Michael Ramirez by Michael Ramirez

Michael Ramirez

Comments (44) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Rockngolfer

    Rockngolfer said, over 3 years ago

    I see that someone deleted my “I Love Paris” parody yesterday.
    Hope a sufficient number enjoyed it before it was deleted.

  2. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    Ramirez is probably right. And no gun control won’t stop another Sandy Hook, either. Does he have a suggestion to make? Perhaps a better gun control bill?

  3. Wraithkin

    Wraithkin said, over 3 years ago


    I have one: Remove the “gun-free zone” restrictions and allow schools and other public places to have armed security. In the Hunter-killer anti-terrorism training we had prior to heading to Iraq, they explained that the presence of defensive predators actively looking for offensive predators naturally pushes away those who would do harm to those protected. While criminals don’t obey the law, they do obey (for the most part) common sense. If they are likely to get shot while trying to commit their crimes, they are going to go elsewhere.
    Ask yourself this: Why are all the mass-killings like Sandy Hook committed in places that are known to have no firearms? It’s because the criminals want to kill as my people before they themselves get killed/arrested. If they are likely to get shot before they even get in the door, that prevents them from “spreading their hate.” It’s the same

    If you see someone who is clearly armed, or you know there is a reasonable expectation that someone in the target zone is armed, and they are all actively watching for criminals, the criminals are less likely to attack that location.

    And no, this won’t create an “O.K. Corral” scenario, because they won’t start a gunfight in the first place. Criminals are cowards, by their very nature, because they only attack unarmed people.

    The second thing to do is to have early detection of this kind of behavior. The guy out in CO sent in a notebook to a school psychologist prior to him going on his killing spree. Why wasn’t this guy hauled away in cuffs before he had a chance? Why wasn’t he thrown in a loony bin before he could shoot up the theater? I’m sure this Adam Lanza guy had plenty of tell-tale signs that indicated he was going to be a problem.

    So preventing or impeding the legal ownership of firearms by law-abiding citizens doesn’t stop criminals from getting them. It just prevents people from having them to use in their own defense and for sport. Time for cops to respond: 6 minutes. Time for an armed civilian to respond: 0 minutes. Cops don’t prevent violent crime, they simply pick up the pieces afterwards.

  4. Chillbilly

    Chillbilly said, over 3 years ago

    “Nothing” is a Republican keyword. Know nothing. Do nothing. Help nothing.

  5. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago


    How does “someone” delete anything here? It had to be the "webmaster’ or his minions on the gocomics censor staff.

  6. Fourcrows

    Fourcrows said, over 3 years ago


    Columbine had armed guards, and it still happened.
    It takes a lot of training and experience to be able to pull a gun in a stress situation, make the right call in a fraction of a second, and prevent a potential murder. Most civilians will think of themselves first, until completely backed into a corner. Add to that a civilial adding bullets to the fray, and you have a greater potential for death.
    When a person sees a gunman approaching a group, the first realization they make is that if they pull their own weapon they then become the first target. A psychopath or sociopath who wants to commit a mass shooting will not be stopped by a guard, the guard will be the first victim.
    While I agree we can improve the state of our mental health system in this country, there is no way of predicting who will go on a shooting spree. Sometimes, the idea of being forced into counseling because someone said they are crazy is enough to set someone off. I work with several people with Asperger’s, the illness Adam Lanza suffered from. These people are valuable engineers because of their attention to detail and ability to focus on a task to completion no matter how long it takes. Do we lock them up? Do we lock up everyone on antidepressants until they “get better” and can function in society without pills? There is no way to enforce a specific ban on who can own guns based on the potential for mental illness or emotional stress. It is better to limit what is available to the public to non-military grade weapons and allow a gun and ammunition registry to prevent anyone from creating their own Branch Davidian level arsenal.
    Ironically, because you mention being a veteran, I would trust you in a situation like Aurora more than most. You have had training on how to react when your life is threatened and I will assume you have used that training in real life. But do you really trust someone who hasn’t been through that to protect you or your family? In your military experience, assuming you’ve seen combat, how many rounds are fired to remove a single target? The last shootout my uncle (a Cleveland police officer of 30 years and Vietnam veteran) was involved in, over 100 rounds were fired against a single man standing on his porch with 2 handguns. He was hit by 3 bullets. The neighborhood had been evacuated, but imagine four or five armed citizens shooting it out at a mall, trying to hit a single gunman in body armor with a legally owned arsenal. The body count would be even higher than what the gunman could do himself.

