Maybe if they didn't have the most corrupt governments in the U.S, they would actually be able to take measures to prevent crimes in that city.

a week and a half after her death brought national attention to the city's staggering gun violence.

Keep focusing on the gun instead of the gangs and these deaths will never stop.

Hello folks, let's be truthful, this is all about gun control and Obama's gun ban agenda. Anybody using half their brain pan knows that while Hadiya's death is sad, this is all politically motivated.

"A Little Gun History

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

During World War II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!"

Here's Thomas Jefferson on the right to bear arms:

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

Trust

You have an extremely narrow view of history. You listed several countries' experience with gun control .... NONE OF WHICH HAD THE PROTECTION OF RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY OUR CONSTITUTION. Your examples have nothing to do with the conversation about gun ownership rights in the United States.

Thomas Jefferson's opinions about gun ownership are reflected in the Constitution, which he wrote. In the Bill of Rights the phrase WELL REGULATED was included in the 2nd Amendment. The current democratic conversation involves that regulation.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

This is not true. Germany did not establish gun control in 1938. In fact, they relaxed gun registration regulations that year which had been in place since 1928 during the Wiemar Republic, long before Hitler. Gun ownership in Germany was quiet common throughout the Third Reich - only Jews were prohibited from owning guns but 90% of the population had no such restrictions.

TrustVerify: And your comments are not politically motivated? Especially since most of what you say is the result of paranoid delusions.

almost 3 yrs ago , when BO won the nobel peace prize , i emailed the WH & suggested that he use part of the money to fund programs in his old neighborhood to help stop the violence . I sent the email because of a murder that had happened at the time he won the prize . A young male who was a gifted student was caught on cell phones as he was beated with sticks & kicked & punched by gang members , right outside school grounds. It made natl news as murders were rampant at the time , sometimes as many as 10+ shootings a nite. The right wing was criticizing Obama & i suggested that it would show he recognized we also need to look at ourselves & recognize the need for work on violence here as we try to tell other nations how to resolve conflict & stop violence & it would show other nations that we are not blind to our faults.

I got a form email from WH & yrs later , the murders continue & nothing has been done & Obama in word , stands with his old neighborhood , too bad it isnt mirrored by action.(unless you count the additional taxes levied against legal gun/ammo purchasers that was enacted a month ago. He now makes a speech about keeping assault weapons out of the hands of bad guys as he sends military aircraft & tanks to the muslim brotherhood in egypt while cutting our defense budget.

Keep focusing on the gun instead of the gangs and these deaths will never stop.

Keep dodging the undeniable fact that gun violence will not occur without the guns necessary to kill innocent people and we will never be able to prevent tragic murders like the poor girl in this article. This is clearly no time to be a coward and to be willfully delusional and pretend firearms are not a problem; it is time to act on rational, broad ranging gun control. Now, more than ever, it is the right thing to do.

I wonder if she'll also attend the funerals of all the children that have been killed due to her husband's drone strikes in other countries?

The slaughter will NEVER end, get used to it. Americans have said, in word, in deed and in faith, that GUNS ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO US THAN OUR CHILDREN. Period. Given this fact - and the fact our politicians' "solution" to school slaughters is an arms race - the ONLY way to keep your child safe is to keep 'em home. Kinda the same way the Fundies keep _their— families so VERY safe, but MASSIVE, secular homeschooling (non-violent protest @ its best!) just might get something done. While public schools are a the whim of CONServative and PROGESSive regimes alike, I have YET to see guns displayed (carried? maybe in Israeli Schule) openly @ =ANY= homeschool. I say fight back against the gun fanatics the WOPR way - just stop going where they want guns to be (would be interesting to see how many Fortune 500 companies allow OC @ work ;)...

UnderSerf

The slaughter will NEVER end, get used to it. Americans have said, in word, in deed and in faith, that GUNS ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO US THAN OUR CHILDREN. Period.

The black and Hispanic communities have said that ETHNIC UNITY AND SKIN COLOR ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO US THAN OUR CHILDREN. Period.

We will not name the killers and drug pushers in our neighborhoods. We will hide and cover for them because they are the same skin color, they talk the same language, they are our brothers. We will live in fear and hell, we will bury our young before their time, but we WILL NOT give them up for their crimes.

Pendleton's godfather Damon Stewart, wearing purple accents to honor her with her favorite color, said he thinks her passing will help raise awareness for those who have lost their lives to violence.

Awareness for those who have lost their lives? Considering the 532 homicides last year on the streets of Chicago and the more than 47 so far this year… unlikely.

Just one more photo op for the likes of Jessie, Rahm and Pflegher and the ghetto queen.

A person pulled the trigger. If not the gun, then they would stab or beat or drag. Our society has a problem, it is not the gun, it is parenting and lack of it. Why has the White House said nothing of the man who was trying to help a soldier and was shot by him? Chris Kyle was an American hero and gets no mention. Yes, this is a sad story and one we should never hear, my heart and prayers go out to the family, but it is being used for political reasons. Gun laws will not stop this from happening. There has been a loss of morals and accountibilty in our country that extends from big business, government, economic collapse, our school systems, and down to the children who commit these crimes of violence. America, the people, need to look hard in the mirror and adjust that moral compass for ourselves and the future of our country.

God bless the departed soul and grant fortitude to the grieved family.

