Gun violence shifts to forefront of campaign
Photo
Aurora Police Chief Daniel Oates, center, looks at the memorial across from the movie theater, Wednesday, July 25, 2012 in Aurora, Colo. Twelve people were killed and over 50 wounded in a shooting attack early Friday at the packed theater during a showing of the Batman movie, "The Dark Knight Rises."
WASHINGTON — Days after the mass shootings in Colorado, guns shifted to the forefront of the presidential campaign as President Barack Obama and Republican candidate Mitt Romney engaged in their most extensive discussions on the issue since the tragedy.
Obama, in a speech to an African-American group Wednesday in New Orleans, embraced some degree of additional restrictions on guns. He acknowledged that not enough had been done to prevent weapons from getting into the hands of criminals and pledged to work with lawmakers from both parties to move forward on the matter.
Romney said in a television interview that changing the nation's laws would not prevent gun-related tragedies. But he mistakenly said many weapons used by the shooting suspect in Aurora, Colo., were obtained illegally, despite the fact that authorities allege that the firearms used to kill 12 people and injure dozens more were purchased legally.
Neither candidate strayed significantly in their remarks Wednesday from their previously held positions on gun violence. But their pointed comments revived a debate — if perhaps only briefly — that has steadily faded to the background in national politics and been virtually non-existent in the 2012 campaign.
The White House in particular has faced fresh questions since the shootings about whether Obama, a strong supporter of gun control as a senator from Illinois, would make an election-year push for stricter measures.
Following last year's killing of six people and the wounding of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, Obama called for steps to "keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place." But he has advanced no legislative proposals since then.
The White House blames the lack of legislation in part on congressional opposition and says Obama has used his executive powers to strengthen some gun control measures.
It's been more than a decade since gun control advocates had a realistic hope of getting the type of legislation they seek, despite predictions that each shocking outburst of violence would lead to action.
During remarks Wednesday night to the National Urban League, Obama acknowledged a national pattern of calling for tougher gun restrictions in the wake of violent crimes but not following through.
"Too often, those efforts are defeated by politics and by lobbying and eventually by the pull of our collective attention elsewhere," he said.
Obama called for stepped-up background checks for people who want to purchase guns and restrictions to keep mentally imbalanced individuals from buying weapons. Those steps, he said, "shouldn't be controversial. They should be common sense."
Still, Obama is unlikely to make a robust push for new gun control legislation while mired in a deadlocked campaign centered squarely on the economy.
Romney was pressed on gun control during an interview with NBC News in London, where he is attending the Olympics and kicking off a three-country foreign trip. The presumptive Republican nominee said changing laws won't "make all bad things go away."
Romney was asked about his tenure as Massachusetts governor, when he signed a bill that banned some assault-style weapons like the type the Colorado shooter is alleged to have used. At the time, Romney described such guns as "instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
Asked if he stood by those comments, Romney mentioned the Massachusetts ban but said he didn't think current laws needed to change.
"I don't happen to believe that America needs new gun laws. A lot of what this ... young man did was clearly against the law. But the fact that it was against the law did not prevent it from happening," Romney said.
Authorities have said the suspected Colorado shooter, James Holmes, methodically stockpiled weapons and explosives at work and home in recent months. He purchased thousands of rounds of ammunition and a shotgun, a semi-automatic rifle and two Glock pistols, authorities said.
On Friday, clad head to toe in combat gear, he allegedly burst into a midnight showing of "The Dark Knight Rises" at an Aurora, Colo., movie theater, tossed gas canisters into the crowd and opened fire.
The Colorado shootings also have brought fresh attention to the frequent incidents of gun violence that plague many American cities, including Obama's hometown of Chicago.
Obama addressed the nationwide troubles in front of the Urban League in part because African-Americans, who make up the bulk of the organization's membership, have been disproportionately affected by gun violence. While mass shootings like the one in Colorado receive widespread attention, Obama said roughly the same number of young people are killed in the U.S. by guns every day and a half.
