Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Congress To Weigh In On Gun Control Debate Following Arizona Shooting

January 13, 2011 by  

Congress to weigh in on gun control debate following Arizona shootingSeveral lawmakers are set to propose gun control legislation in Congress following last weekend's deadly shootings in Tucson, Ariz.

According to Politico.com, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) — whose husband was killed by a gunman in 1993 — has promised to introduce a bill that targets the high-capacity ammunition clip used in the Jan. 8 shooting that killed six people and wounded 14, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.).

Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said that he is preparing a similar bill for the Senate. In a written statement, Lautenberg said that the high-ammunition clips should "not be on the market" because the only reason people purchase them is "to kill a lot of people very quickly."

The Arizona shootings have prompted Republicans to take action, as well. The Huffington Post reports that Representative Peter King (R-N.Y.), the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, will introduce legislation that would make it illegal to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a government official.

Although the public debate over gun ownership has heated up in recent days, FOX News reports that Giffords herself is a longtime gun owner who has advocated for 2nd Amendment rights. According to the news provider, Giffords urged Supreme Court justices to overturn gun control laws in 2008 and 2009.

“It is a tradition which every law-abiding citizen should be able to enjoy," Giffords said at the time of the court cases, quoted by FOX News.

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Congress To Weigh In On Gun Control Debate Following Arizona Shooting”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Vicki

    From the article
    “will introduce legislation that would make it illegal to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a government official.”

    That should be fun to enforce. Since police and fire are government “officials” the 1000ft gun traps should nicely overlap most of the parts of the country that most need civilians to have guns. Also with the police always patrolling a gun owner is bound to fall across those traps.

    And of course if no one is allowed within 1000 ft of a government official while carrying a gun how are the police going to be able to patrol without breaking the law? And who is going to protect the government officials from those very few who don’t obey laws anyway?

    Or is the plan for the royal guard to be armed to protect the lords from the common folk?

    • lkar

      I think the real issue is not the introduction of specific peices of legislation. It is about getting political points in the midst of a tragic event. We all know the Democrats cannot wait to score, but we have to undrstand that the Republicans have to at least show that they can “fix” the problem. And this is the underlying fallicy of gun control laws being introduced, people want the government to fix it.
      How about review mental health policy at the federal, state, and local level? How about sheriffs actually investigating complaints and documenting them? Then how about better databases to track these borderline people so they are restricted to gun licenses? Or at least tagged by the local law officials for monitoring (I mean signs of metal instability and not big brother type monitoring).
      This government can fix it mentality is best seen in the San Fransico prohibition on happy meal toys to “fix” child obesity.
      Instead of the government trying to “fix” (social engineer) problems, how about individual responsibility and individual consequences. The shooter is to blame, not the gun!

      • Robert Smith

        Hey lkar: “How about review mental health policy at the federal, state, and local level?”

        That is actually a great idea. It certainly would have saved lives in VA.

        But what about tracking such folks? I’ll bet there are a few around here who will be upset at that.

        What about paying for ther diagnosis and meds if necessary? Considering the viceral opposition to universal health care around here that ain’t gonna fly either.

        Rob

        • Teresa

          Robert, although I do not agree w/most of your ideas, this is an excellent one. You hit the nail on the head. The officials are going after the wrong things here. This is an attack on Our rights when they clearly need to be going after the real issues here. Our country suffers greatly from mental illness. I have noticed a great increase in mental disorders due to medications. (at least that is what my mother was diagnosed with) This was a tragedy and instead of going after our rights, go after the school systems who failed, the mental facilities, the law enforcement who failed to get this man help…

          • Robert Smith

            How do you tell which are doing it right.

            Who will pay for it?

            Rob

          • Teresa

            Robert, as much as you would like to push this health care on everyone else it is not the solution. Even You will not survive what’s coming w/the new health care. Only the Elite will survive the NWO Robert, we are nothing and the sooner you realize that the better. WE have already paid 10x’s fold. Go to the pharmacetucial industries for starters.

          • Granny Mae

            Teresa,

            I can tell you from experience that there is not a whole lot anyone can do about a person that is mentally disturbed (in Florida) unless they agree to go for help. You have to go to a judge and have them Baker acted and that is not easy. My son was married to a woman that not only has a mental problem but is also a alcoholic. She is lucid enough most of the time that you would swear she was fine. However you have to know her and be around her a lot to catch the things that she mostly keeps hidden. She has threatened my life and my sons life many times. He finally had to have her committed on one occasion but it only lasted over the weekend because when they discovered they had no insurance they turned her loose! There was no looking for another place to put her till she recieved the help she needed, it was just turn her loose to go out and do it all over again. I could go into all sick and sordid things this woman has said and done but it would no change anything. The main problem here is there needs to be a way to get these people the help they need even if their families can’t afford it. That is a place where the government could step in and help but they don’t. How many lives would have been saved if there was a way to afford that kind of help for the poor. We are so afraid to step on someone’s rights that we do nothing and then inocent people die. When that happens we jump to blame every one and every thing. A gun was used so we should ban all guns, a knife was used so we should ban all knives and it goes on and on. There seems to be no common sense in dealing with these things! Does anyone realize that if a person wants a gun they will get a gun, if they want explosives they will get explosives, and if they want a knife they will get one or even a chain saw, for crying out loud. Banning these things doesn’t stop the problem. The problem is a deranged mind that needs help. It is time to address the real problem and not go laying blame on inaniment objects that can do nothing until someone uses them. Fix the mind so it doesn’t go off uncontrolled and you will fix the problem.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            If you put that power into the hands of the government, the power to decide who’s crazy and who’s not, half of us here would end up institutionalized.

        • 45caliber

          Rob: The easiest way?

          That’s simple. Do it as they used to do it. Someone like Loughner would have been put into an institution and kept there for his own safety and the safety of the people in society in general.

          • Robert Smith

            Hey 45, I can’t disagree except to ask: Who decides who is going to be locked up?

            Who is going to pay for it?

            BTW, this is ONE guy that comes along every couple of years. Who else should be locked up and how do you find the “one?”

            Rob

          • Average Joe Patriot

            I think Rob has a very serious point we should be listening to, here, .45cal. Increase the power of the PTB to determine who is “insane” and should therefore be locked up, and some of the first people they’ll be coming after are half the people on this thread. Probably one of either you or me first. Maybe Al Sieber. Perhaps a coordinated round-up of the dangerously insane.

            Stop them at your doorstep with your 1911, they’ll say: “See? We told you!”

            (Anyone comes to my door, wants my name? I’m going to announce loud and clear: “CLARENCE SWINNEY!” I suggest you do the same.)

            I say, do it like in the Old West, where there were no asylums. As we’ve both suggested here and there, let ‘em all have guns and rather than let God sort ‘em out, let the people do it, as should have happened up front with Loughner. Just looking the situation over, had everyone else been armed, probably would have knocked a little sense into him. But…that’s not gonna happen.

            Why? Because most people are stupid and lazy. Sorry, it’s staring us in the face. That is our biggest threat to weapons ownership actually, not frightened politicians, who are very few in number. Frightened people–sheeple–want a Big Brother, or Nanny, or Daddy Warbucks to do their thinking and work for them. Look what it takes to carry a gun:

            1. Cost of acquisition. They’d rather spend those dollars on Cheetos and beer or cosmetics, rather than assure their basic security first.

            2. Learning. Stupid and lazy people are inherently unwilling to do the work required to acquire the knowledge of how to handle and care for a weapon. (“Whaaaat? I have to LEARN how to use it, then how to CLEAN it? I don’t do cleaning. And I have enough civic responsibilities now, and I pay taxes. That should cover protection.”

            3. Responsibility. Most people would rather pay taxes, yea verily walk through the valley of death, etc…and hope someone else will be the meanest bastard in valley for them.

            4. Fear. Facing up to the responsibilities of gun ownership requires facing up to the possibility of finding yourself in a situation where you’ll need one (certainly wish you had one). People who feel they’ve been protected all their lives (paid their taxes, didn’t they?) cannot adjust to adrenaline, having experienced fear as a more spread out, underlying, nagging thing, rather than a sudden rush. They will not even confront the statistical fact that when the bad guys smash in the door or open up on a crowd of cowering people or grab them by the neck in an alley and start ripping their clothes off, speed dial to 911 will merely tell the “authorities” where to find the body.

            My loose-knit community is 30 miles from the nearest constabulary, 20 to 40 minutes response time with luck, therefore my neighbors possess, without doubt, more firepower than the police forces of the entirety of the two nearest towns.

            I say rightly so. And if a crazy in our midst were to act up with a gun, he knows exactly what would happen. Someone would blow the sick idiot out of his or her socks. Too bad, shyte happens.

        • EddieW

          Well Rob, I’m sure you know, use any emergency to take away more of our freedoms!! That is the Liberal Watchword!!! The two freedoms under almost daily attack is Gun ownership and freedom of speech. There are more people killed by far each year from pharmecuticals, than guns in any country of the world!!! over 100,000 a year die from their prescriptions….let’s outlaw them!! it would make far more sense!!!

          • Average Joe Patriot

            And while you’re at it, outlaw cancer, the common cold, and death. That’ll do it. Let’s propose a bill! “Vote for me again! I sponsored the No More Sniffles bill!”

            Damn, will people ever wake up?

          • Patriot38

            Why not ban the automobile, they kill more people than most anything else. To me, gun control is being able to put 3 rounds in the bulls eye within 7 seconds of presentation, and if I were a violent person I could use a hammer or a knife or a ball bat or a car for a tool to get the job done. Banning guns would only put us in a position to be vulnerable to those who don’t believe in law and order in the first place. A gun in a properly trained hand is better than 10 cops on the phone, and having one available and not needing it is much better than not having one when it is needed.

      • 45caliber

        There is an excellent way to solve this type of problem.

        Simply require ALL adults to carry a weapon. I seriously doubt that Loughner or any other nut would even consider pulling a gun in this type of situation when he KNOWS that every other person standing there has one too.

        • Bitter Libertarian

          I all for that.

          • Robert Smith

            What about situations like “suicide by cop?” Just act crazy and let the neighbors knock ‘em off.

            That doesn’t sound like pro-life to me.

            Rob

          • Vicki

            It would however be Darwinian evolution that the left so seems to love.

        • Average Joe Patriot

          That would be too simple .45. It would not only fit with all the police and federal statistics, even international statististics, which UNIVERSALLY show that more gun-control equals more violent crime, fewer gun-control laws ALWAYS result in less such crime, but it would actually SOLVE the problem.

          By what stretch of anyone’s deluded imagination do they think politicians want to actually solve problems? Problems are what give them a platform to get them elected. The drug problem, the poverty problem, the education problem, the race problem, the teen sex problem, the homosexual problem, the religion in schools problem, the obesity problem, the CO2 problem, the medical care problem, the insurance problem, the unsafe foods problem… There seems to be no end to problems which Big Government gets itself elected to tax us for solving for us.

          Not that we asked them to, but what do WE know? We’re just ignorant subjects who keep causing all these problems.

          By any measure, there’s a corollary to the clear statistics showing that more gun-control equals more violent crime: The bigger government gets, the more problems we have for them to “solve” for us. (On our dime, of course.)

          • Robert Smith

            And your solution for health control is “Let ‘em die.”

            Unless they can pay, of course.

            And when all the wealth gets transfered to all the corrupt healt care companies then what will you do?

            Rob

          • Vicki

            Robert Smith says:
            “And your solution for health control is “Let ‘em die.”
            Unless they can pay, of course.”

            And your solution is to put a gun to MY head to make ME pay for them? Nice guy. How about YOU pay for them.

            Robert Smith: “And when all the wealth gets transfered to all the corrupt healt care companies then what will you do?”

            Stop being a victim Rob. Start your own Health Care Company that is not corrupt cause you own it. Americans are an honest lot and will come to you because you are not corrupt.

            Oops. Government regulations. Bummer.
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sSg0xjzIec

          • Al Sieber

            Average Joe, I agree with you and .45 also, and Rob, their gonna kill us anyways, no matter what we do. you need to read at least some of Obama’s health care bill.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Hey, Robert?

            “Robert Smith says:
            January 13, 2011 at 1:35 pm
            And your solution for health control is “Let ‘em die.”

            Unless they can pay, of course.

            And when all the wealth gets transfered to all the corrupt healt care companies then what will you do?

            Rob”

            Well, obviously I, here, did not say anything of the kind, but at the risk of starting off sounding like one of our useless, clueless politicians? This is a complex issue.

            So, let’s simplify.

            To begin with, you know what makes it so complex? It’s a web of layered lies. Health care is actually sick care. Most of what makes people sick? Diet, and health care. Who controls diet and healthcare? The federal government in the form of the FDA. Which is funded by Big Agri and Big Pharma, feeding us expensive deadly foods and expensive deadly drugs to counteract the deadly food and drugs which make us expensively sick (that is not oversimplification, it’s a comprehensive conclusion).

            So, you’re talking about sick care, not health care. That cuts through some chaff. Funded by Big Government in a circle jerk of pain and death, which is one of the most lucrative shell games on the planet. At the higher levels there are those who would love to see most of us useless eaters dead (Kissinger said that). We peons, we’re inherently dangerous organisms sucking life out of the economy and the planet (and who set that up?).

            On the second-up tier, minion level, you have those who just want the money from us (unaware that on the next higher level, They CREATE the fiat monopoly money, it’s little more than a tool for them, a means to control the minions–God forbid the peons should get their hands on enough actual wealth to fend for themselves, with seeds, land, water, tools, and…whoah, weapons). They get this notion in their heads they are “free” and, damn it all! Here we go again.

            Folks, currently we’re touch football, you and me, most expecting our coaches and referrees (elected politicians and the known establishment) to make everyone play by the agreed upon rules. “Play ball!” But nice.

            The people generally screwing us over are the college boys, creaming us on the field, better trained for tackle, bigger, stronger, better protected, better financed, with the referees in their sweaty pockets. A no-win situation for the common man, forced by law to play “touch” only while getting smashed flat.

            The ones creaming THEM (stomping among the collegiates) on the field at will, are the Pros. On steroids, with mucho-dinero contracts so big it’s not really about the money. It’s about control, and ownership of the field. And that’s about as far as we can see from down here, us touch junior-high footballers, required by law to play by the rules.

            Are there higher levels? Who, one might imagine, owns the owners?

            Don’t be silly, we’ve seen about as far as They can go. Everything’s up to date in Kansas City. How could there be any more Higher-Ups?

            Right, Bobert, you just go right on thinkin’. Wondering, “Who are these guys?” Until it’s too late for you or anyone to find out.

          • Patriot38

            Big government busies themselves with creating most of these problems so they’ll have something to talk about and justify their plush positions and distract the public from noticing what they are really working for, socialism. They are truly ‘Weapons of Mass Distraction!’ It wouldn’t surprise me if the government was paying the terrorists to cause events in order to scare the sheeple into compliance with their NWO program. Socialism doesn’t work because they will eventually run out of other peoples money; it has been tried before, and always failed. The socialists always attack their political enemies by being offensive and smearing those who disagree with them. If they keep repeating their lies long enough they will become accepted as the truth. If they win, we will all work for the government elites, with no incentive to better ourselves, or work harder to get ahead. That’s not a pleasant picture in my book.

        • URW

          45caliber (1911 is my choice too!!)

