Dana Summers by Dana Summers

Dana Summers

Comments (13) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Wraithkin

    Wraithkin said, almost 4 years ago

    Don’t forget to add, “infringe on our second amendment rights,” Eryx. Restricting firearm ownership does not prohibit criminals from obtaining them. Criminals, by their very nature, do not follow the law. They don’t care about gun control laws. With as porous of a border as we have right now to the south, there is ready access to all kinds of firearms.

    And not to diminish the tragedy of the lost life in CT, but we also should keep this in perspective. In 2007, the amount of homicides accounted for .5% (one half a percent) of all deaths in this country. Something like 14k out of 2.4 million. And out of those homicides, how many were firearm-related? And out of all the firearms in the nation, how many were used in a manner like in CT? So, you see that while this is a tragedy and mourning appropriate, and one of those stages of grief is anger, make sure we keep a cool head and keep things in perspective.

    The issue is not the legal ownership of the firearms. The issue is not the firearms themselves. Turning firearm owners into criminals overnight will only have the same effect as Prohibition had, and look at how well that worked out. If you want to find a better way to stop things like this happening, provide security at the schools. Lock the doors. Keep idiots like this coming in. Arm the teachers. Don’t punish law-abiding citizens and diminish their ability to defend themselves, prevent the lawbreakers from having the capacity to harm others.

    VA Tech, Columbine, and now CT… all these could have been restricted or mitigated if even ONE person had a firearm.

    Look at the statistics supporting CCW laws. Even neighboring counties, where one has CCW and the other does not, violent crime in the non-CCW county is consistently higher than in the pro-CCW county. So this is empirical evidence that supports my theory of an armed populace is safer than a disarmed populace.

    Plain and simple, you will never be able to keep everyone safe at all times of the day, everywhere. If you believe that, I have a ocean-front property I can sell you dirt cheap in Nevada. We can try our best, and we should, to keep the public safe. But limiting LEGAL gun ownership is not the solution. You will never be completely safe from the crazies. Just be happy this nutjob didn’t follow in Timothy McVeigh’s footsteps.

  2. ODon

    ODon said, almost 4 years ago

    They also delay for fog which I think we can count on rolling in soon from stage right.

  3. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, almost 4 years ago

    You’re a moron.

  4. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    All these tragedies, Wraithkin, could have been prevented if in each case, one individual, did NOT have a firearm. Also, large magazines should NOT be legal, nor should bullet proof vests.

    Dynamite and high explosives, even ammonium nitrate, is now more regulated than firearms, designed to have even less “civilian” application than either dynamite or ammonium nitrate. It has to change, period.

  5. Baleine

    Baleine said, almost 4 years ago

    New laws? why not? Simple answers to complex problems that won’t stop the next one have always been the way to go. Why change that now.

  6. Baleine

    Baleine said, almost 4 years ago


    You don’t go on the internet much do you? Ever hear of a zip gun.

  7. sw10mm

    sw10mm said, almost 4 years ago

    Which of the at least 41 broken laws prevented this? Quit knee jerking and get an education.

  8. sw10mm

    sw10mm said, almost 4 years ago


    Tell your story to the chinese guy that injured 22 with a knife.

  9. dannysixpack

    dannysixpack said, almost 4 years ago


    or pseudofed, or milk.

  10. dannysixpack

    dannysixpack said, almost 4 years ago


    yes injured, not exterminated with multiple gunshot wounds each in less than 1 minute. why do you try to minimize what happened in sandy hook? have you no shame?

  11. dannysixpack

    dannysixpack said, almost 4 years ago


    by all means, then let’s arm every elementary schoolchild with an ak15. makes sense, no?

  12. runar

    runar said, almost 4 years ago


    Hoe many did he kill?

  13. greyolddave

    greyolddave said, almost 4 years ago

    The simple observation here is that if a deranged person has ready access to assault weapons he will use them. If he only had access to a knife, he will realize he can’t do much damage. American is the candy store for people who want to kill people. We have all the tools ready and waiting.

  14. Refresh Comments.