While I respect everyone's right to do damn near anything, I'm weary of hearing about some crazy SOB shooting a dozen+ people bacause he was angry, got bullied as a kid, lost his job, snapped, etc. This behavior is not protected by the right to bear arms or to defend yourself. They mass murderers are protected by something else. Political correctness!Everybody, just 'shut' up'. We can't offend these unfortunate misguided souls. Allow me. They are cruel and unhumane. They murder defenseless people. With their guns to which they are entitled. After the fact as the bodies are counted, most are found to be some kind of crazy. Probably shouldn't even be allowed to use a steak knife. But somehow they can own an arsenal of weapons. Any attempt to weed out these people is probably discrimination. I call it poor judgement and it endangers the rest of us. I know that most gun owers are responsible. But the gun thing is clearly out of hand. There's no way to remedy the problem without offending some people. Maybe they just have to get over it. Like the poor people who bury the victims. We need stricter gun laws. The rights of the rest of us to be secure and safe have to be protected. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"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."

the second amendment is a testament to the effectiveness of citizen-militias against the regular forces of unwanted militaries. it is a ratification of the military doctrine of guerilla warfare, and an expression of two assumptions: that americans will arm themselves to defend their lives and livelihoods, and that this armament is a social necessity.

guns are dangerous, that's their purpose and nobody would deny it. but, despite the unfortunate events they can cause, we must not give in to the fear-mongering that would lead you to throw away what someday may become your only protection against an increasingly brutal state, criminals, or god forbid foreign invaders.

guns aren't toys, they are weapons. we need to be responsible in ownership of guns as in all other things. more dangerous than guns are the factors that lead people to believe that lashing out at others is the only course of action. perhaps we should focus on the disillusionment our dying culture engenders as it crumbles before our eyes, and think about banning something more harmful, like wage slavery, or debt peonage, or irresponsible spending.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

horrible violence, aside from having anything to do with guns per se, is about the economy and the society. It is a twisted person who would destroy his own kind and himself, but we see it all over the world under the guise of religious belief, fanatics of various ideologies, etc. and it seems also to do with a dark aspect of humanity.

I have also noticed that many of these shooters are on legal mind drugs for depression etc. yet that relation has not been explored too much in the mainstream media; instead we get the problem portrayed to us as a gun control issue.

Personally I feel that this is the price we pay for freedoms-- cars cause mass deaths every year and have other unintended consequences and represent cultural values, just as guns do, yet no one talks of denying anyone the "right" to own a hummer; the car equal of a semi-automatic rifle. The example can extend to many things in our culture.

Overall, I would prefer to have the "right" (and I don't consider it a "right" to be able to defend yourself or family) to bear arms then to be denied the "right" because of the horrible actions of others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yeah, well maybe it's hard to get serious about gun control. After all, it's quite astounding to me how NRA types can claim a need for "self-defense" in response to yet another massacre of the innocent. But, let's put that aside...

Whether triggered by school bullying, adult unemployment, or romantic rejection; and independent of age, race, and income, what unites all of these kinds of incidents???

THEY'RE ALWAYS MEN.

Always.

Now, don't misunderstand. These men don't represent all men (so spare me the argument that I'm attacking all men--I'm not), but they all seem to share 1. a disproportionate sense of entitlement; 2. no empathy for other humans, perhaps because they can only see themselves as victims; 3. inability to cope with economic hardship or romantic rejection; and 4. the willingness to use guns to "get revenge" on those who they believe have wronged or rejected them.

Nothing will change until we reckon with how we socialize boys--our pervasive worship of both militarism and a possessive, take-no-prisoners masculity. Hey, even "Change Inc." Obama is jones-in' for more bloodshed in Afghanistan.

Cuz, ya know what? I've had my heartbroken. I've lost my career. I currently have no job and have about 6 weeks of unemployment left. Yet, it's never occured to me to find a gun and kill my loved ones or total strangers. So, make all the guns ya want, or sell them as easily as you want--the issue is how and why they're sought in the first place.

