Lisa Benson by Lisa Benson

Lisa Benson

Comments (49) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    TEA party, JBS, and NRA, the three real culprits.

  2. Kylie2112

    Kylie2112 said, over 1 year ago

    Yeah, because it’s not like Conservatives support things that abridge the First Amendment or anything.

  3. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, over 1 year ago

    Thanks, Lisa. Really pertinent, implying that gun owners having to identify themselves, the way drivers of cars or flyers of airplanes do, or stop parading with fully loaded 100 shot clips in their Bushmasters, is gonna BLOW UP the Second Amendment. I suppose Rubert ‘The Fox’ Murdock is signing the checks to the people who pull your (bank) strings too, eh? Meanwhile, onto matters of actual life and death…
    -
    “We’re having this national conversation, and our elected representatives are getting cold feet, because people don’t know what the carnage looks like. Out of respect and decency, and for the dignity of the victims, we very rightly don’t show the carnage the first responders see, or the carnage the medical examiners see at the morgue.
    -
    As a very young U.S. Army Captain, I led a few hundred men in combat for a year. I was always there with them before, during, and after.
    -
    I not only know what it looks like, with mental images any combat veteran will confirm linger for a lifetime, I also know what I thought as I walked among bodies. They looked human but the spark we call life was gone. I couldn’t bring it back. I was totally helpless to snatch back that life gone away.
    -
    Our legislators, and the public, only see the pictures of victims from when they were alive. It creates the delusion that they only went away. It dulls the pain of a lost loved one but it also dulls the clarity that supports the courage to ban public ownership of combat assault weapons.
    -
    It’s time our Federal representatives get some backbone and take action to restore the dignity of this nation as a place of pragmatic common sense.
    -
    This is not about ending gun ownership. It’s about removing from public sales devices with very fast human-killing capability that are not suited for hunting or home defense.
    -
    Are Federal legislators going to cower before fear mongering or pass laws needed to protect the public?”
    -
    With a tip of the cap to Liam Jumper, SC

  4. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 1 year ago

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/us/politics/gop-senators-add-gun-protections-to-financing-bill.html
    ^
    The link is about a rider slipped into the last spending bill without discussion. That safe is tougher than it looks.
    ^
    In addition to the rider protecting gun rights, the ATF has very little enforcement power, gun makers are protected from being sued when their products fail or are used improperly. And while many of us are seeing our constitutional right to have access to voting restricted, the constitutional right to own guns that can fire 150 rounds in 5 minutes is being treated as the more important of the two rights.
    ^
    I like guns. I like cars. I have to register my car and report when its sold or stolen. Why is it wrong to do that with a tool like a gun?
    ^
    Then there’s Mr. Dwyer from MD. He wants to create a militia to defend threats he sees to Constitutional rights.
    ^
    http://delegatedwyer.com/constitutionaldefenseforce
    ^
    I support a Civil Defense Corp like that from the 50’s that works with law enforcement, but Mr. Dwyer seems to be concerned that law enforcement is part of the problem. There’s someone in Texas who feels the same way and he’s killing law enforcement officials. This is not the way a civilized country resolves issues.
    Respectfully,
    C.

  5. Incredulous

    Incredulous said, over 1 year ago

    @wmconelly

    You were a leader of a government sanctioned “murder” team? Tell me, were any of those spark-less bodies trying to harm you? It is about ending gun ownership!

  6. Incredulous

    Incredulous said, over 1 year ago

    @Respectful Troll

    I’m not familiar with Mr. Dwyer’s politics but I can sympathize with his concern about the constabulary. Peace officers (as they used to be known) and “law enforcement” officers as is the current incarnation are two different breeds. The supposition is that all laws are just and therefore must be enforced. If you can’t see the fallacy of that then you need to rethink your position.
    Now I’ll follow your link.

  7. Incredulous

    Incredulous said, over 1 year ago

    @ghostkeeper

    I’m not a member of the NRA and even I know that that is a lie!

    NRA certificates can be acquired by passing certain pistol safety and training courses around the country. These certificates do not necessarily represent an NRA membership, but rather signify that the NRA has endorsed the safety or training course.”

  8. Chillbilly

    Chillbilly said, over 1 year ago

    I don’t think people will notice gun violence until it happens to their loved ones.

  9. Tax Man

    Tax Man said, over 1 year ago

    @dtroutma

    How distorted can YOU get.

  10. mskemple

    mskemple said, over 1 year ago

    @wmconelly

    Sorry WM but you sound more like a long winded liberal , uneducated , misinformed , but passionate – not a retired service personel. The guns , clips , background checks etc… are not the real problem . The real problem remains unaddressed – “failure to address mental health as a Serious health crisis in this country”. I don’t normally agree with much of the Democrats politics but this time around H Reid did the right thing. Have you seen D Degettes (D CO ) reasoning on high capacity magazines and wanting a ban. It is very dangerous when our lawmakers are so misinformed about the issues/facts of laws they want passed.

