• #5
    There is no Middle Ground, Gun grabbers will never stop. We reach some kind of Middle Ground today, Tomorrow the gun grabbers will want something else. Give them nothing.
  • #54
    Two more shot dead they are the real winners? How? more innocent people die and you sit there and blame the gun! Are the guns are going off with with nobody pressing the trigger? The number one killer in the USA poverty not guns. When you have the poor with no prospect of a ligitiment chance of a good job that is what causes youth to join gangs. You will always have murders grow up and blame the person and the system not the gun. Repeal drug laws as long as they are the only victims. Laws created the situation we are in so start repealing victimless crimes.
  • #18
    Original Ten Amendments: The Bill of Rights
    Passed by Congress September 25, 1789.
    Ratified December 15, 1791.
    Amendment II
    Right to bear arms
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    End of discussion!
  • #17
    There's four boxes every American can rely on,
    1). The soap box
    2). The ballot box
    3). The jury box
    4). And if those fail, the CARTRIDGE box.
    The second amendment is a basic right of a free man. Only a fool would look at history and think it to be a threat. If you're scared sh!tless of the thought that another man might harm you, maybe you need to man up and realize that reality exists and only you can be responsible for your own security.
  • #21
    The way I see it, I don't trust the gun control clowns. Just as Obamacare is likely a step toward real socialized medicine, I see most every gun control idea as a step toward disarming me.
  • #2
    It is a constitutional right to change any is an attack on all rights and the constitution itself.The debate should focus on current laws and why they are not followed, along with what is the reason fools use this tool to destroy.
  • #6
    If to change any constitutional right is an attack on all rights and the constitution itself then adding additional requirements for a voter ID would fall into that catagory. Yet you support voter ID laws, so I'm guessing you also support gun control laws. Otherwise you would be a hypocrite.
  • #19
    @PoliticalSpice I support the current gun laws we have that judges also refuse to follow.Com mit a crime with a gun is an automatic 5 years it is also the first thing given up in a plea deal.
  • #34
    This "tool" is a weapon created for the prupose of killing. Lets not pretend it is anything more.

    The biggest problem is, of course, people. The thing is though to control people who should not have guns requires a certain level of control over those very guns.
  • #36
    @Yobyag I shoot a lot of zombie targets in the same way that some police are shooting targets of women and children.Neither kill anything .In the stone age rocks and spears did the same.
  • #42
    @miketost - If all you care about is shooting targets then why use real ammo? Why not rubber bullets or some other kind of non lethal round? Because you target shoot to hone your killing skills for that time you need to kill someone.

    Rocks and spears are a "one and done" deal. There are single spearman mass spearings in our history.
  • R Load more replies

  • #22
    I don't think there can be middle ground. Ever heard the saying "give an inch, take a mile"? After Sandy Hook, nothing was passed because democrats couldnt be reasonable. It was all or nothing. They wanted everything. And that is never going to work.
  • #15
    MIDDLE GROUND?'Middle ground' is a slow movement toward disarming the populace. Once we all agree on a 'middle ground,' that middle ground will be the baseline for the next 'middle ground' fight which continually pushes toward less individual rights and more government control.
  • #28
    Rampant gun violence is a cultural problem. Continually lowering educational standards so that no one fails and promoting a society without consequences is the cause.
  • #186
    There is also over-reporting by the media, as shootings are much lower over the last decade than most any other previous decade in history, but the perception is that they are on the rise. That false perception is due to clever propaganda by the antigun crowd, who simply want to consolidate guns in the hands of the State.
  • #44
    We have been compromising for nearly a century. The gun-controllers’ strategy is now to threaten mass actions (like over 30 bills each in NJ, CT, NY, CO, CA, Et. Al.) and then “compromise” on 10 or so.
    I have been watching gun control legislation for years now. There is nothing new being proposed in response to the 2012 shootings. They are the same bills with the same agendas that have been proposed by the Brady Campaign and others for decades. None of the bills will have any effect on gun violence.

