Best
274 Comments
Post
  • #2
    !
    Good to see that the left continues its irrational fixation with inanimate objects. Keeps them busy enough to avoid looking for legitimate endeavors.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #22
    !
    This website has made me sick. When I first started I thought it was a place for real discussion. It is a hate machine. People writing some of the most ridiculous things. I mean, the fixation on inanimate objects, REALLY? It is the epidemic of mass shootings. They are all done with these assault rifles. They are mostly done by troubled young males. There are so many problems to deal with. Mental illness being the biggest priority. It is easier to buy a gun than it is to get an appointment with a psychiatrist. There needs to be more done. This all comes back to Republican policies. God forbid we give healthcare to everyone. We wouldn't want some mentally ill person seeing a doctor on our dime. God forbid we have an assault weapons ban. I mean who doesn't go hunting with an assault rifle. This has to be the most disgusting website in the world I am never going to visit it again. It is a bastion of ignorance and vitriol. More people are defending the guns than they are defending the children. Sick. Sick. Sick.
  • #42
    !
    @srs606791163 Real discussion involves talking with people who disagree with you. A cozy chat room where everyone nods in time is not real discussion, it is a circle jerk.
  • R Load more replies

  • #9
    !
    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
    -Thomas Jefferson
  • #62
    !
    @Dan_Tien

    How is this proving a negative? When has there been an attempt by our gov't to impose tyranny on the US citizenry and it was put down by people exercizing their second amendment rights?
  • #65
    !
    @woodtick57 You cannot prove that there never would have been an attempt to impose tyranny on people in the US if they had not been able to defend themselves with weapons. One example of the US Government imposing tyranny on people living in the US who were not able to defend themselves was called "The Trail of Tears".
  • R Load more replies

  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #39
    !
    with the libs its not really about gun control its about population control, and they will never accomplish that with an armed population. THATS THEIR REAL PROBLEM WITH GUNS
  • #45
    !
    @PuroChorizo361 People who break up with their mates often go insane. That is the nub of the story you posted about a police officer who shot his "common-law wife" to death. Did you mean to say that police officers who carry guns are all psychotic?
  • R Load more replies

  • #88
    !
    Yeah, Dianne, abolish guns and then only you and your type will have ARMED security. Provide armed security for every citizen and then we can talk about gun restrictions.
  • #8
    !
    I'm in the middle on this one. I see no reason for more controls on handguns, rifles and shotguns. But assault weapons? Why do we need them? Those guns should be left to the military and, in certain circumstances, law enforcement.
  • #10
    !
    I think that is what the majority of us are calling for. Keep your handgun with 8 round clip and hunting rifles etc. but assault weapons need to go. And keep the NRA out of any and all discussions.
    When the NRA actually classifies the 223 bushmaster ( its basically an AR15) as a hunting rifle, they lose ALL legitimacy.
  • #15
    !
    @mtkopf

    Really, because I know people that hunt with AK47's. Not the AR you mentioned but still an assault rifle that's being used to hunt.
  • R Load more replies

  • #257
    !
    I'm sure the Hoplophobes are hoping the blood of 20 six and seven year old children will do a good job of greasing the skids in front of their political agenda.

    Diane Feinstein was screeching "BAN THE GUNS" before the first lifeless child's body was removed from the crime scene.

    At least we know what's important to her and her followers.... All that's missing is a clip of her dancing with joy at the news of yet another opportunity to attempt violating our constitutional rights.

    I have asked this question here before and being the charitable sort, I'll assume it has remained unanswered because the Anti Rights supporters haven't seen it.

    I'm puzzled, why do hoplophobes so strongly resist the possibility of ANYTHING other than guns to be the cause of problems?

    Semi automatic rifles have been commonly available since the 1930s. The AR15/M16 available since the 1960s with high capacity magazines. Pistols with high capacity magazines since the 1930s. All of this technology existed for a very long time before these CRIMINAL acts have began to appear.

    If the technology existed and the CRIMES didn't, what changed and why wouldn't you want to focus on that rather than another failed attempt to control something that OBVIOUSLY isn't the problem?