"the only way to keep your kids safe is to keep them at home"

Serf....you really ARE an idiot, like ALL Democrats....

That girl was right in front of her house when she got killed, you stupid excuse for humanity.
Get a damn education and learn how to read and investigate for yourself instead of listening to the liberal media machine, sucking Obama off on your knees 10 times a day, or listening to the liberals in Congress who are destroying everything that made America great.

This is Sailcat-2064101 opinion about the second amendment after proving facts about what the Forefather intent for the 2nd was"

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/31/16791677-texas-assistant-da-shot-to-death-at-least-one-gunman-sought?threadId=3657131&commentId=73861989#c73861989

#1.87

We are only one little Supreme Court decision away from a complete reinterpretation of the Second Amendment, little guy. Stay tuned!

So as you see, he is one of the liberals that like to try to reinterpret the Constitution to their way of thinking verses the true intent of the Constitution.

Ignore him..........

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to allow the people the ability to fight by against a tyrannical government.

A. The Federalist Papers, No. 28: Alexander Hamilton expressed that when a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise their original right of self-defense — to fight the government.[Halbrook, p. 67]

B. The Federalist Papers, No. 29: Alexander Hamilton explained that an armed citizenry was the best and only real defense against a standing army becoming large and oppressive. [Halbrook, p. 67]

C. The Federalist Papers, No. 46: James Madison contended that ultimate authority resides in the people, and that if the federal government got too powerful and overstepped its authority, then the people would develop plans of resistance and resort to arms. [Halbrook, p. 67]

D. There was no National Guard, and the Founders opposed anything but a very small national military. The phrase “well-regulated” means well-trained and disciplined — not “regulated” as we understand that term in the modern sense of bureaucratic regulation. [This meaning still can be found in the unabridged Oxford English Dictionary, 2d ed. 1989, Vol 13, p. 524, and Vol 20. p. 138.]

E. The Federalists promised that state governments and citizen militias would exist to make sure the federal military never became large or oppressive. To say that the National Guard replaces the notion of the militia runs contrary to what the Founders said and wrote.

F. The Third Amendment: Expressly restrains the federal government from building a standing army and infiltrating it among the people ...and at the people’s expense ... in times of peace. The Third Amendment runs against the idea of a permanent standing army or federalized National Guard in principle, if not by its words.

*********

CHALLENGE TO AMERICANS

As you read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights:

• (1) Look at the enumerated powers of the federal government;
• (2) Look at the express limitations on federal power as set forth in the Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments;
• (3) Ask yourself, where does the federal government get any power at all to regulate firearms?
• (4) Ask yourself, why don’t the high school and college textbooks devote any time to the history, philosophical basis and practical meaning of the Second Amendment?

And then consider that law students and future lawyers likewise have received precious little education about the Second Amendment.

Realize, too, that the judges know just about as little. Then imagine how little the average American knows — based on the average public school coverage of the Constitution.

The protection of our sacred right of self-defense against both petty criminals and oppressive government — the right of civilians to keep and bear arms — is in your hands.

http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/six-about-2nd.htm

So as you see, he is one of the liberals that like to try to reinterpret the Constitution to their way of thinking

Since you have no idea what our forefathers wanted, your insane ravings are pointless and meaningless. Furthermore, the current interpretation of the Second Amendment was made in the 1970s in the Supreme Court case The District of Columbia v. Heller. the decision was controversial then and it is a disaster now. We are indeed one little Supreme Court decision away from rational gun control. Read 'em and weep.

You make no sense again Sailcat-2064101 as I provided quotes from the forefathers what they wanted, I'll list them again since you like to skip reading:

A. The Federalist Papers, No. 28: Alexander Hamilton expressed that when a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise their original right of self-defense — to fight the government.[Halbrook, p. 67]

B. The Federalist Papers, No. 29: Alexander Hamilton explained that an armed citizenry was the best and only real defense against a standing army becoming large and oppressive. [Halbrook, p. 67]

C. The Federalist Papers, No. 46: James Madison contended that ultimate authority resides in the people, and that if the federal government got too powerful and overstepped its authority, then the people would develop plans of resistance and resort to arms. [Halbrook, p. 67]

And how much violence could be brought by these gangs if the only weapons they could get their hands on were the baseball bats in their garage, maybe a knife, maybe a rock....! Semiautomatic handguns with 30 bullets in a clip... much more efficient. Get the guns off the streets! Go after anyone who loses a gun and doesn't report and incarcerate anyone who buys a gun and hands it off to criminals! Do away with large capacity clips. Other countries have criminals and gangs and turf battles and drugs - but they don't have 5 guns for every person in the country!

Well said David!

It's the War on Drugs that leads to gang violence that in turn leads to senseless deaths like these.

Compassion is useless here. An effective fix would be to legalize all narcotics and end the war on drugs. This goes in conjunction with proper non-propagandized education about specific drugs.

AB- Compassion is never useless. Perhaps only to those people who try not to feel it, as you blatantly showed in your previous posts on this thread.

Mandatory monthly drug testing for anyone receiving Welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing, any government subsidies, etc.

It isn't the middle class and upper class neighborhoods where these drug wars, and gang turf wars are occurring is it?

If drugs were legalized are you going to pay for all the Health and social issues that go along with drug use?

