White House considers broader U.S. gun control: report

Comments (38)
reality-again wrote:

Sounds good.
This would be a great leadership test for Biden and Obama – If they succeed, future generations will remember their courage and determination, and thank them.

Jan 06, 2013 10:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
tatman wrote:

yesterday, i sold back a 9mm glock pistol to a retailer in my area. i had purchased the weapon a few months back to have in the house and to use for sport (shooting in a range, not hunting), but decided against continuing to be a gun owner after the newtown massacre. i would rather be someone who goes through my entire life never ending the life of another by a bullet. i don’t buy into the victim mentality, and there are plenty of ways to protect oneself other than with a firearm.

the scary thing though, was how many guns were flying off the shelves to frantic buyers stocking up their weapons supply when i stepped into the store. there were so many people purchasing guns, it was like a crowded concert venue — we had to meander and snake our way through hundreds of gun buyers. the salesman working with me even commented: “we’re not buying back guns very much right now — we’re selling them like crazy!”. it made me even more resolute in the voluntary surrendering of my weapon — how the hell could i protect myself in the event i should need to with one pistol, when many of the guns being sold were higher-capacity weapons? if someone were to enter my house with a Bushmaster, my 9mm glock (which i would have had to retrieve from a safe location and load a magazine) would have been useless — i would be mowed down like a duck in a shooting gallery before i could even open the case…

i’ll probably be the only non-gun owner in texas by the time this comment is posted, and surely be the butt of pro-NRA slander/comments as well. but, i’ll rest peacefully knowing that i no longer have a gun in the house. that gives me great reassurance in an odd way…

Jan 06, 2013 11:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
ccharles wrote:

And this will protect the children how?

Gun laws dont correct these problems. Just look at the major citys that have strict No Gun laws… namely chicago and New york, the highest murder rates in the country. These bozos in there now are acting like this is a new problem. Not. When we had Courthouse violence, we stopped it, every, and i mean every Courthouse has security and that effectivly stopped the violence to a large degree. Not arming the judges and prosecutors. How can we do less?

And do it with the ones trained for this work. I appreciate the Marines stepping up, but unless they are vetted by the authoritys im not too cool with that. Police are vetted and vested with the security of the community. Its there job, do it. Instead of shooting radar in the school zone, put an automated system on the street, and the cop at the door.

Jan 06, 2013 11:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
reality-again wrote:

@tatman

I salute you!

More than a shooting epidemic, this country is plagued by a gun addiction epidemic. Millions of Americans are gun junkies. They buy guns whenever they can, and for no reason other than they like buying and owning guns.
The NRA’s main role is to promote, facilitate and encourage gun addiction by any means.

Jan 06, 2013 11:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
beancube2101 wrote:

We don’t need gun laws. Our 2nd Amendment was written by mentally ills who honestly believed that only guns can overthrow govts. Defenseless kids are useful as the human shields against wimpy authorities but they are useless if we are facing some not so wimpy authorities. As to sport shooting effects, machine guns make more helpless noise from those defenseless kids when they are scared. It makes gun worshiping more entertaining. Shooting at news media broadcast scenes would be a lot more exciting regarding responsive level. We don’t need gun laws for this to be possible.

Jan 06, 2013 12:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
texoman wrote:

If you want to experience “Gun Control” visit Mexico if you dare! Only bad people and the law have guns. The bad people bribe or threaten the law and then the regular law abiding people are Screwed! About 50,000 people were murdered there in the last five years by drug cartels. We are not immune from this! I’m a Democrat, but I believe in unrestricted gun ownership! I support the NRA’s position on this and will never vote for a canidate that votes for any of this!

Jan 06, 2013 12:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse

McConnell can only focus on one thing at once. Don’t confuse
him. And it’s not like he doesn’t know which side his gun
is buttered on…

Jan 06, 2013 12:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
madmilker wrote:

and Congress has no intentions to look into this….

http://www.ssristories.com/index.php

most likely because the AMA and Pharmaceutical Lobbyist pay more than the NRA to those turnips on Jenkins Hill that don’t give a rat’s @ about freedom, liberty and hope…..only what they can spend in way of We the People’s future.

