This will surely set the gun nuts follicles on fire!

You said it! They just can't be man without their Bush Master! They've all got bunkers with MREs and 1,000,000 rounds of ammo too! Wayne save us from those socialist Libbie's!!!!

Feisty . . .

They have spent half the day trying to convince us that the majority of Americans DO NOT favor common sense gun control

I think I've posted on quite a few of those comments as well. Of course, they won't bother to read this article and will just continue with their Fox/NRA mantra . . .

No kidding, they'll be along any minute.

Feisty - Then again, math is not really a strong suit of theirs You mean they actually HAVE a strong suit???? Not a chance!

Yeah, at what point do they stop the armed guards? How do they determine where to put them and when?

Devie - I believe you mean those socialst Libbies, armed to the gill with (GASP-SCARY) tomatoes. Surely, you've seen the tyrannical true to life film, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. We as a nation MUST be armed and ready to do combat with our vegetable state enemies, and be ready to reduce those tomatoes to ketchup, or as preferred by some, catsup.

Of course, they won't bother to read this article and will just continue with their Fox/NRA mantra .

Layton,

I also see where they have jumped on the "Bushmaster" was in the trunk bull@!$%#! The bullets they dug out of those dead babies came from the rifle!

(CBS News) NEWTON, Conn. - It's still unclear what -- if any -- connection
suspected gunman Adam Lanza's mother had to Sandy Hook Elementary School, the
scene of the mass murder on Friday. But we do know the weapons Adam Lanza used
to kill his victims came from her home.

As new details emerge, the scope of the horror expands. Lanza apparently
sprayed two classrooms at the school with relentless fire from a semi-automatic
assault rifle.

It was a massacre, and most of the victims were first-graders. Autopsies on
the bodies of the children reveal that many, if not all, had been shot multiple
times.

"I only did seven of the autopsies," medical examiner Wayne Carver said. "The
victims I had ranged from three to 11 wounds a piece, and I only saw two of them
with close-range shooting."

All Conn. shooting victims hit multiple times
Conn. school shooter had 4 weapons
List of Conn. school shooting victims

Investigators believe most of the bullets came from a Bushmaster .223 assault
rifle. It was one of four guns Lanza took from the home he shared with his
mother after he shot and killed her

Damn those pesky facts!

No kidding, they'll be along any minute.

and why does it always seem that it's bald headed white guys posted on You Tube insanely ranting about it? Talk about crazy folks. And they're the ones with enough firearms and ammo to last three lifetimes. Go figure.

They've all got bunkers with MREs and 1,000,000 rounds of ammo too! Wayne save us from those socialist Libbie's!!!!

Like those will do them any good against a modern, well equipped and trained armed force. I guess if you watch Red Dawn enough times, you begin to believe it. The fate of the free world in the hands of Charlie Sheen? Yea, right (lmao). "A little vodka with that 7 gram rock, comrade?"

It looks like they (the rwnj Fascist wannabes) never learn. They are wrong on so many issues and yet they continue to spew their BS for all to see.

Tonybeeerm, this is one bald headed white guy that doesn't fit the mold. I am for sensible gun control legislation and believe it is long past due.

Unfortunately Lanza's mother knew he was unstable yet, she didn't secure the weapons in a way that would keep him from getting to them. It turned out to be a fatal mistake for her.

In the fantasy world of the NRA all the weapons sold without background checks at gun shows end up in the hands of the "good guys" and military-style weapons and high-capacity magazines are only used by "good guys" to protect themselves and their families.

Oh, and armed guards at banks have prevented all bank robberies.

Yes, I agree that criminals will always find ways to get illegal weapons but why do we make it so easy for them? Ask any law enforcement professional and they will tell you that lax gun laws in states like Virginia and Arizona, that allow unlimited purchases and unlimited private sales without background checks, are the main source of weapons used in crimes in other states.

I am a life-long hunter and shooter (and coincidentally a bald-headed white guy), and I firmly believe in our 2nd Amendment rights. However, claiming the 2nd Amendment gives you the right to purchase anything in any quantities without ANY responsibility is a recipe for disaster.

Poll also shows that most people want more guns "in school" (teachers, school officials), I'm definately not for that!

Adler - not only did she not secure the weapons, she considered time at the gun range to be a suitable outing for she and her mentally ill son. I'm sorry she was killed but I have to think she is in large part responsible for her son's actions. There is a common sense factor she seemed to be lacking.

But when it comes to arming more teachers, those numbers are nearly flipped, with 57 percent giving the idea a thumbs down.

Amazing that any of the TeaPeople would support arming teachers, the very same teachers who just a few months ago were derided and considered incompetent by the same bunch.

Seems like teachers are suddenly competent to handle a gun in a crisis situation, but not competent enough to practice the trade of their degree......Wow!

Attack of the Killer Tomatoes...

Attack of the killer tomatoes!
Attack of the killer tomatoes!
They'll beat
you, bash you, squish you, mash you
Chew you up for brunch and finish you off
for dinner or lunch!
They're marching down the halls
They're crawling up
the walls
They're gooey, gushy, squishy, mushy
Rotten to the
core
They're standing outside your door!

Remember Herman
Farbage
while taking out his garbage
He turned around and he did see
tomatoes hiding in his tree
Now he's just a memory!

I know I'm going
to miss her
a tomato ate my sister
Sacramento fell today
They're
marching in San Jose
Tomatoes are on their way!

Yep, their out to get us... better stock up on the 5.56 rounds today!!!

Seeking Sanity -

I'm sorry she was killed but I have to think she is in large part responsible for her son's actions

but...but...but..I thought the NRA told me that I needed one of those miltary-style weapons with lots of ammo so I could protect myself?

Now you are telling me it didn't work out that way for the shooter's mom, that her guns actually made it EASIER for her son to kill her and many, many others?

Oh, I guess maybe she should have had MORE guns - THAT would have protected her for sure.

"A little vodka with that 7 gram rock, comrade?"

Maybe that's what those uptight "A"holes need...

Every problem, as far as the RWNJs are concerned, seems to be solved with guns and violence.

See, I keep hearing the mother described as the "first victim." The only thing she was a victim of is her consummate bad judgment. She is responsible for that massacre. For her to make the decisions she did about her mentally ill son just leaves me without words.

If you are struggling under the deception that guns will keep you safe, I suggest you ask Adam Lanza's mother how her guns kept her safe.

Oh that's right she is dead and her guns, all her military guns didn't keep her safe. The truth is that if you have a gun you are 22 times more likely to be killed yourself or kill a family member than use the gun for self defense.

Don't forget that Gandhi learned the knowledge of the magic of non-violence from our Bible. He and Dr. King knew that as soon as you pick up a gun even to defend yourself, God is no longer on your side. And the NRA is only on the side of the gun manufactures and could not care less how many of our children die.

No one is saying "take their stuff away" Jeff, so you won't be "effected" (sic).

Jeff Schultz: "Its easy to say "take their stuff away" when its not you who is effected."

Seriously? Try telling the parents of the 20 kids in Connecticut that "its not you who is effected (sic)".

Try telling the spouses and children of the 6 teachers and administrators who were also killed.

Hell, try telling that to ANYONE who's ever lost anyone to gun violence.

We are ALL affected. And we all have the same right - to life.

Jeff, you are ignoring the facts to maintain your beliefs. In fact without a gun that shot 50 rounds like in the classroom or 150 rounds in the case of the theatre there could not have been such carnage. The guy in the theatre could only be taken down when he ran out of bullets, wouldn't it have been better if they could have taken him down after 10 instead of 150 bullets?

