized and have a million people march on Washington. You can bet the NRA will have a least 1 million people when they march on Washington.

Do whatever you think is right chuck.You won't get a single gun or bullet from me.This is just a statement,so don't take it as a threat,because it's not.Just my using my 1st ammendment unless you have a plan to take that away too.

That's right seaskip,blame it on the Republicans.I know of alot of Democrats who are members too.Don't forget to include them on your hate list.You might be alienating some of your own people.

That is why collective citizens groups like the NRA are important.. It pools WE The Peoples resources to fight in the big boy arena.. Do you thing individual citizens carry the weight of a collective.. If you hate lobbyists then the NAACP and all the other special interest groups must be on that list as well.. But this is not about them, but they want you to think it is as a diversion.. This is about supporting the ideals of the people who founded this country and not those who want to hand out free stuff for votes..

Roadrunner,Don't these people realize that by taking our 2nd Ammendment that they are lining themselves up to lose the rest as well?Without the 2nd Ammendment there is literally nothing to stop the government from doing as they please.Regardless of what is said and done.

They should be blown off by both Democrats and Republicans both. Obama-Biden in their quest for false moral superiority has them proberly propagandized, as usual with liberals. They're not after safety for the children, they're our to demean the NRA as if the NRA murders people. Wake up and get your heads out of the sand.

I saw an photo from the air and it looks like about 500 or so people at this march.

ASureBet,

Then you don't need to be worried do you? If there are only 500 family members and friends of victims in Newtown asking to be heard. It is shame that the NRA refuses to listen to their voices.

Tonytellsthetruth,

Thank you. It means a lot to hear from veterans like you. I know there are a lot more gun owners and veterans who feel this way. And also there are NRA members, and former NRA members, who believe we need to find a good compromise to gun control as well.

It really doesn't need to be so complicated, nor does there need to be such hateful exchange.

hide those high-capacity, military-style arms! They're coming to take 'em away uh huh, oh who, eeeeeee heeeee!

Jefferson did not speak of it as deterrent to crime but as a deterrent to a government bent on ruling the people and not serving them.. Yes some people have gone off on emotional tangents and even the leaders of the NRA have spoken more about hunting and bla bla bla.. We have become so lazy as to trust others interpretations of things that our liberal government hands out free stuff and lies to subdue the quest for liberty.. Tony Do you remember the oath you took?? Was it to the President first or the Constitution and the people first following it's guidelines to determine what is a legal order and what is not from all ranks above you all the way to the President and Congress.. Some would say that Homeland Security is an illegal federal police force that has been given automatic weapons and freedom to ignore the bill of rights.. So should we feel threatened by our government??

In the wake of the Sandy Hook School Shooting, the following factual discrepancies must be clarified.

1. There were media reports of a second shooter, and that a second shooter had been arrested, and was in custody.

2. There is video footage taken from a helicopter that clearly shows at least (2) police officers approaching a suspect in a wooded area near the school.

3. There are at least (2) eye witness accounts of individuals seeing a man in camo pants and a dark shirt outside the school, in police custody, This person of interest was seen both handcuffed on the ground, and sitting inside a police vehicle.

4. There is audio tape from the police dispatch that clearly indicates (2) individuals were :proned out” on the ground by some of the first responding officers, who arrived at the school.
   What happened to these (3) suspects? Were they released? Why were these suspects never mentioned again? If they were cleared as persons of interest, why not set the record straight on this?

5. The intial reports were that (2) pistols were found with the shooter and that handguns were the murder weapons. It was also reported that an AR-15 was found in the trunk of the vehicle the shooter drove to the school. There were also reports of (2) additional handguns being found at the crime scene for a total of (4). this story was later changed, to the shooter used a rifle, approximately 2 days after the shooting.

6. There is video evidence that shows police removing a long gun from the supposed trunk of Lanza's vehicle in the school parking lot. This weapon was not an Ar-15 rifle. This is clearly a shotgun.

7. The “official” story is that the shooter fired “hundreds” of rounds of ammo, and had hundreds more, which he did not shoot. If he did fire hundreds of rounds, there would have been empty rifle brass and empty magazines that littered the crime scene.

Hmmm.

oops...VP Biden, better add handguns and high capacity shotguns to the list of things to remove. Itiswhat corrected us!

ItisWhatitis!,

But no discrepancies in this fact:

20 children dead and 6 teachers

According to these protesters logic we must blame the aircraft for 9/11 and fertilizer for the Oklahoma City bombing. It is just sick to see people using these 20 childrens' deaths to push their anti-gun agenda based upon opinion and not fact.

Wolfhound Sure they do it is the agenda of the Socialist in Chief so it has to be good?!?! It is obvious that they can not read or comprehend what was written by the founding fathers.. They rely on trusting those who will twist things to suit the new world order.. I see so many here twisting the meaning of the Second Amendment and also collapsing comments thus ignoring the First Amendment regarding free speech.. All that it would take is Senator McCain standing in front of the Senate and reading the letters of the people who wrote the Constitution and the grand documents warning them that not following it is treason.. Some member of this forum even went as far as maligning his speech and physical limitations.. Seems the fact he was wounded and tortured serving the people is a joke.. He asked of Hilliary her involvement with the attempted cover up of the attack that killed the Ambassador at a known CIA compound.. Remember Obama also considered a law banning any negative speech against Islam..

It is what it is, I could not agree with you more! Yet the media and our government will never tell us the truth. For hours there was nothing at all said about any type of AR. And for hours they listed the name and model of the hand guns. And if he had used an AR he surely did not shoot himself with it. So lies and more lies. Yet the un educated feed off of it. And the media blows it all out of proportion all thanks to what? Do they get government kick backs? Really would not surprise me! What does really amaze me is the amount of people that don't look at the obvious and they only believe the crap the media is feeding them. Sad that it has come to this and all this far. But our government is powerful and will do anything they can , including lying stealing and corruption. Hopefully there are at least a few strong people out there that see this and understand what they are really trying to do to this country.

so again the media tells people what to think, the say the NRA is the bad people and banning weapons like assault rifles, high capacity mags will curve gun violence. well now the truth every one who says a assault rifles killed the kids at sandy hook well thats a lie it was hand guns OK ,and people say why do you need them, well why do you need a car that can go faster than 70mph. The truth is that if they really wanted to help push gun safes it will create more jobs and help keep guns off the street and companys that make assault rifles can keep making them again saving jobs. So it;s OK to voice your opinion but thats all it is don't mess with my rights (2nd )because you dont like something or understand it and by the way I can change a mag in under 1.5 sec. so that kinda makes the high cap mag ban stupid

I give these people a thumbs down.

Sad, that a terrible loss like this polarizes people and reduces both IQ and common sense.

But, that's the way it goes with gun control. Smarmy liberals that need to feel like they belong to something that's doing something!

Something that makes them feel good and important.

Regardless of how ineffective it is or statistically misguided.

Ask these folks why they weren't on the street protesting the thousands of handgun deaths of young black males.

Uh huh.

If in all the massacre's in this country parents would just parent their kids and lock up their fire arms we wouldn't even be here..How can you blame the rifle when the parent should be arrested..

We need LAWS for being so dumb..

Granted the last two parents are dead from their own child they need to be for being so stupid.

Blaming the object and ignoring the criminal is short sighted at best..

If my child gets killed by someone I will blame the person and not the object..

Note I said object because some person driving a car texting is more of an odds threat then someone with a gun unless she decides to start hanging out with gang members.. Why are we not at war with gangs?? Why can we not get our financial house in order?? Because we are too busy being at war with the honest citizens.. I have an 1860 Remington .44 caliber black powder revolver.. It can knock a grown deer down and kill it from 100 feet.. So why would it be OK but something else not.. By the way anyone can buy and have one shipped via UPS with no background check in most states.. Also the carry law does not apply in most states as well so you could open or concealed carry one legally.. Maybe we all should start open carrying them and wait for the government to start balking at that..

Laws against being stupid, well we better build a prison big enough to hold congress.

They would rather lock us all up in FEMA camps.. But then the only people not locked up would be the non working liberals so nothing would get done and no taxes could be collected.. Since the government confiscated all the gold the first time a President went Socialist over 100 years ago do you think they will try that again but instead of gold take every ones 401k and other retirement funds??

I see most of the posts are from the usual suspects. Extreme, unfounded, paranoid & heartless.

What I don't see is more of it.

Could it be that theses people are at the RNC winter fest getting their new code books and decoder rings?

Just like the GOP the NRA will have to come around to reason......They can't afford to loose 67% of their members. (67% of NRA members support gun reform of some type)

Wonder how many of these "marchers" were bussed in by the Progressives.

Maybe someone should ask "Gun toting" Feinsteeeeen, Reid, Pelosi, Trumpka, Holder, or Napolitano.

The "marchers" energy would have been better spent if they "marched" against Congress for Government SPENDING CONTROL.

ItIsWhat!t!s.....

The answers to your questions will be available after a complete investigative review by the DOJ and will be made available to the public sometimes during the Summer of 2016.

ldo

The "marchers" energy would have been better spent if they "marched" against Congress for Government SPENDING CONTROL.

Um...Why bother...Most of them are at the RNC winter fest trying to figure out how to turn the screws on the public. I wonder if they are serving crow at any of the dinners.

OK, it looks like it's time to lay down some factual information for all of the fact challenged gun control supporters. Now just so you know, these facts come from the FBIs website, and the U.S. Federal Census Bureau website. You don't get anymore factual or accurate than those guys.

First.
Since the year 2000, there have been an approximate average of 9,500 gun MURDERS per year.
Of those, only an approx. average of 400 per year are with a rifle of any kind.
7,500 by hand gun.
the rest by others like shotguns and such.

Something is seriously fishy about the idea that the libs are promoting, that repeating semi automatic rifles are to blame for this countries murder woes. What is the real reason behind wanting to ban THOSE firearms? Could it be that hand guns are actually only efficient to about 40 yards, and that that gives the advantage to those who would wield a rifle 2-300 yards out from those they are attempting to subjugate? After all, how would those who fought for our freedoms fared if they had to go up against the Kings armies with nothing more than pistols?

Just a little something to think about.

Second.
The FBI states that over 48% of all crime in this country is committed by gangs, with over 90% committed by gangs being the case in many cities, regions, and communities. The actual percentage of violent crime committed by gangs is higher. When you take into consideration that the weapon of choice for the great majority of gang bangers is the hand gun, then it stand to reason that the gangs are responsible for the great majority of those 7,500 gun murders per year.

Rather than attempt to infringe upon the 2nd amendment rights of law abiding citizens, why don't we just kick all of the traffic offenders, and pot smokers, and petty offenders out of the jails and prisons? That way we could actually hand down sentences to these sociopathic menaces to the peace of the law abiding community that would effectively get them off the streets for good. You see, if we mandated laws that any crime committed by a gang member would automatically receive a life sentence, with any gun crimes receiving a mandatory death sentence. Then we channel mass amounts of resources to the agencies that would investigate and prosecute these pieces of societal waste, and pursue total eradication of these groups. And I mean TOTAL eradication, causing ALL gangs to cease to exist. They are a blight on our nation, and most deserve to die. We might see a much bigger result than taking any gun from the hands of a law abiding citizen. Right now there is no reason to respect or fear the consequences of their actions.