["In January 2012, the Mexican government reported that 47,515 people had been killed in drug-related violence since President Felipe Calderón began a military assault on criminal cartels soon after taking office in late 2006.

The official tally, provided by the attorney general’s office, included data only through September 2011, and it showed that drug-related killings increased 11 percent, to 12,903, compared with the same nine-month period in 2010. Still, a government statement sought to find a silver lining, asserting that it was the first year since 2006 “that the homicide rate increase has been lower compared to the previous years.”

But that was unlikely to calm a public scared by the arrival of grisly violence in once-safe cities like Guadalajara and in the region around Mexico City."]

Whether a gun can shoot only one bullet or many at a time….

the gun itself ever changes…

Only the society where the gun is at….

Over 60,000 have died from all types of gun fire in Mexico since Operation Michoacan started ….

The right to keep and bear arms was first recognized as a constitutional right under Article 10 of the Mexican Constitution of 1857…….

BUT in 1917 and also in 1972 Article 10 of the present Constitution was reformed…..

NOW….

you can come upon this site all you want and preach about how guns kill….

and one doesn’t have to be a sandwich short of a picnic to know that….

just look at the facts….

but what you fail to state in your plastering of hate of what guns of all types can do…

is…..

there is a finger in front of almost all those guns that are fired….

most attached to a person that loves outdoors, hunting and the shooting of guns as a sport…

The society in Mexico changed in the 60′s and in 1968 there where chants of ¡No queremos olimpiadas, queremos revolución! …..

and 20 to 30 people died….

Now, look at the past few years ….

62 killed in 2006
2,837 killed in 2007
6,844 killed in 2008
11,753 killed in 2009
19,546 killed in 2010
24,068 killed in 2011……

So, before you have the American Government change the Constitution….

maybe you need to ask how 24,068 people in Mexico last year got shot from living in a society where a person has the “right” to own nine long guns and one hand gun to be kept inside his/her home….

and outside the home it is a “privilege federal law” that is regulated and authorize on a case-by-case basis…..

Guns have only two enemies……RUST and POLITICIANS.

People have million of enemies….to which ignorance is at the top of that list.

“The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson

This O’fart knows most here will mock at what is written but whether one has a third grade education or a Phd from Yale or Harvard you sir/madam will have to wait until the people in Hell are drinking ice water and character reappears on Jenkins Hill in Washington before I surrender any of the guns this O’fart owns.

“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.” – Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts

Good day..!!

Jan 06, 2013 12:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
detroittruth wrote:

I do not want to shoot a home invader. Even more impoerant though, I dont want my family beaten, raped, and killed by one. Somebody kicks in my door, I am doing the best that I can using hands, knives, bats, and guns to send them to the low-life afterlife. I am not going to be like the second poster who assumes he will be out-gunned, out-drawn, and frankly out-manned. Baby you are a victim for somebody who says they dont buy into victim mentality.

Jan 06, 2013 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
madmilker wrote:

to this media….the truth hurts don’t it

and Congress has no intentions to look into this….

http://www.ssristories.com/index.php

most likely because the AMA and Pharmaceutical Lobbyist pay more than the NRA to those turnips on Jenkins Hill that don’t give a rat’s * about freedom, liberty and hope…..only what they can spend in way of We the People’s future.

["In January 2012, the Mexican government reported that 47,515 people had been killed in drug-related violence since President Felipe Calderón began a military assault on criminal cartels soon after taking office in late 2006.

The official tally, provided by the attorney general’s office, included data only through September 2011, and it showed that drug-related killings increased 11 percent, to 12,903, compared with the same nine-month period in 2010. Still, a government statement sought to find a silver lining, asserting that it was the first year since 2006 “that the homicide rate increase has been lower compared to the previous years.”