Quit defending the murdering of our children and accept that when the old west started to become civilized gun safety became necessary. Small things like you couldn't carry a weapon in a bar as they recognized drunks and guns don't mix. But the NRA would have us allow concealed weapons into bars now.

The NRA bringing back the wild, wild west one gun murder after another.

In your case CA is you are ignorant and a moron. All one has to do is read your idiotic post about anything to know that.

Jeff, while the problem isn't your guns per se, it is guns in general. Not only the guns but the extended clips (magazines). If you say that you absolutely need a gun capable of shooting 30 to 100 times non stop without stopping to reload I will then put you in the same category as CA and other right wing nut jobs here. I am a gun owner, have been for about 55 years, I hunt, and am a sportsman. Nobody except the military needs a gun whose only purpose is to carry out mass killings, that is killing 20 1st graders and 6 adults before the cops can stop it. Many of these children were shot several times, one little fellow shot 11 times. We do not need that in America. You don't need it and the 2nd amendment was not meant for that.

Keven, the only freedom I see you or anyone else losing is the freedom to create havoc and mass carnage. That is not a freedom guaranteed in the constitution.

edit: apparently I cant post a youtube link ... search youtube for "fast gun reload" and watch the first video and the rest would make more sense.

I am no where near as trained as this guy and I can still swap a magazine in about 1-2 seconds on a bad day.

I have never said I need a high capacity magazine, simply that leathality is not simply based on how many times someone has to reload.

Would you accept AR-15's being sold with 10 rd magazines instead of an Assault Weapons Ban?

Keven, the only freedom I see you or anyone else losing is the freedom to create havoc and mass carnage. That is not a freedom guaranteed in the constitution.

With that narrow minded view point of what guns are used for I cant believe you haven't ran for office.

Democracy is two thirds of the people taking away the freedoms of the other third.

You mean the freedom to marry someone of your same sex, the freedom to be an atheist and hold public office, the freedom to smoke pot, or the freedom to have an abortion?

But, OK, let's suppose you're a libertarian or you will counter that it would be equally hypocritical of me to be for some freedoms and against some others as it would be for a Republican. Two points, then:

-No one's taking away the freedoms of one third of the people. We're just saying, more and better background checks and no assault weapons. If you're a law-abiding individual, a background check does not infringe upon your freedoms, because you will still be able to purchase your gun. And nowhere in the 2nd Amendment does it specify which "arms" you have the right to bear. So to say that a ban on assault rifles is an infringement upon your freedoms is like saying your freedoms have been violated because you can't own an F-22 Raptor.

-Even if, on principle, you're taking away someone's freedom, you're taking away a criminal's (past or present) freedom. We already do that when we punish or incarcerate them for their crimes. Democracy isn't violated because a majority of the people think people with a criminal or mental history shouldn't be allowed to have guns. A majority has also taken away these people's "right" to murder or rape their neighbor, is that a bad thing?

A minority can't take away the majority's right to live in a safe society.

We wouldn't have these problems if it weren't for the LIBERAL ACLU......

and speaking of the ACLU, why are they so quiet when it comes to 2nd Amendment rights?

Considering that a miniscule number of gun crimes are committed with assault weapons (the vast majority are with handguns!)...

..I'd say math isn't your strong suit either.

Bazinga.

Johntho - you sicken me.

The killing of school children is a very emotional issue, but the statistics show that mass killings are only a tiny portion of the total of murders in the US every year. By far, handguns are used for murder more than any other method.

While I personally disagree with the NRA's interpretation of the second ammendment, there is no chance of rewriting it. The focus must therefore be on reducing the motivations for murder. Profitability of gangs is the easiest area to target.

So here it is. If America is a free country, people should be allowed to make their own informed decisions about what to put in their bodies. Make Drugs legal and tax them. Hundreds of billions are wasted every year in the never ending, ever expanding drug war. A tiny fraction of that money would be enough to treat the cronic drug users that get into trouble.

As was seen after prohibition was aboloshed, profitibility of gangs dropped, the murder rate dropped and membership in gangs dropped.

The drug inforcement industry has no motivation to end the drug war. From the sherriffs, to the Private prisons, their livelyhood and profit relies on the ever expanding war on drugs and the imprisonment of casual users.

I'm not even a casual user of drugs. But it is easy to see that this is a relitively painless way to reduce murder and crime in general. It also could, with the savings from enforcement, and revenue from consumption taxes, balance the budget.

Perspective:

Since 1949, 150,000 more Americans have been murdered than have died in combat in all the wars America has ever been involved in.

From January 1 1949 until now, just over 1 million Americans have been murdered.

Yes I counted at the bureau of statistics site.

Let that sink in. A Million Murdered.

Something has to change.

fiesty - you wrote:

Damn those pesky facts!

Just like the facts that the last assault weapon ban did absolutely NOTHING to diminish gun violence?

Yes, damn those pesky facts indeed.

How many guns bought for defence end up in the hands of criminals?

Let me execute basic logic, something partisan tools on both sides lack.

1. We cry about "assault" gun bans...bans on any gun that looks in any way like anything a soldier might have carried in our lifetime. We ignore every war previous to WWII because only assault weapons are worthy enough to be banned. The bolt actions of WWI didn't really kill that many people.

2. Every gun nut in the nation remotely interested in purchasing any kind of gun buys it. And mags. And bullets. Regardless of responsibility or his or her intent to practice.

3. gun shops jack prices and encourage the flow of these now HIGH profit products. Gun manufacturers work around the clock to fill demand.

4. There are now more insecure guns in the nation.

Thank you, ignorant left wing, for making the nation much less safe. Thank you, ignorant right wing, for supporting 100% d-bags like the NRA, who is willing to propose armed guards and more guns in school are a solution to too many guns in school.

Both you are ignorant tools who are more concerned with fights about verbiage and ideals than solving problems.

Why did they report the rifle was in the car when this happened? It was a couple days after I started hearing the rifle was used at the school. I guess the kid went in shot the rifle till ammo was gone took the rifle back to the car then went back in to finish with the pistols is that how it happened? If the rifle was used inside it would have been near him when he killed himself. It was in the car people.

fiesty and her ilk will believe anything that fits their agenda. She is usually first to respond and say what her puppet masters tell her to say. Then she starts the insults and her sick minded followers begin insulting and then she leaves when proved wrong

How many of the people who responded to the polls actually have an understanding of:

1) The 2nd Amendment and its true purpose

2) Guns

How many people who responded to these polls are basing their response on information fed to them by the media?

Do these people realize that the 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting (a favorite argument of left wing gun grabbers) and it is NOT about protecting your home from a criminal?

Do these people realize that the 2nd Amendment is not a right given to us - but a guaranteed right?

Do these people realize that the 2nd Amendment exists so that the citizens can come together and form a militia to fight against tyranny - whether it be local, state or federal? That its purpose is well documented in the writings at the time the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written?

Do they understand that well regulated militia means organized militia and that it meant all able bodied men coming together to defend and protect?

Do they understand that "assault weapon" is merely a term created by the left wing gun grabbers to define a group of weapons solely on their appearance? That they only LOOK like the weapons carried by the military but are, in fact, no different than semi-automatic weapons that do not look like them?

Do they understand the difference between the weapons carried by the military and that these are not legally available to most civilians? That it would require a Class III Federal Firearms Permit to purchase a weapon like this?

Do they understand that there is no real benefit to limiting magazine size since magazines can be replaced in a matter of seconds?

Do they understand NONE of the gun restrictions government imposes will do ANYTHING to reduce crime?