Personally, I'm sickened by the moral self-righteousness dripping from the TV about "the horror" of another individual shooting by the very same media that pays generals to talk up the Iraq war, universally endorsed the Israeli bombing of Palestine (as more "defense") and offers absolutely NO discussion whatsover of the percentage of our tax dollars that funds the military-industrial-complex...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tightening gun laws / stopping the sale of guns altogether, even if accomplished, would only make gun crime in this country worse. Know why? Because there are millions of firearms already out there, and there is a huge demand. Its like saying that since drugs are illegal, we don't have a drug problem. Its just not logical thinking.

I guarantee you that if someone at that Civic Center had had a CCW permit and their weapon on them when that guy showed up, 13 people wouldn't be dead. Similarly, if a guard, or even a visitor at that nursing home had a gun, it would have saved those lives as well.

Don't you ever wonder why shooting massacres don't happen at shooting ranges?

I understand the mindset here, that guns are evil and only backward rednecks have them, but its the wrong mindset. If every single person, of age, and of the right mindset, in this country was allowed to carry a gun on their person anywhere they went (within reason - not airports or courts, so don't even give me that), you could expect gun violence to drop suddenly. All this anti-gun rhetoric does nothing but make people less safe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why can't we ever have a calm, rational discussion about guns?

The Onion posted one of their very brief funny comments on this subject, at least once... something about comprehensive licensing and certification requirements for gun ownership. I can't remember the context, exactly... but it was funny. You'll have to trust me on that.

We require registration and licenses for driving (which is not a Constitutionally guaranteed right) and for voting (which is). It seems apparent that such requirements are not an infringement on the basic rights themselves... maybe this is what we need. This shouldn't end up meaning that the average American won't be able to own a gun (or many guns, or even certain frequently-considered-scary types of guns), but it might mean that, if you're going to own a gun, you need to show, with some regular frequency, that you can be trusted with one.

Now... on that subject, I happen to think that, if you're going to trust me to be an adult and to be a contributing citizen helping to make decisions affecting the governance of our country, you should certainly be able to trust me with a gun. People have certainly done damage with both, over the centuries... but they have also done what needed to be done... also with both. (Admittedly, it's frequently harder to find good things that have been done with guns... I'm going to fall back on stopping the Nazis in WWII, for now... that had to be done.)

There has to be someplace where we can meet in the middle on this subject.

PLEASE!!! Let's solve the problem! If we keep hurling rhetoric at each other, we won't ever escape from the clutches of lobbyists and special interest groups!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

After DECADES of slipping freedoms and the slow encroachment of absolute tyranny, a tyranny that has grown with unbelievable rapidity over the last 7.5 years, you're actually anti-gun? You REALLY think that the trained nazis on our police force should be the only ones with physical power over others? You REALLY think that profits from the sales of guns should be relegated to black market mob bosses and militia types who WILL NOT follow the law?

I especially like your use of the word "allow". We "allow" people to go armed. Excuse me, no. You have the goddamned RIGHT to go armed, and it's the most sure defense against the wholesale destruction of this nation by the fascist traitors who have been running this place. You take one look at what's going on in the UK right now and tell me that wouldn't be happening here if we weren't all armed to the teeth. You don't need to be "allowed" to defend yourself. It is tyranny when you are PREVENTED from defending yourself. That's what this country is founded on, and it's one of the only things that hasn't been utterly gutted by generations of cowards and traitors in government.

I mean, as far as a society choosing to place limits on the display of weaponry, there's already a HUGE social stigma against open carry. You pack a pistol on your hip like an old cowboy and see what sort of response you get. Carrying a weapon is ALREADY "disallowed" on a social level. To make it a legal thing makes no difference to the man who's about to break the law and go about killing people. The gun market is nearly as large as the drug market. Go ask a high school senior whether it's easier to find weed or alcohol and come back and tell me we would be safer if guns were illegal. The legality of the existing gun market makes it FAR more difficult to find the sort of untraceable black-market weapons that would be as common as pot if prohibition were put in place.

I just wish they'd start targeting CEOs of banks with their impotent rage-fueled massacres, already.

Another thing-- I'm 6'7", 300lbs and I train in martial arts regularly. Do you really want to live in a world where there is nothing you can do to stop guys my size, particularly if the economy continues to slip? If a guy like me is mugging you, you are FUCKED unless you've got a weapon. And I'll tell you something-- young men with a lot of strength and a lot of anger and no easy access to the economy at large aren't going to starve to death if they can take what they need from other people. And there are a LOT of big, angry young men out there.

