Obama Is 'Elitist Hypocrite'
The Liberals stand on the graves of those children to spread there message of hate and deceit. Shameful !

Joe, your comment is out of line and does not engender a constructive debate.

Joe Sousa and like-minded folks, if standing on the graves of the Newtown 26 is what it takes to stop the massacres, I'm all for it. The way I see it, gun lovers and the NRA are urinating on their graves. If you want a dose of reality, check out the Newtown Patch and the Danbury News Times. Read the article about one of the mothers describing the damage done by some of the 11 bullets that hit her son. Eleven! So tell me why we need killing machines like those. Aparently you don't want to be Part of the Solution. Therefore, you are Part of the Problem.

Read about all the DUI fatalities and let me know how we ban cars ?
Don't Tread On Me

"Read about all the DUI fatalities and let me know how we ban cars ? "
- Joe Sousa, Dr. of Brainiatrics

So, to follow this limp analogy - you're for learner's permits, vision tests, handling tests, written examinations, mandatory insurance and annual permit verification
for guns, then? Guns are dangerous, by design.

Name one consumer device where the manufacturer cannot be sued for deaths resulting from illicit application or misuse of their product.

Automobiles are designed to be safe. It takes colossal mishandling
to do damage with one.

Guns are designed to kill - it's a false equivocation.

You Tea Party pinheads have been clanging on about everyone else demonstrating personal responsibility - time for you lot to do the same.

It's the ethics of toddlers.

On Monday Jan. 7, a California mother was taken into custody for the death of her 2-year-old step-daughter. Proximate cause? According to police, she forced the child to ingest chili powder. Who knew that chili powder is poisonous to young children? The possession of chili powder should be immediately banned. After all, who actually needs chili powder? "If our actions result in saving only one life, they're worth taking."

Thank you. It is time for us to make our voices heard.

Our “history” is becoming one that contains frequent mass shootings. That’s a history that I don’t want repeated. I know our constitution allows gun ownership. But in the preamble one of the reasons they were setting up the constitution was to “insure domestic tranquility.” Living in a wild west civilization with everyone carrying a firearm for a daily shooting is not tranquility.

Tamori, criminals do not obey laws period. Enforce current laws on the books is the answer. Banning honest people from owning something that is a right to own in the Constitution is wrong.

I do not have a problem with backround checks at all. I do have a problem with the Government having a list of every legal gun owner, hat violates my right to privacy and the Government has no business telling me what I can and can't own as long as it is legal.

No knee jerk regulation or law has ever solved a problem. The so called assault ban of 10 years was proven to stop absoluty nothing in the way of crime rates in studies done by the Justice Department, they could find no evidence it helped at all.

These new proposals are nothing but political games exploiting the death of children to get re-elected, and that is all they are. They will not prevent anything. They will however penalize law abiding citizens and help the criminals in their endeavors.

The laws in CT are some of the strictest in the country and in Chicago even more strict especially on handguns (Rifles are rarely used in crimes), Chicago was a handgun free city until heller case and is still one of the hardest cities to get a handgun in. Yet they have more killings and shooting with hand guns then anywhere else.

Again to penalize the law abiding citizen thinking i will stop criminals is just plain insane in my opinion. The problem is not guns it is the violent people who use them. I really do not know how you stop that as those who do not obey the law will always find a way.

Jack, so we agree on training and background checks. See - common ground! I would advocate for a licensing requirement to prove training has been satisfactorily completed. in order to drive my car, I need to pass a licensing test proving I know how to safely operate the vehicle and that I am physically fit to drive. This must be periodically renewed. Additionally, I must register my car, show that it is properly maintained (as evidenced by my inspection sticker), and carry insurance in case of accident. My cost for insurance is dependent on how responsible a driver I am. A car is far more important to my daily activities than a gun, and yet I do not feel that this infringes on my rights.

Again Heather, driving a car is a privilage not a right. Owning a gun is a right. As for the training, only a fool would try to use one with out training and most States have registration all ready. That is called "States Rights" to set reasonable restrictions per the Supreme Court on guns.

The federal Government is foridden from interfering with States rights its in the Constitution. In RI you must apply to the State to purchase a Handgun (They give you a blue card to prove it to the Gun Dealer) and go through a backround check and get permission from your local Police Chief in order to have a consealed carry permit. You are required to tranpost weapons, unloaded with ammo and the weapon seperated in your vehicle if you have no carry permit. If you are going to a fireing range you can only go from home to there you cannot stop at dunken donuts and leave the car unattended with a weapon inside.

If you go to another persons house you must bring the weapon into the house you cannot ever leave a weapon in your vehicle it is a crime to do so. This is what I mean when I say there are over 20,000 laws and regulation on the books around the Country. We who obey the laws and regulations should not be treated like criminals and finger printed. put on list etc.

All States are not the same but that is what in place here in RI. Read up on RI laws and lcal ordinences you will be surprised what is in place and has prevented nothing because criminals do not obey laws.

Oh to get the Blue Card you must pass a written test on guns and safety. No range will let you fire a weapon with out going through their safety coures that I know of. Since we do not have area's where you can just shoot at will. (30 by 90mile state) makes that amost impossible. You only choice is gun clubs to remain proficient.

This, again?

That's the best you've got?
Grow a pair, Jack - the guns are the problem.

"Owning a gun is a right."

- Jack the constitutional scholar.
Subject to strict regulations, which is what this is all about.
There are too many to support the notion that they're for self-defense.

These things are trappings of a death fetish.
The fantasy has spilled over into elementary schools.

Enough, already.

Tamori...it is much more tranquil than one nut with a gun and everyone else disarmed.

@ Jack B. ... Apparently Jack, you've never been in the service ... any service... where when one or two people in a 'squadron', or any segment of the military, commits an act that is against regulations or rules ... those along with ALL those in a 'squadron' get the punishment as well ... not just those who committed the infraction.
And BTW, our society has not gotten to the point of having a dictatorship. (there are probably two exceptions of that last statement ... Nixon's term and George W's term. Can you rationally explain your paranoia?

@ Jack B.... Jack you're just out of line with many of your statements. And who's having a knee jerk reaction here???

Ken@

Calm down and take a breath. Obviously from watching the news you must have seen the kneejerk reation in NY or the proposels in Congress or the Presidents action that will all do nothing to prevent a single thing. I said no kneejerk laws ever solved a thing and that is a fact of history. This pass a quick law and we will reine it later has never worked on anything especially gun issues.

Yes I am a vet from a long history of family vets, and you need to read the UCMJ because you are wrong. No unlawfull order has to be followed, if you do not ollow it you are not culpable in it. Don't know where you read even those in a squadren are guilty by virture of just being there thats insane. As for everything else I have said, it is not paranoid it is reasonable opinion on what I see this Country coming to looking at past history. Nor do I remember when I was in the Army Nixon giving me any Dictator orders, though I didn't vote for the guy 2nd time around.

892. ARTICLE 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION
10. Punitive Articles

892. ARTICLE 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION
10. Punitive Articles

any person subject to this chapter who–
(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;
(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by any member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or
(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties;
shall be punished as a court-martial may dire

As you can see ken, you have to be a violater nothing about, we convict you all enmass for the action of one person. Maybe in a dictatorship but not in the US Military.

People who argue over the technical aspect of a particular weapon; it's range, muzzle velocity, capacity, rate of fire and bore are bores.

Guns are deadly. When did the obvious become incomprehensible?

@ Jack B ... Under your theory ... following all the rules, getting your 'blue card' , all the legal action required etc. Now supposing that someone has done all these things required by current laws and then 3 to 6 months down the line this person has a mental breakdown or gets paranoid-scitso (sp) and heads out with all his weapons and ammo and kills many people. What then? See your plan doesn't work either. You're off the deep end with your thinking. Don't you have a rational side to your wisdom? Space limits my thoughts on your comments as I could continue forever on the subject.

Ken@ So how do you predict future killers, do we lock up all those you suspect may carry out such and act. Do you lock up 87 million gun owners in this Country. Now thats insane thinking is it not, so I guess we lock those who think like that also.

I understand your passion for what happened and I also am disgusted this was able to happen. But I know that no law will ever prevent a person from doing evil or criminal behavior, nor will penalizing those who follow the law and demonizing then as nuts and fanatics do a thing either.

I stand by all my post on this until someone anywhere can post a solution that would stop humans from killing each other with anything period. Yes that includes Wars. But that is a dream that cannot and will never happen, no matter how hard we wish it would.

You're doing a good job Jack of explaining the issue as it is so no need for me to add to it other than to say you are on mark and doing so under good composure. I couldn't do a better job than you are in explaining the issue.

Thanks LU, The Constitution, Founders and common sense is not hard to defend ;-}.

Jack do you believe you need your guns to protect yourself and your family from the federal government? Joe, please feel free to comment.

@r u serious... inappropriate and uncalled for slander on your part toward N. L. And BTW, bows and arrows are no longer available to children in most states for obvious reasons. I think that you should be monitored and / or censored for a short period.

It would certainly make it more difficult.

That's kind of the point.

Don't know why I am answering you. However that would be a "Military armorment", so no you can't unless it is made inactive and for collector etc. Semi-automatic rifles are not "Military Grade" that are sold to the public. Hense they are not "assault Rifles" which are "Military grade".

But Jack what does it matter if it is military arms. I want to own one the Constitution does not say that I cant own one. JoeJay why did you delete your earlier more insulting post. The one where you childishly called me big mouth. You seem more like a knife owner to me anyway.

You cannot take them away from those who own them already that has been ruled on already by the Supreme court. Again these are not "assualt weapons" they are semi-automatic rifles and no matter how much certain politicians and media want tospin it, the fact remains they are not.

There is dialog and it is quite simple and straight forward. Why penalize a perfectly legal item because a criminal uses it in a way that it was not made to be used, namely attacking innocent people or using it to commit a crime.

Many other legal weapons and items are used in crimes and we do not ban them do we?

The focus is only on guns right now because it is politically advantagious to use it to get re-elected in some aea's of the Country. The NRA is merely defending the right to keep and bear arms, that is in the Constitution. s I have said before. People have the right to amend the Constitution. That is how this Country works, not through Pridential fiat, or knee jerk political back door deals like New York just di with out time for any of the public to debate. That is wrong and goes against everything the Republic was founded on.