          “…Simply require ALL adults to carry a weapon. I seriously doubt that Loughner or any other nut would even consider pulling a gun…”
          I am not a shrink but I have a common sense idea that Loughner would have followed through with his plans irrispective of who was armed around him. His, like most others committing this type hanus crime, are dilusional statements from a twisted mind.

          Your idea has merit only if we require defense training to go along with the armed carry requirement. Loughner would have squeezed off maybe one or two rounds before he was brought down by a trained bystander.

          Isreal has NO gun laws, yet one of the lowest civilian crime rates in the free world. Isreal requires training of all citizens which keeps any would-be idiots at bay.

          • Robert Smith

            URW says: “Isreal has NO gun laws, yet one of the lowest civilian crime rates in the free world. Isreal requires training of all citizens which keeps any would-be idiots at bay.”

            I understnd that Switzerland has a similar system.

            Rob

          • Vicki

            We used to have training of all citizens in the US too. Crime rates were lower then. Go Figure.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Thanks URW. We should treat guns exactly as we do cars. If you can afford one, have been trained in the use of one, and can pass the written and proficiency exams, welcome the grown up world of carrying a gun.

            One key difference between cars and guns, though. You screw up, you may not just get a fine or a hike in your insurance rates, or community service. The community might, in fact, be having a service for you.

          • Vicki

            Average Joe Patriot says:
            “One key difference between cars and guns, though. You screw up, you may not just get a fine or a hike in your insurance rates, or community service. The community might, in fact, be having a service for you.”

            Quite right. You are MUCH more likely to be killed by someone (including yourself) screwing up their handling of a car than of a gun.

            This is the totals for the 8 years combined from 2000-2007
            ———————————————————–
            2000 – 2007, All Races, Both Sexes
            All Ages
            1 344,636 Unintentional MV Traffic
            2 165,787 Unintentional Poisoning
            3 143,744 Unintentional Fall
            4 52,159 Unintentional Unspecified
            5 45,999 Unintentional Suffocation
            6 27,428 Unintentional Drowning
            7 26,826 Unintentional Fire/burn
            8 12,902 Unintentional Natural/ Environment
            9 11,345 Unintentional Other Land Transport
            10 11,323 Unintentional Other Spec., classifiable
            11 10,129 Unintentional Other Transport
            12 9,184 Unintentional Pedestrian, Other
            13 8,204 Unintentional Other Spec., NECN
            14 6,987 Unintentional Struck by or Against
            15 5,763 Unintentional Firearm
            16 5,565 Unintentional Machinery
            17 1,695 Unintentional Pedal cyclist, Other
            18 816 Unintentional Cut/pierce
            19 90 Unintentional Overexertion
            ———————————————————-
            you can duplicate this info at
            http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.html#Advanced%20Options

        • BigIron

          I agree. If all those persons who are willing to carry concealed will just do so and learn to safely use and fire their arms much of the current unfounded fear would be found to be unwarranted. Our legislators would have protection from the people they are sworn to serve without additional burden upon the taxpayers. Of course, being concealed, no one would know if any or all persons present were armed and that IS a good thing. Should this rule be applied to ALL states and to DC, as well, we would ALL be safer (and freer).

          If our legislators don’t like the above idea and think they need special protections then let them pay for it themselves, not burden the taxpayer, or they should resign and find a profession more suitable to their sensibilities.

          It is unfortunate that the act of one irrational individual has been politicized in the manner that it has, with the “left” blaming the “right” and the “right” blaming the “left” and the “anti-gunners” desperately grabbing at the incident to support their own agenda. And the anti-free-speechers going after the “conservatives” when it is the “commie/socialists” who are the absolute worst of the lot. It now appears the the “Arizona shooter” was, according to one who had been his friend, not involved in politics, didn’t even watch the news, wasn’t of the “left” or “right”. He was just a “sick” individual.

          • Vicki

            BigIron writes:
            “If all those persons who are willing to carry concealed will just do so and learn to safely use and fire their arms much of the current unfounded fear would be found to be unwarranted.”

            Where the willing have been allowed to they have already proven the fears to be unwarranted. http://www.davekopel.com/2a/lawrev/shallissue.htm

        • Okie7781

          Students in public, private and home schools, should have a two year requirement of civics. One of those years should be devoted to the study of the Constitution. They also should have a two year study in marksmanship. That way there would be 300 million Americans with expert marksmanship skills and experts on the constitution. This would solve so many problems in itself, including the 1 in a million nut that decides to pull a gun or any other weapon and use it with bad intentions.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Okie, quit it. You’re making too much sense. Get back into your time machine and go back to the late 1700′s or early 1800′s, where you apparently came from.

          • Vicki

            He can’t He was sent here from the past to save the future. It is, unfortunately, a one way trip.

      • URW

        Ikar,

        Exceelent thoughts but impractical for the government to try and weed out mentally ill prospective gun owners as we have many wack-jobs within our 370 million population.

        If laws remove the ability for one of these monsters to use a gun, they’ll just switch to a different weapon. Passenger jets killed over 3,000 in Manhatten on 09/11/2001 … not one shot was fired. Nitogen enriched fertilizer killed 168 people in Oaklahoma City on 04/19/1995 … again not one shot was fired. Had Loughner parked his Glock and used his truck as the weapon, he would have killed and injured far more than what was realized in Tuscan on 01/08/2011.

        Why was there far less anti-gun rhetoric following the Fort Hood shooting as there is today. Over twice as many people were killed & injured at Fort Hood as were in Tuscan?

        Can anyone explain why some of toughest ant-gun laws in the world found in Mexico do not stop daily mass murders?

        Why is it Britian has a higher murder rate by firarms per capita than the U.S., yet their laws for well over 10 years have abolished private citizen ownership?

        Do we even try and answer the age old question of illegal drugs and how well the laws to eliminate said drugs has not worked? Criminals will always be able to lay their hands on drugs, same is happening to guns and hi-cap magazines. Only the law abiding will adhere to any legislation…which does nothing for public safety.

        • Teresa

          jolly…best I ever heard!!!!!

          • Teresa

            and that is Not sarcasm!

        • Okie7781

          very well written…great points…drugs are illegal and look at all the drugs in America.

    • Carole Howell

      I think it would make more sense to just be more careful who guns were sold too. They say Arizona has a very lax policy.

      • 45caliber

        ALL guns by Federal law have to be sold with the same paperwork, etc. Where you are in the US doesn’t make any difference.

        The main difference in AZ is that people are allowed to carry openly without a permit. That is probably what you are thinking about. But as one friend commented to me once after he visited there, “It was startling to see the guns – but then I realized that any criminal would have to be an idiot to attempt anything with those around. I felt safer there than I do here.”

        • independant thinker

          45, you are correct. To put it another way Arizona has the most lax STATE laws concerning guns and the carrying of them but they must still follow ALL federal law concerning firearms.

          • eddie47d

            It also means that anyone can buy as many weapons as they want and sell them to someone else. The majority of guns found in Mexico are traced to Arizona so you do the math. 34,564 dead on that side of the border and it was 26,000 just 2 years ago. Praise the Lord for loose gun laws.

          • JeffH

            eddie47d, tell the truth…majority of guns found in Mexico are traced to Arizona…That, my friend, is a fabrication of mass proportions.

            Why the Lies About Guns Going to Mexico?
            by Rep. Tom Tancredo 04/30/2009
            A spokesman for the ATFE, Matt Allen, has now “clarified” the number and admitted that only 17% of the weapons found at crime scenes in Mexico have been traced to the U.S.

            It is obvious that Obama’s teams at the Justice Department and the State Department are exploiting the violence in Mexico to justify more restrictions on gun ownership by Americans. The Obama crew’s hostility to the Second Amendment has been clear for months. This may be yet another example of Rahm Emanuel’s maxim: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

            Mexico needs to face its own demons, beginning with the corruption within its law enforcement agencies and at its ports of entry. The U.S. can help in many ways, such as enhancing our own border security. But adding more restrictions on the ownership of guns by law-abiding Americans will not help Mexico.
            http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=12434

          • Al Sieber

            I live in Ariz. and everyone I know carries, nobody cares or questions it, it’s no big deal. we look out for each other, even the cops. they respect our rights. we have to abide by the Fed. laws, but the “Gun” shows are different because most don’t ask for ID,but they tell me the Feds. are around so watch out, which piss people off like eddie47 who insists that all the illegal firearms come from Ariz. which is a ignorant statement considering that the “Drug Cartels” have enough money to buy any weapon they want, from any Arms Dealer they want worldwide. a good part of the weapons come from deserting Mexican Military who joined the Cartels for the money. if we let them disarm us we deserve what we get.

          • Al Sieber

            Also if you believe that eddie47, you would tell your president to secure our borders. do you live in N.Y., N.J., Delaware,or Cuba?

          • eddie47d

            No change there in the 4 border states and Arizona is the top dog in gun sales to Mexico. Tom Tancredo loves to exaggerate himself and will play politics to achieve his anti-immigration stance. You have to come up with someone who is more believable.

          • JeffH

            eddie47d, more believable that you? Easy. Keep that head buried, it’s only sand that’s in your ears.

            Again…provide some proof that Tancredo is a liar…I suppose the ATF is lying also. Matter of fact if you can back up your claim, I’ll crush it…but I won’t hold my breath waiting.

            Kristen Rand, the Legislative Director of the Violence Policy Center, repeated the unsubstantiated claim that 90% of guns seized from the cartels come from the U.S., blamed America’s gun laws and called for BATFE to use the broadest possible interpretation of the “sporting purposes” test to ban a much larger class of semi-auto rifles.

            But the BATFE has only stated that 90% of the guns traced are from America. BATFE only “traces a fraction of the guns seized”; those firearms are not selected randomly, but are likely selected because they are the guns most likely to have come from the U.S. Trace data reveals nothing about the large number of guns that are not traced.

            Senator Dianne Feinstein used this forum to express her long opposition to American gun owners’ rights. During her remarks, she repeated the claim that 90% of seized guns come from America, and also stated that there are over 2,000 guns smuggled into Mexico from the U.S. each day.

            Feinstein even tried to elicit support for that number from a representative from the BATFE. But when he responded that the number was much lower, most likely in the hundreds, Senator Feinstein was clearly unhappy that he would not endorse her anti-gun soundbite.

            Additionally, three representatives of U.S. law enforcement, one each from BATFE, Drug Enforcement Agency, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, made it clear that the increase in violence in Mexico is being misinterpreted by the media and politicians.

            The claim that “90 percent” of Mexican “crime guns” originate in the U.S. is false. It does not relate to all firearms the Mexicans have seized from the cartels, but only to guns that the Mexicans have asked the BATFE to trace. As the Government Accountability Office has explained, “In 2008, of the almost 30,000 firearms that the Mexican Attorney General’s office said were seized, only around 7,200, or approximately a quarter, were submitted to [BATFE] for tracing.” The 6,700 guns that BATFE traced to the U.S. accounted for about 90 percent of the 7,200 guns that BATFE traced, but only 22 percent of all firearms seized by the Mexican government
            http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5181

          • independant thinker

            eddie is sure hooked on this lie. This is the 4th or 5th time I have seen him blown out of the water over it and he still posts this manure.

          • Patriot38

            The Weapons of Mass Distraction (government) are not too worried about the guns going into Mexico. What they are after is voters, and that is why they are super lax on immigration control. The Dimocrats are the party of giving, and giving, and more giving. All the illegals are given benefits even US Citizens don’t get, so they will always vote for the party of giving. Why would they bite the hand that feeds them? That is how the Dimocrats win elections, by illegal voters, community organizers, and SEIC fixed voting machines. These illegals are not really immigrants, they are felons; immigrants come in through proper channels without breaking the law and adjust to our laws and culture, and become productive US Citizens. All the illegals coming in are not Mexicans either. We are allowing radical Muslims in also, to set up their sleeper cells. This Tsunami of human flesh is going to do irreparable damage to this country if we don’t get this hole plugged up.

          • Lonetrader

            The truth is, most of the guns siezed are M-16′s. M-16′s are not sold by Arizona dealers or any other state dealer. They are supplied by our Federal govt to the Mexican govt. The army is on the take with the cartels. Members of the Mexican army play both sides of the fence. They steal the M-16′s our govt provides and sells them to the cartel. The politicians don’t tell us that. Also when feinstein stated 2,000 guns are being smuggled every day over the border, I would like to know where she is getting this outlandish fabrication. If that were true, that means we are catching them. The other thing is, this is not about crime. It is about govt control of the people. period. It is obvious that where there is gun control, there is way more crime. Where there is no gun control, there is less crime.

      • Average Joe Patriot

        I’m trained and licensed to carry concealed in several states, including AZ. I travel there, have family in Tucson, in fact. It’s gotten so I hesitate to go anywhere I’m NOT allowed to carry. Perhaps I’ve simply gotten cautious in my old age.

        Regarding AZ’s lax gun laws, you have a pro-2nd Amendment congresswoman doing a meet-and-greet in a Safeway parking lot in wild-and-wooly ol’ Tucson (apparently failing to notify the local constabulary of said event, who knows why). Two or three dozen of her constituents show up. Where in the hell were all the guns? Any one of which could have stopped this classically-troubled Jewish-nerd whack-job cold before he managed to empty 30 rounds into the crowd? Where were the guns? Just one hip pocket or purse derringer would have done the trick at the ranges involved. Where was that armed citizen? Where was THAT gun, the one that would have made all the difference?

        Now we have politicians and pundits like Ed Shultz calling for fewer guns in the hands of the populace (most of these people would prefer to see NO guns in the hands of the populace, few dare say it). They want a 1000 ft. gun-free zone around all federal political events. But they want stricter controls because a tragic shooting occurred in which there clearly were not ENOUGH guns in the hands of the populace.

        Explain this to me like I’m six.

        • Robert Smith

          “Jewish-nerd whack-job cold before he managed to empty 30 rounds into the crowd?”

          Not true, Joe.

          Quit making stuff up.

          Rob

          • Average Joe Patriot

            What, you feel the “nerd” part was gratuitous? Who else would list Alice in Wonderland and Meno, both, on his preferred reading list?

        • BigIron

          You unfairly demean all us “nerds” by your derogatory association with this character. He was indeed a “sick” individual but I would not call him a “nerd” at all; he was just “isolated” from society and that is not a very good thing because it makes it difficult to recognize that he IS “sick”. I don’t know the number of shots fired but the standard Glock 9mm mags only hold about 17rds or less, not 30rds; however, an extended mag holding 30rds is available.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            BigIron: You’re correct, I assume (don’t own one of those 1911s, respect them), but an extended Browning mag is exactly what he had and used, according to victims and witnesses, and reportedly is what he was trying to reload with–yet another 30-round mag. And is also just what our fearful leaders are trying, again, to push a ban on, large cap weapons. In fact, several are pushing for a ban on ALL semi-autos (which, as you and most of us know, the MSM and pols apparently insist on mistakenly calling “automatic weapons,” like Russian-designed AKs, Uzis and Thompsons).

            But, I was being facetious in my earlier post. Robert Smith was possibly attacking my use of the term “Jewish-nerd.” We certainly can all agree Loughner was a “whack-job.” Smith was also very possibly, tentatively, putting his toe in the anti-Semitism pool, perhaps to see who jumped on board. Or rather on me. The usual crap.

