Sorry, this content has expired.

Personal Liberty

UPI - United Press International, Inc.

Since 1907, United Press International (UPI) has been a leading provider of critical information to media outlets, businesses, governments and researchers worldwide.

Join the Discussion

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.

  • Sam

    Funny how these “mass shootings” have increased under this POTUS…

    • tarfu

      If obama had a son he would look like Aaron Alexis

      • liz

        If that were the case you would never see his picture and it would be someone else’s fault!

      • peter

        yes and his ‘ would have been son ‘ has already been accounted for so he does not have to worry about bringing him to book.

        • Ron r

          Funny.

    • chocopot

      Yeah, One hell of a coincidence, ain’t it? Makes you wonder…

  • DavidL

    The mentally ill, the criminal, the violent, and the very young should not have access to guns. As a combat veteran, competitive shooter, and defender of the 2nd Amendment, we need an effective universal background check. Let’s all put down the tea bags, smell the coffee, and get it done! The NRA is wrong on this issue today. It needs to return to its historical position of support for background checks.

    • Midnite Rider

      David there are already background checks,so I don’t know what you are talking about.Criminals already have guns and if a deranged person is going to do something background checks won’t do squat.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Better would have been if the victims had been allowed to arm and protect themselves instead of being helpless sheep at the slaughter — Thanks to Liberal Progressive accessories to murder.
      They can’t even stop prisoners from killing each other, DavidL. How in the world would you expect to stop determined killers in anything remotely resembling a Free Society?

    • vicki

      Lets have a look shall we?

      “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.”

      Nope. No restrictions in there about the mentally Ill nor the criminal nor even the young. Then again the founders were MUCH smarter then gun-grabbers and knew that the mentally ill were to be kept in mental hospitals which would limit their access to firearms. The criminals were to be kept in jail which would limit their access to firearms. The violent would be stopped by the intended victim when said victim shot the violent. The very young were not strong enough to pickup a gun and from the moment they were their parents taught them how to properly handle guns. The really smart parents taught the younger children to not touch guns till they WERE strong enough to carry them.

      Regrettably a lot of good wisdom has been lost thru public school indoctrination.

      • http://www.yahoo.com/ wyatt48

        Finally. Someone commenting on yahoo has it correct.

      • chocopot

        Well said, Vicki. Summed up very nicely.

    • JeffH

      DavidL, you fool no one!

      DavidL says ” The NRA is wrong on this issue today. It needs to return to its historical position of support for background checks.”

      That’s just not factually true! The NRA opposed the Brady Handgun Violence Act 1994 from the very beginning. The bill passed, but the NRA continued to fight it in court, funding a number of legal challenges in several states throughout the country.
      http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2008/brady-brag-is-baloney.aspx

      The NRA does not support proposals that allow for unnecessary or overly broad information to be included in the NICS; unfairly target individuals who have not been adjudicated mentally defective; seek to retain approved NICS transaction records for more than 24 hours; or anything else that would expand NICS beyond its original purpose.

      Since the NICS/Brady Bill passed, the National Rifle Association supported including the records of individuals adjudicated mentally defective into the National Instant Background Check System.

      “We believe that the NICS should serve the intent of Congress, which is to prohibit the sale of firearms to criminals and other prohibited persons, such as adjudicated mental defectives. However, we must not forget that the NICS also serves the purpose of clearing firearm purchases by law-abiding Americans. Too often, the system has been abused and has not delivered on the promise of a fair and instant check”.

      “In order for NICS to be effective and efficient, it should not be bogged down with unnecessary information or duplicative records. It should not be used to charge transaction fees on background checks; as a permanent repository of gun purchase information; or to unnecessarily delay the ability of law-abiding Americans to purchase firearms.” – NRA/ILA

  • Midnite Rider

    Here we go again.Crazy people committing crimes and all us law abiding will end up paying the price.We Americans will not give up our weapons at least I won’t.

  • jimmie smith

    A military base…highly secure I might ad…and no weapons other than the Military police? Just like 911, they get there after the fact…just in time to clean up the mess…

    • Ron r

      Just like the civilian , but far more safer.

  • Guest

    Funny. where there is strict gun laws, the murder rate is threw up the roof but in other places where gun laws are much more relaxed, you don’t see all of the crime and murders.

    • chocopot

      Sshhh… Don’t confuse the Lefties with facts – they can’t deal with that.

  • C Zipp

    As a combat experienced vet will you pass a background check that assures “us” that you will not relive such a traumatic esperience and start shooting your recalled enimies? Not to mention that you admitted to being one of those radical terrorist that support such seditious ideas as free speech, keeping and bearing arms( except under the kings control, of course), and probably the rights to peacefull assembly, self defense, privacy, and all those other quaint “don’t tread on me beliefs from the uncomplicated, safer times of yore. So when are you admitting you don’t qualify to own, much less keep and bear?

  • http://www.yahoo.com/ wyatt48

    If Aaron Alexis isn’t a muslim, Then this is a put-up job to distract from the real problems.

    • independent thinker

      Doesn’t matter if he is a muslim or not either way it is a put up job.

      • Ron r

        By put up you mean???

      • chocopot

        Precisely my thoughts…

    • Ron r

      So , is your point that he has to be a Muslim or this was staged??? Or that only Muslims kill like this? Or maybe Newtown was staged because the kid was not Muslim ??

      • http://www.yahoo.com/ wyatt48

        My point is that most of these killings like this are done by muslims or muslim sympathizers. If this wasn’t one of those type of jihad killings. It is a put up job by the government to distract from all the problems they have caused in the past few years. Obama and his press secretary wasted not one minute on sympathy for the families or the dead. They jumped right into gun control speech again. When are they going to stop blaming the gun? When they have us firmly in control with no defense for our families.

        • Ron r

          So Obama pulled off Sandyhook, the Shooting of G. Gifford, the movie shootings, but the only ones that matter are the ones Muslims do. Even though thus guy may have been Buddhist ? I just want to make sure I’m following you. In a nutshell are you saying there are Muslim killings and there are Obama government killings to gain support for gun laws?

          • http://www.yahoo.com/ wyatt48

            NO. You are not following. You are trying to inject nonsensical issues into this. We are not talking about sandyhook or whatever else Obama told you to use as a talking point. We are talking of terrorism. By muslims, individuals and the Obama government.