David.............I'm as about as far right as one can go. We already pay for ALL of the social and health issues right now. You pay for it in.....your income tax, your state income tax, your state retail tax, your home owners insurance, your health insurance and your car insurance.

It would be FAR....FAR Cheaper to furnish those who want it, all the narcotics they want.

I absolutely agree that everyone nationwide should have to be subject to random drug testing to receive benefits. As to your last question-we are already paying dearly for the health and social issues that go along with drug use. If some drugs were legalized I believe some would stop or reduce use, many would be using clean needles and not be sharing spreading disease if there were ready available to purchase or free. The less stigma against use the less desirable, less prone to criminal activity surrounding in personal behavior, in fighting, shooting killing others for it, reducing the cartels influence and rampant criminal activity, reducing the number of illegals fleeing to this country to get away from drug crime in Mexico and the criminals coming in from mexico smuggling, dealing etc.. Something to think about anyway!!!!!

Lib in Oklahoma, how much good have the gun laws in Chicago done? None. There are guns everywhere in America, and every time gun control is mentioned, gun sales shoot through the roof. There is no way the government will ever be able to track those guns. So this idea of "gun control" is absurd, and will only result in honest citizens losing their second amendment rights.

Sorry for the loss of this young girl and condolences to family.

I'd like to know why Michelle Obama felt the need to attend this funeral and not that of all the Newton school victims ? that stuck me as very odd that she did not attend that funeral and she picks and chooses who and where she goes attend all or none !

Lib - according to wikipedia: "The city of Chicago requires registration of firearms. Residents must complete a firearm safety course, pass a background check including fingerprinting, and pay a $100 permit fee which is renewed every three years. Registration of any handgun assumes an additional one time fee of $15."

I'm sure that the gang members passed their background checks and paid the permit fees... also they no doubt recognized that they were not allowed to possess a gun that Chicago has banned the possession of assault weapons, and that the magazines for their weapons can't hold more than 10 or 12 rounds of ammunition. Yup, all those restrictions definitely should have saved this little girl's life. In fact, probably these were out of state gang members, probably from Texas where gun laws are more lenient. That explains how a city run by Obama's good friend Rahm Emanuel isn't the safest, most pure place on the planet where no one cares about the second amendment and violence is a thing of the past.

Oh Elizabeth, Nothing good that the Obama's do will ever please you. If she didn't go you would have had something to say. You forgot to mention that the President didn't go. What is your problem? Just give condolences to the family that has lost a child and stop complaining about who went where and why.

So where is the Westboro Baptist Church protesting. Are they racist or there are no homosexuals living in Chicago. Maybe they are afraid of Obama. Or maybe they don't want to be shot at by the gangbangers. They only picket with signs not guns. They were going to picket Sandy Hook, no homos there, why not here?

And how much violence could be brought by these gangs if the only weapons they could get their hands on were the baseball bats in their garage, maybe a knife, maybe a rock....! Semiautomatic handguns with 30 bullets in a clip... much more efficient. Get the guns off the streets!

Grow up and live in the real world instead of your fantasy one.

The guns are on the street and in the homes. Deal with the gangs, enforce the laws that are on the books. It's a people problem. These communities have held a "don't tell" policy that has fostered a safety zone for these killers and turned these places into the slums and killing fields they are today.

This girl would not be dead if they had not laid down their civic responsibilities two generations ago and wallowed in the "homie" pride of "never tell." They are the only wall between the life and death of their children.

Grow up and live in the real world instead of your fantasy one.

The guns are on the street and in the homes. Deal with the gangs, enforce the laws that are on the books. It's a people problem.

No, gun violence is a gun problem. The laws that are on the books are inadequate to meet the needs of society, as readily evidenced by the fact that most of the guns used to commit crimes in Chicago come from out of state, where gun laws are far more permissive.

It's not a fantasy - every other industrialized country in the world has regulated guns appropriately and has gun violence rates that are a tiny fraction of ours. Instead of trying to change human nature, change the environment that allows them to do so much harm.

It's not that complicated but it couldn't be more obvious.

That's right, gun violence is down, while violent crimes are up. Take a step back and look at the whole picture, and you realized that the "civilized and industrialized" world you dream of over there in Europe is a fantasy. Why do you think so many people are still trying to get in this country if the rest of the world "has it figured out"?

Reading tons of posts on here, and no one has asked why the gangs exist and what the hell are they fighting over and why. None of these guns being used are obtained legally. None of these gang members have a clean record so they could never pass a background check. This isn't Africa or some 3rd world country where the black market runs unchecked. Who owns the property in these communities???? It isn't the people that live there. Chicago is top 3 of the biggest corrupt places in this country. Crime is a business in this country. The war on drugs can't be fought if the people responsible for allowing drugs in the country are the same ones deciding who goes to jail for it and who doesn't!

That's right, gun violence is down, while violent crimes are up.

You have that backwards, actually. Gun violence since 2000 is basically flat.

John Doe-2241225

That's right, gun violence is down, while violent crimes are up. Take a step back and look at the whole picture, and you realized that the "civilized and industrialized" world you dream of over there in Europe is a fantasy. Why do you think so many people are still trying to get in this country if the rest of the world "has it figured out"?

Actually, I believe that I read that there is a lot of violent crime in England, though there aren't many murders, and they haven't many guns.

there aren't ANY assault rifles used in killings. 'assaulty looking' maybe

No such thing as an assault rifle as a rifle is an intimate object an assault is an action acted upon...that simple.

