Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Gallup: Americans Have Mixed Feelings About Guns

December 26, 2012 by  

Gallup: Americans Have Mixed Feelings About Guns

A recent Gallup poll shows that Americans are more likely to favor an increased police presence at schools, increased government spending on mental health screening and treatment, and decreased depiction of gun violence in entertainment than assault weapons bans to prevent mass school shootings.

Fifty-three percent of respondents to a recent Gallup poll said that increasing police presence on school campuses would likely be the best option for preventing future school shootings. Similarly, 50 percent favored increased government spending on mental health services to help recognize individuals likely to carry out violent acts.

Banning the sale of assault weapons was considered the most viable option for avoiding mass shootings in the future and was favored by 42 percent of respondents. Party affiliation was an important indicator of how the respondents felt about such a ban. Sixty-one percent of Democrats favored the idea; only 26 percent of Republicans did. More favorable among Republicans (49 percent) was ensuring that at least one official on every American campus was armed with a firearm. Only 27 percent of Democrats thought arming teachers would be a good idea.

Just less than half of those polled (47 percent) indicated that violence in television, movies and video games attribute to violent outbursts and mass killings.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Gallup: Americans Have Mixed Feelings About Guns”

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

  • independant thinker

    “Just less than half of those polled (47 percent) indicated that violence in television, movies and video games attribute to violent outbursts and mass killings.”

    I do not believe the violent entertainment in and of itself causes violent behavior including the shootings. However, I do believe they can serve as a trigger for ones who for whatever reason have a tendancy to violence especially the video games where you are a participant in the action not just an observor.

    • Harold Olsen

      Violence on TV could be a factor but it wouldn’t be if parents did their job. I grew up in the 50′s and 60′s and I watched violent (for the time) TV programs all the time with my older brother. We loved them Our mother would watch them with us and she made sure that we understood that what we were watching was make believe. These days, kids watch violent shows and movies and can’t seem to tell the difference between reality and make believe because parents do not supervise their kids. Kids see things on TV and in the movies and decide they want to emulate it. The major factor, though, is that kids grow up without any common sense and they are not taught morals. In fact, these days, morality is scoffed at and ridiculed.

      • dalek

        Very well said. A person taught morals, the value of life, can handle seeing bad things and be just fine. Thing is, we removed God which is a good teacher of morals and look what we get, evil, a healthy dose of it too.

        People see bad things and do fine when they have morals taught to them. People see car wrecks and other bad things in real life and do fine or even sometimes realize how short life can be. That can change a person for the better if they have morals.

        What we need to learn is what has been said for a very long time. You can not legislate morality. You can teach it but you can’t legislate it. Murder has been illegal for decades, people still do it. Murderers don’t follow the law because they have no morals that teach them they should and more importantly, why they should.

      • SarahR

        Mr. Olsen. I believe, if parents did their job, could be the answer. Too many mothers and fathers are away from the home making a living and with the person in the WH it is getting increasingly harder to make that living. I too sat with my children to watch movies on TV and pointed out that it was not real, but make believe.

      • AL CRACKER

        Harold, you have no clue what you are posting. Parents CANNOT do their job. In this society which you are probably a non-participating member of, sit back and made claims just like the liberal media.
        In my attempt to do my job, all the powers of the self-righteous all knowing Child protective services came down on me. You cannot enforce anything in your home or set rules as that infringes on the child’s rights.They even supply the child with a phone to call them if the parents step out of the prescribed box. Who allowed this ,you and all the others that would rather post than make sure these criminals like Obama, liberals and progressives don’t destroy everything of moral value. Just like the recent election. Choosing not to vote is allowing the continual raping of society.What a shame, the ignorant,educated ignorant,entitlement,illegals stole your country and you were complicit in the thieving of your taxes,if you pay any ,our history and culture.
        The extermination of what America represented is at hand and You my fool ushered it in along with everyone else that thinks someone else is responsible for not doing their job.
        How did America get to the point of all this, watching the lobotomy box and stuffing your cake hole with meds, gmo’s, and Twinkies.

      • Bob Maroldy

        I completely agree with all you have said but there is one more ingredient added to this deadly mix of influence: illegal AND prescription drugs. Doctors are prescribing more and more medication to our young children with no long-term study of the possible later effects. While they might help with disorders for which they are being given, what about years later? Also, too many people “poo-poo” the idea that marijuana has lasting effects. I believe that, while it has a mellowing effect while smoking it, it may well influence poor decision-making later in life. Combine all those factors mentioned and you can get a case of no sense of reality and a “quick solution” to [your] problems is to just go out and shoot everyone, expecting that later everyone will just get up and be OK and your problems will be solved.
        Trying to ban the “tools” that these psychos use is completely useless as they will just switch to the next most poplular one in their violent video games or use the innovative ones shown in movies. We need to get to the root of the problem, the kids and what society is doing to them

    • dalek

      I think you mix TV, video games, and the removal of God from about everything and then you have a recipe not for everyone to turn to bad things but for a small number of them. This is what we have now. Also, it seems you have to mix in a little bit of a mental disorder.

      On that subject, while most of the shootings over the past decade or so appear to be by people with some alleged mental issue, we should keep in mind that not all people with mental problems do this sort of thing. Most people with mental issues are more of a danger to themselves than anyone else.

      My opinion, we have allowed the courts to take God out of everything that the courts can, especially schools, then we wonder why this sort of thing happens. My questions is this, why not? When you add in the things listed above, it is a recipe for disaster. As it stands with so many people turning toward socialism, communism and such, I don’t see this changing any time soon. If they try to ban ALL guns, it will change. That will lead to the mass self-defense killing of a large number of Government officials and a severe shrinkage of the same. Shortly after, politicians will follow. Liberals will be unarmed and perhaps then we can get out Constitution back.

      I read a article where some city police, sheriffs, even federal agents were asked: Would you go door to door and confiscate guns if ordered to do so? The unanimous answer. NO!!

      Until then, we need to pray.

      • eddie47d

        Dalek:I have seen or heard few Americans who want to abolish the Second Amendment yet all we hear from the pro gun groups and individuals is that it will be abolished. Few want to abolish it let alone change it so the right is constantly fear driven. Whenever gun violence escalates its always this gun buying feeding frenzy.Fear once again dominates the pro gun side of the aisle. Matter of facts it is almost never that any positive changes are advocated by pro gun groups. Wayne La Pierre proved that out and ducked out of every question asked him. Once again nothing more than stubborn fear without any measure to make gun owners more responsible and more accountable. In other words weak policies are never their fault. Its like the bad cop who stops and beats up the person or shots them without a solid reason. The cop will NEVER admit wrong doing even if a panel says he’s wrong he never is punished or losses his job. The NRA and other gun groups have tremendous power (like police) and they refuse to admit anything is wrong and they refuse to give up any power. Considering we have 20 massacres a year in this country (over last 12 years) its time for gun owners to step up to the plate and acknowledge their side of this problem is also broken.