          • Ron r

            Ok, so what put up job are you talking about? Which killings and why. That’s all I ask. The shootings in Colorado was not Muslim related, the Az. Shooting not Muslim , Sandyhook not Muslim, the temple shooting not Muslim , and this one to be determined . Ft. Hood was Muslim , so since 911 most have been home grown. So that’s why I ask about what you mean about put up jobs. We may not agree to anything but I am intrested in you point of view

          • Average_Joe56

            “since 911 most have been home grown.”
            Are they home grown…or are they government grown?
            Can you prove without a reasonable doubt, that they were home grown rather than government grown?
            When the pieces don’t seem to fit together in a cohesive manner, I tend to be skeptical of the “official” narrative.
            When the MSM, AKA: “The Propaganda wing of the CIA”, gives us it’s spin, we can rest assured that it is pre-packaged, agenda driven, and mostly dishonest “media”….for the assembled herd.
            Step away from the trough……..

          • Ron r

            Can you prove your conspricy theory ? If you beleive the government is killing citizens to get a point across there’s nothing to prove to you .

          • Average_Joe56

            You have failed to answer my question. You don’t get to duck the question by playing your “Pee Wee Herman” card.. The, ” I Know you are, but what am I?” routine. Answer the question and then we can proceed.
            I thought that I was debating with an adult….Obviously, I was mistaken in my assessment.

          • Ron r

            If you think that the government (Obama) has something to do with these idiots with guns who shoot innocents them there is no question you have that I can answer. As far as you juvenile post , grow up you sound like a damn fool. Do you also believe Kennedy was killed by Nixon????

          • Average_Joe56

            “Answer the question and then we can proceed.”
            Note to ronr’s parents:
            Child does not follow directions.

          • Ron r

            You do not have a question that I can see other than your ranting about government hit squads . And you really don’t want to play the dozen do you?? That’s so, so , juvi.

          • Average_Joe56

            The Question (yet again)
            Can you prove without a reasonable doubt, that they were home grown rather than government grown?
            You are awful quick to dismiss what I’ve said…..but you have yet to disprove me. So, here’s your last chance…prove me wrong….if you can.
            Simply asserting that I am wrong won’t work…..nor is speculation….show me the undisputed facts in your favor.
            The ball is now in your court….try to hang onto it….if you can…….

          • Nadzieja Batki

            wyatt48, Rib r does not intend to follow your comment thread. His purpose is to distract from the fact that this was another staged incident but this time the shooter was black and a possible muslim.

          • Ron r

            And your intent is to Jeb an idiot race baiter. Are you glad the shooter is black??? Does that fit your agenda?? Black , white, pink or whatever color, people of all color lost their loves. IDIOT. Now go kiss a claymore mine. And the idiot was Buddhist , do you hate that religion also?? IDIOT!!!!!!!

          • Average_Joe56

            Such vile hatred coming from you…the non-aggressive, tolerant guy….and here I thought you were a winning adventurer.
            What happened Ronnie? Somebody piddle in your Post Toasties?

          • Ron r

            So Nad makes a statement like she made and I’m the racist. I said Nad not you. Keep you cap on.

          • Average_Joe56

            I don’t recall the word “racist” or “racism” being mentioned anywhere in my post….Reading comprehension problems too?
            I also don’t recall Nadzieja saying anything that was remotely “racist” or telling you to “go kiss a claymore” either….

  • WTS/JAY

    Keep this in mind as you process the mass shooting at the D.C. Navy-yard: One of Bill Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993, was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases.

    • Libertarian Soldier

      Since this guy shot his way in, that means that if every military man had a weapon, he wouldn’t get far.

      Still, that kind of doesn’t matter, anyway, since this was a civilian, gun free zone.

      You’d have a good point if there was a point to your pointless dribble!

      • WTS/JAY

        LB: Still, that kind of doesn’t matter, anyway, since this was (a civilian), gun free zone.

        Get your facts straight, einstein.

        “We still don’t know all the facts. But we do know that several people have been shot and some have been killed,” President Barack Obama said earlier Monday afternoon. “So we are confronting yet another mass shooting. And today it happened ON A MILITARY INSTALLATION in our nation’s capital.”

        Did you get that? (military installation)

        The Yard serves as a ceremonial and administrative center for the U.S. Navy, home to the Chief of Naval Operations, and is headquarters for the Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Historical Center, the Department of Naval History, the U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps, Naval Reactors, Marine Corps Institute, the United States Navy Band, the U.S. Navy’s Military Sealift Command and numerous other naval commands. -Wiki…

        A little more than a (civilian gun-free-zone) don’t you think so, numb-nut?

    • Ron r

      They were never armed , except for MPs, prisoner escort, and some guard duty or other special duty personnel (CID) Clinton did nothing like this. Military installations do not look like 1700 Dodge City.

      • vicki

        We? are you speaking from experience? If so when? All information I have found indicates that the requirement to disarm soldiers on base in America started with President Clinton in 1993

        http://gunsnfreedom.com/after-naval-yard-shooting-its-time-to-end-1993-clinton-gun-ban-on-military-bases/

      • vicki

        We? are you speaking from experience? If so when? All information I have found indicates that the requirement to disarm soldiers on base in America started with President Clinton in 1993

        http://gunsnfreedom.com/after-naval-yard-shooting-its-time-to-end-1993-clinton-gun-ban-on-military-bases/

        • Ron r

          Re check your source, When I stayed in the barracks (permanent party) my civilian wepon was kept in the company arms room. I also had to let the PMO know I had the wepon. There has never been to my knowledge open carry on military post. I went to the site you directed me to. The article did not explain that military personnel are allowed to keep firearms in their homes on and off post. I knew many friends who kept hunting rifles in their POVs and went hunting immediately after duty. The article would have you think that there was open carry on military bases and that is not the fact. While serving in the ROK and the 2nd D, I remember two knuckle heads turning their wepons on fellow soldiers at a rifle range and kiting other soldiers. All on the firing line had wepons locked and loaded, including the tower NCO. It did not stop the efforts of those two traitors. Military bases are far more safer than the surrounding civilian towns. The last shooter was talked down by a woman with no gun.do not lose the fact that the NRA was for gun registration befor it was aginst it.

          • JeffH

            The pressure cooker did it!

            ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ASSAULT ANYONE USING ANY FIREARM.

            ~300 MILLION Americans DIDN’T SHOOT anyone AT ALL. Not even by accident.

            Join the NRA, GOA, SAF and the rest of us in telling them to STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT

            STOP IT

            STOP IT NOW

          • JeffH

            The NRA did help to write the Federal Gun Laws back in those old days but they have never supported a national registry of all guns and mandatory licenses for all gun carriers.

            What the NRA backed in those old days was registration requirements on certain classes of weapons—those used in gangster style violence like machine guns, sawed-off shotguns and silencers—making it all-but impossible for average people to own them. Gun makers and sellers had to register with the federal government, and certain classes of people—notably convicted felons—were barred from gun ownership. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld these laws in 1939.

            Much has changed since those days…in particular the anti-gun agenda ridden representatives and an increasingly anti-gun government along with the usurping of our Constitutional freedoms which only forced the NRA to create a strong political lobby in DC so they can stand toe to toe with those that want to remove completely our 2nd Amendment right to “keep and bear arms”.

          • Ron r

            The fact is that the NRA will not support that right now. And Reagan had more in mind when he signed the Mulford act into law when Gov. Of Cal. He was supported by the NRA.. It was Reagan who said there is no reason for an American citizen to be armed. (Para phrasing) thanks for the info.

          • JeffH

            Like Bob asked…what does that have to do with this discussion or the NRA particularly when this discussion is focused on the national level?

            The Mulford Act was a 1967 State of California bill, not a federal or national bill prohibiting the public carrying of loaded firearms in public places.

            I cannot find any evidence, other than opinion pieces, that offer proof that the NRA supported or opposed that law and from everything I can find the NRA didn’t start involving itself politically until the mid 70’s long after the Mulford Act was passed into California law

            Can you provide proof that the NRA supported the Mulford Act?

          • Ron r

            Jeff my point all along has been that no matter what laws the NRA supported in the past they will not support now. It still has nothing to do with beans. Can you prove they did not?

          • JeffH

            FYI, You made the accusation that the NRA supported Reagan which is true to a point…but not before he started his bid for the presidency…and not while he was governor of California.

            Your point is really moot considering that we are in a totally different era and mindset today and there is now a much stronger anti-gun agenda being pushed than there was back in 1967-68.

            Sure the NRA has changed also but, as I pointed out, the NRA didn’t start involving itself politically until the mid 70’s long after the Mulford Act was signed by Reagan into California law.

            Just what laws did they support in the past that they’re not supporting now? I’d really like to know.

          • Ron r

            Sure Jeff, and food cost more today than it did then. Should we dtop eating?? BTW the NRA raised no objections to the Mulford act because it was aimed mostly at the BPP. Thanks for the debate

          • JeffH

            Ron r says “BTW the NRA raised no objections to the Mulford act because it was aimed mostly at the BPP.”

            You know that as fact? That is pure conjecture on your part and you know it!

            The NRA had no political lobby arm at that time and there is no evidence, other than pure conjecture, to even support the idea that the NRA supported Reagan or the Mulford Act during that time.

            Yes, the Mulford Act began shortly after the shooting of Denzil Dowell. Easy Bay legislator Dan Mulford introduced a bill to repeal the law that permitted citizens to carry loaded weapons in public places so long as the weapons were openly displayed.

            What the Mulford law sought to achieve was the elimination of the Black Panther Police Patrols, and it had been tagged “the Panther Bill” by the media.

            The BLack Panther’s made a tactical error when the group marched on the capitol carrying loaded rifles and shotguns, publicly displayed and entered the State Capitol building to read aloud Executive Mandate Number 1, which was in opposition to the Mulford Bill. Fully armed with loaded weapons, they tried to enter the Assembly Chamber but were forced out of this public place where they then read Executive Mandate Number 1 out on the lawn.

            I do see that you avoided this question…”Just what laws did they, the NRA, support in the past that they’re not supporting now? I’d really like to know.”

          • Ron r

            He’s proud of you Jeff you can move on.

          • JeffH

            Say “uncle”?

          • Ron r

            Auntie Em.

          • Ron r

            FYI , the Munford act signed by Reagan and backed by the NRA in 1967 banned all loaded wepons and was not specifically targeted at so called gangster wepons.

          • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

            Dear Ron r,

            You write: “FYI , the Munford (sic) act signed by Reagan and backed by the NRA in 1967 banned all loaded wepons (sic)…” It’s Mulford Act, and what does that have to do with beans?

            Best wishes,
            Bob

          • Ron r

            Dear Bob, Jeff and I were discussing the NRA and gun laws. Not beans.

            Best wishes , Ronr

          • vicki

            Ron r writes:

            Re check your source, When I stayed in the barracks (permanent party) my civilian wepon was kept in the company arms room.

            Which does you no good at all unless you happen to be in that room when the “active shooter” comes looking for you. Which is rather the point.

            Now at your request I did recheck my source and found that indeed it was an order signed by President Clinton in 1993.

            http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/r190_14.pdf

            Interestingly the government removed this from their public website but I found a copy saved by

            http://jneilschulman.rationalreview.com/2009/11/clinton-bush-gun-control-enabled-fort-hood-massacre/

            Here are more sources for your edification.

            http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/09/16/flashback-us-military-bases-are-gun-free-zones-because-democrats-decreed-them-to-be/

            http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/clinton-era-gun-law-responsible-mass-carnage-us-naval-yard/#.Ujinzz8k6-A

            http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/end-clinton-era-military-base-gun-ban/

            http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/09/17/When-Military-gun-free

            http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2009/11/18/time-to-revisit-firearms-policies-on-military-posts/

            http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2009/11/fort_hood_faq.html

          • Ron r

            When I said recheck I did not doubt your research, just the way it was written. The Clinton order did little to change how soldiers with private weapons stored them while living in the barracks. And in all the time I was in the army I never read of a barracks shooting. I also never saw a civilian openly carry on base. Again, I did not question your research, just the affect it had (very little) on at least the Army Post I was stationed at. I read the article you mentioned .

          • vicki

            Since there are a LOT more than 2 military bases in the US it would be a taouism to say that must of them are not affected (yet). Other than the obvious violation of the Constitution. Note that even the liberals interpretation that it protects only the militia means that forbidding the carrying of firearms by soldiers is a DIRECT violation of the Constitution.