"For every Columbine or Virginia Tech, there are dozens gunned down on the streets of Chicago and Atlanta, and here in New Orleans," he said. "For every Tucson or Aurora, there is daily heartbreak over young Americans shot in Milwaukee or Cleveland."
The president urged parents, neighbors and teachers to also play a role in helping end gun violence among young people.
Jul 30, 2012 at 7:47 a.m.
Jul 29, 2012 at 9:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Kersy52 exactly where I was going on the 27th at 11 am
Jul 29, 2012 at 9:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
“God made some men big and others small, but Samuel Colt made them equal."
Jul 29, 2012 at 4:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Protection from overzealous government agencies during disasters. If you doubt it, active Army was called into New Orleans to confiscate ANY firearms from citizens protecting their homes under the guise of "protecting" them. Two problems, use of active Army, Ididnt hear about any declerations of marshall law, and the confiscation of firearms BY the military. Im not going to hold your hands and give you specific links, I researched it the old fashion way, doing the work on my own. Go on youtube though. A guardsman or Army reservist (cant remember which) gave a first hand account of this AND refused to follow said orders. Also, there were reports of plain old police officers being ordered to take weapons from civilians, an order given by the mayor. Musta forgot he isnt above the Constitution huh? As former LEO, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, I still will. And if you want to get picky about it, the Constitution was written when it was musket vs musket. Well a civilian musket is obsolete these days. Equal protection from tyranny is my guess as why the second amendment was included. Look at most countries who have "absolute" gun control....their government doesnt play to nice with people of dissenting opinions do they? Say it cant or wont ever happen here, I will call you a liar. Power corrupts, absolute power can kill. I will just continue to belive in peace through similar or superior firepower.
Jul 29, 2012 at 2:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
First GoodAmerican says " Show us one actual incident when 5 gang bangers entered someone's home with these weapons and someone in the home stopped them with one. In fact, please show us an example or two of any actual crime that was thwarted because the victim used such a weapon to stop it."
And we show him news videos thats does excatly that , then he changes his statement and says
"The point that you are all missing is that these crooks could just as easily have been thwarted with a .45, or .44, or .38, or .22, or ANY other gun. "
well ya sure they could of but those weapons were not in the home and available, The AR15's were.
then GoodAmerican states that the news videos could possibly be propaganda , and has insulted and called people that names that have a difference of opinion from his own .
GoodAmerican you don't seem to understand the Constitution or the freedoms that come from it .
We just wake up to be the greatest Country on the planet , we fought our way there with Guns .
Jul 29, 2012 at 12:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
factsplease stated....
"Ron Johnson said on Fox that Wisconsin hunters need semi-automatics and huge rounds of ammo for hunting."
I believe you have embellished the story a bit.
"Does something that would limit magazines that could carry 100 rounds, would that infringe on the constitutional right?" host Chris Wallace asked Johnson on "Fox News Sunday."
"I believe so," Johnson replied. "People will talk about unusually lethal weapons, that could be potentially a discussion you could have. But the fact of the matter is there are 30-round magazines that are just common all over the place. You simply can't keep these weapons out of the hands of sick, demented individuals who want to do harm. And when you try and do it, you restrict our freedom."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/22...
So Obama and the dems had total control for the first two years...why didn't they renew the law Clinton signed that expired after 10 years?
Jul 29, 2012 at 11:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
So an 8yr old boy was killed in an accidental shooting...how many kids are killed in accidental car wrecks? How many kids die choking on food? Should we ban them from eating solid food until they are a certain age? How many kids die from drugs? alcohol abuse? Yet I can walk down to the corner and buy booze and I dont need a back ground check.
Jul 29, 2012 at 11:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
The way politicians think is that a person who is unable to obtain a gun will go: "oh shucks, I can't kill because I can't get a gun", is absolutely ridiculous, but that is their idea. We the people know that if a person is bent on doing something, they are going to do it.
