Gun groups: Push to ban assault weapons will fail

Comments (67)
EverymanQ wrote:

I fear the gun control groups may be right. The will of the people does not seem to mean much to those TRAITORS in the House of Representatives any more.

Jan 13, 2013 12:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
neillevine3 wrote:

Clearly we need more guns for all

Jan 13, 2013 1:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
reality-again wrote:

Republican representatives depend more on gun owners than Democrat representatives do, but voting against measures designed to protect the safety of the broad American public could end up hurting legislators from both parties.

Jan 13, 2013 1:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
revamadison wrote:

“We don’t think that there is much likelihood that the Congress is going to move on making gun-control laws worse than they are.”

This statement is entirely right. They cannot get worse than allowing every Tom, Jose, and Mohammad, the ability to walk in and buy any and every weapon that want, without registering them, or insuring the buyer has training in safety of their use. They cannot get worse than allowing him or her to purchase a weapon which can easily be turned into a fully automatic killing machine, or with large capability magazines to spew out death – giving the holder the idea that he or she is a world savior by killing everyone who does not believe as he does.

Right- they cannot get worse. They can only get better.

Jan 13, 2013 1:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SteveMD2 wrote:

Psychopaths who put profits ahead of the lives of people and our chidlren.

The NRA sells paranoia and its sponsors – the gun mfrs feed the NRA part of the profits. Hitler would be proud of them.

The NRAs HQ should be renamed the Reichstag, the gun mfrs association should be renamed Krupp GMBH

Jan 13, 2013 1:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
baker2000 wrote:

Some of the laws that they are trying to enact already exist! None of it is going to stop criminals from getting guns anyway. There will always be unlawful people that have the money to get something illegally. Or they’ll just steal it.
Oh, and making it so that private sales “such as those conducted over the Internet” have to be done with a background check, you already have to. You buy a gun on the internet, even from a private party, it is required by law that the gun is shipped to a dealer for the transfer.
I wonder if the ATF ran a background check on the Mexican drug cartels before they gave them the weapons that ended up being used to kill Americans?

Jan 13, 2013 1:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Eugene31 wrote:

“Your old world is rapidly fading”. How about we ask Bull Connor if civil rights laws will fail in Congress? How utterly, incomprehensibly foolish are mainstream media “journalists”! They take foolish talking points from ignorant talking heads who are shills for the most retro elements in US society, and then they call it “news”.

Jan 13, 2013 1:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
meanchili wrote:

Revamadison:

Now, who exactly, do you think the current gun laws / any further gun laws are going to impact?

The law abiding citizens or the Criminals?

Mind you, it is NOT the law abiding citizen committing these crimes.

So, that means they would only afftect the CRIMINAL’s behaviour, correct?

Well, what is the definition of a CRIMINAL ? One that does NOT OBEY THE LAW ….

So, again, who would further gun legislation affect?

Jan 13, 2013 1:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Aldo1887 wrote:

Gun groups have predicted this kind of thing and have been wrong before. Hopefully there are enough folks who value personal freedom (and vote) over emotional folks who wouldn’t know a gun from a stick. For those of us who want this to fail, PAY ATTENTION!! Don’t assume and let this slide or next thing you know your local cops are going to be knocking on your door demanding you hunting rifles!

Jan 13, 2013 1:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ugg wrote:

The real problem here is—-HE WITH THE MOST MONEY RULES—Answer to this problem is—do not allow any one person or Corporation in America to have the most money and get bigger than Our Government. For a truly peaceful and happy America, we need to know the ambitions of the people with the most money and decide if they should be able to keep that much money. If we need to keep them poorer to help them have respect for all other on earth, then so let it be. If their ambitions are not to have a peaceful majority of folks in America—they are in conflict with the Constitutions our Forefathers Gave Us and they need to be brought to their knees as soon as possible and our Government needs to straighten her-self so as to be able to enforce peace as the law of the land under the Constitutions.
Modernization in America has brought us all of these little (communes),under different names but—-(no different than little communist business organizations to benefit themselves only)– like the oil companies, mega-religions, manufacturing, industries of all sorts banning together to smothering out the common folks who will eventually rebel if left without any hope for a better future.
Remember—no kidding now—When Momma (the common folks) is not happy—the rest of America will not be happy—our jails and prisons reveal this—many Americans are just too dumb to recognize it.
If a man searches for war—he will find war—-if man searches for peace—-he will find peace.
Would you say—If man tries hard enough while looking—he could actually cause what he is looking for. This is where peace comes into play.