Do they know that violent crime in countries such as the UK and Australia that banned guns actually increased - because the criminals knew that the law abiding citizen had no way to defend themselves?

Yes, background checks are a good thing. But fingerprinting honest law abiding citizens? This is just a way to establish a database. My state test shoots from every handgun sold - that is a fingerprint on the gun. That gun is registered to the owner. They have my name, my contact information, my SS#. They do not need my fingerprints. I am not a criminal.

Requiring doctors to report mentally ill patients or those who they "feel" pose a threat to themselves or others so that they will be forever labeled will only result in fewer people seeking the help they so drastically need.

The American public is woefully uninformed. If you do not have an understanding of the issues, any responses you give to a poll are invalid. I view these polls as less than honest and they only serve as a tool for those anti-gun pols to strut around claiming "see, the public is behind us" - when in fact, the public doesn't understand what the facts are and are, in fact, giving away their future freedoms.

Why is everyone here bickering? They can't pass an "assault weapons" ban anyhow. It'll never make it through congress. Ever. He can probably get universal background, private sale loopholes and mental health checks passed without a vote-- maybe even magazine capacity limitations. He cannot get a new assault-style weapons ban through. Period. He doesn't have the votes. So, what's everyone fighting over again?

Homie,

Abortion is not murder.

Abortion opponents murder doctors.

ngiotta, he already threatened to use executive action to create any ban he couldn't pass. I didn't support it when Bush did it, and I sure won't start now.

Feisty,

You are correct. We are living in an age of terrorism. We are not living in an age of security or common sense. We need to protect areas where large people gather in difference otherwise if we leave these areas left unguarded then more terrorist attacks will take place.

We do not live in a pre-9.11.01 world where we are not under attack. The attacks on 9.11.01 showed us that our government was weak and puts its own image and popularity before the peoples by not taking out Bin Laden when they had the chance to.

As a result we as a country cannot live in a state of false security where because Bonnie-Jack-Along says that we will be alright absolutely means that we will be alright.

If we leave ourselves open to such terrorism without taking precautions to thwart such terrorism then terrorists both here in America and those abroad will take the oppurtunity to attack and kill us.

Security needs to be emplaced in every possible location where large groups of people gather, hospitals, schools, libraries, football stadiums, etc.

Another problem with creating such a security net are those who would say that employing such trained professionals would cost too much as well as those trained professionals saying that they do not get paid enough to stand such a post. Once again capitilism being the determining factor, the cost or expense, of whether an American facility is secure from terrorism.

Those seek liberty yet cannot or will not protect such liberty because of the monetary issues of affording such protection when it is well within its means to provide such necessary protection against those who take away such liberties deseve neither.

When Gabby Giffords was shot, onlookers wrestled the shooter to the ground when he stopped to reload. It may be possible to reload very quickly, but the halt in the action may be enough for someone to jump in and prevent more carnage.

I am a strong advocate for the mentally ill. But I believe some of the laws designed to protect the mentally ill do them more harm than good. Allowing a mentally ill individual to decide he should live on the street and go through garbage for food is not in his best interests. Sooner or later he will be beaten up, arrested, or murdered. He will freeze to death or die of some undiagnosed disease. He will get malnutrition. Or a cop will shoot him because he is coming after the cop with a knife or a heavy object. The street is not a healthy place for someone who is not reality based.

Keeping records of mental health issues and preventing people with serious disorders from obtaining guns is simply common sense. You can keep the records secure and use them ONLY to screen for weapons purchases. I also believe we should look at people who have a history of drug and alcohol abuse. They are not competent (at least part of the time) to make good decisions around loaded weapons.

Most people are amenable to trained personnel being tasked to guard schools. We are not comfortable with teachers being given that job. Knowing how to handle, load and shoot a weapon at a firing range is not at all the same as suddenly being in the middle of an armed conflict with a crazy person. People without extensive training in emergency armed criminal/combatant situations can't be expected to respond effectively when thrown into that situation. The problem still remains over who will pay for this.

In fact, the President did not threaten to use an executive order to ban guns. He said he would use an executive order to do those things that it was legal for him to do. I suspect that does not include banning guns. I believe he was referring to things like background checks and a federal data base that would provide information about mental illness and criminal convictions.

The right, in particular, is always screaming about personal responsibility. I believe it is a personal responsibility to use the freedom of the second amendment in a responsible way. It is not responsible to sell a gun to any guy that wants to buy it. It is not responsible to allow your guns to be unsecured. It is not responsible to allow the mentally ill to have access to guns with which they will kill themselves or someone else. Freedom demands responsibility. We have a right to due process, but we don't have a right to kill people and not expect there to be consequences. If you sell a gun to a killer, there will be consequences for you as well as for him.

We need to stop fighting with one another! What did we learn for the Move shooting, Newtown, AZ, and the guy that shot the firemen in NY? All these People that had no business having these Guns, Had them. That is a fact. They all found ways to get these Bushmasters witch seems to be the Weapon of choice for mass murder. The guy in NY was a felon and got some dumb woman to get it for him and she will be put in prison for many years. We know the Newtown shooter took the many guns from his mother and killed her with them, Good enough for her. I don't know how the others got there Bushmasters, But we are all sure they shouldn't have had them. For all the Bull@!$%# in here, We all have to agree on that. We all know the 2nd amendment didn't say crazy people have the right to have theses Bushmasters or any other gun for that fact. We know People that buy these AR 15's legally can lose them to a crazy person, like we just saw. So the Question is, what are we going to do about it. Are we just going to keep hiding our heads in the sand? I think Not. The Rights for the Masses not to want to be shot at the moves or school or Church's or anywhere else, is fare more Important then the few. That is the way it is in a Democratic Society. The Majority will rule. Then NRA will put up a fight and will lose. We have hit Critical mass and the Masses will stand there ground and will not back down.

We need not to start many little Grassroots groups, We need do all join into one, like Gabby Gliford and her husbands, Merge them all to gather, Who better the Gabby to be our spokeswoman.

Another wrote: "Our inalienable rights are not for any majority of halfwits to vote on."

Funny, if this had been an article about gay rights and same-sex marriage these same people would be talking about how the majority disapproves of these, how we need to leave it up to the majority to decide the issue, that it should be left up to the will-of-the-people to vote on it and not the government or activist judges to decide. But when it comes down to your right to bear any kind of destructive weapon you desire, suddenly that majority becomes a bunch of "half-wits". Guess when it comes down to something that affects your life personally, you suddenly don't value the majority's opinion so much

Chuck you don't know what you're talking about. Bushmaster is a brand, not a type of gun. The AR style of rifle is not exceedingly popular for shootings, either. Handguns are by far and away used the most often. In fact, explosives have been used in nearly as many mass killings as AR styled rifles.

A majority of Americans want this economy fixed and they aren't distracted by the gun issue.

Orthosophy,

Please cite where Obama said this. He cannot create new legislation (which would include a ban) by executive order. He can only enhance enforement of current laws. No where did the Administration say they were going to create a ban by executinve order!

JohnB,

It's not the same thing at all! We're not talking about taking away rights, as you are with the abortion and gay marriage issues. We're talking about limitations, which are already a part of marriage and abortion laws, and inherent in most of our rights, as a matter of fact. All rights can be limited when the harm to other people is greater than the ability to practice the "right." The problem with a gay marriage ban is no one has shown one bit of evidence that gay marriage is harmful to society, so there shouldn't exist that particular limitation. As far as abortion, life does not begin at conception, according to the medical establishment, though you may believe it does.