As for handguns do you really really believe the agenda stops when they get their way once? For a quick comparison look at the non existent debt "ceiling".... nuff said.

David Noah

The root cause isn't guns its gang activities, illegal drugs, mental instability, etc.

Just to be clear, the root cause is always the PEOPLE who have the guns. One of the most ridiculous statements of the Second Amendment discussion in this country is when gun advocates say that gun control advocates are "blaming the gun". No one blames an inanimate object like a gun for one of our society's very serious problems.

There will always be too many guns in the hands of the wrong people as long as we lack a universal, effective background check for the transfer of ownership of all guns. That is not "blaming guns". That is recognition that some people should be denied access to guns.

As long as the NRA and other opponents of reasonable laws regarding POEPLE's responsibility for guns block universal background check requirements they share significant blame when people who should not have guns kill American citizens.

as long as we lack a universal, effective background check for the transfer of ownership of all guns.

Those laws already exist, so if laws rules and regulations work .... why would you need MORE?

as for the rest, Does the name DONNER mean anything to you?.... He passed your regulations.

I'm just curious...why is owning an assault rifle so important to you?

Tramp

In fact we do not have laws that require a background check for every transfer of gun ownership. Nearly half of all gun sales take place without a background check.

The NRA has also used the politicians it has in its pocket to block funding for the ATF and has blocked confirmation of the head of the ATF for the past eight years. It's one thing to have laws, but if the enforcement agencies are undermanned and underfunded the laws are ineffective.

jw101: you are absolutely correct, it was caused by the ability of anyone, anywhere to be able to obtain and use a weapon designed to KILL.

Would this young person be alive if guns were not so readily available?

Tell us how that universal background check would work when the laws we already have don't work?

Maybe its not a problem of having enough laws maybe its the laws we already have are ineffective because they are not being enforced?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57564869/mental-health-reporting-gaps-cloud-background-checks/

Mental health reporting gaps cloud background checks

Under federal law, anyone who has been committed to a mental institution or deemed mentally unstable by a judge are prohibited for life from purchasing a gun.

For the past 15 years, Pennsylvania did collect the names of its seriously mentally ill residents, but until this month, it never sent that information to NICS.

Through 2011, Pennsylvania was the most populous of 23 states that had submitted fewer than 100 disqualifying mental health records to NICS, and it was among the 17 states to submit fewer than 10 such records, according to the report, "Fatal Gaps," by http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/maig_mimeo_revb.pdf">Mayors Against Illegal Guns. (MAIG).

When MAIG updated its data this month, it found that two states previously inactive, Delaware and Idaho, had begun submitting mental health records.

By submitting 18,699 records last year, MAIG reported, Delaware has become the second most compliant state on a per capita basis behind Virginia, which sprang into action only after the 2007 Virginia Tech University massacre.

In December 2005, just 16 months before his killing spree at Virginia Tech, gunman Seung-Hui Cho underwent a psychiatric evaluation. A judge deemed Cho a danger to himself and ordered him to get treatment, which never did.

Virginia had not sent Cho's name to NICS, so when he went to purchase a Glock 9mm and a Walther P22, both semi-automatic pistols, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/17/cbsnews_investigates/main2695059.shtml">he twice passed a background check. On April 16, 2007, Cho shot 49 people - killing 32 and wounding 17 -- before shooting himself.

Absolutely correct, dirp. The more guns we have in this country the easier it is for criminals, mentally ill and others who should not have guns to have guns. And the NRA is major reason that there are so many guns because they drive the fear level with their 24/7 fear campaign.

David Noah

A universal background check will work if any "law abiding citizen" who sells a gun without a background check loses his Second Amendment right to own a gun. Almost all guns in this country are initially purchases legally, yet millions of guns end up in the hands of criminals and juvenile gang members who should never have a gun. That happens because our system of background checks and other gun laws are ineffective.

I'm guessing you didn't read the article I posted. Cho bought his guns illegally.

Don97524-

It surely wasn't the NRA that influenced me to purchase my new firearm last month. Credit yourself (and others like you) for that.

tiger

The girl was from Chicago. The girl performed at the Presidential inauguration. The girl is a symbol for the gun problem in the United States.

The racist stuff is your problem. And yes, when you accuse someone else of actions based only on race, you are a racist. Deal with it.

don97524 - Maybe we should have a "universal background check" for liberals like you . . . to check their IQ before allowing them to vote. l

The NRA is not killing anyone. NRA members are not killing anyone. Gangs like the bloods, cripts, ms13 etc. are. Yet we cannot point the finger at them because we would be called racist.

tiger

Your racist comments reveal a level of ignorance and hatred that I do not understand. You are unworthy of participation in an adult conversation.

DT

Without the NRA's opposition to reasonable gun laws the gang members would have far fewer guns to commit murders. Congratulations. You people have done a wonderful job of ensuring that people who should not have guns have guns.

who cares if people cant drive.just take away everyones airbag.dont pay attention to the problems,just chip away at the protections.bass akwards acirema.

FYI....................... #1) Handguns 67% of the homicides #3) Tie Shotguns and ALL RIFLES COMBINED each at 4%. OH....you ask what is #2 ???? KNIVES 13%. Knives kill 5 to 6 times as many people as all the AR-15's and AK-47's as there are in the US. Source for the stats came from MSNBC.