Jan 13, 2013 1:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
irevolt wrote:

So which well regulated militia does all these second amendment supporters belong to?

Jan 13, 2013 1:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
trapp416 wrote:

‘A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ At what point is regulating weapons against the Constitution? Read the whole Amendment again. If the first part applies to just militia, so does the second part. If the second part applies to individual;s, as interpreted by the courts, so does the first part, by definition. The NRA is about profits, not about it’s individual members. The government is perfectly within its abilities to regulate, and it does not affect a gun owner’s rights. I know, the Constitution tells me so. Read it again. ‘A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’

Jan 13, 2013 2:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
longtail wrote:

The U.S. Constitution guarantees a well regulated militia. I have no problem with gun ownership – I have three, but someone forgot to regulate the militia.

Jan 13, 2013 2:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DeannaTx wrote:

Given our Congress has reached epic levels of dysfunctionality perhaps now is the time to begin taking bills to the public for vote.
Our Constitution didn’t allow for heavyweight lobbiests to wield the level of power over elected officials we’re seeing in today’s Congress.
It’s sad and for the first time in my life I’m beginning to believe perhaps we’ve outlived it’s time.
The Citizen’s United ruling has had much more far reaching and dire consequences for this nation than I think many thought possible. It laid the foundation for what will surely go down as the most corrupt inept Congressional body in American history.

Jan 13, 2013 2:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

@tracing wrote: if it makes u feel better to rail against the nra go ahead the fact is the constitution over rides your parties zest and zeal to control this country. the second amendment is there to put u in check, and that explains y u all are so damn determined to violate it. if u want it gone, convene a constitutional convention and repeal it, that the ONLY way you will remove the guns.
you need 38 states. 43 are pro gun. good luck.

Actually all it would take is a couple of right wing supreme court justices to pass away or retire over the next 4-years and be replaced with more forward thinking Justice members and the court could rule different on the right to own guns. game over…..

Jan 13, 2013 2:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Blodwin wrote:

commonsense_rqd
The tobacco industry is a far greater threat to the US population than gun industry. That does not mean we should ignore either.
On US soil al-Quaeda “only” killed 3,000 – does that mean they should be dealt with last?

Jan 13, 2013 2:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
randburg100 wrote:

Only if the yanks put a fraction of the effort & expenditure into stopping loons with guns trotting around slaughtering at will, as they put into chasing down Bin Liner….but hey…there’s a 40lb pig on the horizon so I won’t hold my breath.

Jan 13, 2013 2:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

@Blodwin I’m curious, where did you get that statistic from?

Jan 13, 2013 2:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
trapp416 wrote:

@ ConstFundie {Jan 13, 2013 3:25pm EST} A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ At what point is regulating weapons against the Constitution? Excerpts and sound bytes do not make Constitutional law. You have been miseducated by your gun lobby, it is well within the rights of Government to regulate. Read the Second Amendment again, or my prior post @ {2:08pm EST}

Jan 13, 2013 3:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@EvarmanQ

“I fear the gun control groups may be right. The will of the people does not seem to mean much to those TRAITORS in the House of Representatives any more.”

The people don’t want more gun control laws. The only traitors are the politicians pushing this emotion fueld agenda.

Jan 13, 2013 3:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dragos111 wrote:

Just the other day a Georgia woman was home with her kids when someone broke into her home. She and the kids fled to the attic to escape him. He followed them up there.

The prior weekend her husband had purchased a handgun and taught her to use it at the local range. When this guy came up to the attic she shot him five times. Lucky for her she had purchased her gun.

