“The child "somehow" found a gun in the living room? Most likely, it was sitting out in plain sight on the coffee table. We have here yet another irresponsible--but probably law-abiding--gun owner. With friends like this, who needs enemies?”
“Anti-government groups don't attack the people? What about Timothy McVeigh? And I suppose you'll say that anti-abortion groups don't attack the people either? Tell that to the doctors who have been murdered and the clinic workers who are threatened on a daily basis. One more question: who would choose Patriot Day for this act of terrorism? In the 60s and 70s, we had to worry about violent acts committed by the far left. Nowadays, we have to worry about acts committed by the far right.”
Hendrickson on Apr 17, 2013 at 17:37:30
“Who would choose Patriot Day? Most likely those that want to pin the bombing on the Patriot movement, or pinning it on returning vets, claiming that they are American Al Qaeda. But, they don't need to blame anyone. Homeland security will just use the crisis as an excuse to roll out more authoritarian security.”
“Senator Wicker won't receive any more tainted letters, since he's flipped on the proposed background check legislation, and now intends to vote against it. It looks to me like that the letter was sent by a disgruntled right winger(s) who was unhappy when Wicker initially appeared to be leaning in favor of the legislation. At this point in our nation's history, we have the far right to fear rather than the far left.”
“I think you may have it mixed up. Senator Wicker initially indicated that he was leaning toward voting for the proposed expanded background check legislation. My guess? The individual or group who sent the letter to Wicker did it to scare him into voting AGAINST the bill.”
“So you're rehashing the "America: love it or leave it" mantra from the Vietnam War days? I prefer to stay where I am. Ya'll are free to move to Iraq, or Afghanistan, or wherever, so you can play shoot 'em up cowboy games.”
seancoddington on Apr 15, 2013 at 17:49:22
“What are you talking about? I am rehashing the I have rights as an AMERICAN CITIZEN and if you try to take them away I will use any means necessary to protect them.”
“I believe 100% in the Bill of Rights. But I also feel that I and my loved ones have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as stated in the Declaration of Independence, free from the fear that every Tom, Dick, and Harry--and Mary, too--is running around with a semi-automatic with a 100 round magazine. You have the right to own firearms for protection and recreation. You don't have the right to own a personal mini-arsenal. And you certainly don't have the right to attempt to overthrow our lawful government should the Supreme Court in the future reverse itself on the 2nd amendment issue, and rule that it applies only to "well-regulated militias". My guess is that most of you gun fondlers would throw our Constitution right out the window if a SC reversal interfered with your gun ownership.”
“You're a sorry excuse for an American citizen, but I have to give you credit for being honest!”
Ambassador Nigel on Apr 14, 2013 at 22:46:56
“Yeah, everyone who supports the Constitution is a disgrace to America. In your eyes.”
seancoddington on Apr 14, 2013 at 19:43:36
“Sorry excuse for protecting his rights? Maybe you would like to give up your rights and I am all for it, move to cuba, iran, or one of those places.I for one will not relinquish mine.I don't own a gun but if they start coming for them I will buy one.I am almost 60 years old and will have no problem defending my rights to the end.”
awake1112 on Apr 14, 2013 at 19:35:33
“a sorry excuse for an american citizen is anyone who dont believe in the bill of rights”
“Cowards, you say? Cowards are those who don't feel safe unless they have their own personal arsenal of semi-automatics and large capacity magazines, those who are afraid to leave their homes unless they're carrying. As for the bedwetting insult, it just goes to show that you're a classy guy, right?”
unused9997 on Apr 13, 2013 at 10:58:45
“You did read the several Classy comments from your lefty pals right after his didn't you?”
“It's not easy, but I have to admit that you're correct on this point. It is indeed easier to target police officers, which was the case in Parkland. Still, the element of surprise can be pretty deadly, even for those with a concealed carry.”
MEVirginia on Apr 12, 2013 at 10:28:12
“Agreed. The element of surprise can be deadly. For somebody with a concealed gun, they have to evaluate the situation to see if they could even pull the gun without being killed, and if they do will they be able to shoot. Like the military anybody carrying concealed needs to be trained and not just at the range. Not willing to spend time and money on training, then do not carry, you are more of a danger to yourself and others around you than a help.”
“It's time for you to come out of your bubble. I've seen posts on this site from gun fondlers who threaten violence should this law or that law pass. It's bully talk to scare us from pursuing the issue of gun control. By the way, years ago I attended an NRA rally--as a counter-protester, of course--on the steps of the capitol building in Olympia, WA. Believe me, I was threatened multiple times by NRA members, so please knock off the BS. Whether you want to admit it or not, alot of ya'll--but certainly not all--are nothing but thugs at heart.”
fjmcm on Apr 11, 2013 at 22:56:06
“Where is the link to my statement not your stories I got stories also”
“And there are thousands of cases where firearms owned by law-abiding citizens have killed innocents, whether accidentally or intentionally. There are many more thousands of similar incidents resulting in injury rather than death. Every day we hear stories of children shooting children, homeowners shooting loved ones and friends late at night, fatal road rage incidents involving guns, children bringing daddy or mommy's gun to school, and on and on. Seems ya'll don't like to think about those things, doesn't it?”
record7jet on Apr 11, 2013 at 22:42:01
That's exactly it but your not getting it at all. The media ONLY shows types of events you just said. BUT NOT any storys how someone WITH a gun stopped 1, 10, 30 from getting killed. We see the stories you say (only you exaggerated the amount or frequency). Thats there job to report but NOT pick & choose which ones because there willfully trying to make one side look worse than it is.
