As has been pointed out,law abiding people have not been committing these mass shootings. On the other hand,others will not suddenly become law abiding, who intend to do evil or who are mentally ill, just because new laws are passed. The laws are already in place in every state.They need enforcing. Owners need to make sure people can't get to their weapons as much as possible.

We know mass shooters take weapons illegally, to commit their crimes. New laws won't make any difference in the least, nor save one single child, regardless how illegal a weapon or clip becomes. That is a fact you can bet on.

One should also keep in mind, often what has been passed into law, for the best of intentions, ends up having unforeseen consequences later on down the road. Much to regret of consumers. Usually the government will not give back, freedoms once lost. No matter how good intended the original cause for which the law was meant.

When passions are high, it is hard to have cool level heads prevailing. How easy the mob can be led astray. Rarely does the majority do what is best for itself.Most often it is the minority which knows what is wisest from experience and history. Also rare is the simple solution when the problem has multiple root causes.

As noted by one of the nation's top profilers, these mass shootings are following a chilling pattern, of young men, wearing dark clothing, lots of ammo, in public places, no escape route, and living out a fantasy revenge, copycat killings raising the bar. Any law passed, would have no effect on such individuals.

There are already enough guns and clips, legally owned, for someone to kill others. That genie is out of the bottle. Any laws passed now, would simply be feel good ones.Unless the government requires everyone who owns them to turn them in. And if that is the case, what is the penalty if they don't? Go house to house searching, and arrest anyone who doesn't?

Defending children should not be a bad thing,
Officers are at college, high school , mid school , why when our sons and daughters are at the most vulnerable do we not want to protect them.
Drugs have been banned how is that working out ??

TO Freedom Frys:

"Armed guards in schools? Since when did going to school become like going to prison? It would much easier and cheaper to ban high caliber guns and maximum ammo magazines."

Big difference. Guards in prison are there to shoot the prisoners if needed. The ones in schools are there to protect them. See the difference now?

You can ban anything you want, I know it feels good, problem is IT JUST WON'T WORK.
We need something RIGHT NOW that will work.

nice comment deweydan

With the Progressive/Communist/Democrat Government poised to take over and rewrite the Constitution I think it's a good idea to hold fast to our 2nd Amendment Rights!!!!

ROBERT: 1.4 Unions are the most violent orgs. in this Country,one only needs to look at the "Violent Union Protest" in Wisconsin, Mich., the longshoreman in Ca. Union Teachers brought Middle School students to destroy State Capitols. I'd rather see RESPONSIBLE N.R.A.gun ownerswith guns than Communist Union Members. "Legislation Passed in Secret" you mean like Obammacare? Where we need to pass the Bill to see whats in it? Where AFL-CIO Communist President Conrade Richard Trumka meet secretly with Obamma? Comrade Trumka came out of the meeting with a handfull of waivers for the Union trolls? Unions are part of the problem!!!!

wantnot: Same as for arming teachers -- I do not support amateurs running around with guns in public. I go for someone with a lot of hours in shoot-don't-shoot training.

Is this how freedom dies?

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin

Will-1091847

@lokay5

And when crack is outlawed, only outlaws will have crack. It is still a good thing for society that crack is outlawed though. You're comments seem to be short, so reading anything longer than one sentence may be a challenge for oyu, but hang with me here.

If guns were outlawed, it would be a crime to even possess a gun, therefore if you see someone with a gun you can call the police. Once the manufacturing of guns has ceased and all of the guns of private citizens have been rounded up and destroyed, there will be a much smaller pool of supply for outlaws to use. One at a time, as they are rounded up and their guns taken away, the amount of guns available will dwindle. Gun shows will be over. Police could raid the headquarters of known gangs and round up every gun they own. The price on the street for an illegal gun will skyrocket. Within ten years, guns will be a rarity.

Interestingly enough, the biggest threat to society will then be private gun owners who refused to give up their guns. YOU will then be a target for theft by criminals.

This is doable - IF the NRA will shut its big mouth and let it happen.

Your post is so very short sighted. Do you not realize that just shutting down gun manufacturers does not stop the manufacture of guns? If you do then you do not understand the resolve of those that want weapons to use in crime.

As to those that think taxing ammo is the way to go then you too do not understand, people will simply re-load or go to the black market, you will never have enough revenue to spend on the armed gaurds.

Be very careful about your regulation of "rights" as soon it will be rights you hold dear that are regulated into oblivion.

An AR15 style weapon is often used for coyote hunting, particularly in the west. It is no different then a Rugar mini 14 which is a favorite for such use.

Using the phrase "spraying the countryside" is both untrue and is used only to inflame people. When that term is used is in context with machine guns, which we all know are illegal and have been since 1934.

• I've been wondering....... why do so many in Congress think it's okay to have guns anywhere except on the Halls of Congress??

Make that 4 million plus 4, I just sent in for my families membership. The NRA is citizens of this country nothing more, Citizens that have a common interest that have formed a membeship in a group to protect that common interest.

Yep. I joined the NRA on line the other day, after being on the fence about it for so many years. One, to preserve my Constitutional rights, and two - to drive the batsh1t crazy anti-gun loons even crazier. And I don't even own anything high powered. I have just 4 handguns. For target shooting.

Look at the article headline:

After reaction to it's defiant stance, NRA prepares for 2013 battles

Don't you just love it when the moonbat liberal media calls WE THE PEOPLE who want to preserve our Constitutional rights "defiant"? LOLOL!

Wow, cant believe some of the posters here. Take away all guns? Never-ever going to happen. Its not how many rounds a weapon can hold, its the placement of those rounds that matter. As much damage can be inflicted with a .22 caliber 10 shot rifle as any other gun. It only takes a fraction of a second to change a magazine. Everyone was clambering for dialog and ideas, the NRA gave their opinion and is now being crucified for doing so. Like many responsible law-abiding gun owners I have a carry permit. I own several so called "assault" weapons. I have never been arrested, have a masters degree and if I stood in line next to you at a store you would never know I was well armed, and would probably even strike up a conversation with you. There definitely needs to be more responsibly to the gun holders for the storage of their weapons, close the loopholes that allow guns to be sold without background checks, a mandatory training course given to all gun owners and a more thorough background check to include a history of mental defect. Passing laws that ban certain weapons and/or limit magazine size will not work, didn't work before wont work now.

Actually, I think people need to get a grip.

How many schools are there in the US? How many classrooms, how many students?

How often does a whack job come into a school and start shooting?

Oh, yes, it's going to happen, we can NEVER stop all the violence. But the fact of the matter is that this, though a tragedy, is NOT an daily occurance in life. Acts such as this, or the theatre shooting in Colorado, are NOT being carried out by normal, everyday people (who haven't withdrawn from reality and convinced themselves that their fantasy world is real).

We DO need to take reasonable steps to minimalize these incredibly violent acts by irrational people. Whether they believe they are The Joker, believe they can impress Jodie Foster, or believe that Y2K will be the end of the world and commit mass suicide (Heaven's Gate cult, anyone?), they all have one thing in common, some form of mental illness.

Not every gun owner is mentally ill. Not every gun owner goes on a homicidal shooting spree in a movie theatre or school.

So, why don't we recognize the problem for what it is, and deal with it as a mental illness isssue?

The NRA really, really, did gun owners a major dis-service by taking a week to come up with a lame brained solution. They needed a more comprehensive, well thought out plan than to blame television and computer games and call for guns in the classroom.

It's almost as if the NRA didn't prep because they want the fight so they can shake down their members, and the gun manufacturers, for more cash donations. I mean, seriously, the NRA is a lobbyist organization that makes it's bread and butter from gun controversy. If the gun control issue goes away, so do the donations.

This issue is a money machine for them. If they had offered a reasonable solution and diffused the situation, they would have been all the poorer.

Of course they thrive on the controversy, and want to prepare for the battle, it's their "cash cow".

Outlaws have guns

therefore

Guns should be outlawed

So glad I left the NRA 20 years ago --- if they fail, good riddance.

Remember Concord and Lexington? Remember 1939 ? Much around with Americans rights you will loose.

@HOTTICKET-2304234

There are many people who are fed up with psychos going on mass murder sprees. Would you feel the same way if you were burying your little girl today because the NRA fought to keep it easy for the Lanzas of the world to get guns? Can we agree that mentally ill people should not have guns, especially with the firepower he had? If you can agree to that, how, then, will you keep guns out of his hands without registration and background checks? Why would any honest person with a clean background and sans bad intent object to respomsible, common-sense measures to keep guns out of the hands of sick people? I don't object to guns but I do object to having my grandkids trying to function in a world that is swimming in an ocean of guns. An AR-15 has no legitimate place in society. It is a weapon made for war and mass killing. I wonder how many NRA supporters have had their family members slaughtered like cattle by these weapons like AR-15s. Damned few, I'll bet.

LaPierre is foaming at the mouth on Meet the press. literally.

Starman,

Concord and Lexington: There was no National military then, now there is.

1939: The majority of Germans were firmly behind that action.

@ tomilvento

The interpretation that the second amendment is meant to protect citizens from government is one I cannot support.

That seems self-evident to me. The Brits committed quite a few war crimes in the Rev. War and other wars besides that. It's noteworthy that only the right to free speech trumped it (2nd Amendment). But we are at a point that no firearm(s) you could possess would stop or even slow down the govt if they came for you. Winess Waco and Ruby Ridge. An AR-15 would be no deterrent to them. Is only real use, coyotes notwithstanding, is to kill many people very quickly. It won't stop Uncle Sam.

Incidentally, tomilvento, it is very noteworthy that Japan's emperor briefly considered invading the US mainland during WWII and one thing that helped deter that strategy was the knowledge (according to Yamamoto) that the US had millions of armed citizens and would likely resist and cost the Japanese dearly. There is something to be said for an armed populace. But we've gone too far. Govts are dangerous, but they're a little less dangerous if they are afraid.

It's funny that the NRA is all up in arms about someone POSSIBLY passing laws that make access to guns a little stricter. They had NO problem back in the late 60's when some black males that called themselves The Black Panther Party took up arms because they were frustrated with a tyrannical government (state, local and in some cases federal) that was still denying them the same rights as their Caucasian counterparts. They RAN to help set up legislation banning them from owning any firearms.

So it's okay for the NRA to deny some of this country's 2nd amendment rights (even when they hadn't done anything at that time to warrant it), but it's NOT okay for the Rest of us to demand that we have some common sense laws in place. Yes I said common sense, because what is out there right now MAKES NO SENSE and they know it. Which is why they keep going back to that bullcrap each and every time.

Yes I own guns, Yes I am an Independent LIBERAL. And yes if you attempt to harm myself or my family that are in my presence, I will put you down like the rapid nutcase that you are!!!

@tomilvento ... very well said. Even though I don't agree entirely with your statement, I do respect it. I wish more people were as level headed because then we may have the chance for productive dialog. There are many on both sides with ludicrous views that will never work, lets hope for productive debate from both sides ...

When the "patriots" stood on the village green at Lexington and Concord they were armed in a fashion similiar to the "redcoats", with muzzle loading muskets.

Today, the public is not armed in a fashion similiar to any military force. "Red Dawn" is a really entertaining movie, but if you think any civilian force can run around shouting "Wolverine" and shoot down bombers, fighters, helicopters, and drones, and survive a chemical attack, you've been watching too many Hollywood movies.

Any revolt of a civilian population against a government military force requires outside intervention, either direct, as in a French fleet at Yorktown, or indirect, as in surface to air weapons, and anti tank rockets.

To even argue that owning an assault weapon insures freedom is totally preposterous, and reflects ignorance of modern military capablities.

When guns are outlawed

Only outlaws will have guns

I wished the outlaws were the only one's to have them..

Its time to get these guns out of our cultures.

Drug companies are going to love and profit from this one. Altermative to more guns. 1. Ban on all video games, movies that are above PG13 in violent content plus if movie plot suggests anything vulgar or shows anger it will be banned. Note; even the 'Sound of Music would be banned. Music? LOL I remember years ago a survey was done to show what type of music did suicide takers listen to and it was country music. Tim McGraw might have to give up his guitar. 2. Everyone will be forced to take flawed tests to determine if they are even a little off, whereby drugs will be administered to 'temper down' the patient. It will be part of your medical history. 3. Forced sterilization of all those who have mental issues. Note: Connecticut mass murderer had mental issues and parent was forced to home school him. All home schooled persons will be under special scrutiny. 4. Nation wide ban on inbreeding. More prevalent than you think folks. Although in today's culture mental issues can be directly connected to drug use a great deal of mental health stems from genetic material passed through procreation. If our best are being killed in wars what is left at home? 5. Courts... While on the surface this sounds like the culprit, Most judges would like the time to fit the crime. After culprits are incarcerated and dry out, either drugs or alcohol, put them to work. Most do not know what it is to work up a sweat doing work. Or ship them off to another country to have them take care of the problem, how about China? I did not hear anything mentioned about blaming drugs. Maybe the NRA considers the mixing of drugs and firearms as nothing wrong. For hunting purposes you do not need more than 2 bullets to bring down a deer. If you cannot bring it down with 2 then you shouldn't be out in the woods hunting. Same goes for fowl or small game although I prefer the bow as the hunting device of choice. Remember grand father hunting with an over and under 12 gauge for rabbits and single shot 30-30 for deer. Before that it was a muzzle loader. Our founding fathers did not have repeater or assault rifles. Those were invented for the purpose of achieving more killing and to win wars. Old George and his buddies would have banned all except what you can use to hunt for food.

Typical liberal argument, it is the guns fault. It amazes me how liberals have pushed social agenda's by forcing the education through the schools. Our nations education system has become the bastion for the liberal movement, yet on the topic of guns the target is the weapon and not the entire culture. Children are bombarded with violence throughout the gaming industry, movies, the media, and by fellow students in the school systems. So where is the outrage from liberals about the ever increasing violence in video games? How about Hollywood movies that do there level best to make movies both adult and kid viewable, with the ever reduction in rating standards. Wait I know the liberal argument, don't play video games and don't go to the movies. You can turn the channel. But when it comes to guns it is the weapon and not the person behind it, how typical.

Robert in Oregon

Foreign Ammunition (made outside the borders of the United States) will not be legally imported; and is illegal to own (more American jobs).

Foreign Firearms (made outside the borders of the United States) may not be legally imported; and are illegal to own (still more US jobs, lots of US jobs since most guns are currently imported)

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Is this going to be as effective as our “war on drugs” as far as being illegally imported and owned?

Come on Bobby, be serious.

You Liberals keep insisting on putting your full faith and confidence in our government to protect us. You demand that these irrational “social wars” continue because you hope someday, if we just throw enough of our hard earned tax dollars at them, they will actually work.

The “war on drugs” has been in effect since 1971 (actually drug prohibition policies in the U.S., started in 1914) and it has been an abject failure. The “war” on poverty has been an even bigger failure costing us over $17 trillion with no measurable improvement as our poverty rate is 14.3%, which has increased since 1965 when it started.

I won’t even insult anyone’s intelligence with how big a failure our “war on illiteracy” has been (pun intended).

Our “war on crime” continues to be an embarrassment to our great Republic.

You Libbies keep thinking that punishing law abiding citizens with more and more taxes or rules, laws and regulations, will actually work. The ONLY thing that will work to reform all these “wars” is education, not more money. We already spend more on education than any nation, other than Switzerland, we need better common sense academic education rather than our current ridiculous “outcomes based education”.

Violence is not a single issue problem, it’s not simply a gun used incorrectly. It’s multifactorial. We need to educate more people about all the factors that influence them.

Newtown was a tragedy. But is it really anymore tragic than the thousands of murders that occur every year in Chicago, Detroit or Compton?

446 school age children have been shot in Chicago so far this year which has some of the strongest gun laws in the country, and the media is silent about that.

62 school aged children have actually been killed by crazed nuts in Chicago so far this year with almost two weeks to go. So why isn’t this news worthy? Is it because it would embarrass those anti second amendment nuts who brag about Chicago’s tough gun laws? Is it because most of the kids who were shot and killed were minorities? Or is it because the corrupt media doesn’t want to show Chicago in a bad light? Amazingly, no Obama crocodile tears either.

Liberal hypocrisy is only surpassed by its delusions.

NRA.... please note: More guns will not fix or cure the epidemic or destructive culture that has been ALLOWED to run unchecked for years.

chicory51, you DO realize that not everyone that watches a James Bond movie doesn't leave the theatre and run around acting out that they have a "license to kill", and not everyone that plays "Call of Duty" doesn't kill people once they log off their computer?

Yes, violence IS part of our culture, but ACTING OUT VIOLENCE ON OTHERS IS NOT.

You make it sound as if everyone that owns a gun can't wait to kill their neighbor? That killing people is the norm, not the exception, in our society?

Maybe this is more of a mental health issue than a gun issue?

Why is our mental health system so difficult to talk about after these horrific events? Why is it the elephant in the china shop that everyone seems to talk around, not about?

Why is our mental health system so difficult to talk about after these horrific events? Why is it the elephant in the china shop that everyone seems to talk around, not about?

Sharkey,

Do you think that the same folks who fought so adamantly against the Affordable Care Act would be supportive of governmentally supported mental health programs? Socialized medicine as long as they get to keep their guns?

THE NRA IS A UNION?