            Fact is, although I don’t initially hail from the Eastern seaboard, I’ve lived and worked there, and the “Jewish-nerd among Goys” is such a commonly accepted stereotype that they write whole books about it, make movies, etc. Latest case in point: “The Social Network.” It’s about a nerdy Jewish kid at Harvard, who makes a billion inventing Facebook. The whole characterization key to the book, the movie, the plot, is that the kid is a nerdy Jewish kid. The movie got an 8.2 out of ten stars on IMDB.com, hence I feel I should be allowed to reference this tired but ever popular meme about the Jewish nerd kid. No, too anti-Semitic? Well…the book was by Ben Mezrich, the screenplay by Aaron Sorkin, director was David Fincher, stars Jesse Eisenberg playing Mark Zuckerman, and it was produced and financed by…but, you get it.

            Robert Smith claims I’m making this up but, I don’t have to, it’s all over the Internet.

            There are several problems I have with this. One is that he told me I was making stuff up. Actually, no. I’m plagiarizing from the Internet where this info/speculation is all over the place. That Giffords is Jewish is on TV. That Loughner is or may be Jewish (the lineage confers maternally, his mother’s reportedly Jewish), or that such info/speculation even exists in the known universe? Dead silence from “our” MSM (who’ve tied him to everything from right wing patriot militia leanings to liberal pot-enraged violence and running stop signs–sheesh). Except in Mother Jones who said his best friend described him as Jewish, mother’s side. But, Jews commit heinous financial crimes, not mayhem. Right? Can’t speculate on THAT on Zionist-owned TV, the sole news source of so many naysayers here.

            I’m willing to bet Robert Smith would not have tried to call me on anything here, had the perp’s name been Abu Hassan and I called him a raghead whack-job.

            A couple more reasons I’m an unlikely target for accusations of anti-Semiticism (aside from the fact that all Arabs are actual Semites, few Jews are):

            Abu Hassan (whoever he is, I wish him well) IS Semitic.

            Most Jews are not.

            I’m part Jew, from my English grandmother but I’m guessing Khazarian, which legitimately and maternally, I suppose makes me as much or more a Jew as Obama is Negroid. Or am I not allowed to say that nowadays, either? Africa is the only continent in the world we all get to identify by…skin color? Absurd.

            So. Much in the same way our double standards make it okay to use the “N” word, but ONLY if you’re a black American? I am (not only classifiable as a nerd, which I have so been and proud of it), I’m “allowed” to say Jew-nerd. I don’t say it often (you’ve read it here first), but when it applies, screw it, it does indeed apply. You can’t make this stuff up.

            Loughnerd was apparently a closed-up whack-job waiting to happen. If he’d been denied a gun, like he was denied admission into the army, he might as easily have stolen a cement truck and done worse damage.

            And the pols and the pundits seem to love him for it. And all you’re going to get from CNN, MSNBC, Fox, et al, is the Mein Kampf-Communist Manifesto side because, most likely, the truth would set you…freaky.

            I’m done now. I feel better.

    • Carole Howell

      Vicki,

      You know the police would be exempt, that is a given. Maybe this legislation is flawed, but the fact is Arizona has some of the most lax gun laws in the country.

      Did you hear of the newly elected Arizona Republicans that are resigning, for fear that they may not be deemed conservative enough for ‘tea party people’ and so their very lives may be in danger over it. Now why is that? LOL All that effort the radio talk show hosts put into saying the shooter was not politically motivated (which was a lie) were not convinced. ROTFLMAO And that King who introduced the 1000 ft gun legislation is a REPUBLICAN. Giggle Giggle

      • Robert Smith

        Someone has been lying for years. Who?

        On one hand media owners say they can influence people to buy products. An entire industry is based upon that notion. Billions of dollars change hands for advertizing to influence people.

        Then the likes of Rush etc. say their blatherings doin’t influence people.

        Who is lying?

        Rob

        • CLARENCE SWINNEY

          A few years ago Mush Dimbaugh said: “That media watch group FAIR studied 4,000 hours of my transcripts and found jsut 45 little errors”

          I got the report

          45 Try over 10,000 LIES(intent To Deceive)
          This was before he became a crazed druggie.

          When Mush had a 30 min TV program I taped while off whuppin up on Tiger. I reviwed each day. I never once watched 30 minutes I could not locate one usually several lies. The last time he was on TV the first four things he said were “blatant” lies.

          He has mastered Techniques of Deception like Karl Goebbels Rove.

          • David in Ma.

            Don’t you have something better to do? Like take a nap!

          • Robert Smith

            Al Franken covered Rush well.

            Rob

          • Angel Wannabe

            RS, Al Franken’s seat was bought and paid for by SOROS!__still laughing Pharaoh…..

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Everybody, Rob. Everybody is lying. You’ve now crossed over into the new world. Terra incognita, the twilight zone. You’ve stepped in…politics. Wipe your feet before going into anyplace respectable, now.

      • http://yahoo richard

        why don’t you compare D.C.gun laws and gun deaths to Tucson’s gun laws and gun deaths

        • David in Ma.

          OR, New York OR Chicago….very restrictive and very crime ridden.
          Definately proves the saying that when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns…….
          Think about this: If your going to commit a crime would you really give a chit if you break a gun law in the process?
          Besides that most criminals actually believe they will not get caught!
          So, the law abiding citizen gets the shaft!

      • 45caliber

        Carole:

        I don’t know where you are getting your stories from but it sure isn’t here – or any media I know about. Possibly Huffington or KOS?

        In any case, this shooter was a flaming liberal. He was upset at Gifford because he had asked a stupid question that she didn’t understand and couldn’t answer. Read some of Loughner’s posts and you can see why. No one can understand those. So he was influenced by the radio conservatives? The conservative GOP members are resigning in fear? I hardly think so.

        • Robert Smith

          45 asks: “So he was influenced by the radio conservatives?”

          The billion dollar media empires are built on advertizing that influences people to buy things.

          The extreme right claims it doesn’t influence people.

          What’s wrong with this picture?

          Rob

          • 45caliber

            I don’t listen to them and I’m conservative. He was a flaming liberal. Why should he want to listen to them and be influenced by them?

      • BigIron

        A 1000 foot buffer, don’t be absurd; if that’s the best the “turkey” can come up with then let him resign and find a profession more in keeping with their sensibilities. They could pass a law allowing ALL persons to carry concealed in ALL states and DC and start carrying. Even if he didn’t personally choose to carry there would then likely be others in the crowd to protect him. The taxpayers should not carry any additional burden for the protection of legislators; if they feel the need for protection let them pay for their own from their own funds, not the public’s.

      • Al Sieber

        Carole, where did you get that info. on Ariz.? Alaska, Ariz., Vermont, all have the same laws, what’s wrong with our right to protect ourselves?

      • Lonetrader

        Who? Which newly elected officials are resigning? Name names. Officials all over the world are targets. they know this. If these people are afraid, then they don’t deserve the office they were elected to anyway. When you are a politician, you automatically become more of a target. WE ARE ALL TARGETS. Crime is rampant. Why. Because of left wing laws coddeling criminals. The govt wants the crime. They want us to be sheep. It has nothing to do with crime. It has to do with Govt power over the people. Rember Hitler, Stalin, etc.

    • 45caliber

      What is even funnier to me is that the 1000 ft. mark is only 333 yards or so. And I hunt at distances further than that. Any good rifle shot can easily be outside that distance and still hit accurately. Not that anyone would.

      It is illegal to shoot people like Loughner did – but he did it anyway. Does some politician seriously believe that a prospective murderer is going to worry about breaking the law by carrying a hidden weapon within that distance?

      • David in Ma.

        Yes, and add to that the no carry near schools, govt. buildings, bar rooms, 500 feet of a house, 300 feet of a road, etc., etc.,etc. kinda cuts down where one could actually carry a firearm.

        Heck, if you buy one you may not be able to legally take it home if the politicians keep going with their nonsense.

        I still cannot figure out why politicians cannot understand what SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED means!

        I have a better idea, everybody carry openly and dare some punk, insane or not, to draw down—–

        • Robert Smith

          There’s that violence thing from the right again.

          Rob

          • Vicki

            Actually the violence was from the punk. The right was being nice by warning the punk that they are not sheep.

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Been there, dunnit. Won. Without having to pull.

          Been in worse.

          No one has ever been hurt. They understand they’ve been fortunate.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            That last was in reference to: “I have a better idea, everybody carry openly and dare some punk, insane or not, to draw down—–”

            I’m on board widdat, friend. Frankly, I don’t want to have to play Batman for every slob sister who can’t handle his or her own confrontations. I’ll do it. You’ll do it. When there’s no cop around. But why should this be OUR job.

            Learn to take care of yourselves again, folks. Learn and confront, learn TO confront. Our nation’s populace used to do this as a matter of course.

            What the hell happened to you all? (Not most here, just some, here.)

      • Mick

        45caliber says:
        January 13, 2011 at 9:37 am
        What is even funnier to me is that the 1000 ft. mark is only 333 yards or so. And I hunt at distances further than that. Any good rifle shot can easily be outside that distance and still hit accurately. Not that anyone would.

        It is illegal to shoot people like Loughner did – but he did it anyway. Does some politician seriously believe that a prospective murderer is going to worry about breaking the law by carrying a hidden weapon within that distance?*****************
        *****************************
        45caliber,,,,,It’s just another ploy to slowly but surely try to disarm the citizens,,,,’Anyone with a bit of wit would realize that any good snapper could take their target out from a much further distance if they wanted to.

        • 45caliber

          Mick:

          It’s like the 1000 foot clearance around a school yard that was shot down by the SCOTUS. If a politician is walking down a street, everyone on that street (and several other streets around the policitian) would be in violation of the law by having a gun in their houses. Even if you didn’t live near the politician. It would make it manditory that every citizen would have to have some way of knowing where the politician was at all times and then take their guns and run the other way if he came close.

          • Mick

            45caliber

            You’re right,,,It’s a pure shame that the people working for us are actually working against us by trying to take the rights that made America so great from us and little by little they’re doing it by any mean at their disposition even if it means using tragedies….Talk about morally deprived.

    • eddie47d

      The only reason anyone would take a weapon to a political rally or even a football game would be to do harm. Go protect your home,business or family for irregardless of what happened last Saturday a “good” civilian spraying bullets isn’t going to make anyone any safer. The chances of someone with a gun standing right next to a perp and be able to take him out is almost Nil.We all think we can stop these tragedies while sitting in front of our TVs but it is never that easy. Stop trying to be wanna-be heros.

      • 45caliber

        Oh, I see. Instead of being ‘want to be” heroes, we should be unarmed victims. Makes a lot of sense to me.

      • Average Joe Patriot

        Ridiculous. Many of us never even step out the door unarmed. I’ve carried, legally, on and off for decades, depending on the laws of whatever state I lived in. If it’s legal for me to carry, I carry. So I don’t forget anything on my long trip into down, I have what I call my 4Ws mantra the moment I pick up my car keys: wallet, wad (money), wireless (cellphone), weapon. Keys=Wallet, wad, wireless, weapon.

        Most of us have had the experience of getting all the way to the store and realizing we forgot our wallet or cash, or getting all the way to work and discovering we left our cell phone at the house. If you’re legal to own and carry a handgun, imagine your chagrin if you walked into a shooting situation and…oops, sorry. Not today thank you. I left my gun at home.

        What earthly good will a handgun do you in your home if you don’t happen to in your home when trouble strikes? I would venture a guess that several people in the Safeway last Saturday had guns…in their homes.

      • Robin from Arcadia, IN

        eddie47d… You must not be a supporter of concealed carry? I support it. I haven’t got the handgun I want yet, but I will eventually. I will then apply for my concealed/carry permit. You can be anywhere and have a whacko threaten you or your family. We have already seen it happen in churches! Schools! Colleges! Why shouldn’t we be able to protect ourselves?

      • JeffH

        “The only reason anyone would take a weapon to a political rally or even a football game would be to do harm.” Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about and I’m quite sure you have all kinds of back-up to substantiate your brash comment.

        eddie is the same guy that said the NRA, GOA and the 2nd Amendement Foundations use “intimidation” tactics on their members and political candidates to influrnce the outcome of elections. Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me…eddie.

        • eddie47d

          Facts are facts Jeff, not toys for you to play with.

          • JeffH

            eddie…then stop playing and post some real facts, not your imaginary kind.

          • eddie47d

            As I said Jeff I’ve read the same magazines you have so I know what get’s said.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Eddie, facts are indeed facts. NOT toys for you to play with, any more than are handguns). ALL statistics (and my personal experience over three and a half decades) indicate that a citizen carrying a weapon is by far safer than one who is not, yet by far more suspect. Still, a society carrying is safer than one which is not.*

            You can’t back up from the facts, but you can concede your position, sir.

            DC, Chicago, wherever we’ve seen reversals in draconian anti-gun laws, we’ve seen dramatic reversals in the violent crime rate. Refute it with proofs and references, or puleeze won’t you idiots shut the f-word up? Facts, statistics, open debate.

            *If you saw a print of President Jefferson conversing with a barefoot youngster with a squirrel gun on his shoulder in the streets of our future capitol, you’d think it quaint, folksy. But that used to really happen. People could just walk up to and talk with their leaders.

            Nowadays, old Thom Jeff would be rushed away into a helicopter by insistent bodyguards, the surrounded kid would be threatened at gunpoint from numerous directions and shackled, his gun confiscated, everyone he ever knew interrogated, he would be incarcerated and grilled and psychologically plumbed down to his wet dreams, lawyers would arrive in droves, and it would be on national news for weeks.

            “How did you FEEL when you saw your child arrested on television?”

            What’s happened to us? What’s happened to our country?

            What, one wonders, are they keeping from us, now that we’re so free?

        • Jag

          GOA serves several purposes; sending out email alerts to gun rights activists, supporting laws that roll back gun control, supporting candidates that have a history of supporting gun rights, defending gun owners that have been railroaded by gun hating judges and juries that don’t know what their rights are, and the do not negotiate away our gun rights like the NRA, which I belonged to for years.

      • Vicki

        Eddie47d writes:
        “The only reason anyone would take a weapon to a political rally or even a football game would be to do harm.”

        Since I am the weapon your comment makes no sense. Perhaps you were referring to one of the tools I would use to defend the people there from an attacker. There is your 2nd reason and it is the only LAWFUL reason of the 2.

        • eddie47d

          Don’t be playing mind games with me sweetie it won’t work.

          • JeffH

            What mind?

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Exactly right, Vicki. YOU ARE THE WEAPON.

          • Vicki

            Which makes it interesting to answer truthfully when asked if I have any weapons in the car and I am standing outside the car :). I answered no unless he considered a 3 cell maglite to be a weapon thus answering truthfully and acknowledging his probable poor training on what constitutes a weapon at the same time.

        • Lonetrader

          Does this guy really think that if a 1,000 foot law, or large magazine law were in effect it would stop him? He planned this for years. Evidently this man has never dealt with a criminal face to face. They care nothing about laws. Their attitude is to break them. All the bleeding hearts need to take criminals into their homes. In about a few hours they will be begging for these people to be removed. If he had no access to a gun, he would have figured out how to make a bomb and just drive it in. More killed. Remember Australia? They made guns illegal and, guess what, VIOLENT crime went up hundreds of percent.Including murder.

      • Lonetrader

        I have a simple solution. Let’s outlaw every other tool that kills MORE than guns first. Knives kill more people every year than guns. Cars kill more people, alcohol kills more people, drugs kill more people. Doctors, yes Doctors kill more people a year than guns in this country. Oh yes, I forgot. POLITICIANS kill more people every year than all the rest put together. So let’s get rid of all these problems first. Then work on the guns. Why is it liberals have no common sense???????????