        • dalek

          eddie47d, you need to understand, the liberals in this country have to take baby steps to appease people who think like you do. Look at religion and school. First, they take the baby step of saying you can’t say prayer in school. Then they take it a little bit further, then a little further. Give it enough time, it will be an arrestable offense to mention God in a public place. Remember, BABY STEPS. People like you might not let it happen the first time or two but given time, YOU WILL.

          Right now, they just want to remove “assault weapons”. Here is a news flash for you. Assault weapons which are fully automatic like the military has, have been banned since the 1930′s. They got those over 70 years ago. Well, that is not enough. Now they want “mean looking’ guns. After they get that, someone will go on yet another shooting spree and they will want to outlaw some more guns. This slippery slope will continue and you will think it is OK. The liberals will not be satisfied until they have the American people disarmed. See, at that point, we will be like everyone else that has had gun bans. The Government will tell us to jump and all we can do is: Ask “how high”.

          It is a awful thing that happened at all these shootings. What would be more awful, is if people don’t learn from history. The 2nd Amendment is not just about self defense, hunting, having a gun collection or going out for target practice. It is to protect the people from a tyrannical government. The sooner you understand that, the sooner you will wise up. The ONLY thing that gives us power over this government is the 2nd Amendment. Think I am wrong? This is a quote: “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — (Thomas Jefferson)

          When we fought for our independence from Britain, the founders said the people should never be put in this position again, NEVER. They made certain that we would always have the same weapons our government has so that we could rise up and put the government back in its box. If you think the government listens to the people, you are so misinformed. Hundreds of polls were done that proved the majority of people did not want Obamacare. They did it anyway. The last election cycle is riddled with problems. They don’t listen and elections are starting to not matter either. This is the beginning. They can NOT finish until we are disarmed enough we can not defend ourselves.

          With all due RESPECT, you need to wise up in a quick hurry. Your way of thinking is going to lead us to repeat history.

          My personal point of view on gun control, any law that infringes on the 2nd Amendment is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has been WRONG on this but has turned around a little bit recently. If a teacher or staff member was able to have a weapon of their own at Sandy Hook, the shooting would likely never even made it on the news. Just like a few attempted shooting shortly before or after Sandy Hook didn’t because the people were stopped, usually by a concealed carry holder.

          One additional thing, of all the shootings that have happened over the past 10 or 15 years, all but one or two were at a “gun free zone”. You ever notice how the criminals go where there are no guns to resist? You ever notice how a government wants to disarm its citizens first then rule with a iron fist, a gas chamber or other mass murder where the end result is mass killings of its own people?

          Wise up Eddie. Do it soon. Do it before it is to late.

      • momo

        eddie47d says: “Whenever gun violence escalates its always this gun buying feeding frenzy.Fear once again dominates the pro gun side of the aisle.”

        Are you saying that “gun buying feeding frenzy” is just by pro gun people? That’s insane, I went to 4 sporting and gun shops before Christmas, and everyone one of them was sold out of the AR15 type rifle. You need .223 caliber ammo…forget about it, all gone. So is the 9mm pistol ammo along with the.45 caliber pistol ammo. I doubt all the buyers were card carrying members of the NRA.

      • eddie47d

        I said gun buyers live in fear and that doesn’t necessarily mean just NRA members now does it! You did rather reiterate my feeding frenzy statement though. There have been several polls over the years and most NRA members support strong laws such as background checks (about 75%) vs 87% of general public. According to another poll (The Luntz Poll) 29% of all NRA members say that even citizens on the terror watch list should be allowed to possess and buy weapons. Like everything else there are decent NRA members and some who are beyond extremist.

      • Buster the Anatolian

        eddie says “I said gun buyers live in fear… ”

        What most fear is not being able to get guns or a particular gun in the future because of misguided souls lime you eddie.

        eddie says “…29% of all NRA members say that even citizens on the terror watch list should be allowed to possess and buy weapons.”

        And just why should those on the WATCH list (an arbitrary list that people can be put on for any or even no reason and will never know they are on said list) not be able to purchase firearms.

      • JC

        eddie47d says:
        December 26, 2012 at 9:39 am
        I said gun buyers live in fear and that doesn’t necessarily mean just NRA members now does it!

        What makes you think we “live in fear”?
        We have Guns! LOL

        Whenever the Libbies and Progressives get going on their hysteria driven anti-gun crusades…we just do the practical thing and stock up. That’s not fear…it’s just sensible.

      • eddie47d

        Dalek: I would say she is scared of much more than she is revealing.

      • eddie47d

        Dalek; Haven’t the Conservatives taken “baby steps’ throughout our history too? The original Pledge of Allegiance never said God but they snuck it in years later because it had to be their way. It was Conservatives who snuck in slavery instead of hiring new immigrants to do the work. Why didn’t they put their own kids in the fields instead of being the elites of the day? Why did Conservatives (Democrats and Republicans) fight the right for women to vote? Why did they fight the right for blacks to vote even though it rightly states all men are created equal. Yes sometimes it takes baby steps to overcome evil and to use laws wisely. Just like I think the Second Amendment has been abused by those overreaching to mean weapons of mass killings. I hardly doubt if our Founding Fathers wanted that.

        • dalek

          Little bit of info for you. It was the Republicans that changed a lot of things Democrats take credit for. There was Democrats to but it was mostly Republicans. Go look it up. I did. Civil Rights was actually opposed by one Democrat that was the chairman of the committee. Quoting from the wiki page:

          “The bill was reported out of the Judiciary Committee in November 1963, and referred to the Rules Committee, whose chairman, Howard W. Smith, a Democrat and avid segregationist from Virginia, indicated his intention to keep the bill bottled up indefinitely.”

          There was a lot of going back and forth but do not try to blame ONLY the Republicans. If you look at the numbers, there was more Republicans for it than Democrats if I recall correctly.

          As for the womens right to vote, look at this:

          Quoting for you:

          “The roll call on the amendment follows:

          FOR ADOPTION – 36.

          Republicans – 36.

          Capper, Cummins, Curtis, Edge, Elkins, Fall, Fernald, France, Frelinghuysen, Gronna, Hale, Harding, Johnson, (Cal.,) Jones, (Wash.,) Kellogg, Kenyon, Kayes, La Follette, Lenroot, McCormick, McCumber, McNaty, Nelson, New, Newberry, Norris, Page, Phipps, Poindexter, Sherman, Smoot, Spencer, Sterling, Sutherland, Warren, Watson.