But you see, that will never happen, because it is too easy for one, and it would seriously reduce the influence of the fear and loathing over the easily cowed masses, which is the basis for much of the power that the politicians wield in this country. They have to have a villain to create fear and distraction. They can't tell the truth about the real numbers compiled on gun violence because it doesn't fit the agenda.

Third.
30 years ago 50 companies/corporations controlled 95% of all the media sources in this country. Today that same influence is controlled by 6. It makes it much easier to indoctrinate through media/government generated propaganda. Doesn't it concern any of you that so much influence is wielded by so few? It would be my guess that that is why the report given by NBC Chief Justice Correspondent - Pete Williams on the TODAY show with Matt Lauer was so easily wisked under the rug. In this report segment given directly to Matt Lauer by Pete Williams on national morning TV, he stated that NO rifles of any kind had been found at the site of the Sandy Hook tragedy. He states that the authorities found 4 hand guns. The one long gun that they found was locked in the trunk of the shooters car, and was reporedly a shotgun. Those facts were dismissed and got lost immediately. If you go the NBC website and attempt to pull up the report, it has been edited and scrubbed to meet the agenda. Kind of like the NBC producer who edited the Trayvon Martin 911 tape to indicate racial profiling and cause a national racial crisis. BUT, there are many sites where good concientious American citizens track all of that stuff and keep recordings that all of us are free to view. Again, there were no rifles found, just handguns. Add to that the fact that supposedly there was security footage that the cops wanted to review to help piece together what happened at sandy hook elementary. Now back when columbine happened that footage was all over the air, as has every other incident where footage was available. Hell, they even did live coverage of a suicide. Why haven't we seen any of the footage? Just one photo? Anything that can corroborate the assertion of a rifle of any kind?

Doesn't it make some of you go HMMM? I wonder why the current administration and the liberal leadership in the senate and house want so desperately to cram through a knee jerk fear driven piece of legislation to weaken our 2 amendment. Doesn't it make any of you liberal fear cowed gun control supporting masses wonder why so much fact based information contradicts EVERY last shred of what you are being spoon fed through the media? I mean forget the whole gun issue for just a second, and think about what you are being fed. Doesn't it make you angry to be lied to constantly?

NONE of the facts add up to back the assertions of the current administration or the radical gun control members of our congress. NOT ONE FACT backs up the desire to ban Semi automatic wanna be look alike fake assault weapons or rifles, and the high capacity magazines that they can hold.

But there are a sh-tload of facts that back up the idea of punishments of draconian severity for all gang bangers.

And remember, this information is not from some so called conservative media outlet or website. It is not in any way made up. It is just the facts as given to you by your very own federal government. The very same government that wants to ban YOUR guns, but allows gang bangers to roam free on the streets that your tax dollars pay for, thumbing their noses at the police that your tax dollars pay to enforce the laws and keep the peace, while they commit murders every day, and sell drugs to your children, and kidnap your daughters to sell into bondage as sex slaves, (it's called human trafficking).

Again,
what is the real agenda here?

Steve That's why almost a million new members have joined in the past month.. That poll is about as valid as the one they took and called Obama phones.. Or the one they took that targeted inner city registered Democrats about a total gun ban.. I call BS...........More crime is committed by people getting free stuff from Uncle Obama then any one else.. Gang violence is half of all violent crimes, there is where we need to start..

And what is with the censorship here on this thread????????

We have to protect the children, right? After all that's what this is all about right? Sooooooo...... What's the leading cause of child mortality in the U.S.? Please don't let CNN, MSNBC, Fox News or the NRA tell you what to think about this too. You claim you want the violence to stop. Well lets get after it then, all of it.
Last week a 16 year old Philadelphia boy beat his own mother to death with a hammer and tried to cremate her body in the kitchen oven. This was allegedly over a video game she took from him. A Las Vegas police officer killed his family, set his house on fire then took his own life. How about the guy who met a woman on match.com and after a few dates, she decides its not a good fit for her and he stabs her in the neck in head area multiple times with such force it breaks the knife. That happened a year or two ago but it makes national news now because she filed suIt against match.com. Not exactly sure what a high capacity magazine or "assault rifle" had to do with any of these situations. I guess off the wall brutal violence is only important if a firearm is involved.
Do you want to stop the violence or do you want to continue following someone's political agenda? I suppose you need to wait for the media of your choice to tell you what to think. Gun control is the medias featured flavor of the month, of course to "protect the children". This is the laziest bunch of horse excrement I have ever seen. Far left and far right, you wait for the government to take action. So you lefty's can sit in your cozy little home and say, " Bill Wright, aka Pistol Instructor, you can't have a 30 round magazine." And this makes you feel safer? Righty's you want to walk around with you little thumbs tucked in your belt spouting off about your second amendment rights and somebody needs to do something about all these nut cases. Somebody else that is, right?
Of course, once again we need to protect the children. You know, I work with some kids who generally get two meals a day. That's breakfast and lunch at school. These are not inner city kids. These are suburban kids who live in houses that were built within the past ten years. You're all worried about "assault rifles", there's kids in your neighborhood right now who stay in the same house as mommy and daddy but are completely neglected. You want to stop violence from happening? You want to protect the children? Then get off your dead arse and get "positively" involved in some young people's lives. Go to the dirty parts of your community and help out. Stop wait for the government to do something about it. Seriously, I wouldn't trust the government to water my house plants when I'm on vacation. Why dufuq would I trust them to know a damn thing about what's best for me and the community I live in?
It's Saturday night, how many people are going to think they're sober enough to drive? You don't "need" alcohol anymore than I "need" a Ruger SR556. I always hear the question, "what's the intended purpose of a gun?" My question back is, "what practical purpose does alcohol serve?" Both of these are killers, at least a gun has the common decency to be honest about its identity.

We were going to schedule an NRA counter-rally with the 4.5 MILLION members but hard to get to a rally when you are working. Ever notice those who rally are those that don't have jobs to go to?

So is there any evidence to support the notion that banning assault-style rifles and limiting magazine capacity will actually curb violence in our country?

For the record, I'm OK with background checks and increased penalties for illegal distribution of firearms. I don't think violent criminals should have access to firearms...although I think it's been proven that if someone wants a firearm they will get it.

@ Bob

No there is no evidence to support that. That is why the ban from 1994 - 2004 was allowed to expire. This is just a way for the gun grabbers to try to get the camel's nose under the tent. Their ulterior motive is to ban all guns. Period.

If Feinstein had her way she would ban all guns. She has been trying to ban guns for decades. You can go on YouTube & watch her in a 1995 interview with Dianne Sawyer (I believe) where Feinstein says & I quote:

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban picking up everyone of them, Mr. & Mrs. America turn them all in, I would have done it. I could not do that, the votes weren't here.

(just type in - feinstein gun ban 1995 - in the search box on YouTube)

So there you go. It's not about sensible gun control. If this old train wreck had her way she would have government goon squads kicking in doors to confiscate them, if they weren't turned in voluntarily, no doubt.

A complete ban is the ultimate goal of these gun grabbing, power hungry, egotistical, control freak, scum, who think they know how to run your life better than you do, when it comes to all topics under the sun.

It disappoints people like Feinstein that they can't do a complete gun ban all at once. So instead they try to take small steps & chip away at the 2nd Amendment until nothing will be left. But I have confidence that gun owners in this country won't let that happen.

FBI stats show that crime & violent crime (which includes homicides committed with firearms) have been declining for the last 20 years.

According to the FBI Uniform Crime report for 2011:

12,664 murders in the U.S.

Out of the total above 8,583 were murders by firearms, broken down as follows:

6,220 committed by handguns

323 committed by rifles

356 committed by shotguns

1,684 committed by unknown type of firearms

1,694 committed by knives or cutting instruments

1,659 committed by other weapons

728 committed by hands/fists/feet etc..

Out of 315 million people in the U.S. means your odds of getting murdered by a firearm is a small fraction of 1%. The odds are even smaller if you only consider murders committed with rifles. That is a risk I'm willing to live with in order to preserve one of our basic freedoms.

I guess we better start banning hands/fists/feet also since they kill so many people every year.

That doesn't mean I'm against sensible gun laws, ones that would actually keeps guns out of the hands of criminals/mentally ill. Nothing Feinstein is trying to push through addresses either of those issues, so I'm still waiting (nothing wrong with background checks for all but that won't stop the majority of the criminals/mentally ill).

its true if they dont like it get rid of it, if they want more free money they take from the working class

I suppose you think all the criminals that will still have guns will agree to a lengthy Time Out if they are caught.

THEY dont give a RATSA$$ about whether criminals have guns or not...Thats not what this is about..THEY{The government} want to DISARM the regular people{you and me} from being able to "resist" when the house of cards collapses and chaos ensues

@silverton-2953905

Ummm, Michael, time to wake up and grow up.

Time to follow your own advice!

@Blade Well said, but "they" are not alone. China is seeking to expand their borders into north america and australia, and has all ready created the perfect weapon to do it. Weaponized flu virus. So keep healthy.

THEY dont give a RATSA$$ about whether criminals have guns or not...Thats not what this is about..THEY{The government} want to DISARM the regular people{you and me} from being able to "resist" when the house of cards collapses and chaos ensues

Nice paranoia.

First, things aren't getting worse, they are getting better; the deficit continues to go down, unemployment keeps on going down, the stock market keeps going up. We are starting to recover the damage done to the economy and the country before liberal policies were re-instated in America.

Second, we were already disarmed when private ownership of aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons was outlawed. Your silly little guns are no match for the firepower that the US Government is capable of mustering.

The gun industry is trying to persuade you that somehow you might have a chance if they come for you. You don't. Your only recourse is prevent a government from coming after you in the first place. What is ironic is that when liberals work to prevent that, when we criticize government overreach, you scoff at us for being "politically correct" or "terrorist lover." We are not. We are working to protect YOUR freedoms when we fight against wiretapping and such-like laws.

What is not being mentioned in any of the comments are facts. The fact that the parent under which the child that did the shooting in Conn broke the law by not securing the firearm from a violent (medically diagnosed) child. There were NO "assault weapons used in the shooting (coroners office). High capacity magazines are unlawful to own in Conn. The school is a "gun free zone", no security.

Now that that has been brought to the attention of the uninformed, the shooting is Colo. was also enacted by a mentally ill individual. Not only was he diagnosed, his own mother was not surprised that he did what he did. That theater was also a "gun free" via posting on the entrances stating " NO GUNS ALLOWED". Were those of you that think banning high capacity magazines, certain weapons (because the look dangerous), ammunition, etc., really thinking for yourselves instead of being led around like sheep you would know that according to FBI statistics more people we killed with clubs and knives in the United States than with firearms. Also be advised that the 2nd ammendment also protects all of the other ammendments of The Constitution. Were it not for the second, not one of the others would have and grounds to stand upon.