    We've tried gun control, it hasn't worked.

    National Firearms Act 1934, enacted in response to the gangsters of the 1920s..... result, FAILED.

    Gun Control Act 1968 enacted in response to the JFK Assassination passed on skids greased by the blood of Dr. King and Robert Kennedy. result FAILED

    Firearms Owners Protection Act, banning Machine guns.... result.... FAILED.

    Clinton Assault rifle ban including hi capacity magazines... result FAILED

    Shall I continue to list the state laws as well? Gun control has been tried.... it DOESN'T WORK.

    Tell me...Why are YOU resistant to addressing all of the issues?

    It amazes me that people would rather continue to have mass shootings where innocent men, women, and children die then even discuss solutions to the problem...

    It also amazes me that people would rather continue to have mass shootings where innocent men, women, and children die then recognize the solid facts proving gun and/or ammo restrictions DON'T WORK.

    Why should your new angle on the same thing be any more successful than the countless failed attempts we've experienced?

    Buehler......... Buehler???????
  • #262
    !
    You can bet politicians secretly LOVE tragedies like this because it gives them a diversion to try to focus the public on, away from their failing leadership and dwindling economy.
  • #234
    !
    I AM the NRA, along with 5 million other mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, of all backgrounds. Gun Control is political poison for any politician that pursues it. Remember the elections of 1994. If politicians exploit tragedies again to pass more gun laws, they will be voted out.
  • #215
    !
    Any type of gun legislation should not be passed. The left wing anti gun zealots will not stop till all guns are illegal.
  • #147
    !
    But, of course, it's the new age Dem-Socialist mentality . What's good for them isn't good for the commoner. They're 'SPECIAL'. What these corrupt professional prostitutes need are term limits, serve your 2 terms & get out . Like leftovers in the fridge, the longer they are in there , the more they stink & become harder to clean up. America doesn't need uppity, lifetime political hacks of ANY party believing they are royalty.
  • #112
    !
    All these mass murders have been committed in " gun free zones" that you spineless chicken liberals have created to make yourselves feel safe. in reality all you have done is created gun free killing zones so cowardly evil creatures can kill at will without any fear of being challenged. In reality these were created to get just this result. you want these murders so as to excuse the gun and population control your communist overlords desire.
  • #143
    !
    Really? Have you forgotten that a U.S. soldier killed 13 people and wounded more than two dozen others at Fort Hood? Was that a "gun free zone" created by "spineless chicken liberals"?
  • #176
    !
    no i have not forgotten our brave military who are without a doubt the finest we have are not allowed to carry firearms not only on our bases here but also have been disarmed on bases in combat zones. it again is because of wrong headed liberals who want "safe" areas.
  • #263
    !
    Bingo! Gun free zones are created by the anti-gunners so that incidences like this can happen, so they can pass more restrictive laws! Shocking isn't it!? They are without conscience it seems! As to the silly comment above from Dan Tien or whatever, obviously he's never been in the military and doesn't realize most areas are "gun free" zones, only a select few can carry around sidearms, ammo, etc. on bases.
  • #106
    !
    you gun control nuts make me sick. who the heck are you control freaks think your tryin to control anyway ? pizz off !
  • #157
    !
    nice argument there bud. I'm NOT a "gun control nut", but, think you need to (possibly) go back to commenting at your local Topix site. They like these (ignorant) comments, we prefer some intelligence!
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #76
    !
    First off a gun has never killed anyone, without a human behind it.
    Gun laws never stop crazy people.
    anti gun idiots need to just shut up.
    This time the RIGHT needs to silence the Left using Alinsky's rules.
    Turn the tables!!!!!!!!
  • #44
    !
    no, he should spend all his time, for another four years, sinking this country deeper into debt, passing more pork filled stimulus bills, preaching his religion of Islam, giving away tax dollars to people who cheat the system, extend further rights to minority criminals and their families, you know, the same old liberal marxist ideas!
  • #60
    !
    Followers of Islam are required to bow toward Mecca 5 times a day. Can you show me a single unaltered photograph of Barack Obama bowing on a prayer rug? Congress introduces and passes bills. The President only signs them or vetoes them. He may encourage the creation of a bill, but he does not have the power to pass any legislation on his own.
  • #145
    !
    @Sabio Uh... that is a picture of Barack Obama shaking the hand and bowing to Emperor Akihito of Japan. Bowing is a form of greeting and respect in Japan, which is primarily Buddhist and Shinto, not Islamic.
  • #20
    !
    fienstien announced shortly after obamas first election that she and the dems would be going after the second ammendment but she added "we will but we are waiting for the right time "