But hey......focus on the real problem. lol

Big Daddy

You would have a difficult time finding anyone who believes that assault weapons cause the majority of gun deaths in this country. But only a willfully ignorant gun rights guy would believe that assault-type weapons do not make MASS MURDER easier. Law abiding citizens do not need assault weapons, but mass murders can murder a bigger mass with an assault weapon. Get it?

We have more than one type of gun problem in this country. Effective universal background checks will help keep guns away from people who should not have guns. Reducing the number of assault type weapons and large capacity magazines will reduce the number of people a mass murder can kill before he is stopped.

No single solution is going to do more than reduce the number of gun deaths. No solution is perfect. Doing nothing is dumb.

StackDat

First of all what is YOUR definision of an Assault rifle. Any weapon is a way to assault someone. I call them defense weapons. There are so many uses for a 30 round magazine. I don't have to reload 4 times when the LAPD is firing into MY truck. I have the fire power to shoot back.

Don-97524

The only people that I have found that really need back ground checks are liberals. Most, including the last 6 mass shootings, have been by Liberals. All law abiding citizens I know don't kill just for the hell of it.

flex

The only way that we will have background checks for all liberals is to require background checks for ALL gun purchases. Let's do it!

flex

Even though I am not a gun owner there are many reasons for which I would DEFEND YOUR RIGHT TO OWN A GUN. But I will never fight for your right to have the firepower to make your shootout with the police more efficient. People like you are a good reason to legislate gun responsibility in this country.

I'm just curious...why is owning an assault rifle so important to you?

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

How about, it's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

Angela

Way to participate like a child in an adult conversation.

Without the NRA's opposition to reasonable gun laws the gang members would have far fewer guns to commit murders.

Let's just ignore the real problem here, which is that there is a gang of killers roaming the streets. Take away their guns and they will find another way to kill. The key point here is that they are a gang of killers.

But let's kid ourselves into thinking that if guns disappear that all crime will also.

"child like"?

No honest. Why I own my guns are NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. Nor do I have to explain why I want them. It's my RIGHT under the Constitutional Amendments to own them.

End of story.

It really is that simple. Sorry you can't understand that easy explanation, 'child like' or otherwise.

don97524

Angela

Way to participate like a child in an adult conversation.

She is correct that it is none of your business why someone would want an assault rifle. It's your privilege to ask the question, but it's her privilege not to answer. YOUR response is the childish one.

How about, it's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment that guarantees anonymity associated with the right to bear arms. Indeed, registration would be a very good idea.

So, yes, it is our business to ask. You may choose not to answer, but not on the grounds of any constitutionally protected privacy, and apparently not with common courtesy either.

WOW! this is a TACKY comment! Why it hasn't been deleted or collapsed is beyond me! It is a total violation of CoH #1 plus has no value.

Bob johnson-1135406

how many assault vibrators does angela own? since it is my right to ask

#4.29 - Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:09 AM CSTh
Reported and moving on.....

StackDat...

I don't expect to hear from you, but let me know when you get an answer to your question.

Don and StackDat, how about the 4th Amendment? Protection from unlawful searches and seizures. If you own a weapon you want as few people to know about it as possible. That's how you keep it out of the minds of criminals, and subsequently out of the hands of those who would seek to misappropriate it. Personally, I seek to own a semi-auto rifle (not an AR as it's so incorrectly named) for self and home defense as well as recreation or any other legal use i can find for it. Every guns serves a purpose. Some multiple purposes. To say that guns only serve to harm others is such a farce it's almost laughable if it weren't affecting our freedoms to own firearms we deem necessary for our own protection and recreation. Who are you or anyone else to dictate terms of necessity. That'd be just like if the Gov't tried to regulate how you were allowed to modify your vehicle. But that would never happen... Oh, wait... Some states, due to Gov't influence, are already attempting this. Another point for the slippery slope argument. Hopefully all you anti-gun folks will see the folly of your ways before our Constitution and our Country become empty husks of their former glorious selves.

I own an AR-15 because I was properly trained to care for and shoot one (actually an M-16) as an infantryman in the Army, and I am confident in my ability to employ it accurately, effectively, and safely.

I own an AR-15 because contrary to popular belief, they are an excellent weapon to use for hunting. It is my preferred rifle to dispatch feral hogs, coyotes, foxes, raccoons and other predators on our property.

I own an AR-15 (with several 30-round magazines) because I enjoy competition shooting and the AR-15 is an outstanding weapon to use in carbine and three-gun competitions. If you enjoy shooting and you've never fired one, I recommend it. They are quite fun to shoot.

I own an AR-15 because it is MY responsibility to protect my family and my property. I cannot, in good conscience, abdicate this responsibility in the hope that local law enforcement will be there when I need them. I own several firearms (all properly secured), each designed with specific uses. My AR-15 is an important part of this collection.

I own an AR-15 because it is my right to do so.

I own an AR-15 because they are a pretty good investment these days!

I own an AR-15 because I love my country, but fear my government. And I can no longer discount the possibility that some day, someone might actually come to my door to confiscate my firearms and property.

Theo,

... Thank You!!!!!! Some one finally gets it.

I don't do illegal drugs therefore I'm not driving anything. WE don't own the illegal drug problem its the people that do illegal drugs that own the problem. It is illegal drug users that have the blood on their hands just like its not law abiding citizens that are responsible for gun violence its criminals.