On Dec. 28th, two Texas boys were home alone. Two men broke into their home. The older boy took his dad’s AR15 and shot at the invaders. They fled and were later picked up while seeking help for bullet wounds. Again, the boys were very lucky they had a weapon at hand.

These stories simply do not make the news. Guns DO SAVE LIVES. We keep hearing that nobody needs a 20 or 30 round magazine. Personnally, I want to be better armed that the guy breaking into my house. When he hears a round being chambered in an AR, or when he sees the green dot from my laser on his chest, he is going to be leaving ASAP. No shots even need to be fired if he decides to leave. But, if he is going to stay, he is going to be outgunned.

Jan 13, 2013 3:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Mott wrote:

Good – this will let the constituents know who voted against.

In the current age of analytics, this data will haunt them over time.

Jan 13, 2013 3:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dragos111 wrote:

Why should someone own an AR15? Here is the news story about a boy defending himself and his sister from home invaders.

http://www.americanthinker.com/video/2012/12/assault_rifle_saves_children_from_criminal_home_invaders.html

Jan 13, 2013 3:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bemore2day wrote:

I fail to see the logic behind the argument that any gun safety laws are a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

Our amendments have changed and/or been revised or even are irrelevant in today’s world.

1st Amendment: Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly
How many protests have been put down, denied, restricted?…Is this a horrendous violation? Have we lost our freedoms? Is our country on the verge of collapse because of common sense law enforcement breaks up a protest, or denies a permit?

3rd Amendment: Quartering of soldiers
Now here is an amendment that is absolutely vital to our democracy! The argument that our forefathers could “see into the future” and foresee the need of the 2nd Amendment and it’s relevancy in today’s society would seem to fall apart if you look at this amendment.

The 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms.
There is no violation of that right as long as the public can own weapons. What types of weapons and their capacity is certainly a restriction that has no bearing on infringement of these rights!

How about a law that requires ALL weapons be imbedded with a GPS locating chip? Lack of compliance and/or tampering with, or the removal of the chip would be a felony. There would be “gun safety zones” set up and monitored by the GPS system that would ALERT law enforcement when a weapon is in violation of entering a “gun safety zone” (such as a school). Law enforcement responds to determine whether or not the weapon carrier represents any danger.

Of course the argument that the “criminals” would not comply can be made, but as many have said in these comments, most of these shooters were not criminals before killing dozens of innocents.

Oh, interesting fact: 85% of the world’s children killed by guns occur in the USA.

Jan 13, 2013 3:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OscarJulius wrote:

If this legislation fails, we just keep trying

Jan 13, 2013 4:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SM55438 wrote:

These gun grabbers are the minority we don’t get to pick and choose what we like or don’t like in the Bill of Rights. ” Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Jan 13, 2013 4:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MacMan wrote:

@ConstFundie

It is scary that somebody THIS stupid and with so little understanding of the law can be granted a license to poses a firearm….

“ConstFundie wrote:
… Gun control is absolutely unconstitutional. The right of the PEOPLE to Keep and Bear arm, shall NOT be infringed. All personal weapon control is unconstitutional and that on weapons of war more so than any other….”

Jan 13, 2013 4:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gacha wrote:

Considering the scope, range and power of gun hobbyists in the USA, it seems as if guns are a “right.”

Of course guns, especially assault weapons, ma come in handy during the next zombie apocalypse.

Jan 13, 2013 5:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gacha wrote:

Considering the scope, range and power of gun hobbyists in the USA, it seems as if guns are a “right.”

Of course guns, especially assault weapons, ma come in handy during the next zombie apocalypse.

Jan 13, 2013 5:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
akrozbi wrote:

Blodwin
Carefully review National School Shield or come up with a better plan to protect our children. I think the retired cops idea is fabulous.
I myself am mystified why there are still so many missing children notices at the Walmart bulletin board.

Jan 13, 2013 5:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:

@MacMan,

“It is scary that somebody THIS stupid and with so little understanding of the law can be granted a license to poses a firearm….”