Jul 28, 2012 at 6:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Here we go again. The democrats Schumer, Lautenberg, Feinstein trying to slip gun control in the Cybersecurity bill.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/se...
May I suggest slipping the fy 2013 budget into the bill also. You know, do your jobs and mind your own business.
By taping two magazines together for quick reload defeating the 10 round limit.
I for one never liked the M-16, I'm a M-14 guy. And when you need to knock someone backward regardless of a vest & helmet, only the Colt M1911A2 will do.
Quote: "A pistol is what you use to fight your way to a rifle"
Jul 28, 2012 at 5:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
http://www.thonline.com/news/tri-state/a...
Wonder if this boys family feels great about the guns in their home? Your right guns dont kill people kids playing with guns kill themselves. As long as their parents are irresponsible law abiding citizens , its cool.
I am NOT anti-gun, I am just pro common sense, I believe that if a child dies in an accident in the home due to any type of irresponsibility, parents should be charged with a crime plain and simple.
Jul 28, 2012 at 5:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-14/justi...
Yeah your right guns dont kill people , 8 year olds playing with UZIs at gun shows do. GA is spot on here.The rest of you are making frivolous repetetive argunents about Chicago and the inner citys gun problems. Last time I checked this nation is far larger than inner cities.
BunBun also makes the point that you cannot obtain an automatic weapon without a special permit, that GA didnt address. GA?? I believe he is correct is he not? Automatic weapons have no place in society whether the Chicago gangs can get them or not. FYI this is Janesville, and I have not yet read a link of 5 gangbangers with guns breaking into a home in Wisky, in Chi town. If that happens in the night, got news for you you are dead and robbed, any dreams of you becoming Rambo and overcoming are strictly nocternal emission.
Jul 28, 2012 at 4:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
The AR is a fine rifle. The civilian version in semi-auto operates the same as dozens of other rifles that have been on the market for over 100 years. Because it is black in color and has a slightly different shape than some of the other rifles changes nothing.
All of the major manufacturers make a version of the AR. It is a part of the hunting, target shooting, plinking, self defense, competition sports shooting scene and will be for a long time. It is not going anywhere regardless of types like "GoodAmericans" attempts to use lies and untruths to undermine ownership of this fine rifle. By the way, the ARs military version which is a semi and full auto rifle has soldiered on with the US military longer than any other rifle they have ever adapted.
Jul 28, 2012 at 7:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
I believe that anyone who owns one of the AR-15, AK-47 type weapons does so for the purpose of self defense. Self defense of your home and family during a time when conventional measures would not be effective. During hurricane Katrina, Rodney King riots and recently the Colorado wildfires there were many instances of chaos, looting and a breakdown of social order. It is times like these where you will not be able to count on the local police to help you. The people who want to remove guns from the legal public landscape are sadly misguided. Murders,rapists and miscreants are the first ones to react during times of social breakdown and there are not enough police to defend everyone at the same time.
Jul 28, 2012 at 12:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Boy Uses Dad's AR-15 to Shoot Invader
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-q2zHIov...
Jul 27, 2012 at 9:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
goodamerican - Here is your link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuhKCiY-l...
-
Simply one example and there are more. I know you don't believe it because you were called out and proven wrong. And AGAIN, what "this type of weapon" are you referring to? A semi auto was used. Practically every type of caliber of hunting gun is offered in this. For someone that owns guns, you should do some more research on this before commenting.
-
iouxsiesioux - Your comment make absolutely zero sense and it's pretty sad you wish that on responsible citizens. When are some of you going to start blaming the human race instead of an object for such acts? It's pathetic.
Jul 27, 2012 at 7:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
siouxsiesioux - wow you just portrayed your own foolishness amazingly well. You should re-read your own posts before submitting it.