Yes and no. It's true that hardened criminals will get guns regardless. However boys like the shooters at Columbine and Newtown and the Portland Mall for example, wouldn't have a clue how to obtain an assault rifle if it was illegal to do so. And no, they would not have been able to kill as many people so easily with a baseball bat or knife or even a handgun with a 10 shot magazine. Limited to those things they might not have even tried.

The last assault weapon ban may very well have stopped some mass shootings. We know for sure it didn't destroy the Constitution as some claim the next one will.

I do hunt every year and I do own guns so don't try and dismiss me with that.

So why not legalize drugs as they have in many European countries? At least legalize marijuana--which sees to be on its way. If it not illegal we take the thugs out of the equation.

soul, I wonder why a lot of those countries like Amsterdam are recinding those legalizations?

souls2feet..... - Agreed.

I'll dismiss you on that any time I want, because you are wrong. Feinstein's last assault ban did zero, nada, ziltch on killings.Why, because killings by what liberals claim are "assault" weapons kill and infinitesimal number of people in this country but are played up to be the main cause of all deaths, and if "outlawed" will solve the problem. The problem is non-enforcement of current laws, allowing felons to pour across our borders by the millions, suing states that try to enforce the enacted laws in place, and allowing idiots like Feinstein to draft what "she" considers an assault weapon is. 187 guns on her list. 187. Off the top of your head, name me 5 you can come up with. You see, it isn't about "assault" weapons, it's about your rights as a citizen to own a gun. You know it, I know it, the whole nation knows it. All other attempts at explaining it away is pure bs.

Jon, which countries? There will always be people that abuse substances where they are legal or illegal.

Simply put, BS. Stop trying to blame America for Mexico's problem. Blame your politicans for not stomping down on border and immigration laws and working hand in hand with the Mexican government to perpetuate their corruption and drug problems. Most Americans have no blame at all for this situation and your being ridiculous!!!!

Drugs are a medical problem, not a legal problem, and cannot be solved with any amount of legislation and enforcement. It's a waste of time and money. If we treated the medical problem instead of outlawing it, we could mitigate the gun violence associated with the illegal drug trade.

But we would still have rampant gun violence. The problem with gun violence is a readily accessible supply of guns.

tim, you don't kill a weed by pulling out the broad leaf. You go to the root. Every fuggin liberal in this land does the same chit every time something happens in this country and scream, PULL THE LEAFS!!! PULL THE LEAFS!!! Gun violence is caused in this country by the mentally ill and thug felons. Go to the root or all you'll have is deaths by some other means.

theo , the need for a secure border is an issue far surpassing the drug/illegal alien issue , it is a natl security issue. A test tube vial can contain viral/bacterial agent capable of killing millions. Soon , terrorists will try to exploit this weakness.

john jones - "Feinstein's last assault ban did zero, nada, ziltch on killings. last assault ban did zero, nada, ziltch on killings."

Actually you can't say that with any certainty anymore than someone can claim for sure that it did - difficulty of proving a negative you know. Additionally the NRA via the politicians they own prevented funding for any monitoring of the last ban so we just don't know. But I can surmise that one or more people bent on mayhem but then unable to obtain their weapon of choice may have become discouraged or may have used a less effective gun and killed fewer people. That's just as likely as your contention that the ban did zero, nada, etc.

No one is naive enough to think an assault weapon ban will solve ALL the problems but if it prevents one Newtown I'm ready to give up large capacity magazines. I can protect myself adequately with my 10 shot .45.

My logic strikes you as pure bs and your logic strikes me as pure bs.

skrewedworld - You are right most Americans have no blame for this problem, but some Americans have all the blame. It's really very simple, if we ain't buyin' they're not smugglin'.

If we legalize pot, that cuts off half the cartel's profit and incentive and since pot prohibition is a total failure why not. It's demonstrably less harmful than high fructose corn syrup.

Gun violence is caused in this country by the mentally ill and thug felons. Go to the root or all you'll have is deaths by some other means.

Violence itself may often be caused by the mentally ill and 'thug felons', but gun violence is a particularly lethal type of violence which is caused by the open availability of guns. We cannot solve the problem of overall violence but we can mitigate its most lethal effects by removing the guns.

The problem we are attempting to solve is not all violence. We are attempting to solve gun violence.

Theo... It doesn't matter how accurate your gun is if the shooter is ineffective. Just because someone couldn't obtain their "weapon of choice" doesn't mean they would be any more or less deadly when charged with finding alternative means to wreak havoc. We'll use semi-automatic rifles as an example... So, if these people didn't have access to such rifles, are we to believe that they would've been any less effective in taking lives if all they had were a couple pistols and a shotgun? It's open to speculation, but I tend to believe that someone who is Hell bent on doing others harm will do so to the best of their ability no matter what deadly medium they choose. I, for one, am glad that people aren't aware of how easily they could just construct a bomb to exact the same or greater amounts of carnage without actually having to stick around the crime scene. "ARs," as they're so incorrectly named, are merely scapegoats in the political and social war on firearms. Does anyone REALLY think that once politicians see these firearms taken from those who would surrender them (law abiding citizens) that they wouldn't continue incrementally chipping away at the 2nd Amendment until there was nothing left? Whether this is the case or not, I don't believe that our Gov't has proven itself to be trustworthy enough to be allowed to go through with such undertakings... Even if they aren't talking about bans (perse) at the moment. Research the 1946 Battle of Athens, TN and see the corresponding screen play then tell me we shouldn't hold a high level of scrutiny over our Government while standing firmly by our Constitutional Rights; this includes, but is not limited to our Right to keep and bear arms. Once they do away with that one, the rest will be easy pickins.

angel-3242369

Not to mention many innocent bystanders being shot by Police as in NYC and LA.