Ahh, do not be so hard on yourself, you are not stupid just uneducated.

Jan 13, 2013 5:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@bemore2day

How are you going to require people with illegal guns to imbed their illegal gun with a GPS chip? Wouldn’t you just be better off with metal detectors? It works for Airports…

Jan 13, 2013 5:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Blodwin wrote:

@bates148
“119,079 children and teens killed by guns in the USA since 1979″
I first saw this statistic on juancole.com and it is also here – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marian-wright-edelman/the-massive-human-and-moral_b_2459693.html

Another interesting statistic is that, in a recent 12 year period, the numer of police killed by guns in the USA was1,132, whereas in the UK where generally police are unarmed, the number of police killed by guns was 10 (multiply by 5 to get a US eqivelant).

Jan 13, 2013 5:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
medic wrote:

Pat Paulsen had the foresight back in 1968, “let’s preserve our right to kill”.

Jan 13, 2013 5:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
reality-again wrote:

I’m far from being an Obama supporter, but I doubt I’ll ever be able to vote for a Republican candidate if the Republicans succumb to the NRA’s pressure, and somehow manage to kill this law.
It’s not about interests or preferences – this is about the very moral compass of this party.
Allowing assault rifles and high power guns to fall in the hands of killers is unforgivable, and I believe many people in the center of the political map feel this way.
The NRA may win this round, but that would stigmatize the Republican party as the NRA party – a sure way to lose any election from now on, since no party can win major elections without the center.

Jan 13, 2013 5:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
wokeup wrote:

British crime rate soars after gun ban google it

Jan 13, 2013 6:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Romas wrote:

I have been around for quite a few years. Back in the 60′s gangs fought with fists, knives and chains. Time marched on and guns took over as the weapon of choice. wonder why? Is it possible that the NRA and it’s backers have made guns more prevelent then they ever used to be? Seems that way. The gun freaks think that more is better. It’s a shame that the vast majority of Americans fall for the fear tactics the NRA and it’s supporters use. And the biggest stupidity is concealed carry. Where in the 2nd amendment does it give anyone the right to carry a hidden weapon? Where? Of course it seems so f***ing obvious to the NRA and the right wingers that the 2nd amendment gives everone a right to a gun. Wow, we all have to form a militia – right? What mde sense over 200 years ago, is stupid now. time to repeal the 2nd amendment. Of course our politicians have no guts to ddres this. Let’s keep killing our children. The NRA says more guns make us safer. Morons!!

Jan 13, 2013 6:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DeannaTx wrote:

Sadly this is likely true. But only because this isn’t being put to vote by the American public.
The wishes of the majority will not be met.

Jan 13, 2013 8:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
chris87654 wrote:

The last version of this statement was “Sarah Palin will clean Obama’s clock in 2012″. The extremists are LOUD but relatively few in number. This will be decided on Rove’s estimate of how Republicans could benefit in 2014 – i.e. “how many will sit home crying on election day vs. how many might be gained by moving a bit toward center.

Jan 13, 2013 8:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
chris87654 wrote:

to Dragos: Your statement says why you’re wrong – no one is taking guns out of anyone’s hands. You’d just have to buy something other than an “assault weapon”, a maximum 10-round magazine, and you wouldn’t be able to buy a gun without getting a background check.

Jan 13, 2013 8:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
libertyville wrote:

The petty tyrants in the White House go after law abiding citizens but refuse to attack the core causes of violence.

Jan 13, 2013 8:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kenradke11 wrote:

Without reading anything but the headline the Gun groups are dead wrong and they should be ashamed of themselves after all the past incidences in the schools and elsewhere.Don’t they get it! If they want to sell their heavy automatic weapons then they can sell to other Countries the dumb morons!

Jan 13, 2013 8:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse
go2goal wrote:

If true, out country is completely broken and declining into being a despicable place. The US is the most violent nation in the world….if a society ever deserved to lose the privilege to widely and wildly sell and market guns it would be these United States.