But that was unlikely to calm a public scared by the arrival of grisly violence in once-safe cities like Guadalajara and in the region around Mexico City."]

Whether a gun can shoot only one bullet or many at a time….

the gun itself ever changes…

Only the society where the gun is at….

Over 60,000 have died from all types of gun fire in Mexico since Operation Michoacan started ….

The right to keep and bear arms was first recognized as a constitutional right under Article 10 of the Mexican Constitution of 1857…….

BUT in 1917 and also in 1972 Article 10 of the present Constitution was reformed…..

NOW….

you can come upon this site all you want and preach about how guns kill….

and one doesn’t have to be a sandwich short of a picnic to know that….

just look at the facts….

but what you fail to state in your plastering of hate of what guns of all types can do…

is…..

there is a finger in front of almost all those guns that are fired….

most attached to a person that loves outdoors, hunting and the shooting of guns as a sport…

The society in Mexico changed in the 60′s and in 1968 there where chants of ¡No queremos olimpiadas, queremos revolución! …..

and 20 to 30 people died….

Now, look at the past few years ….

62 killed in 2006
2,837 killed in 2007
6,844 killed in 2008
11,753 killed in 2009
19,546 killed in 2010
24,068 killed in 2011……

So, before you have the American Government change the Constitution….

maybe you need to ask how 24,068 people in Mexico last year got shot from living in a society where a person has the “right” to own nine long guns and one hand gun to be kept inside his/her home….

and outside the home it is a “privilege federal law” that is regulated and authorize on a case-by-case basis…..

Guns have only two enemies……RUST and POLITICIANS.

People have million of enemies……to which ignorance is at the top of that list.

“The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson

This O’fart knows most here will mock at what is written but whether one has a third grade education or a Phd from Yale or Harvard you sir/madam will have to wait until the people in Hell are drinking ice water and character reappears on Jenkins Hill in Washington before I surrender any of the guns this O’fart owns.

“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.” – Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts

Good day..!!

Jan 06, 2013 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
KWMerican wrote:

People who fail to keep firearms are borrowers who don’t give back. Their sense of security is borrowed from responsible people who do keep firearms…which is what criminals fear.

Non-gunowners need to put their money where their mouth is. Post a sign on the front of your house that reads “This is a Gun-Free Home.”

Until then…

Jan 06, 2013 12:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gigimoderate wrote:

@tatman
Looks like you are in step with the Bushmasters owner Cerebus Capial! They first purchased Bushmaster in 2006 from the owner Dyke. They recently sold off ownership! I think they finally understand selling semi- automatic assault weapons that are designed to kill as many people as necessary in “combat” as no place in a civilian hands or homes!

Jan 06, 2013 12:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
justinolcb wrote:

ahh who cares what the Constitution of the United States of America says anyway??!!?? Obviously Obama is wiser than any of the Founding Fathers…

Jan 06, 2013 1:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
RexMax46 wrote:

@justinolcb
The “well regulated” clause in the second amendment shows that your irreproachable Founding Fathers intended to regulate gun ownership in the first place.

There is also another story in the news where a mother used a revolver to defend her home and family from an intruder. Gun nuts in the comments section are heralding this as some sort of counter-point to the White House’s gun control efforts. What these fools fail to see is that while the straw man they’re arguing against wants to take everyone’s guns away, the actual President of the United States is trying to pass a law which will allow for armed self-defense without an assault weapon or a large magazine clip. If anything, this news story backs up the Obama/Biden viewpoint.

Below is a link to the story.
http://now.msn.com/atlanta-mom-shoots-intruder-in-the-face-5-times?ocid=vt_twmsnnow

Jan 06, 2013 1:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
johnathan58 wrote:

“stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools”-yeah, that’ll stop the next school shooter dead in his tracks; no way they’ll dare break that law. Actually, that will make schools an even safer environment for an armed killer. Liberillogic strikes again.