Those in favor of guns of all kinds, most kinds or whatever are talking semantics. Can you answer the question as to why you all are afraid of the 'government'?

Easy and sad answer is absolutley nothing can prevent them. How soon we forget that Even in History with the most protected people like a president, a lone gunman was able to kill them as well as Canidates (RFK).

There is no answer to the question even if you stopped manufacturing of them. Look at history and you will find even before they were invented there was mass killings with other instruments. All it takes is the ingenuity of a madman.

Australia was successful. we can be too. Yes, humans are ingenious at figuring out ways to kill each other. Certainly not all crimes will be prevented. However, making it hard to acquire a gun and ammunition will make them more infrequent. Also, the proliferation of guns had lead to a situation where an argument that would have been settled in less deadly ways is now often settled with a gun. This has to stop.

Tax the Be-jayzus out of gunpowder.

When bullets are REALLY expensive, you'll see fewer sold.
Hopefully that leads to fewer fired.

Heather AU is brought up a lot but it had its up and downs on that also. Pointless to compare as the people there are much more spread out and the population is not even close to the 300,million people in this Country. Also consider this, with 87million law abiding gun owners and about 300 million guns in their hands, why is there not mass murders every single day of the year by these legal gun owners if it is the guns doing it.

Had Newtown not happened would you have written that? Nothing that has ever been banned or strictly controled has stopped anything booze, heroin, meth, machine guns, pot, you name it people find a way. The reason is still penalizing honest people will never stop a criminal but will leave the honest people at risk.

Heather buy back program have never accomplished anything either except to allow criminals to get money to buy new guns. They give them food debit cards etc, that they just sell for cash and buy new guns on the black market. For every solution you can come up with a criminal will find a way to get around it.

Even the mental health issue solutions will not work, you may prevent someone you may not, there is no way to know. Most drugs used for mental health have side effects that can cause phycotic actions, you cannot prevent that person from if stop taking them for a day anymore than you can stop a criminal from carrying out a crime. It is just the reality of life.

You can make reasonable attempts to curtail violence but again forcing the people who are would be victims of violence to give up their protection is illogical and very dangerous precident to say the least.

I have made clear my argument on this and have yet to see a rational argument to curtail an honest citizens right to own and bear arms o protect themselves and their families from the evils in this world. That is the real world for you. There is evil and law enforcement does not spend every waking hour in your home waiting for it nor should they or can they.

Right, we shouldn't talk about the deadly implement, out of respect for the dead.

Crocodile tears, from another American Taliban.
The presence of all these firearms - owned by the same people I don't want
anywhere near my kids has a chilling effect on our country.

We want our country back from those that would turn us into the next Pakistan.

If we're being honest about gun violence, what was the sex of the mass killers?

Maybe we need a 10-day waiting period for publication to let the writers "cool down" and have background checks. They should be required to pay for a "press safety certificate" every two years. We should ban any word processor and printer cable of handling more than 500 words without reloading. Boy, maybe we should just do away with that pesky Bill of Rights. Think of all the problems that could be solved then!

Guns are not the problem. People kill, not guns. Many more people die due to auto accidents than by firearms, but you don't hear an outcry against cars. Unfortunately, we cannot go back to the days of horses, swords and candles.

"Guns are not the problem. People kill, not guns."

- Robert E

The guns we're talking about make it a wholesale operation.
You're in denial. Time to get real.

That's a frequent problem on the Right.

You're no expert on this.

The ease of access, size of the weapon and prevalence make this too common.
There's no justification for a modern country to be armed like Waziristan.

It's a Concrete Hillbilly way to run the country into the ground.

You're attempting to change the subject because you can't defend this position.

This is an obvious, clear and pervasive threat to a civil America.
If you were raising kids, you wouldn't have any doubt about this.

The NRA leadership has stood in the way of forming legislation "rationally,coolly, logically." They could have been part of a rational discussion on rights and responsibilities. Instead, they are currently attempting to inflame their members with paranoid screed that their guns will be confiscated and "reduce your freedom to ashes." Hopefully, responsible NRA members will decide to be part of the solution and leave the NRA leadership behind.

Hear, hear, Heather T !!!

How about the fact that the mother was able to buy these killing machines without a problem? If these types of guns were not available to the public then 20 first graders would be alive today!

Right, so the sober thing to do, in the response to all the SHOOTINGS
is to start a witch hunt. That's productive.

How about we make the instrument of lethality just a little scarcer?

The poison is in the dose. America is overdosed on guns.
One per household, like the Swiss.

Everyone that wants one attends mandatory training,
like the Swiss.

Anybody that fails a basic intelligence test, loses theirs -
like the Swiss.

This Redneck response to uncertainty, the hoarding of canned goods, the stockpiling of ammunition, the boundless stupidity about what "The Founders"
meant is just another sign of how far we've slid since The Greatest Generation.

It's pathetic.

512 kids killed in Chicago with hand guns in 2012. 0 outrage.

Geesh NL, again with the "white kids", what the heck does race have to do with children being killed? They were children killed by a madman who stole guns because the laws in CT forbid him from buying them. I doubt he cared what color they were. Again I think it is disgusting you keep using "white Kids". It is out of line to talk about the children that way in my opinion.

Katherine:

-- 512 kids killed in Chicago with hand guns in 2012. 0 outrage.

There were 532 total homicides in Chicago in 2012. The weapons of choice and the age of the victims varied.

Your number seems made up.

Please cite your source or retract your statement. If you are unwilling to do this, please go away. Making things up to annoy people is not contributing to the discussion.

" Again I think it is disgusting you keep using "white Kids". It is out of line to talk about the children that way in my opinion." - Jack the Gun apologist

White voters don't get worked up over gang killings, particularly when the victims
are brown. You can bet they see the faces of their own kids when they view
the footage from Newtown - I know I do.

This was a threshold moment, and anyone with school age kids (or grands)
crossed over in a heartbeat. Your generation has done enough damage.

It's passed time for you lot to step aside.

Welcome to reality.
Enjoy your visit.
Slow thinkers, keep right.

All the victims survived.

Look it up.

In the USSR they would censor the news for that reason.

Exactly! Less is More --- OUT OF SIGHT = OUT OF MIND. But the media keeps pushing it and pushing it because their overlords are telling them to keep pushing it and pushing it. Its quite funny to see how the media spin machine continues to follow this story yet they AREN'T talking about the 700tonnes of gold Germany requsted from the Federal Reserve and THEY DON'T HAVE IT. Yes folks, your Central Bank is bankrupt to the core and has no more Solid Money. Goodluck in your future...if you planned for it.

@ Lemon Pie Sally

Take your conspiracy theories elsewhere. Anyone quoting Alex Jones as a source
fails at basic fact checking. This bilge is too low even for Beck.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323468604578245481704511870.html

This is exactly the right time to change America's gun laws. So was the day after Columbine, the day after Tucson, the day after the Sikh temple shooting, the day after Aurora.... it's a National disgrace that a lunatic fringe would claim their
right to bear arms is more important than kids attending school without fear.

You lot are contemptible.
Go Galt, already - you won't be missed.

Flesh that out, won't you?

"Hitler also relied on terror to achieve his goals. Lured by the wages, a feeling of comradeship, and the striking uniforms, tens of thousands of young jobless men put on the brown shirts and high leather boots of the Nazi Storm Troopers (Sturmabteilungen).Called the SA, these auxiliary policemen took to the streets to beat up and kill some opponents of the Nazi regime. Mere fear of the SA pressured into silence other Germans who did not support the Nazis."

http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007673

The open parading of weapons at political rallies looks much the same.
The denouncement of public figures who don't support war as somehow
not "Patriotic" follows. The parallels are pretty obvious.

What, exactly, do YOU consider Fascist, AT?

"Naome, is there any specific topic that you have an actual mastery of..."
- Baywatch

I'm no more an expert than anyone else chiming in on this site.
(The big dogs don't run here.)

"... do you just use google as an extension of your cerebral cortex?"

Doesn't everyone? I also write things down, so that I don't have to remember them
and read books that I can scarcely recall.

If by your question, I take it why am I involved in this line of discussion it's because many of the board regulars have an active role undermining the education of
my kids, right here at home. Having their views printed out in the open is
an invitation for rebuttal, refutation and rebuke.

Let's turn it around, shall we... why do you think anyone beyond the OP comes in?
(That includes us.)

Alex Jones is a crackpot.

Anyone citing him as a source for the truth fails the smell test.
Spare us the conspiracy theories - plenty of places to air that out, elsewhere.

The photos posted by "Lemon Pie Sally" are real, regardless of the source that complied them. Has Naome been appointed judge of what is acceptable commentary in this forum? Jack, thanks for doing your best to educate those engaged here.

Godwin's law has been invoked.
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/godwins-law

Time to close the thread.

It's amazing, really to have a democratically elected president compared to
Joe Stalin, or Mao, or Hitler. Like I said - crackpot Tea Party trash.

Arguments based on fact cannot be broken, but arguments based on feeling and emotion are easily defeated. I was probably a young, stubborn idealist once upon a time. Then I started to do my own research and realized truth is truth and all the strong feelings and intended goodwill only result in poor outcomes and unintended consequences. War on poverty = more welfare recipients. War on drugs = more illegal drugs. War on guns will surely equal more illegal guns in the wrong hands. It doesn't matter what any of us believe or feel or wish. It is the plain truth and the unintended consequence will also be a false sense of security and a greater dependence on someone else to provide your safety. And yes, that will be the same "someone else" that you depend on for food, water, utilites, health insurance and social security. Feel safer?

Joe,
As I see it Heather never trampled on the second amendment rights. She, and many of us, are looking for reasonable gun control legislation. We are not saying that people should not be allowed to have guns.

Your second amendment comes, well - second.

We're not hasty about this, I would say we're about ten years too late.
Newtown was the gun rights Fukushima reactor - afterwards everything changed.

"Cheryl, I was using the expression metaphorically. " - JTP

The shooting in Tucson was an attempt to solve a perceived transgression against the 1st amendment with a 2nd amendment solution. Slippery slope, there.

You can't be a true Conservative standing up for the right to bear arms
until you tackle all the post 9/11 insults to the Bill of Rights.