How come all the gun rights advocates, who keep talking about the constitution, aren't also for gay right. minority rights, and women's rights?

How come all the gun rights advocates, who keep talking about the constitution, aren't also for gay right. minority rights, and women's rights?

What 'rights' are you referring to? What are 'women's rights'? What are 'minority rights'?

The NRA isn't going to care what people think! They want their toys and the so called SPORT, that they enjoy! (Having the guns fall into the wrong hands and murder!) Slaughter as well!

Obama Punta,

All we need is to have the businesses and corporations to turn in the people they know they have hired that are illegal and do something, like don't give them low paying jobs without health benefits that they would have to give to legals! GREED does that you know!

I've mentioned that a local foundry knew that there were 5 men with the same name and Social Security number working for them and did nothing about it so they could keep their profits high. When there was a raid they suddenly realized their mistake! Right!$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Feisty, get a life, really! You have to be a disinformation internet shill or have no life. Nobody posts first the number of times you and pigotry do by sheer luck.

Folks, the MSM presstitutes are pulling out all the stops to try and convince people that they have taken a poll and the majority wants to change the second amendment.

Well go right ahead, there is a process for just that. But if you think we will let you circumvent that process by Executive Order or some other shenanigan, you are in for a big surprise.

If we as a nation can't protect our constitution, we will get what we deserve!

First the rifles, then the handguns!

Let us see if Feisty Red Head or Pigotry are the first posts when the presstitutes announce Biden's recommendations tomorrow.

The IRONY is, even the bad guys believe they're the good guys, and that the good guys like themselves, need bigger, badder guns for self-protection, as well as body armor to survive the shootouts. I can imagine the arms race on the streets going on, right now. ..ever more lethal in its escalation to beat out the other guy's better weaponry. Who needs the "Wild West," where everyone's got a six-shooter, when you can have the bomb-torn streets of Syria? Or better yet, "...Nukes, anyone? Get 'em while they're hot! Everyone's got one for protection, so why don't you?"

The 2nd Amendment clearly says that Americans have a right to own assult weapons without a background check. It also says nothing about not allowing the mentally ill to own firearms. Go and read it, you will see.

This post (2.1) is a prime example of what passes for "thinking" from the fringe right wing.

The only thing this poor creature can do is try to whip up emotions that the Federal Government is coming knocking on the door to take all guns away.

No more. Not this time. It may work with the paranoid, who love them some Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, but it doesn't cut it with thinking Americans.

1funnygirl . . .

Next the Progressive PaRTY can remove the second amendment from the constitution. Heck, let's suspend the Constitution as a whole.

You don't read articles, you don't understand history, but you have such a crush on Feisty. AMAZING how you live your life full of such bitterness and hatred.

1funnygirl - why do you show your ignorance on this? Who said anywhere at anytime, anything about banning all guns? Please show that if you can. Otherwise, quit making an a$$ out of yourself.

You are not a comedienne funnygirl, you are much more of a drama queen, it's about a ban on assault weapons only not any and all firearms. You kind of went off the deep end on this one, you are way out there.

What? 1funny throwing a temper tantrum and spewing the talking points of the NRA, FOX, Limbaugh and the rest of them to stir fear without any basis in reality. It is what the right does best--feed their paranoid delusional with what to fear and who to blame for it.

Hi Forrest! Happy New Year to you and yours!

Oh please guys - you're not trying to have an intelligent conversation with neverbeenfunnyb*tch are you. She's beyond demented and delusional - she is one of those who we don't want having any guns or we'll be reading about her in the future. Improved mental health services would have been a great help to her parents - I'm sure.

If they don't, let's have the police knock on their doors and arrest them for unlawful possession. Then we can remove them from society, placing them in confinement without the rule of law applying.

Sounds just like the right-wing War on Drugs. At least we have a playbook already devised, courtesy of the right.

There is no "Progressive Party" these days. The last time we had one, it was headed by Theodore Roosevelt and it's symbol was a bull moose. That was 100 years ago.

And Adler: If Roosevelt were alive, he would leave the Republican Party again, and be out there ROARING his disapproval about what is currently going on in this nation.

Hi Ya New Day, Happy New Year to you and yours, and to all. I've been very sparse on FR for the last couple weeks, I was in Indiana all last week for business meetings which last all day long, and then all evening long people try to see who's liver can process the most alcohol, it gives a new twist to the term workaholic. I just landed in NC a few hours ago, I hope to be done here in about 3 days, next week I'll be in PA for 6 or 7 days. I get around, I meet with people from all over the US, and believe me, more and more people all around the country are having serious seconds thoughts about our wide open gun laws.

We are glad to see you here when you can, Forrest! I know you are busy!

Well, first things first... Who stuck you in that wet paper sack unfunnygirl and when do you suppose we might expect you to actually punch your way free?...

I think the reason the hard right tweakers get all confused about what's a majority is because they keep spelling 'merkans with an "A" at the front... They don't yet understand that "merkans are an exclusive and, as a result, excluded breed in the thought processes.

It's something how people try to rewrite their own meaning of the Second Amendment, where it clearly reads "well regulated militia."All guns need to be registered. A background check on everyone owning a gun and national data base has to be set up. Any guns sold without a report to the set up data base would be a felony. The high power assault rifles should only be for law enforcement and the military use. And more control should be placed on the bullets used.

If Congress won't get this done, then the President needs to use his executive powers to order such actions.

They are "HERE" We all knew the Repugnant Reich would craw out of the sewer long enough to cry "They want my guns" whaaa whaaa whaaa geez grow up and get a clue.

I think Funnygirl should be fined for having a fire without a permit and for violating air pollution laws. That strawman that the liberals want to "take your guns away" is a flagrant lie and your strawman caught fire and burned as a result.

It's something how people try to rewrite their own meaning of the Second Amendment, where it clearly reads "well regulated militia

What cracks me up is that the word "guns" is nowhere to be found in the second amendment. The word in there is "arms." True, guns are considered "arms" but so are tanks, planes, hand grenades, anti-air missiles and Trident nuclear submarines. How are these "arms" unlike guns? None of them can legally be owned by common citizens. So the rightard crack fantasy that they need military style semi-automatic weapons to "prevent government tyranny" is just that, a crack fantasy. There are plenty of laws in the books to prevent any private militia to amass the type of weaponry needed to pose any credible challenge to our armed forces.

newdayDAWNING...RETURNED

This post (2.1) is a prime example of what passes for "thinking" from the fringe right wing.

The only thing this poor creature can do is try to whip up emotions that the Federal Government is coming knocking on the door to take all guns away.

SeekingSanity

Oh please guys - you're not trying to have an intelligent conversation with neverbeenfunnyb*tch are you. She's beyond demented and delusional - she is one of those who we don't want having any guns or we'll be reading about her in the future. Improved mental health services would have been a great help to her parents - I'm sure

When I posted this satire on liberal thinking earlier, I couldn't wait to have the left-wing nutzo's comment their thoughts, especially the self-proclaimed liberal from Duke University. And you jerks didn't disappoint me.

new day refers to me as a poor creature, while the educated Seeking who went to Duke (really Seeking) uses her formal education to refer to me as: b*itch, demented, dilusional, and needing metal health help,.

Seeking, your parents spent money in vail to educate you. It didn't work for you there deary, since all you can do is cast negative comments to those who disagree with your logic process. Ya don't know satire when it's thrown your way.

Perhaps you need to go out and find some clients Seeking rather than spending all day on the company site dispelling nautious comments at others.

To paraphrase your cherrished leader, "Let me make this perfectly clear" seeking - bite me b*itch!