Gun laws are a recipe for crime. It's tragic that guns are abused, but I could do that much killing with a sword or a bat far more easily than you think. And I can MAKE a fairly sharp, sturdy sword in an hour or two with the right tools. People are incredibly fragile, and guns only win because they're often small, they have a longer range, they don't care how big or strong the person using them is, and everyone is afraid of them. A collapsible baton is just as deadly, and if you're a criminal you're a hell of a lot more likely to use it because it doesn't make any noise. You can use it to break bones and create other non-life threatening serious injuries without risk of spending your whole life in jail. Knife wounds, of course, are far more deadly than even gun laws. Regardless, the point is that gun laws do not and CANNOT prevent the use of violence against the innocent. And it's incredibly obvious to those who actually know the mechanics of it.

I never understood the fanaticism for gun control on the left. Fact is, I'm generally more left than 90% of you, and I STILL don't get it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obviously it is distressing to read about so many unhinged humans letting loose with a gun on innocent people. Certainly, guns make attacking others easier.

However, the real point is that there is a root cause behind these attacks that have nothing to do with guns per se.

You want to prohibit gun ownership in a culture that worships violence. Violence surrounds us in our media, in our schools and offices (bullying), in our approach to diplomacy, etc., and we allow it and consume it voraciously. It's not going to work.

We are not NICE to each other. This country is one of the most judgemental places I have ever lived in and I have lived abroad for several years. We pick on each other incessantly. We label each other and spew horrible venom on the internet.

Face it folks, Americans are not a well-behaved people. Alot of us are mean, arrogant, egotistical, predatory (and I'm not talking about the bankers). We never want to listen to the other side or find common ground or foment dialogue. It's our way or the highway.

Where do you think yuppies come from? They are spawned by our culture that values status and short-term gratification and one-upmanship over heart-centric connection with others. If we can't lord it over the other guy, we aren't happy.

Of course, not all of us are like this. But a solid majority of Americans are.

When I left home at 18 after years of child abuse and peer level bullying, I was like Diogenes, except I wasn't searching for an honest human. I was searching for a kind one. I didn't find many.

Not one of the persons who shattered my life have ever apologized to me. I'm not complaining here. I'm trying to make a point. (My life is good now. I have few complaints. However, it took the kindness of a very few strangers for me to heal my losses.)

We inflict alot of pain on each other and then never own it. We never apologize. We just expect our victims to deal. Well, human beings aren't machines - we have souls and hearts and are easily wounded - both our mortal coil and our psychic bodies. All of those wounds we inflict go somewhere - energy can't be destroyed. They go inside our victims and fester until they germinate in an act of insanity or desperation.

As long as it is okay in our culture to predate upon the weak or ignorant, to get our rocks off at someone else's expense, to assume a moral superiority that we then use to straight-jacket our children, peers, and others in a proscribed mindset harmful to their exercise of free volition, we will have wounded citizens attacking innocent bystanders.

Love is the answer here, people, not laws.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Either the American people are the dumbest in the world, or the most violent... or maybe, both! Year after year they allow the National Rifle Association (NRA): a small, minority of gun owners, to dictate gun policy to the rest of the country. The majority of people in the United States WANT gun control!

The NRA is made up of those with a "killer" mentality. They won't rest until the last elephant; the last tiger; the last polar bear; the last deer; the last dove; etc., is wiped off the earth. Perhaps, when all wildlife is wiped out, these "killers" will go after each other? We can hope, can't we?

In order to get at least a handle on the gun and violence problem, we need to register ALL guns, and license ALL gun users. The process should be no different than that used for automobiles and driving. The NRA fights these measures, since it says this is the first step to gun confiscation. If that so, then let it be. Its time to put a lid on the violence.

Its time to put the blame for senseless killing and violence where it belongs: The National Rifle Association.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Banning something never makes it go away; you fuel the underground market for high-powered weapons, making gun-runners instead of rum-runners and drug-ringleaders, and you take away the state's ability to regulate the sale of such weapons. Sure, it is instinctive to want to ban that which we would like to see go away, but has that EVER worked?

Let's be careful what we wish for. We could end up with all manners of guns in the hands of criminals and none in the hands of those who have the Constitutionally guaranteed right to protect self, family and property.