Jul 27, 2012 at 4:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Okay I got it! More guns equals less crime. Duh! Well, hopefully statistics will remain the same and gun owners will be killed with YOUR OWN gun during an invasion of your home. I guess that would be how the crime rates go down?
Jul 27, 2012 at 2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
I will never understand the logic of the far left. They want to protect the ability for illegals or illegal voting rights (ie.e no IDs) and want to strip the rights of people to protect themselves -- maybe from some of the same people.
Jul 27, 2012 at 2:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
So true ECartman...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local...
Jul 27, 2012 at 1:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
There you go "GoodAmerican". Who's ridiculous now? You don't like guns and want to be a victim, by all means do so. Don't tell me I got to sit down and take it! I hear Chicago is nice this time of year. Perhaps you should go visit a while.
Jul 27, 2012 at 1:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
truth1 - I have seen that video and it's priceless.
Jul 27, 2012 at 1:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Gandalf - “Japan would never invade the United States. We would find a rifle behind every blade of grass.” Isoroku Yamamoto, the Japanese Commander-in-Chief during WWII.
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
GoodAmerican - First of all, I am not arguing with you so saying my argument is senseless, is pointless. I am merely pointing out the obvious to many of the uneducated that think a fully automatic gun and semi auto gun are the same thing. Not even close. And BunBun is correct on his post. Fully auto have been regulated for years.
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Pima County Az.......I was wrong, two of them actually did run away.
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
It was so funny because they knew they had to try to get back in the car and get WAY away from there instead of just trying to run and be shot...It was hilarious.
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
GoodAmerican- There is a home-security video on youtube from Phoenix that recorded two robbers getting out of a car with guns only to be repelled by rapid-fire from the homeowner's assault rifle...As their car was being rapidly filled with holes, they couldn't get in it and get out of there fast enough.
That was GREAT to watch.
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Just trying to figure out where this discussion went into the "ban automatic weapons" realm...AUTOMATIC weapons have been only available legaly to holders of a class 3 Fed permit since 1934. Saying that a SEMI automatic (properly called a self loading rifle) AR-15 is not a sporting rifle would come as a surprise to varmint hunters.
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
I don't want to live in the kind of country that allows someone who has ALREADY killed another person(s) by reckless use of a motor vehicle to still have access to a motor vehicle.
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
hey gandalt, the american founders were the non-sanctioned traitors to the king of england, not a gov sanctioned militia. Think about it, why would they ban what they themselves did. "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
Jul 27, 2012 at 11:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gandalf go back and read your history and how this nation was formed. Decaration of independence and our break from the King of England. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charter...
Jul 27, 2012 at 11:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I am gonna throw this into the conversation. I am not saying we are at this point now or in the foreseeable future however if there comes a time when the government gets to controlling in our lives like when this was written what chance would said militia have against an all powerful controlling government
Jul 27, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
goodamerican - There is a big difference between a fully automatic gun and a semi automatic gun. The gun used in this crime was a semi automatic. He also had a regular shotgun we all would use for hunting, many which are semi automatic. You either ban them all or you don't. Banning won't work and hasn't in many other Countries. I'm sure nobody though of banning fertilizer in Oklahoma bombing. It's time we start looking at the nut jobs doing the killing and not the weapon. It can't fire alone.
Jul 27, 2012 at 9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Here is a news story the media failed to do national reporting from last April. Man buys knife then stabbs customers.
http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios...
Jul 27, 2012 at 9:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
GoodAmerican said"Thanks, facts. Fully automatic weapons are manufactured for one purpose and one purpose only--to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time."
So five hood rats do a home invasion at your house, and all have guns. Isn't that exactly what you want?
Jul 27, 2012 at 9:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
If gun types should be restricted, I want to know why you can buy something that weighs two tons that can go 100mph.
I want to know what the "purpose" is for that.
Jul 27, 2012 at 9:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Good American -- and all others out there -- if tougher gun laws and regulations are the solution -- then why is it that some of the strictist laws in the city of Chicago have not solved the problem..... its not the gun stupid.