          • Ron r

            No it would not Vicki soldiers get orders and they follow them. Their rights are protected under the UCMJ. Their 2nd amendment rights are not being violated. But we will agree to disagree. Thanks for your response.

          • vicki

            You’re welcome.

          • http://www.yahoo.com/ wyatt48

            Granted it was a few years ago, but when I was on a military base we were required to keep our rifles in our barracks. Marines 1968-1972

          • Ron r

            Vicki , go to Breitbart.com , the Blaze or http://mediamatters.org/ for the story on the military gun free zones.

  • WTS/JAY

    IF the Naval Shipyard attack happened THIS (Monday) MORNING, then HOW THE HELL did the Associated Press get the story SUNDAY NIGHT at 11:30 PM???? BEFORE IT HAPPENED?!?!

    THIS IS PRE-PACKAGED PROPAGANDA NEWS! Just like the BBC did on the day of 9/11!!!!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXlCh27_nxg

    • Libertarian58

      I’ve always suspected the possibility of a “Manchurian candidate” setup to get the people all riled up about gun control. It happens over and over at the most opportune times. This guy was supposedly under the “care” of “psychiatrists” at one time? Then, it appears that all the proper security apparatus in place simply failed, at just the right moment. Hmmm…

  • Libertarian Soldier

    It wouldn’t have happened in a “Gun Free Zone!” Oh, it was a Gun Free Zone? Well, it wouldn’t have happened if guns were illegal! Oh, a Gun Free Zone means it’s illegal to have a gun? Well, if guns were never made, we wouldn’t have gun violence! We’d probably be trying ban steak knives, then bats, then sticks…

    • Ron r

      Looks like the tragedy happened even though there were so called good people with guns there also. The jury is still out as to if a background check would have taken or prevented a gun from being in his hand. Of course he could have taken / stolen it from a good guy with a gun. Regardless, it’s a tragedy.

      • vicki

        Good people with guns were NOT there. That is why the tragedy happened. The good people with guns were only minutes away though. Hmmmm. Where have I heard that before?

        • Ron r

          I could be wrong but I’m pretty sure there were some people there who were armed Vicki. I think he may have gotten the advantage on them. Also There was a good person without a gun in the Ga. Incident. It can go either way sometimes.

          • vicki

            Thus letting ALL good people choose when THEY want to carry is the solution. Eliminate GunFreeZones.

          • Ron r

            Understood, but what about those who do want gun free zones.

          • vicki

            Ask them how it feels to want.

      • Libertarian Soldier

        If you understand what a background check is, it has to do with convictions. Where the system let these 12 innocent victims down is where this guy kept firing his guns in anger and kept being let go and not prosecuted.

        I have friend still in the county Jail, Alameda County, California for repelling an armed home invasion by 5 young black kids at 4:00 AM.

        After almost two years, and one in a witness protection program while three others had charges dropped to testify against him, he’s facing a charge of discharging a (shotgun) gun within city limits and firing into an occupied dwelling (drive by shooting law). They’re offering him a deal for 9 years.

        One guy, an armed neighbor got away and the kids from Oakland were caught with drugs on all 4 of them (2 were cousins of the San Leandro neighbor), driving stupid, a few blocks away and one had been shot in the ass by his crime partner and had his shoulder grazed when my friend was wrestling him for his own shotgun.

        He’s being prosecuted because local governments believe white men shouldn’t use a gun to defend themselves. That’s their job. It’s that simple!

        • Ron r

          I’m not sure what. Point you are trying to make but you seem very angry. I’ve seen the same thing happen to black men who defend themselves. Or the black lady in Florida, with stand your grown . But thanks for the information.

          • Libertarian Soldier

            Not a bit angry at you. You missed the point. My friend’s name is Eric Ferreira, August 2, 2011, in San Leandro. You can look him up.

            I wasn’t mad but i’m a little irked right about now if you bring that BS that you’ve seen the same thing with black men who defend themselves. Black men are not being hunted by racist white people but white people and since the Zimmerman case are routinely attacked “for tryavon” or for being white or a “…wood”.

            You’re full of $#!+. If you make a wide statement like that, you’d better be ready to provide facts, huckster!

            My commentary had to do with the fact that the system failed. I’d be willing to bet that if a white man which I’m not were to have shot up someone’s automobile and shot into the living-room of his neighbor who was making noise, after having confronted her about her noise, already, would almost certainly be prosecuted.

            You know, I wasn’t angry but I am, now and it’s definitely at you made that last statement absent a fact, a citation or a real example since you’ve challenged my assertion, race baiter!

            By the way, learn grammar and punctuation. It’s hard to get mad at an illiterate, ignorant racist!

          • Ron r

            1st your friends case is not unique , welcome to the justice system. And since when are white men being hunted down by black men? There is less than 1 % black on white crime but any % of violence aginst another is too much. Race baiting, you brought up race. And last, I have a child who was the victim of gun violence and has been I n a wheelchair for over 10 years. Never called you a race baiter, but then again what has race got to do with this anyway? Thanks for the debate.

          • Libertarian Soldier

            My friend’s case is becoming more commonplace seeing the travesty in Sanford, FL.

            You’re wrong! Whites are hunted by blacks. Here are five in an article. http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2013/09/14/5-americans-who-were-murdered-for-being-white-n1700024?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

            You’re making up numbers in lieu of evidence to support your absurd claim to the contrary if you say that back on white crime is less than 1%. You’re not only a liar but you think everybody else is stupid.

            I have no idea what happened to your child and your circumstances are not completely uncommon, however, contrary to your apparent beliefs, violent crime and gun crime are down and are more likely to be intraracial. However, crime and violence that is not intraracial is 7 times more likely to be black on white than white on black and if we’re charging whites for defending themselves, that formula changes to more than 7 times more likely.

            Institutional racism has everything to do with it. It’s in our laws and the biased enforcement of it and factually, it’s discriminatory and anti-white racist.

            Facts! Not made up statistics. “There are lies, damn lies and there are statistics!” -Mark Twain

            Then, there are lying liars that lie and know they’re lying. That would be you.