"Meanwhile, on the right, The Heritage Foundation, National Review, The Weekly Standard, and sundry others are more often than not active cheerleaders for those very same War on Terror policies. Due process? Warrants? Congressional oversight? You must have a pre-9/11 mindset.

It's one thing to argue that gun control legislation is a nonstarter, despite tens of thousands of deaths by gunshot per year, because the safeguards articulated in the Bill of Rights are sacrosanct. I can respect that... but not from people who simultaneously insist that 3,000 dead in a terrorist attack justifies departing from the plain text of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth amendments, and giving the president de-facto power to declare war without Congressional approval."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/01/the-strangest-conservative-priority-prepping-a-2nd-amendment-solution/266711/

It's pandering, at best, fear-mongering at worst.
If you're panicked about this, you've been had.

Who's pulling your strings?

Naome,

What are you talking about?

I do not understand the place your rantings have in a discussion of the Constitution.

Naome, Naome, Noame.

The law is NOT there as you wish to "prosecute crimes and give us recourse"

The second amendment is there to prevent some future government from overthrowing our Republic and disarming our citizens.

In the words of Patrick Henry, during the ratification hearings:

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined"

That is why we have the amendment. That is the intent of allowing us the freedom to bear arms.

@ Noame:

You say "Alex Jones is a crackpot."

I don't suppose you would cal Patrick Henry one.

Gee NL, now you read minds? Who new? Not rehashing anything; merely stating an opinion on Heathers post. UN take over, I admit I think we should throw the UN out of the Country. I am more worried about criminals and those who would deny me the right to protect myself from harm no matter what it may be.

My guns are not used on kids, where do you get that from?

Again you use derogatory words and name calling as usual when you argument falls flat and illogical. Never said I was a genius, but I do know my rights and have first hand knowledge of what happens when they are irroded or taken away. I am the son or a Russian Immigrant who fled Stalin well my Grandparents could not. I knw full well what happens when people are unarmed and marched to the town square with teachers, town leaders and clergy and then executed. Do you have that history in your family.

I am also of native American Ancestry. Do you know what happened to them when they were disarmed? It was called genocide. History is replete with example of that and every time with out exception people said it will not happen to me or that will never happen here etc. Everytime that has proven to me false. Be it Russia, Germany, Poland, China, Cambodia, and on and on.

That is what the 2nd amendment is about; because the founders new it very wellthe trappings of a Government gone wild on the populace. Why we are a Republic and not Majority rule.

"Do you know what happened to them when they were disarmed? It was called genocide. History is replete with example of that and every time with out exception people said it will not happen to me or that will never happen here etc. Everytime that has proven to me false. Be it Russia, Germany, Poland, China, Cambodia, and on and on."

This is a red herring, and you trotted it out two weeks ago.
Totalitarians controlled their populations TOTALly.

The majority oppressed the minority, willingly. Hitler's brown shirts carried guns.

Quit rehashing the conservative conspiracy sites, it makes you gun apologists
appear to be complete loons. It's not about YOU - it's about your guns.

Where do you think Spengler got his? You lot can't police your own, it's not a private issue any longer. This is about a fetish that now threatens domestic
tranquility. If you can't see your own culpability in this; if you can't recognize that
the instrument of lethality is essential to the killings, you're a part of the problem.

Do you have children, Jack?
Those of us that do might well see you and your "rights" as a pervasive threat.

How many guns stolen every year in the US?

http://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-gun-policy-and-research/publications/guns_theft_fs.pdf

Nope.

It's about the guns.
Guns go bang and fire bullets.

Get it?
I know it appears complicated.

You do know that John Green called for the execution of Loughner, right?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345788/Arizona-shooting-Christina-Taylor-Greens-father-calls-gunmans-execution.html

Maybe we should be talking about LESS killing, instead of more, for once.

Sorry NL but in case of absolute Guilt it assures the a person will never again take alife. I agree he should be executed.

"Awfull lot of misinfo on the founders view. "

You said it, Skippy. Face it, there are no Constitutional law experts on this site.
It might be worth considering that America has dramatically changed, and now
the threat facing us IS us.

You did see the JFK quote right.

Very true Baywatch. People should understand the Oath that all Military takes also, To protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies Foriegn and Domestic. Domestic being a key wrd people seem to forget the meaning ofas that would apply not only to the people for insurrection but to the Government should it ty to subvert the Constitution and subjugate the people. History shows that has happened many times also and the Founders were well aware of this. Ben Franklin said it best when asked by a citizen what he they had given the people.

"We have given you a Republic if you can hold on to it"

The founders knew true Democracy was nothing more than "Mob Rules" by the majority. Hense a Republic in the hands of the people, for the people by the people allowing for minority rights that do not exist in a Pure Democracy.

I did read the JFK quote.

"...citizens who are NOT ONLY prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously WORK AND SACRIFICE for that freedom."

This came at the peak of the integration struggle as an exhortation to Americans
to be our best, rather than our belligerent worst. He didn't say,
"Strap up and invade Georgia."

Context is everything, Jack.

Jack you used a quote from President Kennedy, "Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservati¬on of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciousl¬y work and sacrifice for that freedom."
-- John F. Kennedy

Where does it state that every citizen has a right to own a killing machine like the one that was used at SHES?

Your other quotes from our Founding Fathers reflect their views based on what was going on in the country at the time. The American Revolution has just ended and many Americans remembered how England tried to disarm the colonists in Massachusetts. In addition, many Americans who lived in the wilderness needed rifles for protection and they were used for hunting.

If our Founding Fathers were alive today, I am confident that they would see the need to limit the sales and purchase of the killing machines that were used to murder 20 innocent first graders.

I agree nothing is working to stop evil acts like Newtown, But disaming the populace or making it impossible for one to defend themselves is sure not the answer.

It is important though to remember that the founders knew tyranny and knew it well and made sure to protect the freedom of the citizens from it. We are in the midst of a systematic removal of our rights and this cannot be ignored.

I doubt the Founding Fathers would assert the 2nd amendment's supremacy over
"Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness."

20 children died for an anachronism that's outlived them.

Naome 20 children died because of a failed mental health system.

Disagree on that one Robert, they dies because an evil pesron did an evil criminal act, there is no way to predict evil acts. just saying ;-}

"Naome 20 children died because of a failed mental health system."

- Robert E

Did the psychiatrist prescribe murder? Did the pharmacist dispense bullets?
Please. This is beneath contempt.

Adam Lanza used a gun to slaughter a classroom full of six year old children.

"All it takes for evil to exist is for good people to do nothing."

Well, we see you for what you are.
It's just a matter of time, Joe.

"...a Marxist fascist elite continues to loot us."

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present you Exhibit B.
"The only viable solution is for the citizens to meet at the liberty pole and embark on a plan to take their country back from incompetent and sometimes perhaps even evil men." - William F Horan

Has anybody seen "The Russians are coming" ?
http://cli.ps/nJvY

The more crackpots clanging on about Constitutional rights and "taking back our country from "evil men" are precisely the same people that shouldn't be packing.

I did, back on 26DEC12

Naome Lixes

8:31 am on Wednesday, December 26, 2012

I'm not sure I can evaluate Dianne Feinstien's mental status, nor do I think anyone with a school age child can be rational about this. Certainly those advocating gun-rights appear to do so from an irrational position.

We've spent more on less ambitious plans. ($2.9B Cash for clunkers)
This, coupled with a confiscate and convict statute afterwards will at the very least reduce the number of weapons under the ban in circulation.

Any reduction in the number of weapons used to spray so many bullets is at the
least reasonable. Perhaps a cynic would claim it insane to try.

The failures in the last attempt were largely due to NRA changes to the law
and manufacturing changes to skirt the restrictions.

No change won't stabilize the situation; it perpetuates the problem by leaving
so many weapons available for ready use, by both registered and illegal users.

No argument about shifting DEA resources to ATF - I would argue that DHS is
failing in it's mandate by turfing this to an underfunded department (the ATF).

ATF $1.12B budget
DEA $2.02B budget
NSA $11.6B budget (un-classified expenditures)
DHS $68.9B budget

The CDC might be used to research the problem, after being forcibly banned
from the inquiry back in 1996. Care to guess who was behind that?

http://politix.topix.com/homepage/4141-should-obama-overturn-the-ban-on-gun-research

What you're hearing is the same conservative voices that attempt to dominate this
(and all) discussion with endless cut-n-paste submissions from conspiracy sites.

It's not a debate, it's a shouting match.

The deterrent is to make it illegal to purchase these killing machines. Eliminate the gun show loopholes. Demand background checks on anyone who wants to purchase a handgun, rile, or shotgun. Guns kill people.

Revisionist history?

Do tell. You do understand that the word amendment implies change, right?
The notion that facts will sway you gunsters is arguably pointless.

Your resistance indicates how close we come to the mark, and where to press
our representatives for action. It's just a matter of time...

http://www.jamestownpress.com/news/2013-01-17/News/RI_congressmen_push_for_gun_control.html

Mark, maybe Jack or Joe can provide you with answers to your questions. I can't wait to see what they have to say!

Thanks, Just Another...I think we might be waiting a while...at least for something substantive.

Mark in case you don't know your history, I will opine . America became the United States after our Revolution,
American Revolution — History.com Articles, Video, Pictures and Facts
www.history.com/topics/american-revolution
We fight our battles at the voting booth. The election process can be challenging . We all understand. and live with the results . Knowing that we have a chance to turn it around every 2 to 4 years. We are free men /women . All with Rights, and Freedom that men / woman fought for in every American war since our Revolution.
The Constitution is a living document that can be changed with the will of the people through our elected Congress and the vote of the states. That's what we call a Democratic Republic. Government of the people by the people and for the people.
So stop with the crazy thought that we own weapons to over throw the Government. We did that already. Know we elect our Leaders and live relatively safe in one of the best countries in the world. Elections are the battles you refer to.

Dystopia? Really, I think you have that backwards, you are living in the opposite of dystopia a fictional world of Uptopia that does not exist.

To even think that 87 million gun owner of 300 million guns(does not count Law enforcement or the Military who would have to give up their privately legal owned weapons) owners would willing give up their arms is shear lunacy.