Better think it over, lefties....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Given how long we have had guns and how recent such shootings are, when exactly do we reach the tipping point for deciding it is our civilization that is making people so ill and desperately miserable that they snap and do things like this?

You can blame the guns all you want, but you'll just end up with the stabbing sprees seen in places like Japan and other countries that ban guns.

Its not the guns... its the culture. Its not the movies or the music, its the alienated lives people lead.

www.greenanarchy.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

" The Lord made big men. The Lord made little men. Smith and Wesson made the difference "..... That's an old, but true saying. I'm not religous. I'm about as left/ progressive/ socialist as anyone out there. And I fully support the 2nd ammendment... It was put in place to allow ourselves protection FROM the government. How can any "progressive" person believe otherwise? If you can see Bush lied about 9/11, WMD,torture, bank bailouts and so much more... then you can see we're already living in a police state. Obama cannot easily change our road to fascism..... Violent acts, be it from guns or whatever,have always been with us. Will always be with us. Better to outlaw predatory banksters than than to outlaw guns.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We can read the hysterical, frightened, neurotic and ignorant posts here about "THE GUNS" "THE GUNS" "THE GUNS".
These same posters IGNORE the cause to focus upon the easy target~~OTHER PEOPLES' POSSESSIONS, i.e., YOUR and MY guns.
If the CAUSE of these problems was actually the gun, in their little imaginary world, my guns would be walking around looking for someone to shoot.

What these neuroes have NO ability to understand is that it just might be ME who is actually the problem.
My guns are inanimate objects with just as much ability to make a decisions as is that dangerous hammer in my toolbox.

The hysterical ANTIs do more damage to the nut case problems going on than all of us RESPONSIBLE CITIZEN GUN OWNERS combined.
We are the ONLY ones who actually focus upon the actual probel, THE MENTAL PROBLEMS OF THE PERSON!!

We know that NOTHING will change till THE MENTAL PROBLEMS OF THE PERSON holding a tool are addressed.

YOU, the hysteria number finger pointers, STOP EXACERBATING the problem and get WITH US, the RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS, i.e., YOUR NEIGHBORS and do as WE do, make YOUR first attempt at addressing the true CAUSE~~THE MENTAL PROBLEMS OF THOSE ACTING OUT.

STOP telling me to take a pain med for my broken bone WITHOUT healiong the broken bone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You realize at least one of those shootings was a direct result of the 'Lefts' Rhetoric about banning guns- Right?
so now you want to further this counterproductive (dangerous) campaign.
The left should realize the more they are uncompromising about Gun ownership the more the crazies on the right come out of the wood work-and start shooting.
I don't own a gun, but might if I lived on a farm where there could be the need for one to rid the place of disease infested vermin.I'm also a daughter and sister in law of hunters. I see no reasonable excuse to own an assault weapon, and have been opposed to handguns since the Murder of John Lennon. But I am not so naive as to think Americans are going to give up their gun rights without a fight- so why approach it that way.
Let's be totally honest on the left- regardless of whether guns were totally banned- if someone wants to kill another- or many- they will find the means (Knife,poison,explosives).So Death and mayhem will not be negated merely by passing stricter gun laws. In fact our children won't be any safer- we have plenty of examples of parents who've used other means to kill their own children.Smith strapped hers into the car and drove them into a lake, the other gal just drwon them in the tub.Most either beat them or strangle them. so we can not guarantee childrens safety even in their own homes.
Nor can we assure the mental status of anyone buying a gun- either at the time, or in the future. may be sane when you purchase- but go off the deep end when you lose your job and home.Again th elack of a gun in the house did not assure the safety of the gals who's husband loped her head off- or the man who School teacher wife hacked him to peices.
A gun was not responsible for the deaths in the Oklahoma city, or at the Atlanta Olympics, and certainly not 9/11.
so instead of deluding yourselves the world will be a peaceful place without guns, it would be more advantageous to address the underlying psycho-socio-economic conditions which provoke/incite such violence.
Gun control is literally just putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I live in an area in upstate NY where it takes 20-30 minutes before the police will arrive from a 911 call. We have wildlife that can be dangerous, like bear and coyote, as well as those of the wingless two legged variety. This past spring I had a 400lb bear on my porch looking in at be through a glass door. Fortunately the bear left without smashing his way through the door. And I was happy that the confrontation ended peacefully. No one was hurt, not bear, my dogs or anyone in my family, but I would have killed the bear to protect my family or myself.

