Matt Davies by Matt Davies

Matt Davies

Comments (31) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. win

    win said, about 3 years ago

    his fly is open…how convenient for our elected representatives

  2. zoidknight

    zoidknight said, about 3 years ago

    Why are liberals and democrats so against Americans having the right to defend themselves? What are they really planning, that they do not want us stopping?

  3. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, about 3 years ago

    @zoidknight

    hahahahaha, you know the original intent of this amendment was that the citizens would not be caught unarmed when their own government became so oppressive that they wish to change it. Remember after establishing that all men were created equal and that they had certain basic rights they wrote: “That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

    As introductions go not bad. We should all read it again and pay attention. And it was all about TAXES! (well maybe not all)

    And what did government try to do first? Why confiscate all the weapons.

    It seems that for the most part Liberals think that government should control all aspects of ones life with regulation and should support citizens by taxing those that produce and give that to those that do not.

  4. cdward

    cdward said, about 3 years ago

    The NRA is one of the most powerful advocacy groups. And get on our knees to thank you for defending your 2nd Amendment rights? As if it were scripture. The constitution was designed to be changed – and that amendment needs to go. The need for arms is mostly in the heads of paranoid whackoes who think someone’s after them. (and they’re the scarriest thing in this country). By the way, your little guns aren’t what protect us from an overreaching government. After all, we have the best financed army in the world. And as my right-wing friends often tell me, if guns were made illegal, they’d just get them illegally.

  5. Northern Redman

    Northern Redman said, about 3 years ago

    @cdward

    There is a process for amending the constitution. I’d suggest that you read up on it.

  6. ARodney

    ARodney said, about 3 years ago

    More people die from gunfire from fellow citizens, and their own family members, than prevent their toys from being stolen. I’m not wild about having assassins roaming the streets, and I’m especially not wild about the NRA telling us that somehow preventing people ON THE TERRORIST WATCH LIST from buying guns is unconstitutional. It doesn’t need an amendment, the 2nd amendment is very clear that it applies to militias. It needs sane judges.

  7. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, about 3 years ago

    @ARodney

    Right. Define “Militia”………

  8. fritzoid

    fritzoid GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    Yes, but an automobile has an express purpose other than causing grievous bodily harm. A gun is designed to put holes in human beings. There are millions upon millions of automobile operating-hours occurring every day, which of course result in some accidents and fatalities. A gun in your home is more likely to hurt or kill someone by accident than to ever be successfully used to fend off a threat.

  9. fritzoid

    fritzoid GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    @Bruce4671

    “Define “Militia”…”


    Well, we know it’s gotta be “well-regulated.” The National Guard is well-regulated; a guy who gets “Neighborhood Watch” printed on his jacket is not.

  10. charliekane

    charliekane said, about 3 years ago

    @Bruce4671

    What amendment you talking about? Surely not the 2nd. The one tha begins with the words A well regulated militia. . .?

  11. Rockngolfer

    Rockngolfer said, about 3 years ago

    The latest news on what Tampa is doing to prepare for 15,000 protestors is that they will have a small roped in area to gather but they WON’T have guns.
    The gun part goes against recently passed state laws, allowing people with permits to have their guns.
    I have a feeling a lot of lawyers are going to get rich fighting the government.

  12. Wabbit

    Wabbit GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    those are cool, but they don’t have the pouch to put the representative that was bought by your party in.

  13. Good Evening

    Good Evening GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    Control is the person behind an object, that person has the control to either shoot or not, the object is nothing more than an object.

  14. mdavis4183

    mdavis4183 GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    Left fringer can’t understand why 100 million American gun owners do not buy their hate spew.

  15. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, about 3 years ago

    Definition of MILITIA
    1
    a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency b : a body of citizens organized for military service
    2
    : the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service

    Don’t dodge the question. Now that we have defined militia, and yes well regulated would imply training and organization of some kind but not just a neighborhood watch, you should think about logistics. Which is:

    : the aspect of military science dealing with the procurement, maintenance, and transportation of military matériel, facilities, and personnel
    2
    : the handling of the details of an operation

    So you have private citizens subject to call for the defense of the country (or a small portion of it). do you supply them with arms and munitions at a cost to the public coffers (as in some norweigian countries) or do you make it acceptable for those citizens to buy and maintain their own personal weapons and munitions at no cost to the public?

    Yes the national guard would be the correct venue. BUT do you require all citizens be a part of the guard with all the rights and benefits involved at a cost to the public or do you make rules for private citizens to follow (and attach fees to ) in order to be legally able to own and maintain weapons in their home at no cost but perhaps profit for the public?

    Just questions people. Use some common sense. There are criminals that take advantage of the situation. There are laws in effect today to handle those criminals but our justice system is skewed to err on the side of innocent until PROVEN guilty as it should be. Criminals by definition do not obey the law. Making it impossible for a private citizen to own a firearem will not prevent a criminal from obtaining one. Making it criminal to own one will only make more criminals.

    I would welcome legislation that required those that want to be gun owners to attend weekend duty with the national guard and to be on call to assist in any national emergency situation. But how would you pay for it?

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