To think that law enforcement or the Military would violate their oath enmass of an unconstituional and unlawful order is also lunacy. I suspect the vast majority would not. This is not the Middle East it is a Representative Republic. Nor is the US a pure Democracy which is nothing but Mob rule the founders abhored.

Plan? Only plan is to stand up for our rights. As so many have said; if you do not like the way the 2nd Amendment gives me the right to own and bear arms, change it. The Constitution gives you the right to do that also. To try and do it through violation of the Constitution is not legal it is treason at the very least.

If you succeed in changing it then I will follow it as I follow all legal laws that are Constitutional. However it is my right as well, to defend the Constitution as it is written now and to have the right to stop you from changing it by the same legal means you have to change it.

Congress the President or anyone in Government is forbidden from making laws or regulations that are unConstituional period. Laws are forbidden from being applied retroactively also.

I always wonder if people even know why Amendment to the Contitution stay in it even if repealed. The reason if the Founders wanted to make sure that mistakes are not repeated. Hense the reason the prohibition Amendment is there along with the Amendment repealing it. Proof by the way that banning anything that was legal does not prevent something it only makes matter worse, as it gave rise to rapid crime and was the main reason the criminal syndicates became so powerful during prohibition.

Do you really think bans and penalizing legal owners will stop anything, especially crimes of violence with guns? Of course not criminal will always find a way to do their deed. Laws do not apply to them. Laws stop honest citizens from becoming criminals out of fear of the penalties for breaking the law. Criminal's could careless.

Who has proposed taking away guns from citizens who legally own them? This notion that the Government is going to take away people's guns is just another lie that is be perpetuated by the Far Right. Let's stick to the facts.

Here is Dianne Feinstein on video saying she would have made people turn them in. (if she had the votes). http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=blXkl9YVoHo

In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.
Assault Weapons - Issues - United States Senator Dianne Feinstein
www.feinstein.senate.gov › Home › Issues
NRA-ILA | Feinstein Gun Ban Just Tip of Iceberg!
www.nraila.org/legislation/...legislation/.../feinstein-gun-ban-just-tip-

Well JAT; If you decide to call a semi-atumatic rifle an assault weapon, which it is not and seek to ban it, then you are taking away the right to own a perfectly legal firearm. How hard is that to understand? If you do not think the next step is for them to force the turn in of those so called lied about assault weapons that are not, you are dreaming.

A semi-auto-matic is not military grade weapon which the supreme court has ruled can be regulated as Machine guns were banned in 1934 except in strickly controlled sales and ownership, for collectors, museums etc. Thse JAT are the facts.

Do you support every single law and regulation law makers put forth to pass? Of course you don't, that is why your representatives get public input. You seem to only want your public input to be allowed and not those of us who disagree. That my friend is not a representative Republic it is a Dictatorship by definition.

Joe, you have not answered Mark's original question. Your inability to respond to direct questions is one reason why you are not taken seriously.

TG, Senator Feinstein is not a contributor to this thread. Nice try at trying to deflect the conversation.

JAT, you're question was "Who has proposed taking away guns from citizens who legally own them? This notion that the Government is going to take away people's guns is just another lie that is be perpetuated by the Far Right. Let's stick to the facts."

I answered. You were wrong and now you are trying to make it sound like you only meant people on here when you clearly reference the government in your statement.

"If Obama decides to declare himself King and suspends elections. I will be calling for people to revolt." Well, you're already revolting.

Why not just number all of your Obama conspiracy theories to save us time?
http://wonkette.com/479749/tennessee-state-rep-knows-precisely-how-obama-will-steal-this-election

Here's my version, Joe Sousa of Tiverton, RI decides to declare himself unfit to hold a considered opinion and retreats to his family estate. In other news, flocks of flying pigs were seen over Arruda's dairy farm on Sunday.

Wonkette??????? You're kidding, right?

For those of you unnerved by the image of Catwoman (memories of a Halloween, gone horribly wrong, perhaps?) here's another link to the same crackpot
conspiracy theory referenced by our man in Tiverton:

http://blogs.tennessean.com/politics/2012/state-rep-kelly-keisling-forwards-obama-october-surprise-rumor-ignites-firestorm/

@ katherine

katherine
9:26 pm on Tuesday, November 6, 2012
I am not disappointed. I don't care what happens in Rhode Island. You keep electing the same people. How is it going over there?

katherine
10:06 pm on Tuesday, November 6, 2012
You are just mad because I was smart enough to get the heck out of there. In a deep red state with a very low unemployment rate. Paradise:)

katherine
12:13 am on Wednesday, November 7, 2012
I'm not wasting anyone's time. I only comment on national things. I do still live in this country and I have a right to voice my opinion.

You voted with your feet, katherine.
Your opinion isn't valuable, here.

No quiero oir mas quejas de ti, pendeja.

So naome...under rules, and how did you get to make the rules, you have no business having an opinion about new town since you don't live there.

Katherine:

I asked you a legitimate question above about a comment you made about this issue (i.e., you said that "512 kids killed in Chicago with hand guns in 2012").

You have not answered my question.

Yet you keep posting.

Answering my question would help all of us better understand your point of view.

But you haven't answered.

Why is that?

Nard...I don't think the exact number is important. The point which everyone is trying to avoid by demanding exact numbers, is that hundreds of black kids are killed with guns every year, and we never hear much about it.

-- Nard...I don't think the exact number is important.

Katherine, you're right. Last year in Central Falls, 3,289,521,124 cute white children were shot with handguns in Central Falls. Zero people were outraged.

Please don't ask me for a source on my numbers because, as you say, exact numbers are not important.

Unless, of course, you expect other people to believe what you're saying.

Nard...as I said the exact number is not the point. If you don't get that then you are a blockhead.

Except that this version of history is totally wrong...

The German citizenry was heavily armed and the brown shirts were an extra-judicial lynch mob intent to stomp out dissent. Who's feeding you this? It's bogus.

http://propagandaprofessor.net/2011/09/26/the-myth-of-hitlers-gun-ban/

Would add TE that many of the State Constitution have that Language and the reason it is in there is that it does not Violate the US Constitution as the Supreme Court has RUles endlessly through History on the right to bear arms.
No State can have anything in their Constitution that violates the US Constitution and all rights not expressly listed in the US Constituion to the Federal Governement are reserved for the States, so many people do not understand that simple language sadly.

Now hang on a minute.
"For myself and for a great many Citizens of the sovereign state of Pennsylvania,"

You're not from Rhode Island?
Don't you have your own sandbox?

Why are so many Conservative infiltrators attempting to crowd public opinion?
You lot must be desperate, if this is the best venue to "get out your message".

Isn't this how the Tea Party sold out?

Just how do you know someone is far right/zealot JAT? Tell me the last time a legal automatic weapon was used in a killing? They are banned already as has been explained time and time again to you. Where are these 100's of rounds of magazines. You say people are lying, the only one doing that is you.

Who is parnoid? It is not paranoid to stick up for your rights! Check RI Laws, you are backround checked for handguns alread. Assault weapons are banned allready. Semi-auto's are not assualt weapon and it is a lie to say they are.

I have no problem with so called loopholes being closed at gun shows. But that is not what you want You want to label all gun owners nuts and have them listed in a data base and treated like criminals. You talk about people not answering questions all the time when all you do is ask them most of time.

Heres a question for you. How do you read the mind of a criminal and stop them before they commit any crime? How does a backround check for mental problems work in a society that healthcare records are private work?

How do you find if a person is unstable? We start testing every citizen, or just those you want tested. How will you stop homemade Bombs? How will you stop poisoning water, over the counter medicines, using a car, bat, knife or anything to kill a human with.

What is your view of a country that regulates every aspect of your life from what you can buy to what you can eat to what you watch or listen too. Where are your answers?

The only one thing you are doing JAT is throwing out insults or trying to deflect away from the real problem which is enforce the 20,000 laws and regulation on the books in this Country period. To penalize and stigmatize 87 million people as nuts and treat them as criminals is the beginning of the end of society. Many, Russian, Chinese, Jews, Armanians,Pols, Gypsy's, Native Americans and on and on prove that to the tunes of over an estimated 150 million of them killed for no reason other than some self rightous nuts thought they could eradicate that which they disagreed with. Great company you are in ther JAT.

The old saying of "it can't happen here" is as foolish a statement as it has been in the past as it would be to use it now. The fact that you cannot even see the real problem for your hate of anything that does not tow your line proves you to be a zealot against a free society and a supporter of genocide on those you deem unworthy to live. Now thats scary.

What is really sad also JAT is you come across as one of those that thing if we disband the military throw all armaments in to sea, get rid of out nukes, everything will be cumbya. Sorry to inform you but humans do not follow those rules except in imaginary uptopia's, movies fictional books and evidently in your mind.

Most of us realize that human nature is unpredictable and anything can be a weapon to kill.

That's because Rush's audience is comprise primarily of uneducated people who don't know any better. Joe, do you fit into this demographic?

Just Another Taxpayer
"uneducated people who don't know any better. "
Boy, do you have a screw lose ?

Robert E. all the amendments have limits, except one, the 2nd amendment. Why are you talking about banning free speech? Nobody posting has made such an assertion. Once again, the Far Right is trying to deflect attention to the real problem. Guns are used by people to kill other people!

There are no limits on the 2nd amendment? You know that isn't true. There are background checks, there are waiting periods, there are restrictions put in place by the National Firearms Act... etc.

JAT I am not a member of the far right I am a liberal Democrat that happens to own guns and do not like peopel who want to take away my Constitutional rights. Surprise surprise yes liberals do own guns also this is not a Conservative vs Liberal issue it is a Constitutional issue so don't try and pigion hole me you don't kanw what you are talking about.

Are you kidding JAT? "Guns are used by people to kill other people!" they areused for many other things that do not harmanything other than maybe a target or animals for food etc.

Then again by your theory you could say the same about Baseball bats, knifes, poisons, Bow n Arrows, cars, trucks and a thousand other things. The only one deflecting is you by not realizing guns are not the problem they are just one of many inanimate object that can be used to kill. It is the person that kills not the object period.

Also JAT 20,000 laws and regulation on the books concerning guns is this Country, I would say are a heck of alot more limitations on the 2nd Amendment then there are on anyother Amendment in the Constitution and that is a fact period.

Two things, if you're a Liberal I'm sending back my secret decoder ring.