Jan 06, 2013 2:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
davespc22 wrote:

I have decided to be Heard on this issue in the Loudest way I can manage; With my check book! The NRA, Second Amendment Foundation, Illinois State Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, National Association for Gun Rights and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, all received my early renewals and/or contributions this week. Also: I VOTE!!

Jan 06, 2013 4:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

Well since the highest court says people have a right to bear arms. Simple solution outlaw handgun ammo. Nothing in the constitution says people have the right to own ammo.

The average citizen really has no need for guns unless they hunt. People always say if good citizens don’t have guns, the criminals will. Well folks the stats say the majority of people will be killed by family, friends or themselves.

Jan 06, 2013 4:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

Mexico is dealing with the Drug Cartels who have revenue of 20-billion dollars. It is not like the average criminal is running around with a gun and killing people. It’s the Cartels who are doing all the killings.

So using this as an example is not good, really apples and oranges in comparison. The average citizen in many countries do not own guns and their death by gun rates are tiny. Take a look at South Korea, even England.

Jan 06, 2013 4:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jscott418 wrote:

Most guns that commit crimes are stolen or unregistered. All we end up doing with more regulation is make work in the form of paper work and fee’s. The right the bear arms won’t change anytime soon. Why a person needs a asault rife for target practice or hunting is beyond me. But I doubt much will come from Obama and Congress preventing him or her from doing just that. In fact more States are passing conceal and carry laws and more people are buying guns. Now tell me again how America is changing its attitude about guns?

Jan 06, 2013 5:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dragos111 wrote:

Let’s hope the GOP stands up for the rights of every American here and puts down these attempts to strip us of the right to defend ourselves. If sweeping gun laws go into effect those who vote them in will be voted out at the first opportunity.

Jan 06, 2013 5:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Carlo297 wrote:

The 2nd amendment is NOT about hunting, so much as it is to PROTECT ourselves from a govt that has been taken over by TYRANNY,
…kind of like now!

Jan 06, 2013 8:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mikefromaz wrote:

I am a lifelong gun owner without apology. I do however believe there is a lot to be gained through sane and sensable gun laws. Smaller msgszines won’t help. Anyone who spent 1 day in Vietnam knows taping magazines back to back is the preferred method for extended firepower.
Gun shows without backround checks? Get rid of them. In my opinion the glitz and hype of “gun shows” is no different than buying a Saturday night special in an alley. Waiting periods….absolutely. If you “need” a gun so desperately that you can’t wait, you have other issues that need attending to. Buying thousans or tens of thousands of rounds of ammo? For what the next revolution? If you need so much ammo, you must show cause, and no target shooting isn’t good enough to justify an army sized ammo order. Anyone who thinks he/she needs to fire ten thousand rounds a year has issues that need attending to. Make accidental gun fatalities to children in a family a charge of negligient homicide against the parents.

Jan 06, 2013 10:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Sonorama wrote:

ccharles makes a good point in his comment way up above this one. More proactive cops are needed, and their training should be better(-funded). I don’t think that the considered background check law is unreasonable but really isn’t the most precise way of measuring criminal intent. Plenty of armed criminals have been otherwise model citizens, and that should be taken into account by federal (and lower-tier) legislators.

Jan 06, 2013 11:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

johnathan58 wrote:
” Actually, that will make schools an even safer environment for an armed killer. Liberillogic strikes again.”

How did the armed killer get armed? Could it be that he walked into a shop and bought one, with the blessings of the NRA? Or maybe he begged, stole, or borrowed it from all these self-proclaimed responsible guns owners who make up the NRA?

Either way, it is the NRA and its sheep who are allowing killers to arm themselves. You are part of the problem.