It is time that you educate yourself and stop allowing others to fill your head with hot air. Pay real attention to what is really happening. The Debt is NOT dropping, Unemployment is still high and getting higher, inflation is getting worse (look at content on packaging less for same price), and just to lay one more truth on you, THE UNITED STATES of AMERICA is not a muslim nation, it was and still is a nation based of the principals of GOD word and the teachings of the HOLY BIBLE.

If the last statement is too harsh for you, to bad it is my right via the 1st ammendment and is protected by the 2nd ammendment.

Jack Dulouz...How about he start at the ROOT of the problem then. THAT is what causes these terrible mass murders...DAMAGED, SICK PEOPLE. The gun didn't walk itself into the school, nor did it have a motive, didn't have an agenda, didn't have a grudge, wasn't exacting revenge and it didn't pull its own trigger. We have a society that feeds on sex, violence, disrespect of life, greed, self-centered, I'm a victim, it's all about ME culture....addressing those issues should be the FIRST thing to do.

@Byron
I appreciate seeing a level headed and thought out reply on here even though it (partially) goes against my views.

I too see wiretapping as a serious overreach and, personally, I see this as a fight that shouldn't belong to left or right but all Americans. Likewise, I believe the same about firearms. It is true the government is fully capable of wiping out large numbers of citizens if they ever wished to; what I disagree with in your statement though is that people on the ground will not be able to accomplish anything. There are many instances where that is simply not true- even with all of the technology in the world there are still many civilian v. government conflicts in which citizens are able to combat established military/law enforcement. With the ability to use bombs and aircraft carriers comes the reluctance to use them; if the US ever did come to revolution the government would lose significant support from loyalists if it turned destructive weapons like these on anyone- especially if an innocent was caught in the midst.

I feel very strongly that certain people should not own firearms due to safety concerns for themselves or others. I understand too the dislike of firearms as I used to loath them myself. Over the years though I have come to understand their value and do not feel it is proper to deny anyone their right to feel secure. This, like wiretapping, is an overstep of government power. This is telling a person what they are able to purchase for defense, hunting or recreation with.

Michael:

We call it Democracy. We have hit Critical Mass, And the masses say its time to stop the crazy people from getting AR 15's and the clips that can hold up to 30 rounds. And any other guns like them. Same with the 9mm. the 9 round clip is ok. No more 30 round clips. Close the gun show loop hole and National back ground checks. That is a good start.

Chuck try to stay with the facts. Only ONE crazy person had an AR-15 in all the mass shootings in our countries history and that was at the theater in Aurora, CO. Note, I said he had one. He attempted to use it and it jammed after just 5 or 6 rounds. So he went to his shotgun and that is the gun that did all the damage there. The media and certain politicos jumped on the assault rifle after a Bushmaster was found in the trunk of Lanza's car at Sandy Hook. However, according to the ME no one was shot by that weapon. Lanza used 4 handguns of unpublished brand and caliber. Under Connecticut law no handgun held more than 10 rounds. There are at conservative estimate over 3,000,000 of these so called assault weapons in circulation, yet in only a handful of crimes has one of these kind of firearms been used. This whole assault weapon mytique is nothing more than a media/political ploy to further restrict the rights of law abiding citizens.

P.S. Most semi and full automatic firearms use a "magazine" not a "clip". The M-1 Garand and some revolvers use clips. There is no such animal as a 30 round clip.

Chuck....if you think for one moment that the masses are saying this then you are watching way too much liberal media. If they try to take guns from law abiding Americans you will see the masses. I have fought for this country and for freedom and will never allow my guns to be taken. You will find that there are millions more ex-military, police, and many many others that will stand against it and so will many current military. We live in a country where police and military flip out from time to time and kill others and most of us still believe in the Constitution. Our forefathers created the 2nd amendment for a reason because they had seen that absolute power corrupts absolutely and an unarmed society has no means of protecting themselves from a tyranical government. To think that banning a gun or magazine will stop criminals from getting them is just plain stupid and naive....all that will do is turn millions of law abiding citizens into law breakers.

that sounds just like republicans as well Michael

We were going to schedule an NRA counter-rally with the 4.5 MILLION members but hard to get to a rally when you are working. Ever notice those who rally are those that don't have jobs to go to?

So if guns kill people do pencils misspell words?

The son of a teacher from your own town is the murderer........ Better look within Newtown..... the blame is on your teacher

Why is a federal registry of all guns so damn bad.(private sales included.) You have to do the same with your car in the state you live in so that if stolen they can recover it or if used in a crime you don't get nailed for it. Talk about messing with fire. Realize that if something is not done and your gun is used in a crime you may be the one held liable for not keeping your firearm secure..... weather you pulled the trigger or not. Think about that. I'm sure lawyers would love to see that happen.

If hand guns are the cause of gun violence that you all want to get off the street then it should be a good thing to be able to trace where that gun came from.....That is unless your paranoid, and think that you may be doing something wrong or might.

It might come down to any firearm is required to have a ballistics test before sold/gifted and have that filed in a national data base so in case they are used in a violent criminal act they can be traced.

You guys keep screaming about getting the guns out of the hands of criminals but none of you have any solid solutions on how to do it....You just say we should focus on that.....Put up or shut up as they say.

Thank goodness the NRA cannot bully us or shut us up anymore.

It's a good day in Washington.

We hear you, Newtown.

Let's put it to a vote. Millions are with you.

By the way, this is how most laws manifest...you see that something has become a problem, and you try to fix it.

Do you mean like Daryl Metcalfe's H.B.357?

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/bill_history.cfm?syear=2013&sind=0&body=H&type=B&bn=357

For all you Second amendment squawker's...

If we used your logic of the founding fathers intentions then none of the following would be constitutional:

Your Social Security Card

Drivers License

Finger Prints

Photo ID

Pass Ports

Vehicle License & Registration

That's just a short list.....You see how absurd it is to try and argue. All of these things have one thing in common with our modern weapons.....They where not around when the constitution was written. I don't see a lot of bitching and moanig about those things I listed as a violation of your rights.

Amendments to the constitution will always be made as long as we are a country of laws. It is a living document meant to reflect current civilization....And that's how it was written.

Why is a federal registry of all guns so damn bad

It's a confiscation list. How did they find out the guns he used belonged to his mother if there is no form of registration? They checked the records at the state level. The Federal Government does not need a list of every legal gun in the United States. But they want it.

What's the trade-off? A nation that has far more guns per capita than any other free nation? A nation that has far more deaths by guns than any other free nation? A nation that has far more of it's citizens imprisoned than any other nation or reasonable gun control?

Here's the trade off. Every American gun nut can amass lethal weapons designed solely for killing cops, military personnel and the massacre 20 or 30 innocents in a matter of minutes out of fear of their own government. Every gun nut that insists these murderous weapons will repel a government armed with tanks, drones and precise surface to air missiles. Every gun nut that believes reasonable gun control will enable criminals to excess more guns. Every gun nut that proposes even more guns are the only protection for our innocent school children.

Facts are that the more guns manufactured and sold, the more guns end up in the hands of criminals. Where do you think they get their guns? Do they have their own private and illegal manufacturers? Hell no! They get their guns from the very same sources as the rest of us. Less guns in the hands of the populace mean less guns in the hands of madmen and criminals. There is no escaping that fact despite strong lobbyists such as the NRA.

For Christ's sake, if the 22nd amendment is your best argument, then have at it. I won't stand in your way. You are welcome to manufacture, buy and own as many flint lock pistols and muskets as your little hearts desire. These were the weapons protected by the 22nd amendment.

I refuse to honor it while awarding you weapons capable of piercing law enforcement armor and the massacre of dozens of school children in mere minutes. I refuse to honor it by allowing you to turn our educational institutions into fortresses where gunfights rule the day. Personally, I think you are a few beers short of six-pack. I wouldn't trust you with a butter knife.

We're not trying to take away anyone's right to bear arms, we're only trying to take away certain types of arms that no one has any business with anyway.

We're not trying to take away anyone's right to free speech, we're only trying to take away certain types of speech that no has any business with anyway.

We're not trying to take away anyone's right to religion, we're only trying to take away certain types of religion that no has any business with anyway.

We're not trying to take away anyone's right to a free press, we're only trying to take away certain types of free press that no has any business with anyway.

You know? It sounds really damn weird when you try to make these anti-second amendment arguments apply to the first.

What about all the people like myself that have always been around firearms and use them on a regular basis that can't understand why you need a 30 shot magazine in your rifle? Don't tell me you need it for hunting or you are retarded, and blind.

If numbnuts, may he burn in hell, had to actually stop and dig around for another magazine, pop the expended one out, insert the new one, and recharge the chamber after 3-5 shots instead of 30 there would not have been 20 families without their children last Christmas. There would have been some, but not 20.

I do agree that weapons bans are pretty dumb. A .223 with a wood stock is a hunting rifle, but the exact same parts in a synthetic stock is an assault rifle boggles me.

Most of you also need to stop living your lives in fear and lock your damn guns up. Chances are you will win the lottery before the need to shoot someone in your house ever come up. Ever think so many criminals have guns because they know they have a 50/50 shot of breaking into one house and arming up out of nightstands and under beds?

Ross;

The reasoning was pretty much summed up by Rudy Giuliani....

Ban high capacity magazines (whatever that is) from law abiding citizens...

The CRIMINALS will not care. They will still have their 15+ rounds in their handguns...

Therefore, they will have a decisive advantage over the law abiding citizen, which would be unconstitutional.

And without ringing the "paranoia" bell, we ARE given the right to bear arms, in addition to that as individuals for self-defense and other uses, to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government.

Whether you believe that is possible, relevent, or irrelevant- is, in fact- irrelevant. It is the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"....

I need say nothing more.

"TRUE" Assault Weapons- select fire military-style weapons, are, and have been, controlled since 1934.

There is nothing more entertaining to me, than listening to far-left liberals BLATHER about weapons, when they KNOW absolutely nothing about them...they are making fools out of themselves with their blatantly false claims of "fact".

Then, the NRA....

The NRA represents it's MEMBERSHIP.

Just like our Congressional Representatives represent their voters.

Ross how do you figure, even if Lanza was a complete imbecile and could barely operate the weapon and he had to clumsily reload 5 round magazines, the cops didn't show up for 9 minutes! He could have done the job with a single shot weapon in 9 minutes. I keep hearing the word need. It's not about need. It's about what is guaranteed in the supreme law of the land, the Constitution. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is a phrase that is being overlooked and run roughshod over.