Apparently it is. Do with that what you will.

Yep. Blame everything except the guns. That's just like the NRA we all know and love! Doesn't that just make you all so happy?

What I wish for Wayne LaPierre this holiday season is for him to come face to face with a good guy wielding a gun.

Call me crazy,. . . Wayne La Pierre

Sooooo

easy

. .

.

.

YES YOU ARE CRAZY

.

.

It wasn't a well thought out solution.

.

.

McBarker watches the Kardashians....What a loser....That's what anti-gun people are like. No wonder they act that way.

btone,

No, and I don't for a second think that the people that believe the NRA response of "more guns in schools" would be willing to pay the higher taxes to put armed guards in ALL the schools across the US.

On the one hand the want smaller, less intrusion government in their lives, on the other they are calling for more armed government paid employees/contractors to patrol public buildings. Lower taxes and more government services. They are totally dysfunctional in their political position.

That is why I believe the NRAs response to this issue has been totally irresponsible and self serving, to maintain their controversal "cash cow" issue. They are incapable of presenting a logical, coherent, political position without contradicting the other political positions of their base.

Even conservatives such as Michael Steele had a WTF? moment with their response.

NRA wants tw cops in every school...let them pay for it with membership tax and a gun sales tax.

Close loopholes on gun sales at gun shows with waiting period.

Make republicon politicians rebuke Norquist pledge and their pledge against America or try them for treason. The last statement has nothing to do with gun control....it's a mental health issue. republicons are crazy to support anyone who pledges for King Norquist and to pledge vote against against America

NRA is a propaganda arm of the ZioNazi monetary system monopolizing war profiteering spawn that finance and sell weapons to the opposing sides of every war. The Federal Reserve tells the US government what to do and they will get you brain dead idiots to jump off a fake fiscal cliff while cashing their paychecks. Their leaders are the New World Order of international criminals who are buying every profitable business and every nation with their FIAT money system. Neo-conservatives and neo-liberals, demolicans and republicrats are all their little lap dog mouthpieces or brainwashed twits. This is obvious by the comments here arging for or against gun rights instead of getting to the real problems and standing together against the infinitely greedy inbred enemies of humanity that rule over us like Satan with their FIAT money system developed in the Synagogue of Satan. Bow all you subjects, you goyim chattle, bow.

@ ED2874315: to say guns "don't belong in modern society" is just ignorant. Maybe for you your food is down the street wrapped in nice neat little packages and labeled nice, but for some people our food is walking around in a field. Now I agree that we should ban high capacity clips and assault rifles that just makes sense (You can protect your family fine with a 12 gauge and a revolver), but there are some of us who have to have firearms to survive and to protect ourselves and our livelihood from threats (for my family it's more from the kind with teeth and claws than other humans). Just because you live less than a mile from your nearest food source that has been prepared for you, you shouldn't assume everyone does. I'm all for getting rid of assault weapons and high capacity clips though.

"When guns are outlawed

Only outlaws will have guns"

DUMBEST SLOGAN EVER

But seeing how you like stupid slogans, here's one for you:

When money is put in banks to protect it from being robbed

Only bankrobbers will rob banks

NRA broke its silence, "Lock'n Load" Lets put more Guns with 30 Round Magazines in our Schools and Kill more Kids, This dude is Crazy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If guns were outlawed, it would be a crime to even possess a gun

It is already a crime to use a gun for illegal acts.

That doesn't stop it from happening.

More guns make the world a safer place? What sort of logic does, indeed, constitute 'crazy'?

to, Un-patriotic american U.S.A. What makes you so sure that it is not you who is "crazy as a bat"?

If you do not want the children safe while they are in school, speak your reasons.

There are enough police who are already on the payroll that one in each school will not cost any more money.

Sharkey,

You are correct. It would be an impossible, expensive program to manage.

And the mental health aspect would be the same The government can't institute an all encompassing mental health program to stop people from being crazy. And even if they could, no one would want to pay for it.

I can hear it now. "Why should I have to pay for your mental problems?"

Let's face it, there have been crazy people ever since there have been people. That'll never change.

I believe in the right to bear arms, but we don't need Weapons of War and 30 Round Magazines !!!

Do we arm ourselves against the "wingers" who abuse their freedom of speech? (Limbaugh, Beck....)

Is a retired police, fire or military person assured of quick reflexes to take down a gunner who is wearing protective kevlar? What if they need to pee, or eat, or grab a cigarette? Who relieves them? A hall monitor?

Does a frantic, obsessive buying of semi-automatics demonstrate paranoia ?

Am I the crazy one for thinking that?

So many THOUSANDS of posts:

if, if, if comes up all the time.

If the gun was locked, if a teacher had a gun, if a "husky 12 year old" had taken the shooter down (seriously, that was a suggestion)...

Hi,

I don't own a weapon except for a daisy pellet gun, but if they pass another gun law, I will own as many weapons as I can buy before the law comes into effect. You rock heads don't seem to understand that it is not guns that kill but it is the people behind them and using them. If you ban weapons I urge the NRA to bring into consideration automobiles, more children are killed each year by crazy speeding drivers then by guns. I come home from work each day and hear that at least one accident happened and some crazy driver talking on his cell phone and speeding has killed someone, yet you people don't complain about that.

How many of you jerks actually follow the speed limit and maintain concentration on the road, and follow the laws that are in effect, maybe one very old lady going shopping, yet you never hear our misguided and very informative experts at the news media bring that up.

Ask yourself, will banning guns bring about any change in the killings anywhere?

I don't think so, I think all it will do is give the bad guys more opportunity to buy automatic weapons because there will be a huge influx of them from the black market gun sellers. Why? because now they can double or quadruple the price of their product.

The news media today is very biased, instead of reporting the news as it happens, they try to sway you in one direction, they no longer just report the news. They are a bunch of one way blabbermouth that shouldn't have the right to talk over the air waves. Case in point, some guy named Steve who talks on the radio in Pennsylvania, this so called news media talk show host, doesn't even give you the right to say what you want to say without interrupting you 1 million times, he keeps on saying he wants facts, but the real fact is, is that he is an arrogant media user, it is all about him and what he wants to say, if you don't agree with him, he just hangs up on you. If you call him a name, he BANS you just like the rest of you who want to ban weapons.

Your argument that the 2nd ammendment has no place in todays world, I say it has more of a place because look at the people running the country, they spend money at their whim in order to support there favorite people, business's, and corporations. They have no regard of keeping a budget, they give money to our so called bought out friends in the middle east, and they definetly support the oil industry. Why Afganistan, well it does have an over abundance of poppy plants, but more importantly it has lithium, the main ingredient used in our new batteries.

As the baby holding his hands over his ears says "Make the stupid people shut up and go away"

I leave you my best regards for the people who want gun control, may you never run into a bad person carrying a weapon

Buy a cop a cup of coffee. They truly deserve it, and while your at it say "Thank You"

all except for that local cop at the Bloomsburg turn off, he is a complete idiot, puts up a sign of 35 mph on the off ramp 10 feet off the entrance to it, then gives you a ticket for doing 55 in a 35 mph zone. Next time he pulls you over and you notice that sign up, pull off to the side, then politely tell that fat donut eating cop, that you would like a Pennsylvania State Trooper to verify his ticket and sign. That sucker is so fat that when he gets out of his SUV it raises about 2 inches.

If it’s crazy to call for putting police in and securing our schools to protect our children, then call me crazy

It is good that he knows now, even if he is the last to know....

SO YOU SAY YOU HATE GOVERNMENT? Really, tell me more.

This is why I call these freaks fake conservatives. Sticking to your guns, literally, when you are wrong is better than thinking to these guys. And they joke about being crazy as if they are not. Mirror, LaPierre, use it. You don't represent me as a person who believes in the 2nd amendment. Not by a long 'shot.'

btone,

Agreed.

But it seems popular to address the issue only from a gun control position, not a mental health issue. As if gun control alone will stop a minor segment of mentally ill people from committing violent acts.

The fact of the matter is that this is evolving into a big political agenda in which lobbyists are seeing cash, but not solutions.

Frankly, the way I see it, at the end of the day, maybe magazine size will be restricted, maybe semi automatic "assault" type weapons will be restricted, and everyone will have one of those warm "feel good" fuzzy moments until the next whack job falls of the mental health train and commits mass murder.

It's like everyone getting upset about taking actions that won't change a thing.

Things tomorrow will be more like today then they've ever been before.

The democrats are Drooling over the deaths of the children, because they can go for more gun control

Iamnotyou,

The only people who are drooling over these deaths are the gun manufacturers. Sales are going through the roof. Bring on the next tragedy. The more heinous, the more dollars.

Smerf,

The gun / car analogy is ridiculous.

Also, if you don't own guns now, why would you hurry up and buy tomorrow? See my opening statement. Gun manufacturers love you. And they drool.

Hey, CPO Sharkey, hand in hand I've been saying take away the rights of those who have been diagnosed with mental health issues that threaten to injure themselves or others for LIFE. It is as large an issue.

You don't get to restrict gun ownership and not take on the violent mental health issues because you think they'll be better off if no one had guns. You don't get only one side of this. Everybody gets to give something up. Or they aren't interested in solving the problem.

Lokay, "when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns" is pure BS. Not one of the mass shooters of the past two decades were "outlaws" prior to picking up a gun and shooting dozens of innocent people. They were all fine up standing gun fanatics who just snapped and blew away people for no reason. This last kids mother was an avid gun collector, a memeber of the NRA and a conservative republican.

and how can LaPierre (sounds awfully French to me, bring on the freedom fries) say that guns dont kill people but movies and video games about guns do? If thats the case ban all advertisements for guns, all magazines, all cop shows that show gun use, all movies that depict guns in a positive light, all country and western songs about guns, ect.... 100 million people play video games and 300 million watch movies without killing anyone, it's always that one whacked out child of a republican Fox news watching parent who looses it and shoots up a school full of children, if anything blame Fox News.

Sharkey,

Once again. Agreed.

Take care.

Big Chief A$$hole Wayne Nut NRA said all Schools Lock'n Load, yes this Looney is Crazy as a Bat !!!

Freedomfryes: "Armed guards in schools? Since when did going to school become like going to prison?"

About the same time you started going to the airport and assume the position of freedom (arms up in the air, over your head, going through a scanner). The likelihood of a terrorist at the airport is about the same as a nut going off with a gun in a school, so what's the difference. Frankly, the best defense is having a couple of armed, trained teachers in the building.

And no, I don't own a gun nor am I a member of the NRA. You can't legislate away insanity but we can protect ourselves if we choose.

"lee-936758

With the Progressive/Communist/Democrat Government poised to take over and rewrite the Constitution I think it's a good idea to hold fast to our 2nd Amendment Rights!!!!"

And you're the same nut job type that needs a mental illness eval before you go all ape sh**and start shooting Democrats because you think their Communist posed to take over!!!!

Well jade, play it the other way - you're not in favor of guarding children.

Putting armed police in schools is crazy! P. S. "You're crazy!"

NRA chief: If putting armed police in schools is crazy, 'then call me crazy'

Anyone with sufficient recall will remember the tremendous controversy surrounding the proposal to put armed security on aircraft (Air Marshalls). The anti-gunners vehemently wanted to keep guns off the aircraft predicting all sorts of carnage but the end result was safer air travel. There is little difference.

As soon as any new gun restriction proposal appears (probably sometime in January) it should be examined to see if these restrictions, were they already in place, would have prevented the Sandy Hook shooting, or the Aurora shooting, or any other recent shooting. The answer will be a resounding NO, and that is because all the gun grabbers do is to use these tragedies to promote their agenda. Their proposed restrictions never address street gang gun violence or that of other criminals, only the law abiding, their goal from the beginning.

BehindEnemyLines-InUtah, #1.19- EXCELLENT!!!!!! I was going to answer the question in James-2110694, #1.18, but then I read yours!!!!!! I gave you a vote, too. I've not given out a lot of votes, either, because there have been a lot of posts that actually have some good things to say but then one line will be thrown into the mix that actually changes what's being said. But I think your post is just all-around EXCELLENT!

Robert in Oregon, #1.4- EXCELLENT!!! LOVE IT!!!! Especially LOVE! how you show "exactly" HOW IT CAN BE DONE (and IS!)!!!!!!!!!!

charlie-295522, # 1.5- EXCELLENT!!!!! I think it's GREAT! that you "REALITY"-framed it and chose to call it Gun "Safety" Laws as opposed to Gun "Safety in Recklessness" Laws!

Wayne LaPierre is one arrogant @!$%#......

I'm Retired Army Infantry, believe in bearing arms, and keeping my weapons, but have never been a member, never, ever considered being a member of the NRA. There's something about that organization, to me, that borders on being no better than a domestic terrorist organization.

Patriotic American, part of the problem is the name calling and demonizing. Try to not call names as much as you might wish too because you are frustrated.

I know of what I speak because I too have been disappointed in myself after I have read a comment in which I have done so and been unhappy with myself afterwards.

Keep it civil and let's at least TRY to have a dialogue.

Just some thoughts on the subject:

1) I have lived in one country where gun ownership was severaly limited (Great Britain) and one where gun ownership was virtually impossible (Japan.) In neither country did anyone complain about any rights lost, but in both countries they were very appreciative that their gun-related crime rates (armed robbery, homicide, etc) were far lower than in the USA. And remember that both countries were awash with weapons at the end of WWII, but virtually gun-free within two years.

2) The cowboy gun owner model that is often shown in the movies never existed. Most "cowboys" before railroads were Latino/American Indian or Negro (freed and escaped.) Only about 15% of "cowboys" prior to the 1880s were white. While there was a massive release of weapons after the Civil War, they were all older black powder weapons of little use to civilians, since they had to be loaded immediately before use. And metal cartridges were far too expensive for cowboys working for "$1 a month and found."

3) The rates of mass (more than 4 victims) killings has not increased in over 60 years. Before they were lower because of the use of muzzle-loaders which limited the number of victims and made knives the #1 killing tool. They seem to be a fixture of American life that has been little effected by the availability or non-availability of guns or ammunition.

4) Overall the nimber of gun death has plummeted in this country. The humber of handgun deaths has gone from around 14,000 in 1993 to around 7,000 a year currently.

Folks, the issues involved are a lot more complicated than the over-simplifications that you read in these threads.

btone

Hey Jim Spence,

I'm am liberal, and don't own a gun. Don't need to. If I ever want one, I'll just come to your house and take it out of your warm, sweaty, shaking hands while you piss down your leg.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Should I just start pissing now Mr. Limpwrist? Or should I wait until you prance in on your rainbow colored unicorn?

I'm not the one you'll need to worry about. I let my 13 yo daughter take care of my light work like you.

Now stop being more insignificant than you already are, Spanky.

La Peee, You are the very best thing that can happen to gun control advocates. His appearance just makes me sick. Get him back in his hole or we are going to get much worse regulation than we ever expected. People just hate this guy for his looks much less when he opens his mouth. I'd almost like to see his reaction in a neighborhood firefight while he trys to kill all the bad guys not knowing he is the bad guy and they are the good guys. Get him the heck off the stage.

The 2nd Amendment never meant for many of these guns to be owned and in the numbers that some own.

You know that because you were there when they discussed this amendment?

Oh, it is just like the amendment that says government can't interfere with church, but you guys have twisted it to be keep church out of government.j

Always twisting things to be what you want it to be, now that is lunatic!

Typing from my temporary quarters in PA, most high schools and middle schools in the cities already had guards. Now they are armed. Now the consideration is how they will handle the elementary schools which is sounding like they will hunt up partially physically disabled police or military. I'm certain they could use the extra income.

Problems solved.

I see people saying they are making the schools like prisons. Where have these critics been? There are only a few differences between a school and a prison, what on earth do you think a school lock down is?

All many schools need to do to complete the concept is install bullet proof / resistant glass at every entrance, every classroom and put an armed guards at key locations.

The concepts are really quite similar.

We may not need to go that far architecturally. Improving school communication systems and adding armed security (retired, partially disabled law enforcement and military) at the appropriate entrances with video surveillance at all entrances should be adequate. Most schools already have the video surveillance, already, they just need someone who's job it is to watch and be able to identify real threats.

It's real simple. the only thing that stops a gun is another gun of equal or greater power. Government already knows this, why do you think so many in government want to ban guns to the individuals. then they can decree anything and the citizens will have to comply.

I've said this before, but it's a fact that bears repeating:

If more guns made us safer, the U.S. would be the safest country in the world, followed closely by Pakistan. Instead, we have the highest rate of violent gun crime of any developed country - 19 times higher in fact.

Of the worst 25 mass shootings in the last 50 years, 15 of them have happened here. The only other country to have more than 1 mass shooting was Finland (they had 2).

We are 5% of the world's population, but own 50% of it's guns. They clearly aren't making us safer. It's time to accept the fact that more guns simply does not mean increased security. It means (many) more deaths.

Confidence and manliness don't come from the barrel of a gun. Courage and character don't come from bullets. Real men know this.

It's time to accept the fact that more guns simply does not mean increased security.

I had a thought about this. If it were known that somebody was packing heat, that wouldn't deter crime. A person who intends to mug you but knows you're armed will just shoot you first and take your wallet from your cold dead corpse. It just presents a justification for escalation of the violence in the crime committed.