Jan 07, 2013 3:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
txguy2112 wrote:

Looks like Obama is proposing the beginning of gun confiscation. You cannot take them unless you know who has them and where they are. Also, having Bloomberg as your poster boy just shows that the intent is the confiscation of all guns as his attitude is that nobody should have guns except his ARMED bodyguads. Are we really going to respond to a hypodrite like that and the others who want to completely disarm us while hiding behind their armed guards?

Jan 07, 2013 7:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

txguy2112 wrote:
“Are we really going to respond to a hypodrite like that and the others who want to completely disarm us while hiding behind their armed guards?”

Gun regulation means that gun-owners, who love to describe themselves as responsible, will have to prove it or give up their guns. To most people, irresponsible people with guns is not a smart idea, and judging from comments in thread (“from my cold, dead hands” etc) many current gun owners are far from responsible.

Is that why are you are all so scared of having to prove you are fit to have a gun?

Jan 07, 2013 9:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
AZreb wrote:

Maybe the WH should take a hard look at Chicago, the president’s home town. TEN killing in SEVEN days of the first week of 2013 – this in a city with strict gun control. Plus – if the government cannot track and trace the thousands of weapons in the “Fast and Furious” fiasco, how can we trust them to track and trace the millions of weapons now owned or to be sold legally?

No – not a member of the NRA – don’t own an assault rifle – have no weapon that holds a large capacity magazine. BUT – I do have a problem with trusting our government to do the reasonable and logical thing when it comes to gun control.

Jan 07, 2013 10:03am EST  --  Report as abuse
DaveEddleman wrote:

Good. I am a strong advocate for legal gun ownership, but gun owners should be required to be responsible and be held accountable for the weapons that they legally buy.

If we actually get all guns under control and in legal, responsible owner’s hands, this database should only be available to LEO Branches of our government. Criminals will become desperate to get their hands on 1. Let’s not advertise where they are at, huh?

I would go further and add manditory federal prison sentences of 5 years or more for anyone, publically or privately, selling a gun and not verifying individuals who wish to purchase it have a legal right to own one, and for not “transfering title to that individual in the database.

Manditory federal prison sentences of minimum of 5 years, or being charged as an accessory to the crime committed, (whichever is higher) for anyone who doesn’t “notice” that someone “stole” a gun and properly document it stolen to the authorities PRIOR to it being used to commit a crime would be needed as well to prevent straw buyers. There should be a 2 gun “loss” limit to disallow a person from ever being able to buy another gun, not by saying that they are straw buyers, which they probably are, but regardless, if they are too irresponsible to keep them secured, they shouldn’t have them.

I might want an AR15 sometime. I may even want a 50 round banana clip for it just for giggles, and I should have the right to buy it, but I should be held legally responsible properly securing it, and for it’s legal use or illegal misuse.

Jan 07, 2013 10:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
ErnestPayne wrote:

Good. Time to separate “little” boys from their security blankets.

Jan 07, 2013 10:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
DaveEddleman wrote:

ErnestPayne,
These proposals only force people who want a weapon to take responsibility for it, as they should. They take away nothing. It their intent in this database is to locate th weapons now so that they can violate the second amendment and take them away later, they may have a problem with that.

Jan 07, 2013 11:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
lawgone wrote:

As with any coin there are two sides. What isn’t being brought to light is the other side of the coin. Every article and comment is saying the NRA spends money to lobby Congress. Ironically, no article or comment mentions that anti-gun groups spend money to lobby Congress too.

Now the other side of the coin…

Anti-gun groups outspent the NRA and Gun owners of America by 17 times as much on lobbying Congress than Pro-gun groups in 2011.

The two main anti-gun groups:

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns

The two groups above spent a total of $4,212,996.

The two main pro-gun groups:

NRA
Gun owners of America

The two groups above spent a total of $240,000

Altogether, pro-gun control groups spent $240,000 and were outspent 17-to-1 by anti-gun control groups, that spent $4,212,996.