    America does not need more gun control. America need hoot-rat and gangbanger control.
  • #57
    Gun owners have "compromised" since 1934. We have lost much of our 2nd Amendment freedom in exchange for one single gain - FOPA, in 1986, and even that cost us our right to new machine guns. What some call "compromise" is not compromise at all - it's "concession" - and I am tired of it. If people truly want compromise, we will all work together to restore the freedoms lost, rather than further erode freedom as is clearly the goal of gun control advocates.
  • #43
    There is no middle ground The anti gun people want it all or nothing The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms ... end of story Should crazy people , minors and felons forbidden the right to own a weapon , Definitely To accomplish that we need to enforce the laws we already have not make new ones the aforementioned will not follow anyway. Mandatory sentencing and strict enforcement Stop whining about stop and frisk because it works
  • #35
    It's just outright plain to see that the second amendment secures our rights to own and bear arms. Obama's use of Newtown was a bad move because after the shooting applications for gun permits rose drastically in Newtown. Also while all this bickering was going on, more and more states were making carry and conceal permits legal. It is now legal in most states to get a permit to carry concealed firearms. Also, people in large cities mostly do not realize that in the rest of the rural areas of our nations, guns are a part of everyday lives. They are kept for home protection because dialing 911 does not get a quick response by police or sherriffs offices. They are too far away. For people in rural America hunting is a way of life. Also, sport. Gun shooting competitions, skeet shooting or just shooting at the firing range. Most of America is rural. Gun ownership is normal and now having permits and carrying concealed weapons is also normal. Any gun control laws would only affect law abiding citizens. Gun deaths are usually done with stolen guns and guns bought on the black market. Criminals will always be able to get whatever type of guns they want. They are doing this outside of the law. How do you think these gangs are doing drivebys spraying bullets with fully automatic machine guns? Machine guns are illegal, yet the gangs have them in droves. Along with a full assortment of guns obtained by illegal means. No new legislation is going to stop this violence. It will only limit law abiding citizens ability to buy legal guns. New laws are not the answer when laws already on the books have not been enforced. Also until I and millions of others hear a full legal definition of universal background checks which has not been released to the public we will not support it. It's like going back to congress voting in Obamacare without ever reading it. We have not been allowed to read this administration's definition of universal background checks. It may sound good, but once passed we find out in contains laws that go against the second amendment. Obama does not want us to know his definition of universal back ground checks. He only says what he thinks people want to hear. Not the full truth. Also the term assault weapon can be applied to any firearm. There needs to be a full legal definition there too. My legal handgun could become illegal under the too broad term assault weapon. Universal Background checks is also to broad to not have a full definition. Obama's last gun bill failed because it contained way more than what he promised was the only two things that would be contained in the bill. He lied. Also some democrats loaded that bill down with so much pork it was ridiculous because these democrats thought the bill would not fail. We owe a great thank you to the house and senate for recognizing the lies contained within the bill and all of the pork that was added by some of the democrats. Lies and pork made Obama's own bill fail. He was furious when he didn't get his way and once again referenced Newtown who was at the time arming themselves. He used the parents of the children who were killed to try to get what he wanted before the Sandyhook massacre. I could care less about large magazines. Let them go. But most do want to know an exact legal definition of universal background checks that Obama doesn't want us to know. It could be so strict that if you've ever taken antidepressants you cannot legally purchase a gun. I took antidepressants after my child died. That does not mean I'm mentally unstable.
  • #70
    My problem is this, our issue with violent crime that uses guns has little to do with the guns themselves as proved by the high violent crime rates in European countries which have banned guns outright. Australia's own crime rate with firearms is up despite never having liberal gun rights and not having a large abundance of guns as the US. Despite some states having strict gun control those states are in the top 25 of violent states. Meanwhile, the laxest on gun laws, Vermont, varies between 48th-50th in violent crime and Florida is ranked 4th. Just looking at this gross variation illustrates that guns are not the issue, regardless of SYG or gun control, they're simply moot. They're an easy emotional boogey man target for those who want to do something but don't know what is truly causing violence (which is declining by the way).

    The truth of the matter is that once you start digging into the data and statistics you find that the most violent cities line up with the most impoverished cities as well as those with a high influence of the cocaine and heroin drug markets. This is why you see far fewer western cities with violent crime rates as high as in the east because of their fondness for homemade Meth. This correlation accounts for the drop in violent crime in 1993 after the height of the crack epidemic, way better than the passing of gun control laws or concealed carry and SYG laws. So the issue here is not guns, but the impoverished relying on expensive illicit drug trades to survive and using violence with firearms to protect their interests.

    If you truly want to deal with violent crime with firearms, you have to look at the economy and the national response to the drug prohibition which has created the black markets the violence stems from. In other words, there is zero need to compromise on guns, and as a leftist gun owner and ardant supporter of the second amendment and it's historical uses by the weakest social classes to ward off oppression (the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s against racist corrupt law enforcement) I do not see the need for gun control nor support it in any facet.
  • #174
    @WeNotYou Hmmm very interesting. I'm curious if the western states see a lower violent crime rate due to a smaller population in the 40s and 50s, particularly LA which is one city I see throwing a wrench in the idea. In particular, why is LA's crime rate not even near many of it's eastern brethren when it's one of the smoggiest cities in the country, which the only difference I could find was that the western states vastly preferred meth over cocaine and heroin. Curious. Got some more digging to do.
  • #177
    @zenfiral Good point.

    Ive recently been looking at the UK to see how gun control has affected their crime rate. Their crime rate peaked in 2004 while ours peaked in 1993. I just checked to see when Europe stopped using leaded gasoline. They stopped in 2000. We stopped in 1986. According to Eurostat "The number of crimes recorded in the EU has been steadily decreasing since 2005"
    Of course the use of lead gasoline didn't cause everyone to become violent but if you add that to other factors like poverty, drugs, etc it paints an interesting picture. Also its not just lead gas its also lead pipes. Lead leaches much easier in soft water and LA has hard water.
  • R Load more comments...