Clay Bennett by Clay Bennett

Clay Bennett

Comments (16) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. PianoGuy24

    PianoGuy24 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Is this how Clay views all gun owners?

  2. mickey1339

    mickey1339 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Although I find the cartoon over the top for credibility, it did remind me of another cartoon today (Arial) on this subject. Mayor Bloomberg and his mayors anti gun lobby have been having problems shaming democratic politicians with their advertising campaign. More than one have responded with a similar statement as an Arkansas senator (Pryor). "“I don’t take gun advice from the mayor of New York City. I listen to Arkansans.” Such is the plight of several other democratic senators who are actually under great pressure from their conservative constituents to vote against this legislation, contrary to the position taken by the democratic party. Is it possible they are actually representing the will of their people and not bowing to powerful lobbyists?
    When one looks objectively at the states in question it shouldn’t be too surprising. They are primarily rural and despite political affiliation are strong gun owning and hunting areas.
    But speaking of lobbying, our beloved president is going off on another campaign style swing to promote the gun legislation, giving uplifting speeches and wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on his favorite activity, road trips…

  3. d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C's Release

    d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C's Release said, over 3 years ago


    No. Just the ones that like the Virginia Tech, Columbine, and the theatre massacre gun owners who did not have any criminal history what-so-ever.

  4. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 3 years ago


    Is it possible they are actually representing the will of their people and not bowing to powerful lobbyists?

    No. Polls indicate that the majority of NRA members - yes, you read that right — do not agree with Wayne LaPierre, and favor stricter gun controls, background checks, and more limited access.

  5. DavidGBA

    DavidGBA said, over 3 years ago

    Some . . . .

  6. Rockngolfer

    Rockngolfer said, over 3 years ago

    That has to be the stupidest thing I have read today.
    70 or 80 year old people have to come up with birth certificates to vote, but I could walk into a gun show and buy anything I want without ever showing an ID.
    That’s why I hate Republicans.

  7. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 3 years ago

    “That’s why I hate Republicans.”

    48.6% of 121,745,725 voters voted Republican in the last election. I find it difficult to believe that anyone could hate that many of his fellow voters.

  8. mickey1339

    mickey1339 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago


    What you say may very well be true. I think what many also have in the back of their minds is the 2014 elections. People have a tendency to have short memories and these guys may not want to risk being on the “wrong side” of an issue down the road, particularly if they are from a state with a predominantly rural population. We shall see, the senate is back on April 8th.
    Although it’s not national in scope, many states are putting their own A.R. and magazine bans, background checks etc in place.

  9. mickey1339

    mickey1339 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Yes they can. As long as the dealer doesn’t illegally discriminate in his reasoning (race, gender, sexual orientation) they can refuse to sell if in their judgement the person is “impaired or dangerous.”

  10. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Standing next to a guy at a gun show last weekend, and he said “Something tells me I should buy both of those.” Does that in ANY way sound like Bennett might have it nailed??

  11. d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C's Release

    d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C's Release said, over 3 years ago


    Those are also the same people that gave us George W(ar). Bush for two terms.

  12. cdward

    cdward said, over 3 years ago


    It only takes one. And I’ve seen more than one gun owner who’s at least that unhinged.

  13. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 3 years ago


    Thank you.
    Hate is a powerful and unhelpful emotion.
    I do enjoy your contributions Mike.

  14. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 3 years ago

    And let us not forget that NRA members do not get to dictate to the rest of us. 80%+ of all Americans, regardless of party, support making private gun sales and gun show sales subject to background checks, ditto preventing mentally ill people from buying guns. By the way, that used to BE the NRA position, if you want to look up old video of LaPierre.

  15. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    Here we go. This PolySci professor (Edward J. Erler, Ph.D.) at Cal State San Bernardino had some interesting things to say about the 2nd Amendment.

    One example he gave that the debate has become hysterical is that one prominent Congress person alleges that 2nd Amendment supporters have become “enablers of mass murder:”.

    “Special animus has been directed against so-called assault rifles,” He says. “And we are assured that these weapons are not well adapted for self-defense – that only the military and the police need to have them.”

    “Now it’s undeniable, Senator Feinstein to the contrary notwithstanding, that semi-automatic weapons such as the AR-15 are extremely well adapted for home defense – especially against a crime that is becoming more and more popular among criminals, the home invasion.

    “And”, he continues, “we must be clear – the Second Amendment is not about assault weapons, hunting, or sport shooting. It is about something more fundamental. It reaches to the heart of constitutional principles – it reaches to first principles”.

    Breakdown: “militia”

    “Many of the revolutionary generation believed standing armies were dangerous to liberty. Militias made up of citizen soldiers, they reasoned were more suitable to the character of republican government. Expressing a widely held view, Elbridge Gerry remarked in the debate over the first militia bill in 1789 that “whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, the always attempt to destroy the militia”.

    The 2nd Amendment says that militias are necessary for the security of a free state. We cannot read the words “free state” here as a reference to the several states that make up the Union. The frequent use of the phrase “free state” in the founding era makes it abundantly clear that it means a non-tyrannical or non-despotic state. The majority opinion in the cse of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) rightly remarked that he term and it’s close variations were “terms of art in 18th century political discourse, meaning a free country or free polity”.

    So much more in this lecture. Maybe I can continue later.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (1).