Although I do not hunt, I keep a shotgun for protection. To me it is a tool. Yes, a dangerous tool that requires respect. But then I have quite a few other tools that are dangerous and require respect, most especially automobiles.

Too many of those who live in urban and suburban areas have little understanding or empathy for those of us who live in rural and exurban environments. And, having lived in both large urban and suburban centers, I can also say the reverse is true -- it is not some special failure on the part of one portion of the population. Simply a lack of experience.

I had an amusing discussion with a guy who had an encounter with a bear in a generator shed -- they were off the electrical grid. The bear chased him around the generator before he got out the single door. He had no qualms about going back out to the shed, but he would never go to Boston because he terrified of the violence there.

It is pretty much the same with guns. People with little or no experience are very afraid of them. Just as someone who has never used a chainsaw is more than leery of one, or a person who has never been in a subway is afraid of getting mugged.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

#1:"You need to spend a weekend in my community,"
I'm from a small town in Illinois. You may have heard of it. It's called Chicago.

#2:"There may very well be a few of you gun owners who might be responsible."
A "few"??!!
LOL
I know ,many many people.
I am a sociable human being.
In my business, I see people in thier homes. I play golf with people.
I shop and socialize with others in the store.
I now live in north central WI in a city of almost 50K.
MOST of the citizens here own guns.
There are VERY VERY few gun crimes committed here.

#3: "The problem with your logic is that you are assuming that gun ownership comes from the place of responsibility and accountability that you claim for yourself."

Of the almost 70,000,000 gun owners in my UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, the MAJORITY of uf gun owners are as I DID state.
And, YES, I DO claim a place of responsibility and accountability for myself.

#4: "But no one gives a shit about the illegal guns being used against the fucking gang members, right?"

I would say that it is an ACCURATE assumptionb that YOU and others like CHOOSE to ignore the PROVEN FACT that, gun owners like myself and my fellow LEGAL gun owners GIVE A SHIT about the illegal guns.
YOU do not have the courage to actually speak with a RESPONSIBLE CITIZEN who happens to own a gun as, it would destroy your lies and falsities which you use to frighten others who are as hysterical as YOU are.


#5: "Why do you love your powerful killing mechanisms? Why do you insist on polishing them, collecting them, locking them and loading them and pulling their triggers?"

My "powerful killing machine"??
Oh, do you mean my Jaguar which I sometimes drive at 140mph??
Or do you mean that golfball I hit which, if it hits a person can kill/injure him/her?

One of my major fascinations with my guns is as follows:
I am an analytical person.
As such, I am into figuring out why whatever product on which I am working does/doesn't do what it does.
One of the things in my vocation is repairing electro/mechanical things.
I am fascinated with their inner workings and functions.
When I look/hold one of my gun(s), I respect the workmanship which went into the design and MECHANICAL functionality of them.
I was a corpsman in Nam.
I saw a lot of shit go down.
I saw REAL stuff, not just imaginary shit like YOU seem to think of while sitting on your cellulite laden ass in your safe little home while shivering at your TV.
I do NOT at all care for what a gun can do to a human being.
I have DONE it, seen it and gave all I could to repair those to whom it was done.
Why the fuck do you think I call myself what I do here?
Another thing which goes through my CLEAR mind is the financial worth of my belongings, some of which are my guns.
Rather than suffering from deranged thinking like YOURS, I see them as investments.
I have a few other things which I see as investments such as, antique fishing equipment, a 100Y/O slot machine. OOOOOHH, I see it as something mechanical like my guns and marvel at the workmanship which went into it.
I have a lot of collectibles which are enjoyed for what they are, something which YOU clearly do not understand.

#6: "Do they make your dick hard?"

