Register for a FREE GoComics account and get this plus any other comic strip delivered to your Personalized
Comic Page, Daily. With a free account you will be able to build a Comic Page filled with the Comics you
want to see each day.
With the largest collection of Comics and Editorial Cartoons online there is plenty to choose from. Upgrade
to a GoComics Pro account (Only $.99/Month) and have unlimited archive access to decades of comics.
Prohibition of alcohol failed. Prohibition of drugs has failed. Neither of them were protected under the Constitution. Prohibition of guns will be a bigger failure, since people have seen what happened in other parts of the world when citizens are stripped of their guns.
This administration does not call for the confiscation of guns. In effect it would reenact the Brady law and call for more intense background checks including for gun shows.
From what I can see – and I have lived in many countries where people don’t own guns – when people are stripped of their guns, they stop shooting each other. And anyway, no-one wants to strip you of all your guns, just battlefield weapons.
Battlefield weapons? You mean like the 7000 that “Homeland Security” just ordered?
“Feinstein says that the only purpose for semi-automatic rifles is to kill school children, so why is the White House buying 7,000 for “personal defense?”
The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56×45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.
Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”
http://stevengoddard.wordpress…
Read that very last line again very carefully.
The hypocrisy just makes you want to scream.
BTW, which "battlefield weapons?? are you speaking of? Specifically?
Do you mean like a bolt-action M-1 with a five-round internal magazine? Or a semiautomatic AR-15 with a 15-round external mag?
Guess which one is an actual “battlefield weapon” and which one has NEVER been carried on the battlefield.
PS — you’re right, when stripped of guns, people stop shooting each other. They just find more creative ways to kill one another. Contrary to what your biases have led you to believe, the actual murder rate in the US ranks very low among nations of the world, lower in fact than Russia, Costa Rica, or the People’s Paradise of Cuba.
we have restrictions on the first amendment (freedom of speech, no shouting fire in a crowed theater) why not be equally sensible when it comes to the second?
My use of “battlefield weapons” was a trifle imprecise, but any weapon that can shoot dozens (again imprecise as I have never lived in a country that allows civillians to own guns except for hunting) of bullets without reloading is totally unnecessary for personal self defence – except perhaps for a Self Defence Force, which I am guessing is what Obama wanted them for. I meant semi automatic weapons, which, in my opinion (not bias) only belong on a battlefield/war zone, if anywhere.
you commies think you get to decide what we really mean no matter what we say. well, we don’t need to be psychic to understand that every inch you get gets you closer to your real goals. Otherwise why would you care so strongly about banning cosmetic features? Every gun on that list is exactly like dozens or hundreds of others in every way that matters, except for looks. So why is that so important to you? Because you need to do SOMETHING. It makes it easier NEXTTIME to do something MORE, of course.
"Moderately Confused is an extension of my daily thinking routine, says Jeff Stahler. "I'm used to observing the front pages of the news and commenting with a cartoon. But every day, the rest of the paper tracks the culture, and all of those stories are rich for commentary, too. This panel gives me an outlet for observing those back pages of the paper that I enjoy reading as well." Stahler's Moderately Confused was a finalist for the National Cartoonists Society's Division Award for Best Newspaper Panel in 2005.
A native of Bellefontaine, Ohio, award-winning editorial cartoonist Jeff Stahler graduated from the Columbus College of Art and Design. He resides in Columbus, Ohio, with his family.
Minimum Security by Stephanie McMillan
Molly and the Bear by Bob Scott
Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)
win said, 4 months ago
If we could only stop shooting each other.
J. Short
said, 4 months ago
Let the commentary begin. Try to play nice everyone.
treesareus said, 4 months ago
Prohibition of alcohol failed. Prohibition of drugs has failed. Neither of them were protected under the Constitution. Prohibition of guns will be a bigger failure, since people have seen what happened in other parts of the world when citizens are stripped of their guns.
DDS029 said, 4 months ago
@J. Short
I’m just glad I got in early today, so I can just move on. Not enough comments to get me even interested in playing today.
Justice22 said, 4 months ago
This administration does not call for the confiscation of guns. In effect it would reenact the Brady law and call for more intense background checks including for gun shows.
ferritt123 said, 4 months ago
No. You should try to harness the energy of a 2 or 3 yr. old.
YokohamaMama said, 4 months ago
From what I can see – and I have lived in many countries where people don’t own guns – when people are stripped of their guns, they stop shooting each other. And anyway, no-one wants to strip you of all your guns, just battlefield weapons.
sandflea said, 4 months ago
@treesareus
Paranoid?
Penny Robinson Fan Club said, 4 months ago
@YokohamaMama
Battlefield weapons? You mean like the 7000 that “Homeland Security” just ordered?
“Feinstein says that the only purpose for semi-automatic rifles is to kill school children, so why is the White House buying 7,000 for
“personal defense?”
The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56×45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as
“assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is
calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.
Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking
for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”
http://stevengoddard.wordpress…
Read that very last line again very carefully.
The hypocrisy just makes you want to scream.
BTW, which "battlefield weapons?? are you speaking of? Specifically?
Do you mean like a bolt-action M-1 with a five-round internal magazine? Or a semiautomatic AR-15 with a 15-round external mag?
Guess which one is an actual “battlefield weapon” and which one has NEVER been carried on the battlefield.
Penny Robinson Fan Club said, 4 months ago
PS — you’re right, when stripped of guns, people stop shooting each other. They just find more creative ways to kill one another. Contrary to what your biases have led you to believe, the actual murder rate in the US ranks very low among nations of the world, lower in fact than Russia, Costa Rica, or the People’s Paradise of Cuba.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Redkaycei Repoc said, 4 months ago
@treesareus
Like England? or Sweden?… Somehow I fail to see your point….
chireef said, 4 months ago
we have restrictions on the first amendment (freedom of speech, no shouting fire in a crowed theater) why not be equally sensible when it comes to the second?
Daeder
said, 4 months ago
If we can’t settle the gun debate, might as well solve the energy crisis.
YokohamaMama said, 4 months ago
My use of “battlefield weapons” was a trifle imprecise, but any weapon that can shoot dozens (again imprecise as I have never lived in a country that allows civillians to own guns except for hunting) of bullets without reloading is totally unnecessary for personal self defence – except perhaps for a Self Defence Force, which I am guessing is what Obama wanted them for. I meant semi automatic weapons, which, in my opinion (not bias) only belong on a battlefield/war zone, if anywhere.
flake-67121 said, 4 months ago
@Justice22
you commies think you get to decide what we really mean no matter what we say. well, we don’t need to be psychic to understand that every inch you get gets you closer to your real goals. Otherwise why would you care so strongly about banning cosmetic features? Every gun on that list is exactly like dozens or hundreds of others in every way that matters, except for looks. So why is that so important to you? Because you need to do SOMETHING. It makes it easier NEXT TIME to do something MORE, of course.