Best
1043 Comments
Post
  • #82
    !
    Absolutely right but happens in this country all the time. This event is a terrible tragedy but really has nothing to do with gun control. I believe the killer actually used knives on several of his victims. A terrible tragedy and I can understand how the father needs to find someone/something to blame. I do however think the issue is more along the lines of mental health rather than gun control.
  • #92
    !
    @politics2014

    The father is from California...the La La land of weak conservative and liberal mindsets. Why blame himself for poor parenting when he can blame something else. It's the American way.

    Perhaps he'll make a movie about it.
  • #109
    !
    @politics2014 Agreed. However, if he needs someone to blame he could easily, and correctly, blame the actual guy who did the shooting.

    There have been many instances of people in a rage simply driving their vehicles into people and killing them...yet one never hears of victim's families outraged over the availability of motor vehicles....it doesn't suit a political agenda.
  • #123
    !
    Maybe not, but making decisions based on reality is. People are being murdered senselessly and nothing is being done to mitigated the issue. Nothing.
  • R Load more replies

  • #21
    !
    Stop blaming guns. Blame the societal decay and moral rot that has engulfed this country the last several years especially.
  • #188
    !
    This story isn't about guns, it's about some scumbag gun owner who is so far gone from reality that he criticizes a grieving father.

    That is pure trash, NRA inbred militia retarded trash. Nothing more
  • #253
    !
    @Placratotle so you ignore that the father has made this political, already attacked the NRA and Republican, and has already announced that he is going to make it his mission to get rid of guns? Once he starts making political statements he is no longer just a grieving father, and is a political activist.
  • #281
    !
    @Yank
    Don't be ridiculous. A grieving father isn't responsible for the words that come out of his mouth in the midst of his pain. The father is trying to understand/come to terms/find some explanation or justification. Whatever kills your child is the ONE thing you will hate--forever--whether it's a gun, car, swimming pool, disease, etc. Where is the compassion? Where is the understanding? This is so simple for most people. When tragedy strikes WE the people MUST show sensitivity, care and sympathy.
  • R Load more replies

  • #1
    !
    This guy's one of the idiots who should never be able to buy a gun legally. The guy's either insane or the dumbest jackass on the face of the earth.
  • #100
    !
    @Zazziness I have had several discussions with you. What is written and what you read often bear little, if any, resemblance to one another.
    I certainly havent seen anyone mocking the deceased, so it cant be that prevalent.
  • R Load more replies

  • #150
    !
    True.

    However, Democrats should have absolutely SQUAT to say as long as they promote the free speech rights of the Westboro Baptist Church (a very Democrat organization) as they torture grieving widows and orphans, mothers and fathers at graveside.

    Whenever this kind of thing happens, some ignorant ass on one side or the other makes a stupid comment and it gets all blown out of proportion based on party lines.

    As an Independent, I see the hypocrisy on both sides.
  • #163
    !
    Agreed. The father is grieving and being angry is part of healing process. It's just natural for some people to irrationally lash out at everything they can place blame.

    People just need to back off and allow him to heal, and not judge him. Or make political decisions or propose harsh laws based on irrational emotional cries.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • R Load more replies

  • #89
    !
    Hey david mark... two articles on this shooting and no mention that he also stabbed some of the victims. Guess only guns are the problem. Can we ever get one unbiased story on this site?
  • #158
    !
    Probably because he only used the knife to silently kill them in their sleep ... he didn't go around doing drive by stabbings afterwards now did he?
  • #182
    !
    They also didn't mention that Kincannon was only chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party for three months before he was kicked out by his own party. Just because he calls himself a republican doesn't mean he speaks for all republicans.
  • #245
    !
    @AMSCountryboy There is a BIG difference when it involves physical proximity. You can dodge a knife if you see it; you can't dodge a bullet, and you can't wrestle for the gun in a drive-by.
  • R Load more replies

  • #76
    !
    While his comments were incredibly harsh and uncalled for, the grieving father cant seem to grasp that his son was killed despite the fact that he lives in a state with some of the most radical and extreme gun laws in the nation. If this stuff happens in CA where firearms are regulated to ridiculous extents, how does he think more laws will help?
  • #156
    !
    @AMSCountryboy : You mean except for that Amish school shooter who also targeted young girls ... this shit never happens in PA?
  • #161
    !
    @JimCO55 lol the amish dont count. you had to take an incident from 8 years ago involving a one room school and a group of notoriously reclusive, insanely religious people to make your point.
  • #378
    !
    @AMSCountryboy : I thought your point was that the people in PA aren't so easily caught off guard by a gunman when obviously they are. Perhaps you haven't noticed but these gunmen don't target the drug lord gang hangouts ... they seem to prefer softer targets like school rooms full of 1st graders or people in a movie theater?
  • R Load more replies