When guns are outlawed...

Only criminals will have guns!

...for a while. Then, once the guns dry up with no ammo available, the local schoolkids can stop worrying about going to school, and life will get back to normal.

More extremist rhetoric from both sides, with only a handful of thoughtful posts, which are carefully ignored.

Simple thought, entirely doable; license all gun owners. Pass a test demonstrating knowledge of safe handling, an understanding of pertinent laws, and have minimum required secure storage. Just because a person is over a certain age and not a felon doesn't make them competent to own or operate a firearm. You could even 'step' the license, i.e. 'learners permit', basic license, advanced. I would think the NRA could get behind this seeing how 'education' is one of their professed missions.

We do this for plenty of other things where public safety is involved; driving, medical care, food handling, construction, to name just a few. Charge enough for the license to pay for security costs at schools, etc. It is a right to own a gun, but don't ask others to pay the costs of exercising your right, take personal responsibility. If the cost of a license is too high, tax ammunition or gun sales to make up the difference.

But I suspect this sort of solution will be ignored....

Hey, if you ban all guns, that means police too won't have any. They won't need them because no criminals will have them. They will be able to protect citizens with pepper spray and batons. Innocent bystanders wouldn't get shot by police stray bullets in a shootout if there are no guns around. Also, President Obama's security force wouldn't need them either...Remember, all guns will no longer be available since they have all been banned. Sounds like a wondeful idea to me, especially regarding Obama's security forces with no guns since they really aren't qualified to have them anyway. They just want to get hookers and get drunk anyway.

To those who insist on arming teachers, installing armed guards or police in schools, or to those who say if only there was a gun available to a "law abiding citizen", I have two words - Fort Hood. On a military base full of armed servicemen, all of whom were trained in the use of firearms, 13 people were killed and another 29 were injured before someone was finally able to take out the shooter. If we can't prevent casualties in an situation like that, what good do you think one or two armed police officers, or a minimally trained armed teacher will do when trying to face down a shooter with a semi-automatic rifle?

As far as the efficacy of an assault weapons ban on overall gun violence, it's probably true that there is little to no affect. Why? Because most gun violence is perpetrated with hand guns. However, if there had been an assault weapon ban in place, it would have been much more difficult for the Newtown tragedy to have occurred. The shooting was done with LEGALLY PURCHASED weapons (including the "assault type" weapon).

Regarding gun control in general, I believe that does work. Take a look at New York City. In the years since its strict gun control measures have gone into effect, violent crimes have dropped to record lows. This year promises to be the least violent since the 1960s.

Though I do not own any guns, I consider myself fairly reasonable. I do not propose that we eliminate all gun ownership. The Constitution does guarantee us the right to bear arms. It does not, however, guarantee to the right to arm oneself to an unlimited degree. If you've been permitted to purchase a handgun (or two or three or four), a rifle, and a shotgun, your right to bear arms has not been infringed. Remember, the text of the second amendment reads, "...shall not be infringed," it does not read, "...shall not be limited."

I only hope "Patriotic American" doesn't own a gun!!!! He's one angry person. Are you really an American?

This is a problem that requires practical, fast mitigation. We will never be able to ban ballistic weapon sales and there are 30 million guns in private hands today. A partial ban on one certain type of weapon is useless for the immediate defense of our most defenseless citizens. While can bend the curve of gun deaths over time with regulation, no law will prevent the next tragedy.

As much as some would hate to admit it, LaPierre is correct. The only way to deter the next massacre is for armed defense of each school, mall and movie theater.

Take all the unreasonable gun nuts and shoot em'.

There.

Problem solved.

Yeah we've seen how "compassionate" you folks on the left are....think I'll pass. Liberals are fabricating the "battle" to take power away from America's citizens. I'll stick with the framers of the Constitution....they were a hell of a lot smarter and wiser than you'll ever be!

GOPisextinct

Take all the unreasonable gun nuts and shoot em'.

There.

Problem solved

Stalin.........is that you?

The NRA wants to preserve the 2nd amendment, the right to bear arms amendment. Fine. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to prevent the government from being able to disarm it's citizenry and thereby prevent citizens from violently opposing government tyranny. As a corrolary to supporting the 2nd amendment the NRA is also opposed to big government. They don't want government, at any level, taking over that which should be left to individual rights. Yet, here they are supporting the idea of introducing armed government agents into our schools. One of the arguments LaPierre used was the fact that we protect our leaders with armed guards, so why not protect our kids similarly. It doesn't hold water.

Armed guards in schools is a bad idea on many levels, for many reasons. 1. It only (in theory) protects kids in one locale. What about sporting events, malls, theatres, beaches, Sunday school, church groups, summer camps, proms, local hangouts, etc, etc. 2. Highly trained secret service agents protect our leaders where every move is planned. Having 2, 4, 6, 8 or 10 trained guards protecting 1,000 kids who perform the same routine every day is not the same. The shooter need only target a few guards first, by the time the other guards respond a semi-automatic weapon converted to fully automatic could make Sandy Hook seem like a minor incident. Or the shooter could just stand at the base of the bleachers during a football game and spray the crowd. Just like the theatre in Aurora. When the panic ensued how would an armed guard firing at the well armored shooter have avoided killing innocent people too. (When I was a kid the wife of a neighbor answered the door and was accosted by 2 armed men. The husband was in another room, got wind of what was going on and got his handgun. He came out from a hallway and level his gun and fired, striking his wife. The robbers opened fire and killed the husband. They fled and luckily the wife survived.) 3. How long will it be before one of these thousands of newly trained guards becomes the attacker? We all know it will happen.

I could go on, but the bottom line is that more armed people, whether trained guards or not, is not the answer. To make a dent we are going to have to have a blend of gun regulations (assault rifle ban, better background checks, mandatory gun ownership training and annual recertification, which should include mandatory time at a range); stronger gun crime laws (like Florida's mandatory sentences for using a firearm in a crime); more and better mental health options; a means of family members reporting of a loved one's suspicious behavior without it resulting in criminal prosecution of the loved one so they will be more likely to come forward; etc. I don't purport to have all the answers but I do think that we can make useful changes that may have an effect.

Folks, we can do this if we can work together. Given the often hateful, derogatory exchanges that one sees on these comment boards, I wonder whether we shouldn't first take a long hard look at ourselves and consider how we might all be better served by standing down from our high horses and figuring out how to work for the 'common good". It couldn't hurt. We could also start being kind to one another. That might be all it takes to avoid lighting the fuse of an otherwise unstable person. Some of us treat our animals better than we treat other human beings. I know that I could be more kind to others. I'm going to start today.

@btone,

The gun / car analogy is ridiculous, why may that be, I went through three driving schools, High School, NASCAR and police training, which I quit since 2 police officers where shot right out in front of my house why dealing with some drug dealers, my wife was very upset so I quit the school, but as every driving instructor has said "The only difference between a car an a gun, is that a gun shoots a 1/2 once bullet, a car is 3000 pounds of dynamite waiting to go off because of some loose nut behind the wheel". I was just wondering btone, are you one of those loose nuts?

When you drive do you always obey the law?

Check out the stats, Cars kill how many people in America each day?

Guns kill how many people each day?

The only real reason cars don't cause a scene each day is because it is just local news, but sometimes when there is a 200 car pile up, then it makes national news. Just like guns, you hear about a local shooting in your community, but it doesn't go national until a tragedy happens, then all you anti gun nuts come out of the closet and say those poor children, but what about all the poor children that die each day in a car accident, you don't really care? why because you own a car and need it. Well bubba I don't own a gun. had enough of it in Nam, Grenada, and Kuwait, but I will be damned if I let someone like you talk the government into getting rid of the 2nd ammendment, see I fought for this country and I for one am very unhappy with our government.

I saw and heard of Seal Team 6 getting osama bin laden from Osama Obama, that is what I will call him until I die, wanna no why, because "I gave the order, I approved the plan" and the most significant thing Osama Obama did "I told the nation about Seal Team Six", now guess what, Seal Team Six had a saying and it goes like this "You never saw us because we where never there" I am not a Seal, I wish I had the gonads to do what those men do, but all we did was be a taxi if needed.

Cars kill just as good as bullets, if you don't believe it, ask some mother who lost her child in an auto accident, and usually it was by a drunk driver, or some idiot using todays modern tech the cell phone or just some speeder enjoying his cruise. Hey if you don't believe cars can kill just as good as a gun, please stand out in front of mine when I am doing 70 mph.

deweydan,

" The Law Abiding Citizens that own firearms keep in check the Criminals." HUH?!!

I don't see law abiding citizens doing police work in preventing criminals from breaking the law. If it happens it happens only on rare occasions, so the "lawfully armed citizen" is not a deterent at all.

How do you spell terrorism? N R A!

@7.62x39mm

And there you have it. The "New Black Panther Party". You know, the one that only exists in the minds of those who only watch Faux Nues and nowhere else. You lost all credibility when you spewed that garbage.

Just like your movement, you're a laughing stock.

Jw 1.120

When guns are outlawed...
Only criminals will have guns!
...for a while. Then, once the guns dry up with no ammo available, the local schoolkids can stop worrying about going to school, and life will get back to normal.

My my, what a simple and elegant solution. Why hasn't anyone thought of this before? We can apply this solution to illegal drugs as well. Oh wait, we have, but why then is the country awash in illegal drugs?

Need I answer the obvious?

So, Libbies, tell me why when it's recommended that we put an armed guard in our schools you all of a sudden become rabid fiscal hawks?

Try driving your car, or better yet a van or pickup truck, to the front entrance of the U. S. Capitol. See how far you get. Now, IF you so happen to get to the front entrance see how easy it is to bring a legally purchased, registered and owned gun into the Rotunda.

Why is it so important to protect the 545 criminals that inhabit the 3 branches of government? Are they that much more important than our children in school?

Now, as far as funding is concerned, I have some recommendations. It's been estimated that the cost for nationwide security is between $4-$5 billion. Of course this is a lot of money but it's pocket-change in our corrupt government. Not that this is the whole solution, but it can be done IF we have a responsible, accountable government.

If you want to fund it, here are a few sources:

The federal government made at least $125 billion in improper payments in 2011.

Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.

The Congressional Budget Office published a “Budget Options” series identifying more than $140 billion in potential spending cuts.

Examples from multiple Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports of wasteful duplication include 342 economic development programs; 130 programs serving the disabled; 130 programs serving at-risk youth; 90 early childhood development programs; 75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities; and 72 safe water programs. This report identifies more than $100 billion to $200 billion in annual government spending on 1,500 different programs that are wasteful, duplicative, or inefficient.

A recent Institute of Medicine report showed that health care fraud is estimated to cost taxpayers more than $750 billion annually.

Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them–costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually–fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.

This last one should even outrage the most limp-wristed Liberal. Almost 25% of your sacrosanct government social programs do NOTHING but waste more money. They don’t even help the population they’re intended for.

Of course in Liberal/Progressive LaLa Land all this waste, fraud, abuse and corruption is perfectly acceptable. In the delusional mind of a Liberal anything the government does is OK, even when it wastes hundreds of billions of dollars in the process. Liberals don’t care because rarely do they contribute to our great Republic, they usually take more than they give.

Our criminal government wastes more than 25% of our money. Imagine how much more you could do with all that money that just disappears into that black-hole called government.

But of course, the Libbies will just demand we all pay more in taxes to feed their precious incompetent idol, the government.

Yes, you are a crazy, dangerous psychopath, and being in your mid-sixties you are showing early signs of dementia. You only listen to the loonie 15%, the gun dealers and the gun manufacturers and you assume that a majority of Americans are behind you -- just the opposite, my friend.

Say they outlaw semi automatic weapons, how are they going to know who already owns them? They can't take away something that they don't know you have.

Think about it, the people who are committing these types of gun crimes (school shootings etc...) are not in their right mind, they are mentally ill. If they ban the guns lets just say that takes care of that problem. What is their plan for the mentally ill people who commit they same kind of crimes with a bomb, a car, a knife or any other type of weapon? The people need to be fixed first. How about respect, morals and values, they are what has gone down the toilet screaming racism and demanding politically correctness.

HMMM!

@KEN

1. It only (in theory) protects kids in one locale. What about sporting events, malls, theatres, beaches, Sunday school, church groups, summer camps, proms, local hangouts, etc,

The only way we are going to protect them from all that you ask is:

1. Build a 18 inch thick steel box with an 18 inch thick steel door and put them in it.

Lets be realistic here, they have more chance of being killed in an auto accident then they have of being shot in any of these place. These shootings all though rare can happen because of human beings, take the human out of the picture and I don't care if there are 19 trillion ( you know the debt of the nation, caused by our politicians) guns, without humans they would just lye there. You know like a lifeless rock, to put it simpler, chevy, like a rock, something lying along side the road lifeless and non moving.

Listen when you go out there is a chance of you running into a bad guy, since there are a lot of them in the USA right now. Heck, I hear gun shots going off in my neighborhood every other week, is it the guns, well I don't think so, because this is a hunting town, and we didn't have any killings in our town until the late 80s and then the invasion began and since then I bought a pellet gun for some protection, in case some one came into my home. When I walk my dog I carry it and this is just a small town, about 47000 people.

I say ban humans, they are giving guns a bad name.

It is true that the people who purchase guns legally are not usually the ones who commit crimes with the guns. However, those who commit the crimes with the guns often take weapons which are legally owned by someone else. Most often stolen from legal owners who do not secure their weapons when not in use.

Compare owning and operating a vehicle to owning and operating a weapon.
To legally drive a vehicle one must pass a test to obtain a drivers license.
People who want to use a weapon should have to pass a test, which would go over the proper handling and proper safe storage of a weapon.
Someone applying for a drivers license must take an eye test.
Someone applying for a weapons permit should have to take a psychological test.
A driver must renew their license every four years and pay a fee for that renewal.
The owner of weapons should have to renew their license to own weapons, and pay a fee for that renewal.
If someone owns a car they are required to pay a fee to register and tag that vehicle.
Each weapon should have its own registry which is required to be renewed for a fee.
The fees to register and tag larger trucks is higher than fees for smaller vehicles.
The fees for automatic weapons should be higher than a simple pistol.
Besides the fee for registering the vehicle owner must prove they have insurance. If their car causes damage to someone else or their property the insurance covers the costs needed to pay medical bills and repair damage.
Every weapon owner should have to carry weapon insurance. If their weapon is ever used to harm anyone the insurance should cover medical and funeral costs instead of leaving that burden for the victims and their families.
Each time a driver buys a gallon of gas the cost of gas includes taxes which help to cover the costs of road upkeep.
Every time a weapon owner purchases ammunition they should have to pay a tax. Ammunition for automatic weapons should be very much higher than ammunition for a simple weapon.
Owners of weapons should be required to own a trigger lock for every weapon they own.
Owners of weapons should be required to own a gun safe, and their weapons should always be locked in that safe when not in use. If an owner of a legal weapon fails to secure their weapon, and that weapon is stolen, the owner of the weapon should have to pay a fine for not securing their weapon.

Businesses which sell weapons and ammunition should have to pay a higher tax on those sales than anything else they sell.

The additional money collected with the fees and higher taxes should be high enough to cover the cost of armed police personnel stationed at every school, every university, every government building, every public building, every church, every mall, every movie theater, every store, and yes even every Walmart. The additional jobs through the police force would lower unemployment and boost the economy.

I have a great big problem with this Good Guy vs. Bad Guy thing. When does a good guy become a bad guy? When he uses his good guy status to do a bad thing, that is when his status changes. Putting weapons in a lot of Good Guys hands only speeds the process.

Wayne LaPierre You are crazy it's not only guns. Guns are a tool too be used by crazy people and criminals. But Wayne LaPierre missed the point and so did NBC, we've allowed Hollywood and video games to control our children mental health in the areas of killing, car jacking, and bank robbery they are shown this day in and day out to a point that has harden them emotionally to the act of murder. Hollywood has in the past five years put out movies of mass murders to total destruction of cities combine these types of movies and video games a small minds will become warp. So guns are a tool we should control the gun but we should demand more control on movies and video games. Schools are having a hard time just paying the union retirements now you want to put 8 billion more on schools. Only place to get that money is to remove the unions from schools unless the NRA wants to foot the bill each year.

@Robert in Oregon

Ahhh yes, that's what you should do..put a huge tax on ammo. Do you really think these things out? Do you really feel that would work? Are you for real? Do you even know what your proposal will do? If you had it your way, you would create the biggest black market the industry would ever see.

Just like how NY has a HUGE black market now..but one of the strictest gun laws in the country. Why is that? Detroit? Ehhh, bring it on they will say..we will continue to do what we are doing..your laws don't phase us.

Since all this talk do you even have a clue what has been happening now? Any? If you have any friends that has a firearm I suggest you talk to them. If you think they don't..ask them.

The media and gov has goten the public in such an uproar that manufactures are being sold out!! Parts, Amo, you name it..gone!! Why? because those that didn't have a firearm are taking up one now. Those that do have one, are fearing a ban. Take a guess who these people also? These are mostly people who you would say, PROTECT YOU!! Law Abiding Citizens from Law Enforcement to the Military Personal. Oh yes, did you know someone in the Military doesn't get to keep their firearm? Once out, they are no different than you or me. Go through the same process even though they served our country.