          Democrats – 20.

          Ashurst, Chamberlain, Culberson, Harris, Henderson, Jones, (N. M.,) Kenrick, Kirby, McKellar, Myers, Nugent, Phelan, Pittman, Ransdell, Shepard, Smith, (Ariz.,) Stanley, Thomas, Walsh, (Mass.,) Walsh, (Mon.)

          AGAINST ADOPTION – 25.

          Republicans – 8.

          Borah, Brandegee, Dillingham, Knox, Lodge, McLean, Moses, Wadsworth.

          Democrats – 17.

          Bankhead, Beckham, Dial, Fletcher, Gay, Harrison, Hitchcock, Overman, Reed, Simmons, Smith, (Md.,) Smith, (S. C.,) Swanson, Trammell, Underwood, Williams, Wolcott.”

          So, there was more Republicans pushing this than Democrats. If you want some more history, look here:

          You will notice if you read down far enough that the Democrats tried to stop this in every way they could. Quoting:

          “Meanwhile, the Republicans continued to introduce the 19th Amendment in Congress every year, but the Democrats were able to keep it bottled up in various committees for another decade before allowing either chamber to vote on it.”

          Adding God to the pledge. That was proposed by Louis C. Rabaut, a Democrat. It is one of the things he is known for.


          “Louis Charles Rabaut (December 5, 1886-November 12, 1961) was politician from the U.S. state of Michigan. He was a Democratic congressman representing Michigan’s 14th congressional district from 1935 to 1947, and from 1949 to 1961. He is best known for introducing legislation that added the words “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance.”

          So, it was a Democrat that started it but people blame the Republicans. Neat huh?

          The Democrats claim they did things they did not do. As I said, you need to wise up. Research for yourself. Do NOT believe everything the media tells you. Heck, even Fox gets off course quite a bit.

          I hope you enjoy and learn a little bit. I know I have learned a lot while looking up things myself instead of believing the media.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “Dalek:I have seen or heard few Americans who want to abolish the Second Amendment yet all we hear from the pro gun groups and individuals is that it will be abolished.”

        Perhaps that is because those “few” Americans happen to be public officials that can, have, and will again infringe upon the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms.

        Since we are limited to only one link per post without moderation I couldn’t provide the other 2 MILLION hits on the search
        “politicians wanting to abolish the 2nd amendment” but you guys can put that in google and get the list.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “Whenever gun violence escalates its always this gun buying feeding frenzy.Fear once again dominates the pro gun side of the aisle.”

        That is because of a rational fear of politicians rather than the irrational fear of inanimate objects that clearly dominates the anti gun side of some aisle.

    • Robert

      I concur whole heartidly. Violent games/movies, etc increase the awareness of violence and if children are not reared with love and responsibility that awareness can lead to personal behavior actions which would not otherwise occur. Why else does the CIA contribute so much money and efforts to creating these games, is it all for training perposes?

      • eddie47d

        I was aware that the military and possibly the CIA uses video games for training purposes but I doubt if they are released to the general public if made by them. Adam Lanza’s favorite video game was Call To Duty yet that was produced by Activision/Treyarch and Infinity Ward. They are private companies who recently made over 1 billion in sales from 872,000 customers. Those numbers don’t include all Christmas sales so as I have said before Americans love their weekly (maybe daily) dose of violence. Oops! military training via private companies.

    • Robert Smith

      “I do believe they can serve as a trigger for ones who for whatever reason have a tendancy to violence ”

      Not necessarily. It can also be a relief in a safe direction of such a tendancy.

      It’s like with porn. Someone who watches porn doesn’t go out and rape. They’ve shot their load and simply don’t have the urge for awhile.

      Odan’s sin wasn’t shoothing his seed on the ground, it was that he didn’t knock up his sister-in-law. Unless that’s what SHE wanted it seems kind of brutal to me, but that’s what some forms of christians seem to advocate.


      • WILDFIRE

        typical reaction from an incompetent liberal – divert and distract. Doesn’t matter what the topic is, Robert always tries to change the topic and reference some kind of sexual perversion and misguide and redirect and attack everything and everyone he detests due to his feeling of inadequacies in society.

      • DaveH

        Rape is a violent crime of aggression against a female, which has little to do with sexual urges.
        “While sexual attraction may be influential, power, control and anger are the primary motives”.

        Kind of like the Power and Control which Progressives (Liberal and NeoConservative) like to exercise over the rest of us.

      • eddie47d

        That’s been proven many times over that rape is about power and control and forceful sex not willing sex. That wasn’t as true even back in the 50′s heyday when Conservatives ruled the roost. It took Progressives to change rape as a more serious crime. Now go back to the Conservative mindset that “rape is legitimate” Dave H.

      • Dennis48e

        “That wasn’t as true even back in the 50′s heyday when Conservatives ruled the roost. It took Progressives to change rape as a more serious crime. ”

        When I was growing up the punishment for rape was just below or equal to the punishment for murder. As liberals have excerted more influence on things the punishment for rape has been reduced to the point you can get more time for a DUI death. That is hardly making rape a more serious crime.

      • independant thinker

        RS go back and read the entire comment then note my use of CAN. I did not say they ARE a trigger I said they can be.

    • wandamurline

      Did you kow that there is a violent video game called “Kindergarden Shooting”…this video shoots little kids in the head….someone told me about it…does anyone else know about this game? Don’t know if it is true or not, but it should not be marketed to anyone under the age of 25.

      • WILDFIRE

        Its actually called “Kindergarten Killer” and yes there is / was a game available to the public. Just search “Kindergarten Killer”


        “wandamurline” – HAPPY HOLIDAYS.


      • WILDFIRE

        Here is a youtube video of the actual game “Kindergarten Killer that your kids can play and enjoy. Shooting children in their classrooms and school hallways and playgrounds.

        Civilized society we are, YES, YES, FORWARD LIBERALS, FORWARD – O-BAM-A, O- BAM-A (Chanting for our new lord and savior as jamie foxx puts it.)

        When is the populace going to draw the line in the sand and say enough is enough of this misguided and misinformed populace forces their illusions of a civilized society as being filled with hating, killing and advocating violence at every turn?

        Here’s an idea, to create a counterpart of this video game being “LIBERAL KILLER” and the theme of the game is to go around and take out anyone with an liberal or Democrat bumper sticker or shirt or buttons depicting and broadcasting their ignorant intentions. If they don’t see nothing wrong supplying our children with video games like kindergarten killer and supplying our children with easy access in fact encouraging our children to not only access but to participate in acts of violence as well as perverted sexual acts and call it progress of a civilized society. Then certainly they shouldn’t see nothing wrong with a video game equally advocating shooting them as they these video games advocate shooting children.

