Mike Luckovich by Mike Luckovich

Mike Luckovich

Comments (14) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. tiredofit

    tiredofit said, over 2 years ago

    We really should protect our first amendment rights to bear arms, all arms!

    After all, why limit it to gunpowder-based arms? We should be allowed to store chemical and biological weapons in our house to throw at intruders if we want! Suitcase nukes for protecting our suburban towns from the urban hordes!

    After all, the Constitution doesn’t define “arms” at all, so they are all fair game. I mean, they didn’t have 100 round capacity magazines for weapons that could fire five bullets a second back in 1791 when the Second Amendment was ratified, but we’re allowed to have them! ALL ARMS MUST BE LEGAL TO CARRY IN A CHURCH OR BAR!

    Unless you believe the idiocy above, that all arms should be legal, then you believe in arms control. And if you believe in arms control, then we should be able to discuss which arms are allowed and which are not.

    Myself, I would limit non-sporting weapons (hunting, target, etc.) to 10 rounds and limit firing speed, require that they be locked separate from their ammo when not in use, and shooters be trained and licensed just like drivers and weapons be registered just like cars.

    Unless you plan on armed insurrection or mass murder there are few rational reasons to have more firepower than listed above.

  2. hippogriff

    hippogriff said, over 2 years ago

    antiquetracman: If you read the whole thing, you will see the distinction, but the first amendment is what you want to destroy with the second – the right to believe, to communicate, and to join with others to do what the Constitution says.

  3. jonpeterson001

    jonpeterson001 said, over 2 years ago

    Antique, you aren’t doing your side any favors with that argument/name calling/radicalism (Every citizen is a member of the militia).

    BTW, I am not a member of any militias.

  4. goweeder

    goweeder said, over 2 years ago


    “…. require that they be locked separate from their ammo when not in use…….
    Yeah, I always keep my gun locked in my safe, and my ammunition in another.
    I figure if someone breaks in, in the middle of the night, they’ll be willing to wait while i unlock my safes to get out my gun and ammo, and load it, etc.

  5. goweeder

    goweeder said, over 2 years ago

    “And you want them all dead because they don’t conform to your ideas. So, that makes your ideology as bad as theirs.”
    No, we want them dead because they are fanatic murderers who kill everyone on sight because it’s so much fun. And they kill women and children with no remorse, because they want to be the boss of everyone they don’ kill. And they’re mean, too.

  6. dchavers

    dchavers said, over 2 years ago

    Numbnutz-read the entire response so that you understand his comment.

  7. ODon

    ODon said, over 2 years ago

    “Yup. About a third of firearms deaths are suicides. Another third are gangbanger POSs shooting each other. That leaves about 13,000 people killing others with firearms.”
    So 1/3 don’t count, 1/3 are subhuman leaving 1/3 killing others so it really isn’t a big deal (?). What is the point you are making?

  8. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, over 2 years ago

    Twice this year we’ve had an idiot put an automatic weapon in the hands of a pre-teen child, resulting in someone dying.

    I knew we worshiped stupidity in this country, that we’d violently defend our right to not learn anything ever, but it seems we’re willing to give our lives for it.

  9. ChevJames007

    ChevJames007 said, over 2 years ago

    Luckovitch lives in a lily white neighborhood and keeps a Glock under his pillow—you can bet on it!

  10. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    And giving 9 year olds fully automatic Uzi has proven so good an idea. BTW: in the 18th century, “arms” included swords, and “biological” weapons had been used for centuries during siege warfare. (Even though they didn’t really understand what it was about dead livestock in wells that was lethal, just like so many today don’t understand either chemical or biological weapons of “terror” that aren’t really all that effective.)

  11. hippogriff

    hippogriff said, over 2 years ago

    dtroutma: Chemical and biological weapons are effective – in fact too effective. They ignore all boundaries and given enough use and time, will travel all around the world and attack the user. Check out the August 2014 Scientific American article on how chemical exposure can piggyback on DNA without changing it, to the point of being detected five generations later.

  12. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    ^My point is that any “weapon” just as likely to kill the user as the “enemy” isn’t very effective, but yes, I do see your point there as well.

  13. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    Just another note? Our HOMICIDE BY GUN rate is roughly three times the number of our losses in years of war in Iraq, EVERY YEAR! “ISIS BOY” has it right.

  14. ChevJames007

    ChevJames007 said, over 2 years ago

    Five gets you one that Luckovitch has a gun at home!

  15. Refresh Comments.