I will guarantee you this..If a ban does go into effect, I congratulate you for creating a black market. I know a person who sells like 2 to 3 lower receivers in a week. Well after Cuomo's comments, he sold 170 of them in 3 days!!

You can bet one thing, your current Law Abiding Citizens will have them and they will hide them if a confiscating ban comes into effect. Again I am not talking about your avg. Joe. I am talking about professionals people who help and protect others now..From Doctors to Officers.

I may not own a firearm, but I know lots of people of all different professions that do. Even those who are Liberal.

To Robert from Oregon...That is the stupidest thing I have read on here yet. Cocaine is Illegal and it is everywhere. Heroin is illegal and it is everywhere.

It is illegal to enter the usa without a passport and Illegal Aliens are everywhere. Illegals pay no taxes.

I can load my own amunition and it don't cost much at all. I can also make my own high capacity magazines and it is easy to do. I am a Metalsmith.

When the shooting happened at Columbine, The Biden / Feinstein Gun Ban was in effect and it made no difference, Did It?

Mental illness is running rampant on here, and the mentally ill people all seem to be Democrats.

Judging from the crazy comments you anti-rights democrats are making, if there was a psychological exam for a Drivers License, you all would be walking, because you would get robbed on a public transportation vehicle.aka Bus.

Before you make up your minds take a look at this:

http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bauerle/disaster.htm

Let's just all get a few things clear. First, he is not crazy, he is just deluded and greedy and is so invested that he cannot see how dangerous and insane the idea of more guns is.

Next, some points to be clear on because it is very easy to get tangled.

1. No one (except radical unrealistics---there are always a few on each side) is suggesting banning guns. Just assault rifles/automatic weapons/flame throwers/grenade launchers and other high capacity killing weapons designed more massive damage. Rifle/shotguns for hunting and pistols are not the focus here folks so you right wing loonies stop ignoring that acting like the "state" is coming to take all guns away.

2. Non-assault style weapons would DRAMATICALLY LOWER THE BODY COUNT the next time, and there will always be a next time no matter how hard we focus on this, if the only weapons easily accessable to these kooks is a shotgun or rifle. There is no arguing the point here folks...no automatic weapons = lower body counts. Pure and simple

3. If there are lots of automatic weapons already in circulation but they are now outlawed, weapons changing hands, those seeking magazines and high capacity clips and the ammunition for the automatic weapons will have to be much more sneeky and covert to avoid raising suspicion. Because they will have to work harder, their efforts will immediately raise eyebrows and help us avoid a possible mass shooting.

4. These incidents are THE MAJOR EXCEPTION in every developed country. You gun nuts always reach for the shooting in Norway right away to suggest this is not just the US. Yes, everyone knows that occassionaly some jackass is going to go wacko. But it is exceedingly rare in other countries and pretty much the norm here. Your argument that the US is no different flies in the face of a multitude of statistics that leave you buried. Don't even waste your time. Chances of being killed in this country by a gun are between 9 and 20 times higher than the next 20 developed countries. It is what it is. If you ignore this fact and continue to state your argument that the US does not have a serious problem then you are a fool not worth debating with.

5. Lastly, mass shooting and this sort of problem is a complext issue with a myriad of factors and influences. Mental illness/bullying/easy access to assault weapons/violent media in the form of video games and graphic movies/bad economic times and the list goes ON and ON. No one who is making the case that assault rifles are the ONLY REASON this happened. There are numerous things we need to address BUT TAKING ASSAULT WEAPONS AND MILITARY GRADE WEAPONY OUT OF THE PICTURE WILL IMMEADIATELY REDUCE THE EASE WITH WHICH SOMEONE EFFECTED BY THE OTHER ISSUES CAN WIPE OUT 20-150 PEOPLE IN FIVE MINUTES.

Just because you want to own a gun or are paranoid does not excuse you from acknowledging and accept the facts as they stand or the reality of how each action will effect the continuing problem. You cannot simply say "we are allowed to own guns no matter what" and just walk away. It doesn't address the problem here so knock it off and behave like rational adults and find some sort of middle ground here which achieves the greatest good for everyone.

Wayne La Pierre is not crazy, although he acts like it. He is doing his job. It's not children he wants to protect, it's profits. Mr. La Pierre is not in the least concerned about children being murdered, or anyone being murdered for that matter. His concern is to ensure that no restrictions impede the sale of guns and ammunition which thereby ensures that his income is secure.

Wayne La Pierre is the type of man who would feel comfortable with a job as commandant of a concentration camp, as long as he got paid to carry out orders and execute the inmates. His morality is inversely proportional to the size of his bank account.

How quickly they forget. For all those Democrats who have as usual forgotten their history:

In 2000 after Columbine....Clinton announced $40 million in grants for 23 school districts that he said have found successful, comprehensive approaches to help troubled young people."These districts are bringing school nurses and counselors together to respond to warning signs like depression or bullying," Clinton said. "They are improving classroom security and expanding after-school and mentoring programs."

Clinton also unveiled the $60-million fifth round of funding for "COPS in School," a Justice Department program that helps pay the costs of placing police officers in schools to help make them safer for students and teachers. The money will be used to provide 452 officers in schools in more than 220 communities."Already, it has placed 2,200 officers in more than 1,000 communities across our nation, where they are heightening school safety as well as coaching sports and acting as mentors and mediators for kids in need," Clinton said.

See http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?Item=54

Anyone can go to a NRA gun show and buy a gun with no federal back ground checks, this is Nuts !!!

Could this be a GOP loophole for the NRA coffin outfitters ?????????????

The biggest problem that the NRA just doesn't understand is that currently, the nation is really only asking for the repeal of assault weaponry to the average citizen. If they fight that, we will look upon them as the unreasonable a$$wipes that they are truly showing themselves to be. Subsequently, we may try to go further than that. If they would just show a tiny bit of intelligence and be reasonable on this issue, then we will no doubt back off from anything else. Nobody is asking to take away ALL guns, just the ones that can fire 200 bullets in 60 seconds! Am I missing something or is that not a truly sane idea?

fyte 4 justice,

"It's not children he wants to protect, it's profits."

I agree. That is no doubt why La Pierre advocates armed guards in every school. Armed guards in every school would mean even more gun sales to arm them and, therefore, more profit for the gun industry.

This is a no brainer everyone. The nra is a terrorist organization hell bent on promoting and advocating American vs American gun violence and murder which includes the murder of children? Let's vote all of the republican teabag taliban terrorists out of public office starting in 2014. The rational thinking majority of Americans have overwhelmingly rejected neocon ideaologies and craziness in 2012 and in 2014 we can finish the job once and for all. It's going to be fun playing whack-a-mole with these right wing extremists in the next election. Yes lil' wayne - your one loopy crazy bastard.......................

tiradgerj, then it is your responsbility to turn that individual in, and let them be fined and weapon confiscated.

the NRA has 4 million members and there are well over 133 million americans. they do NOT represent the majority of people, they represent high profit gun companies, like smith and wesson, remington, etc. do not own stock in these companies, his is about big business and profit. they could care less how many americans are killed each year by guns, obviously. more than the past four wars put together, we lose our own to murders each year, more and more mass murder. ban assault, semi automatic weapons, make illegal online purchase of guns and ammonition, make illegal secondary private sales of weapons and ammonition. i believe in the second amdndment, but am sensible enough to know citizens do not need military style weapons to protect themselves. if teachers and adminstrators want to have concealed weapons? fine, make it their personal option.

as a united states citizen, people who do not want to have to carry weapons have rights also. they have the right to have their kids go to school and be safe, without armed guards. they have the right to go to the mall, go to the movies, go to dinner, feeling safe, without having to carry a weapon. time to take back our country, instead of listening to the NRA. who the f#@$ do they think they are, dictating to us? please, let's stop making these tools accessible to the crazies. when in the last 100 years has the government tried to take over the people when we didn't have all these guns? this talk is strictly parinoia psychology to have their way. something bad happens and gun sales spike. the world murder numbers speak for themselves. where does this all end? what's next when bazooka's become affordable to the public? we need those to hunt down bigfoot? use your head, people and be sensible. BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS and internet sales.

Crazy Steve-1996926, #1.121- 2 things, just a question and a comment. All of that would have to be at the point of or before "access", in order to be effective, wouldn't it? And 2, "securing" the weapon has always been a puzzling concept for me; ie, if you arm Teachers, they would have to have their weapon "secured" somewhere "definately" away from where a Student could access it. (locked away in a safe in the classroom somewhere, etc, same as in your home). When Someone bursts into the classroom , like what happened, the Teacher IS NOT going to be able to "access" the weapon in time. Same to a degree with a Home invasion. Weapon is secured so nobody can get to it (because you're responsible for it) and Someone invades the home while you're in the kitchen but your weapon is locked up in the Den on the other side of the Livingroom where the Intruder has entered and is even just blocking your path to get to the "secured" weapon. Intrusions and Emergencies AREN'T PLANNED ON HAPPENING and you can only "prepare" so much, so you have to be wise and sensible about preparation. IT'S MULTI-FACETED! Sorry, 3 questions, Did the NRA tire of this scenario and push for all this carrying out in Public, instead?

I'm about to leave to finish up some Holiday loose ends with my Son and Daughter, but will try and check back later, if you'd like to reply.

P.S. I've seen some other good and interesting posts of yours, (Couldn't miss the name), but also couldn't get to replying, either.

When guns are outlawed...Only outlaws will have guns...

It's true...Obama and Holder will fast and furious some guns to them and all the liberals will say...no big deal...Then, they'll shoot up some schools and the liberals won't complain because a Democrat was responsible for them getting guns.

Neo-cons, Nazi-whatever...blah blah blah....When are you liberals going to call someone a racist for wanting to own a gun? It's the only name calling I haven't seen yet from you.

LaPierre dodged a direct question asked 12-times this morning by David instead if the NRA would support ANY legislation which included new regulation of guns and ammunition; rather than answer the question he 12-times responded that Sen. Diane Feinstiem and her legislation is the problem.

This is the face of the NRA, which is that one female Senator is the problem, not the more than 300 million guns, not the unlimited ammunition, not the high-capacity magazines .... one female US Senator from California is the focus of the NRA?

You know, I made it through about 20 comments and the people on this board are really rude and thoughtless. I can see why people snap and kill other people. If you all are even 1/2 as rude and selfish as you are online (which I doubt because it is easy to be a tough guy behind a screen) it stands to reason what type children you are raising. Since most of the people in today's society deal with internet and social online media, then it stands to reason it isn't guns that kill people, it is the average joe online-including yourselves.

As for you people that are calling people yee-haws and rednecks and hillbillies, I'd really like for you to spend a week with my "hillbilly" family. I live in Georgia where I was taught to shoot, hunt, fish- and I am a woman. But I was also taught to respect those around me, including walking away from a fight I knew I could win. I was taught the value of an education- I hold two degrees. My children have never been arrested, even though they have been surrounded by video games, social media, and potential issues frequently; the oldest graduated college with a scholarship and the 2nd is currently in college with two more right behind them that are both part of the brightest in their classes. They all know how to shoot-well, I might add-even the 7-year old. They are not perfect children but they would never hurt one another because I taught them that people, even rude ones, have value. I think it is a lesson that many of your parents didn't teach you growing up.

Take a good look at yourselves. Methinks you might be the problem- not a gun or the NRA.

Did the whack-job also mention after we've been drowned in taxes in order to pay for armed police in every school (and probably need several in every school), that we then need to have armed police in every movie theater... and in every mall... or did he forget about those mass shootings? Guns guns guns, baby. Solution to a gun problem is always more guns. Maybe we should just militarize our nation now and get it over with.

fyte4justice--That was a great post. You bottom lined it perfectly. LaPierre is little more than the chief lobbyist, not for gun owners but for the American and international weapon manufacturers.

On another note I would remind people that any armed guard placed in a school would have to be armed to the teeth so as to match any possible armament held by a school invader. Fully automatic assault rifles, body armour, tech9s, and plenty of extra ammo. And that is the point beyond LaPierre's statement. More guns, more ammo on the streets of America. Everybody, and I mean everybody! with a gun. Young, old, male, female, in schools, stores, daycare centers (Texas), everywhere. More guns to be sold, more ammunition for everyone! That's his real point, make no mistake about it.

Expecting an armed officer to be present anywhere where a violent crime may possibly occur is unrealistic to the point of insanity. It cannot happen and will not happen because it is physically and virtually IMPOSSIBLE!!!

Same thing with screening people that might have mental health issues on the verge of loosing their minds and kill someone. You cannot predict when anyone will loose their mind and go out on a rampage. It is virtually impossible. There are no suretail signs. How can you possibly tell when someone is about to snap in such an extreme way as to go into a school and start killing children? What are you gonna do, lock someone up because you THINK they might be going crazy?

Anyone that suggests otherwise is being purposefully obtuse to advance their own insane, gun raving agenda.

And LaPierre, you're not crazy, your a puppet for the gun industry and are dead set against ANY type of gun regulation (and by extention public safety) because it hurts the economic interests of the industry your organization lobbies for, and YOU KNOW IT! You're purposefully attempting to block attempt to improve public safety to advance your own greedy agenda and should be ASHAMED of yourself.

Gun ownership in our society can be argued to be about as much a "right" as having access to a motor vehicle we need to get to work, get children to school, etc. If anything, owning a motor vehicle is even more a "right" than owning a gun because it has more practical application and ever present need in our daily lives. And we actually REQUIRE people to get a licence for those--and they're not even as dangerous as guns, since we can't smuggle them into a school to run over someone.

When we don't even have gun ownership regulations and requirements that are even on par with owning a motor vehicle that only highlights how out of touch we are on this issue in our society.

Anyone can go to a NRA gun show and buy a gun with no federal back ground checks, this is Nuts !!!

And anyone can go to any big city street corner, with no federal background check and buy whatever they choose.

Heck, even the Mexican drug cartels buy whatever they want, courtesy of the U.S. government. U.S. government funds foreign wars through drugs/arms sales (Iran/Contra).

Law abiding citizens are not the enemy or the problem, and have the "uninfringed" right to defend themselves.

After the football player murdered his wife and then calmly talked with his coaches then shot himself, Bob Costas made some remarks that "Blacks should not own guns". (Racist and nothing was said about it).

Charles Shurmer (D) is the same person who had Martin Luther King Jr. arrested for speaking out for equal rights.

There is a report that a 11 year old boy was using his cell phone and it was taken away from him. Then the shooting happened. Should cell phones be taken away from teachers too? It only took 5 minutes for the police to get there, and another 4 minutes for them to enter the school.

I had to perform CPR on a man on 12-04-2012 and I was on the phone with 911 operators for 8 minutes, they took 10 minutes to get there. The Man died 2 days later, but I did what I could do. 18 minutes total. That's a long time to do Chest Compressions.

You anti-rights people sound drunk or crazy or both.

If you want to get 4 million people to counter the NRA, you do not have far to look, there are 22,800,000 illegal aliens who would gladly take everything you have, and live in your house while you are tied up in the basement.

Democrats are so gullible.

I wonder what the "More Flexibility" is that Obama* promised to the Russians, while the russians had a submarine in the gulf of mexico and a bomber flying close to Alaskan airspace.

...when we give up gun's...we give up freedom...if you trust a government that doesn't want it's citizens armed...then you are dumber than a box of rocks...better mental heath help for the mentally sic...you'll never stop crazy people from killing...when the media exploits it...i mean school shooting is a competition for the crazy...

Drugs are illegal. I suppose no one here has ever done a single illegal drug.

Theft is illegal. I suppose nothing has been stolen in this country, ever.

Insider trading is illegal. I suppose that hasn't happened. Just ask Martha.

Murder is illegal. I suppose no one has been killed in this country since that law was made. Oh wait, why are we having this discussion again?

Steven-1488825, you argument failed when you started calling people names.

Iamnotyou wrote:

" ...You anti-rights people sound drunk or crazy or both.

If you want to get 4 million people to counter the NRA, you do not have far to look, there are 22,800,000 illegal aliens who would gladly take everything you have, and live in your house while you are tied up in the basement.

Democrats are so gullible.

I wonder what the "More Flexibility" is that Obama* promised to the Russians, while the russians had a submarine in the gulf of mexico and a bomber flying close to Alaskan airspace."

A complete derail. If you don't like the question, then don't answer, just change the subject. Wonderful. Exactly the same tactic used by Mr. LaPierre this morning on 'Meet the Press'.

PS. 22,800,000 illegal aliens? Really, 22.8 million?

You know, not to be critical, but MOST of us would not include the 10 million Martians and Venusians and Dark-side of the Moon dwellers that you have included in your total.

I'm just sayin ...

"Obviously, the NRA is not a thoughtful or compassionate organization, nor does it exhibit appropriate leadership, at such a delicate moment in our nation's history when we are all grieving."

Obviously, the politicians, liberals, and people such as yourselves are not thoughtful or compassionate enough, nor do you exhibit appropriate leadership, at such a delicate moment in our nation's history when we are all grieving when crimes worst than this happens each and everyday in cities across this great nation. Where are you and yours every day, every weekend, every month when there are many killed to include innocent men, women, and children in Chicago, Detroit, and else where. You and yours are no where to be found, you, your politicians, your media are silent. Quit the nonsense and tackle the problems and issues at hand, stop blaming others for your self created problems and stop telling us what to do, how to think, what is good for us, and everything else you and yours love to tell us.