          • Ron r

            First I must apologize for not fitting your profile of an inner city black who’s son was gunned down in an act of random violence committed by a so called gangster. Far be it for me to live not in the inner city and damn if my son was a victim of work place violence. That only happens to whites . As to blacks hunting whites where are the stats? How is black on white crime a y worse than it has always been. Whites kill each other at around the same rare as blacks kill blacks.

            So with all due respect spare me the poor white man and the animal black thug. This is not , the Beck or Briebart race report. I could have taken the same line of thinking on your friend as you did my child. Anyway thanks for the debate that some how had to turn into a discussion on how after over 400 years Stanford Fla will be recognized as the start of white independence , and their right to return to a 1930s South.

          • Libertarian Soldier

            You mean the democrat dominated South? You mean the home of the Ku Klux Klan (the democrat ick party)?

            What are you babbling about, now? You want me to make up some statistics, like you did?

            In 2011, a guy like me, son of a legal immigrant, servant of his community, even if he didn’t serve his country, in his own gated community profiled as a “cracker” by a young black visiting thug, the worst house guest, ever and attacked but he’s no longer the survivor of a race based, hate crime, in Sanford, FL (no “t”). They have to go back 50 years, half a century to compare it to a lynching of a 14 year old to deliberately stir the angry hearts of blacks that are taught by their community and their schools to dehumanize already vilified whites while there isn’t a person alive that’s owned a slave.

            My family is personally offended by the policies of this country that goes so far from its charter and its compact (compact between the states to which the fedreal gov. is not a party but is a creature thereof).

            I have an NRA sticker on my front window. It says that we don’t call 911, here. Restore the Constitution! Good thing George Zimmerman had a weapon, otherwise he’d be dead or brain-damaged.

            Your brethren have to pretend whites are hunting and killing blacks to keep the donations and federal funds coming for the proliferation of black hate for relevance! Need a new car?

            I already referenced your son and your worries. There’s no accounting for crazies or for the way people victimize employees in the work place and make them feel helpless, that they have to take back their power, crazy or not but you only get to play that card once in a debate.

            This discussion is just starting. Too bad you can’t keep up.

            Got education? Got facts?

          • Ron r

            Do you want to talk about the idiot who killed 12 people, or argue the civil war??? Because you show me you know nothing beyond reich wing talking points. Don’t flatter your self or your silly a??friends by thinking black kids are being taught to hate you. You do a good enough job of that also don’t fool yourself with the reich wing talking points and think there were never any republicans in the klan . So if you are looking for a reason (s) to hate blacks look within yourself , because this was not a conversation about race untill you took it there. So have at it , and have a good day sir. Spare me your self pity. BTW you do not get to play your friends card at all.

          • Libertarian Soldier

            I digress: I’m done talking off point. The departure from the point was yours. Don’t call me out for answering it. I’m done talking about the paranoid schizophrenic that killed 12 people.

            This “gun free zone” didn’t protect those 12 people. The background check failed to restrict a guy with at least 3 known incidents of gun violence that the government, in different states failed to prosecute. Explain that! Good laws promote and expand liberty; they don’t infringe rights that may not be infringed. Bad laws restrict liberties and rights.

            I didn’t say blacks are taught to hate me. I said they’re taught to hate whites. My kids, in college, now could not possibly be mistaken for white and they get the message that whites are oppressors from their teachers and administrators. Today, right now, my daughter, a Sr. in College is reading a book called, “The Lies My Teacher Told Me”. I started reading it.

            It’s actually not so much revisionist history as it is a lie, itself. What it does is tell the kids that history lies when it doesn’t tell you that Helen Keller was a radical socialist. Factually, the lesson learned didn’t lend itself to teaching 1st graders about socialism. The inspirational point was a deaf and blind girl was able to learn to communicate and got a college degree. Glorification of the socialist party should not be part of that lesson.

            It discusses Daniel Webster, likely the finest Constitutional Attorney of his day and maybe since from the decade following the ratification of the Compact. They tear him down by calling him a drunk. That’s the “lie” our teachers told us. They didn’t call him a drunk!. While I guessed that most men of substance, in the time of the revolution, likely owned slaves, a distinction of the time, another “lie” was that it was not rammed down the throats of the students that George Washington owned slaves. Really? How is that a “lie”? Nobody said he didn’t and it’s not terribly relevant since the forging of the Charter and the Compact were the vehicles used to set slaves free from the democrats that fought a war and a congressional campaign to keep them.

            This is the institutional tearing down of the fabric of our society, attacking history, portraying our flawed founders as racist, subhumans rendering their mission for liberties null in order to dismiss their works and attack our liberties.

            George Washington called the 2nd Amendment the most important Amendment, second only to the Compact, itself.

            I believe you’ll have to tell me whether there were any republican infiltrators in the Klan of the days of the civil rights marches since you’re closer to it than I am, democrat! The Klan was created by, manned by and operated as a secret part of the democrat ick party. It wasn’t until my lifetime that any democrats championed any kind of civil rights but those days are gone. democrats, now, only work to stifle freedoms, control the populace, limit liberties, encroach into our health, our conversations, our family values, our God given, natural rights affirmed in our Constitution as they attack our faith, attack our 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable searches, therefore our 5th 10th, and 14th Amendment rights.

            The current dictatorial purveyor of tyranny has attacked freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of association in favor of islam and rights of other special interest, like the proliferation of the gay agenda, even in our armed forces, under threat of court martial. Bills marshaled in the House to return liberties to the military are threatened with veto by the executive.

            The tyrannical pResident attacks our 2nd Amendment from every angle possible, attempting to sneak treaties that would supersede the 2nd Amendment and put Iran in charge of who has what weapon in what home in our country. He’s attempting, as I write to impose executive order further limiting, further infringing the 2nd Amendment to which he is not only not a party but is a creature of the compact it is part of. They work toward pushing federal and state legislatures to further infringe the natural right to self defense and machination, per Hobbes and other natural law scholars.

            As for the conversation of race, it is totally relevant because of the advent of reverse discrimination in the government and the message it sends though our educational institutions and our government offices.

            The gun control and gun grabber lobby is a democrat wielded mechanism to control men like me, patriots, defenders and former defenders of our country, educated people, concerned with the Constitution, age 25-65, gun owners, possibly military or retired military and while I’m not white, I fall within the group of people that are considered by our government to be “potential homegrown terrorists”, deemed more dangerous than foreign terror groups, as described by Janet Napolitano, in April, 2009, ‘with no specific evidence” to support that report.

