Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Would stronger gun laws have prevented the D.C. rampage?

  1. Yes
  2. No
 
 
 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(37)

rpmwwe

Sep-19-13 1:29 AM

Outlawing the devices that microwave bad thoughts into peoples heads would be far more effective.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Sep-19-13 8:14 AM

As any decent American knows, there is no feeling more powerless than to realize that a couple of mass murderers are loose in your neighborhood and you are denied the right to keep a gun to defend yourself, your family or your home. A sickening knot tightens in your gut.

“Do not take action.”

Then came the latest Orwellian phrase in the “homeland security” lexicon: “Shelter in place!” So, not only are you not allowed to defend yourself against mass murderers, you are not supposed to run from them, either.

This, my fellow countrymen, is pure insanity.

And all the terror and real bloody carnage took place inside the most impenetrable fortress of gun-control utopia.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Sep-19-13 8:15 AM

The very guns Aaron Alexis used to kill 12 people are banned in this city, unless you submit to an exhaustive, invasive and expensive process and prove to the city bureaucracy that you are worthy of your Second Amendment rights. Clearly, that failed.

We now know that Alexis was run through the normal background checks already in place to purchase a gun from a gun dealer. He submitted to even more exhaustive background checks to get his job and access to the Navy Yard. All of those background checks, and he still massacred 12 people.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Sep-19-13 8:26 AM

The following & two posts below were written by...

CHARES HURT, September 17, 2013: "Defenselessly ‘sheltered’ as anti-gun fortress is breached" For those of us foolish enough to live in a crime-gripped city that summarily denies our constitutional right to protect ourselves, this week's massacre at the Washington Navy Yard pretty well sums up our insane, defenseless existence.

Our Capitol Hill neighborhood drowned in the screams of sirens as police cars, vans, trucks and armored vehicles streaked through the narrow streets at deadly speeds. The skies filled with the constant whopping of countless helicopters.

Just back from dropping off children at school, neighbors began frantically calling, texting and emailing one another to see what was wrong. The crisp morning reminded many of Sept. 11, 2001...

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Sep-19-13 8:48 AM

And like everything else kozy.

What is your answer.Like most just ***** and complain. Don't worry. Just like newtown everything will be forgotten and back to normal until the next one.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-19-13 10:38 AM

The worst part about all of this is the war on terror. Modern day terrorism is designed to bankrupt us. The same way it did the Soviet Union. While we build up a huge military and massive "national security" forces, we run up massive debt. This is why recently al-Qaeda's top brass called for sporadic, spontaneous strikes in the US designed to create more economic chaos in our already unstable market. The idea that we must allow the government to protect us, when they fail to do so time and time again, is killing us both physically and economically. Every time something like this happens, millions of dollars are spent and security is tightened. These domestic cases essentially create the same atmosphere as a terrorist attack and the problem is then compounded. The Founders realized how important an armed citizenry was, especially economically. Yet a lot of people see this the opposite way, more spending, more security, less freedom. It has never worked and it never

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-19-13 10:44 AM

The fact that people with military clearances, whether civilians or not, can't carry weapons is completely asinine. They swear an oath to defend us and the Constitution from both foreign and domestic enemies. It's tough to defend against domestic enemies when you can't be armed. Police swear that oath and we have no problem with them carrying guns. There is so much backwards thinking in this country. Every time something like this happens and I see the reaction, I lose a little more hope in the people.

People want to talk about the non existent AR-15, but we never talk about SSRI drugs or how people are slipping through the cracks of our enormously expensive security systems when they've been red flagged for various things. It happens time and time again and all we get are stupid questions like this poll question. Think a little deeper, why do we continually refuse to acknowledge the real problems and the real facts of these cases as a whole?

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-19-13 10:45 AM

There are clearly some forces at work that make that happen and twist the conversation that way. We have to start asking why. Not just arguing with the people who are talking about a non existent AR-15 and point out the facts to them. We have to start dissecting the reasons why we aren't paying attention to the real problems and the connectable dots between MANY of these mass shootings.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Beaumont

Sep-19-13 11:24 AM

How many killings by guns in Canada this year?

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-19-13 12:25 PM

How many in Mexico?

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rpmwwe

Sep-19-13 12:42 PM

Canadian gun control scam...

w w w .davekopel****/2a/Mags/The-Failure-of-Canadian-Gun-Control. h t m

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Phoenix

Sep-19-13 2:24 PM

Grant, comparing Mexico to Canada, really? How many drug lords in Canada?

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Phoenix

Sep-19-13 2:32 PM

As far as the supposed SSRI and mass shooters connection goes, approximately 120 Milllion people are prescribed SSRI drugs a year in this country. How many mass shootings are there a year? Do the numbers. Serious mental illness connection, yes, but common antidepressants, the numbers just don't add up.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Sep-19-13 3:55 PM

About 183 gun homicides per year in Canada...

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Beaumont

Sep-19-13 4:14 PM

So how is the NRA working out for us?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Sep-19-13 4:20 PM

It's not about us.

It's all about them $$$$$$$$$

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Sep-19-13 4:45 PM

UK-68 Austra-65 Japan-39

USA 11 thousand

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Beaumont

Sep-19-13 6:19 PM

Are these drugs taken in other countries? So it's the drugs.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-19-13 10:58 PM

Countries with no guns have fewer gun deaths?! NO WAY! Brilliant research, you should probably get a Nobel prize for that. I wonder how many tribal Africans die in car accidents every year?

Many counties have far fewer gun deaths than the US, many countries also have a much higher rate of violent crime. No other country has the 2nd amendment either. You know, that inconvenient little CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT that gets in the way of anyone's anti gun stance. The conversation should end right there, if you want to eliminate guns then get an amendment passed. Instead the conversation goes something like, "I'm taking full advantage of my 1st amendment right, which you can't strip from me or deny me, to tell you that you should be stripped of your 2nd amendment right, despite all of the facts that destroy my argument."

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Beaumont

Sep-19-13 11:14 PM

Wow Grant you the man!

So much for the debate.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rpmwwe

Sep-20-13 12:25 AM

We're going to need a lot more than a change to the Constitution to stop gun violence in this country. The guns are already here. They have been for a long time. Over 100 million of them, or about one gun for every three citizens. This is a fact. Not only do you need a legal process that outlaws their ownership, but (here's the tricky part) you will also need a process that removes them from circulation. Any ideas?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Beaumont

Sep-20-13 7:55 AM

"Great! They keep people like you from infringing on my Constitutional rights."

No people like me that stood up and protected your constitutional rights.

The nra only puts money into the pocket of*****like your friend wayne.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Sep-20-13 8:48 AM

I personally stand firm on every Constitutional right and will always do so, but we must finds ways to cut down on the killings. And, if we just keep getting angry with each other, it won't happen.

I don't understand why Bob, who was in the service when our Presidents couldn't find a way out of the quagmire called Vietnam, could back another even weaker President...but it's his right to do so. And, if you just stop being so absolute...maybe he has some points to ponder...

Ok, I'm a hunter and I would love to target shoot but do I need a bazooka to keep my rights? And since we cannot trust the government anymore, how can we find a way to find the bad guy's guns and keep our freedoms?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Sep-20-13 11:32 AM

If someone poses a threat to society with a gun, then they pose a threat to society without a gun.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Beaumont

Sep-20-13 11:40 AM

good point grant

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 37 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web