Best
120 Comments
Post
  • #11
    !
    Would expect nothing less from liberals, "do as I say, not as I do" is their way of life! They always tell others what not to do, then turn around and do the same or worse!!!
  • #105
    !
    EVERY ONE needs some type of protection. I just took the time to learn to do it my self instead of hiring someone to do it. And don't say that the police should do it. They carry guns to protect THEM not you. Plus I just spent a day at the range with the local sheriffs dept TEACHING basic handgun skills. Good guys but pitiful shots. No, I don't want to depend on them for anything but filling out reports.
  • #24
    !
    All that shooting portrayed in that liberal thumb-sucking clip, was in malls, schools and theaters, all advertised "Gun Free Zones" - So that potential crazies can do their dastardly deeds without recourse from honest citizens that may have a concealed carry permit that could have put a 'round' in their brain-pan.
    But liberals were never that smart -- and completely devoid of common sense.....

    "When seconds count and police are minutes away."
  • #72
    !
    More anti-gun propaganda using celebrities to brainwash the masses, to train the herds subconscience to fear guns and demand our goverment do something about it.
  • R Load more replies

  • #53
    !
    This is funny. The problem is not keeping the gun owner's information private; it is public information. But it is the act of compiling the data and presenting it this way. It was a very immature action. This illustrates their level of competence and forethought. What did they hope to accomplish? Publicity at all costs, or was it to attempt for push a rolling ball over the edge (after the shootings). Whatever it is, it is bad business. If you throw disdain at people....be careful you may get a little on you.
  • #30
    !
    What they just said by doing this is their article is nothing more than propaganda from a subversive organization planning an overthrow of the government. They should all be taken to a military detention facility and waterboarded until they start telling the truth. Their names and addresses should be published along with where everyone in their family works and where their kids attend school. The IRS needs to audit the paper for at least 10 years because anyone who endorses both sides of the same issues depending on convenience obviously must lie about other things as well.
  • #55
    !
    @Your_Name_Here Your statement is not that much different from how Al-Queda views things and deals with those whom they disagree.
  • #62
    !
    @jessejaymes I guess I need to explain in great detail when I spoof someone else's actions and use sarcasm. My comments are taking what the paper did and putting it into perspective by turning up the idiocracy just a notch. They did something that could result in death because I'm sure there are a lot of psychos running around looking for inventory so they can be the next great mass murderer. Now they have a road map of where all the guns and ammo live. The paper should also publish a list of where the wealthiest families live in case the nutbag needs some cash for gas. I'm not sure about how Al-Qaeda (please excuse my correct spelling of Al-Qaeda) thinks but as a self-proclaimed expert I will take your word for it. Too bad we have laws against publishing names and addresses of mentally ill people who have violent tendencies - it's best to catch people off guard if you're a psychotic mass murderer.
  • #63
    !
    @Your_Name_Here That's simply not true. the list was of people who have handguns. Rifles and shotguns are not tracked so was not listed. If someone is dumb enough to think a home is unprotected because that home is not on the list then I suspect that load of double O buckshot in the face will be well deserved. Was it a stupid thing to do publishing that list? Absolutely. Was it a road map for criminals? Not at all.
  • R Load more replies

  • #16
    !
    Aw, these liberal weenies didn't like a gun owner(s) publishing their vital statistics either, so now their relying on the gun as well. What a bunch of phonies!
    "What comes around, goes around." <wink>
  • #117
    !
    well before yall get to texas and start listing everyone here i will save u the trouble i own three guns yep thats right three so if i miss the first time i dont have to reload cuz the second and third are ready to go as far as guns killing children i dont think so i grew up in a house wiloaded guns and when u could walk u learned it was a no-no or got ur butt busted 7 kids and not one got shot.
  • #45
    !
    1.) It was totally idiotic for the newspaper to post the names and addresses of gun owners since rifles and shotguns are not registered. It's an incomplete list and as such is selective harassment. 2.) The hiring of armed guards to protect a business is not uncommon and in light of the genie being out of the bottle already and no way to put it back in, the newspaper hiring of them is appropriate. 3.) There is a lesson to be learned. It's called cause and effect. Wonder if the Newspaper publisher now realizes this?
  • #89
    !
    Gannett has only one thing in mind, the bottom line. In that spirit, they make a lot of stupid decisions which tend to drive away, not attract readers. They bought our local paper a couple of years ago. Since then, the readership has dropped, production, writing, editorial staff, sponsorship has dropped, the printed edition is smaller, thinner, lacks quality, all while the price has increased. Gannett is the anti-press.
  • #90
    !
    @Keyjo Well I worked for Knight-Ridder for 10 years and I know people at Gannett. The internet is responsible for most of what you fault Gannett for but they are a newspaper of today. They make very little money and depend of "sensationalism" to survive. I remember sitting in a policy meeting where another exec and I suggested we got to a tabloid format and emulate New York Newspapers in the Los Angeles Area and we got laughed out of the building. Today that same newspaper is a tabloid. It is what it is Keyjo. They can't compete with instantaneous news on the net and cable. They live by doing things that are not journalism. This doesn't surprise me at all.
  • #4
    !
    A waste of money, they should just equip the staff with guns and shoot anyone who presents a threat...it would save money, and they would have an exclusive on the story. Proposed headline "First Amendment supporters use second amendment remedy"
  • #13
    !
    You don't understand the second Amendment do you? In your mind the 2nd amendment is the "right to commit murder" that's pathetic.
  • #120
    !
    Ironic, funny, justice. The paper should now notify the public that the paper has arms on the premises. This would bolster their policy of pinpointing gun locations.
  • #119
    !
    In other words, "we can have armed guards, but LAW ABIDING CITIZENS should be stripped of their INALIENABLE RIGHT to keep and bear arms". Typical liberal hypocrisy. If the liberals get their way and they can strip us of our 2nd Amendment then only criminals and police (redundant, I know) will have guns.
  • #118
    !
    This paper has performed a civic service. All the criminals in that area now know which homes NOT to rob, making it easier for them to spot victims who can't fight back.
    Imagine how many criminals who will not have to risk their lives by breaking into just any home at random. Since this has happened, the unarmed neighbors just might have to consider buying a gun to protect themselves. This should be very good for the owners of sports and gun stores in that area. Unintended consequences can be so very interesting.
  • #115
    !
    Hypocrites, all of them. They hate guns, yet they hire armed guards and didn't like their personal information being published. Here's a Newsflash: If you like your info to be private, then don't publish other people's private information. What's good for the goose...
  • #114
    !
    They tried to lump law abiding citizens in with the crazies. Only some one sane thinking, was able to formulate a response in kind. Knee jerk reactionary journalism beware.
  • #113
    !
    What did those dopey reporters think the result of their idiotic exposure of gun owners
    would be? People do not like it when their privacy is compromised, whether or not they are gun owners. I trust that these nitwit reporters enjoy the notoriety they so richly deserve.
    MORONS--it's the only way to describe 'em. Anything for a story.
    What concerns me is that there may be a gun owner out there who is angry enough to take
    matters into his or her hands and retaliate with a weapon.
  • R Load more comments...
Post