It would be difficult to find a more ignorant question anywhere on the internet.
Let me tell you what makes my dick SOFT.
Ignorant, opinionated, stupid women who are rigid in their refusal to see human beings as the real human beings they actually are, especially one who calls itself "godess".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How will preventing American's from buying guns stop violent gun crimes? Did illegalizing drugs stop people from buying and using drugs? NO. Does the fact that alcohol is illegal if you are under 21 stop teenagers from buying and consuming alcohol? NO. Drinking and driving is illegal too right? Does that stop people from doing it? NO. Criminals who want to commit a crime using a gun will find ways to get a gun! For every one person that commits a crime with a gun, there are THOUSANDS of people who own guns that don't commit crimes with them. Why should you take away everybody's right to own a gun when the real fact is that a very, very, very low percentage of gun owners commit crimes with their guns?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HR 45 section 801 states that All government employess in every agency and department are Exempt from gun control laws.
This would mean the citizens would be under the control and at the mercy of "government employees". Not a good sign for any US citizen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I suspect a correlation between the number of armed individuals and vigilante / martyr shootings. Or perhaps a correlation between legislative lax and gun shot wounds and fatalities. And how about a correlation between Christian-extremists and gun usage. The big cities have been scape-goated as hot beds for crime as reflected by decades of poison pen screen-writers seducing TV and movie audiences with allure of inner city drama fueling stereotype over reality. Rather, I wonder what the visual representation of localities across the U.S. will look like when these correlations are plotted out. I suspect we'd see the face of America's inward terrorism ignored by a wreckless platform of the NRA, super-charged by a romance with power, and blind-sided by religious extremists' cry wolf armageden blame-police. This sets a tone, a baseline from which youth are raised and then explore their adulthood freedoms. But the NRA, family-values zealots, fear-based media, violence as male prowess set examples of entitlement, blame, fear, vigilante justice. It is any wonder that in a moment of rage any American might reach for a gun and use it to simply act out without realizing there are other options?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not a soul in these shootings was equipped to defend themselves. They were all free victims. The author should look to today's previous article on who will be the serfs. The issue is really the same. If we do not look out for ourselves, someone will do it for us and we probably won't like how they do it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It won't end until members of the NRA start knocking each other off.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unfortunately, you cannot "un-invent" anything. So, we will probably have guns until our civilization has run its course. However, that does not mean that we should not come up with some form of sane control of these "personal weapons of destruction". The typical reasons for gun control vs. pseudo-unfettered gun ownership ala the NRA are many and well known so I won't go into them. However, it is always interesting to contemplate what life could be like if we let this issue go on unchecked into the future:

- What would life be like if/when Captain Kirk's "Phasor Pistol" is created and mass-marketed? Will we be greeted by headlines of "Crazed gunman wipes out several neighborhoods with handful of Phasors"!

- What would life be like if an NRA-like organization were advocating individual ownership of atomic weapons? If indeed the only means of ultimate protection from handguns is to personally own a handgun then why is it so repugnant for the USA to not want EVERY country (regardless of size) to not have their OWN atomic arsenal for their "self-protection"?

- What would it be like if a well-armed crazed gunman started running around in a crowded environment and start shooting indiscriminately AND everybody else also was similarly armed? What are the odds that many more folks would be shot from other well-intentioned folks who heard shots, screams, and saw panicked people running around with THEIR firearms and thought that the source of the original shots were from THEM? Wouldn't this simply escalate into a frenzy of shooting that would not end until they all ran out of ammunition (or until everybody was shot)? If well-trained police officials have difficulty discriminating the good from the bad in tense life-threatening situations how in the world would the average gun-carrying citizen know who to shoot in a room full of gun-brandishing people - even assuming that they only hit their intended target?

These may sound like far-fetched situations but sane people should always rationally think about the ultimate potentialities of their views and put reasonable checks in place to avoid the potential of unintended consequences. Personally, I have always thought that if you don't like "gun control" than you must think that "gun un-control" is OK and I for one think that anything that can be easily used to end a human life SHOULD be controlled.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You have to go back to post revolutionary times to get it. The Americans had just thrown off a tyrannical government using the weapons they had at hand. To insure that they would always be able to defend themselves from a future tyrant they provided for the availability of the weapons that they would need and made it a basic right. The first amendment would do you no good if you didn't have the means to insure it was followed. There are those that say you don't need to defend yourself, that is what the police are for. With the very existence of governments being based on faith alone we could wake up tomorrow with no government and no police force to protect us. There is also the very real possibility that the ones we will have to defend ourselves from are the police

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If EVERYBODY had an AK-47, like the gentleman in Pittsburgh, we would ALL be a little safer.