    the dems motto is never let a tragedy go by without turning it into a crisis, because if you can convince people its a crisis they will demand you do something.
  • #19
    !
    I hate to break it to liberals, but there are those within the Democratic ranks that favor the 2nd Amendment over "gun control". It's not just a GOP vs. Dem thing. The Majority of Americans (Vast Majority) I should say do NOT favor "gun control" legislation. The 2nd Amendment does a better job at keeping the peace than BS Big Brother Government failed legislation.
  • #26
    !
    The issue is not guns, it mental health. If the government wants to do something intelligent for once, they'll address mental health issues (the prime culprit behind these tragedies) instead of taking gun access away from law abiding citizens.
  • #36
    !
    @woodtick57 Hence why I said to address mental health issues. Apparently Jared Loughner, Jacob Tyler Roberts, Nidal Hassan, etc. all had mental breakdowns but were supposedly law abiding citizens beforehand. Pay attention little boy...
  • R Load more replies

  • #13
    !
    In 1927 the largest school massacre occurred in the US!!! The killer used his car, and a bomb!!!

    Maybe we should talk about car control!!!
    Link:
    http://qz.com/37069/the-deadliest-school-mass...

    ----------
    Oh, and might I add that there were 3 other mass murders that was in favor of gun control! In fact 56 million people were murdered by these individuals!!!

    -Adolf Hitler
    -Joseph Stalin
    -Mao Zedong

    Will Obama and his UN thugs be the fourth? Will you communist liberals be able to live with the blood of millions on your hands?

    "Those who don't know their history, are bound to repeat it!"
    -George Santayana-
  • #27
    !
    Well, it would seem that bomb should be regulated, which they are.

    those three you mentioned did not kill all those millions, it was the weak minded that folloed them that did the killing for them.
  • #43
    !
    @woodtick57

    So you're are in defense for these individuals? So your saying if Obama used an unconstitutional executive order for more gun control and brought in the UN to enforce it, you would not hold the fourth mass murderer Obama accountable for all of the killings that would take place? Would you support the murders of gun owners that refused to turn over their guns?

    Sounds like you are the violent one here...
  • #50
    !
    @woodtick57

    I'll understand stand if you support mass murderers!!! Everyone has their fetishes!!! Mine is liberty of the people!!!
  • R Load more replies

  • #3
    !
    Gun control is going to be a hard sell on all sides.

    43 - 55 million households with firearms...not counting all the illegal weapons in the hands of criminals.

    Good luck with that.
  • #74
    !
    if we have 43-55 million household with guns that would mean the anti-gun folks need to come up with that many murders every year to prove anything they have to say has merit. if guns kill like they say where are all those bodies?
  • #92
    !
    I have to wonder how many of these anti gun hypocrites have a gun or two stashed away because in their minds, they know better than us.
  • #239
    !
    Gun control does not mean banning all guns, it means a reasonable banning of Assault Rifles to start. Civilians were never meant to have weapons that fire hundreds of rounds per minute. If the founding fathers thought that multishot weapons were possible then they would have been more clear, the only weapons of the day were Rifles and Pistols that were single shot with a minute and a half to two minute reload. The only other weapon was a canon that civilians were not allowed to own. Can you at least accept that there has to be a limit somewhere to what types of arms are acceptable for civilians to own or will you feel comfortable with me building an atomic bomb since it would be my preferred method to defend my home?
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • R Load more comments...
Post