Matt Wuerker for December 17, 2012

Canada and Australia manage to provide their citizens with the guns they need, without allowing crazy people to have assault weapons. It’s not like there aren’t examples of countries who are doing a LOT better than we are at protecting themselves from home-grown terrorists and crazy people. I hope that our representatives in Washington will realize that the NRA doesn’t even represent the wishes of its own members, and pass assault weapons bans. We could probably get a law passed here in Colorado, since we have a sane group in government at the moment, but it’s a short drive to Arizona. This needs to be a federal issue.

Since 1980 more than 4000 Americans have been victims of mass murder. (And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Since 1990 660,000 thousand Americans have been killed by guns, with a million more injured.) Since the 1980’s arms manufacturers have been a major source of funding for the NRA. Since the 1980’s the NRA has reaped millions of dollars from the direct sale of ammunition and high capacity magazines by mail. Since the 1980’s arms manufacturers have flooded the US with first cheap guns and then more and more powerful weaponry for profit. Who needs a handgun with a 20 round magazine? Who needs an assault rifle? Who needs 40 caliber antiaircraft machine guns? NO ONE. But weapons manufacturers and the NRA need us to buy them. Weapons manufacturers and the NRA need us to live in fear of each other possessing them so we have to buy more of them to feel secure. The NRA and weapons makers directly profit from mass murder.

disarm the working class? just the solution favored by hitler, stalin, and the approaching policie state here.

Dianne Feinstein’s bill is the right idea, but the wrong solution. There is no point in outlawing guns. They are out there, there are millions, they are made of metal and will last for a thousand years if they are kept oiled. Failing that, I could find materials in my basement that would produce a workable gun, and it doesn’t take much knowledge of the subject to figure out how to do it.

Bullets, on the other hand, are time consuming to make and require specific equipment. Production of enough to do serious damage would require planning and patience that are not characteristic of those who shoot up elementary schools. And, working on such a project might attract the attention of someone sane.

Bullets can be individually stamped, and their sale can be registered, so that every bullet can be traced back to the person who purchased it. This way, a guy who wants to buy a couple boxes of bullets to go shoot deer, or the woman who wants a box to keep with the gun in her bedside drawer, won’t set off any warning bells. But the guy who is buying an arsenal will attract attention before he finds a more lethal way to do it.

draft everyone at 18 teach them what guns are for then put them in guard or reserves for 8yrs if they are con objs to the peace corp to drill or build and use riflemen to protect them no deferments military or public service i am a vet

One of the guys where I used to work had an uncle who died, and left him several guns.He put an ad in the local Flyer, with a list of what he wanted to sell, and his phone number.Someone called and said he would like to look at the guns. So this guy gave out his apartment address and said he would be home in an hour.When he got home, the lock had been picked and the guns were all stolen.I think it was two shotguns and three rifles that are out there somewhere now.

GUNS DO KILL. Don’t believe the same old nonsense from the pro gun lobby that apparently feel that their right to own an assault weapon is more important than a six year old’s right to turn seven. We’re already hearing the old replies that we heard after Columbine, Luby’s, Va. Tech, and all the other slaughters over the last forty years or so. If the weapons were banned all those children would be alive to celebrate Christmas. If you are arguing for the right to own assault weapons it’s time to reexamine your life and your priorities. You cannot defend the indefensible so please don’t try. It’s offensive

This shooter used guns in his own home, they were NOT “stolen”, period. They were his mother’s guns, and NOT properly stored, which is typical in America.

I carried a gun daily at work for a decade. When off duty, all my guns were secured so my kids couldn’t get at them. My kids NEVER had “toy” guns. At age 12, both were taught to shoot, and instructed in gun safety,and shown what bullets do, to animals, and people, as part of that “ethics” lesson. One is now an RN and doesn’t like guns, though she’s very good with them, and respects them. The second spent 13 years in the military, is very good with shotgun and pistols, but doesn’t seem as “gifted” with rifles.

We definitely need stronger gun regulations, including banning any magazine for a rifle/shotgun holding more than five rounds, and limiting sidearms to a maximum of 12 rounds, now typical for a 9 mm.

The illegal SALE of a weapon should bring a penalty not less than 10 years in prison. Just like with illegal drug sales, it is the seller who should pay the price.

Penalties for illegal sales of a weapon should get at least 10 years in prison. And how do they justify giving pot smokers 10 years in prison? Tax it a lot, regulate when and when it can’t be smoked, and let the ones in jail out now.I don’t think the reason we have the highest incarceration in the world because we are all so bad.