Ross,

Lanza did not use the assault rifle as proven by the ME's report for starters. Second under their State law his guns were restricted to 10 round magazines, however he had 4 of them. Just for a second lets say he was restricted to 5 shots per magazine (one less than most revolvers), he still would have been able to crank off 20 shots before having to reload. You see this is the whole falacy of these arguments. Magazine capacity, assault weapons, these terms are meaningless as there is always a way around the restrictions. If no gun were available, just make a couple of Molotov cocktails...or should we ban the possession of gasoline except in your cars tank. Well, then I'll just make a Chlorine bomb with ordinary household chemicals and a formula easily found on the internet. No restriction is going to stop a nut case.

Make ALL NRA members take a MENTAL TEST!!

Problem solved! ha ha

Where is the medical examiner's report that keeps being referenced?

This is what I am reading:

NEWTOWN, Conn.--Dr. H. Wayne Carver, the medical examiner investigating Friday's massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, said autopsies completed on 20 children and six adults on Saturday showed they were killed with multiple bullets fired by a rifle at close range.

The veteran medical examiner told reporters that the victims had all been identified and their bodies released. In what appeared to be an uncomfortable moment for Carver, he said all of the victims he had examined had all been shot by a Bushmaster .223 caliber assault rifle, one of at least two weapons Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old suspected shooter, used to commit one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history.

For all you Second amendment squawker's...

If we used your logic of the founding fathers intentions then none of the following would be constitutional:

Your Social Security Card

Drivers License

Finger Prints

Photo ID

Pass Ports

Vehicle License & Registration

That's just a short list.....You see how absurd it is to try and argue. All of these things have one thing in common with our modern weapons.....They where not around when the constitution was written. I don't see a lot of bitching and moanig about those things I listed as a violation of your rights.

Amendments to the constitution will always be made as long as we are a country of laws. It is a living document meant to reflect current civilization....And that's how it was written.

Gunfighter

The Medical examiner stated most of the victims appeared to be shot by a high powered rifle. There was a story released and then retracted that Lanza did not use a rifle at all. The problem is that the final report which every shot will be checked on and determined from what gun they were actually fired has not been released yet.

Facts seem not to be so important to waited for, when allegations seem good enough to act on.

Trying to stop retarded, or, people that don't know the difference between right and wrong, with gun control is a slippery slope.

.

Actually it is a federal issue.

Taking California as an an example, because it is the place most likely to be invaded by some foreign country, it is in the best interest of the nation to have large numbers of semiautomatic and even select fire riffles concentrated there and in the hands of citizens so that even defeating our military will not be enough to secure victory and dominate the people.

For that reason all laws regarding personal firearms, including the laws from the 1930's that prohibit ownership of real military grade weapons are unconstitutional... and motivated by a naivete that is irrational and verges on insanity... in other words, only an insane person or country would ever fail to protect itself in the most efficient way.

The second amendment is the only gun law that passes the test of Constitutionality.

All other gun laws infringe the individual right to bear arms and are motivated by rationalizations that ignore reality and undermine the safety and security of America.

@SW-This is not a federal issue. If California and New York want to outlaw high capacity mags and semi autos and sentence possessors to life in jail, that is their business

Actually our second ammendment right may not be infringed by any government, that's why it is specified in the Bill of Rights. Anything not given the feds or specifically prohibited the states is reserved to the states or the people. The right to bear arms was specifically prohibited infringement. The Supreme Court has previously ruled that military capability is the test to determine if arms are lawful. Google US v Miller

McMWest 6.4

I would like to add that some constitutional scholars have already stated their belief the NY anti-gun legislation to be unconstitutional. Additionally, even using their own state laws, considering how the legislation was hurriedly rammed through, they violated their own state laws.

However, suit needs to be brought against this legislation before it can go to the courts. If no lawsuit is forthcoming, the legislation would stand and I’d bet the prospect of this legislation going before the SCOTUS doesn’t set well with Cuomo.

US vs Miller(1939) - The court ruled among other things that military style firearms are the most protected of all.

There goes the first amendment!!!!!!

Look at all the censoring going on.........

Tony You want facts??

I think we are talking denied since shall not be infringed as written in the Constitution would constitute denial of that right.. And infringement would be denial of choice or am I missing something.. Any act that limits it is treason of the Constitution.. But I understand you confusion since you take the liberals word for it and most likely have not read the authors letters.. We are all sad when someone commits a crime but demanding a police state to feel secure may be your idea of bliss not ours..

Roadrunnero,

It's not a matter of shall or shall not. It's a matter of shall posses what and shall not posses what........... And part possesion is not is not sole denial of what shall be possesed.

Tony

There is no "right" to operate a motor vehicle referred to in the Constitution.

Your "Case in point" regarding flintlock muskets means that, following your own train of logic, your 1st Amendment rights are only protected on block-printed handbills or handwritten letters, not through any electronic media, because the Founders had no electricity.

Besides, my friend, the 2nd Amendment doesn't grant any "rights". It acknowledges the fact that the protection of one's continued existence is a HUMAN necessity (not just an American one), and that government shall not infringe upon this (inalienable, or God-given, if you prefer) right. In other words, the "right" is preexisting as a fact of human existence, and it is above the scope of government interference, just like "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

In the Framers' day, you, as a free American citizen, were expected to excercise your Right and Responsibility to protect your own life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and your own continued existence. That is still true today.

If you feel that allowing a government entity to assume the responsibility for your security is a good thing, you have voluntarily given up your status as "free citizen" in exchance for that of "ward of the state." You no longer participate in representative democracy, you are merely governed over. If this is a state of affairs that seems good to you, you're living in the wrong country. Good luck in Europe.

Agnomad Spoken as a patriot would.. Do they even teach about the Constitution anymore?? It used to be required reading along with the letters that were written describing it.. I remember having to read an entire 200 page book that had them all in there and doing a report in 4th grade and also going over them again in high school government class here in a rural Ohio school system.. I just asked my son and he said they do not but they did get a week of OK to be gay on home class? what ever that is.. This seems about right as they stopped saying the pledge as well years ago.. Liberals are censoring the children's education to suit some sick agenda..

For all you Second amendment squawker's...

If we used your logic of the founding fathers intentions then none of the following would be constitutional:

Your Social Security Card

Drivers License

Finger Prints

Photo ID

Pass Ports

Vehicle License & Registration

That's just a short list.....You see how absurd it is to try and argue. All of these things have one thing in common with our modern weapons.....They where not around when the constitution was written. I don't see a lot of bitching and moanig about those things I listed as a violation of your rights.

Amendments to the constitution will always be made as long as we are a country of laws. It is a living document meant to reflect current civilization....And that's how it was written.

There seems to be a lot of fear in the NRA right-wing today. It seems silly to get so worked up about something so easy to compromise on.

The proposals set out by the VP committee are fair and numerous suggestions, not all of them aimed at gun owners, but also mental health issues, violent games/movies issues, etc.

And yet the NRA says NONE of them are acceptable. Just like the GOP, they are the voice of NO.

No compromise.

No solutions.

No changes.

No way but their way.

I know that not all NRA members are this paranoid and angry. Many are rational and have made reasonable suggestions in these forums, only to be cut down and cursed by their own fellow NRA members.

Very sad.

Here's an interesting observation from a Study on Guns and Crime Rates;

"The potential defensive nature of guns is indicated by the different rates of so-called "hot burglaries," where residents are at home when the criminals strike (e.g., Kopel, 1992, p. 155 and Lott, 1994). Almost half the burglaries in Canada and Britain, which have tough gun control laws, are "hot burglaries." By contrast, the U.S., with laxer restrictions, has a "hot burglary" rate of only 13 percent. Consistent with this, surveys of convicted felons in America reveals that they are much more worried about armed victims than they are about running into the police. This fear of potentially armed victims causes American burglars to spend more time than their foreign counterparts "casing" a house to ensure that nobody is home. Felons frequently comment in these interviews that they avoid late-night burglaries because "that's the way to get shot."[8]"

I would much prefer that someone thinking about breaking into my home be worried about the possibility of my being armed and try to do it when my family is NOT at home, rather than expose my family to possible terror from someone that knows I CAN'T be armed. Link below;

http://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/gunslott.html

Tonytellsthe truth 6.7

Actually you are completely incorrect and especially when you use the old "they had muskets and they aren't comparable to today's AR's and other firearms" rhetoric.

Take some time and review the SOTUS decision regarding "US vs Miller(1939)" and also look at the militia act of 1792. You will discover to your dismay that they were speaking of military weapons currently employed. This translates to the 2nd amendment protects military style weapons primarily, as the SCOTUS so stated in their decision.

A brief summary of the militia act of 1792 is that citizens were required to meet muster in possession of muskets consistent with the type regularly used by armies. They were not to show up with shotguns or squirrel guns or anything of the like.

Thus the 2nd amendment protects primarily military style firearms and not any hunting or varmint rifles and shotguns. Modern rifles such as ones based on the AR platform are versatile and as such are used for hunting, target/competition, and most assuredly for personal defense.

Yes they can, and are misused to cause carnage but considering criminologists findings, such cases while tragic are rare and their findings are that a person has a better chance of getting struck by lightening than being caught up in a mass shooting. Few of the uninformed would be aware of this fact especially considering the lengths the media goes to sensationalize such tragedies.

deleted

Silverton:

You say "paranoid and angry".

As usual, you are completely wrong.... AGAIN.

The proper terms are: Prepared and Vigilant. {And I don't even belong to the NRA...}

"Whenever something terrible happens, people reflexively demand that government do something. This impulse almost always leads to bad laws and the loss of liberty." -- Ron Paul

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tonytellsthetruth:

Case and point; The Forefathers of the Constitution had flintlock muskeets (single shot) and fintlock single shot pistols. Now....folks like yourselves would like to argue thier second ammendment rights would be violated by the Federal Gov't. if they weren't allowed to purchase AK-47's or AR-15's with 100 round drum clips when possesion of muskeets was sufficient for Consitutional Forefaters to maintain their second ammendment rights???? No.....I don't think so. That.....is bullsh*t.

So what you're saying is that if we get invaded by, say China, and the "militia" is called up to support the federal military AND National Guards, you want us to show up with muzzle loaders to repel them? Are the gun grabbers really that @!$%#ing stupid? The majority of the Founders were "Futurists" and KNEW of that little thing called "PROGRESS". None of the anti-gunners can seem to remember that Benjamin Franklin invented a ton of NEW STUFF!!! HELLO!!! It was their forethought that allowed for this country to make more progress in less than 200 years than the world had seen in all of recorded history!

Break it down, break it down...

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state... "

"Well Regulated" is defined as: well equipped, well ordered and well trained...

militia (mə-lish-ə). 1. A body of citizens armed and trained, esp. by a state, for military service apart from the regular armed forces. • The Constitution recognizes a state's right to form a "well-regulated militia" but also grants Congress the power to activate, organize, and govern a federal militia. U.S. Const. amend. II; U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 15-16. See NATIONAL GUARD. [Cases: Militia 1-3; Weapons 1. C.J.S. Armed Services §§ 288-289; Weapons §§ 1-8, 61-62.]

reserve militia. All persons who are not exempt from military service and not actively serving in the armed forces OR national guard. -- Black's Law Dictionary, 8th Edition

2. Roman law. Military service.

ie - A well EQUIPPED, ordered and trained body of CITIZEN SOLDIERS IS necessary for the security of a free state... Hmmm!!!