    • Dogma-Free

      No guns = no more shooting deaths.

      And who said math was hard…?

      Oh, right…all the kids in our schools, since the funding of education takes a backseat to military spending in America. D’oh!

      • JeffH

        Dogma-Free says “No guns = no more shooting deaths.” I suppose you think the cops will stop a shooting by a criminal before it can happen or that violent crims have not dropped dramatically since the assaul weapons ban expired. Letting law-abiding citizens carry guns reduces the rate at which criminals are carrying guns… Criminals tend to avoid activities that are risky to them. Hey Dog, tell me how to stop the bad guys who don’t comply with the no guns rules? Now lets see, whats wrong with that message?

        Albany, Georgia: Pistol-packin’ manager answers robber with hot lead
        From WALB of January 6, 2011:
        A woman known for carrying the notorious Taurus Judge had occasion to use it when two armed men attacked her. The woman was beginning work Thursday morning at a mobile home park office when the men accosted her. The attacker’s bullet grazed her, but she is confident the shotgun blast from her handgun struck the man. Authorities are looking for the suspects.

        Miami Springs, Florida: Man shoots attacking dog
        From WSVN of January 8, 2011:
        An armed citizen came to the rescue of a woman and her dog on Friday. The woman was walking her Dalmatian when another dog broke loose and attacked her. A nearby neighbor heard the screams, grabbed a handgun and ran to the rescue. When he saw the dog biting the woman’s arm, he shot and killed the attacking dog.

        Charleston, West Virginia: Woman says she shot man in self defense
        From the Charleston Gazette of January 7, 2011:
        A woman arrived to pick up her mother after her mother reported having a fight with her boyfriend. Upon arrival, the boyfriend became angry and struggled with the daughter. The woman stated the man was choking her on the ground when she saw a gun on the floor and used it to shoot her attacker. The woman was not arrested.

        Liberty City, Florida: City Survey Crew Opens Fire on Would-Be Robbers
        From NBC-Miami of January 11, 2011:

        A group of armed thieves attempted to steal equipment from a Habitat for Humanity survey crew. They didn’t realize one of them was armed. One of the surveyors confronted the group, exchanging shots with the thieves and striking one in the leg. The property was recovered.

        Pensacola, Florida: Robbery Victim Fatally Shoots His Attacker
        From WKRG of January 10, 2011:

        Three armed robbers approached a man on the streets of Pensacola, demanding money. The would-be victim drew a concealed handgun and fired, killing one of the robbers. The other two were apprehended by police and charged with the murder of their comrade. If a person committing a felony is killed, current law allows for charging the accomplice with the death.

        http://www.thearmedcitizen.com/

        • Al Sieber

          Good post and link JeffH, but you’re waisting your time with eddie.

          • JeffH

            Al, I know, but never a waste to correct his mis-information.

          • Al Sieber

            Good point Jeff, never thought of it that way.

        • JC

          The bed wetting Liberal News media doesn’t report the many many episodes of people defending their own lives with a gun…it doesn’t suit their agenda.

      • Vicki

        Dogma-Free says:
        “No guns = no more shooting deaths.
        And who said math was hard…?”

        Math may not be hard but critical thinking appears to be.
        No guns != no more deaths. No guns = FEWER people able to prevent deaths from any attacker.

        • independant thinker

          you know, for someone who claims to be “Dogma-Free” he sure has a dogma laden agenda to push.

      • Lonetrader

        The primary function of the US Govt is to protect its citizens. Not educate them. If we were involved in a 3rd world war, where the enemy was on our soil, which is becoming a real possiblity in the near future. Do you really think that school would be in session? The reason we have never been invaded is because we DO have guns and ammo. Also what the newsmedia doesn’t report are the automatic weapons,hand grenades, rocket launchers, cash, bullet proof vests, para military uniforms, coming into the USA FROM MEXICO that were siezed. That would be a hush hush subject that doesn’t go along with liberal news.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      Vicki,
      The hilarious part of this is one of the guys that helped subdue the shooter, the guy that came out of the Walgreens, had a pistol in his jacket pocket and had his hand on it when he came running up!!! Had he gotten there a little sooner, the shooter might now be dead instead of a little 9 year old girl!!! He said he has been proficient with a gun since he was 10 years old!!

    • MikeN

      In the first comment, Vickey asked if the proposal by rep King was an excuse for the elite lords to protect themselves from the commoners. I think, yes it is. Also, I guess we will have to familiarize ourselves with any and all govt officials so we can run away when we see one coming in our direction. As usual, we can expect knee-jerk stupidity from the elitist idiots in govt.

  • BlackDog

    “Politicians are one step above child molesters.” Abby Hoffman made that statement over 40 years ago. And Senator Lautenberg has reinforced that statement by trading on the tragedy and anguish perpetrated in Tucson to introduce another worthless Gun Control bill. These posers and their posturing sicken me. Their slimy, self-serving actions make them a different species altogether, and their grandstanding at the expense of another’s misfortune makes them suitable to be the attendants at the National Vomitorium. So you got that going for you, Frank!

    • Average Joe Patriot

      And you’ve got that going for you, BlackDog. Nice post. All these elected @$$holes are running for cover, without recognizing that the shooting would not have occurred had everyone been equal under the eyes of Samuel Colt.

  • s c

    Golly, no one saw this coming (barf). We’ve known for many years that Washington is neck-deep in politicians who claim to love the Constitution but secretly hate the 2nd Amendment. This mind-boggling, schizoid approach to reality makes it possible for elected types to cater to both sides of the 2nd Amendment issue (and gives them free access to the media).
    As far as I’m concerned, when all it takes is a kookoid like the alleged Arizona shooter to bring Washington basket cases out of their caves, we need to write down all their names and remind them that the 1st and 2nd Amendments are inseparable. It’s expected that they occasionally act like they have spines and brains, but we know better. Ventriloquist’s dummies (politicians in general) can be dangerous, but it’s their controllers who do their thinking. It’s like a cheap magic show, where you have to keep your eyes on the sneaky hand that keeps the crowd in a trance.

    • CLARENCE SWINNEY

      secomd amendment-”In order to Maintain a Militia” you freaks can kill children

      • 45caliber

        Clarence: I know you are being paid to stir up trouble here but we don’t need it. Go back to Huffington and tell your boss that we simply ignore you.

      • David in Ma.

        CLARENCE SWINNEY, it’s time for your med’s, report to sick bay!

      • JAFO

        And what “As a last Resort” were the Founding Fathers referring to?
        The most important cited reason for not infringing the right to bare arms…
        C’Mon…
        It had to do with a “tyrannical Government”…

        A “Tyrannical Government” is defined by it’s actions against the will of the People… And obviously, even looking at our 2nd Amendment Rights is Against our will…

      • independant thinker

        Clarence. unless you are under 16 years of age you are in the militia whether you like it or not.

      • Average Joe Patriot

        That is not what it says, Clarence. It says: “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.” (I have removed the extraneous commas which lawyers so love to argue over, older historical copies didn’t have them, so this is what the original Founding Fathers signed off on, not that the added commas make much of a difference.)

        Even at first glance, this could (I believe should, particularly in the context of when it was penned, and what the colonies had just been through in the face of British Army control of the populace) be interpreted as: SINCE there will be a need for a well regulated armed force in our midst, THEREFORE the individual must NOT be disarmed.

        Being as the “shot heard ’round the world,” the one which signified the final straw and the beginning of our fight for independence from tyrannical rule WAS IN DEFENSE OF OUR STORE OF GUNS, powder, and shot, any interpretation of the Second Amendment which includes disarming American citizens becomes nonsensical.

        Furthermore, the argument that the Second Amendment should ONLY hold true when citizens are threatened with tyranny, and hence we may by law be deprived of our otherwise inalienable right to possess the means of personal defense, is in and of itself specious. To deprive us of our right to own the wherewithal to ensure the security of ourselves, homes and families, is in and of itself, tyranny.

        Look up the definition of “circular logic” in any Logic 101 textbook. You cannot logically argue that gun ownership should be made illegal because there is no threat of tyranny necessitating said ownership, while performing an act of tyranny by confiscating our guns. Get it, Clarence?

        Or do you require that in single syllables? Okay, I’ll give it a try:

        LESS GUNS = MORE CRIME; MORE GUNS = LESS CRIME. (This means crimes of all sorts, such as theft, rape, death, and bad laws which tend to do harm to our rights.)

        I think that about sums it up in syllables even you can understand, Clarence.

        Until modern science convinces me that the government is possessed of some way to “magic away” every gun in existence, SIMULTANEOUSLY, I’ll keep mine, thanks anyway for your concern.

      • Robert Smith

        Hey Clarence,

        How’s come you are willing to deny some Americans their second ammendment rights yet I’ll bet you demand abortion rights, maybe access to some recreational drugs besides the Christian one, alcohol, and maybe some other things.

        Try this on for size…

        Go pro-choice on anything that doesn’t impact another born person, of which there is little doubt or debate about their humanity.

        You respect their rights, they should respect yours.

        MOF, around here I’ve found nothing but intollerance for pot, abortion, and several red meat issues, but they still claim their guns, presumably to keep you from enjoying what you want. After all, there ain’t been any christian doctors killed for NOT doing abortions.

        Rob

        • Average Joe Patriot

          As usual, Bobby, you change the subject. Check me out, here…this was about gun rights, no? Not abortion?

      • JeffH

        Clarence, where are all of your statistics? Is your comment strictly based on your emotional instability where guns are concerned?

        Give a gun to each person in the United States – desiring to lawfully carry it for self defense, collecting or the shooting sports including hunting. This person must be a law abiding citizen (no criminal record, age 21 , no mental history, you know…responsible). Make sure he/she knows how to use it for self defense (proper training). You’ll see violent crime drop substantially.

        Here’s the obvious: If you’re a criminal – do you break into a house where a little old lady will shoot you or where a helpless victim is easy prey? If you’re a criminal – do you care anything about the law? Obviously not! Isn’t it naive to believe criminals will follow gun control laws? Why should criminals carry guns while law-abiding citizens are prohibited? Why add more gun control laws when criminals clearly ignore existing gun control laws?

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Jesus, where do you get all this sanity? Why display it here? JeffH, this is not an actual discussion. It’s a forum for the reaffirmation of deeply held beliefs based on one of two things: (1) The rational desire for personal and familial survival (neighbors would be good, too), (2) The less sane belief that your elected Big Brother has your better interests at heart and in mind.

          It’s clear upon which side you stand. Thanks. No, I mean it. Just watch out for possible incoming. There are crazies about.

      • Vicki

        CLARENCE SWINNEY says:
        “secomd amendment-”In order to Maintain a Militia” you freaks can kill children”.

        Ad hominem attack. Debate win to the Conservatives.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        clarence,
        even your omnipotent supreme court has agreed with our interpretation and said that the right to own and carry is a right that will not be abridged!! We have a God given right to own and carry and if you don’t like those conditions then move to Chicago!!! ‘Course don’t cry if your loved ones get murdered or your belongings are stolen!! Remember, when seconds count, the cops are just minutes away!!!

        • Al Sieber

          JoeH, where I live the cops could be from a few days, to a week or more away, or sometimes not at all. they’re cutting out the Fed. Rangers too, there’s only one in my area and he’s retiring next week, no next in line. the closes one is 80 miles.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Sounds like you have a job opportunity there, Al. I’d say, why don’t you go for it, impact the unemployment rate. With you as law-enforcement, I just might want to move up there and say how do, get away from all these gun-toting crazies down in southern New Mexico slaughtering each other all the time. Oh, you missed it on the news?

            Yup, they allowed us guns, so we jest set to killin’ down here, fast as we could shoot. Thet’s whut heppins when you give us rednecks guns.

            Murder and mayhem. Everwhur. Safest place I’ve ever lived.

        • Vicki

          Joe H. says:
          “clarence,
          even your omnipotent supreme court has agreed with our interpretation and said that the right to own and carry is a right that will not be abridged!!”

          Ummmmm… I don’t think the Supreme Court has ruled on the “shall not be infringed” part yet. They DID rule that the right is an INDIVIDUAL right and I think they ruled that it is a restriction on the states as well as the e federal government.

          They hinted that “reasonable” restrictions might be allowed but as I remember the decision it did not say that the right will not be abriged or infringed.

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062802134.html

          Warning to Liberals. Don’t go to the above link. There is a link there to a video of a rally where most everyone was carrying a pistol or rifle. Sadly for the liberal dogma no one was shot at the rally that day. No one was even mugged or attacked.

      • JC

        Swinney, you are one sick twisted puppy.

    • Jag

      If you want to find out how high of esteem politicians hold our U.S. Constitution, go to the GOA website and look at the grade given, based on votes for, or against gun control bills, and how they answer questions on gun rights on the survey sent out to each candidate. My Newsletter, sent out before the general election, had all their grades.
      Unless you have looked, you wouldn’t believe the number of F and F- grades these dirt bags have. Fortunately, there are also a lot with A and A+ grades, like Dr. Paul, and Dr. Coburn.

  • Angel Wannabe

    The criminals couldn’t give a good-go-to-h*ll what the guns laws say. Like the poor, the criminal will always get a weapon/gun and be among us. We The People are the ones who’ll suffer the consequences of further regulation.__To repeat once again, adding more gun regulation & control to the body of the people, because of the actions of a few___Makes about as much sense, as pulling the life saving medicine pennecillen from the shelves, because a handful of people are allergic. The benefits of the right to bear arms outweighs the risks. God gave us that right, the God-wanna-bes in Washington are doing all they can to take them away.

    • Robert Smith

      Angel says: “God gave us that right, the God-wanna-bes in Washington are doing all they can to take them away.”

      What a diaper load.

      It starts with “WE THE PEOPLE”.

      Your god has nothing to do with gun ownership.

      In fact, it’s in your violent god’s name that so many doctors have been killed eith guns.

      Rob

      • Angel Wannabe

        AHH, Go Pound Sand Robert, and waste your time on someone who’ll beliEve your shyt, CUZ YA GOT THE WRONG CHICK HERE FOR THAT!__I know where the rights came from, You and your freakin mindless ILK are the reason, we’re in this friggin mess in the first place. Your too damned full of yourselves to bow to a GOD you can’t see, so “you” your atheist followers make up your own rules and think they’re better than GODS__AGAIN, GO POUND SAND !!!

        • 45caliber

          I agree, Angel. I would much prefer to believe in God and learn after I die there isn’t one as these athiests insist, than to not believe in God and find out there is one after I die. But they want their heaven on earth by insisting that everyone else MUST do things their way.

          And all those doctors that were shot? The only ones I’m aware of are the abortion doctors – and there haven’t been too many of them shot either. Why should I give up my rights to defend myseld and my family to possibly save the lives of half a dozen people over thirty years or so?

          • Angel Wannabe

            45caliber, your right George Tiller the baby killer was the most recent that I remember._-I stand by the old saying, “that if you live by the sword, you’ll die by the sword”!

          • Robert Smith

            Thanks for another example of right wing violence, 45.

            I knew you would come through.

            Rob

          • 45caliber

            Rob:

            I have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about.

            All I did was mention that the only doctors I knew about who were shot were the very few abortion doctors. If there are more, I don’t know it. And I’m very much against ANY law that restricts my freedom due to have a dozen deaths over thirty years or more.