IF they reported any of more shootings with a good ending (good means even if life is lost many more were saved that would have died). Fact your media isn't doing there job because there not reporting it.
example: We all know how Sandy hook went & only took just minutes & even when police arrived the killing was mostly over.
Now your blasted each min with its the guns!!!!
Now what if someone was there (gaurd or legal carry person visiting his kid) they plugged the guy within minute after the first shot & only 2, 4 died? & the media actually truthfully reported it as it was only so few that died because there was someone with a gun there & the police showed up 5 mins after stopped. If you heard mostly those types of stories often & not in just schools wouldn't you tend to think that it actually just the person not the gun?
Well there's many more instances like that then you think. Blaim your media for playing you”
“Should the Supreme Court ever reverse itself, and rule that the 2nd amendment applies only to well-regulated militias rather than individual citizens, I hope that you remember how it works in a Republic. I suspect that alot of you, unfortunately, would forget, and would choose to take matters into your own hands--in other words, violate the law. Granted, it's a very, very long shot that the SC will reverse itself on the 2nd amendment in our lifetime, but hey, I never thought I'd live to see a black man elected President of the United States. I'm hoping.”
illinoisgun on Apr 11, 2013 at 21:28:16
“And when my uncle begins to grow breasts I will remember to call him my aunt. Thanks.”
“Excellent suggestion. Ironically, many of those strongly opposed to such an idea don't know that the Army has a similar practice. When a soldier's rifle isn't being used on the range or in a combat environment, it's securely locked up in the unit arms room. A weapon found to be missing from the arms room often prompts a lock-down until the lost item is located. If it's good enough for the military, isn't it good enough for our civilians? At least our Army leaders recognize that it's dangerous having people running all over the place with unsecured firearms.”
Atwill on Apr 11, 2013 at 20:47:22
“this is the same for the prison i work in. the officers do this. check them out, turn them in. I see no reason to take them home.”
“At least we're not threatening to back up our big talk with guns, as ya'll are fond of doing.”
fjmcm on Apr 11, 2013 at 20:33:45
“name one time anyone has done that, name one NRA member that has killed anyone show me one link , now also show me where one person with a CCW permit has killed anyone, if any of this would have happened it be on every news outlet so your comment is like everything else you libs and progressives come out of your mouth BS.”
“Who in the world said anything about "banning private gun sales"? We're only trying to bring some common sense into the equation by requiring background checks on private sales. You are correct, however, when you state that criminals steal their guns. In many cases they steal their guns from the homes and vehicles of law-abiding citizens who originally purchased the firearms legally. If law-abiding citizens are allowed to own semi-automatics, super large capacity magazines, and so on, isn't it just a matter of time before a bad guy steals them and uses them to harm other law-abiding citizens? Lastly, I know you're not going to believe me, but most of us gun control advocates have no wish to confiscate the legal firearms used for self-defense and recreation, in light of the 2nd amendment. There should be common sense limits, however.”
illinoisgun on Apr 11, 2013 at 20:46:21
“The current bill pending in the Senate would ban the private sale of all intrastate firearms. Instead of blindly following the latest anti-gun hysteria, you should do some research on how the Federal government is overstepping it's Constitutional boundaries. Also bear in mind that semi-automatic and full standard capacity magazines are protected under the recent SC decisions.
If you are afraid that a criminal may steal a gun, please be sure not to buy one. Otherwise, we do not allow the actions of burglars to determine the extent of out civil liberties. That's not how it works in a Republic, son.”
“I guess you're not aware of the massacre that occurred in a Washington state (Tacoma vicinity) restaurant a few years back. Four well-armed police officers were eating in a booth. A gunman, with the element of surprise, walked up and executed all 4 of them. Only one of the officers was able to get off a single shot, which wounded the gunman, but he was still able to get away. Four dead police officers--I guess that qualifies as a mass shooting by your standards. All 4 of the officers were certainly "licensed gun carriers". What good did it do any of them?”
record7jet on Apr 11, 2013 at 21:59:27
“I'm just stating how its seen as a mass shooting by the definition set forth since 80's still today. Why the wouldn't call that instance a mass shooting? Well I would think maybe with the medias twisted way of thinking & how it wont report everything unless they manipulate the facts to serve there agenda. Maybe since its that they were all cops not kids or other innocents, or maybe it was only cops & the criminal only intended them & somehow was a hate crime towards cops? In the story it states it appeared the cops were the intended targets. You said:
""A gunman, with the element of surprise, walked up and executed all 4 of them.""
Like your trying prove more good guys guns wouldn't have mattered because they were armed? when taken by surprise anyone with gun can get taken down. What if one or more guy were sitting on the other side of the room not yet targeted with a legal guns? They most likely would taken the criminal down since now they had the surprise. Whether it would have all the officers, maybe not but Im sure they would have liked the instant back up.
If you intended to down play whether other citizens with legal guns wouldn't have made a difference that were not snuck up on wouldn't stop the criminal you failed.
The officer was still shooting & wounded criminal in the parkinglot. What if the officer didn't get his gun & woundhim?”
MEVirginia on Apr 11, 2013 at 20:58:57
“There is a difference between a police officer that is wearing a uniform telling the shooter that he is a police officer and a person of the general public wearing a gun concealed so nobody knows they are armed.”
wmarik8 on Apr 11, 2013 at 20:48:49
“For every incident which may occur like you referenced there are literally 10's of thousands in which private citizens with a gun have stopped crime. Easily researchable from the DOJ, the Police Foundation and Gallop. Singling out thses incidents is a foolish path to go on. It's like saying that everyone who smokes doesn't necessarily die of cancer....ignoring the 1/2 million who die from tobacco related illnesses every year.”