Jim Morin by Jim Morin

Jim Morin

Comments (23) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Darsan54

    Darsan54 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Careful. You’ll enrage the world’s largest, most well funded terrorist organization.

  2. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    When even Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts said similar in “Heller vs D.C.” with regard to the government’s right and duty to regulate, it would behoove some to actually read documents like the Constitution and SCOTUS decisions.

  3. Libertarian1

    Libertarian1 said, over 3 years ago

    We live in a constitutional republic. You are entitled to you own opinions but not your own facts.

    The US Supreme Court ruled, and that makes it the law of the land, whether you like it or not ,that the 2nd amendment says the RKBA is an “INDIVIDUAL” right and has nothing to do with a militia. Using your faulty logic any state can ban abortion or segregate the schools. We don’t care what the Supreme Court says.

  4. Libertarian1

    Libertarian1 said, over 3 years ago


    I usually try and ignore your tripe but here you are 100% wrong. The justices you named specifically said the RKBA is an individual right. They specifically dismissed, ruled out any militia requirement. I suggest you actually read Heller. That is law of the land.

    As usual you are totally confused. They also said just like with speech and the press the RKBA can be limited but that has zero to do with the political cartoon under discussion. Different subject. Suggest you actually read the editorial cartoon before you make up your own facts.

  5. wolfhoundblues1

    wolfhoundblues1 said, over 3 years ago

    Well regulated means well trained. Militia means every male over 16 years of age.
    Read the whole document with an understanding of 18th century english.

  6. jdlambert

    jdlambert said, over 3 years ago

    “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The opening phrase “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state…” describes the purpose, but the second phrase says who the right belongs to, “the people.”

  7. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    of course not dude, that isn’t how it is done. You make small "adjustments’ to the law and then politicize it, demonize those that oppose it and then slowly take away the ability to exercise your constitutional rights one small “adjustment” at a time.

    Then, when to task is accomplished, that is when the “stormtroopers” appear with the only arms around. Obey or be eliminated.

    BUt why do you care if your neighbor has a gun? What are you afraid of?

  8. Nos Nevets

    Nos Nevets said, over 3 years ago

    Morinic. moronic.
    Purpose: well-regulated militia.
    What: the right to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed.
    Who: the people.

  9. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    So ok, let’s look at it with an open mind. Webster’s concise encyclopedia says a Militia was a: “Military organization of citizens with limited military training who are available for emergency service, usually for local defense. In many countries the militia is of ancient origin. The Anglo-Saxons required every able-bodied free male to serve. In colonial America it was the only defense against hostile Indians when regular British forces were not available.”

    Keeping in mind that the term was applied to every able-bodied free male in ancient times and that during the American Revolution the militia, called the Minutemen, provided the bulk of the American forces, it is not difficult to understand why the founders said that a “militia” was crucial to the people’s ability to remain a “free state”. To facilitate the concept of as well as the practice of a community being able to defend itself until the “regular Army” could mobilize and respond to a crisis, it was paramount that those “able-bodied free males” be armed and ready to respond.

    Today is no different. There are thousands of examples – if you care to look – where the homeowner has defended his/her life and property while waiting for the “authorities” to respond to the distress call.

    The problem is not arms or regulation – there are plenty of both – but the enforcement of those laws. Today we do not have a need to defend against foreign invasion (well take THAT with a grain of salt) but rather against those that have ignored the law and spent a lifetime perfecting their criminal lifestyle. Laws and regulations mean nothing to them and further restricting the “right” of a citizen to BE the first line of defense assists and promotes criminal activity.

    So think before you condemn. The founders said: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State …”

    Remember, a militia consists of every able bodied male (person) and the object is “security” of the “free state”, they go on to give the way to ensure that a militia can be called together in self defense by saying:

    the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    No, they did not say the right of the militia which would be an organized group consisting of every able bodied person available at the time but rather the PEOPLE which would be every citizen in the city, county, state or nation that chose to obtain, train with and use arms in self defense.

    At least that is the ruling SCOTUS gave.

  10. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 3 years ago

    I’m sure the gun manufacturers thank the President for the threats or threats perceived and hope he brings them up again when sales fall off.

  11. jshebester

    jshebester said, over 3 years ago

    The only problem with this comic strip is that the second amendment simply does not state that gun ownership is to be limited to a well regulated militia. Sorry folks, it just doesn’t say it. The first half of the amendment is a qualifier, it in no way limits or attempts to define who “THE PEOPLE” are in the second half. So, it’s Mr. Morin that is apparently the one that needs to learn to read. Why doesn’t it say “the rights of the militia members to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”?? Because they meant “the people”, that’s why.

  12. Davit_O

    Davit_O GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago


    Help me out here. Name one terrorist act committed by the NRA. Just one. Not by an idiot with a gun, but by the Organization.

  13. Libertarian1

    Libertarian1 said, over 3 years ago

    40,000 dead each year from automobiles. Would you ban them also?

  14. Scott

    Scott GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Are you sure it’s not Jim Moron? 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. Which is the same as right of the people in the Frist, thrid, nineth and tenth amendments. Tyanny comes from politicians not the constitution. People kill people not the tools they use. It is politicians who do not enforce our existing laws and release criminals early that are the problem.

  15. Libertarian1

    Libertarian1 said, over 3 years ago

    Are you really intellectually unable to see a difference between a hereditary King ruling the American people and a freely elected, by the American people, a constitutional convention writing their own basis of law.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (8).