Jan 07, 2013 1:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
txguy2112 wrote:

I find it interesting that the anti gun crowd constantly calls us gun owners paranoid while showing increased paranoia concerning us. What they are doing is demonizing us for exercising our rights under the Constitution. Next is to claim we are all stupid rednecks for DARING to disagree with them as they have determined that they are our “betters” and know what is best for us. We have a different attitude from them on this we state that if you do not own a gun don’t get one whereas they say that because they do not want one then nobody can have one. Who is more for freedom, the ones who will give you a choice or the ones who wish to deprive people of legally owned property because they do not like it?

Jan 07, 2013 2:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
lawgone wrote:

@txguy12…I hear ya…There are people commenting on hear that haven’t reviewed the facts pertaining to legal gun owners. They vilify legal gun owners that went through the process of being able to own a firearm by calling them “far from responsible” and other names. In fact, as you probably know the statistics show that few crimes are actually committed by legal gun owners (its rare) and those that do commit a crime are stripped of their right to own firearms if they commit a felony and even certain misdemeanor crimes. Its unfortunate that these uninformed people make fools of themselves because they haven’t bothered to study the statistics, but, instead base their comments on emotions rather than facts.

Jan 07, 2013 8:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
KellyBoyle wrote:

everything said by previous person tryng to educate us on gun laws in Mexico are wrong. The cartels shoot and kill. Citizens of Mexico must wait months on end for a permit and then cannot take their guns outside their homes to cities. Cartels are well stocked. We need our gun rights to protect our people from cartels forming and corrupting our people, like what has happened in Mexico. Mentally unstable people should be reported and if found unstable, on a list to not be able to acquire guns. Look at any society where the people do not have guns and you find a loss of individual freedoms and more powerful gangs. My family owns one gun, it is enough for me to feel safe if someone invaded my home. I am not a gun lover, but I feel it extremely necessary to be able to own whatever type of gun I want for protection or hobby.

Jan 07, 2013 9:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
lawgone wrote:

Biden apparently will be giving his guns to Obama. In 2008 while on the campaign trail he spoke to a crowd of people in Virginia.

Quoted from the actual speech that Biden gave:

“I guarantee you Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey,” Biden said Saturday at the United Mine Workers of America’s annual fish fry in Castlewood, Virginia. “Don’t buy that malarkey. They’re going to start peddling that to you.”

Biden went on to tell the crowd that he himself is a gun owner. “I got two,” Biden said, “if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem. I like that little over and under, you know? I’m not bad with it. So give me a break. Give me a break.”

Liar lair pants on fire Biden not only lied but hes leading the charge to take guns away from the very people he guaranteed that Obama wouldn’t take them from. Perhaps someone needs to call out Biden on his guarantee. I bet the crowd he was speaking to in Virginia would like him to explain why his guarantee is worthless.

Jan 07, 2013 9:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

txguy2112 wrote:
“What they are doing is demonizing us for exercising our rights under the Constitution.”

What they are doing is demonising you for constantly working to make it as easy as possible for criminals to get guns.

txguy2112 wrote
“Who is more for freedom, the ones who will give you a choice or the ones who wish to deprive people of legally owned property because they do not like it?”

Who is the more for freedom? The ones who think everyone should be free to attend school, go to malls, walk the streets, or sit at home free from the fear of being shot or having their right to life violated, or the NRA who just shrug their shoulders and say “So what? People dying is no problem. We have a second amendment right blah blah blah”?

Having to arm yourself before going to school or going shopping is not freedom. It is a society with an out of control gun problem.

Jan 07, 2013 9:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
tailend wrote:

I’m clean
You won’t get mine…

Jan 07, 2013 9:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
RexMax46 wrote:

txguy2112 wrote:
“Looks like Obama is proposing the beginning of gun confiscation.”

Actually, it looks like Obama is proposing the beginning of gun regulation. The basis of such regulation can be found in the Second Amendment. To jump to “gun confiscation” is the height of paranoia, and paranoid people are among the last who should own guns.

Jan 08, 2013 2:27am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.