The NRA has for years lied to the American people using fear to sell even more guns, they don't have a conscious nor do they have a heart. Anyone who says these proposed changes to our gun laws is based on emotion has no brains. To many people have died due to this organization and many, many more people will die if we allow our congress to get away with listening to this lobby power house. It is time to tell the NRA to F Off. It is time for reasonable people to do reasonable things. No humorless, it is not about taking all of our guns away, it is about taking away guns capable of mass murder.

I would submit that it is the cowards like newdaydawning and johntho who are paranoid. They will allow criminals to dictate the rights of law abiding citizens. They will allow wannnabe tyrants to stand on the graves of children and steal our rights from us. Not because they think it is "right". They do it because Obama is their lord and savior. If a Republican proposed such a measure they would be the ones calling him tyrant.

Because they are paranoid cowards.

Obama killed more innocent people in a drone strrike on a "terrorist" funeral than Lanza did at Newtown. Get outraged over that cowards.

Simple Theory ...

Get outraged over that cowards.

1funnygirl ...

dispelling nautious comments at others.

Why don't you two lazy ass posters explain what the hell you mean rather than sitting in your basements jacking off over your stupid posts?

Sick to DEATH of you little paranoid people! If you don't like the country MOVE! Yep, your vote didn't count the last go round and for you to insult, belittle, and whine away in your DISGUSTING manners .... Mexico has a LOVELY Gulf Coast.

Ah, the poor creature strikes again... post 2.17.

The only "funny" part is the creature's self congratulatory post on how clever it feels it is.

But, the creature isn't. Rather it makes people "nautious." (sic)

Layton: the paranoia of people like poor Simple Theory knows no bounds. They must needs have guns to protect themselves from the government, from the "bogeyman" that inhabits their very tiny brains, and want to be critical of those of us who do not live our lives in fear. The only thing I have learned from the gun discussions on FR is that ANYONE who wants to buy guns should be required to go through a complete mental evaluation first. It can be like the anti choice nuts try to legislate. They must go to a clinic, that specializes in de programming gun nuts, submit to an exam, have to look at photos for days on end of victims of gun violence, and then have some internal exam just for the hell of it.

Wouldn't that be the solution?

Then tax the hell out of them, make them criminally responsible if their guns are stolen and used in a crime.

The only thing this poor creature can do is try to whip up emotions that the Federal Government is coming knocking on the door to take all guns away.

Why do people continually delude themselves?

Here, read the actual FACTS, then get back to me.

.

Straight from the Mouth of a U.S. Government Attorney

The U.S. government argues in federal court (U.S. v. Emerson information page) that there is absolutely no right of an individual to own firearms!

Judge Garwood: "You are saying that the Second Amendment is consistent with a position that you can take guns away from the public? You can restrict ownership of rifles, pistols and shotguns from all people? Is that the position of the United States?"

Meteja (attorney for the government): "Yes"

Garwood: "Is it the position of the United States that persons who are not in the National Guard are afforded no protections under the Second Amendment?"

Meteja: "Exactly."

Meteja then said that even membership in the National Guard isn't enough to protect the private ownership of a firearm. It wouldn't protect the guns owned at the home of someone in the National Guard.

Garwood: "Membership in the National Guard isn't enough? What else is needed?"

Meteja: "The weapon in question must be used IN the National Guard."
(Excerpt of oral arguments in U.S. v. Emerson, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, June 13, 2000)

newday- why is anyone that wants to exercise their right to own a gun a "gun nut"? Because you post on here and are adamant about what you believe, even if it is wrong, should we label you as a "nut"? All you are doing is exercising your right under the 1st amendment.

job1 - it does not ONLY say "a well regulated militia". It also says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Why do you anti-gun nuts stop reading at the word militia? This is what the Supreme Court Justice Scalia had to say on the matter:

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in Heller, stated:

Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset. This contrasts markedly with the phrase “the militia” in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the “militia” in colonial America consisted of a subset of “the people”— those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people”.

If anyone of you think that they will only ban assault weapons then you don't read your history much. It always starts with one liberty being taken from you and then it's another and another, 'till you don't have any liberties left.

Al in Visalia - yes private citizens can own some of those "arms" you mentioned. There is a private citizen in Texas who has a vast collection of tanks. I know lots of people that own planes, yes military planes. I am also fairly sure you can own grenades. You just have to have an FFL license and pay $200 per item. That might have changed but last time I checked that was what it took. So, when you say "none of them can owned by private citizens" you are, quite frankly, wrong. What everyone seems to forget is that the last assault weapon ban did absolutly nothing to diminish gun violence at all.

you dems are a funny lot aint ya. there is already a list of gun owners but the only ones on it are the law abiding. You say to do mental checks for purchasing and again it's in the background check that is done when you buy a gun legally. We have so many laws for guns the pollys can't enforce and say lets add more. I'm a shorter person and when a bigger person wants to do me harm I would like an equalizer to not be stomped to death. Guess I could stay inside all the time but then I would start acting like a whinney dem like fiesty. I have no faith in our pollys on both sides anymore they are only out for votes and rather useless in todays problems.

@forrestGrump

I was in Indiana all last week for business meetings which last all day long, and then all evening long people try to see who's liver can process the most alcohol, it gives a new twist to the term workaholic. I just landed in NC a few hours ago, I hope to be done here in about 3 days, next week I'll be in PA for 6 or 7 days. I get around, I meet with people from all over the US, and believe me, more and more people all around the country are having serious seconds thoughts about our wide open gun laws.

more and more people all around the country should be having second thoughts about those who they admire as workoholics, and should be notifying police everytime the see one.

You rail on gun owners and just kinda laugh off your workoholics mantra. You are responsible for more deaths than any gun owner. EVER!!!! How is that for facts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nobody drove drunk, if that is what you are getting at Jay.

NVart:

Anyone who puts their guns over the lives of those children that were slaughtered are nuts.

Just that simple.

When I read the posts on FR by the gun nuts, it is clear that mental health exams MUST be a part of being able to buy guns.

The paranoia of the gun nuts that post on FR is frightening. You want to be a part of that, go ahead. I prefer sanity and rational thought.

And again, tax the hell out of guns and ammo, use it to fund mental health community services, including treatment and rent support, and make gun owners criminally responsible if their guns are used in a crime. Some of these morons going to jail might take the blather out of the NRA crazies.

Jody, Feisty:

Haven't the gun nuts spent today telling us that America agrees with THEM?

Oh my goodness, whatever will they do?

What they always do, lie.

NRA stands for Not Representing Anyone (except the gun manufacturers). Why is it so hard to understand who they care about? Once again, the rwnj's are roped in by the high dollar boys who take their hard earned $$ and invest them anywhere but here. Stupidity knows no bounds with them.

NDD, yes, they have been. But don't forget, they're the same ones who swore up and down Mitt Romney was going to win big time because, you know, the polls were wrong!

Tony - love your photo of Michelle B. It must be the look on her face after attempting to exorcise her from her firearm by Praying the Gun Away.

Oh that's right. Thanks for reminding me, Jody. It is the GOP and magic math! ; )

Ah, the politics of fear... Isn't it grand? it's bad enough when you can rile up a group of people into believing that the government is going to disarm them and vacate the second amendment... This time they get to hint around that a Negro is going to steal yer stuff and leave yer wimmin unprotected!!!

If the whole thing weren't so unbelievably stuck on stupid it would be laughable. 'merkans, sheesh!!

Tony - love your photo of Michelle B. It must be the look on her face after attempting to exorcise her from her firearm by Praying the Gun Away.