Benjamin Franklin secured STATE-OF-THE-ART rifles from France for the colonists to purchase and use to defeat the British and their smooth bore muskets. I say again, STATE-OF-THE-ART.

Got it?! {rhetorical}

"...the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."

The Bill of Rights ACKNOWLEDGES the RIGHT of the People, to keep and bear arms, NOT THE RIGHT OF THE MILITIA... The Founders wrote it this way because the Colonists just got done fighting a war against a state-run MILITIA!

On the surface, this may seem contradictory, but it is not. The People are only the militia when called to action by the Governor. If it said it was the right of the militia, then the State would control the arms. But since it says it is the right of the People, the People maintain control of THEIR arms. Therefore it is most certainly an INDIVIDUAL right that CANNOT be limited in any way, shape, or form! ALL LAWS RESTRICTING OR LIMITING PRIVATE CITIZENS FROM OWNING OR CARRYING, (open OR concealed), IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! As such, no one is bound to follow them, and no officer and no court is bound to enforce them. {Unconstitutional Official Acts - 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256}

(NOTE: Firearms are only one part of "arms".)

In 1774-75 the British confiscated firearms and gunpowder, thus starting the Revolutionary War.

Who is looking to start round two???

Across America, state lawmakers, governors, attorneys general, sheriffs, and other officials are promising to protect the gun rights of citizens in their jurisdictions in the face of the most aggressive assault on the Second Amendment in generations. Indeed, as the Obama administration’s unconstitutional agenda becomes increasingly transparent, backed by some Democrats and much of the presstitutes establishment media, resistance to further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms is exploding nationwide.

Gun control is illegal, and it’s against the Constitution. In a recent poll 2 out of 3 people realize that the Second Amendment was designed to protect us from the power of the federal government.

Numerous bills have already been introduced in state legislatures, for example, that would nullify unconstitutional federal gun control and even criminalize enforcement of such lawless restrictions. Texas, Wyoming, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Iowa, and other states are considering nullification legislation in the wake of Obama’s recent push to enact gun control by executive decree and proposals sent to Congress. Other states are expected to join soon, and many have already adopted laws in recent years protecting guns made and kept within their jurisdictions from federal regulations.

Analyst say that legislation filed in Missouri by Republican state Rep. Casey Guernsey with over 60 co-sponsors, known as the Second Amendment Preservation Act, appears to be among the strongest bills at this point. If passed, it would nullify any and all federal acts, orders, laws, statutes, rules, or regulations purporting to limit or restrict access to personal firearms, accessories, and ammunition. Any federal official caught attempting to enforce such unconstitutional rules in the state would be charged with a class D felony, facing up to four years in prison upon conviction.

I think most people can see that there is an all out assault on our Constitutional Rights. Our fourth Amendment right has been eliminated by the National Defense Authorization Act. Our 2^nd Amendment is under assault.

Local sheriffs have much more power than they are given credit, and as such serve as Americans’ last, best line of defense against federal tyranny. Most sheriffs have stated that the line in the sand has been drawn and that they will not enforce any Federal Regulation that deviates from our Second Amendment Rights.

What’s next, banning our 1^st Amendment?

The Sandy Hook Shooting - Fully Exposed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obiQS1xCZHY

Thanks for NRA, millions of idiots who shouldn't breed to begin with can now actively enjoy the company of guns and their idiotic behavior.

I don't have problem with law-biding citizen or well trained people, I however have problem when 4/10 of people in the US who believe we are at the end of the world.

What's the trade-off? A nation that has far more guns per capita than any other free nation? A nation that has far more deaths by guns than any other free nation? A nation that has far more of it's citizens imprisoned than any other nation or reasonable gun control?

Here's the trade off. Every American gun nut can amass lethal weapons designed solely for killing cops, military personnel and the massacre 20 or 30 innocents in a matter of minutes out of fear of their own government. Every gun nut that insists these murderous weapons will repel a government armed with tanks, drones and precise surface to air missiles. Every gun nut that believes reasonable gun control will enable criminals to excess more guns. Every gun nut that proposes even more guns are the only protection for our innocent school children.

Facts are that the more guns manufactured and sold, the more guns end up in the hands of criminals. Where do you think they get their guns? Do they have their own private and illegal manufacturers? Hell no! They get their guns from the very same sources as the rest of us. Less guns in the hands of the populace mean less guns in the hands of madmen and criminals. There is no escaping that fact despite strong lobbyists such as the NRA.

For Christ's sake, if the 2nd amendment is your best argument, then have at it. I won't stand in your way. You are welcome to manufacture, buy and own as many flint lock pistols and muskets as your little hearts desire. These were the weapons protected by the 2nd amendment.

I refuse to honor it while awarding you weapons capable of piercing law enforcement armor and the massacre of dozens of school children in mere minutes. I refuse to honor it by allowing you to turn our educational institutions into fortresses where gunfights rule the day. Personally, I think you are a few beers short of six-pack. I wouldn't trust you with a butter knife.

you really want to live in a gun free country, move to one. there are countries like the one you want.

and if it ever comes down to it, do you really think the entire u s military will be on the side of the government?

guess what, a lot of the people you are calling gun nuts are military, vets, and LEOs. they will not all be on the side of the government. they will not turn in their privately owned weapons. and neither will their family and friends. guns are here to stay, deal with it and move on with your life.

go read the 2nd amendment. no where does it mention what types of weapons, or hunting, or target shooting. it was referring to the most advanced weapons of that time.

Hello folks, let's clear one thing up right now, not all progressives are anti-gun so referring to those that support and see the assault on our 2nd Amendment right as only conservative are wrong. I have friends who are "Liberal" and don't even own guns but they see this gun grab by the administration and are advocating and fighting for our constitutional right.

Plain and simple.I am not going to give up my guns.Make it illegal if that's what they want to do.Just remember what our forefathers did in 1776 was also Illegal.

We worry about gun violence.We should be more worried about how many lives it is going to take to get our freedom back if the government has it's way.

{Lack of} Commonsense101:

You're officially included with Silverton and Tonytellsthetruth.

The only reason guns end up in the hands of criminals is because we either don't keep them permanently locked up, or we don't execute their sorry asses.

“I don't like repeat offenders, I like DEAD offenders.” -- Ted Nugent

"It's a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun control laws. I happen to know this from personal experience." -- Ronald Reagan

“To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” -- Ted Nugent

"You won't get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There's only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don't actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time." -- Ronald Reagan

We're not trying to take away anyone's right to bear arms, we're only trying to take away certain types of arms that no one has any business with anyway.

You know? It sounds really damn weird when you try to make these anti-second amendment arguments apply to the first.

www.crisisactors.com

Obama better get a bunch of people from crisis actors to lead the parade!

Anyone else notice that the parade is in D.C., gun ban capital of the US, with a violent crime rate so extreme that you are safer as a solder in Afghanistan than as a citizen in DC.

Hope none of the protesters get robbed during the parade. Of course the criminals all know that they are helplessly unarmed !!!!!!!!!!!!!

You guys go walk around DC and wave your flags for all the criminals to see. Either brave or stupid.

i have to wonder...how many deaths will it take to satisfy your bloodlust? how many children have to die before you decide that we need to thrust responsibility on people who refuse to exercise it themselves? i don't understand why people think it is 'american' to respond to all your problems with a gun in your hand? is that the only way any of you know how to solve your problems? really, i'm not talking about your 'constitutional rights.' i don't give a g*dmn about your right. for me, this isn't about rights, it's about doing the right thing.

i'll bet you're all good, christians, going to church every sunday and singing glory hallelujah to the sky...between 10a and 11a. and then you go out and vilify anyone who doesn't agree with your gun toting, shoot em' up attitude to the point where i have read that there are people who believe that if you don't own a gun you're some kind of traitor.

well, i don't own a gun and i never will. why? because I'm some liberal radical? no, you see, i am a christian and i really believe in what jesus tried to teach us. 'love thy neighbor as thyself.' he didn't say 'love thy neighbor as thyself and carry a gun.' he didn't leave out loving black, gays, women, arabs, or democrats. and if you think that you have some god given right to kill someone just because why? right now you're all insisting that we are all in imminent danger to being murdered every second of the day so we should all be walking around ready to take out the next guy because you never know!!!!!! aaaaahHHHH!!!!! what fear mongering. what hate mongering i have never read.

if someone feels that his only choice is to kill me, well, then i guess my problems will be over...and his will just be beginning, because you may have to right to own a gun, but you don't have the right to go around shooting people with impunity. it's still against the law...unless you're planning on changing that next. is that what we can expect? forcing laws on the books that makes killing someone because you THINK they might be a danger? or maybe you want it to be all right to kill someone because they insult you? what good does it do you to carry an uzi if you can't kill someone? what's the fun in that?

and just in case you think i don't have any experience with guns, i'll tell you. i had a gun in my face. two members of a gang broke into my house and held me at gunpoint, threatening to kill me. you don't have to believe me, but i wasn't afraid. i put my life in god's hands and well, i'm still here. i have absolutely no respect for people who think that somehow they are superior because they have a gun and they could kill me. i am not impressed, i'm not afraid.

'turn the other cheek.' 'love thy neighbor.' i live by those tenets, i don't just give them lip service. i was a republican for more than 25 years until i realized that radical factions were taking over and trying to turn this country into a theocracy; until i saw that fear mongering and hate mongering had become part of the republican mind. now, since i'm sure you're gonna say something stupid like 'just like a libtard,' as your answer to my post, i need to let you know in advance, don't waste your time. i couldn't give a rat's behind what you think of me. anyway, don't you know, liberals are all atheists, right? isn't that what your lord and master rush limbaugh declares? so i can't possibly be a liberal since i believe in god, and jesus. you know what i am? i'm just a human being who would like to see us become a smarter, gentler people. i would like people who own guns to accept responsibility for them and for the very real danger they possess. i would like to live amongst a people who believe that there are better ways to solving problems than killing each other.

i know your pundits have said that we need to do more to take care of the mentally ill, instead of taking away guns. well, i agree that we should be addressing mental illness, but let me remind you that you back the party that has fought tooth and nail to curb spending on social programs that would do exactly that, address the mentally ill! at this moment they are scheming to take away social programs from the poor, the elderly and the sick while continuing to feed the corporate pig. so, if you really believe that we need to address mental illness, then maybe you should contact your congressman and tell him/her to stop trying to cut programs for those people.

you can't have it both ways.