        • Robert Smith

          How christian of you angel: ” who’ll beliEve your shyt,”

          From your lips to whatever part of your god’s anataomy you wish to contact. I believe the usual place is to his ear, but your milage may vary from the sound of your language.

          BTW, did you know that there is a roumor that your god raped a teenager, Marry, without her permission to have his special son (himself?… your christanity really gets confusing) Jesus? Joe was such a mench to marry her even though she wasn’t carrying his child. Joe should be sainted.

          Rob

          • libertytrain

            While I don’t know what a roumor is, I do know that there is something twisted in the way you need to twist.

          • libertytrain

            St. Joseph is sainted and a Saint.

          • Bill

            Robert,

            where did you get the one brain cell that you have? Out of a Cracker Jack Box? Your lack of intelligent analysis is further proof to my argument that there needs to be a license required to have a brain.

          • Angel Wannabe

            RS, _ROFLMAO__My God is accused of rape, huh?__Hmm_ In all honestly Robert, if that statement wasn’t so damned ridiculously retarded, I’d probably go off on a rant.__But this will suffice_Oh ye, with no eyes to see and no ears to hear. Your nothing a paid sensationalist to conjur up reaction from the opposition.__Next victim….lol–what a howl__Do you hear laughter Pharoah???

          • Vicki

            Robert Smith writes:
            “BTW, did you know that there is a roumor that your god raped a teenager, Marry, without her permission to have his special son (himself?… your christanity really gets confusing) Jesus?”

            How do you know she didn’t give her permission? You really should stop listening to just rumors. Christianity is not at all confusing. Believing in it or not maybe but the rules are simple and easy to follow

      • Teresa

        More people die by the hands of doctors than guns every yr. and thats a fact.

        • David in Ma.

          Bath tubs, I heard Bath tubs….more people die in bath tubs.

          • 45caliber

            Teresa is right. Doctors do kill more than guns. As I was told when I became an engineer, though, lawyers have their mistakes locked up out of sight and doctors bury their mistakes. Engineer mistakes stand for fifty years where people can see them.

        • JimH

          Abortion doctors kill more children than handguns do.

          • Robert Smith

            Actually the term “children” isn’t universal before birth. Not everyone subscribes to your brutal god’s teachings, or at least the red meat servers who proclaim to spread his word.

            Rob

          • JimH

            Rob, Just because you don’t believe in my “Brutal Gods” ( your words) teachings doesn’t make those”children” any less dead. You’re the one who condones unborn baby slaughter, so who’s the brutal one? Your reference to “red meat servers” is only stated to start a fight and is just lame.

          • Vicki

            Robert Smith says:
            “Actually the term “children” isn’t universal before birth. Not everyone subscribes to your brutal god’s teachings…”

            Our “brutal” god isn’t telling us to suck out the brains of children thus murdering them. The red meat servers who do that appear to bow to some other entity.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Hey Robert,
            Why don’t you just go write another support check!!! you had your fun, now you gotta pay!!!

          • JC

            The odds of being killed by a Doctor are about 8 times greater than being killed by a handgun.

        • independant thinker

          Swimming pools as well.

      • Vicki

        Robert Smith says:
        “Angel says: “God gave us that right, the God-wanna-bes in Washington are doing all they can to take them away.”

        Robert: “What a diaper load.”

        Non Sequitur. Looks like an ad hominem attack directed at the statement rather than the poster.

        Robert: “Your god has nothing to do with gun ownership.”

        Your creator gave you life and free will. You have a duty to protect those gifts from aggressors. Your creator gave you the smarts to make and own guns. Her creator gave her the same gifts and duties and smarts. Your assertion is in error.

        The non sequitur about violence was deleted.

      • Jag

        I beg to differ; all our rights come from God, and one of the rights we have is our preexisting, God given right to own the firearms of our choice and to use them to defend our families. This is the right that is enshrined in the 2nd. Amendment to our U.S. Constitution. Our Founding Fathers felt it was important enough that they made it number 2 out of 10, in our Bill of Rights. Any so called “right” bestowed upon us by the government, can also be taken away.

        • Vicki

          Jag writes:
          “Any so called “right” bestowed upon us by the government, can also be taken away.”

          Such a “right” would correctly be called a privilege.

    • 45caliber

      Hey, don’t give the government unwanted advice about pennecillen! They might pull it off! They already keep several medicines off the shelf for that reason!

      But I do agree with you.

      Actually if you REALLY want to stop most violence, require all adults to carry! Would even a crazy person like Loughner try to shoot someone when they know that everyone else there would have a gun? Even if he wanted to commit suicide, generally he would want to kill a bunch of other people for the fame first.

      Actually, from what I’ve heard of him and from comments by those near him, that was part of what he had planned. He just wanted to be “famous” first – which is due to the liberal press making such a to-do about all these mass killers.

      • eddie47d

        Yes Loughner would have done the killings no matter who else had a gun. He left a suicide note and had no intention of coming out alive. Israeli police officials with automatic weapons have been blown up so being armed doesn’t make anyone safer.Someone hell bent on killing someone will get the job done no matter how many guns he has pointed at him. The killer will always have the drop on everyone else so stop with all the macho talk.

        • 45caliber

          But if others there had been armed and willing to use their own guns, he certainly wouldn’t have shot so many people, now would he?

          • eddie47d

            Not necessarily. It was mentioned that someone had a concealed weapon and never used it.May not have made one bit of difference.

          • 45caliber

            eddie:

            If you noticed I said “…willing to use it”. Some people simply aren’t willing to harm another person, even if that person is blazing away at them. Fortunately, I’m not one of them.

          • Robert Smith

            More violent talk from 45.

            Such fine examples.

            Rob

          • Robert Smith

            eddie says: “May not have made one bit of difference.”

            In this case it didn’t. However in the “American Rifelman” there is a page full each month of folks who have been saved by their own firearms.

            The key is that it is an issue of freedom.

            You want to keep abortion legal… They want to keep guns legal. You want pot, they want your soul dedicated to their god.

            Tell them you will keep your soul, let them keep their guns, point out their stupid rules about pot while they keep the much more toxic alcohol legal…

            But then they won’t ever let go of your soul so why bother?

            Rob

        • Vicki

          eddie47d writes:
          “The killer will always have the drop on everyone else so stop with all the macho talk.”

          The sad thing is Eddie and a lot of others believe this. Even though I have sent eddie links to training that would allow him to be able to neutralize (That violent enough for you Robert?) a threat even when that threat has “the drop” on you.

          http://www.frontsight.com/courses/defensive-handgun-training-course.asp

          Oh and mention to Dr Piazza your doubts about being able to stop someone who has the drop on you. I’m sure the Doctor can help.

          • JeffH

            Vicki, very good. Frontsight has become the ultimate training facility in the world. Dr. Piazza has thr public, politicians, security, police and military coming in for training from around the world. Next time I go to Vegas I’mm stopping in for a look see.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        45caliber,
        you remind me of the movie “Code of Silence”. in it two thugs walk into a cop bar and yell “this is a hold-up!” all of a sudden they have about 40 pistols and a shotgun pointed at them!!!

        • eddie47d

          Gotta love Hollywood!

          • Average Joe Patriot

            That is exactly what would, in fact, happen, Ed. No, the guy wouldn’t be dead…yet. He’d now have a choice. Because most trained, armed, responsible people surrounding him would at least give him that.

            Nope, it’s not Hollywood, Ed. BTW, do you carry, Ed?

            You may have that right, depending on where you live. But, I hope you don’t carry, Ed. Because guns don’t kill people, and bullets don’t kill people, and even people don’t generally kill people. Situations kill people. May you never find yourself in one.

            You strike me as the sort who might create one, by not knowing what to do. Given the situation. You strike me as the idiot who believes guns shouldn’t exist, and so jumps up yelling and gets himself and a lot of people hurt or killed. In a gun situation.

            The problem as I see it, many people think because someone is carrying, they’re ipso facto in a “gun situation.” Nope, a “gun situation” is where someone draws with obvious intent to utilize (like they pulled the starter cord on a chainsaw).

            Now you have a “gun situation.”

            Mainstream media, pundits and politicans, would have you confuse possession with intent to utilize. If these equated, one-half of the Swiss population would be dead long ago.

  • Jeepdriver 97

    Pete, It’s too bad your proposed legislation to prohibit anyone from carrying a gun within 1,000 feet of a federal official wasn’t in force last Saturday. I’m sure Jared would have skipped the whole thing if he had known he would get in trouble for having a gun there

    • 45caliber

      So am I.

      I also thought it was funny that this idiot Congressman specified “federal offical”. He wanted to make sure he was ‘safe’.

    • Vicki

      Yep. Gun-free zones that really work :)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7pGt_O1uM8

  • DOGS FIGHT

    Morons. Supposedely (I say this because the media didn’t cover it because it didn’t fit their agenda) Loughner was stopped by a concealed carry person firing back at him. If these politicans want to increase their chances of lone nut cases being successful, go right ahead. Gun control didn’t help the victims of VA tech, the victims of Columbine, etc., etc,

    • Robert Smith

      Hey Dogs,

      You post: “Loughner was stopped by a concealed carry person firing back at him.”

      Is there proof of that?

      The common knowledge is that he was tackled as he tried to change magaziens.

      Rob

      • James

        Robert, there is no evidence of anyone firing a weapon but Loughner. It was stated that one gentleman in the crowd was carrying a concealed weapon, but he never used it. When Loughner was reloading, someone hit him over the head with one of the folding chairs there, and two men, one a retired Colonel, wrestled Loughner to the ground.

        • 45caliber

          James, according to a story, with pictures, in a British newspaper (London Daily News), Loughner tried to change magazines. A grandmother next to him grabbed the magazine. While he was trying to get it away from her, three others, two elderly, jumped on him too. All four of them sat on him until the police showed up … late as usual.

          • independant thinker

            never mind. the thought just went pfeeeet. sorry

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Almost. According to her, in a phone interview, he was tackled just as he pulled out the fresh clip and he dropped it as he hit the ground. She and he both reached for it at the same time, both got hold of it. They played tug-of-war, she won. (Mind you, he was by now in the process of being put in a choke-hold and arm-lock at the time, so he may have been distracted.) Then the 220 lb. armed citizen took his hand off his weapon and piled on, and it was definitely over.

            Well, not quite. They still had to wait five minutes or so for the police to show up and save the day.

      • David in Ma.

        One of the people who tackeled him was carrying but did not use it.

        • Teresa

          The man w/the concealed weapon was walking out of the store when the gunman was already being tackled, he then released his hand from his own weapon and jumped on top of the guy along side the others.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Correct Theresa. Just a few seconds earlier and he might have saved lives (well, he did help, in fact by helping hold Loughner down). In an interview he explained that he was hand on weapon, safety off, ready to shoot to kill, but encountered a “gun down,” situation by the time he got there, and saw no need to draw his weapon.

            An armed, evidently weapons trained, responsible citizen. Quite the opposite of what gun opponents would have us believe, than in such a situation, more guns in the crowd would have resulted in a bloodbath of innocent bystanders shot. It already WAS a bloodbath of innocent bystanders shot.

            Consider another scenario. That armed citizen definitely WOULD have saved lives had the elderly people who tackled Loughner been unable to hold him down, because Jared Lee WAS in the process of reloading. Another 30 round magazine, in fact. Had they failed to hold him (the courage and presence of mind of which I applaud, it was a helluva risk to them personally), AND had there not been a trained, armed citizen newly arrived on the scene, then there unquestionably would have been a MUCH higher body count.

            Speaking of presence of mind, why the hell didn’t Giffords have the presence of mind to ask for a Tucson City police or Pima County deputy detail for her hour-and-a-half Safeway parking lot town meeting? What are she and her constituents paying their taxes for? One patrol car, one officer, is this too much to ask? Even Sheriff Dupnik should have figured that out for himself, it’s not like her event was spur-of-the-moment.

            And for those who claim that Loughner’s motivations were anti-government or political, or fueled by talk show rhetoric? I would point out that he was crazy. You don’t randomly gun down a nine-year-old child because Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity got you riled up. Or because Sarah Palin put gunsights on a phosphordot map on her website.

            These often insufferable individuals and many more rile many of us up, but it’s not like we imagine dog voices or get stuck in mind-loop of Meno’s Paradox (Google it: Meno was on his favorite reading list). Jared Lee Loughner, because of psych-drugs, or schizophrenia, or MK-Ultra style mind control, or all the above, for whatever reason, it can certainly be said: The man was crazy.

            All the rest of this 1st and 2nd Amendment jazz is just political and media opportunism. Loughner could have driven a pickup truck into the crowd, done just as much damage, and we’d still be arguing whether it was accidental (he had an epileptic fit or something), or he did it on purpose.

            Would everyone then be discussing whether crazies should be allowed the keys to a motor vehicle?

          • eddie47d

            Teresa and Average Joe;I’d like to see a live interview on Joe Zamudio for he is the one who had the concealed carry weapon (9mm). A reporter did interview him and he said he had pulled out his gun and originally “pointed at the guy who had took the gun away from Loughnor” and told him to “drop it,drop it or I’ll shoot” He realized he was going to shoot the wrong person and stopped his action. He said “He felt real lucky he did not pull the trigger”. Hardly a testament for having a concealed weapon if he almost shot shot an innocent person. He then jumped in and held Loughnor down. To take it further and this is my opinion. What would have stopped a cop or someone else from shooting at Zamudio thinking he was the second shooter?

          • Teresa

            Robert, I did watch the interview w/the guy that had his hand on the concealed weapon! He said he came out of the store, He NEVER said he pointed it at ANYONE! He said he said he already saw them on the ground when he heard them cry gun, thats when he grabbed for his, but released when he saw the guys on ground. He NEVER said anything about pointing to ANYONE! YOU LIE!

          • Vicki

            I haven’t found an interview with the CCW holder yet but I did find this from the “unarmed woman who tackled” the shooter. Turns out that as we should have known the actual events were a little different. Just as heroic but not quite as we were led to believe by those liberals who told us how useless CCW was in this and previous threads.

            http://video.foxnews.com/v/4490514/exclusive-woman-helped-subdue-shooting-suspect/?playlist_id=87937

        • Robert Smith

          That is true restraint. If he had missed and hit a bystander… It was the huge clip that would have thrown me off too. If I saw a way to control things without shooting I would too.

          Rob

    • eddie47d

      DOGS; No one fired back at him so why did you say that? More heroic talk and false bravado.

    • http://marcum@wildblue.net coal miner

      Dogs,

      You are right:
      The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution states: “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.” The Founding Fathers included this in our Bill of Rights because they feared the Federal Government might oppress the population if the people did not have the means to defend themselves as a nation and as individuals (Halbrook 65-84). This idea was not new. The Founding Fathers’ thoughts on the right to keep and bear arms were influenced by Aristotle, Cicero, John Locke, and Algernon Sidney. Gun control is silly.Criminals and nuts will love it.

  • David

    Gun control laws always increase violent crime. Doctors kill far more people per year than gun owners, perhaps we should ban Doctors from coming within 1000 feet of any government official. True guns kill people, so do sword, knives, baseball bats, sticks, rocks, poisons, animals. Gee what a wonderful world it would be if libs have their way, we would all be incarcerated, eating Mickey D’s with rubber spoons, until they decided to euthanize us.

    • castaway

      You will not be able to eat at Mickey D’s, because it is not good for you and well, you are too old and we need to take care of you.

      • David in Ma.