            Get education!

          • Ron r

            I’m just thankful you’re done ! Get help fast !!!

          • Average_Joe56

            Are you aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?

            Are you aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this century as the reverse?

            We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.

            I realize that facts are an inconvenient to the liberal mind…but they are facts, none the less and simply ignoring them doesn’t change them either…Facts are facts.

            http://www.newnation.org/NNN-Black-on-White.html

            Crime trends

            Some studies had argued for smaller racial disparities in violent crime in recent times. However, a 2011 study which examined the racial disparities in violent crime and incarceration from 1980 and 2008 found little difference for black share of violent offending. Racial imbalances between arrest rates and sentencing have caused some to question the disparities. The authors argued that the prior studies had been confounded by not separating Hispanics from Whites. The number of Hispanic offenders has been increasing rapidly and have violence rates higher than that of Whites but lower than that of Blacks. Another recent study in 2012 raises a different concern, showing that Hispanics and blacks receive considerably longer sentences for the same or lesser offenses per average than white offenders with equal or greater criminal records.

            In the wake of the George Zimmerman verdict, critics such as Jared Taylor have accused the mainstream media of emphasizing or exaggerating crime against blacks. Interracial crime, including rape, is more commonly black on white rather than white on black.

            Victim surveys

            In a 2004 United States Department of Justice report which analyzed carjacking trends over the previous decade, carjacking victims identified 56% of the offenders as black, 21% as white, and 16% as members of other races.

            Homicide

            According to the United States Department of Justice: Blacks accounted for 52.5% of homicides, whites 45.3% and Native Americans and Asians 2.2%, from 1980 to 2008. The offending rate for blacks was almost 8 times higher than whites, and the victim rate 6 times higher. Most murders were intraracial, with 84% of white homicide victims murdered by whites, and 93% of black victims murdered by blacks.

            Note:

            Classification of Hispanics

            The UCR classifies most Hispanics into the “white” category. The NCVS classifies some Hispanic criminals as “white” and some as “other race”. The victim categories for the NCVS are more distinct.

          • Ron r

            Are you aware that crime no matter the race of the victim is wrong??? Spare me the skewed numbers!!!

          • Average_Joe56

            Those darn facts keep getting in the way, don’t they?Sorry, there are no skewed numbers, only your skewed mind.
            Spare us your skewed mind.

          • Ron r

            It’s your source. You would have done better off trying to pass off a klan paper as real news. Thanks for the debate.

          • Average_Joe56

            You’re welcome.
            Thank you for your lack of debate.

            Funny that you mention my “source” but fail to address anything else…typical liberal…..feign indignity…. scream racism…..and ignore the facts…..

          • Libertarian Soldier

            Actually, if you’d stop changing the subject, I wouldn’t be answering off point. You, like the rest of you democrats couldn’t stay on point to save your lives. You’re demanding statistics, then you want to be spared numbers. Which is it. You’re the one that presented made up falsified stats, not me.

          • Ron r

            And you are like so many regressives .

          • Ron r

            Your source is new nation a d you ask me to respond to that BS. New Nation, you’re better off using Fox /Fixed “News” I hope that answers your question. If not get another source and a creditable one.

          • Average_Joe56

            So, what you are saying is that because you don’t agree with the link posted, there is nothing valid with the rest of the post? Even though NONE of the rest of the post came from the link?
            The link has no bearing on the post other than to show you that what I said…is the truth… and apparently the truth scares you, because you continue to whine like a child about the link…rather than the content of my post. It is obvious that you take what you want from the post, twist it up to fit with your narrative….then feign indignity and pout like a two year old.

            Disprove ( with verifiable data) that what I have posted is untrue…or admit that you are simply an uneducated troll, attempting to disrupt the boards.
            Address the issues as presented…or STHU. Doing otherwise will only result in me ignoring your continued stupidity.
            Now, put up…or STHU….

          • Ron r

            Yes to your question. Have a good day and keep smiling!!!

          • Ron r

            Ok smart a?? Prove government involvement in the shootings. After that solve the Kennedy assassination. If you can prove one of them I’m all in. Or did Obama kill Kennedy too??

  • terri

    Why man blame them? 13 dead people terrible & sadden! No easier gun control for them!! Should you watch out if bad man come here with gun danger!!

  • independent thinker

    I noticed in the latest article from NBC they said he had just purchased the shotgun recently and brought it into DC. The article also says he got the rifle and pistol after he got into DC. It will be interesting to see how long that version of the story stands.

    • independent thinker

      I saw in a news report this morning that he got the pistol and possibly the rifle from the guard that was the first person he shot.

      • Libertarian Soldier

        No rifle.

        • independent thinker

          I saw that this afternoon and posted it in another comment. Thanks for noting it here.

  • Average_Joe56

    My thoughts on the “supposed” mass shooting:
    My first thought was, this is a military base and there are multiple safeguards in place to keep bad elements outside of the perimeter.
    1. There are guard towers at the gates, where one must present his papers to enter the base.
    2. There are guards that patrol the perimeter of the base on a regular basis.
    3. Any civilian contractor working on a military base must properly background check all of it’s employees and submit the reports to the military, who makes the final determination of who works on the base.
    4. Video cameras are everywhere on base and monitored 24/7.
    Did the government suddenly screw up on all of these safeguards? All at the exact same time? I highly doubt it.
    The more I look at this, the more I believe that this is another BO/FF (Black Ops/ False Flag) attack to gain support for more gun grabbing…and I for one, am not buying into it….this is a (staged) set up…plain and simple.
    Colorado voters just spoke their minds about “Gun Control” and the PTB are frothing at the mouth to prove how “misguided” Colorado and it’s supporters (supposedly) are:
    “See, we told you that guns need to be banned from the hands of ordinary citizens….you’ve defied our wisdom…and this is what happens and if you aren’t willing to hand over those firearms, it’s going to continue happening”.
    These folks will kill half of the population in order to pass their agenda…if that’s what it takes.