To all the lemmings that would and will stand by while their civil liberties are taken away you can thank us later. You call people who speak truth to power paranoid. You say the government only wants common sense control of guns yet you go to the airports and allow the TSA to molest you. You allow the Patriot Act, FISA, NDAA, NDRP to get enacted and you don't even know what's in those liberty stripping laws. You allow your government to use armed spy drones in American skies! You’ve give the government the authority to surveill you through any number of Federal agencies, have your phone and computer tapped, bank, medical, and private records accessed. You have given the government the authority to arrest you without gaining access to an attorney or a trial (NDAA). This isn’t paranoia this is fact! What’s next sheeple, if the MSM reports there is a suppository bomber will you all line up to bend over at the airports or any public place. What about what is going on in Texas?

In San Antonio, Texas the Northside Independent School District is now experimenting with “locator” chips in student ID badges on two campuses, allowing administrators to track the whereabouts of 4,200 students with GPS-like precision. If you don’t believe me look it up!

Administrators say the chips make students safer and will help boost attendance records that are used to calculate badly needed state funding.

A student, Hernandez, has filed a law suit against Northside – the fourth-largest school district in Texas – argues that the ID rule violates her religious beliefs. Her family says the badge is a “mark of the beast” that goes against their religion. As a result of her refusal, the school is transferring her which will put an undue hardship on her and her family. This also sends a clear message to anyone who doesn't conform to this civil liberties violation.

But U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia on Tuesday denied a request to stop her from being transferred, saying the badge requirement “has an incidental effect, if any, on (Hernandez’s) religious beliefs.”

It is starting folks, first a GPS chip in your ID then a RFID chip under your skin. I’m just waiting to hear the sheeple say, IT’S FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY. The sheeple will fall to their knees in support and call anybody a tinfoil paranoid schizophrenic who doesn’t allow this to happen to their child. Let’s see how the propaganda disinformation trolls spin this one!

Those that have the intestinal fortitude to see what is happening knows why it is so important that we not allow our government to tamper with our 2^nd Amendment rights. The evidence doesn’t get any clearer. To the cowardly sheeple, no one has the illusion that they would win a battle against the military, it’s not about winning or losing, it’s about self respect. I would rather die standing then serving on my knees. People should not fear their government, the government should fear the people!

You sheeple have the gall to call us Patriots fearful, who are the ones standing up for our rights and who are the ones handing over their civil liberties for a little perceived security?

When Benjamin Franklin left Independence Hall just after the second drafting he was approached by a woman on the street and she asked, what manner of government have you bequeathed us? And Franklin said a Republic Mam, if you can keep it. The responsibility of a country is not in the hands of a privileged few. We are strong and we are free from tyranny as long as each one of us remembers his or her duty as a citizen whether it is to report a pot hole at the top of your street or lies at a State of the Union Address or standing up for our Constitutional rights. Speak out ask those questions, demand that truth. Democracy is not a free ride but this is where we live and if we do our job this is where our children will live.

America used to be Land of the Free and Home of the Brave now we are Land of the Detained and Home of the Cowards! Wake up before you allow more of your civil liberties to be stolen! Give the government an inch and they will take a mile.

http :// www. potowmack.org /emerappi.html

Read for yourselves.

TrustVerify...equally I also know many NRA members who are "Liberal and Conservative," that feel what has been proposed is reasonable including military vets. One a special forces member, another a former Green Beret member. The Constitution was designed to protect all the people gun owners or not. When fear tactics eg. their going to take "all," your guns away or ads that target Our President's kids are used credibility is entirely gone. Such tactics raise serious questions about the real intent and sour any integrity.

I know two victims of drive-by shootings whose only mistake was standing in front of a firehouse. Both were high school students one was left a paraplegic the other a bullet lodged permanently. I know a very young girl who for no reason was shot in the leg walking to her grandmother's house. My daughter was an elementary seventh grade teacher last year. A seventh grader brought to school a loaded hand gun and intended to settle an argument with a peer. The school is adjacent to the police station no deterrent there. I know a high school teacher shot at point range to the heart for catching a student smoking. Drive by shootings, college students shot, movie theather patrons shot, small innocent children shreaded by semi-automatics while in their classroom the list of victims goes on and on for what? FOR WHAT? So someone can boast about what they own or did? So someone can walk around covertly with their semi-automatic? Semi-automatics are not the choice for honest recreation they are the choice for arming military members. So who is kidding who? No one is taking all the guns away nor are they forbidding anyone from having any guns. What the public wants is a common sense approach which has been proposed to protect those who are vulnerable. Fellow Americans who equally respect the U.S. Constitution and expect the same level of protection afforded those who choose to own guns. People with guns kill people pure and simple. How do you prevent realistically children and others from being used as random targets? How do you equally ensure gun owners the right to have guns while protecting the public? By regulation and allowing those to retain that ownership via registration. No one is going door to door to confiscate guns. If you've been told that then I've a bridge to Temple-tuttle.

It seems to me that a 30-30 or a 30-06 will kill you just as dead as a AK-47 or a AR-15 yet the police use AK-47's & AR15's as well as a Glock with a 15 round clip & full body armor to disarm some one holding a knife, sword or even a cell phone. Usually the police respond after the crime has been committed. Any ban will apply to everyone except politicians, police & criminals. Politicians like to exempt themselves from any law or bill passed.If any restrictions are made it should apply to everyone except the military. And it should be passed by a vote of all the people not some congressmen/women looking to get reelected. If they do pass one, rest assured it will be late at night with a voice vote so no one know who voted for or against it. I'm in my 70's, have owned guns since i was 13, hunted for food as a youngster, served in the service & have never been in any trouble with the law. I do not support a ban on clips or weapons as long as any member of law enforcement agency active or retired can. Look at the heavy handed ways that law enforcement enforces laws passed by local governments using mace, batons, shields, water cannons & tasers on unarmed marchers if they don't disband. Our freedoms have already been eroded to where just about every thing you do is illegal & we are on a slippery slope. Our history is no longer being taught in school, the constitution or pledge of allegiance & even our flag is being mocked in school. The children are not being taught to read or write or even math but they are being quizzed about guns, abuse, depression & how to be politically correct. Their taught to tell the teacher if someone looks cross eyed at them or if another kid points a finger at them. Parents have no rights at all but are held responsible for their child's actions You are held responsible if your child skips school but if you try to force them, you are abusing them or violating their civil rights. while at the same time passing out condoms

These people are their own worst enemy. They are effectively sabotaging any chance of doing something meaningful. Expanding background checks and access from the mentally ill is an idea that could actually reduce gun violence. Maybe restricting clip size too.

But the entire effort is compromised by trying to add the needless assault weapon ban. A determined gunman can buy four small concealable handguns for less than the price of an AR-15 which is not concealable.

This is a case of people who want to do "something", so they push an agenda doomed to failure and prevent the efforts of cooler heads that could have actually made a difference.

alessa you blame law abiding citizens who have owned guns for probably generations for the actions of some deranged madman who STOLE a gun and went on a rampage?

The RIGHT thing alessa isnt to cave in to a government who doesnt blame the criminals, as a knee jerk emotional reaction to a shooting, passes laws that ONLY affects law abiding citizens NOT criminals or mentally unstable.

And there is NO fear mongering here alessa. My home was broken into not once but twice by meth addicts and our large dog didnt stop them. What do I need to do to protect my children then? Pray? The police arrived at our house after the break-ins by about 50 minutes. Move you say? I live in a middle class neighborhood with great schools, parks and scenery. Maybe Chicago where 435 people were killed with ILLEGALLY acquired guns? Strict gun laws there, hows that working for them?

I will give you an example of how gun controll worked in England. A man was in his own home when it was being broke into, he yelled at the two individuals to leave and one came at him with a crowbar, he shot the man with a single shot shotgun. The man was wounded and the police arrived and arrested the home owner for having a gun. The criminal sued and won, the prosecutor offered the man a 7 year sentance for attempted murder which he refused. The man was found guilty by a panel of judges and received a life sentance. This could happen here if you let the government infringe on your rights. This is not a left or right issue as I know many Democrats who are multiple gun owners, this is a warning, wake up.

alessa:

I read your post three times and have one word for you: Evian... Naive...

If you truly believe what's in your Bible, you have FAILED to study it thoroughly. You've obviously missed the parts regarding righteous anger and doing something about the problem. {Matthew 21:12-13;Mark 3:1-5; Luke 19:45-48; John 2:13-18; Ephesians 4:26}

Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.

"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)

“Those who make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.” –- John F. Kennedy, quoted in Final Solution to the Washington Question

"... But it's also interesting to notice WHO it is we assassinate. Did you ever notice "WHO" it is? Stop to think WHO it is we kill. It's always people who've told us to live together in harmony and try to love on another. Jesus, Lincoln, Gandhi, John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, John Lennon... they all said "Try to live together peacefully."BAM! Right in the @!$%#ing head... Apparently we're not ready for that." -- George Carlin

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -- George Santayana

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

ask the people of Syria about giving up their guns.i think we have much more to fear from our government then any terrorist.that has to be the saddest critique of our government.of the rich by the rich and for the rich isnt the way its supposed to be

Typical cast of liberal left wing wannabe's. While i have alot of sympathy for the parents that lost their children to a madman. But he was evil, it was the darkness and evil inside his soul that was reponsible. If the school had armed gaurds or teachers trained and armed, it may not have happened. In Oregon when a shooter at the Clackmas Mall found himself in the sights from an armed citizen. he offed himself, becuase he was a coward just like most of these shooters. they truly do want to instill terror into our msot vulnerable part of our society. Each school system should follow LA's example of having their own police force. Let us make sure that anyone that has mental illness, registers and has to go before a judge to determine if they pose a threat to society. The majority of the CWH are law abiding and not wacko's I am ok with enforcing the laws we have and maybe even require backgound chescks by all the states. But the feds needs to keep their big noses out our business. I dont trust the feds that is why we have the Bill of Rights, to make sure that we keep the power of the federal government in check.

James Madison and Thomas Paine were alot smarter than history has given them credit.

jqp: "Typical cast of liberal left wing wannabe's." To whom are your referring - the parents that lost their children - or the rest of us that don't want to lose ours? I suggest you read your own sentence - it makes no sense.

Always the same sentiment..." i have alot of sympathy for the parents that lost their children....But.."

"James Madison and Thomas Paine were alot smarter than history has given them credit."