  • #80
    !
    well at a time like this people say ridiculous things Mr Martinez himself announced through an interview that he is turning this into his own personal campaign against gun ownership and yet he hasn't even buried his son yet. in all his lamentations he forgot to mention that this little psycho in the black BMW with reregistered handguns put up more red flags than the Chinese army marching band...and yet none of his therapist or his parents could have put him in an institution where he belonged? Mr Martinez claims nobody needs to own 3 handguns.....? seems like Mr Martinez has found his purpose, which will be to be used as a poster boy..for people like Michael Bloomberg. more twisted ideology without reason. what we need to do in this country is institutionalize crazy people , not look the other way and pump him full of drugs and call them highly functional.
  • #233
    !
    Gee, do you think Mr. Martinez is angry about his child being murdered? Could that possibly have anything to do with his rage about guns?
  • #248
    !
    and apparently since he is grieving and lost a son there can be criticizing his opinion or pointing out errors with his reasoning. We saw the same thing in Newtown, CA where the families used their own losses to push for unrelated gun control.
  • #252
    !
    The shooter was 22--his family had NO legal standing to do a damned thing. Getting someone forcibly committed is virtually impossible, and most states have few if any mental hospitals to deal with them. Now, which party is it that perpetually cuts budgets and demands "personal freedom" to the extreme?
  • #254
    !
    @Hillofbeans You mean like the teabaggers chant "It's Obama's fault" for things that happened before he even took office?
  • R Load more replies

  • #105
    !
    As it turned out it was armed citizens who had to stop the killing rampage. It usually is, and because more guns were used to stop the killing, many lives were saved.

    When one of these maniacs is stopped does it really matter from where came the bullet?

    The real tragedy is that no one early on was armed and trained to protect themselves and others.
  • #131
    !
    The real tragedy is that someone who should not have a gun can easily acquire one. Others with guns can only react after the fact.
  • #190
    !
    @Russell797
    There have always been folks who can get what they should not have, and always will be. The best we can do is prepare ourselves for the inevitable, for reality. Until a way is found to control human nature others with guns must ever be ready to react during and after the fact.
  • #218
    !
    @WMCOL Agreed. I just wish we could find a way to limit the ease with which those who none of us want to own guns can can acquire them. Best to be proactive rather than after the fact in most things. Prevent the disease rather than treating for it later.
  • #323
    !
    @Russell797 It is a tragedy that guns are so readily available on the black market and always will be, hence there really can never be "gun" control. You can only limit the number of guns that law abiding citizens can have.
  • R Load more replies

  • #18
    !
    The problem here was a crazy young man, not guns. His family even notified the authorities that he was making threats and posting videos about his plans. The police interviewed him and let him go. Crazy people belong in institutions, not roaming freely in the streets. This man was clearly a threat and the threat was soundly ignored. Anyone who blames guns instead of nut case is in serious need of mental help themselves.
  • #26
    !
    The problem lies within: this individual was identified as suspect and clearly should not have been in possession of a firearm. However, the mere mention of any legislation to infringe upon his right to keep & bear arms and all a barrage of talking points from the radio gods will descend from the heavens. Just once I'd like to see gun nuts be honest and say point blank: sorry your kid died but no way in all the hells and all the heavens will I ever acquiesce to any legislation that might remotely hinder my absolute and limitless right.
  • #30
    !
    @PauldenZangpo I don't think anyone, even those on talk radio, would want a mentally unstable individual to own or have access to a gun.
  • #33
    !
    His parents claimed to know there was something wrong with him, yet he was still legally allowed to own a PLETHORA of firearms.

    You can try to side step that little fact all you want, but guns DO play a big roll in GUN CRIMES.
  • #34
    !
    @methinks one wouldn't think so, but consider the implication of this talking point: "What about 'shall not infringe" do you not understand?"
  • #36
    !
    @boombatic guns play a major roll in gun crimes: asinine you even have to point that out. Just goes to show the depths of intellectual dishonesty some stoop too in the interest of defending their narrative.
  • R Load more replies

  • #169
    !
    it takes a cold person to say something like that to a person who just lost a loved one.

    with that said, to me it still makes no sense to point at the weapon instead of placing 100% of the blame on the person who did it.

    i look at it like a person who just had a kid hit by a car truck or train blaming the car truck or train for it,its about the same being it still takes a person to do it.
  • #259
    !
    How many of those people died because he had a gun? How many do you think he could have killed without a gun? How do guns become irrelevant in SHOOTINGS, especially drive-by shootings?