      • eddie47d

        Wildfire assumes it is always “Liberals” who produce these video games. Now Kindergarten Killers (video made by Tom Fulp) is produced by Newsground and distributed by Ebaumsworld. So please prove that he is a Liberal or the company is such. They could all be Conservative business types out to make a buck anyway they can. The Mafia families were extremely religious and Conservative. The rules for them were always different than for the rest of us. Free Enterprise and making money doesn’t always take a moral stand and is not always who you think. Violent video games have been around for several years now so why did you try and tie in Obama? Why did you try to solve this problem by advocating for violence yourself?

    • Benjamin Fox

      It’s called evil, has been around since Adam and Eve and the author of evil is satan and he controls most of the people in the world, some more then others. Man kills, not guns, he will use a rock, club, knife or what ever his demon’s tell him to use. Demons can and will take control of people who don’t know God and trust in Him. Satan got God kicked out of the schools and now his people rule without fear, Don’t ask where God was when He isn’t allowed in the public square, in schools and even some churches.


    Sam Rolley,



    • Vicki

      The problem with armed guards at ANY school is as described by CAH. The kids will feel much more like they are in jail than school. Besides with the schools guarded and no longer gun-free zones the crazy person will just select another gun-free zone like a movie theater.

      Once armed guards are there the crazy person will select another gun-free zone like a mall.
      Once armed guards are there the crazy person will select another gun-free zone…..

      See a pattern here? It ends with armed guards on every corner. A Police State.

      Our founders figured out over 200 years ago that there was a better way. Acknowledge and protect the right of the people to defend themselves, family and community with the best tools for the job. Thus the 2nd Amendment.

      • dalek

        I agree except for one thing. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, It is not about self defense that it can serve that purpose. The 2nd Amendment is about protecting “we the people” from a tyrannical Government.

        We need to correct this. If you claim the 2nd Amendment is about self defense, you are loosing already. This is about protecting us from a tyrannical Government. This is a quote: “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — (Thomas Jefferson)

        Thomas Jefferson said it best.

      • Robert

        Cannot agree with your first sentence. Where guns are currently allowed in school systems in this country, and there are a few, the parents are totally in support of having the teachers armed and the students when polled, basically could care less, they have other more pressing issues, ie acceptability, how they look, etc.

      • DaveH

        Care to post a reference to back up your conjecture, Robert?

      • wandamurline

        Dalek is right…in th eDeclaration of Independence, our forefathers told us that at some time in the future, we could have a tyranical government (like what we now have) and we had the right to replace it….actually, they said we had the DUTY to replace it and thus, the second amendment was written so that should we need to assemble a militia, we had the guns to do so. As Thomas Jefferson said so wisely, “Those who pound their guns to plows, will plow for those who do not”. And this is the reason for the second amendment, self-protection from even our own government.

      • TIME

        Dear Vicki,

        Children do feel like they are in Jail / Prison ~ now at many public schools, why?
        Lets explore a few fact’s,

        They must line up in perfectly straight lines, before doing any event such as going to lunch, or outside for a fresh air.
        *This stops the child from breaking out of the control grid, of “INDOCTRINATION.”

        They are told what to think, _ and why to think it. “INDOCTRINATION”
        *This breaks the Childs ability to see outside the box, thus they stop asking questions and thinking for themself.

        They are told what to wear and why, they should wear it, such as school uniforms,
        *This breaks the child’s self expression, thus thay lack creatiivity as well as thinking / planning skills.

        They are told if they exibit any form of natural eneryg level, that they are mentaly defective and need to be placed on “Psychotropic” Drugs to stop such behavior.
        *This keeping them in a tight little box.

        They do not have books they take home for homework, as the schools don’t want the childs parents to see the garbage they are being tought, about my happy two fathers, or my happy two mothers, or how to have sex with a donkey.
        * Really thats what children need to learn in school?

        Most public schools have closed circut systems thus these childern are being spyed on at all times, “INDOCTRINATION”
        *”Behavior modification” or perhaps better noted as, the CONTROL GRID thinking pattern.

        Many public schools within the citys have armed guards now as well as metal detectors, frisking, etc. ” INDOCTRINATION” to the ~ TSA, FEMA, DHS, etc..
        * Aiding in the Control grid thinking patterns.

        Children are not pushed to learn more, they are in fact restricted from learning, and told to stay within the grid, no one is more nor less than the next.
        Anyone with any form of gray matter understands that some children are far smarter than others – thus they should be allowed to advance beyond the set standards known as “the control grid” of ~ Grade 1-12. and up.

        Children are told that sports are good, the Arts are bad, you can’t earn a living from the arts, but you can from Sports. That the only way to get along with others is to learn sports, Oh really?

        We are in fact building future robots, that will have a dissociative break at some point in time,~ yet ~ we ask whats wrong with our Children? Really ~ why is that again?

        We also allow them to watch these deranged games on line or buy them the software that train them to be feelingless indiferant monsters who lust war, hate, and hurting others – all that ~ with no ramifications for their actions or behavior.
        Thus building the perfect Sociopath,

        Now ask yourself who are the leaders in this nation again, and why would they bring this platform to the table as “PROGRESSING?”

        Look to end crimes that involve guns, all children must learn not only how to use a guns safely, { they must also learn the ramifications of improper use of a gun.}

        They must be tought what the ” Original Constitution & Bill of Rights” really mean, the one I am speaking of is the one wrtten by the “Original” Founding fathers not the example we have been under since 1878 with the FAKE 1863 ~ 13th Amendment.

        All of you need to not only come to grips with the fact that we are not what we think, Then and only then can we ever hope to fix the flat time this nation has had since 1861.

        People, if you refuse to learn the facts and address the REAL issues, then we will just keep on doing this same mindless dance until there are nothing but FEMA CAMPS.

        Explore the Missing 13th Amendment, Explore the District of Columbia Act of 1871,
        {{{ but prior to doing this }}} get yourself a BLACKS LAW book, pre 1970, look up the words used in all the Doucments, learn what they really mean.
        { Not what you think they mean, or have been told they mean.}

        Peace and Love, Shalom

      • marcjeric32

        President Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact. The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers. This is standard operating procedure for the school. And this is the reason people like NBC’s David Gregory, a gun control devotee, send their kids to Sidwell; they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren’t used – you know, “gun-free zones”.

      • eddie47d

        Marcjeric32: That has more to do with kidnapping a well known persons kid and either asking for a ransom or or to get back at the parent they loath such as the Obama haters.