I, for one, don't believe that people that can't assemble a cognitive thought, can't spell and can't punctuate should be making laws for their own pets, let alone states or nations.

so to all you gun owners, there is no other solution but violence begetting violence. there is not other way except kill or be killed. i feel sorry for all of you. you will never grow as human beings. you will never reach any level other than the level that violence brings you. and you will lead the way into a world of anarchy where we just go around killing one another pellmell without any regard for human life.

i am NOT naive. i just refuse, refuse to give into violence! i refuse to become a part of a violent society where the idea of killing people is so acceptable that we don't even flinch before we change the channel. and you say there is no fear mongering while you spewing the right wing rhetoric that the government is all about some mysterious conspiracy to take away your precious 2nd amendment rights. all the while absolutely NOTHING has happened that would do that. expecting people to know which end the bullet comes out of a gun before they buy it, is NOT taking away your constitutional rights. banning assault weapons will not deny anyone their civil right to own a weapon. i've read the constitution and the 2nd amendment says that we should have a well armed militia. we do. it's the national guard. there isn't anywhere in that amendment where is says that the individual has the right to own a cache of guns you could start a war with. the truth is, the minute you have one gun in your possession, your rights have been upheld. i'm sure you don't agree with that, but that's the rub of the 2nd amendment, it is one whose interpretation is debatable depending upon your point of view. so, you can argue all you like, i'm not going to agree with you, because i interpret it differently than you. i interpret is from the point of view of someone who doesn't believe in violence.

i've known plenty of people with guns. my ex was a cop and he liked to collect guns. no problem there, except when he used to leave his gun on the dining room table with kids running in and out of the house. i took it and hid it. by the time i told him where is was, he was frantic. and i told him next time i saw his gun laying around, i would take it out and sell it. i never saw it again.

growing up, my best friends' parents were avid hunters. they owned lots of guns and they lived off the meat they got from the elk and deer they killed. i never had a problem with that. i don't today. i'm not talking to or about honest, law abiding gun owners who understand the gravity of their weapons and take extraordinary care to keep them safe. i am talking about those of you out there who have fallen victim to the ravings of the nra president who lately stated that this is a war and that we all need to arm ourselves against the government and accused the president of having some insidious covert plan to send troops into your homes and take away your guns.

this hatred for the government is dangerous. he's advocating the violent overthrow of our government and i don't care what you think of gun control, that's going too far. it's amazing to me that ever since obama became president, the nra has been warning you that "any minute now he's gonna start taking away your guns!!!!" and yet the only thing that happened in the last four years, is that NOW you can carry a gun into a national park! the monster!!! are you kidding me? he has done nothing. and he wants to do nothing except take us back to a point where we were in the nineties when assault weapons were banned and unless i'm mistaken, nobody went door to door taking away anyone guns. there was not military rule with soldiers busting down doors to get peoples' guns. i know, i was there in the nineties.

if you think i'm so naive, then what about the many, many, many gun owners out there who also agree we need stronger gun laws, who agree that assault weapons are not necessary in the hands of the populace. if you think i don't know what i'm talking about do some reading other than right wing propaganda. not everyone who owns a gun thinks we should be going back to the wild, wild west.

as far as the bible goes, i'm not some bible thumping right conservative christian lemming. i don't believe in organized religion. i follow the philosophy of jesus. i don't care what anyone says in the bible, except jesus. HE advocated peace, brotherhood and love. so, quote one place where Jesus said to kill anyone. i don't care what Paul said, or what some obscure prophet said, Jesus was the one who counted. he spoke only of peace, of turning the other cheek, of forgiveness, of humility, of compassion. to believe in this maybe naivete to you, to me it is enlightenment. and i choose to live by that philosophy, so if you don't like it too bad, because for now, we live in a free society and i don't HAVE to embrace your hatred, i don't HAVE to own a gun. that's my choice. sorry if you don't like, but frankly, scarlet, i don't give a damn.

No one is paranoid but Im sure there is writing on the wall alessa. Here is a parable that might make sense:

If you act like a sheep, you will be treated like a sheep. Caged in a pen, sheared, and made into dinner when ever the farmer feels like it. Sheep never question authority. They do as they are told. They believe what the farmer tells them and nothing else. They believe the farmer loves them and will never hurt them, only take care of them. If someone came and warned the sheep that they are all about to be eaten, the sheep would laugh and call that person crazy. Sheep are a perfect livestock if you want easy to control, well behaved investments.

It's always all or nothing with the NRA. Please on both sides of this issue read the history of the NRA, how and why they got started, and their original charter. The NRA has ratified it's own charter and has become nothing more than a fringe militant group with a lot of money and power.

The NRA formed a legislative affairs division in response to debate concerning passage of the 1934 National Firearms Act, the first major gun control legislation in the United States. At the time, the NRA supported the act without studying its impact on the second amendment, and also supported the Gun Control Act of 1968. The two acts created a system to license gun dealers and imposed taxes on the private ownership of automatic weapons ("machine guns").

Since the 1970s, the NRA has undergone a series of internal governance changes, gradually changing from a "marksmanship group into a mighty gun lobby." In 1977, two Second Amendment advocates -- Harlon Carter and Neal Knox -- defeated sportsmanship and conservation-focused officers to run the organization and its lobbying unit, respectively. After 1977, the organization expanded its membership and focused heavily on political issues. The NRA supported the McClure-Volker firearms decontrol bill of 1986, and worked to reduce the powers of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). In 1982, Knox formed a competing lobbying group. By 1984, the organization's membership approached 3 million.

The NRA supported the 1934 National Firearms Act, which regulated what were considered "gangster weapons." However, the organization's position on the act has since changed.

The NRA supported and opposed parts of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which broadly regulated the firearms industry and firearms owners, primarily focusing on regulating interstate commerce in firearms by prohibiting interstate firearms transfers except among licensed manufacturers, dealers and importers. The law was supported by America’s oldest manufacturers (Colt, S&W, etc.) in an effort to forestall even greater restrictions which were feared in response to recent domestic violence. The NRA supported elements of the law, such as those forbidding the sale of firearms to convicted criminals and the mentally ill.

I'm sure that the founders and forefathers of the NRA would not approve of the radical misrepresentation of their original charter...Much like what you all quote about our forefathers and the second amendment.

Isn't it also interesting that since 1977 gun violence spiked to an all time high. One has to wonder if there is any correlation.

LaPierre graduated from Patrick Henry High School in Roanoke, Virginia in 1967. He received his BA in education from Siena College and his MA in government from Boston College. He has been a government activist and lobbyist ever since finishing his MA, including positions on the Board of Directors of the American Association of Political Consultants, the American Conservative Union, and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

Where in his qualifications is he a second amendment expert?

Obama's Latinos

What does that have to do with the NRA protests?

You have no facts to back up your statements and what you just posted is racist and misleading.

Obama's Latinos

Statements reported as inflammatory & no value

Steve,

Nice posts.

In addition to your biography info on Wayne LaPierre, another major incident in his life was when he dodged the Vietnam draft in 1969 by having his family doctor write a letter stating he was ineligible to serve because he has a nervous disorder.

A lot of NRA right-wingers don't want this known, but it is crucial information, especially for any war veterans or other members of the NRA who may not be aware of it.

Although Mr. LaPierre may have been miraculously cured of his nervous disorder when his draft ineligiblity ended, what if he hasn't and he is still leading the charge to incite his NRA followers to more violence and mass paranoia while he himself suffers from a form of mental illness?

Or what if he was just scared and did not want to serve in Vietnam and risk getting killed, so he lied? That is understandable, but he should have said he was a conscientious objector like Bill Clinton and others did (although I don't admire those actions either). The Vietnam war was an unpopular and mistaken U.S. military undertaking, just like when Bush/Cheney led us into Iraq, but there were a lot of soldiers and National Guardsmen who went into Iraq willingly and unwillingly to do their duty. I have a lot of respect for them.

I think that whole situation with LaPierre merits looking into since this is the man who is the mouthpiece of the NRA today and is stuffing his pockets with gold while he fans the flames of dissent in our nation. It is men like Warlord Wayne that have changed the NRA from its original constitutional intent to what it has now become -- an irrational, incendiary organization that divides the American people with only ONE goal in mind -- to make more money off the emotions of misled individuals.

@ spidas,

Exactly, I'm saying the second ammendment does not guarantee every citizens right to own any specific type of all weaponry....period. Whether or not China invades the US within the next 100 years does not matter. The second ammendment does not guarantee every citizen can own Automatic weapons, artillery, grenades, etc. Even in present times, assault rifles with 100 round drum magazines are not guaranteed to every citizen within the Constitution. Organized Militias within the Constitution became organized only when they assembled fighting for the US Gov't or fighting against the U.S. Gov't. In our present era, no future organized civilian militia will ever pose a threat to our US Gov't in possesion of Nuclear weapons. Conversely, no organized civilian militia will ever be called upon to assemble with the Pentagon to fight an enemy abroad or doemstic when America has the Military. So..............the second ammendment doesn't rise to the level of lunacy upon which you base your argument, Pal. Even Justice Scalia of SCOTUS acknowledges these positions.

Why are the the pro gun rallies ignored by the Liberal Media?

Witchking

Last weekend they covered a few of them...even covered where 5 people injured in 3 states at gun shows....Didn't you see that?

The fact is that the pro gun rallies had so few people show up that they where nothing special. Which should tell you something.

The pro gun rallies I have seen covered on the news were also gun shows.

I suppose this is a good way for the NRA to stir up the paranoia factor and increase sales at the same time.

Uh, Tony... Arnold Schwarzenegger just bought a tank... The Second Amendment says "arm", not firearms. Some of the militia from the Revolutionary War went home with a cannon. It's all inclusive. Scalia got it wrong. Just because the SCOTUS makes a decision, the People are the final judges. Remember that little thing called "Prohibition"? Sorry, but your argument is laughable at best...

alessa:

Go take your meds. You seem to be the one who is paranoid. I'ld bet dollars to dognuts that ALL of the law abiding gun owners do not "hate" their government as you believe. You sound like every other religious fanatic out there who's Bible thumping is doing more harm than good. So take your inflated gibberish elsewhere and chill out. You sound like Chicken Little.

Typographical correction:

The Second Amendment says "arms", not firearms.

Guns DO NOT kill people

Correct! It's the bullets that do.

And, that goes where? Oh yeah, in a gun. Unless you wanna hold it with some vise grips, and use an ice pic. Have at it! Good luck with your aim!

People with cars kill people too. And, we have laws to protect our citizens. Called carry and conceal. But, with that said the problem here is not the guns, it's the people. We need more places that we can deal with the mental health problems that these people who shoot others obviously have. But, your never gonna stop a nut! If there's a will there will be a way for them to carry out their will. But, if after me, I'll be ready!

We already have all the laws we need. The CRIMINALS don't abide by the laws, thats why they are Criminals. So if new laws are made, restricting non-criminal citizens, the Criminals will follow these new laws? Why? Why do they not follow the present laws?

Silverton - You are half correct! We need current guns laws enforced. We don't need any more new gun laws to go unenforced. Remember Chicago and D.C. have the most restrictive guns laws in the Nation. Guess that's way the crime rate in those to hell holes are so low.

silverton......SHOTGUNS will be LEGAL...How many people do you think I could KILL in a crowded theatre if I were to let loose with one LOADED with 00 buckshot? THOSE people would STILL be dead, and from a LEGAL weapon none the less..

When you read about countries with strict gun control, you'll read that gun related crimes of various kinds are down. However you do not read that the crimes are down, just that guns are not involved. You can not control another persons mind. If someone wants to commit a violent act they will find a way to do so.