    Unlike cars, trains, etc, a gun has one purpose--to fire a potentially-lethal projectile. To kill. It's a weapon, not a mode of transportation, and its use wasn't accidental.
  • #331
    !
    @cpeter133 Once again, I have to point out to these people who like to make an object the problem and not the poor little misunderstood person with a troubled childhood . The problem in this case was the deranged 22 year old that used a tool (in this case 1. a knife to kill three, 3. a gun to kill three, 3. a gun to injure several, 4. an automobile to injure several, 5. a gun to do himself in) TOOLS, three different tools to kill seven and injure seven people. All anyone is talking about is the guns, tell the whole story if you are going to tell anything, even if it doesn't fit your agenda which is obvious. If you want to understand the situation a little better, sit down, stop running your mouth (post) and read his 'manifesto' and any normal person could see what the problem was.
  • #452
    !
    @Procius The whole story is out there; the knifing victims were done at close range, evidently in their sleep. The gun victims were killed at an in defensible range by a tool whose ONLY purpose is to kill. I know your religious fervor for killing machines doesn't allow you to comprehend that guns are dangerous.
  • #499
    !
    @Procius Once again, folks have to point out that the weapon a person uses makes a difference. A homicidal maniac with a knife can kill people and homicidal maniac with guns can kill many, many more in the same period of time.

    It's so intellectually dishonest to pretend that guns really have nothing to do with gun massacres.
  • #536
    !
    @cpeter133

    And thank goodness they are "dangerous". If I'm attacked by a criminal when I pull my .45, I damned surely do not want to see nerf bullets exiting the muzzle.

    In reality, guns are, of course, NOT dangerous. I have three pistols, a rifle, and two shotguns in my home. They have been guests in my home for many years. Not one of them has ever even been upset with me, much less attacked me. I take one everywhere I go. They get along well with strangers with benign intentions as well.
  • R Load more replies

  • #134
    !
    My heart goes out to Mr. Martinez and the friends and families of all the victims. But I find the politicizing of his son's death before the body was cold appalling. I'm also disgusted by the media who reported six victims immediately but took about 24 hours to even mention that half of the victims were stabbed to death. Anti-gun propaganda at it's worst!
  • #241
    !
    @Russell797 and what problem is that? That there are crazy people who do crazy things, or that there are knives and guns out there?

    The parents called the police on their son because they were so worried about his behavior. The police interviewed him and decided he was OK. What else could have been done?
  • #244
    !
    That is exactly what the left is ignoring. This father decided to put himself out there and make political statements. What really bothers me is how the media is tripping over themselves to get to the grieving family members.
  • #458
    !
    @Russell797 We need to address the problem with logic and rational thought. Once again an individual buys guns legally and goes on a rampage. The truth is almost all mass shooters do not have criminal records.

    California has some of the most restrictive gun laws in America.
    In California a permit is required to purchase firearms. You must pass a written test. You must register all firearms. Assault weapons are illegal. Hi capacity magazines are illegal. All of the proposed federal laws are in full effect in California. Did it change anything? No.

    There is no gun law that would of prevented this tragedy. Half of the victims were killed with a knife. Maybe if he had not of had a firearm there would be less dead maybe not. All we can do is speculate. However, you can't tell me that without a gun this would not have happened.

  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    !
    One of the saddest things about the modern age is that information is traveling faster than rational thought.

    Emotions are running high. People are trying to make sense of a tragedy.

    People are trying to use the tragedy to further their political agendas.

    My condolences to the families. I would suggest you morn in private then make your statements when your not so emotional.

    For the dumb asses who are using this for thier own ends...shame.

    For those us willing to stand up for our rights......lets do so without blaming the victims in as sensitive way as possible.
  • #7
    !
    Trying for middle ground is fine but how would you feel if that was your son, and he was described as "cowering like a bitch". That comment goes way beyond being a dumbass.
  • #10
    !
    @JohnVicky

    I tend not to be an overly emotional person in public. How I feel or not feel will be said after I cool down and my rational mind can take over.