There're maybe 10 million possibly more AR15s out there, 2.5 million 10 years old or newer, in America. The only AR15 shot at American school children is now in the custody of Connecticut police.

Sandy Hook's locked front door didn't work. Lanza shot up the glass. What's the point of a locked door next to a glass window?

Violent military killing style video games should be banned. Electronic toys are hipnotizing and desensitizing and have caused serious brain deficiencies in tens of millions of American youth in my opinion. Think about it. Who hasn't said, "Hello" to a kid who couldn't even take his eyes off of his gameboy?

Know guns, know peace, know safety....No guns, no peace, no safety.

Look people........Armed guard in the school is simply one layer of protection like background checks, and smaller mags, etc etc.

The NRA has agood idea and so do other people.

So left wing, get rid of all guns, ammo, magazines and the NRA how do you stop an active shooter. Tell me your plan. You can't can you, because there is no other way to stop someone who is shooting innocent people.

NewMalthus, no one will respond to that....When Democrats flip flop it is totally acceptable.

The attack in Conn. is not new. Read what happened to Bath Michigan in 1927, And this guy did this without guns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

http://www.freep.com/article/20121219/NEWS06/121219039/Bath-school-disaster-Andrew-Kehoe

WSU Cou, the question is to hard, please rephrase....

I don't understand what is so crazy about the idea of placing armed guards at the entrances of the school building. We have armed guards and metal detectors at court houses to protect crimimals and lawyers but we oppose protecting our children? This is sound thinking isn't it ?

The NRA is not the enemy people. They are a group protecting everyones right to own a weapon. doesn't matter if you own one or not it is your right too if you choose. To allow that right to be infringed would open the door to have other rights taken away as well on down the road. I don't own a gun any more but since i live in a rural community where hunting is widely done I am sure most of my neighbors have them. I feel safer knowing they have weapons. Crime is very low where it is known that most people have weapons. Those of you who think outlawing guns or overtaxing them or ammunition are shooting at the wrong target. This will do nothing to prevent what happend at the Shady school from happening somewhere else. An armed guard would most certainly have changed the outcome in this case and others that have occured.

So I have to laugh at the irony of the reaction to the NRA's call for more police in schools because it's exactly the recommendation that Bill Clinton made about the "Cops in Schools" initiative in the aftermath of Columbine. huffingtonpost.com. funny how it was a good idea coming from Clinton, But coming from the NRA or someone with an R.... no,no,no. What a bunch of Sheep.

Drugs are illegal. I suppose no one here has ever done a single illegal drug.

@everyone making this^ type of argument.

You are WRONG. YES, drugs are illegal and people still buy and use them because: a) they're a addictive substances that can make people feel good and in a blissful state, and b) they're incredibly CHEAP to produced and can be sold at an incredibly high markup price due to them being illegal, which makes them an obscenely lucrative business to dealers of illegal goods. THAT is the REAL reason we still have drugs.

If guns were illegal they'd be so freaking expensive to produce and distrubute compared to drugs they'd never even compare as a lucrative business to drugs and will NEVER be as successful.

Okay. LaPierre, you're crazy.

If someone has their mind set to commit mahem in a school and there is an armed policeman, they will simply kill the policeman first, it will be part of the plan. This is no deterrent when someone is committed to kill then die. The easy access to guns is the problem. As the retired Physicist said above, if more guns makes America safer, then America should be the safest country in the world. The second ammendment has been perverted for profit by gun manufacturers and the NRA, whose members on the supreme court set the current precedent.

NRA chairman lied on face the nation today saying the murder rate in the UK is four times that of the US. It is the other way around US 4.6 per 100,000, UK 1.2 per 100,000. 722 murders in the UK and 12996 in the US.

Guns make it much easier to kill.

there are a lot of extreme views here today that should not be taken seriously by the rest of us. first, NO ONE rational is trying to take away your guns! that is nra fear-mongering. the rational people here who want reasonable, effective gun safety laws that would do just 'this much more' to keep guns from people who want to do us harm. getting a background check is NOT an infringement on you rights. i've read several posts here by nra members who are saying that same thing.

and if you truly believe that we should be doing to more help the emotionally challenged in this country, which i completely agree with, then maybe you should stop backing the very party, the republicans, who are as we speaking do everything they can to kill monies going to social programs to help the mentally ill!!!!! research into mental health NOT supported by the right! the republicans want the government to cut out billions, no trillions of dollars in spending, without touching the military. well, where will the cuts comes from? medicare, of course and medicaid...and health care for the needy including mental care.

so, you can't have it both ways. you can't demand the government be responsible for dealing with mental health care issues and then tie their hands behind their backs and not allocate money to do that with. you can't demand that we pay more attention to keeping people who have mental health issues from getting weapons and at the same time refuse to allow background checks.

if this kid lanza had had a knife, do you honestly think he would have been able to kill 28 people? do you think the killer in the theater would have been to kill all those people with a knife? mass shootings are possible because that person has availability to weapons that can kill a lot a people from a distance. only guns can do that, so to say that guns having nothing to do with mass killings is just blind, head in the sand mentality.

like a lot of people here, who are not right or left wing crazies, reasonable laws that restrict assault weapons, require background checks and yes, showing your i.d. when you want to buy guns, why not? geezuz! how many of you were demanding that we force people to show their i.d. to vote?! but, to buy a gun, it's unconstitutional? what?

and as for the people who are so demanding of their rights...well, i should assume that you are also in favor of the rights of gays to marry and women to have control over their own bodies. right? i mean, are only some people going to be given the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, or is just gun ownership worthy? and you would take away the right of freedom of speech, freedom of expression by censoring video games, movies, books, magazines, television....oh! and bringing back religion into schools and the workplace....the first amendment rights apparently aren't as important is owning a gun.

i don't own a gun. i don't care if you own one, as long as you keep it away from me and my family. as long as you are responsible for it. i will fight for you right to own a gun. i will also fight for MY right to live MY life the way I choose without your censorship and YOUR religion. if you agree, then you need to back the party that believes in that...and it is NOT the republicans. there are radical liberals out there. some of them have written a post here. they are on the fringe. no one really pays attention to them...they are crazy. but, the republican party has allowed itself to be bought and paid for by the radical, religious, big business right. they don't believe in individual rights, they don't believe in freedom of speech, freedom of religion or freedom to live one's life as one chooses without interference by the government. but, they do support guns!...for now.

jade mountain

Obviously, the NRA is not a thoughtful or compassionate organization, nor does it exhibit appropriate leadership, at such a delicate moment in our nation's history when we are all grieving.

Now thats a cheap shot. We have had this unbelievable tragedy thrust upon America. We have grieved, mourned, and watched the coverage. For the NRA to speak out now is perfectly normal. After all every liberal/Commie has shot their mouths off continually since the day it happened. Wayne La Pierre has offered a solution to the problem that is factual with proven success. High Schools all over the country have updated their protection especially since Columbine. SO WHY DID THIS ATTACK HAPPEN AT A GRADE SCHOOL?? BECAUSE THE HIGH SCHOOLS HAVE BETTER DETERRENTS IN PLACE.

LIBERAL/COMMUNISTS are trying to use this tragedy to further their own gun grabbing agenda. What a bunch of heartless UnAmericans. .50 cents per day per student for a full time Policeman is peanuts considering what we get for it in return.

The Liberal/Communist has now proven themselves to be part of the problem, not part of the solution.

alessa:

Just one question: why should the government pay for treatment for the mentally ill, and not their families?

1. Yess call him crazy 'cause he IS Crazy!
2. Do you really want to leave your child's safety up to the NRA and the gubers buying up the latest in Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines!
3. BAN Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines NOW! Nothing else will do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4. SUE the NRA and gun manufacturers when these horrible massacres occur!

David Gregory of NBC news needs to STOP interupting people He's interviewing. IT'S NOT POLITE AND VERY RUDE. How about starting there with a discussion of gun control!!!!

ED makes a good point. My kids' school has an armed police officer as their resource officer and I am fine with that. He does everything from directing traffic in the morning/afternoon to helping staff and kids when they need it and of course school security. He has a small office right in the office so he is right there to help, and I am happy to see him there. So if this is what the NRA meant I would be fine with that.

I am NOT fine, however, with armed guards walking halls and teachers having guns. Guess those who think arming teachers is a good idea haven't met many teachers...some might be tempermentally able to handle one, but many aren't. Let's be realistic here. If the teacher were an expert marksman she probably wouldn't be a teacher, and I want her watching the kids instead of leaving them to fend for themselves while they go have a shootout they will lose against a guy in a vest who really is a marksman and on a mission. She gets killed...which she will right off when she challenges him...and they are left to wander scared and crying. What better target would they be in the open classroom since she was busy out getting out a gun and having a shootout. Teachers don't sign up to be policemen with guns, and I don't want my kids around a gun that can be misplaced, stolen, or who knows what in a classroom. You can't make people carry guns, and sometimes people just aren't suited or allowed to have one anyway. The idea that more guns, more guns will solve this is insanity, and LaPierre isn't crazy.

Make no mistake. The NRA as an organization isn't in business to save lives. They are a gun lobbying firm who is led by people who don't want any safeguards, laws, or any limitations at all on buying, selling, or shooting guns. They are a business representing gun makers and not any else, and this isn't even about 2nd ammendment rights. This is about selling guns to them, and we should be hearing anything the guy says through that filter.

I don't mind if an armed office is around school not focusing on shooting people, but I do mind if schools are made into armories with everyone carrying guns. This isn't where we want to go as a country. Violent video games can indeed help push a troubled person to feel empowered to shoot people, but that isn't the whole story. The troubled person having access to weapons is another part of the picture, and having weapons available that spray humans (assault, you know) with huge magazines that help the troubled person take out groups of people at a time, lack of enough help for mentally ill people of all ages, lack of laws that allow guns to be taken from homes where legitimately ill people can have access (NOT randomly taking weapons for no reason), and lack of common sense that would let us have a reasonable dialogue about this topic without calling names would help.

Insinuating that liberals want kids killed is disgusting. Insinuating that conservatives are all paranoid gun nuts is disgusting. Individuals make up this conversation, and lumping people together and insulting them is what has kept us from solving this problem all these years.

Oregon Bob, won't fly. Those who want guns will just cross into Mexighanistan to get them. Ammo too. Just like illegal drugs and illegal migrants coming into the hands of Americans, Mexico has it. Know any Canadian crooks? Know any Neo-Nasties? That's right, contrary to popular belief, down here along the Arizona/Mexico border hardware of better quality than the overpriced American AR-junk can be had at much less cost. That includes the magic that goes BOOM! America is a desensitized nation and has been. We're constantly in conflict with other parts of the world. I started in Southeast Asia, did time in Central America, Eastern Africa, the Balkans and ended in the Middle East. How about you? Don't have a desire to possess the hardware of the death trade nor the need to. Only hunted the game that shoots back. Won't kill an animal when I can get my grub at the grocery. I guess it has come folks believing they're better off having hardware than not. It is our culture, it is our being, it is our way. Americans want their drugs, cheap labor and guns. Who's gonna take that away? You, politicians, me, China, Russia, UN, who? Where there's a will there's a way! It's that WILL we as a nation have to get a handle with. If a lunatic has a desire to kill, they will. Even if it means donning a boomer suit to set them self off in a crowd. I guess we'll ban sugar so no home-brewed magic that goes Boom can be made too. I'd rather get shot, at least I hava a chance. These US mass killers are no different than any Terrorist anywhere! That's right, Terrorists! Israel banned guns to Palestinians, Britain to the Irish and both answered with bombings. Long, long, long ago I accepted the fact that I can get shot anywhere, anytime. This is still the greatest nation in the world. Born here, raised here and will die here in the USA. Got mucho eclipses living in other warring and non-warring nations. Do you? After all, met my wife in Gaza! It frustrates me that America can go after the likes of Bin Ladin anywhere in the world and yet be imbotent when it comes to taking care of our own. I know nothing about the psyche of those willing to destroy the innocent, I only know about the psyche of reacting to their actions. Banning hardware and ammo is too little to late. Hundreds of millions already out there and billions of cartridges to feed them. Gotta go after that wanting to murder, not the implement. Violence is our culture, it's our cancer. We've done lousy at raising our young. Instead of having a book to read they listen to Rap. Instead if watching PBS they're in the theatres watching gratuitously violent movies. Instead of playing sports they play 'Call of Duty'. Get off yer asses and sign up to do the real thing! Feed that crap to the young and they'll act. Desensitization and nothing short is America's problem. Across the globe America is laughed at calling themself the leaders of Freedom and yet kills its own. Mental health issues and their treatments is paramount. That is where that WILL mentioned earlier comes to play. Gotta get a hand on that to begin with and nothing short of it will do.

Guys, guys

One thing you are missing. The arms industry (manufacturers, sellers, importers) finances the NRA to the tune of $100 million per year. To this add membership dues, advertising, etc and you have a $250 million dollar organization. This money is used to back-hand DC. Also, laPieceOf@!$%#'s salary is in the reputedly in the region of $2 million per year. Add expenses and benefits, and the figure exceeds $3m per year! Google it!

This is what he has to protect. Outlaw lobbying, and you will get rid of the demagogues, right and left!

Now, laPieceOf@!$%#, says that we should have armed police in every school. What about the cost? I thought that the rwnj's were anti-big government, reduced spending, etc, etc. Also, what if one of these cops snapped, like laPieceOf@!$%#? How many kids have to die?

Advice to laPieceOf@!$%# - use some of that money and get some plastic surgery - get rid of that insane look!

...getting a background check is NOT an infringement on you rights

Just as you are tired of hearing that statement, please cite your source and tell us where in the Second Amendment it states owning arms requires a background check, or can be regulated for that matter.

The government should pay for treatment when the family doesn't or can't. It's for the good of society, pretty simple concept.

I think LaPierre is crazy, but his attitude on cops in schools is just the latest evidence of it, not the only reason.

Who would pay for the cops in schools? For the extra training and staffing of police departments across the country? Just like above, it would be taxpayers...so in effect, the NRA thinks that taxpayers should pay to support the NRA agenda, rather than do something effective and real, like enacting and enforcing a gun ban. Sorry, I don't think so.

History proves cops or armed guards don't prevent crazies from acting out. Columbine had armed guards. Didn't do a thing. A guard or cop could potentially act quickly, but not quickly enough to stop a lunatic kid from shooting everyone in sight with the AUTOMATIC WEAPONS that the NRA insists are righteous, and that all gun fanatics should have the right to possess.

Right. Give me a break. This country has bowed to the wishes of the NRA for long enough. The violence is obviously getting worse. There have never been more guns on the street. The logic of the NRA just doesn't fly.

• David Gregory needs to kick him in the ass a little more. Better yet, get Chris Matthews in there with him.
• La Pierre is a coward and a CAD!!

clwyd-2621393

Are you stupid. Do you even know what the definition of a Militia is. It is a Military force of CIVILIANS, the National Guard are not civilians, the reserves are not civilians. You think a gun ban is logical look at Australia who recently enacted a gun ban. Crimes with guns went up over 300%. Now you think banning is still a good idea what about when someone who owns a "illegal gun" shows up at your house or anywhere, what can you do but get shot. I will keep my gun so that if someone tries to kill me or anyone around me I can shoot the guy and end it immediately. This is coming from a Veteran and a First Responder. Get your act together.

Btw, it takes an Amendment to change an Amendment. Our Constitution has been "regulated" and "opinionated" to the extent that it isn't even recognizable.

Mr. LaPierre, please excuse the crude namecalling by the ignorant libs here; you see, they can't discuss any subject without resorting to it....I think it must be a compulsion.

America is one sick country!

It is not guns, but a society that teaches and breeds violence that is the problem!

You reap what you sow America!

"Take all the unreasonable gun nuts and shoot em'."

• No -- you can't shoot all the birthers, all the tea party people, all the ditto-heads, all the Fox cultist -- that's immoral.

'then call me crazy'

With pleasure, LaPierre. YOU'RE CRAZY! Your attitude of arming more people is putting all our lives at risk.

#1.196MtMike - It is not guns, but a society that teaches and breeds violence that is the problem!

You are correct. The U.S. owns half, HALF, of all the guns in the world, and manufactures 5.4 MILLION more each year. Terrific.

Our society is spiritually bereft, and I'm not talking anything about religion, which is not spiritual.

Just a few casual observations.

The NRA is the political arm of the largest gun industry in the world, not its membership; you just donate.

Most of the posters here do not know what is required to pass a constitutional amendment.

There is less than 1% of Americans who are "Law abiding" maybe less, certainly not more. IE. There are millions of laws on the books, many contradictory. Therefore most guns are in the hands of lawbreakers already.

Unfortunately Joe Biden's taskforces' recomendations will not prevent a Sandy Hook incident from happening again,,,,,I'm really sorry to say.

Robert, your plan is great! Only people who are rich will be able to afford the guns. And, of course, criminals as they always find a way to buy guns and ammo.

Mystery Rhee

Crazy Steve-1996926, #1.121- 2 things, just a question and a comment. All of that would have to be at the point of or before "access", in order to be effective, wouldn't it? And 2, "securing" the weapon has always been a puzzling concept for me...