    • Jurgy

      oh – pleeeeze! there are not guard towers – sounds like you are talking about a prison camp – there are not perimeter guards at most US territory military installations, just fences … i do not believe a false flag attack like this can be staged … too many people are involved … this is just one crazy person who went over the edge …

      • Average_Joe56

        When passing through the gates of any military base, there is A guard tower. Just because it doesn’t tower over the entrance, does not mean it isn’t a guard tower. It is usually a small building with a gate on each side and Military Police monitoring the comings and goings of everyone coming onto, or leaving the base.

        “this is just one crazy person who went over the edge …”

        Really? Then, please explain why they are looking for two other suspects? Why were there reports of more than one possible shooter?

        “‘Pow-pow-pow, straight in a row’
        Authorities earlier said they were looking for one person considered a possible suspect — a 50-year-old black man with a rifle, wearing an olive drab military uniform. Earlier they were looking for two people, but they found one and ruled him out as a person of interest, police said.”

        http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/16/20522196-gunman-kills-at-least-12-at-washington-navy-yard-gathering-weapons-along-the-way?lite

        That means that they are still looking for one more possible “suspect”.

        • Ron r

          That’s right, never miss a chance to play the conspricy card. And BTW, where else but in a damn movie did you see a guard tower at a military base entrance??

          • Average_Joe56

            Gee, if I call it a “guard shack”, would it make you feel better? As a veteran, I have never entered a military base without passing through one of these “guard shacks” and provide ID and answer any questions asked by the guards….and do so once a month at McDill, AFB. I have waited in line while other vehicles were searched before entering the base.
            Maybe it is you, who have seen too many movies?

          • Jurgy

            I have been on numerous military bases of all services all over the globe and not once did I ever see a guard tower, only guard shacks – a guard shack and a guard tower are totally different in form and function, as you well know -

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Trying to distract, Jurgy.
            You can call a guard shack a guard tower but it still fulfills the same function of security. How the bloody hell did the shooter get on base with weapons when you have to pass through a security check? Was not his ID checked? You take a car to the base as guest you give a reason you are entering the base,the vehicle is logged into a data base, it is also on camera.

          • Jurgy

            in my experience, whether as a base guest or a registered base visitor, base resident, GI or base contractor, I was always subject to random vehicle inspection, even in the days immediately following 9/11 – it was easy to bring stuff off or on to the base

          • Average_Joe56

            ” I was always subject to random vehicle inspection, even in the days immediately following 9/11 – it was easy to bring stuff off or on to the base”
            The key word is “RANDOM”. Would anyone with half a brain consider random searches to be an effective means of security for a military base? I know that I wouldn’t.
            So, either every failsafe put in place to thwart attacks upon the base failed simultaneously, or…..this lack of safeguards is intentional by TPTB. I have already stated my resolve on the matter….it is by design…to push an agenda.
            Most of the talking heads in DC have already started a “dialogue” about “gun control’ legislation.
            The “agenda” cannot be completed until we are disarmed.

          • Ron r

            Because maybe he worked there ! duh!!!

          • Average_Joe56

            Jurgy,
            The key word in both, “Guard Tower” and Guard Shack”, is the word “GUARD”. It is the function that matters…not the architectural design of the building. It’s not like you didn’t understand what I was alluding to.
            Arguing semantics is rather childish IMHO.
            Now, please go put on your big boy pants…and join the adults in the room.

          • Jurgy

            How you use your words implies different things as I pointed out in my first reply – you make the base sound like a prison camp.

          • Average_Joe56

            Function..is the key here….you are still arguing semantics.
            No “Big Boy” pants?

          • JeffH

            That’s all they’ve got!

          • JeffH

            AJ, you can’t argue with total ignorance.

            Average_Joe56 clearly clarified his statement “When passing through the gates of any military base, there is A guard tower.

            “Just because it doesn’t tower over the entrance, does not mean it isn’t a guard tower. It is usually a small building with a gate on each side and Military Police monitoring the comings and goings of everyone coming onto, or leaving the base.”

          • Ron r

            I just never envisioned a tower and a shack looking anything alike. However, prior to 911 a lot of Army Bases were open and as long as you did not speed through or run over someone and had a sticker on your car you were hardly ever checked. Most AFBs I visited most times checked incoming vehicles. As a retired soldier I also enter military bases. I still see a big difference between a guard tower and a guard shack. Movie or not. My apology sir.

          • Ron r

            I just never envisioned a tower and a shack looking anything alike. However, prior to 911 a lot of Army Bases were open and as long as you did not speed through or run over someone and had a sticker on your car you were hardly ever checked. Most AFBs I visited most times checked incoming vehicles. As a retired soldier I also enter military bases. I still see a big difference between a guard tower and a guard shack. Movie or not. My apology sir.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Have you spent time at all the military bases otherwise you don’t know what is what?
            Are you upset that the shooter/s are black, since you want to believe that only whites are capable of these shootings.

          • Ron r

            I’m retired military and I have been on many military bases. Never said I had been on all of them. As for the race of the shooter, myrder is murder no matter the race. Are you glad he’s black or do you just like murder.????

          • Libertarian Soldier

            Did you say retarded military? What branch? What division? I’m calling BS on you.

            There are towers at most bases abroad and a few in the US.

          • Ron r

            First , I knew it was just a matter of time before the juvenile side of you began to show. An idiot would know that if you retired from the military (army) you have been a soldier in more than one Div. but then again you are dumber than most idiots. Now name a major military base CONUS that has a guard tower at the main entrance. Is it Hood, Benning, Brag, Cambell, or is it Knox. Now grow you a!! Up and move on dud!!!!! As to you and the military . I’m sure you could not be a squad leader in the Salvation Army.

          • Libertarian Soldier

            Right, my medals are Salvation Army! Good one! What division(s). Sorry, I’m not retarded; I’m only dumber than most idiots. What division(s)? Called BS on you and you can’t answer. So, what division(s)? I can prove who I am.

          • Ron r

            Look juvi. It’s been almost a week since you made your wise crack and I responded. Get a life and grow up!!! You were retarded for making that dumb a// statement in the first place. I never called you a name prior to your post on my retirement from the military. Now that I have deal with it and move on!! What now we compare DD-214s ?

          • Libertarian Soldier

            “We don’t care what the other guys do! The 2/5’ll make a man out of you! Hurrah!”