    Now behind close doors I would be making sure he doesn't know my son....which he won't...then I would kniw he is an emotional blow hard who speaks out of his butt...since he is talking about things he does not know. Then I would dismiss him and go about my day. SHRUG..getting upset..waving my hands about...typing on fourms about the mean bad man....sure some people need those emotional forms of release.....I don't.
  • #13
    !
    @craythegray So behind closed doors you would just dress him down verbally. If he had said that about my son, who had just been murdered....... First off he would never go behind closed doors with me I guarantee that. Second if he did, but he wouldn't he's GOP cowardly, I would have to surrender myself to the police and throw myself on the mercy of the court for what had just taken place behind closed doors......
  • #14
    !
    @JohnVicky

    Oh no my dear sirmaim. Behind closed doors means ....ME and mine are behind the doors. This guy is somewhere else...lets face it he is a talking head...so I would never have any real world dealings with him.

    On another tangent...
    Judging from your statements you are a very emotional probably violent person. I hope you can control it or you might get in trouble. You can find mental health professionals on the web for almost every state in the union.
  • #16
    !
    @craythegray Yeah okay. You're cool hand Luke...... So I am angry because someone killed my son and you want to say I have mental health issues? LOL! Ever hear of sociopaths, antisocial personality and psychopathy you might want to look it. Or if there is mirror handy..
  • R Load more replies

  • #23
    !
    Yep, the Republican Party has its lunatic fringe, just like every other party. Where are stories on Politix about the reactions of, say, Sean Penn or Cynthia McKinney?
  • #622
    !
    @JMoreno Cynthia McKinney is still very much around; she's an effective fundraiser, so she could be back in Congress if she remembers to run as a Democrat.

    Her current issue is the War on Women - she's for it. McKinney thinks women like Hillary and Condoleeza Rice and Madeline Albright(?!) are evil for some reason I have not paid enough attention to find out.
  • #227
    !
    Kincannon showed no class. I agree with his stance on the second amendment, but sometimes it's better to be quiet when someone is so emotionally distraught, no matter what their words.
  • #664
    !
    I think the right has made their view very clear, first with Sandy Hook and now with this mass shooting. Dead Americans. Dead children? So what? Who cares?

    It's that attitude that has now completely turned me away from their position. I own guns myself, but I've never feared anyone ever taking them away. I do, however, fear the hate and lack of compassion that our country is wallowing in. This is NOT the America I grew up in. These aren't my people. I went to sleep and somehow woke up on another planet, because the America I remember cared about its people when tragedy struck.

    No. Sorry, gun rights folks. I can't, in good conscience, be the person I would have to be to follow your position. My position is ALWAYS empathy for the victims FIRST and FOREMOST. Everything else, including the guns, is secondary. When you show some common sense and thoughtfulness maybe I'll take another look at what you have to say, but until then you've lost me as a supporter.
  • #671
    !
    @PayThatCEO "Dead Americans. Dead children? So what? Who cares?" Let's push our disarming the citizens agenda while the sheep are in an emotional frenzy. You have never worried about your guns being taken away? I bet quite a few of the citizens of Connecticut said that too, right before they turned theirs in. The America I grew up in, the government didn't punish law abiding citizens. I woke up one day and my government ceased working for me, but for themselves. When the powers that be even once mention or consider the drugs these crazies are on, or coming off of, maybe then I'll have a glimmer of hope that they actually want to solve the problem. When their main focal point is constantly blaming the "gun", sorry, they are no better and are just disgustingly opportunistic. No, I'll keep my logical thinking and my right to bear arms, thanks.
  • #675
    !
    @Nemesis3X

    You can't NOT punish law-abiding citizens because the laws don't work for the NON-law-abiding ones. Don't you see the situation that's been created here because of the fear-mongering?

    I don't know what all the gun laws are in America, but I've heard there's a bunch. Would you agree they aren't working very well? How do you protect law-abiding? Do you simply put a gun in the hands of every man, woman and child and hope for the best? I don't think that's working either.

    Maybe we need to trash the worthless gun laws we have now and start over. What would you suggest? Any ideas? I have 3 that I'll toss on the table. Let me know how they sound to you.

    1. A mandatory 25 year sentence for anyone using a gun in the commission of a crime regardless of whether it was fired or not. This would stop the revolving door jail sentences for gangbangers and armed robbers and petty criminals who use guns to intimidate. Would a man threatening his wife with a gun during a domestic dispute get 25 years? Absolutely. Threatening someone with a gun shows a violent intention and should not be taken lightly.

    2. Families should have the right to commit a loved one who is showing signs of mental deterioration. Mental health these days is basically treat 'em and street 'em. That needs to stop.

    3. America needs to focus on its families and children. We should focus on raising children with respect for life, respect for themselves and respect for others.