      • eddie47d

        Well TIME I see you are not fond of Public Schools and yes they do have their problems. Yet you were obviously so one sided it was like flashing lights going off. ALL schools have discipline and regiment so who are you fooling. School uniforms are far more used in private schools than in public schools. All schools line up their students or make them sit in required spots. Gym classes are taken out of some schools so,where does fresh air come into? Some kids who are allowed outside (lunch) use that as an excuse to become truant. Are you says that private schools/parents don’t have kids on drugs? I definitely won’t buy that one. “Books on “having sex with a donkey”. That’s even a stretch for you in saying they are in public schools ! No cameras in private schools? Hmmm! “Public Schools have armed guard” That is exactly what private schools and conservatives are advocating for and who says private schools don’t? Its Conservatives who vote down school bond issues which means programs have to be eliminated. That always includes Sports,Arts and Band classes so who’s fault is it if schools don’t have those programs? Except for high school ROTC class few if any schools (private or public) teach the use of weapons. Is that the schools responsibility to do so and who will pay for that if other programs have to be eliminated (Art,etc)? Some would even say that wearing a military uniform (such as ROTC) is nothing more than Nazi indoctrination.

      • CZ52

        ” The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, It is not about self defense that it can serve that purpose. The 2nd Amendment is about protecting “we the people” from a tyrannical Government.”

        No, you are wrong dalak. The authors of the second amendment were aware of all uses for firearms including hunting, self defence, target shooting, as well as protecting against a tyrannical government. So, while protecting against the tyrannical government was the primary intent all were included.

        • dalek

          The founders were not concerned about hunting back in the day. That was a given. Back then if you had meat, you most likely killed it. I have read that somewhere around 90% of people back then farmed their eatable food. About the same percent hunted for food or fished for it. The somewhere around 10% was wealthy enough to pay someone to do the hunting or fishing for them. Even some wealthy hunted for sport but also kept the food. When I say farmed, I am not talking about cotton, just eatable food.

          So, the 2nd Amendment is about protecting us from tyranny and hunting just happens since we are armed. The founders were some really smart future thinking people. They fought for and set up a Government that would always answer to the people, one way or the other. We are allowing it to slip away. We ALL need to wise up. Watch this video:

          That young lady knew what it is for even back then. That is the testimony given for the Brady bill. Just another step in the process. The very end is the best part. I’m trying to find the whole thing.

      • dalek

        wandamurline, finally, someone who understands what our founders intended for us. I truly believe that if our founders could see what we have now, they would cry their eyes out. What we have for a Government is NOTHING like what they intended. It’s almost shameful. The founders put everything on the line, including their lives if they lost, and we just let it slip away, bit by bit.

      • CZ52

        “The founders were not concerned about hunting back in the day. That was a given. Back then if you had meat, you most likely killed it.”

        That just proves my point. While the ability to resist a tyrannical government was the most important they were aware of ALL legal uses of a firearm and all are covered by the Second.

        • dalek

          I see your point. It is hard to put feeling into text. Even I am not able to make my point as clear as I would like to sometimes because words sometimes just doesn’t get the job done. One person reads something and takes it one way then 10 others get 10 other meanings from it.

          I think the biggest concern was freedom and that is, or should be, the focus. That was the whole idea behind the Constitution, freedom. The rest is just allowed to happen because it is natural. If you like deer meat, the deer has to be hunted and killed first. It’s just natural and sort of a given. Same for cows, pigs, chickens or any other animal. Nowadays, other people do that for most of us tho. That’s what the liberals use to take our guns. There are not as many hunters as there used to be percentage wise. So, liberals claim we don’t need guns anymore. If we agree that the 2dn Amendment is only about hunting, we are loosing. We have to make sure it is understood that it is about protecting the people from a tyrannical government. I, for one, don’t have a problem pointing that out.

          It seems we agree on that.

      • eddie47d

        Yes Dalek the Founding Fathers would be incensed at what we have become in abusing the 2nd! I don’t think they would have approved of all the thrill seekers in our gun world and the mass shootings.

      • Vicki

        dalek says:
        “I agree except for one thing. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, It is not about self defense that it can serve that purpose. The 2nd Amendment is about protecting “we the people” from a tyrannical Government.”

        Then we must be in agreement then because I never brought up hunting. I said:
        “Acknowledge and protect the right of the people to defend themselves, family and community with the best tools for the job.”

        It is all about defense. Defense of self. Defense of family. Defense of community. Community could be neighborhood, city, county, state, nation. The particular mention in the 2nd amendment has a 2 edged meaning. A well trained armed force, being necessary to a free state (that is both the state of being free and keeping a “state” free), the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED obviously applies to defending the freedom of the individual, the family, the community (neighborhood, city, county, state, nation)

        -dalek; “if you claim the 2nd Amendment is about self defense, you are loosing already.”

        Opinion not supported by facts.

        -dalek: “This is about protecting us from a tyrannical Government.”

        I.E. Protecting our free state from an oppressive government. There are oppressive governments smaller than “Nation”.

        -dalek: “This is a quote: “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — (Thomas Jefferson) ”

        Note that he said tyranny IN government. That is MUCH broader than “a tyrannical government.”

        The case TJ used covers tyrannical behavior of individual government agents as well as small to large groups of them.

        “Tyrannical government” only clearly covers specific named entities such as the state of (named state) or the Federal Government.

        Also worth noting is the phrase “..strongest reason….” NOT the only reason.

      • dalek

        @eddie47d, the founders of this country basically walked through hell to get those freedoms for us and we allow a bunch of liberals to slowly chip at them. You really think they would want to limit what they fought so hard to get? If you do, then at least now I and everyone else who reads your post knows where the problem is. We also know that you will never learn or appreciate what others have sacrificed for you to have just to throw it away. I bet if someone gave their life to save yours, you wouldn’t think anything of it. You wouldn’t be grateful for it even a little bit. You would just step over them and walk away.

        eddie47d, you are a sad person. A truly sad person.

    • Robert Smith


      Let’s see…

      Most (with the exception of religious schools) of the mass shootings have been in upper middle class public schools with the perp from a similar background.

      How’s come there have been no mass shootings in schools hosting minorities?


      • DaveH

        They like to shoot each other one at a time?

      • eddie47d

        So that is why Dave H doesn’t want to stop rouge gun dealers from slipping their weapons into minority communities or big cities. At least from some of your earlier comments you aren’t too fond of those who live there. As an example most illegal weapons found in NYC come from the Carolina’s where there are weak laws in who can buy and the market is wide open. Now consider that Connecticut has one of the largest gun manufacturing operations in the US (employee over 2,000) yet few of their weapons end up in NYC. Some manufactures and dealers are responsible and some just plain and simple don’t give a damn.