Who knows what she could have become. But it would have been good! She had drive & determination.

I'm a liberal & I don't buy it, just as many other liberals are starting to see that Obama was a very wrong, detrimental choice & is helping to destroy America along with corporate America, Wall St., and other ambitious politicians that want to leave "their mark" on history in the most negative, destructive way. He and his wife are both elitist who don't care abt. the average american, they only care abt. preserving their family and pretty much "to hell" with the rest of us

I cannot recall when we last had a president that was not detrimental to this country.

That may be true to an extent. However, Obama has by far been the most detrimental!!!!!

Good for you Renee!!! I hope more liberals wake up and realize what's really going on!!!!

You are an ignorant hillbilly, and most likely a moron.

The First Lady grew up on the Southside. A petition was placed on the White House website, asking her to attend the funeral. She decided to honor the petition. The Obama's house is but a mile from this neighborhood.

The Tramp part I understand, but you do not seem bright enough to ride anything with size or power. Maybe you really do ride a scooter.

That may be true to an extent. However, Obama has by far been the most detrimental!!!!!

That's ridiculous. Obviously you're completely unaware of all the damage his immediate predecessor did or you would never make such an idiotic comment.

She shouldn't be there in respect for that family, not because of her bs safety.

She went to the funeral to show respect for the girl and her family. The girl just performed at the presidents inauguration. I am sure that she probably met the girl and her family and is heartbroken by this. Why are you so hateful? MAH is right. The only reason that she should not have been there is for her safety.

That may be her reasoning HUH? BUT, her being there over shadows the fact that this beautiful young girl was murdered, and this should be about celebrating HER life and mourning HER death.

Do you think that, maybe, just maybe, the family was contacted before the funeral and asked if Mrs. Obama could attend?

A funeral is, generally, not a public event, but a private ceremony for the family and friends of the person who died. Politicians and other public figures attend them by invitation, not by "just showing up."

Because she is the "FLOTUS", Michelle Obama's attendance creates a big security and logistics situation for the funeral. The family is inviting her, no doubt, because they do not want the death of this beautiful young lady to be just another statistic, lost in the numbers.

I have been to many funerals. The people who come do so to support the family and friends of the person who died. Never is that more needed than when a young person dies. I don't know if Mrs. Obama personally met or spoke with the young lady, but I'm sure the family appreciates her support.

The Chicago black community initially wanted the President to attend for some respect reason. They caved with Michelle. I am sorry. She should not be attending gang related funerals with the killer still at large

She is surrounded by Secret Service Agents that carry the very weapons that she and Barry proclaim you do not have a right to protect your family with. She in no way is in any danger. Somehow her life is more important than yours, your families or mine??? Bull @!$%#.

When or if they ever find the perp. I hope he is a 17 year old black male. The exact same age as that Crayon Martin from Florida. I wonder if 0bammy will have remarks on that?

And he maybe wearing a hoodie, and look like The Presidents son if he had one. I feel sorry for the the victims family, but I guarantee the outrage and the rallies won't be as prominent as what we saw regarding Zimmerman.

HUH

"The girl just performed at the presidents inauguration. I am sure that she probably met the girl and her family and is heartbroken by this."

The Girl was a member of a high school marching band. There is not much of a chance she even got close to the president and certainly didn't talk to him, and is is also highly doubtful that her any of her family went with her unless they were chaperone's.

Simply put the last lady is an attention whore trying to gain political capital. At least she's not telling us how to eat while she's bursting at the seams.

I'm Sure that she's dead now and to her family and friends I extend my heart felt condolences.

I'm also sure that Teenagers see everything and they are very watchful. As adults we call that being Nosy.

I'm sure that she probably saw alittle to much. Read something she wasn't supposed to see. She probably overheard something that No One was supposed to hear.

I'm sure that she was probably being watched.

I'm sure that she was possibly feared in the fact that when teens drink they like to talk and i'm absolutely sure that her killer will never be found.

There I said it.

Have a great day while you think about that....

How silly. No US first lady has ever done that of course. This girl was part of the recent inauguration in case you missed that.

Well the jet was just sitting there and she WAS bored so......off we go again on another taxpayer paid vacation...er i mean...another show of support for the "little people" from their Queen..

David Noah - I was just about to post a similar thought - 500 last year in Chicago - I don't even think the mayor went to one funeral. I am just outraged that this young lady who died so senselessy (as did the other 500) got the shout out because she sang at the inaguration - what about those other kids who took care of little brothers and sisters, who could have had a marvelous future. I PRAY for America and a redirection of our priorities. So far, the criminals (and we know who they ALL are) are winning.

Theo, I'd bet you my house if that had been an asian, white or hispanic she would have not even acknowledged it. Quit with the bs bud.

David Noah,

Did YOU attend the 500 funerals in Chicago??? Lead by example if you want to institute change.