Second - you've lifted this submission entirely from an uncredited source.
Dou-che! Not only are you a fraud, but you're also a thief.

http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/opinion/limit-nd-amendment-but-not-the-st/article_000a83c8-01e4-5026-81fd-479b059336c6.html

You stole this directly from Bill Johnson of Jamison, PA off Philly Burbs.com
http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/opinion/limit-nd-amendment-but-not-the-st/article_000a83c8-01e4-5026-81fd-479b059336c6.html

"The spoken or written word can be just as deadly as any weapon manufactured today; it can wound just as deeply. The word can leave scars and cause mental anguish to both the victim and family for years to come."

- As plagiarised by Robert E

Bang! Bang! BANG!
Pow! Biff! Zowie!

Your Mom dresses you funny!
(You dead yet? )

Can you really be both this lazy and impenetrably stupid?
Guns are deadly weapons.

That's their point, innit?

That's right we were slaves to a tyrannical government.

smirking chimp is your refernce for the Constitution, how about you read the Constitution and use the same source the Supreme Court uses, ie the federalist Papers, notes and letters of the founders and past cases sine the founding of the Country. It was good for a laugh though slavery has nothing to do with this current debate in any way shape or form.

JAT,

Absolutely, some states don't use the database and you can go to gun shows and buy guns. I don't see your point. You said "...all the amendments have limits, except one, the 2nd amendment." There are restrictions on the 2nd amendment. Here in RI you can't buy guns on the internet without them being shipping to an FFL (and having a background check). You can't have a silencer, you can't easily own a machine. All restrictions. You said there were no limits which is simply not true. Even 1 restriction anywhere in the 50 states is still a restriction is it not?

Can you see the lure in the water, JAT?

Don't take the bait.

"What if the criminal in Newtown who stole the guns and killed the owner of the guns because he tried and failed to be able to purchase them due to the strict gun laws in place in CT, had decided to use a propane tank bomb, or stole a few sticks of dynomite and tossed them through a window in the school? Probably would have been even more death. How would you Anti-gun people suggest you stop that?" - Jack, grasping at straws.

All of the methods you've suggested as plausible imply risk to the user.
Guns are dangerous at one end, only.

Adam Lanza used none of those things, DID he.

" These are not senario's these are actions that happen time and time again. "

No, they're scenarios. You watch too much television.
Violent crime and gun violence are directly linked in America.

You're denying the obvious.
It's such a charming trait.

What straws? As I told you before about abother fact, from Columbine, that they had propane bombs in the school with them and some left at home. They did not get a chance to use them or they just did not go off.

If you think throwning something through a window endangers a person more than facing law enforcement shooting back at them you need help NL.

You cannot predict who is going to use a gun fo evil anymore than using a bomb. That is why your argument of more laws and regulations that only affect people who follow the laws is a flawed argument period.

Lanza stole weapons after he found he could not get them legally period. It matter not where he got them since he obviously planned for a while to do it according to reports. All of these incidents have been pre-planned recently. You know how to read minds? Because that is the only way to prevent them if at all.

Thanks for answering my questions. Oh wait a minute you didnt answer a single one. Figured as much.

By the way view some of the laws being proposed to include the onein NY passed in the dead of night without public input. That the kinda government you support.

Baywatch is correct on your assumpting of gun owners being GOP or Far right.

87 million gun owners in this Country JA and yet the Country does not fill Congress and the presidenc and every state legislature with far right or GOP. Why is that? Opps sorry I asked a couple of questions which we all know you expect others to answer yours but never answer theirs. Never mind geesh.

Guess you didn't watch the debates when Obama was asked about "assualt weapons" which a semi-automatic is not, and said they should be banned huh. Oh sorry a nother question you won't answer. You know if you quit asking questions then others would not have to ask back, same with post lies, like assult weapons that are all ready banned for the average citizen.

Some day you will get the quote of "When one right is taken away from one person in a society, we are all dimished as a society" Don't remember the person but it sure is true.

JAT,
Hardly, you misstated that there were no restrictions on the 2nd amendment which is NOT TRUE at all. You seemed very fond of accusing people of not answering questions just a few posts up but I guess when the shoe is on the other foot it's a different story, eh?

Are there limits on the 2nd Amendment now? You bet there are. You said "...all the amendments have limits, except one, the 2nd amendment." and now you are the one changing the subject.

Never heard of States rights either I guess, wow read up on the Constitution and make sure to read the Feralist Papers.The federal government can make no law the infringes on States rights or a States Constitution.

Until you answer questions like everyone elese you are not saying anything, merely trying to dictate to others who disagree with you. That is not debate but ignorance of debate. Have a good day. It is pointless to respond to you anymore until you answer the questions.

I know this is difficult for brainwashed liberals to understand. The definition of "infringe" is to act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on. Explain to me how the proposal doesn't.

According to some estimates, the total package will cost at least $4.5 billion in new spending. We could buy ten F-22s for that price!

We could use that $4.5 billion to pay every homeless person in America $8000.

"I know this is difficult for brainwashed liberals to understand. "

You're dead weight, here.
You're missing Rush.

"According to some estimates, the total package will cost at least $4.5 billion in new spending. We could buy ten F-22s for that price!"

Last week you were clanging on about the debt.
Some patriot.

Did you read it? Number 2

2. Banning military-style assault weapons and high-capacity
magazines, and taking other common-sense steps to reduce
gun violence;

Sure sounds like banning to me. He can call a semi-automatic an assault gun but by definition it is not as it will not fire on automatic hense the name semi-automatic rifle.

Most of that has more to do with spending money and adding yet more stuff to the Affordable care Act that ill accomplish nothing. Bottom line he and those in Congress pushing all this have a single goal of punishing law abiding citizens for the action of those who do not obey the law.

Simple example. If you have 2 children and one takes a cookie with out asking, do you ban both children from having the cookie even though the other asked for one by saying please. Simple I know but it is the same premise people are putting forward here of punish the honest citizen for the action of the dishonest.

One more thing on this TIV is how in the world does any of this get enforced with out violating the rights of people under privacy and about 5 other Constitutional amendments. This is not a single amendment issue at all.

I said the same when the TARP program rolled out -
better to cut each of us a check and start over...

I agree with Naome that TARP was a bad idea, simply the globalists paying their banker buddies a big bonus. I hope by "each of us" you mean taxpayers, otherwise it's just another scheme to redistribute wealth.

" Not an opinion just a fact of history for those who care to peruse it."

I call shenanigans. You can't back up this tired old horse.
You're out of your depth, Jack.

Totalitarian regimes enlist a willing majority to oppress the minority.
They engage the citizens TOTALly - hence the name.

This notion that gun owners are somehow an oppressed minority, like European Jews or America's first people is morally bankrupt and intellectually offensive.

In short - a steaming load of sanctimonious self-inflicted martyrdom.
You can't police your own - it's a public health problem, now.

Can't handle the truth NL. You vilify a group of people by name calling. You say they are unintelligent. You tell the people they are the cause of all your problems. You call for them to be registered in a national data base. you Began taking everything away to defend themselves with.

If you do know that is exactly to the letter what Germany did to a group of people for the exact same reason lised above. You know nothing of history. That should sare everyone about the parralell to it. There is nothing in that first paragraph that is untrue at all. You and many others have said it in post for over a year now, either about gun owners or people who support conservative issues.

It is undeniable, I could paste all day long of you saying those things to posters. The only thing you havnt said is the final one. Which was the so called final solution, though there are some who have said that also about the right, bu I do not recall you going off that edge yet.

History does not need backup it speaks for itself from those who lived to tell it and we had many who did thankfully. and over 6 million who did not.

No-one on here speaks more about oppressing the right and gun owners than you have done of late. Heather merely put her opinion out and her solution. Your solutions are like the first lines of my post exactly like 30's Germany. You see it doesn't matter what excuse you use to oppress it matter that you support that oppression which you clearly state time an time again.

Calling gun advocates an oppressed people is base and contemptible.

The people that have the guns are doing the damage. Germany's Jews were victims. If you see yourself as a martyr to the cause of Freedom, you're depraved.

Claiming kinship with all those slaughtered in pogroms, ethnic cleansing or the pursuit of manifest destiny is genuinely disgusting.

Take a good, hard look at who is killing whom. (The killers hold guns.)
"You know nothing of history."

I know enough to see the creeping march to Fascism behind the NRA.
Try reading something that isn't on a conspiracy site.

I'm not calling anyone names, Jack.

You're free to print ridiculous, baseless trash.
I'm free to point out the inaccuracies.

Claiming your an expert on this topic (or any other) insults the intelligence of anyone that can be bothered to check facts.

That's the same price tag for operating ONE cutting edge F-35 airplane.

You want to say that's too much to prevent another schoolyard slaughter?
What are YOUR priorities, Thomas? Do tell...

"When you remove the effects of inflation and examine the cost of operations and sustainment in deflated base-year dollars, it magically collapses to about $417 billion (something like half a trillion in today’s dollars). "

- Forbes 15OCT2012 Super-Weapon, why have F-35 fighter costs increased?

Thanks for reminding us the the "Bridge and Highway to Nowhere", or more commonly know as the monument to teabagger's hypocrisy. Advocated by Republican Representative Don Young and Republican Senator Ted Stevens, after canceling the bridge, the Palin administration spent more than $25 million to build the Gravina Island Highway, which would have connected with the proposed bridge. According to Alaskan state officials, the road project went ahead because the money came from the federal government, and would otherwise have had to be returned. Let's cut all government handouts...except the ones that I get, right?

Too right, Brian.

It's socialism when someone else cashes the check.
Government is the Enemy until all your friends leave.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/12826/tea-party-hypocrisy-continues-with-paul-ryan-and-medicare

The problem as I see it TE with the anti-gun people is you never get an answer to what is enough regulation, because in the end they always get around to banning something, which only affects law abiding citizens and that is wrong no matter how anyone looks at it.