No Red Dev, it was taken after she got done swallowing that corn dog whole!

it was taken after she got done swallowing that corn dog whole!

Well, one thing is for sure, she hasn't swallowed Marcus in ages, which would explain why she is out of practice! ;o)

She's all choked up...

I've met a lot of Americans ... You'd be amazed what passes for sensible. Banning a class of firearm that is responsible for a tiny fraction of gun deaths/crimes is far from sensible.

Do you really think a handgun would have been less effective than an AR-15 in a mass shooting? Last I checked very few happen at long range.

I am surprised how vindictive all of these alleged liberal thinkers are against anyone who disagrees with them in the least. You try to say I'm a liberal I believe in free speech, I'm educated, I can accept others opinions and debate them reasonably.

Then you go on rants that are pure hate and venom. One of the worst is Feisty Redhead. If I were of her mentality I would call her paranoid bitch. She has NEVER taken a position that did not start and end with her degrading those who have an opinion different than hers.

How about a market place of free ideas. What a concept to disagree with someone with out being petty and juvenile.

As for my opinion I personally do not believe an assault weapons ban is effective. Under the old assault weapons ban guns very similar to the ar-15 were still legal. Clip size is negligible for safety, I can reject and insert a new clip in less that three seconds.

Feisty notice that I disagreed with you without stooping to insults. Why don't you give it a try.

Feisty always trolls here to post inflammatory comments meant to increase the amount of vitriolic spew from newdayDAWNING...RETURNED , Forrest Grump 2.0, and other misguided, moral-lacking Liberals.

Point of order: NC will be happy when the drunken Forrest 'big bragger, all-swagger' departs...

Wait a sec...I thought that's what our representatives did when they weren't in Washington - visit with their constituents. BCWC, what you're suggesting is that once elected, Congress hob-nobs with lobbiests in DC then hob-nobs with fat cat contributors when they get back home. Why, that's shocking!

BCWC, I don't think the republicans have met a public poll they agreed with in at least 10 years. Perhaps I should re-word that to be that republicans never met a public poll they didn't conveniently ignore while declaring they were standing on right side of the "principle".

Ursula, actually I think a lot of GOPers stopped having town halls because they didn't like the questions and they certainly didn't like being challenged.

actually I think a lot of GOPers stopped having town halls because they didn't like the questions and they certainly didn't like being challenged.

They also stopped because while not afraid of guns and swords, they are mightily afraid of pens.

Jody, they do seem to like Rasmussen's lies.

Our rights are not for public opinion to decide. Perhaps in the new Muslim nation of the UK where freaks like Piers Morgan roam the streets without a leash, but not here.

How is the crime rate in the UK? My bet is the people no longer bother to call the bobbies because it does them no good. Surely not the poor older folks, they'll find themselves in the hospital dead before the weekend was over, put on the fast track over a cold and lack of space for the new immigrants.

Anyone that believes 85% of Americans want some wannabe tyrant like Obama dictating their rights to them is simple. Possibly 85% of the drones here at FR, but not in the country. Pure propaganda. Like the BBC, right blackie?

"Our rights are not for public opinion to decide..."

Really Simple? Why don't you inform the right wing nuts of that when they try to subvert voter rights?

Or are you one of them?

There is that pesky article that allows us to amend the Constitution.....

What cracks me up is reading all of the ranting from the RWNJs about Obama wanting to destroy the Constitution and take away all of their rights while petitioning to deport Piers Morgan for speaking about vehemently about gun control! Tells me what the RWNJs are perfectly okay with subverting the Constitution when it fits their purposes.

Since you asked.

There were 640 Murders / Homicides in Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) in 2011/12 (10.43 per million population)
Of these 640 Murders / Homicides, 44 involved a gun or firearm as the main weapon

Population - 61,000,000

there is a poll for everyone. People lie in polls, they tend to agree with what ever is politically correct rather than what they really feel. They feel like that because people like fiesty and her minions make them feel wrong in their true beliefs. That is why the fiesties of the world are called bullies and i thought being a bully was a bad thing but seems to be alive in the libs way of thinking

Conservatives don't believe in polls. They made that clear during the election.

Progressive - there is NO NRA leadership. They are owned and operated by the gun manufacturers - have been for some time although the rank and file members think they have input.

Goodness Seekin, you are without a few fries short of a happy meal! Quite a statement that the NRA is owned by the firearms manufacturers! To paraphrase several of your liberal sock puppets - show the data to support your claim.

It should be a simple process for someone with a undergraduate and advanced degree from Duke.

Notsofunnygirl - There's this amazing thing called Google. If you go to Google and type in "gun manufacturers contributions to NRA" you will get several hits that support what Seeking said about the NRA being in the back pockets of the gun manufacturers.

1funnygirl,

Goodness Seekin, you are without a few fries short of a happy meal! Quite a statement that the NRA is owned by the firearms manufacturers! To paraphrase several of your liberal sock puppets - show the data to support your claim.

Comes from the horses mouth. After Newtown the NRA was content to blame the first amendment and supported additional firearms as a solution.

That doesn't sound like an organization of patriots fighting for their rights, promoting safety, and promoting responsible ownership of firearms. If it were, they'd come out reminding gun owners to own a safe, secure their arms, and ensure they didn't fall into the wrong hands. Instead, their suggestion amounts to an advertising pitch for their industry. Guns keep kids safe, buy more guns today!

Yet - none of you Liberals seem to worry about who owns Obeyme & his political whores in DC.

@ ConcernedAllentonian

Notsofunnygirl - There's this amazing thing called Google. If you go to Google and type in "gun manufacturers contributions to NRA" you will get several hits that support what Seeking said about the NRA being in the back pockets of the gun manufacturers.

So based on that statement, it must be factual that gun manufacturers own the NRA? Because a business contributes to an organization, you are saying they own it? I knew it. GE, Hollywood, Planned Parenthood, etc. all own this president. No wonder we are in the mess we are.

concerned

if you do a google search on donors to the dem party you will see the socialist and communist parties give a lot so whats your point

okie58: your statement is completely garbage. Your thinking is the same. RWNJ, nothing more.

Surprise, surprise, a hand that can't read a poll. I'll ask Pew to publish it in Braille next time. Perhaps you'll be able to follow along.

I read the poll. Now, where are the demographics that support the assumption. Oh, you mean this

A majority -- 55 percent -- back a ban on assault weapons, with 40 percent saying they don't approve of the ban, a measure for which President Barack Obama again voiced support during a press conference today. (The partisan breakdown, however, is stark, with seven in ten Democrats backing the ban compared to just 44 percent of Republicans.)

Go figure. Scaredy pants libs are against it for what reason? That 2% of crimes that involve them?

TTTH-

What happens if they decide to outlaw liquor again

Straw-man argument. Liquor is already much more regulated than firearms and ammo, plus haven't you heard of DUIs and Public Intoxication?

Surely you can do better than that.

Once again (and you say straw man) if, and that is a big if, they get caught. They don't until after the fact. The DUI's and PI's are only good after the damage is done in most cases. Do they prevent, yes. Are they a catch all, no. Just like the gun laws already in place.

Talk forgets all of his sans orgasm peeing over Rasmussen pre November.

And I see once again the "polls" have the left peeing their pants in orgasmic proportions, especially when it agrees with their views.

What the truth hurts? Looks like the right is peeing in their pants at the though of losing their precious Assault "type" Weapons.

And BCWC your interest in what goes on in the US is what again since you live in Canada?