It seems almost every day I read that there is someone protecting his family, household, or self from gunmen with their OWN AK-47s, as opposed to those that kill people at random with their AK-47s.

I mean, think about it, if everyone in Binghamton, Pittsburgh, etc., had guns, probably no one would have been killed.

In fact I would actually recommend HK-416 instead. It weighs less, fires faster, it's tougher, and it doesn't get hot. You can get a dual 200 round drum magazine for those extended 'hunting trips'.

Which reminds me, I will have to trade my AK in and get one for my wife and 8 year old.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is a certain irony in the fact that even Obama claims that the Supremes were right when they ruled that the Second Amendment contemplates a private right to bear arms. This, of course, signaled that he would not tamper with the NRA-touted policy of happiness being a warm gun. Never-met-an- assault-rifle-I-didn't-like type thing.

But there he is (Obama) telling European audiences it is time the world disarmed. Time to get rid of nuclear weapons. At home, though, anything short of nukes appears to be just fine. The U.S. government could ban assault rifles entirely. In fact, they could ban all weapons except hunting rifles and shotguns and provide that if people want to shoot handguns or assault rifles, they have to do it at licensed shooting galleries or ranges.

Advancing the two views -- no nukes internationally, assault rifles in the U.S. OK -- amounts to sheer hypocrisy. But, then, in America, hypocrisy is as American as the 4th of July.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I hear that what with all the wars and the increased gun sales because "Obama is going to take away our guns, aaugh!" and so on, there's an ammunition shortage. Excellent. The Constitution supposedly guarantees a right to bear arms (though the sane interpretation is that they were supposed to have their own arms so they could serve in the militia, and incidentally, there were far fewer Americans armed with guns then than there are now). It doesn't say anything about ammo. So let's just ban the production and sale of ammunition. That should do it.
I lived in Europe for awhile. They think we're crazy to allow anybody and everybody to own a gun. They're right. We are. "Self-defense" is a crock. When I lived in DC, I used to read the crime reports; the merchants who got killed by armed robbers were the ones who kept a gun under the counter and tried to "defend" themselves.
Could we stop and think about what it says of us that we think individual "self-defense" is the way to keep order in society, rather than having a well-funded and well-trained police force? Why have a government at all? -- oh, I forgot, that's what the right wing says it wants.
Alternatively: when you buy a car you have to demonstrate that you have both a license and insurance. How about we make the same rules for gun ownership? You have to be licensed AND you have to carry insurance to protect the people you might shoot with it. Hmmm.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The question was asked at the end of this article in reference to the growing problem of rampant killings of other humans in a country armed to the teeth, "Will a sizeable group of politicians have the courage to step up and demand tighter degulations of firearms in this country after all of these shootings? "

After wading through the minefield of these hyper-inflated comments by enraged, snarlingly defensive gun lovers, in my humble opinion the answer is : not highly likely.

Gun control is one subject which is doomed, like impeachment, to be forever off the table and anyone who is so bold as to suggest that not every unstable, paranoid, raging lunkhead in the country is qualified for gun ownership, is branded as stupid beyond belief.

In fact, to voice an opinion on a subject as sacred as gun ownership in a culture already saturated to the max with guns and gun violence, is like poking a stick into an angry nest of smarling killer bees.

So much for civil discourse and freedom of expression!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think I am probably more liberal than most liberals, but I own guns.

I own guns for 3 reasons:

a) because I can - law allows me to so why not? I may need them one day in a zombie apocalypse or something.

b) all the republican redneck a-holes have them, and that worries me.

c) guns are cool as objects - kind of like motorbikes are cool as objects even if you don't ride one.

As for what to do about the weird random violence associated with guns...who knows? We could create laws to remove all the guns from people who care about breaking laws...but then that still leaves all the people who don't care about breaking laws.

You could create some sort of international law that prohibits selling guns to any non-military or police agencies - but then the bad cops and gi's would form their own network of black-market guns that mysteriously disappear from military and police arsenals.

And even if you did both those things - a) ban all guns and b) ban manufacturers from selling to anyone other than the military or police you'd still have at least a billion guns in the hands of random people like myself...not to mention all the guns that criminals own.

What do you do about all those???

There's nothing you can do to stop bad guys from getting guns - nothing at all. Every action you support against gun ownership only removes them from the hands of the good guys - people who give a shit about following laws.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]