        Besides that there is no longer a toy in the happy meal.

    • 45caliber

      David:

      You would have to eat pudding – and not the sweet kind. That is the only thing you wouldn’t choke on and sugar is bad for you.

    • Dan

      David I have one correction to your post. Gun’s DON’T kill people, people kill people. Some people use knives, some use bats, some use cars, some use their hands.

      • http://marcum@wildblue.net coal miner

        Dan,

        I am a proud gun owner.

        Throughout history violence has plagued the human race. Since ancient times the strong have preyed on the weak and the meek. We have passed laws to protect society, but the violence continues. Laws attempt to change human behavior, but laws are not able to change human nature. Laws are not enough to protect people from aggression. We must allow people the means to protect themselves. Protection is a major reason that about half of all Americans own a firearm.

        • 45caliber

          You are right … for once.

        • Robert Smith

          Coal claims: “Protection is a major reason that about half of all Americans own a firearm.”

          That was original theory of why I got mine. Then I got into the social and competition side and I found that I enjoyed a whole bunch. For about 10 years I was at matches many summer weekends and ranges in the winter within 100 mi. of D.C.

          Rob

        • Vicki

          Coal Miner and I find common ground. :)

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Vicki,
            As much as it pains me, I too have to admit that he and I have found common ground, as well!!

          • JimH

            With a miner, wouldn’t it be common underground?

  • castaway

    Anyway if someone wants to kill some low life politician,1000 ft is nothing for a high powered rifle. In fact the perp could be 1500ft. away and still hit his target with enough velocity to vaperize a large part of the body they hit. It is all about “fear”, and the libs are scared shitless of what might be coming.

    • Robert Smith

      hey castaway: “It is all about “fear”, and the libs are scared shitless of what might be coming.”

      Are you implying violence?

      Rob

      • 45caliber

        The liberals are. That’s why they want to ban all guns in civilian hands. They aren’t really worried about crime; they want to make sure they themselves are safe. In fact Feinstein, who carries, stated that once guns were banned she needed to keep hers. After all, there were people who didn’t like her.

        • eddie47d

          No politician should be physically threatened or even physically threatened in print. Castaway has made more than a few threats on this site so what do you think his ultimate intentions are? How many times would I have to say I like cheeseburgers before you believe me? Once should be enough,right? Most have said Loughner was mentally unstable and they should have seen the signs. I say Castaway is mentally unstable with his continuous threats and should be committed or denied the right to own a weapon. If we let the Castaways speak their “mind” and make threats then there really isn’t much we can do about the Loughners now is there?

          • Teresa

            No politician should be physically threatened or even physically threatened in print.
            **********************************************
            Tell me Eddie….do you feel WE have the same rights??????
            Just whos agenda ARE YOU REALLY supporting????

          • eddie47d

            Who’s killing are you supporting??

          • 45caliber

            eddie:

            Are you saying that all the libs who insisted that Bush should have been shot, hanged, etc. were WRONG????

          • Teresa

            I merely asked you….Do you feel that WE have the same rights, or do you feel congress or politicians are somehow subject to special rules? As fas as supporting killings, you eddie really are here to merely provoke people and nothing more I fear. If I do support any killing it would be any attempt on bodily harm or death to me or any of my loved ones.

          • JeffH

            45caliber, why do you spoil it for eddie. Don’t you know he wants to restrict everyones 1st Amendement rights, freedom of expression.

          • eddie47d

            Caliber; Yes they were wrong. If we are a nation of laws then he could have been impeached or censored. You know innocent until proven guilty.

          • eddie47d

            Teresa; I believe you were provoking me on your original comment so I responded accordingly.Now let’s move on.

          • eddie47d

            Mad Dog Jeff; Nobodies muzzling anybodies 1st amendments rights.You of coarse could use a good muzzling or just plain stop lying.

          • JeffH

            eddie47d. always quick to accuse someone of lying but short on proof unless, of course, you feel your word carries more weight than facts. Again I say…and it does gets tiring waiting for your proof…PROVE IT! You can’t, so say something silly and then run and hide…again.

          • eddie47d

            I’m not taking away your 1st amendment rights and you express yourself quite often. So you need more proof about your phony lying accusations.

          • JeffH

            eddie47d, the truth shall set you free…try it, you might like it…

        • Robert Smith

          Remember when Tedd’s guards got caught at a N.Y. airport with full autos?

          Rob

  • Robert Smith

    What is embarassing about this is the fact that in a state with very lax carry laws nobody, NOBODY!, stepped up to shoot the perp.

    Granted it was a bunch of “liberals” in anttendance, but whasn’t there at least one cop on the scene?

    Rob

    • ValDM

      No, Robert. The sheriff in his infinite wisdom decided that this “meet the candidate” gathering did not require his or his people’s attendance.

  • castaway

    Most of the histeria that we see now, is from the media sensationalizing. They have made such a big deal of this it will be in the History books for years. The media has gone after everyone it can think of that might be a good scape goat. The left after the Right. I am so sick of this B.S. I could vomit. It used to be the media reported the news, and nothing more. Yes it was somewhat boring but then at least you recieved the truth and nothing but.

    • Robert Smith

      Aww castaway you seem to be missing a bit of history…: ” Yes it was somewhat boring but then at least you recieved the truth and nothing but.”

      In fact it was Edward R. Murrow who took down old Tail Gunner Joe.

      It was Walter Cronchite who finally started the moves that got us out of ‘Nam.

      Rob

      • 45caliber

        And look at the mistake that was!

        • eddie47d

          A little touchy about the truth Caliber?

          • 45caliber

            Nope. Just pointing out that it was a failed action. The war was okay; pulling out was wrong at that time. Just like it’s wrong in the Mid-East now.

          • Robert Smith

            Keep the violence going, eh 45?

            When is the right time to quit a war that won’t be won?

            Oh! Oh! Oh! Call on ME, I KNOW!

            Don’t get into it. That’s the answer. Don’t fall for the lies.

            Rob

          • Vicki

            What war? Vietnam was a “police action”

    • 45caliber

      My wife has a cousin that took journalism in college to be an editor. (About thirty years ago now.) His class was told that their job as a journalist was NOT to report the stories. It was to “mold public opinion”. The entire class was offended. The professor told them that even lying was acceptable to get public opinion what you wanted it to be – and that it was the journalists who were to decide what public opinion was to be.

      It wasn’t long after that when the journalists dropped from one of the most respected professions to one of the least respected … and most never figured out why that happened. In fact, they are number 3 – after politicians and lawyers – as the worst disliked.

      • eddie47d

        That Professor should have been fired.

        • 45caliber

          I agree – but too many today agree with him.

        • http://marcum@wildblue.net coal miner

          eddie47d,

          Unfortunately that is true,most news medias do mold public opinion.I like to see a news source that would report the facts,just the facts.

          • 45caliber

            I agree. I would too.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            coal miner,
            not only do they mold public opinion, they manufacture the news. There was an inbedded reporter in a unit in Iraq that put a couple of the troops up to asking the questions HE wanted answers to and when he didn’t get the answers he wanted, he bent and twisted the story to what he wanted!

      • Robert Smith

        My first wife’s cousin second removed from the dog catcher down the street once saw on TV giant ants attacking itsy bitsy litte cities on a TV. Yup, it was on TV so it had to be true…

        Next time you cite a source could you be a little less anectdotal? Making stuff up isn’t really an argument.

        I know some fine journalists and news directors and your efforts to belittle them are obviously born of ignorance.

        Rob

        • http://?? Joe H.

          robert,
          and your efforts to build them up is born of BLIND ignorance!!

  • James

    Everyone here seems to have missed the major point of the article. Several lawmakers are preparing to violate the Second Amendment’s “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” The Supreme Court D.C. v. Heller decision held that the amendment’s restriction applies to individual arms as well as the militias.

    • 45caliber

      I think we all caught that. And it is easy to see who the libs here are – they like the idea.

      • Angel Wannabe

        45__yeah, The Liberals are like bad pennies, they just keep turning up.

        • Robert Smith

          And you just can’t not take a shot at all those little heads, can you Angel?

          Rob

          • Angel Wannabe

            Robert Smith, I hear laughter Pharaoh….

  • CLARENCE SWINNEY

    “IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A MILITIA” YOU FREAKS CAN CARRY A KILLING
    MACHINE. MAY IT NOT BE YOUR CHILDREN.

    • Teresa

      Clarence…you silly man…you have killing weapons all around you, quit your rambling. The right to bear arms is for protection in the hands of law abiding citizens.

      • eddie47d

        Loughner WAS a law abiding citizen.

        • Teresa

          really? I thought he lied on a gun application. I thought he had several incidents w/law officals?

          • eddie47d

            That just proves Anyone can buy a weapon.

          • libertytrain

            He did have several incidences with the law. I don’t know if any were felonies. And perhaps whomever was checking the aps that day in probably some governmental office was too busy doing other things than the work they were paid to do. Who knows. Do we know if he really bought the gun or did a friend or someone else. We really don’t know that much about him other than what was gleaned on the Net before it was quickly removed.

          • Robert Smith

            Nothing sufficient to trip a red flag.

            Which is why we really do need to get troubled folks some help.

            At what point do you think intervention might have been proper?

            Rob

          • libertytrain

            Apparently not, he didn’t threaten anyone so the police could not be called in. Though he was apparently tossed from the campus he attended because he said frightening things and would not be allowed back till he got a mental health exam. No one could force him to get one. Though now, that he did attack he will. It’s a fine line we walk with our personal freedoms. Who decides when one of us is required to get mental health evaluations?

          • Vicki

            Libertytrain writes:
            “Who decides when one of us is required to get mental health evaluations?”

            We assigned that power to the courts but we also found that it is way to easy to abuse that power. Better we be armed and dangerous (Violent enough for you Robert?) So that if someone does “loose it” we can quickly neutralize the threat. Then we can evaluate his/her mental health.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Libertytrain,
            There is the problem. Who among us has the right to determine who is sick and who is merely eccentric?? Is the little guy that walks down the street and touches each meter cause he is compulsive really sick? How about the guy that is a stand up citizen and goes to work each day faithfully doing his job and just snaps?? Psychology is a practice, not a science!! It’s VERY failable!

      • Angel Wannabe

        teresa, I agree, my God, we can turn a pencil into a weapon if need be__

        • Robert Smith

          Really Angel… a pencil to kill someone! Wow, who would have thunk it? Does anyone else remember a movie where some action hero killed his Master with a pencil while visiting him in prison? I’ll trip across that one again some day and I’ll remember it. It was a pretty good movie.

          BTW, neither he (fictional), nor I (real) would need your god to turn a pencil into a weapon.

          Rob

          • Angel Wannabe

            RS__Still laughing Pharoah…..

          • Vicki

            Robert Smith says:
            “BTW, neither he (fictional), nor I (real) would need your god to turn a pencil into a weapon. ”

            Of course not. Your creator already gave you the smarts to use a pencil for defense or offense. Your creator hardly needs to redo good work.

    • Bitter Libertarian

      As I said on the other Immature & confused post you did, I assume you own a Killing machine..its called a Car.

      Are you willing to give up your car or face reduced driving freedom every time a drunk driver kills someone?

      • http://marcum@wildblue.net coal miner

        Bitter libertarian,

        You forgot to mention Road Rage.

        • Robert Smith

          In VA it was road rage on Rt. 7 near Columbia Pike, near where the old drive-in used to be, that a punk got out of his car and shot a Naval Officer… Or was it the other way around? Memory ain’t as good as it used to be.

          Rob

    • http://charter howe

      Clarence, I bet your Mommy is really proud of you and your endless wisdom about what the Constitution is all about. After I spent 29 years in the military, I qualify for being a FREAK that carried a killing machine for many of those years, thinking I was protecting people who loved and respected the Constitution and the rule of law. The nutjob in Arizona is similar to mentally deficient people all over the world who find a way to destroy what they perceive as a threat to their deranged ideological and criminal way of thinking. A perp will always find a lethal weapon to carry out these horrific deeds and outlawing guns will not stop the evil in our society. There is always risk in a free society, but it is important to avoid knee jerk reactions. When will these do nothing Congress people and the gun control activists learn that gun control laws impose restrictions on law abiding citizens, not the criminals and certainly not the dangerous schizophrenic nutjobs roaming the country. Vehicles driven by dangerous drivers is a bigger threat to human life than guns, but I havn’t heard anyone on the hill suggesting maybe we should outlaw dangerous drivers or any of those evil vehicles that kill. Mental health programs are being drastically cut because of state budget shortfalls across the country, so while we look at politics, guns and magazines, we seem to have forgotten what will come closer to minimizing this dilemma.

      • 45caliber

        Gun control is a favored way of politicians since it doesn’t take any money from the government to make the law and it makes at least some of the voters think you are worried about crime.

        • Robert Smith

          So, 45… What about going for a few social programs that might stop some of the nut jobs?

          Rob

          • 45caliber

            I tried but they won’t let me shoot them.

          • Vicki

            Robert Smith writes:
            “So, 45… What about going for a few social programs that might stop some of the nut jobs?”

            As long as you don’t take a gun to OUR heads and force us to pay for them, I am ok with you creating a few social programs.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Vicki,
            you have just commited a liberal sin!!! Never ask them to take from THEIR pocket to start a program, only from others!!

          • Vicki

            @JoeH. I’m so bad :)

    • 45caliber

      Clarence:

      I will expect you to give up your automobiles immediately since they kill far more than guns do every year. And many of those they kill are children. Further, I shall expect you to give up your computer since the liberals are all insisting that retoric like yours is inflamible and liable to cause people to do bad things.

      And I for one will be glad to see you gone.

    • JeffH

      CLARENCE SWINNEY, you’ll get more support for your ramblings at your alma mater…the Democratic Underground and the Huffington Post.

      • eddie47d

        Dang, Jeff did you just have a brain fart!

        • JeffH

          …another brilliant contribution…

        • JeffH

          …and follows a question with an exclamation point…SLMAO!

    • Vicki

      Yelling has not improved your proof by bald assertion. Next.

  • Michael G Anderson

    Forget about outlawing extended mags let’s outlaw guns. The British did and look at Northern Ireland, wait who the British consider terrorist (RIRA) use easily make bombs with a can filled with ammonium nitrate, no. 2 fuel oil and a homemade blasting cap. This is what terrorist use it’s a weapon. To farmers its just fertilizer and fuel for their tractors. It’s in the hand of the beholder what turns a tool to a weapon. Let’s outlaw ignorant people. And don’t stop at the ignorant lets outlaw all that believe in god, he kills more everyday just in name and honor. And most of all lets outlaw blacks and hispanics, more are killed by them than anything else in America. My point is not in racism but it’s the person that uses the tools in the wrong manner. Figure out how to stop the ignorant, obviously their was something wrong with this guy if he had a target he would of just hit his target not everyone standing around it. He has no consideration for human life, how do you stop a person like that?

    • 45caliber

      He wanted to be famous. And the media is making him that way. Except it is infamy, not fame.

  • Raggs

    Is it at all possible that thie shooting was a set-up by politicans?

    • David in Ma.

      OOOOOO, be careful, that next knock on your door might not be the meter reader……but it could be possible, socialists and communist could sacrifice one of their own to gain an advantage…..nawww, that only happens in movies, right?