And devie, they are only assault look alikes. Did you have a BB gun when you were young or a simple dart gun? Look at the nerf guns today. The "assault guns" you speak of look scary but do no more harm than a 22 caliber rifle with a good shooter behind the trigger. Hell I have a 22 with a scope and a 15 round capacity that fires as fast as i can pull the trigger. It is 40 years old. Just doesn't "look" as scary.

Once again, TTTH trips all over his idiocy. No one is peeing their pants. The subject is much too serious for that. But I suspect he'll be defecating in his once legislation is passed.

Quite frankly tonybeermug, I don't care what they pass. The paranoia and knee jerk is what drives me almost to liberal craziness.

Talk to.... clearly you are no gun expert. The ones who have been on shows over the past few weeks disagree with you about the Bushmaster - including Colin Powell whose opinion I definitely value over yours! They all consider the Bushmaster more than a BB and say no one should own one!

Talk ... since I reside there on occasion and pay taxes there ... take a few guesses. Also your stupid guns so easily available to smugglers are finding their way up here.

hey TTTH, I can make a daisy .177 look assault with a quadrail forestock and collapsible stock. ban it. I know most libs have no idea what that is but it sounds scary.

Also your stupid guns so easily available to smugglers are finding their way up here.

<cough> Fast and Furious <cough>

as for me an ACR 6.8

knee jerk? Straight from the annals of the NRA. Can't think of anything original, can you? And I think after 11 mass shootings in the last four years, the knee jerk reaction thing is a little outdated. You see, the majority of us want something done about it. I know that doesn't settle in your rwnj pea brain. No one is talking about taking away all of your guns. Never have, But sensible discussions about it are met with nothing but violent reaction. So with that attitude, you will lose for sure.

<cough> Fast and Furious <cough>

hopefully that ACR 6.8 comes with a compass that can distinguish north from south.

it will stop black bart thats for sure.

And I think after 11 mass shootings in the last four years, the knee jerk reaction thing is a little outdated

what about the mass killings in say Chicago, or LA or Dallas or Phoenix? sorry, knee jerk.

If Congress won't get this done, then the President needs to use his executive powers to order such actions.

it will stop black bart thats for sure.

Only if the compass is in the stock.

My God SS what don't you see about a .22 and a .223 being only miniscule in size difference? You are the one who knows nothing. Moronic leftist, liberal, PC crap.

Job1 Executive powers to do what Congress won't do? Now I see where the term National Socialist Party comes from. This was done before by your apparent Hero. Or as you would say Seig Heil

Talk...your defense of the "Assault type" Rifle doesn't hold water.

An assault rifle is a AR-15 by definition - Barrel Cooling, mounting rails that allow multiple sights such as laser guides, scopes and thermal imaging in combination, barrel provision for flash and noise suppresion, removable stocks and pistol grips for one handed operation. Abilty to leagaly make the rifle "Bump-Fire" for less than $700

This is a military designed weapon in Reliability and Function.

So your definition does not hold water...Period.

Name one hunting rifle that is not styled in the AR that has that capability...name just one

Ruger Mini-14/30, Ruger 10/22. Saiga .. just to name a couple.

And by true definition, an AR-15 must have select fire capability to be considered an assualt weapon, which none have. Plus not all AR-15s have mounting rails. Competition shooters just use iron sights. Hunters will have at least one mounting rail for a scope. That hardly qualifies as an assault weapon since any hunting rifle will have a mounting system for a scope. Bump-fire? really? Any semi-automatic weapon has that capability. Plus, you can barely hit the broadside of a barn using that method.

Did you have Rick Perry help you reason and write that for you? It sure smells like a Perry.

"Is it the Mitt Romney that was on the side of — against the Second Amendment before he was for the Second Amendment? Was it — was before — he was before the social programs from the standpoint of — he was for standing up for Roe v. Wade before he was against first — Roe v. Wade?” -Rick Perry, fumbling over his attack lines against Romney at a GOP presidential debate, Sept. 22, 2011

Who is talking about confiscating guns?

Quit listening to the NRA.

Sane - first you clearly aren't. And again, NO ONE is talking about outlawing guns! Your abject stupidity is showing - again. You nor anyone else have no need for assault weapons unless you intend to go on a killing spree. Do you understand now?????

Why do you get to decide what I need? If you can honestly say you do not want anything you do not need then please let me know and I will leave you alone.

If you cant say that then please explain why I must have a NEED to own a certain type of firearm? Or, please explain what benefit taking away my right to own one will have? Statistically, and this doesn't take into account the fact that if someone who wants to kill people can't get a rifle they can always just use a handgun, it would prevent less than 323 deaths based on 2011 crime statistics. Less than 323 because that statistic includes all rifles involved in any death including police shootings, hunting accidents, etc. Keep in mind this is out of over 10,000 gun related deaths.

As far as confiscating guns, Feinstein's proposed legislation would require over 160 specifically named firearms to be registered with the NFA and upon the death of the owner they must be surrendered. This may be a slightly lose translation of "confiscation" but at the end of the day they are taking away citizens property that was paid for by them and should by every right should belong to their family upon their death.

Why do you get to decide what I need?

The constitution doesn't say anything about firearms. It says arms. Why stop at firearms? Why not bombs? Why not antibiotic resistant anthrax? Why not ricin? Why not mustard gas? Why not hydrogen bombs?

Why should anybody have to justify a need for any of those? But when you try to secure any of those arms, you can bet the long arm of government will come knocking and throw you in the hole.

This may be a slightly lose translation of "confiscation" but at the end of the day they are taking away citizens property that was paid for by them and should by every right should belong to their family upon their death.

For a very long time those with power have been content to tell you what you can do with your property. From permits to build sheds, how fast you can drive your car, etc. And there's been long precedence for the seizing of personal property, be it a car for DUI, land for failure to pay taxes, computers for an investigation, etc.

it's the rifles first then when they see that is not working it will go to handguns then it will be your crazy so you can't decide for yourself about anything that's a lib idea since they are always right so we will decide for you and hey that mini skirt causes rape so lets ban mini skirts so just where do you draw the line on personal responsibility

hey that mini skirt causes rape so lets ban mini skirts so just where do you draw the line on personal responsibility

Rape responsibility lies with the rapist. Conservatives would be best to not mention the R word, given the propensity to insert their foot into their mouth.

I'm also quite sure that on the matter of the mentally ill, they are being scapegoated by the right, not the left.

Who is talking about confiscating guns?

The United States Attorney:

Straight from the Mouth of a U.S. Government Attorney

The U.S. government argues in federal court (U.S. v. Emerson information page) that there is absolutely no right of an individual to own firearms!

Judge Garwood: "You are saying that the Second Amendment is consistent with a position that you can take guns away from the public? You can restrict ownership of rifles, pistols and shotguns from all people? Is that the position of the United States?"

Meteja (attorney for the government): "Yes"

Garwood: "Is it the position of the United States that persons who are not in the National Guard are afforded no protections under the Second Amendment?"

Meteja: "Exactly."

Meteja then said that even membership in the National Guard isn't enough to protect the private ownership of a firearm. It wouldn't protect the guns owned at the home of someone in the National Guard.

Garwood: "Membership in the National Guard isn't enough? What else is needed?"

Meteja: "The weapon in question must be used IN the National Guard."
(Excerpt of oral arguments in U.S. v. Emerson, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, June 13, 2000)

"poll."

If you go to the link in the article, you can read what was asked and of whom. Why don't try reading that before you assume you know the answers.

Sane - now you just are being totally idiotic.

The study was done by Pew Researh - Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan source of data and analysis, and takes no advocacy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts.