Jul 27, 2012 at 8:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
I say any car that can go over 80mph should be required to weigh less than 1200lbs to reduce the death and destruction it can cause.
Jul 27, 2012 at 8:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gun killings vs. motor vehicle killings...I'll take up that argument.
So, no one needs a certain kind of gun?
Then why can I buy a car that can go over 100mph?..There is no "purpose" for having that....Why can a (4,5,6,7,8) time drunk driver or a repeat reckless driver own a car, much less one that can go 100mph?
WHY are these people even allowed NEAR a car without being arrested?
Jul 27, 2012 at 8:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
One isnt a criminal until they commit a crime. How do we prevent non-criminals from getting guns that are going to commit crimes? Maybe WalMart has crystal balls for sale? Maybe before all firearm purchases people are required to see a fortune teller? Or maybe even better yet...ones credit score?
Jul 27, 2012 at 8:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Good American: A standard 12ga shotgun with bird or buck shot would have done much much more damage in a close range situation like a theater than the AR15 could have done with the same amount of shots fired. Wanna ban shotguns as well?
Jul 27, 2012 at 8:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
Once again this debate focuses on the wrong thing, the guns themselves..while I personally agree with statements already made on not needing to hunt with many of the weapons available, I continue to maintain that while the anti gun folks mean well, they do not know the details of what they are talking about...what is an assault weapon? They have no idea...Chris Mathews on TV (Hardball) last night was calling one of weapons an AK-47.......Wrong, it was an M&P 15, which is a .223 caliber SEMI AUTO and is actually a Varmint gun...a totally different type of weapon....An AK-47 is a 7.62 caliber FULLY AUTO designed for war...(won't bore you with the details, but very different)
The 100 round magazine he used was ILLEGAL under current laws....
If we go back to the expired Assault Weapons Ban the limit would be 10 rounds...now here is where I disagree with the anti gun folks...FACT anyone with any knowledge can take two 10 round magazines, tape them bottom to bottom and now you have a 20 round magazine that can be changed in about 1.5 seconds...now put several of them in your pockets, and you can still fire 100 rounds in only about ~10 seconds longer...
Point I am trying to make....it is the sicko's out there that are the problem, and with millions of guns already in the USA the fact is you just are not going to stop this violence by just focusing on the guns themselves..When Brady was shot, that sicko broke ~4 laws before he even used his gun.(Brady was the main influence in the Assault Weapons Ban)
No easy answer to this, but we need to realize that we are in a total different mind in today's real world...and yes I think this sicko should be shot it the head today...this "Alleged" stuff is crap...he did it.
And to repeat, I don't have a problem with restricting accessories like large clips and so on....They are not needed for hunting at all..just enforce the laws against the manufactures of these aftermarket accessories.
And as far as a limit on buying ammunition ?? This sicko could have done the same terrible act by possessing ~100 rounds....
Sorry for the long rant, but all involved need to know the facts...
Jul 27, 2012 at 12:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
"I don't know that I'm going be able to find a way to prevent people who want to provide harm from being able to purchase things that can carry out that harm. What I want to do is find the people that represent a danger to America and find them and keep them from having the capacity to use or buy things that can harm or hurt other people." - Willard Mitt Romney in an interview with NBC News.
Talk about self-contradiction! Romney within the span of two sentences first says he doesn't know if he is able of finding a way to prevent people who want to harm others from purchasing things that can harm people. Fair enough. Then in the very next sentence he says he wants to find the people that want to cause harm and prevent them from purchasing things that can harm people. Doh!
And to think that this guy has a legitimate, if not fading, chance of being president of the United States.
Jul 26, 2012 at 11:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
there really should be a edit button for our posts , http://www.wikihow.com/Get-a-Class-3-Fir...