Some times you have to face the fact that there is no answer and prevention of all evil acts is not possible. But then that would be common sense for most people, which seems to be lacking a lot in this gun control debate. ;-}

@ Jack Baillargeron : You don't seem to have a problem with the restriction of alcohol for 18-20 year old's. Where is your cry for their freedom? What happens at the magic number of 21 that isn't present at 18,19 & 20? Are you of the belief alcohol restrictions do not curb alcohol related accidents so the drinking age should be lowered to 18? Just like there isn't any definitive answer to ALL alcohol related crimes/accidents , there are means to curb them. Painting all that disagree with the NRA with the same "anti gun" brush is ignorant. The majority of us are anti "convenience" when it comes to acquiring a Firearm both legally and illegally.

Actually you are incorrect Vinny, I believe anyone who can fight and die for our Country should be able to have a beer. By the way, the Supreme Court has ruled that reasonable restrictions are allowed by the State concerning guns.

Banning law abiding citizens is not curbing a criminal it is penalizing the Honest citizen. "Painting all that disagree with the NRA with the same "anti gun" brush is ignorant." Sorry never said that either.

Vinny You said 'The majority of us are anti "convenience" when it comes to acquiring a Firearm both legally and illegally." I know how you want stop the honest law abiding citizen from owning a perfectly legal inanimate object. So how are you going to stop the criminal pray tell.

FOX news v MSNBC v current v CNN v CBS affiliate v ABC etc CNBC whatever..all of these "cited sources" not to mention their cohorts in the affiliated newspapers are dumpster diving sources..there is always a counter point if you pick the right dumpster..
http://www.hulu.com/#!watch/2306

I've got a simple proposal.

Since all the mass-shooters have been men...

oh I see where you're going......
http://www.austinchronicle.com/binary/1a39/SS.to-wong-foo.jpg

I'm a bit of a traditionalist, I prefer the original to remakes.

Recognize Hugo Weaving, on the right? They would CC Tran(ny)quilizer darts.
http://www.dvdverdict.com/images/reviewpics/priscilla2.jpg

Here's the counterpoint - another exhibit for the prosecution decided to parade his rights in a public place, with live ammunition at hand. If you don't think this sort of thing is chilling American commerce, you're dimmer than advertised.

Why is it always some macho blowhard with a crush on Clint Eastwood doing this?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55649700-78/yorgason-carry-store-gun.html.csp

Jack said; "Banning law abiding citizens is not curbing a criminal it is penalizing the Honest citizen." Jack, please explain how "honest citizens" would be negatively impacted?

When you answer my questions JAT I will until then your irrelevent to me anyway. Anyone can sit there and ask questions that would be a debate moderator no participating in a debate. In anycase that question has been answered by me in one of the post on this. Look for it.

12. "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations."

13. "Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime."

14. "Issue a presidential memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence."

15. "Direct the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies."

16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."

17. "Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities."

18. "Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers."

19. "Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education."

20. "Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover."

21. "Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges."

22. "Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations."

23. "Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental

Sad thing is Joe most of those are already in place and not enforced or are just ones to increase funding to his ACA well taking away yet more rights of privacy.

Typical of the never let a crisis go to waste mentality that this Administration openly admits it does.

On another note, you are aware that leechs and magots are still used in Hospitals right. Just because you considers old remedies and past history not relevent does not mean the rest of us do.

I am staying on topic as my personel life has nothing to do with this debate.

Sorry Naomi. but like what I own or do not dis own it is none of your business. I do not discuss my military time on line and never have other than I am a vet and was in the Army period.

Never said it was etched in stone ever. Always tell people they have the right to change it which you do, and there is a process for it. To your so called vets you know, I take that with a grain of salt as most Vets I know would not let a non-Vet speak for them, nor would they discuss what they did in the military except with other Vets or family.

This is about taking rights away and knee jerk reaction to form laws that accomplish nothing to address the evil situation that happened.

Nice try with the wannabees to get a rise out of a Vet, but having lost family in almost every war in the last century, there are no wannabees in my family only those that all volunteered without exception. They call that serving your Country. You may be interested to know that only about 20% are combat troops in a war zone the rest are logistical support just as valuable and in harms way.

Oops NL forgot to address your NEC, I had to look it up because it means nothing to me as it is for the Navy, I was in the Army. It is Not the same you know? Also none of your business, and I am far from an Amateur with weapons of many various forms as are many civilians, Being in the military does not automaticly make you an expert but practice whether in military or civilian makes you proficient.
.

Let's get this straight;

You enjoy the product of all other endeavors that have advanced since our founding; like indoor plumbing, electricity and medicine that doesn't involve leeches - right?

Why is it that an AMENDment is for some reason etched in stone?
(To amend means to change or alter.)

It's a deadly form of nostalgia.

You claim the high ground on the 2nd Amendment and all interpretation of the US Constitution based on your military service, presumably under fire, yet won't elaborate on what you did in uniform?

Cool story, Gramps.

Here's a question for you, as a VET - Jack.
What was your MOS?

I know a couple Desert Shield vets, they don't particularly like the idea of amateurs
carrying high velocity weapons. It's not professional.

The word they've used is "wannabees", I believe.
What sort of combat did YOU see, Jack?

If you want to lay claim to expertise, back it up - what are YOUR credentials?
Bear in mind that a few of us are well aware of the ramifications under the
stolen valor act. I'm guessing you're the 1970's equivalent of a FOBBIT.

NL I told you if you want to change the amendment have at, I will obey the change if you succeed.

As for the other stuff. you are treading on thin ice there and it is uncalled for. You do not know me nor have I ever discussed my military on line. It is none of your damn business period. You want to talk about that do it in person I am in the book.

You are discusting to even mention "Stolen Valor" and that is an accusation of slander. Keep it up and you will find out from a lawyer what slander is so dont bother posting a link to it. I lost family and many friends in WW2, Korea,NAM Iraq, Afgan and many more Wars. You should be a shamed of yourself.

Personal attacks are your forte and I hope the MOD sees this and and bans you for it. It is so far out of line for anyone to suggest Stolen Valor on a person any person jsut for the sake of a personal attack. You wanted a rise out of me? Well you got it anonymous genius. I am sure the MOD will delete this for being so off topic, But I will not stand by and be accussed of something so horrendous that obviously requires a response to your antagonistic rants for months now on people.

Tell your desert storm friends I will be happy to meet them also, I am in the book.

From now on you can pound sand for all I care. You are just a worthless person posting useless information and personal attacks to get your sick jollies and that is a fact. Good day NL.

Sorry, I must have missed the answer in there...

You're claiming some sort of clearer vision into the workings, application and intention of the US Constitution because of your military service. Further, you've claimed expertise into the handling and disposition of weapons.

It sounds like a great deal of the Tea Party bluster about "real Americans" with nothing behind it other than where you were born, and when.

Put up or shut up.

Sadly It seems Pam, those kind of stories are never shown except in local area's they happen. The National Media almost never get into it unless there is well known celeb of politician involved in incidents like that. However they do happen everyday in this Country and are very pertinent to the topic at hand. Thanks for the link, the kid is a hero in my book anyway, and thank goodness he had a gun and new how to use it, as it appears had he not all those kids would be dead and the screams to ban weapons by honest people would yet again rise.

This is what gets me on this. The flip side of people defending themselves who would be dead if not for the ownership of a gun is never talked about or put on the fore front of this topic. Only the negative and never the positive. Thanks again ;-}

There are many stories like this. Did you read this one...

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/23/12-year-old-girl-shoots-home-intruder/

Nothing being proposed would have precluded the student from defending himself. I am glad he was able to protect himself and his friends. However, since he pulled the gun from his backpack, it seems unlikely to have been a bushmaster.

No Pam, wish hit him in the chest though, I hate to think what wo9uld have happen to a 12 year old with a but like that in the house. Least it is TX and he will be away for a long time I think

I use to go to the NRA site and there is another one I can't recall right now that keeps track of these type of incidents of home defense. It happens a lot, whether in cities or rural. That is why I find it strange when people say if one life is saved by penalizing law abiding citizens, where is the praise for those who have defended themselves and saved lives?

Lets face it that does not fit the narative anti-gun people want to hear in my opinion. I have yet to see a pro-gun advocate not talk about enforcing the laws on the books and hold criminals responsible. t makes no sense to hold honest people responsible for the actions of dishonest. It sounds like a broken record I know, but that is the fact of the matter to me.

Heather the semi-hand gun fires just as fast as the Bushmaster there is no difference, it is how a weapon is used and who uses it. Like I said to you before, I have no problem with reasonable non-knee jerk solutions such as loop holes i the businesses or the gun shows that allow people who are not able to get it a weapon legally. But to do wide spread regulations or laws that will penalize the honest citizen is wrong to me. Bans I am against totally. There are current bans on many weapons and it has been done in the past and did nothing according the the Department of Justice and many other studies. If it didn't work in ten years I do not see how trying it again will.

It should also e noted Heather that the Bushmaster was not the only weapon used and the investigation is on going. The Cornor who first said it all bushmaster bullits has sense decided to not say a word, and the FBI,ATF, Local police are all keeping quiet now about it along with a lot of confusion and differing stories on exactly what weapons he had in the school.

I think we should wait till the investigation is done before just writing laws, when we do not have the facts yet. Would that not be prudent? Just saying

I you can see I am passionate on this issue, but not blind to reasonable discussion over time to get any solution right the first time.

Heather; In order to understand a little better on where I am coming from anyway. Pleas watch this video, it will inform you what an assult rifle is and the difference between them and a hunting rifle. If will also show you proof that the magazine argument banning of 30 round magazines means absolutly nothing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=8C-CLsMRcA0

One more thing Heather ;-}. That student was in GA, had that been in CT. he would not have had the Handgun unless he was 21 years old, which is why the CT shooter had to steal his mothers guns. Also since he killed his mother in the process, there was no no lw that would have prevented him from getting those guns or any criminal from getting them, unless you ban all people from owning weapons of anykind which obviously is impossible.

"Sadly It seems Pam, those kind of stories are never shown except in local area's they happen." - Jack, who can't do math

It's because they're vanishingly rare.
(0.19 percent of recorded instances since December of last year.)
Compared to the number of fatalities in 2012 and it's less.

Perhaps that's because there is no National collection of this data, which was quashed by the NRA in restricting the CDC research into American gun violence.

2 cases where women successfully defended themselves, at home with a gun.
I'm all for women defending themselves at home, that seems a good baseline.

The number of gun killings, in America as recorded by Slate since Newtown?