The licensing may have have to phased in, with maybe allowing some 'grandfathering' at least to start. Although if you do that, some continuing education at renewal to thin out the morons is called for. If caught in possession of a firearm without a license, the penalty should be at least as stiff as driving without one. Buying/selling a firearm, ammunition, or reloading supplies without a license should be forbidden.

'Secure storage' would have to be defined, but could be anything from a gun safe to storing the weapon disassembled with the parts in different locations. But any weapon that's in your personal possession is supposedly secure, so there's your exclusion for home defense or whatever. But any other weapons and ammunition should be secure by some means, and only accessible to a licensed gun owner. If something like that had been place for this shooting, the Lanza kid would hopefully only had access to one gun, likely a handgun.

Nothing is going to completely eliminate these shootings given human nature, but some reasonable gun control could at least mitigate it some....

The GOP is out there selling the "TRUTH" that all Unions are filled with armed THUGS..

and that UNIONS are destroying America .

Lets take them at their word & apply it to this situation

The NRA is a UNION of GUN OWNERS, representing just under 1% of the population

they are openly ARMED, militant, organized & running counter to a far larger number of voters who are not gun owners nor do they see the necessity for the private armories that exist .

Their logic stands on one leg...look what MIGHT happen sometime in the future w/o our guns....

The opposition is focused on stopping that which we ALL know WILL happen AGAIN....

...and beside all of this is one other FACT:

The RIGHT sold American on the idea that THE DEATH PENALTY would stop these sorts of things...

and it seems that quite a number of the perpetrators are killing themselves....

the deterrence turns out to have NO TEETH,

GUNS & the death penalty, 2 planks of the NRC-GOP that are total failures

and yet they still let them rule the party .....

I have to add the thoughts of Michael in Dutton Mich.

" Remember when the NRA mouthpieces were saying that Travon Martin would be alive if only he'd had a concealed Glock?

Yeah, me neither. "

Smerf,

The car vs. the gun is ridiculous because when a car kills, it is because an accident has occurred.

When a gun kills, it has fulfilled it's designed purpose. Someone pointed it at another human, with intent, and pulled the trigger.

That being said, I'm not anti gun. Or pro gun.

I just think the gun / car argument is stupid.

THESE GUN ACTIVISTS MUST BE CRAZY ASKING FOR POLICE TO PATROL OUR SCHOOLS!!!!!!!

Only the Liberals/Progressives have the solutions, none of them would support this would they?

Oh wait. Look at this!

April 16, 2000|LAWRENCE L. KNUTSON | ASSOCIATED PRESS

Marking the first anniversary of the shooting deaths at Columbine High School, President Clinton announced $120 million in new federal grants Saturday to place more police officers in schools and help even the youngest kids cope with their problems. (emphasis mine)

"In our national struggle against youth violence we must not fail our children; our future depends on it," the president said in his weekly radio address.

ROTFLMAO!!!!

Once again, the limp-wristed Libbies can’t get their stories right. They’re always against something after they’re for it. Just like the wars in Iraq, just ask John Kerry, one of the biggest hypocrites.

And now he’s going to be Secretary of State.

More Liberal/Progressive flip-flops, as usual.

Liberal hypocrisy at its best.

Here’ the link if you Libbies are interested.

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/apr/16/news/mn-20323

This is too easy. Putting armed guards in school with young children is crazy. Crazy people are not allowed to own guns. LaPierre need to turn in all his guns NOW.

I totally agree with the ammunition tax. That will make it too expensive to accumulate the amount of ammunition used in these types of crimes. It will also make it more obvious when someone is buying large amounts of ammunition. Bringing these people to the attention of the authorities before they use the ammunition is better than waiting until they use it. It will also make gun owners more likely to secure their ammunition so that it is not wasted in accidental shootings of their children or other people's children.

As to the argument that guns laws don't work because only criminals will have guns, Should we get rid of all the laws that are broken each day? Shoplifting and theft laws don't work. People still do it. Let's make it legal for all of us. Arson? Why not? People are still burning places down. Make it legal. Besides, this is a great way to save money. If nothing is illegal, we don't have to pay for police, criminal court systems, or prisons. Imagine what we could do with that money. Oops, forget it. Someone just stole all the savings!

Jim, Spence,

You are unstable and a typical conservative-"Out of touch with reality and the needs of America and Americans."

Spider,
It's a mental illness,just listen to most of the rankings here,It's more frightening how they want to infringe on rights they don't feel are needed,Fundamentaly change America is a chant Obama uses and boy does he mean it, They demand it be mandatory! However I know I will never let my rights go without a fight as Any true American will agree.

Spence,

Both side can play the name game my friend, but the people have spoken on many issues and the libbies have been the winners recently. The conservative call to let us go over the cliff will seal the fate of these greedy self righteous nuts on the right! They can rot as American grow more disgusted with them and your comment in support of them! Righty!

Hey Whatnot,
I'd love to see a debate and diagnosis on Obama and his whole Administration with The American Psychosocial Association,Ego and Narcism abound Im sure with a touch of anti-social behavior would be the mildest diagnoses Im sure, but then again they are probley in the Dems and Prez's back pocket.

What good are armed security officers on campus when they're outgunned? There were security officers at Columbine. The better-armed shooters specifically targeted the officers and had a shootout with them, before moving on to kill all of those students and faculty.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/columbine-armed-guards_n_2347096.html

More guns in the schools doesn't make for a better learning environment for the children. They feel LESS SECURE with guns around, and, its serious presence promotes the so-called GUN CULTURE that feeds this beast. And the cost for having more armed security is in the billions. Who will pay for that?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/21/security-guards-in-school-scared-students-unclear-effect-on-crime/

And LaPierre rationalizes that "gun-free zones" attract armed criminals? What NRA Chief LaPierre is demanding -- that as a solution, people with guns should then be everywhere -- is essentially nothing but the creation of an unregulated POLICE STATE. I don't think the Founding Fathers had that in mind for our Representative Democracy.

And everyone having guns is constitutional? Consider this: The word "militia" is stated not once -- as in "well-regulated militia" -- but THREE TIMES in the U.S. Constitution. The emphasis then, is armed defense of our country by the military trained in their use-- and NOT exclusively with individual citizens! Thus, LaPierre is obsessed with getting individual consumers to buy and own guns and concealed weapons, with NO support for the military or the police, in terms of funding them.

And, a poll of NRA members done this year, reported by a GOP pollster no less, indicated that a majority in their organization want MORE common-sense regulations of firearms in this country, and not less. So NRA Chief LaPierre is out of touch with his own!

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/public_opinion/public_opinion.shtml

Then explain to me the difference between

the schools of the GOP tomorrow

and

the prisons of our today..?

THAT is the GOP wetdream !!

No education dept.

just send Johnnie to prison right out of the womb....their Idea of a WELFARE STATE !

According to Robert "The Clown" in Oregon, only the very wealthy should enjoy the privelege of defense. He also advocates laws being passed in secret. Enjoy fascism much?

Thank God you knee jerk reactionary, anti-gun, anti-NRA idiots are a minority in this country. No amount of common sense discussion from those of opposing views is tolerated with your bunch. It is either agree with me or you are stupid or worse yet, evil.

That is how ignorant children, which I suspect is most of you, or mentally challenged adults act. In either case, until you grow up or gain some common sense to have a legitimate discussion, you are not to be taken seriously.

This guy is as ignorant as his brothers in the KKK, but there is an audience for him....on Jerry Springer.

If the NRA get there way we be outfitting Toyota pick up trucks with anti aircraft guns on them just like the rag heads do.

Pat, pat.................................if you have no ideas to help just remain silent, your stupidity is showing.

I have had a gun pulled on me 3 times in my life and I have been verbally threatened by someone who claimed they would go get their gun and shoot me 5 times in my life and none of those times was it a liberal or a progressive who threatened me or pulled a gun on me, and it wasn't a so called "outlaw" or "criminal" either, It was a drunk, jealous, conservative redneck NRA member who can only defend his wounded self esteem with a gun. Jim Spence keeps calling people "limp wristed liberals" but yet it is the "scared of their own shadow conservatives" who can't control their temper or defend themselves without the aid of a gun. Walk into any redneck bar and ask every "responsible gun owner" what they would do if they caught someone sleeping with their wife and 99%of them will say they would shoot them. That is not what the 2nd ammendment is about.

I think we need to give psychological exams to people who want to own guns, if they show signs of extreme paranoia as in the case of 99% of Fox news watching conservatives then don't give them a permit to own a gun. Liberals are the only truly responsible gun owners, because they don't really think they need one to protect themselves.

I think it is really funny how obumbo suckered "bite me" into heading this anti gun committee to come up with "ideas". Guns are NOT the problem and never were and we have plenty of gun laws already on the books which are seldom enforced. In this case the mother was stupid and it cost her her life and the lives of others. Ya can't regulate stupidity!!!

Drugs are illegal. I suppose no one here has ever done a single illegal drug.

@everyone making this^ type of argument.

You are WRONG. YES, drugs are illegal and people still buy and use them because: a) they're a addictive substances that can make people feel good and in a blissful state, and b) they're incredibly CHEAP to produced and can be sold at an incredibly high markup price due to them being illegal, which makes them an obscenely lucrative business to dealers of illegal goods. THAT is the REAL reason we still have drugs.

If guns were illegal they'd be so freaking expensive to produce and distrubute compared to drugs they'd never even compare as a lucrative business to drugs and will NEVER be as successful.

Lol! Yeah cause pot is so addicting.

You could never make guns fully illegal. The military would still need suppliers. Even countries like Great Britain that have large restrictions on guns do not make them fully illegal to own.

Also even if they did make them illegal. Then all that would happen is production would be moved overseas like it has for everything else.

This theory of yours about them being made ridiculously expensive is completely false. For starters, labor overseas is cheaper so production costs would go down. Also there are many items such as antiquities and the human trade that are both very illegal, very expensive and happen all the time. Making guns illegal will only create an even larger black market for them and make it easier for criminals to purchase them. Drug dealers and pimps who are bringing in a grand or more a night will have no problem finding the funds to purchase an illegal firearm when the price doubles or triples because they are doing it already.

Further, if we were to fully ban firearms for civilians, then police would not be carrying either. It's the way it is in Europe. If the populace is unarmed the police are as well. Then you'll have gang bangers completely running the inner cities and the cartel running the southern border, while the National Guard constantly needs to be called in to put a stop to things.

And really the last thing I want is a police force with guns and a populace without because then we've completely stepped over the line into a police state. I would much rather have citizens policing citizens than an unarmed populace at the mercy of an all powerful armed police force.

Deprogrammer..............................I think YOU have a problem, the rest of the world is probably ok.

@ Robert in Oregon Yes that was a great idea that Chris Rock had 10 years ago....I saw the stand up routine too. Funniest part is you acting like you thought of it.

Hey bob Jones #1.215, All the Toy Yo-Yo pickup's I know all Rotted out so that won't work !!!

"NRA chief: If putting armed police in schools is crazy, 'then call me crazy.'"

Okay! Wayne, you're crazy.

Satisfied? Good. Glad I could help.

I have had a gun pulled on me 5 times in my life and I have been verbally threatened by someone who claimed they would go get their gun and shoot me 9 times in my life and none of those times was it a Republican or Conservative who threatened me or pulled a gun on me, and it wasn't a so called "outlaw" or "criminal" either, It was a drunk, jealous, Liberal/Progressive who can only defend his wounded self esteem with a gun.

Deprogrammer keeps calling people with guns “conservative redneck NRA members” but yet it is the "scared of their own shadow Liberals" that can't control their temper or defend themselves without the aid of a gun.

See, I can make up these wild stories and accusations too deprogrammer. You’ve never been threatened, nor had a gun pulled on you. Just admit you make these stories up to try and promote your pathetic ideology of social and economic justice for the collective. Your irrational belief that the government should intervene in everything in life just proves your sad inability to exist, let alone succeed, independently.

Jerod Loughner was a Liberal. A crazy Liberal, but nonetheless a Liberal. Professor Amy Bishop, murdered 3 fellow faculty members and injured 3 others. She is described as “a far left political extremist who was obsessed with President Obama,” and student reviews showed, “she is a socialist but she only talks about it after class.” Joseph Stack, the quiet engineer whoflew his plane into the IRS office in Austin, Texas was a Liberal who proudly quoted the communist creed in his suicide note, “The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”.

Liberalism/Progressivism is causing the economic, social, moral and cultural downfall of our great Republic. But then again you probably believe we are a Democracy so there’s no point explaining anything more to you.

Your indoctrination is complete. It seems the only one here that needs to be deprogrammed is you.

Guns in elementary and middle schools will lead to big problems.... Your kids will be shot for brandishing their cell phones among other really stupid situations.... Now a few gun toting cowboys in high school and colleges isn't too bad of an idea (maybe).... But guards outside the schools to search everyone who enters is a better idea so they give everyone (exept students) a quick pat down and search for any weapons (which can easily be left in their vehichles that they came in (even police officers).... And besides look at the jobs this policy will create>>>> this an awesome idea for American jobs this is....

“If it’s crazy to call for putting police in and securing our schools to protect our children, then call me crazy,” LaPierre told NBC’s David Gregory. “I think the American people think it’s crazy not to do it. It’s the one thing that would keep people safe and the NRA is going try to do that.”

Hmmm.... "...then call me crazy", he says. Straight lines like this don't come along too often in one's life. But it is too obvious, too easy. I'll pass.

What is most amazing in this whole post-Newtown spree-killing world, is the NRA's idea, which boiled down, goes something like this:

Guns make us safer. If killings like this tragedy still occur because any maniac can arm himself [or herself], then the answer is more guns. All adults should go around with a sidearm, and we should have armed guards in our schools. Then we'll be safe.

However, only a little less silly is the idea that just tightening up the Federal gun laws, coupled with a more aggressive stance towards the treating of the mentally ill, will prevent some crazy, or very angry, person from shooting up a school, a shopping mall or some other public place.

I doubt it.

To bring about a less lethal environment, society would have to aggressively remove most of the guns in our society, a process which, aside from being politically impossible, would take decades.

So our only remaining option is pretty much the status quo, and the sooner everybody realizes it, the sooner we can halt all the political isometrics [as in effort, without apparent movement] going on in Washington, DC, and get back to steering our nation over the fiscal cliff.

Yes, I would support a ban on assault weapons. But keep in mind that neither Adam Lanza, nor Jared Loughner used an assault rifle. Such weapons are not a necessity for such killing sprees, and banning them alone will not solve the problem.

Loughner was not a liberal, he was a wingnut who overdosed on the hate and venom Fox spews on a daily basis, he was just doing what Palin told him to do.

And what of McVeigh? He was a conservaitve wingnut. And the guy who shot up the unitarian church? the only books he had in his house were by Hannity and Beck. And Eric Rudolph, the Olympic Park bomber? he was a conservative christian anti-aborttion fanatic. And the guy who ambushed the police in New York state right after Obama was elected the first time? He was a conservative wingnut who believed the BS Fox was spewing about Obama coming to take his guns away. Dylan and Kliebold were sons of conservative wingnuts. And out latest shooter who killed 26 people was a self proclaimed conservative and the son of a avid gun collector and a member of the NRA. Liberals don't kill people, conservatives with guns and bombs do. so outlaw conservatism and the problem will be solved.

Seriously, how about a compromise?

(1) We already have an armed police officer in our high school here. It does not seem to freak anyone out that he is there every day patrolling the halls and grounds. Why not have an officer in the lower grade schools as well, but have him or her play a more visible role as the friendly police officer who teaches little children safety tips about crossing the road, riding their bikes, etc. But, at the same time, the parents know (and any potential shooter will know) that this officer is armed.

and

(2) Reinstate the ban on all automatic and semi-automatic weapons, and require background checks for gun shows, and a waiting period to buy guns.

Why can't we do both of these things? Perfect solution!

I have had a gun pulled on me 3 times in my life and I have been verbally threatened by someone who claimed they would go get their gun and shoot me 5 times in my life...

Deprogrammer, unless you live in one of the more violent, inner-city neighborhoods, I'd say that your experience is far enough outside the norm as to indicate it is you who have a problem.

I've been in a couple of dicey circumstances in my life, but I've never had a gun pulled on me, or had someone threaten to go get their gun and shoot me, nor do I know anybody who has.

I support tighter gun laws. I also feel that such items as concealed carry permits, assault weapons and stand your ground laws represent a ridiculous escalation of the very real threat of gun violence in our society. But reading your post, I really see a problem which relates to you, and not to the society in which you live.

LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.
From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend
themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians
disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are 'citizens'.
Without them, we are 'subjects'.

During WW II the Japanese decided not to invade America- because they knew most Americans were ARMED! If you value your freedom, please spread this anti gun -control message to all of your friends.

When government thugs show at my door someday to take me and my family off to a detention center for some *logical* reason (like they did to Japanese US CITIZENS in WW2!!!) It will be comforting to know they will face a semi-auto high capacity clip spraying 30+ rounds their way LOL!!! SUPERIOR FIREPOWER BRINGS SUPERIOR RESULTS! My fundamental right to be able to defend myself against an oppressive government 2nd amendment rocks!