    • 45caliber

      I doubt it – although I have seen an article in a European paper that hinted at just that. Not because of Gifford but because of the federal judge who was killed. It seems that three days earlier he made the Oblama administration mad in one of his rulings against them …

  • Michael G Anderson

    Rob good point its Arizona I thought everyone carries guns there, why is this donkeyhole still alive. I read a story from some years back a gunman entered a school in Arizona and the gunman was took out by a student with a shotgun it didn’t make national headlines though the gun saved lives there. But it is not up to the police or government to protect us, its upon the average citizen to protect us. And its hard defending our American brothers and sisters by football strategies, may the American spirit bless the man that did.

    • David in Ma.

      You said ” But it is not up to the police or government to protect us”
      In the back of my mind I seem to remember there is a supreme court ruling to that effect, that the police are not required to protect people…

      • 45caliber

        David:

        You are correct. It seemed that someone sued the police from not protecting them. The Supreme Court ruled that protection was not one of the responsibilities of the police.

    • 45caliber

      There are two – and ONLY two – ways to achieve safety. You protect yourself or you institute a police state so rigorous that no one can even walk across your bedroom without the police knowing.

      I prefer to protect myself.

    • Robert Smith

      From Michael: ” I read a story from some years back a gunman entered a school in Arizona and the gunman was took out by a student with a shotgun it didn’t make national headlines though the gun saved lives there.”

      The American Rifelman has articles each month about just such incidents.

      One of my favorite movies is “Red Dawn.” Did you ever notice that one of the first things the Cuban general did was order the gun records from city hall?

      Rob

  • http://personalliberty.com Rusty

    I thought it was already against the law for wackos to shoot people. Breaking 11 laws rather than 10 will not change the outcome. An IED and other means are still available to these fools. McVeigh did not use a gun.

    • 45caliber

      I agree. Besides, the prosecutor only uses three charges in normal cases. More that that tends to confuse the jury. And Loughner has earned the death penalty. There isn’t anything else they can do to him after that.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        45caliber,
        Unfortunatly some bleeding heart will term him mentally ill and get him sent to a nice comfy hospital!!!

  • Raggs

    I have read many articles in the past year that bring to the table the limitation on ammunition and the excessive cost of buying ammunition and the registration of any sell that is naturally proposed by the progressive party…

    They are not going to stop at limiting a magazine capacity.

  • Northern Ireland (britian)

    Belfast, Northern Ireland (CNN) — Police in the Republic of Ireland are questioning five suspected IRA dissidents after the discovery of what officers are describing as “a bomb-making factory,” they said Thursday.

    Police said searches were continuing at a remote farm 40 miles from Dublin in County Kildare where metal tubes and other components were found on Wednesday.

    Police suspect the dissident group Oglaigh na hEireann (Irish Volunteers) was making mortar bombs to used in Northern Ireland.

    Forensic tests were being carried out, police said.

    The five suspects, aged from mid-20s to 55, were being held under Section 30 of the Offences Against the State Act.

    They can be detained for up to three days before being charged or released.

    The new head of the Irish police, Commissioner Martin Callinan, this week said tackling dissident republican activity was one of his top priorities.

    Dissident republicans are those who want Northern Ireland to be Irish rather than British, and do not accept the 1998 peace deal that largely ended decades of violence in the province.

    • David in Ma.

      Now, don’t say this took place at a plumbing shop..heh heh heh

  • 45caliber

    Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said that he is preparing a similar bill for the Senate. In a written statement, Lautenberg said that the high-ammunition clips should “not be on the market” because the only reason people purchase them is “to kill a lot of people very quickly.”
    ————————————————————-

    If this was the only reason people bought those magazines, then there were be a LOT of shootings every day! There are millions of these things out here in the civilan world. I liked them for hunting because I could carry the extra bullets I wanted to take already loaded. It kept them out of my pockets. (Now we can only hunt with five bullets in the gun.) I like them for target shooting simply because I dislike reloading after shooting a few rounds, particularly if I am trying to zero a rifle. (Since I use three rounds at a time to locate the aim of a rifle as I was taught in the army, it is annoying to reload after every three rounds.)

    Lautenberg obviously has no experience in shooting or hunting, and hasn’t any interest in learning. Further, I’m expecting someone to start insisting that no gun should be allowed that can shoot semi-automatically – in other words, shoot twice in a row without manually loading another bullet in the chamber. However, EVERY gun with the possible exception of a single shot, can be made to fire that way. In fact, I’ve seen the drawings to make any rifle shoot fully automatically. The drawings were developed and issued in Austrailia during WWII to allow the owners to get their weapons converted prior to an expected invasion by the Japanese.

    • independant thinker

      If I remember correctly there was a device made (although I do not know if it was actualy marketed) that permitted the Winchester and Marlin lever actions to fire full auto.

      • 45caliber

        Correct. And there is also one that will allow bolt-actions to fire automatically.

  • Mick

    Rusty says:
    January 13, 2011 at 9:15 am
    I thought it was already against the law for wackos to shoot people. Breaking 11 laws rather than 10 will not change the outcome. An IED and other means are still available to these fools. McVeigh did not use a gun.
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
    Rusty …..You’re exactly right,the more laws they make the more confusing the issues become and the only folks affected by this procedure are the laws abiding citizens because as you so well stated, it doesn’t bother a criminal to break one or 20 laws. When will people wake-up to that fact ??

  • David in Ma.

    I hope they start the debate by defining that part of the Constitution of the 2nd Amendment which states “Shall not be infringed” or words to that effect.

    • Vicki

      The supreme court has established that the militia clause is a subordinate clause and the main clause (the right of the people) means what it says it means. I.E. an INDIVIDUAL right to keep (posses) and bear (carry) arms. I think they incompletely went with the definition of arms as firearms. So you are right. We only need to have the supreme court tell us what we already know about the definitions of “shall”, “not”, “be” and “infringed”

  • 2WarAbnVet

    When, in recorded history, has passage of a law stopped someone intent on mayhem?

    • 45caliber

      Never

      • eddie47d

        Peace accords are laws and once signed hundreds to thousands of people are no longer dying. So in most cases laws do keep opposing people in line.(cooling down period). Yes, there are exception but most laws make normal folks think twice.

        • independant thinker

          “Yes, there are exception but most laws make normal folks think twice.”

          The operative words here are “most” and “normal folks”. That does not include nut cases or anyone else intent on causing any kind of mayhem.

          • eddie47d

            I guess we could go lawless and see how that works.

          • Vicki

            Or enforce the laws of the land. That would necessitate our throwing out all laws that infringe on the right of the people to individually keep and bear arms. I think I would prefer that solution to the anarchy Eddie47d suggested.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY Just cause Eddie47d likes this one so much. :)

        • Vicki

          eddie47d writes:
          “Peace accords are laws”

          No supporting evidence. I looked. Since peace accords are NOT laws your answer is incorrect.

          eddie47d writes: “So in most cases laws do keep opposing people in line.(cooling down period).”

          Cooling down period doesn’t. Killers get their guns in the black market or in advance. Law abiding citizens being stalked have to wait. 3+ days of terror while the stalker can stalk the prey unafraid.

          If cooling down periods were real than you would only have to have them till you buy your first gun. After that they are meaningless.

          • eddie47d

            Spin away all you want.

          • Vicki

            Is that the best counter argument you have today Eddie47d? If so I accept the win. Thanks.

  • J.M.R.

    JUST ANOTHER CRISIS FOR THE LIBS TO GET THEIR SOAP BOX OUT AND RUN THEIR STUPID MOUTHS.

    • 45caliber

      As I said elsewhere, I think the libs shot themselves in the foot over this. They were so interested in tying the right and Palin to this that they never considered that Loughner was a LIBERAL himself. In fact, he was WAY out on the left! He would even push Oblama himself for a place to stand. Now they can’t back down and the media can’t shuffle it under the rug as they did the character at Ft. Hood.

  • Mick

    David in Ma. says:
    January 13, 2011 at 9:46 am
    I hope they start the debate by defining that part of the Constitution of the 2nd Amendment which states “Shall not be infringed” or words to that effect**************************
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
    David,,,,,Don’t hold your breath although i wish for the same thing but with the bunch we have in DC especially the democrats who couldn’t care a less about the constitution except for amending it to suit their will, I wouldn’t count on too much coming out to uphold the rights of the law abiding citizens..
    They shouldn’t even have a debate, punish the murdurers and leave the rights of the people alone.
    Aren’t people sick and tired to have to give up their rights just because the criminals are not punished enough and the lawyers are getting rich in the process…

  • GaryTraditionalUltraConservative

    If the Federal Government begins to slowly and methodically disarm Law Abiding Citizens and take away their rights to defend themselves from criminals, then the only people who will benefit from more and more gun control Laws will be more and more criminals who could not give a hoot in hell about any gun control Laws and that will cause violent crimes against helpless and totally defenseless innocent Law abiding Citizen victims to skyrocket and overwhelm the local Law enforcement agencies and the morgues will be filled to over capacity with the bodies of innocent Law abiding Citizens who had no opportunity to own and use a gun in self defense to preserve their own lives from criminals who could not give a hoot in hell about the respect for and the sactity of any human Life except their own criminal human Life.

    • David in Ma.

      The fed’s must think they are close t disarming the law abiding citizen because they are now talking limiting speech..
      How could obama get elected when only 40 percent of the people are on some form of welfare and most of them don’t vote…..was there an acorn present? Ya think?

      Congress has to investigate his being qualified or not, if not jail him, if he is impeach him, obama and his gang is destroting America!

      • Mick

        David in Ma. says:
        January 13, 2011 at 10:17 am
        The fed’s must think they are close t disarming the law abiding citizen because they are now talking limiting speech..
        How could obama get elected when only 40 percent of the people are on some form of welfare and most of them don’t vote…..was there an acorn present? Ya think?

        Congress has to investigate his being qualified or not, if not jail him, if he is impeach him, obama and his gang is destroting America!
        &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
        David ,,,,,Liberal haven’t figured out yet and most likely never will that if we allow the fox to run the hen house we will wind-up with a lot of carcasses……….

    • 45caliber

      Gary:

      You are correct. Take a look at England. There are so many crimes that the police don’t even bother to take down reports of lessor crimes in many places. They don’t bother to stop them unless the crime is against criminals (such as trying to defend yourself). You are over 16 times more likely to be a victim if you live in a city. And according to Scotland Yard, there are more guns today in England than there was before they banned them. But the difference is that today all the guns are in the hands of gangs and they are all fully automatic AK-47′s from Russia.

      • http://marcum@wildblue.net coal miner

        45caliber,

        Way to go.I am with you on that one.Great post.

        http://www.a-human-right.com/guncontrol.html · Cached page

        • eddie47d

          That’s an interesting page on the rights of minorities to defend themselves. (blacks,gays,Jews,women who are raped). It puts equality in perspective since everyone should have the right to protect themselves. Since a half a dozen comments on this site (in the past) have said they want to eliminate liberals then I think it behooves them to get out there and arm themselves also. If only conservatives have guns guess who will get eliminated?

          • 45caliber

            I have no problem at all with all these minority groups being armed – including the liberals. The more that are armed, the less the criminals will want to cause problems.

            Remember the “Saturday night specials”? Those were low-cost guns that the libs wanted to get rid of. Not because they were unsafe but because the poor could afford them. Many of the fees, taxes, etc. today are meant to do the same thing. As usual, it is okay for the rich to have things and have the protection but not the common people.

          • Vicki

            eddie47d writes:
            “If only conservatives have guns guess who will get eliminated?”

            It is not the conservatives that you should fear it is the elite when they come to throw the “useful idiots” under the bus.

          • eddie47d

            Right now it’s the “conservatives”making the threats against liberals who are the threat.The elites are so shadowy it’s hard to pick them out. Depends on the political season and who is making hay about them.

          • JeffH

            “Right now it’s the “conservatives”making the threats against liberals who are the threat.”

            eddie, now if I read it right, conservatives are threatening the liberals who are the threat???

            Don’t confuse anybody…I’m sure you have proof of the liberal threats that are being threatened by conservatives…can you give us some verifiable examples of conservatives making threats and who the liberal threats are so I won’t continue to be so confused.

            By the way, I know this is off subject, but who is on first?

          • libertytrain

            Jeff – :D

          • Vicki

            eddie47d says:
            “Right now it’s the “conservatives”making the threats against liberals who are the threat.”

            Eddie gets it :) At least he gets that liberals are the threat. All conservatives are doing is warning the “threat” Much as the Gadsden flag is a warning to the threat of their time.

  • Gary H. Thompson

    What are the 5 cities that have the strictess gun control laws in the US? What are the 5 cities that have the highest gun-related crime rates? Amazingly they are the same places – New York, Chicago, Washington DC, Los Angeles & Detroit. There are enough gun control laws here in this country, however if you are a criminal you don’t pay any attention to these laws anyway. I don’t think these new attempts for more gun control laws will fail because they are stupid. For example, in my case I live 3 blocks away from a school am i going to have to give up my rights to own guns?

    • 45caliber

      Why should the criminals pay attention to all the gun control laws? The feds don’t worry about them. In fact, when Virginia (and now several other states including Texas) started enforcing some of the federal laws such as a manditory 10 year additional sentence for committing a crime with a gun, the liberals all protested that it wasn’t fair to the criminal.

    • eddie47d

      The “pro” people always like to bring up the big cities instead of the fact that a larger population in those cities will equal more killings. They really aren’t the worst per 100,000 population .Mississippi leads the way at 18. Arizona is #2 at 15 and they have the most lenient laws on guns.Surprise,surprise! Now Alaska is #3 per 100,00 population and they also have lenient gun laws. That makes New York City a safer place to live with and with tougher gun laws. We tend to glorify the deaths in big cities because the numbers seems so large. Then shove all the “little” killings under the rug in less populated places. Even though they are in greater numbers.

      • 45caliber

        eddie:

        Many years ago now, Readers Digest commissioned a study to ‘prove’ that the places with the most guns had the most crime.

        They found just opposite. The places with the most guns (the country) had the least crimes; the places with the least guns (inner city areas) had the most crime.

      • JeffH

        eddie, sorry to say you’ve qualified none of those “statistics” What do they mean…Gun killings, knife killings, violent, non-violent???

        More Guns, Less Crime Again. Gun Ownership Rises to All-Time High,
        Violent Crime Falls to 35-Year Low. Coinciding with a surge in gun purchases that began shortly before the 2008 elections, violent crime decreased six percent between 2008 and 2009, including an eight percent decrease in murder and a nine percent decrease in robbery.
        1 Since 1991, when violent crime peaked, it has decreased 43 percent to a 35-year low. Murder has fallen 49 percent to a 45-year low.
        2 At the same time, the number of guns that Americans own has risen by about 90 million. Predictions by gun control supporters, that increasing the number of guns, particularly handguns and so-called “assault weapons,” would cause crime to increase, have been proven profoundly lacking in clairvoyance.

        Crimes per 100,000 population from 1991-2009 are down 43%, Murder is down 49%, Rape down 32%, Robbery down 51% and Aggravated Assault is down 39%.