Did you Joanna?

Oh she'd love to go to Mexico again, on vacay at millions of dollars of expense to the taxpayer. She's not against wasteful spending. I heard they actually served their guests champagne, caviar, and other expensive yummies at their private inagural party at the white house after attending 2 inaugural functions prior. I think partying is a specialty and attending this funeral is a photo op and for attention more than the fact that the girl was at the inaguration. This is the 1st real attention the Obamas' have paid to the extreme gang violence and death toll in Chicago since entering the office!!!!

A 15 years old
girl just died from gun violence, for the haters who are criticizing the first
lady, have no heart, her being there
shows that her and the president does care, and some of you are being racist,
some just hating because they will never appear on yours. What happened? Where
is the love we suppose to share toward each other? President Obama appeared in
20 white children funeral. For some of
you it was all right! What do you have to say about that? Listen stop feeling sorry with pettiness,
there are more things is life you need care about, then criticizing the first
lady. You go my first lady Michelle I
love you, the president, and your beautiful children. May God continue to protect and bless you.

Nope only those who are uninvolved bystanders

Afternoon Scooter and I agree with your point.

Nope only those who are uninvolved bystanders

Crass, callous, classless, ignorant.... The world is not divided into just good and evil, you know. People with drug problems are not simply weak-minded and evil, undeserving of sympathy or help. That attitude has a lot to do with causing the drug problems we have today.

In fact, evil is probably better defined by the extent to which people are too selfish to care about anyone but themselves. Evil is measured on the scale of selfishness.

Which would seem likely to put you in the running.

Show a little class.

GM Tramp. I finally figured out how to get back on. I think Tim is right. Your classless. LOL Show a little class, but not to much.

Never let a good trajedy go to waste . . .

Yeah, you can thank Rahm Emmanuel for those words, the now Mayor of Chicago-these people are ruthless!!

I rest my case....

Stop with that
racist remarks, everything is not about white people, some of you are petty it
makes me sake in my stomach. intead for you to make stupid remarks take a good look at what's going on in this world. God did not create the world for white people only. Some of you think you own this world. get over it and move on, better yet get a life. we as people not white nor black is going to live forever.

you mean Jesse and AL two professional black racists don't make everything about race?

Tell the Obama's to stop the photo op and agenda propaganda at every conceivable chance, and you may get some folks on board with you.

Jon Jones: That is no excuse. We must do the right thing in this time of unexcusable loss of precious life. Fight the other battles next week.

Yes, we should all stop speaking out against the leftist agenda and political corruption while sugar coating or even ignoring the real issues until this girl is laid to rest... Excuse the sarcasm. The problem with that ideology is that these instances will never end. This is a tragedy, but it should not silence those who are voices of reason and clarity in an otherwise bleak and ever more morally bankrupt society. The Obamas are one big walking distraction in the face of the real problems America has been charged with. I hope more and more Lefties are beginning to see the folly in their re-electing of the Divider-in-Chief.

How many billions did the BUSH family spend to run their households? Afterall, George H.W. was president and George W. This country supported that entire family for decades, and is still supporting them. And you whine about the Obamas?? The president IS the president afterall. Maybe you should run in 2016, and then I can whine about how much you are costing me....probably costing me millions right now. I know you owe me some money for the excedrin I now have to buy, in order to offset the headache and the pain in the a$$ you are causing me.

I bet that be one big pain too Johnnia. Unless you are one of the 1%, I fail to see how it is costing you $millions. Let's hear that you pay $millions in taxes. Somehow I fail to believe that.

Please get over your self and right quickly Johnnia!!!!!! BUSH IS GONE, OUT OF OFFICE, AS IN BYE BYE YOU KNOW?????? On the other hand the Obamas' are on year FIVE of wasteful spending, getting nothing done and complete and total frivolity with the nickels, dimes, pennies and hundreds, thousands, millions, billions etc... of the tax paying public!!!! And by the way Johnnia, girl, nobody gives a crap bout your headache but I'd agree you are a pain in the ass!!!

Johngirl has to resort to name-calling and profanity. Typical ghetto thug.

1.4 billion a year to run the Obama household including vacations, AF1, entourage, etc..

Well, since the government doesn't publish anything about this, obviously you made that up, or copied it from the clowns in the Right Wing media.

This administration spends less than the previous one, at least in part because the President takes far fewer vacations. In addition, overall government spending has remained basically flat and as a result the annual deficit has declined steadily since 2009, so comments like this are just partisan B.S.:

On the other hand the Obamas' are on year FIVE of wasteful spending, getting nothing done ...

How many billions did the BUSH family spend to run their households? Afterall, George H.W. was president and George W. This country supported that entire family for decades, and is still supporting them. And you whine about the Obamas?? The president IS the president afterall. Maybe you should run in 2016, and then I can whine about how much you are costing me....probably costing me millions right now. I know you owe me some money for the excedrin I now have to buy, in order to offset the headache and the pain in the a$$ you are causing me.

Johnnia Foster you gotta remember you are talking to people that suffer with stage 5 dementia and can't comprehend Bush took more vacation days than Obama and Clinton combined that's including the 8 months before 9/11. They can see a man sitting next to Clint Eastwood. They live in their own little bubble. No use wasting time on....well......waste.

Clinton took his vacations in the White House with Monica so he saved us money.