The ones who need to serve time are the banksters and those that give “corporate welfare” and who take it. In other words, match the time with the crime.

True and to the point. God bless the Fallen.

The Second Amendment is the only one of the Bill of Rights which begins with an explanatory statement justifying the amendment. All of the others just say what the right is. For example, the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” No explanation, no justification, just a statement. So I ask, Why did the Framers add those words to the Second Amendment? Were they just there for fun? Or were they supposed to have a meaning? They could have just said, “The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.” But they didn’t. They said, “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.” In my line of work — I’m a literary scholar — we aren’t allowed to leave words out when we’re making an interpretation. But the courts, for some reason, seem to think that these words don’t mean anything.

Yes, Fridays events were sad. Many are still grieving and will do so for a long time. But we cannot blame assault weapons. The current mental case may have has such a weapon, but he used a sig sauer and a Glock. The problem with this particular debate is that folks tend to jump to the extreme.

^The kids were killed with .223 from the Bushmaster, at least in the majority as reported so far by police. There is NO NEED for a rifle holding more than 5 rounds for any legitimate purpose, like hunting, target practice. Yes, we can, and should, blame the NRA and their insane defense of high capacity magazine rifles, shotguns, and even pistols; it’s insane to claim they’re needed for “legitimate” purpose, including defense. I assure you, my five round .38 is perfectly adequate to defend myself, unless I’m stupid enough to take on a gang armed with Mac 10’s, but I simply avoid those neighborhoods.

that ‘owner’ that you gloos over was his own mother!

I am a collector but all rifles but 2 are limited to 5 round. I do not hunt or shoot. I trust my protection to myself and no one else. I am a former marine with 32 months combat experience. I did my killing and hope never to do that again. Just as the one percent feel it is their right to take the most money from the working class , I believe that people have the right to own guns.

The Truth

Guy from the CATO institute was on NPR today, making the case that regulating gun ownership wouldn’t work. He cited a statistic that there were over 250,000 “acts of violence” in the US last year. However, he NEVER said there were 250,000 GUN acts of violence. If I beat someone with my fists, or use a knife or club, that is an act of violence, and there is an increasing chance of serious injury/death with each escalation of weapon. The use of a gun GUARANTEES the highest risk of injury/death, regardless of the type used.

HOW DARE YOU! You have a lot of nerve pulling this kind of stuff. We need a real discussion on the breakdown of the mental health and the things that might have caused the break. All you want to do is disrespect the dead by using them as a tool to further your anger and fear fueled agenda. Leave. Now.

You can’t protect anyone with another law. At least 41 were broken. What’s insane again?

Do you need more proof that more laws don’t keep you safe?

Liberals love to expand any other amendment but with the 2nd they’re incredibly restrictive? Hypocrites.

My post under Tom Toles for this date equates with some of the comments here, however, some of what I’ve read here deserves attention. Prisons are already overcrowded, the health care system is famously over budget and fails to provide physical health care to many of our neighbors, and mental health is even harder to get. Teachers and police are already understaffed and under compensated and it is doubtful that state and local budgets can easily afford, implement, and maintain the kind of security and quality of personnel to carry guns in schools.I approve of the type of gun control I posted under Mr. Toles, however-Parents also need to supervise the type of video games and movies they allow children to see. And communities where children are exposed to gang violence are even worse. There are things we can do.We have speed limits on highways because some roads are not safe at speeds over “X”. We need to slow down the speed at which guns can kill people too. Respectfully,C.

Different style books give different rules. It’s no big deal. omQ’s usage is common in England, and I bet that’s where he picked it up. Here’s what the Oxford Guide to Canadian English Usage says: “It is a matter of debate whether to insert the final comma — called a series or serial comma — before the conjuction….Both conventions are common, with the series comma somewhat more likely to be used in scholarly and more formal writing and less likey in newspapers and magazines.”

I see a lot of anger expressed on both sides. I’m sorry to see that. Anger is part of the problem. Yes, we disagree, but let’s try to be civil.

A militia is not just the police force though. Guns are used and arguably needed to maintain freedom for “the people”. Police forces have guns in countries where guns are illegal. An assault rifle is much different than a hunting rifle of a handgun for protection. No citizen in the US person needs to shoot 30 rounds a minute. Go guns! But leave the weapons made specifically to take lives out of irresponsible hands.