  7. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago


    Well, you seem to be out of touch. I think the gun control bill is up for debate. That is progress. As long as there is no “ban” amendment added it will probably pass the senate with republican support. Background checks are already a part of most state gun laws. Though you can see that it can be used to confiscate guns from owners (see NY cases) it is a good tool and should be tough.

    So why do you think a gun ban will stop violent crime ?

  8. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, over 3 years ago

    ’Republican Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, among other politicians owned by the gun lobby, have decried the use of the Newtown parents to push legislation. It’s wrong, Cruz said again this week, “to exploit this tragedy.”
    This is absurd. Human tragedies are the fuel of reform — they are the catalysts for new laws and changed attitudes. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911, which killed 146 garment workers in New York City, led to changes in building and fire codes that are with us still. The tampering of Tylenol capsules, a poison plot that killed seven people in 1982, was followed by wholesale makeovers in the way hundreds of products were packaged. And what was the overhaul in airport security, a system that has for more than a decade prevented a terrorist from ramming a plane into a building, but government “exploiting the tragedy” of 9/11?"
    Tip of the hat to Tim Egan.

  9. furnituremaker

    furnituremaker said, over 3 years ago


    most people are more dangerous to themselves and their loved ones than to an intruder

  10. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 3 years ago

    It is true, it is a bunch of politicians that want to look like their doing something. The Murder captial of the United States is Chicago where they have the strictest gun laws. Remember when Washington was the Murder Capital of the United States. The Supreme Court ruled against one or two little laws and Washington DC is no longer the Murder Capital of the United States.

    The current laws effect assault rifles more than hand guns and guess what thousands are killed by hand guns a couple of dozen by assault rifles.

  11. omQ R

    omQ R said, over 3 years ago


    Please learn punctuation? Please? Pretty please? Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeease? And use a spell-check. It isn’t that difficult, I swear.

    “It is true, it is a bunch of politicians that want to look like they’re doing something. The Murder captial of the United States is Chicago where they have the strictest gun laws. Remember when Washington was the Murder Capital of the United States? The Supreme Court ruled against one or two little laws and Washington DC is no longer the Murder Capital of the United States.

    The current laws affect assault rifles more than hand guns, and guess what? Thousands are killed by hand guns, a couple of dozen by assault rifles.”

    There? Isn’t that easier to read? You’re welcome.

  12. Fourcrows

    Fourcrows said, over 3 years ago

    Sorry, your short memory is forgetting that the murderer was David Koresh. He told his followers to open fire on the agents at the door executing a legal search warrant. The fire that killed most of the people was started inside. Based on the amount of weapons available and the followers’ talk of “bringing Armageddon”, they were a genuine threat to the people of Waco. Would you have been okay with the federal government standing by and allowing them to attack the town? Sandy Hook would have been nothing compared to that.

  13. Fourcrows

    Fourcrows said, over 3 years ago

    Over the course of the seige, the people were given plenty of opportunity to leave peacefully. The fires started inside the compound. Koresh was killed by one of his own, probably after realizing he had been planning to sacrifice everyone all along. Because of the amount of weapons inside, the fire was unable to be fought. The ATF and FBI did not order the murder of anybody. It was a tragedy, yes, but these people likely killed themselves at Koresh’s behest, murdering their own children for the glory of a nutcase. It is no different than what Jim Jones did to his followers, or any other suicide/armageddon cultists.

  14. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, over 3 years ago

    “It is useful to consider the Republican position on ‘Gun Rights’ in the context of their position on voting rights.
    Any attempt to identify gun purchasers using a federal register to prevent killing or mass killing is an intolerable assault on second amendment rights.
    But the use of government maintained information to prevent people from voting is necessary to prevent voter fraud and is not considered, by Republicans, a problem with respect to the 15th Amendment,
    Republican hypocrisy is overwhelming.”
    Tip o’ the cap to Steve of Jersey City

  15. nz4m60

    nz4m60 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    …and Remerez, neither would you.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (29).