I agree, I hope it happens but the right wing is going to go crazy buying even
more guns in the meantime.The record gun sales of the last few years
just prove that a large number of Americans still feel that the violence they
can command from a gun is a good answer to their problems.The
hypocrisy from the self proclaimed religious right is stunning.
"Military-style" weapons had nothing to do with the school shooting, so
this letter is irrelevant.A gun did not kill those kids, a mentally
ill young man did. Mental illness is the problem, not guns.
Just one more attempt from the secular progressive, moral relativism left trying
to destroy the constitution! Drat those founding fathers, drat the constitution
that was inspired by God!
I don't want to have to learn to use a gun; but I am feeling less and less
secure. The police arrived very quickly at the Sandy Hook school but obviously
too late. If the teachers and administrators had been armed this would not have
happened.Criminals will always have assault weapons. How can a
citizen with a pistol defend himself against that?
An excellent letter. Just be prepared for what's going to come back to
you. Thanks for your courage in speaking up for sensibility.
We need assault weapons to hunt the new super animals like Electric Eels and
Flying Squirrels?And because Happiness is a warm gun and God
want's... no...commands you to own a gun it's in the constitution.
Lots of unproductive, arrogant sniping and cynicism in the posts. It is exactly
the (lack of) mentality that will polarize both sides and prevent a meaningful
solution. Some people want others to hear their boastful "wisdom" rather
than achieve something positive. They are as harmful as the original problem.
Mountanman your favorite new line “Just one more attempt from the secular
progressive, moral relativism.”You mean moral relativism like
The Conservative Warhawks who have kept us at war for over a decade and show no
desire to stop sending other peoples children to die for their bottom line?The same who don’t beleive that mental illness should be addressed
or covered by insurance cause it cuts into that bottom line.And
secular progress is what the founding fathers had hoped for not what they fought
against, sorry but they had no intention of starting a new crusade.
I dis-agree.If they were designed for the Military, then let
those of us who've served in the Military be the only ones allowed to own
and use them.There was plenty of OSI back-ground checks, safety and
tons of training before we were issued a weapon.'Ol glory
waving, Joe-Q-Public, orange vested vermit hunters never had any of it.
The problem with banning Assault rifles is the simple fact that it is banning
guns based on appearance only. I have a .22 rifle that can handle a clip with
30 rounds in it. That gun can be used for varmit control where you want many
rounds available. It is a semi-automatic, which means that I can shoot quite
fast by pulling the trigger really fast. It is a standard rifle. Tell me what
the difference is between my .22 and a .22 caliber AR 15?The only
difference is the appearance. My .22 caliber hunting rifle and the .22 caliber
AR 15 function the exact same way. Banning assault rifles will only drive up
the demand for semi-automatic standard looking rifles. This is nothing more
than judging a gun based on its appearance, and has nothing to do with actual
Look at what happens when you allow the public to be armed. This was an off
duty police officer doing security. However, if the anti-gun people had their
way, she would not have been armed while off duty. See "Man Attempts to
Open Fire on Crowd at Movie Theater, Armed Off-Duty Sergeant Drops Him" at
Do we really want to continue and consolidate all political power into one
branch of our federal government by stripping ourselves of it? Do we really want
to create a police state? If you are looking for security in a police state, I
think it will elude us all!
9MMMurray, UTDo we really want to continue and consolidate all
political power into one branch of our federal government by stripping ourselves
of it? Do we really want to create a police state? If you are looking for
security in a police state, I think it will elude us all!4:38 p.m.
Dec. 18, 2012============= You worry about a police
state, but by the sounds of it -- you probably voted for GW Bush,
twice.Why?and where were you from 2001-2009?
"Assault weapons were developed for the U.S. military, not commercial gun
manufactures..."The idea behind the 2nd Amendment is that the
citizenry have arms in the event a militia is needed. A militia is formed from
citizens like the Minutemen. Has nothing to do with the US military. "The school shooting in Connecticut is the tipping point that demands
rapid action by our lawmakers."The action the Connecticut
shooting demands is that parents should not be teaching their kids about guns,
especially kids who might have psychological problems.
@RedShirt:"I have a .22 rifle that can handle a clip with 30 rounds in
it. That gun can be used for varmint control where you want many rounds
available."I think you should consider giving up your ability to
dispatch several varmints in exchange for reducing tragedies such as we have
witnessed in Connecticut.
Redshirt you know you are being a little dishonest. The .223 bullet of an AR-15
is not the same as a .22 bullet. Even a .22 LR or win mag has
nowhere near the power of a .223 used in an assault rifle. I qualified with the
M-16 long ago in the military. It's not the same at all.So you
would be ok with the banning of .223 bullet then huh? Why not? You have your
.22's, same thing right?
Thinkin, Montan & Red: This seems like the perfect time for you folks to
start a petition to legalize RPGs, IEDs and tanks. I am sure that your rights
are being violated by those weapons being off limits. The perp in Conn. would
have killed people no matter what weapon he used, just not as many. The game has
changed boys. If they don't ban them, then they need to license them and
make you renew the license every year and charge a fee based on the killing
capacity of the weapon. I am thinking about $1000 would be about right for an
automatic weapon or surrender the gun.
The most sensible solution is to repeal the Second amendment.
@one vote:"The most sensible solution is to repeal the Second
amendment."Reasonable idea, but it won't work. The
government would make it illegal to own a gun... any gun, even a BB gun. And
there goes my favorite toy, bow and arrow.