Jim Morin by Jim Morin

Jim Morin

Recommended

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    No need to say confiscate all weapons, but there’s no reason for civilians to have 30+ round magazines, and semi-auto rifles that CAN fire over 100 rounds per minute, fast as the trigger can be pulled.


    There should be no need to panic over true “sporting” weapons or those legitimately used for hunting, with a maximum of 5 rounds in a magazine. But whether you say “military” or “assault” weapons, it isn’t the stocks, bayonet studs, or “looks” that make these killing machines powerful, but their rate of fire, and ammunition capacity. Target that, not just “guns”.

  2. ARodney

    ARodney said, over 1 year ago

    That’s all anyone IS targeting, dtroutma. The conservatives say it’s about taking away all your weapons, but they don’t pay much attention to reality.

  3. Darren Blair

    Darren Blair said, over 1 year ago

    @ARodney

    Actually, the original ban did focus on such matters as “bayonet mounts” and “stocks”.
    []
    It did attempt to limit ammo capacity, but had so many loopholes that people were able to import high-capacity items from Europe.
    []
    Most gun manufacturers easily circumvented the requirements of the law. Toppling the original ban was more of a PR thing than an actual battle.

  4. masterskrain

    masterskrain GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    “The NEXT Gun Massacre”.
    It’s not a matter of IF it will happen, but WHEN it will happen…

  5. zoidknight

    zoidknight said, over 1 year ago

    @masterskrain

    Outlaw guns and the next “Gun Massacre” will be by criminals breaking into people’s houses because they know the people inside are unarmed. Just like England, Australia, and Germany had happen when firearms were outlawed.

  6. masterskrain

    masterskrain GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    A question…and, seriously, I don’t know the answer to this.
    If you have to do the background check, and the waiting period to buy a gun from a dealer, or pawn shop, or at a gun show, is there also a requirement to finish a gun safety and operation course to get some sort of a shooter’s license, kind of like taking a driving test to get a driver’s license?
    If not, could something like that be set up by people like the NRA, to give at least basic safety rules?
    Why couldn’t the NRA and the Homeland Security Bureau work together to set something like this up, instead of constantly fighting with each other?
    I have to get a new driver’s license every 4 years, so why not get a new shooter’s license every 4 years as well?

  7. Fourcrows

    Fourcrows said, over 1 year ago

    @zoidknight

    The big difference is we have these massacres several times a year as opposed to each country rarely seeing something like that in a decade.

  8. cjr53

    cjr53 said, over 1 year ago

    @ARodney

    They love their scare tactics. The r/w know it’s about limits, not totally banning guns. They rely on the many that listen to the scary stuff and have knee-jerk reaction of outrage.

  9. Sharuniboy

    Sharuniboy GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Several of you are – deliberately? – ignoring what the anti-gun nuts, and anti-NRA nannies tried to pull, back a couple of years ago in Washington, DC, where BANNING all ownership of guns, and CONFISCATING guns from citizens who already had them was the SPECIFIC wording of the Ordinance passed there. This little specimen of imbecilism stems directly from the English law which DOES ban, all handguns, and HAS CONFISCATED them from all citizens, including those in Gun Clubs, and Target Match activity, such as the Olympics.


    Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court was – and still is for that matter – intelligent, sane, and sensible enough to hold to the Constitution, and Second Amendment, and throw that kind of
    foolishness out. The matter of maintenance of “Militia” was dealt with by stating that U.S. citizens are a “Militia of the whole” – what our Founding Fathers had as intention when the Amendment was written and adopted. But, the anti-NRA nannies, and anti-gun nuts in general, have no use for the Constitution to begin with.

  10. Stipple

    Stipple said, over 1 year ago

    What? never fished with dynamite? Meat is meat.

  11. Tigger

    Tigger GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Dycel

    Actually it was The SCOTUS that said LBJ’s law Violated the 2nd Amendment.

  12. Tigger

    Tigger GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Dycel

    Why do you watch Fox News?

  13. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @dtroutma

    " it isn’t the stocks, bayonet studs, or “looks” that make these killing machines powerful, but their rate of fire, and ammunition capacity. "

    I agree, but would add ammo caliber to the list. I’ve been going over past shootings, and the evidence is compelling that a .22 caliber ‘varmint’ rifle is not nearly as deadly as a 9mm semi-automatic handgun with a 20 round clip.

  14. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    So, the Second Amendment says, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” I just realized it doesn’t actually say anything about bullets!

    Have all the guns you want, but anyone with bullets gets thrown away for life. Only slightly joking about that…

  15. sw10mm

    sw10mm said, over 1 year ago

    @dtroutma

    So it’s ok to kill an arbitrary number of people that you’ve come up with? Not looking good for you trout.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).