I think they are much more objective than the NRA could ever hope to be but that just frosts you doesn't it? You don't have a leg to stand on yet you still spout off!

you libs want to play polls games ? 70% of americans think the goverment needs to curb spending. Obama wants more.

70% of americans think the goverment needs to curb spending. Obama wants more.

But of course, Goober can back up his bull@!$%#? Right Goober?

Back up your crap OR get lost!

We are sick and tired of YOU and your ilk pulling @!$%# out of your ass and claiming it to be a FACT! LOL

well troll , type goverment spending polls and look, oh wait you need msnbc to tell you that huh.

I hear they selling Wild Irish rose for 99 cents a bottle on southside, better get hopping over there fistme.

well troll , type goverment spending polls and look, oh wait you need msnbc to tell you that huh.

There we have it folks, an impotent little man who talks tough via his keyboard in his Mommy's basement, when asked to support his outrageous claims, he folds like a lazy ass cheap suit!

We got your number Gomer, and it is NOT in our speed dial, dumb@!$%#! LMAO@U and you're incompetence!

Us loony leftist liberal do have some awesome parting gifts for you - think of it as, President Obama giving away the FREE @!$%#! LMAO

Us loony leftist liberal do have some awesome parting gifts for you - think of it as, President Obama giving away the FREE @!$%#! LMAO

There we have it folks a used up old hag living off the goverment dime. even to lazy to type but she can play the hate and name calling game .

The only thing worse than T-party is liberals like you.

Better hurry , word is if you get there by nine its 2 for 1 .

There we have it folks a used up old hag living off the goverment dime

So says the creepy dude who can only get off with a used toilet paper roll filled with lunchmeat!

Bon Apetite, pervert! LMAO@ U!

Maybe one day, a little man like you can compete with strong liberal women, until then, enjoy chewing on what's left of your testicles!

well fist me i'm done lowering myself to your level. In all honesty you are pretty pathetic and If you think a strong women is talking trash on the internet I really do feel sorry for you .

36 more min to get that two for one ....

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

There we have it folks, an impotent little man who talks tough via his keyboard in his Mommy's basement, when asked to support his outrageous claims, he folds like a lazy ass cheap suit!

We got your number Gomer, and it is NOT in our speed dial, dumb@!$%#! LMAO@U and you're incompetence!

.

So says the creepy dude who can only get off with a used toilet paper roll filled with lunchmeat!

Bon Apetite, pervert! LMAO@ U!

Maybe one day, a little man like you can compete with strong liberal women, until then, enjoy chewing on what's left of your testicles!

Yet another series of CoH violations from one who arguably posts more than anyone else here.

And, another free pass from the Newsvine Moderators, who allow this poster to become more and more hateful in their rhetoric.

.

Why do the moderators allow their personal viewpoints to cloud their alleged 'impartiality'?

.

Feisty obviously was a 'working professional' at some point in it's life (or may still be practicing the oldest profession...)

How can Feisty be posting this early in the day? Shouldn't it be sleeping now, or does it use the mattress only for work?

Waaa Waaaaaaaaa Feisty isn't nice Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa................

Waaa Waaaaaaaaa Feisty isn't nice Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa................

No, the poster is in violation of the Newsvine Code of Honor.

And can continually violate this code with impunity.

As demonstrated on this very page, repeatedly.

.

And, Stevie, you are equally outraged by Homie's post, are you not?

Yeah. I didn't think so.

You called me stupid

Naw, you're doin' fine all on your own, pardner. Keep posting your bile. It only digs that hole deeper and deeper.

Its Ok Sane just best to ignore seeking. The only thing she can contribute to the vine chat boards is to like fisty comments and call anyone who doesn't make a liberal comment stupid.

Of course, tonybeeerm is another fine example of societal afterbirth that should have been left on the hospital floor.

Waa Waaa Blah Blah Blah.....

Whats the matter davey boy?...lemme guess,either ur diaper is full or you cant find that govt. boob you like to nurse from.

Can the hyperbole. Liberals were pretty fearful Bush wouldn't leave office without an armed revolution too. But he did. As will Obama.

The SCOTUS has said that it is unconstitutional for the government to make felons register weapons.

Did they now? Perhaps you have a link to that ruling, because it sure doesn't exist.

When you stop cooking you meth and come down off your trip, let's review again the number of adults who want to arm their children with guns.

Nobody is talking about arming kids in school. But also NOBODY who is a law abiding citizen is allowed to have even a butter knife on any campus. Remember the kid who grabbed his moms bag lunch by accident and tried to turn in the butter knife that was in the bag to the lunch room monitor and was summarily expelled. Imagine if it was a parent who brought their legally concealed gun on campus. Now how lenient do you think they would be if the only way the gun was "discovered" was if the parent pulled it out and shot the punk a$$ psycho. That's right, ZERO TOLERANCE. That parent would go to prison. despite saving many children's lives. All brought to you by the Lefty, NeoLibs who want to enforce their life choices onto your personal life. I enjoy guns and shooting, they don't. I don't feel the desperate need to make them live by my values why do they feel the need to enforce their values on me? Apparently there is no room in their world for true diversity. Only diversity they agree with.

"the mother was going to have him committed..."

The mother has no power to do that, Adam is an adult. Exactly where did you think he would be committed to?

Actually NOT. Pew is in the business of taking polls. They are there to provide real information, they don't have to make anything up. They wouldn't be in business for long if they did. How's your research business going, making lots of money??

Ditto, America vet1

All the polls I take tell me self-preservation is condoned by 100 % of respondents.

However, there were no collectivists invited to participate in that poll.so it may have a +or- accuracy of 10 to 20 percent. lol

Thanks!

Now I understand why the election of Mr. Obama spurred a mass acquisition of firearms immediately after his election... both times.

It was Republican subterfuge.

I am the last one to believe that people are ill willed, far from it, that's not what I said at all. I said that a lot of gun buyers---millions of them, are buying guns but not getting any training in their use. Guns are inherently dangerous, as millions of people buy them and forgo training, more accidents will occur. and more people who are irresponsible by their nature will inevitably become gun owners. The NRA promotion of guns has some inherent problems that I don't think they anticipated, as the numbers of untrained and irresponsible gun owners increase and accidents with them, the NRA is finding itself defending these folks.

No one needs your childish diapers jokes except, apparently YOU.

I've seen a few road signs riddled with holes that say otherwise. Not only is that wanton destruction of public property, it is done with zero concern for what might be behind the sign. Be it a residence, a playground, a guy peeing by the side of the road, or whatever. There have been news stories out my way of people shooting out the lights on radio and TV towers, presenting a huge hazard for aircraft.

Not all people are idiots with firearms. But to deny that there aren't any is foolish.

You are the greatest promoter of the need for gun control the President could ever ask for! Keep talking.

A 9mm semi-automatic or a .38 cal revolver will do more to mitigate the threat of bodily injury or death and protect you and your family from criminal evil doers than, Calling 9-1-1 will ever be there for your defense.

The single statistic that lead to the ban of federal dollars for investigating gun violence is that for every bad guy wounded or killed by the presence of firearms in the house, 42 family members were wounded or killed, either intentionally (e.g. suicide) or by accident. You speak of responsibility. There is a major lack of responsibility with firearms.

please provide a legitmate sourse of that so called statistic...

Self defense events where a bad guy is actually shot by a home owner are FEW and very FAR between. Whereas 18,000 people a year take the easy way out the quick and sure way---with a gun. And there are about another 800 to 1000 fatal gun accidents a year, many f them involving CHILDREN.

BD,

Glad to: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506