      • DaveH

        Eddie says — “At least from some of your earlier comments you aren’t too fond of those who live there”.
        Show us a single comment of mine, Eddie, where I indicated any such thing. I sure do tire of your lying and slander, Troll.
        If fact, it is the Liberal Progressives, like yourself Eddie, who doom the poor to lives of dependency by supporting the very same Big Government that is draining our financial and physical resources, thus preventing the real Producers from creating cheap quality products and good jobs.
        I care much more about those people than you do, Eddie. My evidence for that claim is your apparent disdain for doing any studying and thinking which, if you did, would surely lead you to repent your sinning Trollish ways.

        For those Folks who, unlike Eddie, would like to understand what’s really going on:

        Especially read Chapter 7 — “The Morality of Capitalism” to learn how Big Government is actually promoting poverty.

      • eddie47d

        I knew Dave H would deny it. By the way Dave H I get tired of your lies and slander too so learn to live with it as I have to live with yours.

      • CZ52

        “So that is why Dave H doesn’t want to stop rouge gun dealers from slipping their weapons into minority communities or big cities.”

        Where is your proof of rouge gun dealers slipping weapons in to minority communities and big cities? You constantly make this claim about there being so many rouge gun dealers but never have any proof.

      • eddie47d

        I look it up and do my own homework CZ52. Feel free to do it your self if you are so concerned.

      • Vicki

        That is because eddie47d can’t prove it. It is not real therefor not provable.

      • JeffH

        Not only is eddie a proven liar and slanderer, he even lies about the proof of his lying…Oh, and don’t forget he’s a progressive PARROT…constantly repeating what he hears, or actually what he doesn’t hear.

        POLLY WANT A CRACKER? baaarraaaccckkkkk!

    • SarahR

      Mr. Horton, please explain something to me. Why has the black community failed itself so miserably? The vast majority of black women are at home getting welfare checks. they are at home supposedly raising their children. Why haven’t they done a better job with all the opportunities available to them? I have to disagree with your statement that the black students would feel like they were in prison. The opposite should be true.









        SO, “SarahR,” NEGROES WHO HAVE MONEY, AN EXPENSIVE HOME/VEHICLE, ETC., ARE VIEWED AS “SELL-OUTS” BY POOR NEGROES. [This is why Negroes complained so much about Justice Clarence Thomas' EEOC Record. Since Justice Thomas is dark-skinned, he is called "Uncle Tom," because Negroes believe his EEOC Record proved he "forgot where he came from"]. OF COURSE, NEGRO PARENTS PASS THEIR VALUES TO THEIR CHILDREN. THIS IS WHY A NEGRO CHILD CAN “STAB” [OR, SHOOT] ANOTHER NEGRO CHILD WEARING EXPENSIVE TENNIS SHOES, ETC.


  • Vicki

    “Just less than half of those polled (47 percent) indicated that violence in television, movies and video games attribute to violent outbursts and mass killings.”

    300 MILLION or so people DIDN’T shoot up a school for ANY REASON let alone watching entertainment with a violent theme.

    Stop looking for scapegoats and give us back the tools we need to neutralize a threat regardless of why.

    • DaveH

      Right on, Vicki.

  • FredomIsNotFree

    The second amendment is also about protecting ones self:
    “The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside…Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them…” (Thomas Paine, I Writings of Thomas Paine at 56 [1894])

  • DaveH

    “mental health services to help recognize individuals likely to carry out violent acts”.
    Oh sure, that would be a viable plan in a so-called Free country.
    For instance, I would recommend all Liberal Progressives to be screened thoroughly, and to be banned from buying weapons unless proven normal (not many would pass).

    • SarahR

      Well said Dave H. Liberalism is a mental illness. this has been proven ask Stalin, Hitler, Moa and more all were mentally ill. Don’t forget the person in the WH now.

    • wandamurline

      The shooter wore the same green shirt and kaki pants to school everyday. He spoke to no one and when he walked down the hall, he would be leaning against the walls. Did no one at school not think that this person had a problem? There were a lot of warning signs….maybe he was abused by his peers in school….but the signs were there and everyone including school staff failed miserably.

      • eddie47d

        Vickie:Maybe they did fail but please go back to yesterdays article (on school students text) and almost every commentor said the school overreacted and had no right to take those precautions. (failed miserabally) Who knows when something or someone is dangerous or harmless? You can’t have it both ways and many here play that game.

      • CZ52

        And that school did over react eddie. The police had already investigated and found there was NO cause for concern. All the school had to do was bring the student in for a counciling session on what he ment by his post and check the bag he brought the santa costume and candy in then let him go on his way. Suspension was in no way justified.

      • dalek

        I have to say this. I wore black dress pants and a white dress shirt to school every single day of high school. I even wore dress shoes. Why, I wanted to look nice. Dressing the same way each day does not mean you have a mental problem. If there are other issues, then that could add data to the pile but it should not be the only reason to look for a mental problem.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “Vickie:Maybe they did fail but please go back to yesterdays article (on school students text) and almost every commentor said the school overreacted and had no right to take those precautions. (failed miserabally).

        Eddie. Were you addressing something you thought I said? I only find “failed miserably” in the statement from wandamurline.

        eddie47d: “Who knows when something or someone is dangerous or harmless?”

        Who cares when you have the tools to defend yourself most efficiently.

    • eddie47d

      We know Dave H likes to talk up Civil Liberties yet now is proving again he doesn’t really give a rat’s patute. I’m not sure Dave H is stable with some of the wacky comments he comes up with. Considering how many death threats Obama receives every month and how the extreme right likes to encourage such actions maybe its Conservatives who should be given the straight jackets!

      • DaveH

        That comment of mine was in jest. I wouldn’t expect a Troll like yourself to catch on, Eddie.

      • eddie47d

        Stick to Mises Dave H for you fail miserabally at trying to be the court JESTer! You reveal too much about yourself when you try and think on your own without Mises to back you up.

      • TML

        I think Dave’s hypothetical example was valid, Eddie. It shows how vaguely abusive, and oppressive, such regulations could become. Whereas he may question the mental health of liberal progressives, you question the sanity of conservatives. This is exactly what I meant below when I called it subjective judgment rather than the rule of law. The citizens are then at the whim of whomever may be defining mental stability and sanity. At that point it could be construed that even anyone seeking to purchase a firearm be deemed ‘crazy’.

        I think if there is anything to say about mental health, then it can only be to those who have had a recorded history of mental illness, such as being admitted to a psychiatric hospital for an extended period, and perhaps when someone is currently being treated with anti-depressants and other such drugs. The latter could even be impossible to regulate.

        In order to create laws there must be a strict and discernible definition in which to prosecute crimes or uphold laws.

      • momo

        Yeah DaveH, don’t you know eddie47d is the court jester.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “We know Dave H likes to talk up Civil Liberties yet now is proving again he doesn’t really give a rat’s patute. ”

        Have you heard of the word “humor”?