Is the US gun crazed, war crazed, and fascist crazed? That’s exactly what the rest of the world is beginning to think of us.

Jan 13, 2013 8:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BurnerJack wrote:

When nthe government cannot get drugs out of the most controlled segment of society,namely the penal system, why would one assume that the same government could remove guns from the society at large? Completely unattainable goal. Absurd at best. This stems from a government that acts onb the old adage “never let a crisis go to waste”. Fact is, guns are used in the commission of many crimes just as guns are used to STOP many crimes as well. It is not that guns are a offshoot of a “gun culture” in America, it is that “taking personal resonsibility” for the safety of one’s self and family IS an offshoot of “the American Tradition”. Someone once asked my brother why he carries a gun. His answer is always,” Because a cop is too heavy.”.
Wherever guns have been made illegal, criminals have operated with near impunity. I’d rather they were less certain if I have a gun or not.

Jan 13, 2013 8:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Wiseoldie wrote:

I carried a rifle and .45 pistol for almost 2 years in Italy, France and Germany, but after I returned home I never owned or fired a weapon again. I have never understood some people’s fascination with and need to own weapons that are clearly designed to kill people.

Jan 13, 2013 8:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MLINNH wrote:

Why are the SELLERS of guns getting to decide this? Hand grenades are ‘Arms’. Hand held rocket-launchers are ‘Arms’. C4 explosives are ‘Arms’. So are tanks, missles, and pretty much everything else in use by the military. If those are illegal or regulated, why not assult weapons and high capacity magazines? If Adam Lanza had had a hand gun instead of a high capacity assult riffle, how many more children might be alive?

Jan 13, 2013 8:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mixup wrote:

I went to the cinema today – the first time in about three years. I was horrified that guns played such a prominent role in all the previews of forthcoming films. We live in a sick society.

Jan 13, 2013 8:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sorgfelt wrote:

We need to find out just what the will of the people is. I know gun owners love their guns, but a sizable portion of the people don’t want to have guns around. I don’t want to have to live my life always looking around for some gun owner who has developed a mental problem. And I don’t want to live by killing someone else or have to depend on being the quick draw. One eventually loses that game. What do people need those assault weapons for, anyway? If you are going to fight the government, does it matter that they are illegal? And who do you think the government is, anyway – many of them are probably your friends? Get real – if you did decide to fight the government, you are going to be outgunned to start with and you are going to need a lot more than an assault rifle. We don’t need that crap. We don’t need another civil war. Grow up and realize that there are better ways.

Jan 13, 2013 8:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jimbojoker wrote:

Would these gun groups argue for the use of anthrax by citizens?

Jan 13, 2013 8:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sorgfelt wrote:

For those that say criminals will get guns anyway – All of the recent mass killings were made by law abiding citizens who acquired their guns legally themselves or through a relative or friend. If they had not had such easy access to guns, much of it would not have happened.

Jan 13, 2013 8:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gunste wrote:

You can bring an assault rifle into most places, but not into the Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court – that is manifestly unfair. Equal protection for everyone is only fair – OR equal potential exposure to such danger.
If someone empties a 30 shot magazine of blanks from the gallery of the House, there would be a new view of assault weapon control.
Or, shoot up an NRA meeting.

Jan 13, 2013 8:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gunste wrote:

You can bring an assault rifle into most places, but not into the Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court – that is manifestly unfair. Equal protection for everyone is only fair – OR equal potential exposure to such danger.
If someone empties a 30 shot magazine of blanks from the gallery of the House, there would be a new view of assault weapon control.
Or, shoot up an NRA meeting.

Jan 13, 2013 8:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gunste wrote:

You can bring an assault rifle into most places, but not into the Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court – that is manifestly unfair. Equal protection for everyone is only fair – OR equal potential exposure to such danger.
If someone empties a 30 shot magazine of blanks from the gallery of the House, there would be a new view of assault weapon control.
Or, shoot up an NRA meeting.