Jul 26, 2012 at 11:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
How to Get a Class 3 Firearms License Fully Auto and Sound Suppressed .....the firearm a AR-15 the Colorado guy was using is used mainly for Hunting Coyotes/Bob Cats Through out the USA and was SEMI Auto NOT Full Auto.
http://www.wikihow.com/Get-a-Class-3-Fir...
License
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8FUup6lp...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZCHjNtDN...
Jul 26, 2012 at 11:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
I enjoy reading how some people think they can rationally understand a reason to limit items to all because someone might use it in the wrong way as a reason. What I don't understand is why they stop there. If you really think protecting lives is the answer why have cars? There are more traffic deaths in this nation every year than gun related deaths and there is no right in the constitution for a car like there is for a gun.
Life is a risk, as parents and citizens, we all go through life knowing this and doing what we can to mitigate and control what we can. But in the end we accept and continue.
The idea that taking a type of gun away while leaving others is another example of attempted control of risk. I don't agree that is an answer or will it solve anything other than make people feel better over perceived changes in risk. The fact remains there are laws on the books that already make killing illegal, no matter the means.
Jul 26, 2012 at 9:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
"So if banning semi-automatics or 100 shot rounds "stomps on my freedom" then why can't I own a tank or a nuclear bomb?"
I guess the second ammendment doesn't define "arms" or limit it to guns.
Jul 26, 2012 at 9:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mexican gun laws only apply to citizens of Mexico.
The US Department of State warns US citizens against taking any firearm or ammunition into Mexico without prior written authorization from the Mexican authorities. Entering Mexico with a firearm, or even a single round of ammunition, carries a penalty of up to five years in prison, even if the firearm or ammunition is taken into the country unintentionally.[7] In practice, however, for a first offense, offenders will be fined around one-thousand dollars, their vehicles will be confiscated, and they will be deported for a period of one year.
State dept advises not even a pocket knife is allowed.
Jul 26, 2012 at 8:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yep, heard it all before. Your argument is exactly the same as the British. Lets split the difference and have strict gun control like Mexico. Mexicans can't have semi-auto large caliber either. At least they get a .38.
Jul 26, 2012 at 8:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
No need for name calling GoodAmerican. Let me quote your 4:31pm post.
"But I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can advocate for allowing citizens to own weapons that are strictly combat weapons. No one needs an automatic weapon that can fire hundreds of rounds in minutes. They do not serve as either sporting guns or for defense of one's home and person."
This is you post, not mine.
That is exactly the British position that lead to stricter gun controls.
In 1987 the Hungerford massacre stricter guns laws made most semi-auto weapons illegal.
In 1996 the Dunblane school massacre made anything larger than a .22 semi-auto rifle illegal. Later the ban on semi-auto hand guns larger than a .22.
So GoodAmerican, I don't think either of us want politicians in D.C making any more laws on law abiding gun owners. Or we both may end up with .22 Cal's some day.
I see the media pushing this agenda. All they want to talk about is the weapons, and how many rounds the Aurora shooter had.
Jul 26, 2012 at 8:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Well, the controlled substance act Worked by clearing the streets of all of those illegal drugs. Heroine gone, meth gone, weed, crocodile, bath salts, cocaine.....that's right they are still around even though they are illegal. Good luck with that 'control' as if it were real.
Jul 26, 2012 at 6:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Oblamer, so you have not heard this story? The gun recoiled, flipped and shot the kid.
"A Massachusetts doctor closed his eyes today when a court played a video that he filmed of his 8-year-old son shooting a powerful Uzi submachine gun that recoiled and shot the boy in the head, killing him."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/jurors-uzi-tria...
Jul 26, 2012 at 6:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
The gun locked up in the Aurora shooting or else the carnage would have been MUCH, MUCH worse. He didn't get off nearly all of the hundreds of bullets that he had on him. NO reason that a gun like that should be available to civilians.
Jul 26, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ron Johnson said on Fox that Wisconsin hunters need semi-automatics and huge rounds of ammo for hunting. Where's the sport in that? They must be really bad shots!