1019

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.htm

Correction of 1 letter (t) should have been an (m) in the word (But) and a number (9) accidently added to the word (would), hope this allows that person to now sleep at night. lol It seems to bother people who have a "legend in their own mind and an obsessive need to serch for typing errors of only certain posters. Geesh get a life! The correction;

"No Pam, I wish it hit him in the chest though, I hate to think what would have happened to a 12 year old with a bum like that in the house"

I've deleted comments that are personal attacks. Criticize ideas, stay on topic, and we're good.

The mods do a tremendous job here, and there's a great deal to manage.

This is still the best moderated site, around.
It's a thankless task.

JAT besides the moderators any theree people can delete a post. If three people flag your comment it is automaticly deleted so three people acting together can remove any posts they want. People keep asking the mods why did you delete my post when it might have been anyone.

A combination of enforcement of existing regulations as well as new requirements and restrictions is needed. Mental health certainly needs to be a consideration, and obstacles to states sharing that information need to be removed. Given the way gun transactions so easily permeate state boarders, I believe action is needed at the federal level. (And by the way, the part about baby killing is GROSSLY out of line.)

The problem with the Federal level Heather is the 10th Amendment.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".

The information on sharing have been largly solved except a few States still do not and the Fed cannot force then because of State rights. Though I agree I see no reason all law inforcement should not be sharing anyway. The Feds have done that for the most part finally. Part of the problem was J. Edgar Hoover kept conrol of everything as well as the others who do not share some information still today for obvious reasons of national security. But most domestic crimes I see no reason for not sharing. Sadly usualy politics is involved in this though rather than common sense on sharing.

The Mental Health issue definatly needs some work also, however you will end up with a lot of ACLU privacy issues on that I am sure as happened in the past. Not sure how much can be done on that do it being health issue which is the most protected private information of citizens out there. Must be some way.

Ironicly Arizona is 1 State of 2 that has a law where they can the State can commit and individual after evaluation with out the individuals permisson I read after the Gifford shooting. I was surprised it was only 2 States on that. But that is a slippery slope also in my opinion ripe for abuse by government.

Since part of the problem is guns travelling from states with lax gun laws to states with stringent ones, I believe there is a case to be made that the Interstate Commerce Clause would apply - thereby overcoming any 10th Amendment issue.

Would be Heather except traving through a state with perfectly legal item that you already own, would not be commerce. Many States have laws on transporting explosives or weapons through their State requiring you to follow those individual State laws now. Also consider the delivery and trucking industry, trains, planes etc. No State would be able to ban that as it would curtail your freedom to visit who you want. I also know of no State where hunting is totally banned. Not to mention a nighmare for law enforcement as there is no way they could stop you for it unless you were stopped for something else. With 87 million owners it would never be possible in my opinion to do that. I think any State that tried that would be stopped immediatly as it would violate the 2nd Amendment which says the weapons are legal and would make it also Unconstitutional to use the Comerce clause to regulate individual people, that is not what it is for at all.

Well States have been able to make gun free zones, that is far cry from making a State a gun free zone. I doubt you get any politicians to try that one. In the end it would still not stop criminals.

Interesting suggestion though, would not be surprised to see that tried somewhere like NY or CA.

Should of added Heather; look at the past problems just in this State for decades with State police and local law enforcement sharing information in a Stae 30 miles by 90 miles with less than a million people and it has happen many times in criminal cases over the decades, though is getting better.

Point being it is an on going problem usualy of "control freak" ego's in department heads or politicians I suspect.

I agree fully with enforcing the 20,000 laws on the books currently in this Country on guns. There lays much of the problem to me. Sadly it is the same problem we see in so many departments in States like DCYF, Welfare fraud, Medicare fraud, SS fraud, and on and on. If we can't even follow the information on that when we can trace a cow with Mad Cow dease back to the day it was born and who owned it, there is no hope.

Maybe someone should figure out how the FDA or Credit Card Companies are able to find things and the Government cannot. (except for the FDA ;-}

You're right the MIL, Murders in our penal system are let out all the time and do it again, if the axium if to do something to save just one life then that should not be possible. Never heard of a rehab program that will stop a murderer from doing murder again or any other crime for that matter once caught.

It is a personal choice and self-responsibilty of the individual on whether to break the law and no-one elses.

Jordan, I agree with both of your points. Unfortunately, you will find that there is a segment of the population that objects to any type of rational discussion regarding this topic.

Alas, I am neither President nor Senator. I have not advocated for eliminating all guns. I do want them at least as regulated as my automobile (licensing requirements, background checks, insurance etc.), and I want the ammunition subject to the same requirements as pseudafed (ie: I can only purchase up to a certain amount within a given time frame, and I give my licence number to do so). I will note that the wife in GA fired 6 shots. That is within the limitations that have been proposed. In my opinion, an AR-15 is not necessary for home protection or hunting game. It becomes my business when I have to explain to my children why they need lock-down drills in school, and what happened in Newtown. Sadly, it is now all of our business.

Heather; Again cars are a privilage to drive and regulated so much becuase of that and the fact they are on taxpayers infastruture.

To the amount of ammo, consider this. He was still coming after her and the twin girls after 6 shots if that is the one I am thinking of. It is not easy to stop all people with a few shots as not everyone is the accurate or has time to aim for center mass ie the torso. I believe that perp on the woman and her children was also hit in the head also and still was coming toward where they were hiding.

Limitation is makes no sense as what happens if there is more than one perp or they have body armor or vest which we see a lot of now like in Auroa shooting.

An AR15 is nothing more than a hunting rifle, and is used for that prupose by millions of people. Best home defense weapons are considered to be by most people handgun or shotgun, however semi-auto rifles have been around for over a century, there is no difference between an AR15 or any other semi-auto rifle so why do people pick on that or the AK47? Because they look like military weapons, but are not. No cosmetic changes would make a differenc either in crime as that is what the previous ban tried for over ten years and it accomplished nothing in the way of curtaqiling any violence at all by all studies done by law enforcement over that ten year period of the ban.

Lock down drill for violence, fires, eathquakes are nothing new. To show my age lol. We use to have to get under the desk drill in the late 50's and early 60's for a nuke attack or move to the bomb shelter in the cellar of the school. These are only prudent planning for a situtaion you can't possibly have control over.

I should mention I am not trying to twart you at every opinion you make on this. I hope I am merely pointing out just the counter argument of what and why things will not work or are not going to accomplish the task of stopping criminals that do evil in the name of who the heck knows why. One thing is sure however and that is we can never stop people from killing other with any law or ban on anything.

Once Pandora's box is open it cannot be closed as they say, and that applies to both sides of the argument as time has shown. Wish there was an answer to violence but it seems the only real answer is education and evolvement all humans to respect all life. But I do not think that is in the human genes.

At the bottom of Pandora's Box was Elpis (Hope), and that give us the strength to persevere.

Good one. Heather I forgot about that ;-}. There is always Hope no Doubt.

When someone is convicted of a DUI, they are typically prohibited from operating a vehicle. We also do hold business and hosts liable if they knowingly serve an intoxicated or underage person. To use your analogy: think of the comprehensive background check as making sure you are of "legal drinking age" and don't have a "DUI" (ie: a prior conviction which would make you ineligible to own a gun) and are not "intoxicated" (ie: you have not been flagged for mental health issues which would preclude the responsibility of gun ownership). We also have a multitude of regulations associated with vehicle operation and ownership. I believe it is reasonable to make the same level of requirements for gun ownership.

"The way you people reason when there is a DUI then the driver should sue and hold the liqour manufactuer liable." - Tedd, maker of strawmen

This is a fallacy, where you construct a weak version of an opposing argument and
tear it down, as if they were the same. The comparison of automobiles, which are designed to be safe to firearms, which are designed to be deadly is deeply flawed.

Nice try, but this sort of intellectual weakness illustrates the point - it ain't the brightest lights on the porch ranting about their "rights".

Aren't you lot the same ones clanging on about everyone else being responsible?

Even money says you were lining up to make sure "those people" had a photo ID
to vote... we're asking for the same depth of registration - for all guns.

Naome worng again it is you who deflect the issue he never said anything abiut automobiles he was talking about alcohol. Alcohol is a posion and was never designed to be safe. The fact is a gun without a person behind it never killed anybody. Get over it guns are here to stay if you can't face facts thats your problem just because you can't refute facts don't try to turn that around on the person making them.

"Even money says you were lining up to make sure "those people" had a photo ID
to vote... we're asking for the same depth of registration - for all guns."

Naome, aren't the democrats in RI the ones that passed voter ID here? The left went after "those people" here in RI. It's not about right or wrong, it's about control.

Since you put it out there, how does registration make us safer?

"...it ain't the brightest lights on the porch ranting about their "rights"." Naome, you're obviously an intelligent person but you constantly attack people and that takes away from your message. Calling people stupid, calling them "Jethro", how is someone supposed to debate or even take you seriously you when you make attacks like that? When you have to resort to personal attacks to make your point that speaks of the point you're trying to make.

Naome has a habit of cyberstalking people who do not agree with her. She not only has a problem with the 2nd amendment but she has a problem with the 1st amendment also she doesn't think anybody has a right to their opinion outsid their home town.

she also thinks this is a left right issue she can't comprehend that a liberal can be against gun control and support the second amendment.

I agree Robert it is far from a left or right issue, (though the left in Congress and the extrem left are pushing it)

With 87 million gun owners in the Country it would be foolish to say they are all from the right. Vast majority of people wish to defend themselves and their families, I do not think political affiliation is all inclusive in that at all.

Most of this is knee jerk reaction or political fodder to advance a political agenda or garner votes no matter what party the politician is on in this banning and over regulation which itseft is the same as banning. We should be more concerned that there are people who would use tragedies to further a political agenda on the backs of those involved in the tragedy or evil in my opinion.

I'm with you Joe Sousa

Joe Hillary would say. " What difference does it make". With a mindset like that we are doomed in my opinion. Sad really sad.

The only thing being accomplishes by the Anti-gun people is too demonize over 87 million law abiding Americans who merely happen to own a legal product that like any other product, if it is used for illegal activity, it is the person using it illegally not the product.

There is only one way to do what Anti-gun people want. That is to become a tolotarian society where the Government control every aspect of your life in what you own. However even those societies have the same crimes you think you can stop with this notion of taking away or regulating them to such an extreme that it will be the same as banning them from law abiding citizens.