    • Chester

      DaveH, DEFINE normal, please!! Under your definitions as best as I can determine them from your writings, at least half of all conservatives would fail the mental tests to obtain a firearms permit. Normal is a lot like average, about half are one side of it and about the same number are on the other side of it. That being said, if you get a group of psychiatrists together, unless they all had the same teachers, there will be NO agreement on what NORMAL is, so no one could ever get a firearms permit. If, on the other hand, you restrict only those who exhibit abnormal thought patterns, you are back in the same old quandary, no one fails to exhibit some abnormal, according to one or another psychiatrist, thought patterns or behaviors. What is bad is the fact that so many of the people who have carried out these mass killings have not had to worry about being able to legally obtain weapons, They either bought them using false information or stole them, so, NO law would have stopped them, but perhaps, in this last case, decent long term inpatient mental health care could have prevented it.

    • Bill

      Good Idea, DaveH
      Let’s screen people politically before we sell them a gun. If they are liberal/progressive, no guns. That way the criminals that they have created by their bad economic policies will prey on them.

    • Vicki

      All that is needed is to show the liberals irrational fear of inanimate objects.

  • SarahR

    I don’t seem to recall anyone in the newsmedia suggesting that retired vets could fill the jobs as guards at schools. I would think that vets would feel abliged to fill that roll and perhaps ask little to no pay or perhaps do it for free. Why not hire returning military troops? this would be a good job for an military vet.

    • dalek

      It was discussed several times on Fox news and at least once on Fox business. I don’t watch much of the others anymore. They so far off the path until they are just about always wrong.

    • Vicki

      Still avoids how you are going to protect all the other Gun-Free zones liberals have created.

  • http://webtv

    I don’t think any of these ak47 guns should be bought by anyone other than our military. If anyone buys or sells this ak 47 that has clips over 20 bullets,I sincerely believe this person[s] should be hanged until dead. All you have to ask yourself is this very simple question why in the world would you need this type of gun? Not for hunting animal game or any other type of a
    nimal hunting.If you care to keep this gun, all our government has to do is don’t buy them from China or anyone unless they make a clip for 3 bullets and do away with all the other clips that holds more than 3 bullets.Another problem we have here in the USA is our gov
    ernment leaders believe more in the NEW TESTAMENT instead of the OLD TESTAMENT TEN COMMANDENTS. The NEW TESTAMENT forgives one for one’s wrong doings and the OLD TESTAMENT believes in getting rid of the bad one’s wrong doings. I sincerely believe if our government leaders would follow the OLD TESTAMENT’S rules instead of the NEW TESTAMENT’S rules just imagine how great our country and its people would be. Sincerely Andrew

    • Bill

      You just proved that you are a nutcase.

  • Chester

    Andrewhughes, the weapon of choice is NOT an AK-47, or even anything similar. Granted, you can buy an AK that has been demilitarized, but the AR-15 was not a military weapon to begin with. Granted, it looks and handles a lot like the M-16, which is one reason so many of them are in use, but it was never intended to do full automatic fire. Oh, by the way, how many shotguns do you intend to take away from their rightful owners? Seems a goodly number of both pump and semi auto shotguns can and do have built in magazines that will handle at least five rounds. Thus, the only way to safely remove those “high capacity magazines” would be to seize and destroy said guns.

    • dalek

      I think it good to add this. A “assault rifle” that the media talks about has been banned since around the 1930′s. All civilian modern rifles are semi-automatic NOT full automatic like the military has.

      So, when the media says they want to ban “assault weapons’ that are like the military weapons, they are ignorant or willingly stupid as to what a “assault weapon” is. You should ignore anything else they say.

      I might also add, the term “assault weapon” was made up by the liberal media. Any weapon can be used for assault, ANY of them. That includes rifles, pistols, shotguns, bats, golf clubs, cars, sticks or even a dinner plate. Think I am kidding? Throw a dinner plate at a cop and see what you are charged with. If you hit him, you will be charged with assault at a minimum. If you miss, it is attempted assault. If the media wants to keep going, we won’t have a spoon to eat with.

    • CZ52

      Most of the AK47s being sold today are not demilled versions of the AK. They are Semi-auto only versions of the military rifle. Unlike the AR15/M16 there is no seperate model number for the semi-auto only civilian version.

  • Don

    while they”re blaming video games and telivision shows and how parents are controlled on discipline we should all take a look at the state of the nation. the fiscal cliff thing is comming up after the first of the year and there will be some really bad hardship for everyone. this government for over the last 30 years should be blamed for almost all of the mess we are in. they have raised a debt that we well never be able to pay back and theres no end in sight. our savior pres obunhole will have it somhigh we will eventually be put out of business. our god given rights as citicens [from the constitution] are being taken away from us more and more. now we have the gun control plans the royalty in congress is trying to pass. with all this crap that is happening and what will happen don’ these dumbasses realize all they are giong to do is cause a lot of desparation whith the hopelessness they are making. they’re predicting hyperinflation, 50% unemployment, a 90% stock market crash. if they think its bad now wait till all this happens. there will be a bloodbath in tyhis country.. no guns, owell theres plenty of ways to kill others. there will be killing for food, water, money or gold, silver or anything ellse of value. taking thee guns won’t make any difference. while they are at it they had better give up all their armed protections guns. hell no, they are the privilaged royalty. we need to go back to the original constitution. get rid of the fed, the un and fire the royalty in washington dc. while we’re at it ratify the original 13th amendmant which forbid royalty in congress. i think part of it forbid lawyers from holding government office look up the original 13th amendment sometime. i’m all for a referrndun for the removal of most all politions in dc and the people taking theis country back. the people who made the national debt should be held responsible for it we the people had no choice. i kinda like the messages of a lot of figures in the past and thin a lot like themm they include senator. jerry moran glenn beck pat buchanan, rossperot, chuck harder, ralph nader, ted nugent, jesse ventura, and ron paul. all these people kinda went against most of the things that are happening right now and i see then as a lot wiser and more intelligent than what we now have sitting in washingtto like royalty collecting huge salaries and benifits. what happened to the servants of the people. i can think right now of some of the royalty: president obunhole, vp biden pelosi, fienstine, reid boehoem, etc. it seems almost endless. can’t people see most of our polititoions are like the parisites of the nation. we the pele of the country need to get them all out now. its probly too late.

