Matt Davies by Matt Davies

Matt Davies

Comments (8) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. BrassOrchid

    BrassOrchid GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    We must start by taking guns away from the police in Chicago. They would be much safer, then. We would all be much safer. You cannot force the criminals to give up their guns, but you can force the law-abiding to do so. We must take the guns out of the hands of the police in Chicago, Detroit and Washington D.C., for the good of the children. And take all the arms and armaments away from the military, too. That will make it a safer world. They can’t shoot at you if you don’t have a gun. It’s like an unwritten law or something.

  2. ChevJames007

    ChevJames007 said, about 3 years ago

    Guns have kept me safe in the USA and here in Afghanistan. Afghanistan has gun laws that prohibit its decent citizens from having weapons—but the Taliban run around armed to the teeth. That’s how gun laws work—they disarm the good people so that only the bad people have guns!

  3. BrassOrchid

    BrassOrchid GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    The Nancy is my spiritual mentor!
    All hail the Nancy!
    I am starting a cult, and we will be calling ourselves the Prancing Nancies.
    We will not give in to barbarism. We would rather be destroyed by it. We just aren’t ready to accept sixth century technology yet.

  4. echoraven

    echoraven said, about 3 years ago

    Another confused cartoon.

  5. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    Davies makes a valid point. Statistically, you’re about as likely to “win” in a lottery, as to be killed by a “terrorist” or nut with a gun. HOWEVER, if you live in many parts of the country where guns are all over the place, in the hands of gang members, your odds of “winning” increase considerably!!

    FEDERAL gun regulations are actually pretty weak for maintaining “control” of access. Part of that IS because of our “right to privacy” (which isn’t actually a “right” in the Constitution), and the other part IS the NRA lobbying keeping those laws we do have on the books, relatively impotent on controlling access to firearms.

    As a gun owner, and a member of a DEMOCRATIC gun owners caucus, I DO support legitimate access to firearms for LEGAL purposes, and to folks who are trained, sane, and responsible gun owners. As with my concealed weapons permit, with a THOROUGH background check, proof of training in ethical use, as well as competency in handling firearms, I have no problem with that being a MINIMUM FEDERAL LAW to be met by all persons purchasing, or obtaining ANY firearm! LIke New Zealand’s system, licensing gun owners with such “limits”, merely assures, like Switzerland’s “militia” having firearms, that indeed sane and qualified people ARE the ones who have access.

    That a “private” (corporate supported, member dues and contributions don’t even begin to cover their administrative costs, and lobbying efforts) organization like the NRA can maintain a computer register of owners, that the law PROHIBITS the GOVERNMENT from maintaining, says something about corporate control of our “state”, but not actual “freedom”!

  6. BrassOrchid

    BrassOrchid GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago


    A private organization can be a religion. A private organization can hire and fire at will. A private organization can fail and disappear if it can’t meet its debts. There is a deliberate divide between private and public organizations. It is purposeful as well as deliberate. You don’t elect corporate leaders, and they don’t make laws that govern your actions, or allow their executives to alter legislation on the fly though it actually requires congressional action to do so. In fact, a CEO who acts against the BOD may be fired without further cause. You can’t compare apples to armadillos.

  7. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    ONguard, then why did the NRA contact me, knowing what pistol I’d purchased, not once, but two different times, to say as a “new” gun owner I should join up????

  8. BrassOrchid

    BrassOrchid GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago


    But you weren’t required by law to join? But there are required public records of all gun sales? But which do you find odious? Is it the availability of public records to the public? Is it the requirement of public records for gun purchases?

  9. Refresh Comments.