Matt Wuerker by Matt Wuerker

Matt Wuerker

Comments (11) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. charliekane

    charliekane said, about 2 years ago

    . . .with death and violence for all.
    (or at least too many)

  2. AgentSmith101

    AgentSmith101 said, about 2 years ago

    What is the alternative? Weapons are out there. They will continue to be out there. You can reenact the assault weapons ban and be confronted with the existence of criminal assault weapons. Try to ban them all? Then it truly will be criminals preying on the disarmed.Myself, I live in a remote area. I hunt on occasion for food. I know it’s not necessary, but I won’t eat an animal that I wouldn’t be willing to kill. As a result I don’t eat veal or lamb, since I couldn’t willingly kill animals at that stage of life. If that makes me a “savage” so be it.I also know that a police response in my town is about 15-30 min away. Everyone once and awhile there is a robbery or home invasion in our area. Moving is not going to solve it. My family will probably not survive that even if we left the house after calling 911 unless I have the means to defend myself. I familiarize myself with the safety and use of any weapons I have and avail myself of proper self defense training. Not to mention assuring that my wife has that same training and that my children understand that weapons are tools and not toys. There will be a time when they learn, but not before they are ready.As for collectors of large caliber automatic weapons? Yeah, I’ll admit that very possible no one is really using an AR-15 for hunting unless it’s something as large like bear, elk or moose. In that case there is some middle ground to requiring more examination of a purchaser before buying a such as weapons. I also know this is part of the cartoon’s point, since the NRA always has a screaming fit when trying to find this middle ground.The real problem exists in the change in american culture. It’s not such much about guns. It’s about the extreme lack of follow through when it comes to dealing with someone with an extreme mental illness. Look at the profiles of the majority of shooters. Young males who are isolated from society while exhibiting high levels of paranoia and feelings of persecution either real or perceived. I’m not saying it’s all society to blame, but if you deal with the mind behind the gun then the gun is just a piece of metal.

  3. walruscarver2000

    walruscarver2000 said, about 2 years ago

    @AgentSmith101

    Stopp selling bullets and the components to reload them.

  4. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    “Rifle” association should be about actual “rifles”, not semi-automatic or automatic pistols with huge magazine capacity, combat weapons WAY above the sophistication of those available in 1791, or even swords, or blunt weapons of the day. Armor penetrating bullets should be a moot point not even discussed, just banned.


    Note to the “hard right”: ANYONE who discusses using firearms to violently overthrow the government, needs to move out of THIS nation, rapidly, before being arrested for what you propose: TREASON! period!

  5. AgentSmith101

    AgentSmith101 said, about 2 years ago

    @walruscarver2000
    The bullets and reload capability are also already out there too. My point is that restriction truly won’t stop anything. I’m sure your point would be to slow it down. Not allowing citizens to purchase ammunition will only take it out of law abiding hands.

    @dtroutma
    “Note to the “hard right”: ANYONE who discusses using firearms to violently overthrow the government, needs to move out of THIS nation, rapidly, before being arrested for what you propose: TREASON! period!”
    Says the Tory to the revolutionaries. : )

    There is a saying that says
    Use boxes in this order:
    Soap, Ballot, Jury, Ammo

    I agree that if it goes past ‘Jury’ the system has pretty much failed. Remember, the chance of any “hard right” revolutionary group succeeding had about as much chance as a sneeze in a windstorm. It would literally take a military breakdown and defection to a revolutionary group. I don’t see any Marine doing that any time soon. We know that Semper Fidelis isn’t something they just shout for fun.