    More guns is a band-aid on a cancer. If we don't treat the cancer, the band-aid will eventually be no good.
  • #805
    !
    @PayThatCEO I guess you feel the same of the 3 killed by yet another sick twisted mind that used a knife as well?
  • #807
    !
    @PayThatCEO I agree with your other 3 comments .The last one fails to include the weapon he killed half of the 6 with.
  • R Load more replies

  • #148
    !
    I'd guess that even most probably gun rights people would find his comments to be utterly insensitive and in the worst of taste. The grief for a lost son would be the harshest of grief.
    This young man was ambushed as he walked in the door of the bodega. Even had he been armed, he would have stood little chance.
    I can only hope that for their own good, the Republicans and guns rights supporters denounce this cold hearted ass. I am a gun owner, second amendment supporters, and I condemn this callous statement.
  • #96
    !
    Sorry , but your right does not over ride my right. I know the left thinks so, unless it's a right they cherish or dream up.
    The "proliferation" of guns didn't cause his son to be killed. A crazy nut job, and a failure by authorities failed to stop his son from being killed. The guys nothing but another leftist.
  • #136
    !
    The proliferation of guns is exactly what makes them so easy to obtain by those who shouldn't have one. What to do about it I don't know, but to say the easy availability to guns has nothing to do with it is inane.
  • #318
    !
    @Russell797 Now you have made a statement and based it on 'guns easy availability'. I would like you to explain further what that means, and how it affects the legal ownership and permitted carry of a gun.
  • #334
    !
    @Russell797 Disagree. I would way rather have easy access when I need a tool and the tool of my choosing. Until you have to put your life on the line it is academic and intellectual when it happens it is survival.
  • #395
    !
    @Procius Sure, at one time before guns existed no one could use a gun to threaten or kill. It has always been the case that necessity is the mother of invention, so in order to gain the upper hand in warfare, at a point many hundreds of years ago devices capable of shooting high velocity projectiles were invented, the evolution of which has resulted in the modern gun. Being the most effective means as a killing machine available to the common man, they have proliferated where they have been allowed to, such as in our country. As guns became more profligate so did the use of guns to kill and maim. We have long since reached the point of irony, where people have/feel the need to protect themselves from others with guns with a gun of their own. Now we have what we in science call a runaway feedback, where guns beget the need for more guns which beget the need for more etc. Now the solution seems to be, arm everyone. How to break the cycle, I have no idea.
  • R Load more replies

  • #297
    !
    It's sicko's like him or the shooter we should be trying to keep guns from. The reason the 2nd amendment says WELL REGULATED is to keep guns away from irresponsible people like them. Some people don't seem to realize that with everyone of our rights comes a responsibility to our fellow americans. You can't meet that responsibility or you abuse it you loose it!
  • #830
    !
    @JMoreno
    Yes it does! Well regulated is at the beginning of the 2nd amendment, just before the comma. That is fact, not fiction. Public or private schooling should teach the same true fact. Some people just forget facts over time I guess. Take a trip to DC sometime and look at the actual document, or even a photocopy online. May I suggest the library of congress online.
  • #852
    !
    @edzu Liberals don't care to read the bill of rights, they want there way no matter what. Unless there personally rights are step on then they cry foul. It's not what ever good for the goose is good for the gander.
  • #892
    !
    @Airtime
    Bullsh*t! I'm a conservative and when I read the bill of rights in DC I was the only conservative in a group of 8. And talking with friends, neighbors, family, and fellow workers over the years it appears to me that most liberals have read it more than once and more than while they were in school and have a very strong knowledge of their rights. While most modern day neo conservatives seem to just agree with someone else's interpretation, especially if they add that liberals don't agree or want to change it. Then whatever was said becomes fact to them. The second amendment is just a real good example. All amendments have a truth and a half truth, depending on how much of it you read.
  • #949
    !
    Have you written your own dictionary?

    First, "well regulated" refers to the militia (note the clause, "A well regulated militia"), not the acquisition of arms. The statement, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" directly contradicts your spin.

    Next, "The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected" ( http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm ). In order for the Militia to be "well regulated", the citizens needed to be 1) already armed, and 2) proficient in their use.

    And when you say "irresponsible people like them", are you referring to the Founding Fathers?

    And finally, regarding "You can't meet that responsibility or you abuse it you loose it!", yes, indeed. If you abuse any law, there are consequences. Not really a new concept.
  • R Load more replies

  • #224
    !
    I am sorry about his loss. According to everything I have read and saw on the main stream media, the weapons were bought legally by him. He passed the back ground checks . The guy would have got the weapons anyway to commit the crime.
  • R Load more comments...
Post