  • TML

    “…increased police presence at schools…”

    Nay, a bigger police state is not the answer

    “…increased government spending on mental health screening and treatment…”

    Slippery slope and circular argument. While anyone with a true history of mental illness, I believe, should not have access to firearms, I believe this is already examined in current background checks. Further regulation in this area becomes a slippery slope. The definition of mental health, and who defines it, is extremely vague and screening people for their right to bear arms then becomes the personal and subjective judgment of a fallible medical professional. This undermines the rule of law, and completely misses the fact that this still might not catch anyone who ‘might’ go postal one day, and also misses the fact that, for example, the shooter in Connecticut never bought his guns to which he could have been evaluated. Mental health treatment is a circular argument that ignores the fact that many of the shooters in incidents like these were actually on some anti-depressant or other psychiatric drug as part of their already applied treatment. An increase in government spending, especially considering our economic state – and indeed the added spending for a bigger police state as mentioned above – is like pissing in the wind and offers no real solution.

    “… and decreased depiction of gun violence in entertainment…”

    This is the same red herring argument that used to argue that heavy metal causes suicide or other violence. Nay, the games or movies that depict violence do not cause these thoughts. These forms of entertainment are already rated, and even if they weren’t, it would still be the responsibility of the parent to censor their children’s entertainment… not government responsibility to nanny for us.

    “Banning the sale of assault weapons was considered the most viable option for avoiding mass shootings in the future”

    Another misguided solution that ignores that fact that crimes like these could be just as easily perpetrated with hand guns. No assault weapons ban will curb these incidents.

    “…arming teachers would be a good idea.”

    That, in my honest opinion, is the only viable and realistic solution. Allow teachers and staff to arm themselves if they so choose with district or state law requiring satisfactory training. I think it will have greater effect as a deterrent and defense against these crimes, will not infringe the right to carry arms, and would cost the tax payers nothing.

    • dalek

      Well said. Heck, at first I was going to just skim over the post then I had to go back and read it for real.

      • Vicki

        What are you going to do about the rest of the Gun-Free zones?

      • dalek

        Me? I would get rid of gun free zones. I would still leave guns out of prisons for obvious reasons. Could leave them out of court rooms too if the Judge says not to bring them in. Other than those, that is all the gun free zones we should have that I can think of off the top of my head.

        As for schools, let teachers/staff/janitor or whomever is qualified to carry guns have one if the school district approves it. I have said all along, get rid of Federal gun laws. Let the local people take care of it. If some people don’t want guns in the school, then fine with me. If a person with a gun ignores their wishes and shoots a bunch of people or kids, then they get to go tell the family/parents they didn’t protect the folks.

        The 2nd Amendment gives you the right to have one, it doesn’t say you MUST have one. That said, if I had to move, I’d go to Keenasaw GA. Crime is pretty low there.

        I can say this, having “gun free zones” is not working. The people determined to commit crimes, they are just not paying attention to the law. They also ignore the one that says murder is illegal too. Imagine that!

        I might add, I don’t mind the background check to much. That I am somewhat OK with but still think it is unconstitutional. What I do mind, is the paper trail. I bought a rifle the other day. There is now a permanent record that I have that rifle. They are required to keep that record for 20 years and I think at that point it has to be turned in to some bureaucrat somewhere. That, I don’t like.

      • Vicki

        dalek says:
        “Me? I would get rid of gun free zones.”

        Good answer and we are in agreement. The question was to another poster wanting to put armed guards in the schools but I misplaced it. :) Usually I include who I was directing the question to but missed that one. sorry :)

        • dalek

          @Vicki, That was why I put “Me?” in there. I wasn’t sure and this site doesn’t always line them up so that it is obvious.

          As for armed guards, well, if that is the local school districts choice, OK. I would guess that cities like New York would do that before they would let teachers/staff carry a gun. I don’t see some cities allowing that for one second. The biggest thing, let the local people decide. Then if something bad happens, they get to face the parents/spouses of the victims locally. Having any President, especially this one, giving his condolences for what should be done by the locals just doesn’t sit right with me. To me, the local people, regardless of what the Feds do, are the ones responsible for those kids. That’s why the Feds needs to get out of it completely. I give full support for those teachers who were defenseless giving their life trying. I just wish they could have had more options than using their bodies as a shield.

          What is the old saying? The Government closest to the people governs best.

  • FreedomFighter

    Totalitarian control is only possible in a disarmed society, as the Nazis and communists demonstrated in the twentieth century.

    Laus Deo
    Semper Fi

    • dalek

      Exactly. Guns first. Then everything else can be taken with no resistance at all.

      I saw a picture the other day that shows it well. It had a picture of the Constitutional Amendments. The 2nd one was circled. In a caption, it said something to the effect, ‘take the 2nd one first and the rest are easy’. That’s their plan. Every crisis has to move their agenda foreword.

  • STEVE E.

    The Americans you mention that want gun control are not really Americans. Americans believe in the Constitution. Those that want gun control do not. They are just Zombies that were born in America. Just like children of illegal immigrants.

  • Tired of it!

    Have you ever been driving, in traffic, and all of a sudden it feels like you are staring at a video game screen? I have. And I drive a lot for work. And I’m 57! I wonder how this would affect your brain as a pre-teen or a teenager, if you watched a violent video game for hours and hours each day. Would it make a connection in your brain? It seems so. And the violent games seem to be played far more by boys than by girls. Can we draw some conclusions from that? Just asking….

    • dalek

      I see video games, TV, meds some kids take, the lack of morals and values and other things as being like a perfect storm. These things are not like a cooking recipe where if you follow the same KNOWN recipe, you get the same results. Most kids can handle those things just fine. However, from time to time, something hits just right and we have a kid(s) with a problem. I say kids because there are sometimes more than one. Columbine if I recall was two.

      While no one thing is going to fix this, taking guns certainly isn’t. Guns are not the root cause of the problem. Those familiar with my posts have seen me ask this question before. If we remove EVERY gun from this country, what will they use next? Answer: Explosives. Knives, not enough for a body count. Ball bat, still not enough plus a person could tackle someone with a ball bat. There may be something else a kid can come up with but explosives is the one that comes to my mind. It doesn’t have to be fancy either. Take a SUV, there are plenty of parents with those, fill it full of either propane tanks or just regular gas tanks full of gas or diesel. Have some method of setting that off at the ready. Just drive the SUV through the front door and down the hallway. When ready, set it off. It doesn’t have to be like Oklahoma City’s bomb, but can be just as deadly. Let’s not even consider a Oklahoma City type bomb. As bad as guns are, that would be a really high death toll. Anyone remember Russia in 2004?

      Now, if that were to happen, are we going to ban more stuff or search for the ROOT CAUSE of the problem? I suspect, a lot of people, especially the media, will stick their head in the sand and want more control of something, anything will do.

      We need to keep in mind one more thing. Even if these kids that do this has a mental problem. Most of them are smart in their own ways. Certainly smart enough to do some real damage.

      Keep in mind, a kid that can do all that above, most likely has a drivers license to drive, may even drive one to school already. Isn’t this scary?


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
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.