Jan 13, 2013 8:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gunste wrote:

You can bring an assault rifle into most places, but not into the Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court – that is manifestly unfair. Equal protection for everyone is only fair – OR equal potential exposure to such danger.
If someone empties a 30 shot magazine of blanks from the gallery of the House, there would be a new view of assault weapon control.
Or, shoot up an NRA meeting.

Jan 13, 2013 8:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
willie48 wrote:

Among Homo – sapien , for those that are, rational response supercedes emotional response. Adaptive evolution developed reason; reason discovers adaptive evolution. Evolutionary process is the source of culture, technology, and the morality that guides behaviour of social groups.

Evolution is the source of mores and folkways. Evolution is the source of the moral standards that guide the competent and civilized behaviours that inform a gun culture that is the very object of the anti – gun advocates.

Evolution is necessaraly a bottom up process. Adaptive traits emerge from the historical experience of a free people, chaotic and brutal, yet selected by nature for those traits that work. There are no short cuts for the experimental history that produces adaptive structures or behaviours. But the requisit of adaptive evolution is necessarly liberty. Suppression of liberty is the suppression of adaptive evolution, thus the path to extinction.

Top – down control by state government, presupposes that government is already in posession of the techniques and moral standards that can only emerge from bottom – up historical experience that is the essence of cultural evolution. Authentic experience requires liberty.

Thus, a viable social group consists of a population that has liberty, that insists on keeping liberty, and posesses the means to maintaining that liberty.

“Good judgment comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgment” – M Twain.

Jan 13, 2013 8:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jimbojoker wrote:

Guns its all about the money
Fear the NRA and their plans to take the country by force.

Jan 13, 2013 8:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sorgfelt wrote:

If those who invoke the Second Amendment don’t get the connection between gun ownership and a “well regulated militia”, maybe they will get that the Second Amendment is not a God-given right, and we can repeal it. And, speaking of God, I will bet that most gun-toting conservatives call themselves Christians. What did Jesus say about violence? If you didn’t get that, either read your Bible or throw it away, because you are not a Christian.

Jan 13, 2013 8:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MattofOC wrote:

What happened to help for the mentally ill? What happened to better security in schools across the nation? What happened to all options on the table?

This is garbage. You’re telling me after all these talks and looking over the facts and data from the last time magazines were banned that the best idea is to ban them again?

This “task force” dropped the ball big time. People demanded help for the mentally ill. Demanded security for schools. Instead we get a list of the same garbage that was done in 1994 that didnt do anything?

Thanks guys for being creative on the situation and taking it serious and looking at all the options other than punishing the innocent that did nothing wrong.

Jan 13, 2013 8:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
freddyshaw wrote:

Hey you people who want gun control. Nice idea’ except that if you are actually doing or going to do anything you’re going after the good guys’ with your bureaucratic controls. It’s effecting the wrong people! And’ worst of all it’s going after one of our original rights (2nd) that specifies that the mass of people must be able to be armed (not infringed).

Jan 13, 2013 8:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jimbojoker wrote:

“A WELL REGULATED militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. Sounds like the definition of the United States Army not a subversive group of citizens.The NRA is a threat to our national security. There is no absolute freedom We cannot race formula one cars around as we see fit but this is exactly what these gun groups propose. Instead of worrying about defending yourself try getting to know your neighbor a little better. Instead of creating a new arms race which we know did absolutely nothing to increase safety, try taking your head out of the sand. Quit hiding behind your weapons and quit threatening this nation.

Jan 13, 2013 9:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
johnkell wrote:

Maybe we should just ban gun groups.

Jan 13, 2013 9:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MattofOC wrote:

I get so tired of hearing about the “well regulated milita.” part of the Second Amendment.

Think about this, how is a militia formed without weapons? Once the militia is formed, where do the firearms come from?

The founding fathers wrote what they meant about The Constitution and they made it clear that people were to be armed as a militia can also turn against the people and need to be stopped.

The first American army was not given all their supplies, uniform, and weapons from Washington. Most brought what they had.

The same applies to the militia that would be formed in the event of the actions of the Second Amendment.