OK, to all the gun control advocates, you shoot your mouth with a negative comment about the NRA solution to all the school killings, so what is the positive solution from your mouth with some law that we have not already tired yet?

With all of the security and lock down in the Newtown elementary school, the Connecticut Killer still broke the glass in the door and got in just like he did. If the principle or some other teacher were allowed to carry a gun like the school district in Texas, there would not been so many deaths. The NRA said it best “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,"

Let teachers who want to carry guns, carry guns and want to stop #$%$ like the Connecticut Killer from killing so may again. Either that or have one extra security persons get hired at each and every school. We already have gun laws and laws against violence, BUT the Connecticut Killer killed any way.

jade mountain and others, I own firearms and like to hunt as well. I am well educated with a post degree in the physical sciences and work in that field. At one time in my life many decades ago I had a membership in the NRA. At that time their stance was much different. I no longer belong as they seem to be comprised of former military militants and out of control.

Do I want to have my right to bear arms or ownership taken away due to some certified nut jobs? Absolutely not. Do I support the NRA or those who are so ready to give away the Second Amendment? Absolutely not. We, the People, need to approach this in a manner that is neither far right nor far left. We must have checks and balances in this country and the Second Amendment is one of those. We gave them the Patriot Act I & II in the middle of the night so the next step to abridging our Constitution would be to amend or strike the Second Amendment. Just as we try to legislate social mores such as Pro-choice and Pro-life it only divides this country further. We cannot do either one without whoring away our Constitution.

I have always been a gun lover and have always had a nice collection but I never joined the NRA. I will be joining now as a lifetime member. I will not have my rights taken away from me!

Gregdh,

What on earth makes you think we are a minority? What is now isn't what used to be!

chris,

Why will you abandon common sense now for joining a terrorist organization?

"Don't be afraid." - Jesus

"Guns! Guns! Guns!" - The Christian Right

The liberal position here is dogmatic and irrational. Passing laws which proponents already agree won't stop these crimes will do nothing to stop these crimes. This seems to axiomatic that it embarresses me to have to write those words for leftists to read. None of the recent crimes which ostensibly motivate liberals for more gun control consist of any criminal components which the laws liberals want to enact to prevent those crimes would prevent.

LaPierre, though I am not an NRA member (I am reconsidering my decision 12 years ago to allow my one-time membership to lapse), is right, but the left simply wants to insult and impugn. It IS our culture, not any gun per se, or even all guns, which is the problem. It is true that liberal, not conservative, jurisprudence made confining those who are mentally ill all but impossible unless and until you can prove they are a danger to themselves or others. But what of these past crimes shows that any of the shooters had been adjudicated as mentally ill? Answer: Nothing.

Movies and music and games must play their part too. But just like guns themselves aren't the problem, neither are better movies, music, and games, a solution. Though I am an atheist I think the systemic removal of morality--for most people this was a Christian morality--from our culture is a major culprit in the kinds of crimes we've seen for the past 40 or 50 years.

But here's the rub...There isn't a chance in hell that liberals will confront this issue. The entire modern liberal society is built on the idea of jettisoning traditional values in favor of modern, but vapid, beliefs. Asking, or expecting, liberals to deal with this problem is nothing more than a false hope. Why would liberals, who've brought us this degrading culture, want to do anything to reverse course, and admit in the process they have helped to cause enormous damage to society?

No, what will happen is that feckless laws will be put into place, and the Feinsteins and Schumers of this country will pat themselves on the back over how much they care. And then another killing spree will occur. And this entire charade will be repeated. I don't think liberals want anyone killed, certainly not 20 little kids, but I'm not convinced they really care to solve any of the problems which help cause all those deaths.

clwyd-2621393

The facts convince me think that you are a minority.

"What is now isn't what used to be!"

I know, it is worse for your cause. Back in '94 a very vocal minority convinced congress that America wanted stricter anti-gun legislation, so they passed the assault weapons and high capacity magazine ban. This legislation had no good effect and didn't stop Columbine from happening. Congress became republican controlled for the first time in 40 years. Why do you think the democrats haven't tried it since? You may also notice that, even though he is anti gun, Obama wasn't stupid enough to call for it before the election.

Polls taken at that time showed that anti gun legislation had better public support back then than they do now.

Facts , not knee jerk reactions.

http://news.msn.com/us/head-on-crash-amid-holiday-travel-kills-4-in-ohio

Two minivans, one of them traveling the wrong way, collided on Interstate 75 in southwestern Ohio early Sunday, killing four, including a 7-year-old boy

Alcohol was a suspected factor

Guess we will hear the crazies saying things like, we need to have police patroling the roads to protect our children from drunk drivers.

1. David Gregory who did the interview was a nooob! He was rude and wouldn't listen to Waynes answers!

2. There are 300,000,000 guns in this country.... you think putting a ban on semi-automatics will make a difference? or reducing the size of a magazine?

3. If someone wants to cause harm they will. The fact is this country is very quickly going out of control! 16 massacres in 2012. Obooma has done nothing and only now does he start getting his people working on an idea.... and puts Joe 'where am I' Biden in charge! LMAO

4. Who needs terrorists when we're killing eachother!

5. Sad that the people of Newtown have taken down their Christmas trees because of what happened. Yep, that's right. Why make this a religious or Christian issue? Now more than ever they should be turning to their faith! but no, they turn their back on the most important celebration of the year!

6. I can go into my local Walmart and buy a shotgun or M4 and it takes 45 minutes to complete the background check. That's it. No license required, no training, no nothing just a clear criminal record.

We wanted to have the right to bare arms..... so why all the complaining now? And why only have armed police at certain schools? who decides which? If they start arming teachers and there's talk of janitors too! then I'd home school any of my children!!! We need more police on the streets not in our schools!!!!!!

Yawn.

Anyone who carries a gun to defend themselves is a spineless pussy. JIm SPence is probably the most obvious example of this.

When confronted with my physical superiority, he actually hid behind his daughter. His thirteen year old daughter.

I've never known a man who carried a gun that wasn't a shameless, pathetic coward.

So go buy lots of guns, honeys. Make the gun companies money. And make up stories about how you'd "take out the bad guy" that you have never, and will never see.

Go get 'em, John Wayne. Go get 'em, Rambo. Go swap manly stories with all of the other gun toting jokes.

All hail the NRA.

I don't see where a ban on anything ever worked in history. I own a couple guns that are registered to me so it's my responsibility to make sure no one can gain access to them except my wife and I. I think that we need to STAND UNITED instead of pointing fingers at each other. It's time that we take back our country and maybe it can become great again where jobs are plentiful and a family doesn't need 2-3 jobs just to "get by". If I wanted to do illegal things with guns than I would buy them from the street. The only thing that laws do is to keep honest people honest. It's illegal to steal something and we can all see how that law stopped the activity, and the list goes on. We need to not try to pass another law or point fingers, but come up with a solution that might actually do some good for the future.

I honestly and truly want to know why anyone thinks another ban would somehow work this time around? Please go look up "insanity" in the dictionary. Reinstating a failed ban is nothing short...

Adam Lanza's Chinese equivalent did the same thing Lanza did on the other side of the globe to 23 first graders but guess what?!? Those 23 Chinese elementary students are alive in their homes and not in a box 6 feet under because they were attacked with a knife and the regulations on guns.

And they say the Commies are the ones that are suppose to be backwards. -_-

This clown won't understand it until one of his family members is senselessly cut down by a gun. That seems to be the only way for him to understand it. Everything any one else says goes in one ear and out the other. He won't get it until he has to bury someone two weeks before Christmas.

This man can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

Hi Nigol,

Some of what you write makes sense to me. But I have to ask you...Why do you think virtually every mass killing in our, more or less, recent history has taken place within a "gun free zone"? Is it possible that people intent on killing as many innocent people as possible might go to these places on purpose? The idea of making these places "gun free" was understandable from a perfect-world view. But our world isn't perfect.

So since we aren't anytime soon going to deal with actual causes, and instead want to hyperventilate (see David Gregory's interview style) about ancillary issues, wouldn't a decent step to take be putting armed security inside the school if for no other reason the deterrent value? Police, in other words, shoudl be where crimes are taking place. If those crimes are in the schools, then why should police not be there?

Robert in Oregon - stupid idea (it’s been proposed before) and very poorly supported. First, you infringe upon a right if you prevent or inhibit its exercise, as an exorbitant tax on ammunition would do. Second, the term "well-regulated" means "well-trained," as in military order. The phrase (no matter how you interpret it) refers to the militia (not to the right to arms or the arms themselves), the existence of which was enumerated as a reason (but not the sole reason) for protecting a general right to arms. (It is of no consequence that other reasons were not enumerated. Please see the 9th Amendment.) Third, the commerce clause has been abused for decades, if not more than a century. It was intended to empower Congress to promote commerce by regulation (to assure fair and equitable trade between the States), not to prohibit it or make it so costly as to cause the same effect. And finally, I think the NRA should push back on all firearms-associated taxes. In many states, there is no sales tax on periodicals like magazines and newspapers in order to promote their distribution, because they are protected by the 1st Amendment, and it is understood as a general rule that the power to tax is the power to destroy. Therefore, property, actions, and institutions (like churches/religions) closely associated with constitutionally guaranteed rights should not be, and in many cases are not, taxed. (For instance, you couldn’t impose a tax upon Muslims for their practice of Islam just because you determine that the faith poses a danger to the public.) Applying the same concept to firearms, ammunition, and related appurtenances, their sale should not be subject to any taxes at all, much less a tax that that would effectively prevent the exercise of a constitutionally-protected right.

so LaPierre wants more guns in our schools and yet none were allowed at his news conference, and none are allowed at the NRA's annual convention? that sounds like our Matt Meade, Wyomings Governor who will allow any wingnut who wants to carry a loaded gun the right to do so ANYWHERE in the state, EXCEPT NEAR HIM! Yep you can carry a gun around our school kids but not around our governor. One word keeps popping into my head when I think of "men" like Meade and LaPierre...... PUSSIES.

The structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates that the soldiers keep their Army issued equipment, including all personal weapons, at home. Some organizations and political parties find this practice controversial^[66] but mainstream Swiss opinion is in favour of the system.

Almost every household in Switzerland is armed and they have one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Why is that?

freedomfrys - what is a high caliber gun? Did you mean to say large caliber? The AR-15 is a small caliber weapon. In fact the round it uses, the .223/5.56 NATO is only .001" (one thousandth of an inch) larger than a .22 short, long rifle or magnum round. As for "maximum ammo magazines" any magazine that is full to capacity has "maximum ammo". It doesn't matter if it's a 7 round magazine for the Colt 1911 .45 or a 50 round drum magazine for a Thompson.

Hey! Anybody see 'Jack Reacher' yet?

This whole debate about ending gun murder where possible actually argues (unbeknownst to most of the posters here, either left or right) for an to the Drug War. And BTW, there is no correation county by county in the USA, nor transnationally nation to nation, between gun ownership rates and murder rates. The USA is #1 in ownership rates, but 28th in murder rtates. What is corollary, and causal, to high murder rates is the Drug War.

When we ended the Prohibtion of alcohol in 1933, the murder rate fell 40%...in one year. Nations that legalized drugs or decriminalized have seen a marked decrease in murders. England's crime rates soared, including gun crime, after their ban on guns, but recently has decreased...while simultaneously their gun ownership rates are increasing. Yep...despite popular myth, they have climbed to 1.8 million gun owners after being lower after the initial gun bans. At the same time, gun murders and murders in general have declined.

There is a Harvard Law and Public Policy (Obama's school) study that shows suicide and murder rates are highest in the nations with more strict laws or total bans, while they are lowest in nations with highest gun ownership rates. The top 8 gun control nations had 3 times the murder rate as the top 8 gun ownership nations.

I could go on and on...but why? No amount of evidence will convince irrational people. They don't even realize murder rates and even gun murder rtates in this country have been falling for 30 years (trend). They don't realize more Americans die in bathtubs than from mass shootings every year. They don't realize that 40-70% of murder, and thereby gun murder, are correlated with the Drug War, not gun ownership.

If there is no consistent correlation across all counties or nations then there is no causality. If there is a consistent correlation across them then there is causatiton most likely. Of all factors, whether cultural, violent or sexualized movies, music, TV, one religion vs another (or lack thereof), single partenthood vs 2 parents, etc., etc., etc. the most consistent correlation is to the Drug Wars raging in high murder rate and gun murder rate nations, counties, and States. The least consistent correlation is gun ownership rate.

Harvard Law Study

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs...online.pdf

UK Gun Ownership Up, Deaths Down Offering Stark Comparison with US Figures

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dan-ehrlich/uk-gun-ownership-up-deaths-down_b_1209967.html

"Racism without Racists": The Drug War's Results Regardless of Intentions

http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/ArrestingBlacks.pdf

The Drug War Causes More Violent Crime and Murder (including gun murder):

http://www.icsdp.org/docs/ICSDP-1%20-%20FINAL.pdf

Study After Study on the Drug War's Effect on Crime:

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Crime

Hey DaveGinOly,

Spot on my friend. But we might have more luck trying to teach calculus to Carp. Other than the lives of my children I would give about anything to get our country's people more knowledgeable of our Constitution. Ignorance empowers despots.

What do the NRA and the GOP have in common?

Not willing to take any of the responsibility for any of the problems we face in America today, and not willing to compromise to fix things.

If you want to ban guns, or certain types of guns, you should be just as willing to ban alcohol too.

As our empty suit Vacationer in Chief claims, “The good news is there’s already a growing consensus for us to build from. A majority of Americans support banning the sale of military-style assault weapons. A majority of Americans support banning the sale of high-capacity ammunition clips.”

So, by extension, the majority of Americans must also support banning alcohol. The havoc wrecked on American society by booze at least equals, and in reality far exceeds, the horrors brought about by gun violence. According to the National Highway Traffic Administration, 10,228 people died in drunk driving accidents in 2010. That compares with 11,105 deaths attributed to firearms related homicides, according to the Center for Disease control. The carnage resulting from drunk driving and gun crimes stand close to equal.

Of course, if you include suicide and gun accidents in the statistics, the number of firearms related deaths increase to 31,513. But a CDC study in 2005 attributes a whopping 75,000 deaths per year in the United States directly to alcohol, including alcohol related diseases and non-vehicle accidents. That’s more than double the number of firearms related deaths. And that doesn’t even begin to touch the damage to families and the violence perpetrated by drunks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, alcohol was a factor in between 19 and 37 percent of violent all crimes from 1997 to 2008.

As our limp-wristed president stated, "We’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."

If not a complete ban, at least a ban on the highest proof booze. And obviously, we need to outlaw high capacity containers, like “forties,” 24-packs and kegs. I mean, who can object? Nobody NEEDS alcohol after all. So, to sum up, if we must take immediate action to restrict guns due to some 32,000 deaths per year, we must also immediately pursue booze-bans due to the 75,000 alcohol related deaths per year.

It's only logical. But of course our statist Evolver in Chief does nothing based on logic. In true dysfunctional Liberal/Progressive fashion, everything is doe based on emotions. How it makes them “feel”. The bleeding-heart Liberals have no concept of policy, it’s all based on convoluted indoctrination into the social and economic justice nonsense they all believe in. This is because none of them are capable of subsisting on their own. What they can’t extort out of their families and friends they then resort to begging for more government help. Of course using their EBT cards to buy more alcohol to remain dysfunctional.

This is the shame they willingly accept as they fear success and prosperity.

From this point forward, I will completely disregard any gun-ban-nut who refuses to support alcohol bans as well.

Fortunately this involves the majority of limp-wristed Liberals and their bizarre ideologies.

this is to anyone wanting gun control,do you think a "feel good"law is going to change anything? REAL HONEST ANSWERS ONLY NEED APPLY. when smart people say secure our schools with armed guards(or teachers that are liscenced to carry) you say they will ABUSE their power,what do you REALLY WANT? if you want to give up your rights....go somewhere else. I want my kids and grandkids to be safe and banning ANYTHING will not stop CRIMINALS DUMBASSES! can you stop your emotions for one minute and THINK! it is not the guns or the thirty round clips you @#@#$#faces it is.....WAIT FOR IT...WAIT FOR IT....THE CRIMINALS DUMBF#2KS!

What do the NRA and the GOP have in common?

Not willing to take any of the responsibility for any of the problems we face in America today, and not willing to compromise to fix things.

Guess what both of them have in common with liberals/progressives?

Blaming things not consistently correlated, let alone causal, to 40-70% of gun murder (the Drug War). They all blame nonsense things that are intuitive, but not deductively logical and back by multiple studies....because they are already opposed to those things as part of their established ideologies.

PATRIOTIC AMERICAN you should change your avatar to UNPATRIOTIC AMERICAN if you're willing to give up a right that EVERY free man should enjoy. and HAGGISBINGO GO @!$%# YOURSELF DUMB @!$%#! YOU MORONS can't see the forest for the trees. it is ultimately the criminal and you retards scream BAN BAN BAN! what the f@#k do you think that will do? do you REALLY THINK CRIMINALS WILL LISTEN TO YOUR LAWS? wake the f@#k up dip@!$%#s!!!!!!!!!! they don't give two @!$%#s to your f@#king laws dumb@!$%#s they will wait a minute.....STILL DO IT MORONS!!!!!!!!

