Jim Morin by Jim Morin

Jim Morin

Comments (18) (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. TheTrustedMechanic

    TheTrustedMechanic GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @zoidknight

    As it typical with you, your comment is VOID of any intelligent thought. Read this very slowly and I will write it very clearly with no big words so maybe you can understand. NO ONE WANTS TO BAN ALL GUNS! No one is advocating for a total ban of all firearms. Just rational gun control, a little education and real personal responsibility. Isn’t that what you devoid of thought minions are always parroting? Personal responsibility? There is absolutely no justifiable reason in the world why someone would need an “assault rifle”. As was recently stated, when hunting you will rarely get more than maybe 2 shots at you quarry. When in a self-defense mode how many shots are you going to need? More than say 3 or 4 and you either a too poor a shot to responsibly be firing that gun (your family in the other room may become your victim, or there are too many intruders for you to take out by yourself. While you’re firing at the three in front of you the fourth is taking aim and you’re dead. A fully automatic rifle would take care of that you say? In my example, of the four intruders and your 30 bullets how many do you think are stray bullets and have the potential to kill INNOCENT people just because you are playing Rambo to compensate for tiny male parts or male part envy? That is not what makes a civilized society. I know we are barely a civilized society, but we can at least pretend. There is no rational, intelligent or simply just reason for owning weapons whose only purpose is to kill mass amounts of people. As a true collector you may have a viable reason but you also, as a collector would have them well secured and under complete and constant control. Come on you gun nuts, let’s hear your lame justifications. A moving compelling explanation would be shocking but welcomed.

  7. TheTrustedMechanic

    TheTrustedMechanic GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @dtroutma

    " …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."
    Sure there is, because I WANT one. When it comes to the NRA
    N o
    R esponsibility
    A ccepted)
    that’s all that matters. Rational thought, real reason or just plain common sense be damned.

  8. 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?

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. Stipple

    Stipple said, over 1 year ago

    What? never fished with dynamite? Meat is meat.

  12. 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.

  13. 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…

  14. 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.

  15. sw10mm

    sw10mm said, over 1 year ago

    @DrCanuck

    There aren’t any good liberal causes that would accept blood money, are there? You propose a very bad theory.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (3).