    As for the moot point of ammo or weapons calibers. I believe the US Constitution as a living document has been interpreted many ways. I’m not trying to weasel out of this, because you have a valid point towards the practical nature of the 2nd amendment. While I am not an attorney I do believe this amendment does allow for an interpretation towards more open gun ownership. Do I think that we should open the shop doors wide and allow anyone to get an HK 54-A jeep assault rifle? Not really, but for the law abiding citizen and collector it should not be an impossibility. As with my previous post, I am more concerned about open purchases at gun exhibitions where no check is required and guns can be sold to anyone. There are many times when Constitutional interpretation happen to my extreme dislike, but that’s why we are talking instead of shooting it out.
    Also, what concerns me is the misconception that just buying a gun will automatically be this self protection panacea. It takes some responsibility and time to learn how to use a gun properly and also when NOT to use a gun.
    I know bringing up these point is arguing somewhat against myself. I wanted to bring up the idea that some gun owners do see the need to find middle ground between “Buy Everything!” and “Ban Everything!”

  6. greyArea

    greyArea said, about 2 years ago

    @AgentSmith101

    I like your take on this debate. The one thing that seems to slip through all of the cracks is that guns don’t kill… insanity kills. Are we not addressing this issue as we should? Perhaps this is the reason that a logical approach to the problem can’t seem to gather enough support from all quarters?

  7. 4my10851cs

    4my10851cs said, about 2 years ago

    @ahab

    " Illegal gun sales flourish at gun shows."

    I have been to gun shows in CA and UT, two extremely different states when it comes to gun laws, and I challenge you to buy a gun illegaly in either state.

  8. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    Of the 50 gun massacres in the past 30 years, not one was stopped by a civilian individual with a gun.

  9. Wabbit

    Wabbit GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    the armed forces are a branch of that “gorilla” you called government. If the conservatives hate government so much, why do they want to be part of it?
    Even the most conservative no doubt has a parent who benefits from Social Security and Medicare. So that you don’t have to be the one eventually changing their diapers.
    Also conservatives like fire departments and decent highways and hope regulations will keep e. Coli out of the food chain. Rightsright, you see what I’m saying?

  10. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    @AgentSmith101

    ‘I know bringing up these point is arguing somewhat against myself. I wanted to bring up the idea that some gun owners do see the need to find middle ground between “Buy Everything!” and “Ban Everything!”’
    -
    ‘The bullets and reload capability are also already out there too. My point is that restriction truly won’t stop anything. I’m sure your point would be to slow it down. Not allowing citizens to purchase ammunition will only take it out of law abiding hands.’
    -
    Agent, I agree you are being reasonable in this discussion (and I beleive you are geting reaaonable responses). Absent the NRA, this kind of discussion/debate could take place between legislators, as well as the public. But the NRA always takes the position that any gun control will lead to confiscation, and you can see that that position is parroted on these boards.
    -
    I agree that making something illegal will not stop all of it, but the idea is to minimize the damage that can be done. Maybe that guy in AZ who shot the Congresswoman could have still gotten extended magazines had they remained illegal, but maybe not. Worth the gamble, I think.
    -
    In any case, I think that most of the responsible gun owners, such as yourself, would approve of some forms of gun control.
    -
    By the same token, most gun control advocates would not intend that your guns be taken away.
    -
    The problem is the NRA.

  11. AgentSmith101

    AgentSmith101 said, about 2 years ago

    @eryx
    That’s where we might have to agree to disagree. I don’t think every Joe off the street should be buying something like that, but there are collectors and enthusiasts who enjoy firing large caliber weapons with high round magazines. A little crazy, maybe? But it’s regulated to where you need to apply for ownership of such things.

    @braindead08
    I think you are correct. I run into this argument when I walk into any gun shop. It’s always the slippery slope where registering guns and gun sales is one step away from totals bans and the federal government going door to door confiscating weapons.
    I would like to see something else tried to curb troubled people at the source before magazine restrictions. Although as I mentioned agreeing with Eryx that 100 round clips for average use are absurd. Just like the insistence that an AR-15 is used for duck hunting.

    The NRA is a lobby like any other. I posted my views on Matt Bors latest comic about that, but the long and short is it needs to get out of policy maker’s way while support its cause the old fashioned way with people contacting congress and not the other way around.

    I have a high amount of respect for you both and appreciate everyone’s civil responses to my posts regardless of their disagreements. We still need to find a middle ground. I am a Centrist at heart and wish we had a Congress that could follow suit.

  12. Refresh Comments.