Once again, Jack declines to cite his source. For everyone else, Jacky's latest spewage was lifted from:

http://nstarzone.com/GUNS.html

Oh, and the mission of "nstarzone.com" is as follows: "I've created this website to stand against these anti-Christian, anti-American gangsters, to give you a Christian survivalist based perspective on today's events, and hopefully inspire you to join me in taking a stand in whatever way God has guided you to."

Among the other frightening initiatives promoted on this website is this gem: "Ban cell phones and cell towers. Anyone who has honestly investigated this knows that cell phones cause brain tumors, and other forms of cancer."

It's all about context, Jacky.

Actually Nard, I got that from an email I had from a long time ago, though I did correct some of the numbers and estimates which were incorrect. I have no clue of the site you post. Since when are facts spewage. If you are going to spout about context, how about you stay on topic and explain what is incorrect about the numbers posted?

Now thats context.

By the way these numbers are in about I estimate a million or more sites and history books. Trying to defect the post by finding some ubscure site that happens to have them on it also is, well an ignorant observation to say the least. You may find it not to your narative, however I am not Christian; numb.

Paul part of what you described is already illegal here in RI. http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/title11/11-47/11-47-60.1.HTM

Well I agree that in the home safety should come first, especially if there are young children in the home. By that I mean you teach your children safety and the dangers of a weapon and the difference between play ones and real.

Take them to a firing range, show them the damage real guns do. No differnt then teaching them about the dangers of predators, chemicals in the home etc.

You have to also realize Paul that no criminal has ever been stopped by an unloaded gun or one with a trigger lock, or in a gun safe etc. These calls for a limit on 7 round is also insane. Many criminals run in pairs, and do not wait for you to reload, since they obviously are not going to follow a 7 round law, do you take away the citizen right to only defend themselves with everything at their disposal or just enough to get them killed.

TO be sure it is a complicated problem as far as the criminals go with the exception of enforcing the 20,000 laws and regulation currently on the books in this Country. But even then the criminals do not follow laws.

To disarm the honest law abiding citizens preventing them from defending their self and family is insanity in my opinion and has been proven a recipe for disaster each and every snigle time it has been tried.

I would point you to the recent Story, you can look it up on google, of the woman in Georgia who had a pistol, which they were following the safety protocls, by common practice of only 5 bullets in it since it was a revolver not semi-auto, ( the reason for that is so that a bullet is not under the firing pin, because if it is dropped it could and proably would fire), also a common mistake of many gun owners sadly.

She fired all 5 shots well pertecting her twin girls from a closet as the man kept coming after her, she hit him everytime and he still walked out of the house. +Humans are raely killed with 1 shot from any handgun even a head shot which you are taught never to do. ( it is next to impossible for the average shooter to do) It is also why all military, law enforcement and civilians are taught to aim for the center mass of the torso I.E. the center of the chest.

Though past studies found no correlation between the video games or music, it may be time to re-educate kids on the difference between reality and those games and TV. To especially has a habit of perpetually showing single shot kills, or wounding in the foot or arm, which is not reality at all. Only specially trained snipers are capable of that and most people could not afford a real sniper rifle nor would you have the time to use it in anycase.

This is not a "here we go" merely the facts or problems with your argument ;-}.

Listen to the 911 call on the GA woman as her husband guides her through that incident in real time as it is happening with the police on the line also. It is chilling.

Paul, you're exactly right. A true attempt at solving this has to acknowledge the limits of what can and cannot be accomplished. We should also look at what inspires people to murder. Our popular culture is teaching our kids to kill without purpose - murder - and for points. Movies and tv make it cool, and video games instruct children to murder for points. Background checks: yes. Locks and safes: yes. Mandatory safety training: yes. But it's notable Hollywood suspended the release of two pointless thrill-murder movies the weekend the Newtown murders happened. The popular culture has great responsibility for promoting murder as entertainment. I'm stunned at the number of parents that call these things entertainment and willfully ignore the effects they have on our kids. The same parents that would refuse to allow their kids to be taught to handle a firearm responsibly allow them to murder virtually for hours in the name of entertainment.

RWB. "Locks and safes, Safety training are common sense as well as a backround check which is the law already in this State and many States for a hand gun, which is the most reliable choice along with a shotgun for home protection. Sadly however cannot legislate stupidy in people so it is pointless to make laws you cannot enforce for the sake of garning votes and that is all those laws and many proposed are doing.

Again it is one the owner to educate family members not the Government or some burocrat. I have not seen a single proposal yet that will affect or accomplish a single thing to stop criminals and just plain evil people from commiting those acts that violate present laws.

What people do not seem to understand and it baffles me why? Is why they think banning a gun, taxing ammo and guns to make them out of reach of an honest law abiding citizen, regulating to the point of effectivly disarming that citizen I.E. ammo amounts and how much ammo a gun can hold etc. When no criminal will obey a single law or regulation proposed!

Laws are made to keep honest people honest in fear of the penalty of breaking that law. But when laws are used to take away the rights of honest people for the actions of dishonest people it is insanity at the very least, in my opinion.

Actually, what it proves is that he was willing to murder, and if he knew the difference between right and wrong, he effectively suppressed remorse, shock, and horror. He applied the lessons he learned from hours of sensory deprivation to control his emotions as he murdered children. The suppression of emotion and negative physical response is the very point of virtual and repetitive training.

As to your second item, he was not well trained. He was self-trained. No child or adult should have unsupervised and un-facilitated instuction in violence. Newtown, Columbine, etc. is the result.

You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Adam Lanza was well trained by a responsible, experienced owner or registered guns. She was his first victim.

He knew how to handle his weapon, he knew right from wrong and he knew how to do the most damage to a community by attacking it's children.

This continued attempt by gun-rights advocates to deny the contribution a lethal weapon had in this, or any shooting is contemptible and disrespectful of the dead.

"CNN confirmed Monday afternoon with ATF that Adam Lanza and his mother frequented several gun ranges over the past several years. The agency will not identify which ranges. Russ Hanoman, a friend of Nancy Lanza, said she was the "epitome of responsibility."

"They've painted her as some irresponsible gun freak, but she wasn't," he said. "She was a paragon for gun safety. She taught the boys how to use the guns responsibly." CNN 21DEC2012

It's cowardly to deny the obvious.
Guns are deadly.

I was merely adding to some of your thoughts on it and what I thought maybe a misconception on some as the lock and safe is.

Training and safety are paramount to owning anything or working with anything that is dangerous. My main point is that there is no way to legislate common sense or stupidy. Especially by penalizing legal citizens who do follow the regulations.

I know at my Club we are told not to engage a person who is doing something in an unsafe manner except to point it out and if the person tries to argue, you just leave and call the club officers so as not to create a confrontation. Reasonable actions as this whole argument should be but sadly is not.

The anti-gun people are doing nothing but demonizing all gun owners period. That is wrong and shows how misinformed they are. So many of them and I say the majority since you never see many moderates, whether in media or on blogs. There are some, like Heather who wrote this who is being very reasonable in her view and debating the issue, all be it, I am not in agreement with quite a few of her proposals, but some I am.

I agree on the police outselves, such as the so called gun show loophole, I think needs to be closed, I do not want illegals, criminals or anyone with a felont, or otherwise to be able to just go to a gun show and buy what they want. Very few State regulate then well and that I think the NRA should get into and set standards for safe sales.

I will however never agree to deep government involvement of data bases of every legal gun owner and what they own, or buy, how much ammo they use or store, etc. I am a private citizen and it is no-ones business plain and simple ;-}.

The definition of "Militia" when if was put into the Constitution is very simple. It mean the people who at a moments notice can be called upon to protect the Country, even if it is from the Government itself.

A bold move at the time, but past history showed the Founders it was the only safe guard of freedom in the end is the people themselves.

The were never meant to be a standing army, but a reserve of the people who would be the last vanguard of freedom. That is how I believe it anyway.

I put the Government in there because there are proposals on the table and in these comments of the Government controling these things. That for me is very dangerous indeed. Right are being eroded every single day in the last couple of decades, no matter the party in office and yes it scares me.

Use to think and say to people they were paranoid. Now I think they were not paranoid but predictors of what was to come. Show me any Government program that is efficient, and free of fraud waste and abuse and I will accept that the Government is capable. However that is not true and never will be except in a "Utopia" that does not exist in my opinion.

Like I said, not deriding you just trying add more clarity I guess ;-}

Also RWB, as you probably know, no gun club allows you to shoot with out proper training that I know of. In this State there is really no way to train anywhere except on a controled range. Same with many towns and cities with clubs. This State has Backround checks and you must have a blue card before a dealer can even sell you a gun. You cannot buy ammo in MA if you live in RI, because of MA laws forbidding that.

I think there has been enough regulation and that maybe these politicians should concider enforceing the laws and regulations on the books rather than penalizing honest law abding citizens just for political points on the backs of murdered children in my opinion. That is one of the many reasons why I am so passionate about this.

you all have an honorable mention in the poetry blog

As usual NL, you just name call, insult and are afraid of the facts when they do not fit your fantasy of a solution. So 87 milion people are "overweight, out of shape, over the hill beer bellied blowhards" huh? Amusing and bigoted at the same time.

What does Zimmerman have to do with this? Far as I know he has not even been convicted of anything. How about we let justice run first, or do you prefer lynching to a trial, it would fit with most of your views on this issue in my opinion.

I doubt very much the US Army would start shooting civilians like you want them too if the Government decides to turn to tyranny and disarm the people. Our military is like no other as well as out law enforcement. They are not going to roll over an let the Country turn into your wish of burning the Constitution, and subjegating the people under their boots.

I love how you talk about your rights but want to remove the rights of 87 million other people to accomplish nothing more than feel good you did it. It will however still not solve a single thing you claim you want to solve.

I guess it was to much to ask my question. I figured you of all the anti-gun people on here would attempt it. But I was wrong. Here it is again.

"Name one thing ever banned in the 20th Century that accomplished its goal of stopping it from being used by a criminal or evil person for the matter?"

PS; It's "Plan 9 From Outer Space" A great Ed Wood movie ;-}

I love Poetry Leave RI, Thanks for the mention ;-}