            Maybe not you

          • http://www.yahoo.com/ wyatt48

            It doesn’t matter if you call it a tower or a guard shack. They do the same basic thing. Monitor entrance to the base. You are just trying to escape the real issue being discussed here.
            By the way. I am a retired Marine. So I do know what I am talking about.

          • Ron r

            I know the difference myself. And what the overall use of both are for. Today is Sunday, Sunday, watch football or something!!!!

          • http://www.yahoo.com/ wyatt48

            Sorry. I hate football.

          • Libertarian Soldier

            There are towers at most bases abroad and a few in the US, including every USAF base

    • JeffH

      Average_Joe56, you’re on to it! The alleged perp was a total nut case with a sordid history of mental problems and gun mis-use.

      Alexis’s employer says Alexis was thoroughly vetted and likely had security clearance to enter Navy Yard.

      The former Navy reservist who slaughtered 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard had been hearing voices and was being treated for mental problems in the weeks before the shooting rampage, but was not stripped of his security clearance, officials said Tuesday.

      The Fort Hood shooter, Malik Nadal Hasan, was clearly a terrorist and commited a terrorist act on a US military installation yet the the government has declined to call this al Qaeda–inspired mass murder an act of terrorism because to do so would be “unfair to the victims.”

      Hasan had conducted correspondence by e-mail with Anwar al-Awlaki, the American leader of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. At the time, the FBI insisted that the e-mail contacts were “fairly benign.” As late as last week, FBI Director Robert Mueller insisted that investigators “took appropriate steps” in dealing with the correspondence. According to an internal report obtained by Mother Jones, though, the correspondence alarmed investigators enough to demand action — which the Defense Department declined out of concern for its political sensitivity.
      http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/27/revealed-how-the-fbi-and-dod-missed-nidal-hasan/

      Starting with the Columbine school shootings and continuing through Virginia Tech, Arizona’s Jared Loughner, and the Norway rampage of Anders Breivik, and now Aaron Alexis, there have been a growing number of shooters who commit random and deadly attacks as a result of their mental disorders.

      Federal law requires a background check for a significant number of gun purchases, and several charactersistics can disquality an individual from being sold a firearm, including being a felon, but also, for having a drug history, or to have a history of mental illness. The statue is fairly explicit about what counts as a history of mental illness (voluntary commitment on the part of someone does not trigger the requirement).

      The background check system can only work when the database is well-supplied with information, and at present, states are not obligated to submit all of the mental health records that they possess.
      http://www.policymic.com/articles/11560/batman-shooter-james-holmes-this-massacre-should-never-have-happened-and-here-is-why

      In the next 24twenty-four hours, you will probably read a lot of articles talking about gun control in connection to this latest shooting, but the issue in most “spree” shootings is not the gun control architecture that governes ordinary citizens, but how well we enforce the narrow and fairly uncontroversial provisions we already have.

      • vicki

        What we really need to do is get rid of gun free zones. That will drastically cut down on “spree” shootings in those zones cause they will no longer exist. And as a plus the truly dangerous crazies will be neutralized.

        Btw if you run the statistics of those with mental health problems against the numbers of those with mental health problems who have done “spree” shootings you will find that the number of innocent is MUCH larger than the number of guilty.

        So again I am impressed by the wisdom of the founders in protecting the majority of the people when they wrote
        “…The right of The People to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.”

        Nothing in there about the mental health of the people.

        • JeffH

          Agreed!

  • Anonymous

    A heck of a coincidence that Bammy was on TV Sunday morning talking with George Stephanopolous, about 80-90% of Americans backing his gun grab, but one faction of Republicans who blocked it. Presto Monday morning we have a shooting, that like Newtown witnesses reported MULTIPLE SHOOTERS, but police now say we got our LONE GUNMAN….

    • ZO666

      I wouldn’t trust those imaginary #s.

  • Anonymous

    The talk of “COMMONSENSE” gun laws begins already.
    1. Commonsense would point out that ALL OF THESE MASS SHOOTINGS WERE IN GUN FREE ZONES. ie Gun free zones don’t work.
    2. Washington DC has the toughest anti-gun laws in the country. ie Criminals don’t obey gun laws OR ANY LAWS FOR THAT MATTER. THEY’RE CRIMINALS…
    3. Commonsense would dictate that we shouldn’t leave our American citizens defenseless on military installations. Ft. Hood, Bengazi, Naval yard, etc.
    4. Commonsense would dictate we follow the US Constitution. The right to keep and bear arms, shall NOT be infringed.
    5. Commonsense is NOT so common in politics any more. As a matter of fact, it’s so rare now that it should be classified as a superpower.

    • vicki

      Commonsense would have noticed that

      ~300 Million Americans have not shot ANYONE, EVER.
      But as you say politics is not about common sense. It is about control.

      • chocopot

        Indeed. Always remember that the key word in the term “gun control” is not “gun,” it is “control.”

        • ZO666

          Don’t you recognize Jihad from our muslum Pres when you see it!

          • chocopot

            It would certainly appear he is doing all he can to help them.

  • Nadzieja Batki

    FB poster Don Berry, you may fool some people that you are a man with male body parts but your comment just told us otherwise.

  • Nadzieja Batki

    Why wasn’t there anyone to take down the shooter before he killed people? How did the shooter get on base with weapons when IDs are checked, cars are gone over?

    • ZO666

      The car wasn’t gone over and with his credentials he didn’t even have to go through security.

  • ZO666

    Something I have noticed is a common denominator, Is the victims are allways
    defenseless….either gun free zones or schools! I’m little baffled
    how the Navy shooting guy got PTSD sitting at his desk at home? If I think about the effects of violent video games on withdrawn children even some adults I could see how the game becomes the norm….

  • ibn insha

    If a few people had guns the carnage would not have happened or scale would be small. Do politicians realize that it took a gun to kill the shooter. Does it matter it was police’s gun that killed the man and not an ordinary citizen’s? All that was needed was a gun to bring this man down. Gun control and Gun Free Zones work only against innocent people who become sitting ducks for murderers.

    • vicki

      Actually it does matter.

      “When seconds count the (military) police are only minutes away.”

  • independent thinker

    I see CNN is now reporting that a shotgun and two handguns (taken from guards he shot) were used in the shootings.

  • Libertarian Soldier

    We don’t care what the other guys do! The 2/5’ll make a man out of you! Hurah!

    Maybe not you