        Less Gun Control: Over the last quarter-century, many federal, state and local gun control laws have been eliminated or made less restrictive. The federal “assault weapon” ban, upon which gun control supporters claimed public safety hinged, expired in 2004 and the murder rate has since dropped 10 percent. The federal handgun waiting period, for years the centerpiece of gun control supporters’ agenda, expired in 1998, in favor of the NRA-supported national Instant Check, and the murder rate has since dropped 21 percent. Accordingly, some states have eliminated obsolete waiting periods and purchase permit requirements. There are now 40 Right-to-Carry states, an all-time high, up from 10 in 1987. All states have hunter protection laws, 48 have range protection laws, 48 prohibit local gun laws more restrictive than state law, 44 protect the right to arms in their constitutions, 33 have “castle doctrine” laws protecting the right to use guns in self-defense, and Congress and 33 states prohibit frivolous lawsuits against the firearm industry.9 Studies for Congress, the Congressional Research Service, the Library of Congress, the National Institutes of Justice, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found no evidence that gun control reduces crime.
        http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=206&issue=007

        • eddie47d

          You knew exactly what I meant Jeff. The issue is about guns and the fact that gun deaths have gone down doesn’t change a thing I said. Overall the deaths per 100,000 aren’t where most people think they are.

          • JeffH

            eddie I present the facts as they are, not how I imagine them to be and NO, I don’t use your methods and just assume things. You didn’t qualify your statistics and that is an important part of any statistic.

          • Vicki

            eddie47d not only did not qualify his statistics he did not even provide a cite for them. So they are just the random fiction of the Eddie47d imagination.

          • eddie47d

            Google gun deaths per 100,000 and start getting a clue. Some of those small towns have more drug problems and killings than some of you are willing to admit. Everything isn’t as hunky dory in red states as is always played up.

          • JeffH

            Gun crime statistics by US state. How high is gun crime across the US – and which states have the worst figures? This is the latest data
            http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

          • JeffH

            As for Gun Murders by state per capita(100,000)
            The US average was 2.98/100,000 firearm murders

            1. DC – 18.84/100,000
            2. Louisiana – 10.46/100,000
            3. Alabama – 8.02/100,000
            4. Maryland – 6.06/100,000
            5. Mississippi – 5.64/100,000
            http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

          • Vicki

            eddie47d says:
            “Google gun deaths per 100,000 and start getting a clue. Some of those small towns have more drug problems and killings than some of you are willing to admit. Everything isn’t as hunky dory in red states as is always played up.”

            Bravo Eddie47d. No Cite. JeffH 2 cites.

            End of first quarter and the score is
            Eddie47d – 0
            JeffH – 2

            now since eddie47d halfheartedly begrudged us a term set to use in Google I went ahead and put it in. Got 57 thousand hits. Not all that useful. However I went to the first one and found that looking at just death where the tool was gun Arizona is way up there. Just over half of the Washington DC rate but still higher than you would expect from a state where smart criminals don’t go. Until you read the comments which reminds us that the above includes the criminals who die when attacking. With the known problem of alien invaders the number makes more sense.

            http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000

  • Mick

    Gary…..You and I are on the same team unfortunately many many have been brainwashed to thinking that the more concessions we make for these what should be considered rejects the better human beings they will become and everything will be rosy again….
    After so many decades of this practice anyone with any common sense and respect for true humans should realize that this practice doesn’t work it only create more useless killings all in the name of so called human rights. What the hell do those human rights do for the people living by the laws ???

  • 45caliber

    There is one reason and one reason ONLY for these gun control laws.

    The politicians want to disarm the law abiding citizens of our country.

    They certainly don’t expect the criminals to give them up.

    And the only reason I can see that the politicians want the citizens disarmed is because there are things the politicians want to do, want to pass into law, that they KNOW the citizens will be upset enough to actually want to shoot them over.

  • Bitter Libertarian

    My hope is that Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords makes a speedy & full recovery, and continues to support the 2nd amendment. I believe she would gain immence respect from many across the nation.

  • Phyllis

    Government control of guns will not stop those with intentions to do harm to others. You can see this as you witness abuse from civil authorities. People need to protect themselves and their families by whatever means they are able. It is NOT guns that harm people….it is PEOPLE that harm people. We have many “responsible” people in this country, unfortuntely there are a few who are NOT responsible in their actions, for which the rest of us have to suffer. War on other nations is not a responsible act….these matters can best be settled by undaunting communication with the leaders of such countries. Teaching young men and women to be “killers” is wrong…..especially when it is done in the name of “patriotism” or for an unjustified means of aggression.

    • 45caliber

      The real problem is that many of those who wants to harm others are in office – and they send the military to do their actual dirty work. Don’t blame the military. And don’t believe that they teach the youth to kill.

      Back when I was in the army, yes, they did. Now? The video games and movies teach them that. Talk to some of the military trainers. They will tell you that they don’t bother to teach how to be able to kill any more. The youth already are willing to do that.

      In fact, in prisons across the country, the youth are kept seperate from the older prisoners – because the older prisoners are afraid of them.

      • Vicki

        45caliber writes:
        “The real problem is that many of those who wants to harm others are in office – and they send the military to do their actual dirty work.”

        Much like the many who like to take other peoples wealth are in office and they use the power of government to steal that wealth to redistribute to their pet causes.

  • Mick

    From where I stand I firmly believe that the stupidity of the left is much more dangerous to our society than the many guns held by laws abiding citizens.

    • 45caliber

      It is stupidity from our point of view. From their point of view it is control.

      The funniest thing I see about the libs, to me, is their belief that the military and the police MUST obey the President as commander in chief. If he were to order the military to search every house in the US, take all guns, shoot anyone who resists, and lock them up in some concentration camp, the libs expect the military to obey. Yet, those in the military insist that they wouldn’t obey that sort of illegal order! The libs simply cannot comprehend that ‘disobediance’.

    • BigIron

      The many guns held by our “law abiding citizens” ARE the “security” of our society.

  • chuckb

    mick

    we are being led by a media controlled by a political force that is contrary to our health. last night was obvious, the puppet masters dangled their talking machine before the bleeding hearts and they all wept. they use these type of incidents to pray on peoples conscience. even the bleeding hearts like charles krauthammer and chris wallace almost wet their pants listening to barry’s speech. bill o’reilly knelt in prayer to the messiah. so what chance do we have when the so called conservative talk show participants kneel at that the masters altar.
    what a bunch of weak kneed sisters that can’t see thru this garbage and the bad part of it they continue to use other peoples sorrow and loss to score political points. even the republicans are ready to sign up for any kind of gun control that will show they too care.

  • oingaboinga

    Lautenberg said that the high-ammunition clips should “not be on the market” because the only reason people purchase them is “to kill a lot of people very quickly.”

    The “only reason” huh? I challenge Senator Lautenberg, or anyone else for that matter, to produce legitimate, empirical evidence/documentation to substantiate this statement.

    I suppose that next, there will be a push to legislate the sale of book or box matches, because “obviously” the only reason that people buy them is to burn a lot of objects very quickly!

    • RoBoTech

      oinga, did you know you can’y but lighter fluid, flints, or wicks for a zippo lighter at Walmart? That only disposable Butane’s are allowed to be sold there?
      I don’t smoke, yet have two Zippos to use as survival fire starters. They are better than matches if you keep them fueled. So, I keep several cans of fluid, wicks and flints. And I am going to buy two more Zippos, soon. I also have two fuel tanks that hold Zippo single refills on a long term basis.
      I keep both my Zippos in waterproof cases and always carry one in my backpack, or on my belt next to my flashlight.
      But, it is not PC to use them to light a Cig with! So, the rest of us have to go out of our way to own them!

      • Bitter Libertarian

        Tobacco stores sell them! LOL

  • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Randy 131

    Isn’t it ironic that the Democrats are now going to try to pass the exact gun control legislation that the target of this tragedy was totally against, any harbor in a storm I guess. If more Arizonians were taking advantage of the rights the Constitution and this state affords them, then this maniac could have been stopped before inflicting all the damage he did, but this was a Democratic rally. If this had been a Republican rally I doubt if the maniac could have gotten off 5 rounds before he would have been brought down by a patriot excercising his right of self defense by carrying a weapon on his person, something the Democrats do not want you to be or do, but instead would rather you be a victim like the 20 were at this tragic rally. It is against the law for outlaws to have weapons today, but they still do, and use them to commit more crimes. If you make it against the law for everyone to have weapons, the outlaws will still have them, but not those who want to be able to defend themselves, as they do today when it is illegal for them to have those weapons. Why are the Democrats so against law-abiding citizens having guns to protect themselves and their property when outlaws use them to take both life and property? Are they to stupid to have learned the lessons of ‘Prohibition’, or do we have to keep on repeating mistakes made in the past? Whatever you outlaw, only the outlaws will have. And what type of warriors will we then produce to fill the ranks of our military, mama boys to scared to hold a weapon? ‘Political Correctness’ has just about destroyed peoples ‘Common Sense’, another goal of the Democrats, but people are getting so sick of it that I think ‘Common Sense’ is ready to make a come back and destroy ‘Political Correctness’ and return our free speech without fear of repraisal for telling the truth.

  • RoBoTech

    Here’s something to think about.
    1000′. 333 Yards = 3.3 football fields.
    1. So, anyone KNOWINGLY lives within 3.3 football field from a Congressman would now be a criminal? Yes, according to Rep Kings staffer. I know, I called, was treated like a fool, asked if I lived within 1000′ of a Congressman, I said no, and the staffer said “don’t worry about it, you get to keep your guns” and hung up on me!
    2. So, as a CCW holder and a daily carry guy, if I drive by the local hardware store and my Congressman is there shaking hands AND I SEE IT, am I now a criminal? Yep.
    Cooler heads and Adults had better step in on this attack on the 2nd amendment. Common sense and Congressperson are NOT synonymous.
    This Drama Queen knee jerk reaction needs to stopped, now!

    • http://gunner689 gunner689

      This is similar to the 1000 ft. law regarding schools. If I drive by a school on a way to the gun club am I a criminal ? Yes technically I would be. Common sense and the law are often 2 different animals.

      • 45caliber

        The 1000 ft. rule for schools was shot down for that reason. Also for the reason that the feds didn’t have that authority since they were claiming the Commercial clause as a reason.

        • Vicki

          As far as I can tell the gun free school zone is still in effect having been rewritten after that 1991 ruling.
          http://gunowners.org/fs9611.htm

          • http://gunner689 gunner689

            that’s my impression to. can anyone give an update?

  • JimH

    There was a time that a person went to the sporting good store, bought a firearm(no id, no waiting period and no back ground check) and took it home. Now in some states a F.O.I.D. (fire arms identification ) card is required, a 24 to 72 hour waiting period and a background check are required. How much did the crime rate go down? It went up. People killed each other long before the invention of gun powder. Cain killed Able(first reported murder) with a rock. Hindering the law abiding citizen with more useless laws won’t deter criminals or the criminaly insane. Some politicians speak of common sense gun laws, so far I haven’t seen or heard of any.

  • Bitter Libertarian

    The Arrogance of the Modernday politician is aggitated by his knowledge that the people respect and admire those that founded the nation more then they respect thoe currently ruinating the situation.

    I see this in many things….almost every new college graduate is itching to “make his/her mark” on the scene of their career. To be rapidly recognized as the “expert” or achieve some new record, or fix a logstanding problem.

    I dont believe that anyone’s “drive” is the problem, but more the lack or Humility & respect for those that came before them. That Arrogance and lack or respect is causing the nation to lose sight of where it came from, or wors a twisted negative of it.

    Politicians believe they have “something to fix” simply because a few clamor for change, yet fail to understand their role is not always react and try to change anything, but perhaps to help people understand why change isnt necessary. The ‘Micro-managing” of peoples rights in relation to singular events is beyond poor leadership and does infact (if we are to presume they are intelligent) lead us to believe they have alterior motives for meddling with simple inalienable rights!

  • Doug Rodrigues

    As usual, it’s all about grabbing the guns, and nothing about controlling criminals, or in this case…crazy people. If the gun grabbers had their way, only the Government, the Police, the Military, and the criminals would have guns. All the law abiding citizens who would be stupid enough to turn their gun in to the government would be nothing more than unarmed potential victims. Criminals would have nothing to fear from law abiding citizens. A corrupt out-of-control politician could function like Joe Stalin, and there would be absolutely nothing for the citizens to use in defense. Don’t say such that such a situation couldn’t happen here. We’re getting a little taste of it now with the government overstepping their Constitutional authority!

    • 45caliber

      You are right.

      A “hot” burglary is one where the burglar KNOWS that the owner is home before he breaks in.

      In the US, less than 10% of burglaries are “hot”. In England, where guns are banned, 90% are “hot”! The reason? They know they have nothing to fear from the owner so they can attack the owner and make him/her tell where any hidden money might be.

      • Raggs

        Thats it… Don’t bring a cell phone to a gun fight!

  • Raggs

    I look at it this way.

    The only measure that a citizen has against tyranny is a loaded weapon and it’s funny that the tyrants know that as well.
    A crazy loon like loughner is just a cog in the machine that has an untold purpose of distruction. I think that this would explain the intent of the democrapist party to pin this on anyone that they find in contempt of thier agenda..

    I didn’t make that up it is the truth.

  • Pat

    The media circus is coming to town. The clowns have already arrived!

    • Raggs

      Hummm… So which side of the street are you driving on?

  • Raggs

    I was born on God’s earth without obama and his cronies, I will die the same.

    For the weak minded prehaps they need someone to wipe thier ass in the morning?…

    I have NO default setting for any government program, it is a default for me to abide by a rule of what is called a law by the ones that wish to control me.

    If you don’t understand this than, well I hope you get feed more peanuts.

  • BigIron

    I believe that this situation calls for exactly the opposite of what the anti-gunners are attempting. What would make actually make a difference is if CCW was lawful for all lawful purposes in ALL states and DC, in ALL places at any time when one is NOT, nor has been, consuming alcohol, using drugs or otherwise engaged in activity which would render judgment or control questionable.

    • Raggs

      Agreed!

      This comes to me on the same line of, you have to trust yourself prior to trusting others… In other words you are your first defence and being sobber damm sure will not hurt.

      Ya know… it makes me sick that obama continues to let illegals ( oops “un-documented” ) people run the US citizens from thier own backyard… The political correctness is that of bat crap on a flies ass.
      With three break-ins years ago I learned one thing… The police get there hours later. the first two times were nothing but paperwork / reports… The third time I didn’t even call the police..

      The third time left a bad taste in the would be robbers mouth in the form of buck-shot.

  • Raggs

    No I didn’t actually kill anyone but it sounded good / not really.

    The truth is that I did throw lead and for some reason they never came back.

  • Glyn

    No firearms within a 1000 feet of a government official? What an IDIOT to suggest this but expected from a politician. The 1000 feet of a Government official pretty much includes about every place a person goes. Mr. Politician, do you really think someone with a mindset to kill a bunch of people really cares if there is a law saying he cant come around the official? All an idiot ridden bills like this would do is keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. The bills to ban high capacity magazines is as equally stupid. I have a great Idea Mr. Politician, How about you pass some worth wild laws to get these mentally ill people off the streets? But that would make sense wouldn’t it.

  • http://gunner689 gunner689

    When I was in high school in the mid 60′s I shot on our schools rifle team. having my own target rifle i often carried it to and from school on the school bus along with match grade .22 ammo. If I was going hunting after school at a friends farm I carried a shotgun or rifle on the bus and kept it, along with hunting clothes and ammo in my locker. Many of us did and no one gave it a second thought. But back then we weren’t bombarded with rap music, video games or exposed to drugs and God was still allowed in school. We said the Pledge of Allegence and recited a morning prayer. We weren’t angels but neither were we serial killers. If you screwed up in school you got wacked by the gym teacher and got it again from your old man when you got home. My how times have changed and not for the better. Thank you liberals for destroying America.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.