People with knives, cars and ball bats kill people do we take them away. Oh Oh We will have to find another way to type when they realize hands kill people also.

Gun control is not the answer, gun owner control may be. It's not the guns, and in general, its not even the majority of gun owners. It's the mistakes and oversights made by a small few of these owners that have helped lead to some of the recent tragic events.

Just like the issuance of driving and hunting licenses, ensuring these gun owners know the rules on how and when to properly shoot and secure their weapons is paramount in helping to prevent some of the types of shootings we've been seeing - teenagers using their parents' own weapons to them along with siblings; mentally disturbed individuals being essentially trained with these guns and later turning these same guns on to the owner and subsequently many innocent others.

ameridian,

And people don't rape people. Because the female body shuts down when raped. Let's see......do ya think a person can shoot someone killing them without a gun in their hand, Einstein????

However you do not read that the crimes are down, just that guns are not involved.

You might read that they're dressing up as Oompa Loompas and really taking the time to be creative and enjoy their assaults. Why not? Who's gonna stop 'em?

Tonywarvet (which he never was) has changed his name to Tonytellsthetruth (which he doesn't). ROFL Wow, you're really clever aren't you. I'm sure you're a legend in your own mind. LOL

you can tell he isnt a vet by the way he bashes our freedoms. no self respecting vet worth a crap would post the things he does. he gives us real vets a bad name. everyone who has ever served has taken an oath to defend the constitution. not defend the government, the constitution.

You got it right fedup.I have too many years in the Army protecting the constitution to give up the rights i have earned to some Yahoo.I don't care which party anyone is in.I will not compromise my freedoms.Liberals,Conservatives,It does'nt matter to me.Say what you want.I will not give in or give up.

jeff: I've lived and traveled the world for 65 years. Never carried a gun. What are you afraid of?

A local gun rally had over 5000 attendance, news media reported 500. Now reports that the "black/scarey" weapon was not used in Sandy Hook (being left in the trunk and all), seems the media and Senator whats her face (the witchy looking one, Feinstein) need to be held accountable.

That just wont do..Reports of something like that just dont fit into the AGENDA..

There are more people gathered in St Louis right now, but they are here to remember Stan "THE MAN" Musial. God Bless.

I have seen several gun rallies being televised recently. They are all held at gun shows, too. Makes some more money for the NRA while they whip their supporters into a frenzy.

Some won't be quite so frenzied in the future silverton, some got shot at recent gun shows (D'oh!). Republicans will drag their feet for the NRA and their knuckles for the religious right.

...and the Libs will continue to kill babies through abortion, yet cry out when 2nd graders get shot... hypocrites.

There are so many NRA rallies going on all the time, that they are as newsworthy as a shooting in Detroit. The only thing that separates out a pro-gun rally as news is when someone at one shoots himself in the foot, and even that it becoming ordinary.

o msnbc, your agenda is soooo obvious.

homie d clown,

those 20 precious children in newton were ALIVE!!!!! breathing human beings with mothers and fathers who WANTED them!!!! you're comparison is dispicable to say that those living, breathing children are no more important than a bunch of cells that could fit into a petrie dish! maybe you don't like abortion, but THAT is between the woman and GOD, not you. IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. and if a woman is going to burn in hell for her sin THAT is between her and god, not her and the u.s. government. you stand and scream and shout and threaten when you're right to go out kill someone with a gun is infringed upon but the right of a viable american citizen to have control over her own body and her own life, oh! THAT'S immoral!!! don't talk to me about being a hypocrite when you all talk about killing other people like it was a sunday stroll in the park. ya'll have no more respect for human life than you accuse women who get abortions. if you truly, truly believe that killing a fetus is wrong because it is a human being, then you MUST be willing to accept that killing ANY human being is wrong and therefore owning a gun that you have every intention of using to kill someone with is wrong. but, of course you don't think that, do you? because your idea of rights is subjective to your own ideals and the rest of us are just crazy, liberals with no morals, right? you're disgusting.

Alessa:
This is not about children getting shot, our current laws provide protection from that.

• First let me preface my remarks by stating that I am not a 'gun guy'. I do not hunt. I do not target shoot. I do not collect guns. I do not belong to the NRA. I do not live in a 'rough' part of town. I own no guns, nor have I ever needed to have one.

  That being said, there are many people today, (myself included), who have a deep, (and a legitimate), distrust of the government (and it’s propaganda arm called the media).

  They believe that it is in the nature of governments to accumulate and to concentrate more and more power over people's lives. More power leads to more control.

  It has always been so. As Lord Acton so famously stated, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Meaning that those who are given power over others will use that power.

  Even if the government is not specifically intending to do so, it is the nature of large governments that this occurs.

  Now the government may espouse their desire to help the citizenry, but when individuals disagree with what the government determines is in their best interest, then those in power use coercion. Sometimes subtle sometimes not so subtle.

  This concentration of power and increasing coercion can be gradual (like slowly turning up the heat on a lobster in a pot), or sudden (like dropping him into boiling water).

  One need only be a casual student of history to see the process at work again and again and again.

  The Second Amendment is *our* guarantee that this loss of individual freedom and increasing control of our lives cannot be done with impunity.

  One need only look at what is occurring in Syria today or in Mexico, or any of a dozen other locations around the globe to see examples of what happens when the government controls the people and when the people are defenseless to resist.

  Now you may feel that this distrust is not warranted, or that it verges on paranoia. Many might agree with you. However many more, would not.

  The Founding Fathers believed fervently that ordinary citizens needed to be protected from an oppressive government. If they had not, then there would not have been a Second Amendment in the first instance.

  They were *very* distrustful of the concentration of power into the hands of the few. They set up safeguards against it by diluting that power into different branches and different levels. They tried to define precisely just who could do what, and what things they could not do. They added further protections in the Bill of Rights.

  The Founding Fathers, I am certain, would be aghast at the degree to which the government controls the lives of Americans today. Indeed, they went into rebellion over transgressions less onerous than what we today have allowed to be imposed upon us.

  Read the Declaration of Independence. Look at the reasons that are enumerated there. They speak of an oppressive government seeking to impose it's will upon the citizenry.

  The Second Amendment was NEVER about what type of arms citizens might own or about what the technological developments of the future might bring. It was not about hunting. It was not about home defense. It was not about target shooting. It was about the ability of citizens to oppose and resist the oppression of a tyrannical government.

  There are those Americans that honestly feel that this point of view is not applicable to the 21st century; that such concerns are the things of history. They label those like myself, as 'gun nuts' or as paranoid, even dangerous.

  If you are one that believes that this distrust is stuff out of a dusty history book, and has no relevance in the 21st century, then I urge you again to look around more carefully.

  Those of us that support the Second Amendment feel that it's relevance is as valid now as it was when it was first penned.

• When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

dave: Interesting post.

Do you not own the gun you carry, or do you not carry the gun you own? If you need to carry a gun to feel unafraid, what is your emotional condition when not carrying?

How is it that so many people are unafraid when not carrying a gun? Collective foolishness? If that were the case, I know many people that have been successfully foolish for more than 90 years.

How do you suppose Adam Lanza interpreted " It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force."?

Roadrunner and wetwilly,

The final U.S. vs. Miller decision by Justice McReynolds on 5-15-39 reversed the Cheif Justice Heartsill decision to which you are referring in support of a Gov't position registration of firearms of those in question heard in that case would be Consitutional. This was the last decision rendered on the case. In 1739, there were no AR-15's and AK-47's with 100 round drum clips. Your argument that any such ban of those types of weapons in present day based upon 1739 era court decisions-standards remains ill equiped to address today's argument. In light of present day politics, Justice Scalia (the most conservatice Justice within SCOTUS) has already stated on the record our second ammendment would have limitations in the future. It's not a fact of if it happens, Fellas. It's a matter of when..........

@ Argomad,

The Consitution has no specific referrence guaranteeing any specific weaponry to an organized miltia. It only states a right to bear Arms shall be guaranteed on ambigious terms. Rifles and pistols would be arms. I have no problem supporting the second ammendment for law abiding citizens on constitutional terms. But....you are not going to tell me the Constitution guarantees the right to bear certain arms with modern military enhancing capacity for killing large numbers of people quickly which weren't even invented-engineered before the Constituion was written. Legally, the basis of your argument will lose in a future SCOTUS case heard on this subject. You and your buddies are wrong. By the way, this isn't a liberal or conservative thing. That's Gun Lobby Coporate bullsh*t. Many Liberals own guns and Many Conservatives don't. Don't base your arguments on the relics of the past. Instead, look around you and see in the future.

Tonytellsthetruth 8.12

Have you read the SCOTUS decision and understood it? If you understood what you read you would know that Justice McReynolds decision referred only to the sawed off shotgun which was the central focus of these proceedings.

A portion recapping the unanimous ruling follows:

These types of firearms, accessories, and ammunition are precisely those most suitable for military and militia use. and have been so issued by the Federal government to U.S. armed forces. The Court held that the keeping and bearing of such firearms was explicitly protected by the Second Amendment.

As stated, the focus of these proceedings was the sawed off shotgun and whether is has any militia or military purpose. Absent of any view from the defense, they concluded it did not and was therefore subject to the NFA tax.

Are you another one of those that considers the constitution a relic of the past?

Some kid in the school would have found the gun first, or they would have when I was a kid. Bart Simpson had nothing compared to some of my classmates.

Some kid in the school would have found the gun first, or they would have when I was a kid. Bart Simpson had nothing compared to some of my classmates.

If someone is carrying it then the "kid in the school" would have to take it away from them before he could "find" it. I don't know how things are now but when I was a kid in school we did not knock teachers down and search them.

I bet when the principle was charging a loaded weapon she was thinking; if only I had a pistol. (was it a pistol or an assault rifle? who knows, in the video I saw, police pulled a rifle out of the trunk of the car, so what the?)

Is it fair for us to ask our school teachers to protect our children without any tools? This principle was very brave to charge into a person discharging a weapon, though rather pointless. We give a mechanic tools to work on our cars, but teachers we say protect our children with nothing. In fact we advertise that our schools are helplessly unarmed. Are we really this stupid?

Some on here voice concern about an armed teacher in school. A student could take it away, why? How? They don't know who carries it. So a teacher might not be a swat specialist, but the school would not need to wait an hour for a swat team to arrive, and with the element of surprise you don't need to be a good shot. Also armed schools would discourage these cowards from doing this. Some say that bullets would be flying everywhere, I think that is better than letting them concentrate on innocent children. Armed teachers could even be tried on a limited scale and see if these fears are valid? It is better than trying nothing, which is what the current gun ban proposals are. They will do absolutely nothing to really improve safety at schools. When was the last mass shooting at an airport with all the armed TSA personnel? And, I've seen some of them, not sure if they know which end to point at the target. Yet they have had a perfect track record. I think that an open mind here would go along way.

Dav1bg,

A teacher is trained to teach subjects like math, science, history, reading, etc.

Not guerilla warfare.

That's what they teach you in the military and in police training.