  11. Dypak

    Dypak GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Give me a break. There are limits on all our rights. We have to be responsible in the exercise of our rights. It’s called citizenship.

  12. Nancy

    Nancy GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Dypak,
    Limits- perhaps- but taken away- NO!

  13. Fourcrows

    Fourcrows said, over 1 year ago

    @wmconelly

    Thank you, Wmconnelly.
    I did my career shadowing with the county coroner in high school, and think you hit on part of the problem. People see news stories that don’t show bodies and unrealistic movies, and are fed a fear and an idea that a gun could save their lives. They never see the reality of what a gun actually does. They never see people screaming and crying as they die, the vomiting as blood enters the stomach and lungs, the families who have either had to watch this or have just been told what happened…
    Fun fact: most gun deaths are suicides, and suicides by gun have outnumbered homicides every year since 1920. What this means is gun owners are much more likely to be killed by guns than non-gun owners. If you have children and own a gun, you are not protecting them, but are putting them at a greater risk of being killed. Guns offer a quick and easy suicide, while most other methods give the person time to think about what they are doing, and many times other methods are less effective, allowing the person time to call for help before it is too late.
    In Isreal, suicides, and gun deaths in general, dropped 40% after a rule was passed that the members of the Isreali Defense Force could not take their guns home.
    There is also no evidence that carrying a gun makes anyone safer. Look at Texas. Gun violence has not dropped, nor has the overall crime rate, even though 60% more concealed carry licenses have been granted since 2010. I see a post here quite often about an off duty officer who shot a gunman who had just shot his girlfrien in a restaurant and was heading towards a larger crowd. The story is true, but proves the opposing point instead – In a state that brags about citizens protecting themselve, none of them did. Had a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER not been present, the shooter may have killed many more, as NOBODY ELSE made a move to stop him. One would assume that on a crowded Texas street, somebody else was armed, but when it came to acting, fear took over and they did nothing.
    Couple that story with the elderly lady in Houston who was injured at a restaurant when a legallly carried handgun fell out of another patron’s jacket holster and discharged.
    Except in extreme cases, there is no way of determining who is too mentally ill to own a gun without using it on themselves or someone else, so the best solution is still to limit what is available for them to acquire.

  14. ahab

    ahab GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    During the 1990s researchers for the CDC found that easy access to guns and keeping firearms at homes increases homicide and suicide rates. “The fact that gun ownership was being identified as a risk factor for violent death legitimately raised the possibility” that gun policies might need to change. Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California. The National Rifle Association then stifled the threat, swinging into action, using U.S. Representative Jay Dickey(R-AR) , the self described “NRA’s point person in Congress,”, convinced the House to cut 2.6 million from the CDC budget, preventing the CDC from further study on gun violence. A 17 year freeze of CDC gun violence studies since 1996has existed because of Republican legislation, all the while an identified “public health crisis” has occurred annually with 30,000 Americans killed by guns. The 1996 Republican ban of the CDCresearch was devastating for the field of gun violence prevention.

  15. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 1 year ago

    @ wmconnally – you state your position well and with a “first person” narrative voice. I appreciate and support your call to action, and the service a young captain gave to his nation. Do not let uncivil voices deter you from speaking. For every person who posts on GC, there are many more who do not. It is to them your messages should be aimed. People who do not like a message attack the messenger. As long as you can maintain your balance, you words will plant seeds that may open hearts and minds.
    @ Adrian Snare – Mussolini once said that Fascism would be better described as Corporatism. Eisenhower warned us of corporate power as well. Corporations control the news media and the quality of the information being given to our neighbors. I have a suggestion tho…
    ^
    Too many know the consequences of Hitler but do not know how he came to power and the conditions under which it happened. Invoking his name usually results in someone feeling as if they are being accused of being a Nazi. Since joining GC, I have seen the policies of Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama described in the terms of Hitler. Both men have been caricatured with that tiny mustache. I think Mr. Schiklgruber would be pleased he’s still part of the discussion. I suggest resisting using Hitler in commentary. It rarely raises the tone of the debate.
    @ Incredulous – I flagged your reply to wmconnelly. You either read it wrong or you chose to insult a man who served his country in combat and for no other reason than you don’t like his opinion. In light of Mr. Connally’s words, I found yours cruel. Based on some of your other comments, I think you will like Mr. Dwyer’s uncompromising and authoritarian positions.
    ^
    And as far as your comment to me goes. I did rethink my positions on many things. I rethink them whenever a lucid, civil voice says something I had not considered. And in rethinking them, chose a path of educated respect. I wonder how much history you have read. It is amazing how one can expand their paradigm when they study the actions of those who preceded us.
    Incredulously,
    but respectfully,
    C.

  16. Load 15 more comments. | Load the rest (34).