-
Sudafed is harder to get than guns in parts of this country!
-
So if banning semi-automatics or 100 shot rounds "stomps on my freedom" then why can't I own a tank or a nuclear bomb?
-
I'm with GoodAmerican on this one.
Jul 26, 2012 at 5:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yes GoodAmerican, the British feel the same as you. Turn in your weapons for a .22 just like the Brits. And good luck to ya.
Jul 26, 2012 at 4:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Gun laws never have and won't stop criminals, sociopaths, dictators, and Terrorists from getting a gun. In fact, this forementioned group want stricter gun laws to disarm the citizenry. Criminals thrive in places where they have a clear advantage over potential victims. Responsible gun ownership by law abiding citizens is good. In fact it saves lives. We will never rid our society of insanity. But we should not allow the Government to render us helpless. I don't see people banding together to ban trains, planes and automobiles when one of those vehicles kills someone. It takes a human to manipulate the controls.
Jul 26, 2012 at 3:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Britain and Mexico has strict gun laws. Deaths by guns in Britain are lower than the U.S. but higher crime per capita of every 1,000 people, 85 crimes in Britain to 80 in U.S.
In Mexico no hand guns larger than .38. That's working real well for Mexico, isn't it?
During the riots in Britain last year baseball bats were the weapon of choice, for defense until they stopped selling them.
Jul 26, 2012 at 3:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
http://gazettextra.com/photos/2012/jul/2...
Jul 26, 2012 at 2:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
They were talking about all the gun violence in Chicago on the news. They mentioned that there are over 100.000 gang members in that city. Why doesn't Obama round them up and send them to Afganistan? Thats a win-win. We get rid of all the gangbangers and they can shoot all the Talibannies they want!
Jul 26, 2012 at 2:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
As Reagan said - if it moves to fast -- they will tax it, if it moves slow they will regulate it. When it stops moving they will stimulate it.
If you think-- how many tax dollars would be lost if all guns were outlawed ... this is just playing to few nutjobs in his base.
Jul 26, 2012 at 1:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
"When guns are outlawed...only outlaws will have guns!"
Jul 26, 2012 at 1:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
There was another shooting that occurred earlier this year in Aurora,Co. that there was hardly any news about. A man pulled a gun out at a church and started shooting but as luck would have it someone else in that church also had a gun. Only two people died that day and one was the gunman. No law will prevent a nut from getting a gun and killing.
Jul 26, 2012 at 12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
I'm officialy declaring myself a Mexican cartell even though I have no product to sell. Now I will just sit back till Holder sends me my AK-47.
Jul 26, 2012 at 12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
No politician wants laws enforced, they just want to game the system.
Jul 26, 2012 at 11:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Obama is not advocating more gun laws, only enforcing the ones we have.
Jul 26, 2012 at 11:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
If Oblamer picks this fight he will definately lose. He keeps going with the far left agenda. This guy needs to be out.
Jul 26, 2012 at 11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Both very good posts! No you can't stop people from doing bad things and taking guns away really only stops the law abiding citizens from owning them. Yes I understand the guy in Colorado bought his from what I understand legally but if they haven't committed crimes in the past and don't have a history of mental illness, now what? Unfortunately bad things do and will continue to happen. People making personal choices to do bad things will never change or stop. Look at England, they have a no gun law for all citizens and they still have shootings. Why, because criminals are just that, criminals and don't care what the law says and will do what they want to.
I feel much better knowing I have a firearm in my house that can be used to protect my family/house should someone who has no respect for others life/property decide to kick in my door and attempt to harm my self/family or take what I worked hard to earn. If that happens, they have two options: Option #1 Get on the ground and wait for the police to arrive and take them away. Option #2 Be escorted out of my house in a large plastic bag with a fancy name tag attached to their big toe.
Jul 26, 2012 at 9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Ask Chicago how having strict gun laws has stopped their violence....
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.