Makes no difference. Every time i see a cop walk into a school they have their gun with them. Where i live even off duty take them in and usually wear them into stores and about everywhere they go. However here i think it has something to do with avoiding the ass whippings they have been promised for the way they treat people. Same as banning guns will not change anything. There are already thousands out there. What about them? No way people will give them up.

Well, I do care about drug use. I don't want people to abuse drugs. But more importantly I don't want people to infringe upon my liberty, a primary facet of which is the fact that I own my own body (or should if I truly lived in a free country) and so long as I hurt no one else by my actions I should be able to do as I want. If that means I want to destroy my mind and body with drugs it should be my right. The same is true with guns. So long as I harm no one else I should be able to keep and bear arms.

None of the above means that each of us, as individuals, can't tell our family and friends we don't like their behavior. It simply means we shouldn't use the government as the mechanism to impose our personal will on another. This is the essence of liberty. Liberty in a real sense has been lost in America, and the above posts indicate that if we are looking for it we don't even have a clue of the right direction to go.

A lot of the gun control activists on here keep saying armed security in schools is not the answer, that its crazy. Yet not one has offered a solution as to how to stop an active shooter in a school. Come on, I want to hear it. What are your solutions to stopping this from happening again besides a bunch of nonsense that amounts to nothing?

NRA= Not Rational Americans

clwyd-2621393

Just want you gun carrying nuts to know that there are some (many) of us who think that ALL guns should be turned in and be banned. I don't care if they go door to door and do searches. The 2nd Amendment never meant for many of these guns to be owned and in the numbers that some own. The 2nd Amendment says a Militia. Since most of us aren't in the National Guard we shouldn't own guns according tot he 2nd Amendments wording as interpreted by many! Including me! I pray to God daily that those of you nuts out there will not kill again in Malls, Neighborhoods, schools, college campuses, forts, and in your own homes. I was glad to see hundreds of guns being turned in voluntarily in once instance!

• 32

• !

#1.38

I do wish you people would apy attention to current and not so current events

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves.

also reference SCOTUS (2010) Chicago Lawsuit pertaining to handguns

Also, the Militia is not the National Guard, and vice versa.

And since we don't depend on any one persons interpretation of the law that means I have to acknowledge that the ACA is law too.

I have yet to have any of you dope smokin hippy liberals answer this:

Up until 1934, any one in the US could order and have shipped through the USPS, a fully automatic sub-machine(Tommy Gun) or even a BAR. Where were all the spree shootings then(other than criminal gangland)?

It was not uncommon, at the time, to walk into a hardware store and buy a case of Dynamite to remove tree stumps. If easy access to deadly weapons is the measure of a deadly society, why were things like the "Bath School Disaster" not regular occurrences?

The true Definition of "Gun Nut" is someone who hates guns for any reason or no reason.

You people are so lucky that I am a Certified Ethical Hacker and not Unethical like Biden,Obama,Feinstein and Holder are.

I could have a list of your IP and MAC addresses and the physical locations of your residences.

I am an Ethical Hacker so I do not break the laws.

Just think of how lucky you are, that I am Ethical because you could lose everything in your bank account, your work histroy, your school records and whatever else I wanted to do to you.

Instead, I track Unethical Hackers so that the government can arrest them and protect your meaningless lives.

So be careful what you say and who you say it to. There are plenty of criminals out there who can do what I can do.

I own 2 HK 91 Rifles, 1 HK 93 Rifle, 3 Glocks and 4 Walthers,a mini 14, some collectors items and Several Classic Revolvers that I deer hunt with. My Favorite is the Thompson Contender.(single shot pistol) I can change Barrels so that I can fire a 30.06 from a 14 inch barrel and hit a deer's heart at 250 yards. I can put a .223 barrel on it and hit a Coyote in the head at 400 yards. And that is from a 10 inch barrel with open sights.

I could buy a real Machine Gun if I wanted one, but $15,000.00 to $50,000.00 is a lot to pay for a gun. My federal Security Clearance is First Class.

That's correct, machine guns are still available for sale to anyone who can buy any handgun and pass the backround check.

And to you soviets who think that your idea of a $25,000 tax on a bullet will stop sales, it will only initiate a black market for ammo. Cocaine and Heroin have been illegal for decades and it is still available almost everywhere. And it is so cheap that Your kids bring it home from school, and Illegals just walk across the border and bring it with them.

Remember that what you say on the internet is world wide.

I do not need a Bushmaster. the millitary called them "Mattel Toys" during the vietnam war.

Reality is that if someone out of their gourd decides to hurt other people they will. The same day as Newtown a guy walked into a Chinese elementary school with a machetti and did the same thing. Police primarily react to crime, not stop it. Yes if they get a tip, see something, etc. they'll gladly step in but getting there is much more difficult.

So is it a case of "if you get rid of the guns this won't happen"? Only if you are completely naive. Reality check- If there are over 300,000,000 guns in this country- all of which are too dangerous for us, then why are there less than 30,000 gun related deaths per year Statistically half are pegged as suicides btw- so that puts "deaths by gun" at below 15,000, which includes the police shooting someone, someone defending themselves, accidents, and yes actual homicides (which unfortunately are not statistically broken down by the CDC and FBI).

But you say that they are too dangerous and need to be banned, well if all it takes is a law to make everybody safe then how are those drug laws working out for you- did everybody suddenly go clean and no more drug trades? You break the law- get a DWI- and your license gets taken away from you- so there aren't any more DWI's or accidents by people without licenses anymore?

Lasty, the hypocracy on guns. While our political elite decree that we shouldn't have guns out in the public (especially black ones, ones that can carry over 5 rounds, etc.) they are perfectly happy with sending their children to schools with whole armed teams to protect them, they get their own armed security teams, they have CCW licenses and carry themselves, yet they can't fathom why you should.

On the armed guards in schoo- they are already there in many, many places. As things go, I'd be more happy if (as is starting to happen) if a portion of the teaching staff would get "air marshal" training and have the ability to react quickly to a panic button being pushed on campus. Statistics also show that most of the idiots whom would harm large numbers of others tend to kill themselves when they think they might get hurt by someone else- so by knowing that there are amred people in the schools they'll either not try or it'll end sooner. Your only other option is the stupid one- make our kids go to school in prisons with bulletproof everything. Yeah that's a really healthy way to bring up your kids- it's too dangerous out there. Then you get to figure out how to push them out into the street and start their own lives.

Charlton Heston, when he was a spokesperson for the NRA, used the same brash tone. Of course time would eventually reveal that he was "crazy," in that he had a physiological brain disorder (Alzheimer's) that, based on present understanding, can be rooted decades before there is an actual diagnosis. I realize that this sounds nasty, but I honestly think that Mr. LaPierre should have himself examined for early detection and treatment, if necessary, as he may also be in the pre-detection phase.

We're not taking away your f#$king guns... got it?

We just need to draw a line somewhere between a pellet gun and a stinger missile.

Below that line you can purchase and own all day long as long as you pass certain restrictions including criminal and sanity checks.

Above that line you cannot purchase nor own.

I like the line below assault weapons. I'm pretty sure more would agree than not. It's THAT simple.

Add a program that removes these killing machines from existing inventories in shops and homes and you've completed the task... which is to remove the temptation and the false glory from twisted minds.

Look. Even if you support equipping everyone with massive fire power, you have to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise, what... would you make RPG's legal? I think not.

This is nothing but reasonable. We've simply gone over a line that should have existed and that we, as a society, should have anticipated.

JoeNY

So having assault weapons is worth driving our society to such violence? Read your post again. Yes, some people violate drinking and drug laws. But, yes, also, many minors and many people have these same laws to thank for less loss of life and less harm to others. So, what, you want to legalize drinking while driving? Legalize liquor to minors? No.. because reasonable limits in laws DO work and DO deter. The problem we have is defining "reasonable limits".

Show me the data that says assault weapons make us safer... the data doesn't exist. Do you own an AK-47? Ever fire one? Do you realize how "out of control" an inexperienced shooter is with an AK-47? The first bullet is aimed while the second and beyond is streamed in a general direction. It's lousy for home use, for carrying on a trip, for deer hunting, and, yes, even for legitimately protecting yourself. It's only good for killing massively and wildly.

Tell me. Exactly WHY do you apparently need an AK-47?

Hey ProIndividual...Don't forget to add that liberals don't take any responsibility for anything like Obama has not been responsible for the last 4 years of his presidency....It's all be George Bush's fault.

I mean, seriously, after Obamacare crashes and burns in a financial disaster, the liberals will be screaming about how George Bush was responsible for it.

G-Man-804405The nra and a large part of their members are hands down the biggest terrorist threat to America period.

I am sorry to disagree with you TOTALLY on that one. Why is it that people that want to PRESERVE THE CONSTITUTION and it PRECEPTS OF FREEDOM are the terrorists?

No, terrorists are those that try to TAKE AWAY FREEDOM. Terrorists are those that pass laws like NDAA, Patriot ACT, will not protect our health by passing laws that allow GMO crops and not label them, endorse programs like Fast and Furious and then hide behind EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, any other legislation that promises "safety" by stripping freedoms such as gun control.

I ask you SAFETY from what? ALL of the latest mass violence incidents happened in areas that were ALREADY GUN FREE ZONES!!!!! What else can be done besides that?

That is just a TINY list that I can come up with off the top of my head. I won't even get into all the false flag events that have occurred to encourage this FREEDOM STRIPPING legislation.

If you agree with all of that then YOU are a terrorist too.

I would say we need armed guards for this Nut Wayne LaPierre, not our Schools !!!!!!

I read posters like LMarcT and Patriotic American (who is truly inaptly named) and I can only conclude one of two things about them, presuming they don't want innocent people killed. That is a possibility, but what a stretch to imagine. No, I think they are either ignorant, or they are simply followers (which may be due to ignorance). LMarcT favors passing yet more laws despite the fact that none of the laws being considered would have done anything to stop any of the crimes their supporters claim to want to stop. Patriotic American wants no help within the schools to repel a criminal invader, despite that criminal invader being the motivation for his desire to rid the USA of guns.

It's irrational and silly, but these are the cornerstones of modern liberalism. They will succeed at making an even more dangerous America only to the extent that rational and serious people give in to them.

HURRY WAL-MART SHOPPERS!

Every parent needs to stampede over to Wal-Mart this morning. I saw a big display right in the middle of the aisle with BB guns in the shape of an assault rifle and an automatic handgun.

These are going fast, so if you want to arm your child, but he or she is not old enough to carry their own machine gun, then this gift pack is the next best thing. They can actually practice shooting their neighbors and school friends!

Hopefully, come next holiday season, we will all be wearing bullet proof vests under our Christmas sweaters.

Gun BANS being brought to you by the SAME PEOPLE that have purchased over 1.4 BILLION hollow-point bullets......please take note...... the Geneva Convention forbids the use of hollow-point bullets in "interantional battles"..............

Wonder who Obama is gearing-up to fight?

Hi Silverton,

What I think is so hilariously ironic about your post is that despite your total disdain for Wayne LaPierre or the NRA you are hitting on his major theme for the gun violence problem you claim to want to solve: The culture.

I'm not a member of the NRA, though I may soon be if you lunatics keep your drivel up, but their goal is responsible gun ownership, where people who are legally eligible to buy a weapon are allowed, and where those people assume the proper training and hadling of the weapon to harm no one improperly. LaPierre erred in thinking that leftists actually want to solve the problem, and because he did he said things which, while I agree with his analysis, were never going to be well-received by the left.

More training, but not necessarily government mandated (mostly because it will cost more than it's worth if every other government training program is an example to follow), better mental healthcare in the USA including the ability to confine dangerous people against their will, states that should give to the database information about those people presently adjudicated to be a threat (can you believe that some states don't do this?), and a general change in the culture away from violence glorification.

I would add to this list a rejection of modern liberal pedagogy where right and wrong are not exactly paramount, but feelings and self esteem trump most anything else. Other than teacher pay and class size anyhow. There's more, but I doubt you get the point so far, and so I might stand a better chance of teaching a cat to play a trumpet. Anyhow, my take is that you actually agree with LaPierre more than you can even fathom, but because your handlers tell you he's bad, you parrot the same.

For anyone who uses Netflix, check out the excellent streaming 2010 documentary:

"Murder by Proxy: How America Went Postal"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To see a list of 2012 Presidential and Congressional candidates who paid contributions TO the NRA (rather than the other way around!) go to:

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/read-list-of-us-politicians-donating-to-national-rifle-association/310570-2.html

The NRA is a Protection Racket!

a Washington, D.C. area private school, has 11 armed security guards and is apparently hiring an additional police officer because Sasha and Malia Obama attend there.

So lets think for just a minute here, the LIBERAL GUN CONTROL DEMO-RAT Presidents kids, (D) Governors, (D) Senators even (D) Mayors have gun toting, even full auto "assault" rifles with armor piercing ammo carrying security for themself and their families but these same people don't want the that for the rest of our kids. HMMMMM wonder why that is, are they all better than the rest of us and our kids, I don't think so.

Funny how so many of those who are calling for a ban on assault weapons, large cap mags and limits of ammo aren't calling for their security personnel to be disarmed, why is that.

Liberals any of you have a answer??????? Any answer good or bad.

OBAMA:America's Eva Peron wrote:

Robert in Oregon

Based on the population of the world, 8% are Latinos, yet 18% of the United States in now Latino because of illegal immigration. More that 65% of all illegals caught are from Mexico with the total from Latin America making it 94%. Wouldn't the average person call that ......AN INVASION?

The average person? No. The average delusional and paranoid person? Probably, so I will concede you that. You presently have no other point-of-view from which to draw conclusions (stick with the meds, though).

I just learned the Mexico has an even bigger "Latino problem" than does the United States. According to the percentages you have provided only 8% of the world's population is Latino, ...

and yet more than 93% of the population of Mexico is Latino. Clearly Mexico has a HUGE alien invasion on its hands ... and that's even before we count all of the Martians!!!!!!!! :-o

And the problem is not just isolated to Mexico. All throughout Latin America the percentages of Latinos have become greatly disproportionate to the world's averages. The invasion is clearly well under way.

The truly shocking thin is that those countries also to be discriminating against immigration by Watusi and Japanese people, given that they represent well less than 1% of the populations of those countries!

Doesn't David Gregory's kids go to Sidwell. Aren't there 11 armed guards at that school. So he wants you to send your kids to schools that aren't protected by armed guards. Typical.

@Obama:AmericasEvaPeron, WOW, your a rare breed with your like minded cohorts of David Duke, Strom Thurmond, Adolph Hitler, George Wallace, Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough. Is this your gift to humanity? I wonder if you like what you see when you look into the mirror. I seriously doubt it!

Starman,

By your comparison of owning guns today compared to the need to protect us from events like Lexington and Concord there isn't much we should save if the two events can be compared is there?

The 2nd Amendment clearly beings with the word "Militia." It means citizens in the "Militia" not all citizens. You know like the National Guard.

More regulations will save us??!! A war on guns, just like the war on drugs (which we are now legalizing) should be most effective.

The guns he had were illegal so the laws we already have didn't work.

At least this is a real step towards better security. It may not be perfect but I bet it helps. And it works at banks, airports, police stations, etc.

No, NOT crazy, something positive to try.

I feel sooo much safer knowing that the government is going to protect me from the guns that protect me from the government. LOL

I'm sure 300 million gun owners feel better too. LOL

Like the way we won the war on drugs by legalizing drugs, lets legalize guns. We have enough laws, now it the time to try something else, like arming schools and actually protecting our children!

And limiting the violence in video games and movies since they are becoming so realistic!

why is this a surprise?

btone

Yawn.

Anyone who carries a gun to defend themselves is a spineless pussy. JIm SPence is probably the most obvious example of this.

When confronted with my physical superiority, he actually hid behind his daughter. His thirteen year old daughter.

I've never known a man who carried a gun that wasn't a shameless, pathetic coward.

So go buy lots of guns, honeys. Make the gun companies money. And make up stories about how you'd "take out the bad guy" that you have never, and will never see.

Go get 'em, John Wayne. Go get 'em, Rambo. Go swap manly stories with all of the other gun toting jokes.

All hail the NRA.

• 1 vote

#1.241

"Anyone who carries a gun to defend themselves is a spineless pussy."

So the Police, and All the police officers are "spineless pussy". (It would be so nice to divulge your identity to those folks who work so hard to maintain order in this crazy country, and see how they treat you)

The men and women of the Armed forces, are spineless pussy. (The people who fought, and died, or are wounded, just so you have the freedom to call the Pussies. Wow, Your mother must be proud)

As I have stated before on some other vines, I am a cripple, and can no longer "run away" or flee a would be attacker. I am trained in self defense, against one attacker, maybe two. I carry a gun as a just in case. Care to call a cripple, Oh I mean a "Handi-Capable Person" a pussy? Isn't that being a little insensitive?

What a vile, disgusting, loathsome, little creature you must be. I am glad you are on the side of gun control. I can show all my friends this quote, and show them this is what the left has to offer for an argument for gun control. (I think I will even forward a copy of this to my Representative, so that he can show those on Capitol Hill what a strong argument the left has for gun control)

Obama eliminated school security that may have prevented this tragedy. Check out this article.

http://www.washingtonguardian.com/washingtons-school-security-failure