By the time something serious happens in the US where civilian militias have to be created, chances are you are not going to have time to go to your local gun shop and just pick up your rifle and ammunition for it.

Jan 13, 2013 9:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gripp13ndk wrote:

None of the weapons that have been used in any of these
terrible shootings have been assault weapons. These people
that are anti gun have no idea what they are talking about!
The very guns they say are military grade weapons are no such thing .
These people have no idea what they are even talking about !

Jan 13, 2013 9:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Califorguns wrote:

Approx. 30 deaths occur every single day due to alchohol related traffic accidents, thats roughly 9000 people dead every single year. Thirty one percent of all traffic accidents are from alchohol related deaths. 211 kids between the ages of 0-14 years are killed every year from alchohol related car crashes (2010 CDC Sats).I guess cars and alchohol are and assault weapons used by irrespondsible people. No one in congress seems to be beating there chest on banning either one. Should be bring back prohibition? Do we need to find statistics on how many deaths baseball bats, spatulas and golf clubs claim. Im sure its pretty significant. Square wheels and horse drawn wagons will make our lives that much safer thanks to the 1% of idiots out there that ruin it for the rest of us. P.S. Ask African Americans and gay rights advocates what it feels like not to have constitutinal rights. Slippery slope people! Oh yeah enjoy your right to bitch and complain about our gun laws someone might take that away too.

Jan 13, 2013 10:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse

I joined the NRA this morning.

They are the only ones making any sense in this debate.

So make that 5 million members + 1

Jan 13, 2013 11:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ghostlly wrote:

If you look at gun sales lately I would say the people don’t like the idea of gun control very much.

Jan 14, 2013 9:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

MattofOc – You are grossly, factually, wrong. The soldiers of the continental army were woefully under equipped and relied desperately on cash aid, weapons and even men of war (ships), donated by the Monarchic government of Louis XVI and the French nation. The Continental Army was even short of uniforms. Don’t you even recall that George Washington crossed the Delaware river and marched with his men, many of whom were unshod and walking barefooted in snow to fight the Battle of Brandywine Creek? If I’m wrong about the battle field it’s because I didn’t check the history while writing this.

I am more and more convinced this country is becoming a soulless, consumer driven, military monstrosity and the appetites of its citizens – whether they are armed to the teeth or not (actually a perfect reflection of the gut selfish and paranoid character of so many of it’s citizens) and their shear desire to shoot their way to preeminence, gives them a snow ball’s chance in hell of surviving intact this decade, let along the century. I hope I am long dead before the day comes when all those well armed citizens ever actually have to use that arsenal. It would be something like Rwanda, the Keystone cops and post invasion Iraq. They will have more than enough to feel paranoid about then, I’m sure. Anyone with any sense will have sought refuge and another citizenship elsewhere. It is more than likely their money will have preceded them off shore to more stable countries and will leave the wreck to idiots who believe in personal untrained heavy arms use (could one ever call them armies and do you think Facebook would be busy coordinating strategic resistance) and would start to get out and play at being real soldiers?

Big waste of time and money retired_sandman. I remember “Logan’s Run” too. You couldn’t possibly be genuine or you would have been dead at least 35 years ago to face “renewal”. BTW – what color was the crystal embedded in your palm?

@ ghostly – One of the reasons for the separation of powers and the creation of a longer termed Senate, and the protection of the right to private property as established by the Constitution (and also established in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights)was to ensure that even if the vast majority of “the people” were hell bent on a foolish course of action, there were still, at least, some less interested or wiser and less frantic heads capable of attempting to think and act objectively and who were wiser or experienced enough, not only in the history of this country but also world history, to understand that very nearly all the people could bamboozle themselves into fits of pig ignorant stupidity. And the stupidity might be organized by a commercial interest that need exercise no real accountability for it’s actions than a car salesman. I’m not a good enough student of history to know if that phenomenon ever happened in European History except, perhaps, for the Senate’s very corrupt aid in establishing Octavian, as Augustus Caesar as first emperor of Rome. That was kind of a booboo.

Jan 19, 2013 6:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.