Nick Anderson by Nick Anderson

Nick Anderson

Comments (42) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. sw10mm

    sw10mm said, over 3 years ago

    If more sheeple were willing to die at the hands of a home invader, things would be better, right?

  2. Tue Elung-Jensen

    Tue Elung-Jensen said, over 3 years ago

    I´m sure its true in some way. but doesn´t mean you don´t need more regulations.

  3. Ottodesu

    Ottodesu said, over 3 years ago


    Why do you live in a place where home invasions happen?

  4. omQ R

    omQ R said, over 3 years ago


    sw10mm asked “If more sheeple were willing to die at the hands of a home invader, things would be better, right?”

    I ask: If more sheeple were willing to die at the hands of a fellow home dweller, things would be better, right?

  5. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 3 years ago


    Missing the point again, eh? Let me explain it for you: The NRA says “enforce the laws,” while at the same time lobbying to make the laws unenforceable. Sneaky trick.

  6. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 3 years ago

    The ATF has overreached and abused its authority in the past. The ATF has been punished for these abuses to a point it is almost totally useless as a law enforcement agency. The gov’t should be using the lessons learned from past abuses. It should also be using the lessons learned from impairing the ATF’s ability to enforce the “laws already on the books.”
    A relatively short search on the internet will show how lobbyists have helped draft legislation that keeps the present day ATF from doing its job. These same lobbyists are actively working to keep a new director from being chosen until a ‘friendlier’ environment exists to install a director who is friendlier to gun and ammo manufacturers; one who places less emphasis on law and more on profits.
    92% of people polled want 100% background checks. This is the least that should be done. If a car is given to an adult child as a gift, the title has to be transferred. If a dog is purchased in my city, it has to be registered and an id tag is issued. Why should a legitimate gun owner not have to title their guns and that title be transferred as ownership changes? If a person owns guns, why is it wrong to show the weapons are secure from casual theft? If a car is stolen, why wouldn’t an owner not call the police, and why shouldn’t the same be required for the theft of a gun?
    This forum has seen many essays on these matters, but the point of the cartoon simply addresses the inherent hypocrisy of telling Americans that if the ATF would just do their job we wouldn’t need to go through all of this. Until a dedicated director of the ATF is in place, and the hobbles removed from the ATF’s ability to do their job, talking about how many laws are already on the books makes as much sense as funding an agency that has nearly no power to function.
    Notice in this cartoon, the shooter doesn’t even have to look in order to hit his target. The ATF is just that easy to knock down.

  7. Cynthia

    Cynthia GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Whenever anyone on the right feels the threat of the “evil” ATF preying on their precious, precious guns, just bring out the Waco fuckup.

  8. Chillbilly

    Chillbilly said, over 3 years ago

    Still cracks me up that people think “home invasions” are a bigger problem than … say … meteorites or bedbugs.

  9. Ajax 4Hire

    Ajax 4Hire said, over 3 years ago

    It is not about firearms, it is about protection and…
    The Police are not there to protect you (look up Warren v. District of Columbia).

    You are the first line of defense, you must protect yourself.

    If the 2nd Amendment were written today: The right of the people to a well trained legal defense (access to a lawyer) shall not infringed.

    If you read the Declaration of Independence you see the reason citizens need protection from government.

    The US Constitution, 2nd Amendment is NOT to ensure your ability to hunt; It is to protect YOU and me from the oppression of government.

  10. DavidGBA

    DavidGBA said, over 3 years ago

    But the NRA made the current law unenforcable, weak, inconsistent and denies us any data on what we need and how well they work.

  11. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, over 3 years ago


    That kind of thing can happen in “nice” places too. Cheshire, Connecticut- ranked #73 in Money Magazine’s “100 best places to live”- saw a violent home invasion, rape and murder, leaving a woman and two girls dead despite the police having been called.
    This issue hits close to home for me as well- four doors away from home, in fact, where a shooting happened late last year. But moving isn’t an easy proposition; any other apartments in the area cost at least $200 more a month for rent, and anything affordable would require a ridiculously long commute to work.
    This is why I support owning certain firearms (revolvers or handguns) for home defense and protection- and advocate for state-regulated safety and training courses. What I DON’T advocate for, though, is people owning home arsenals sufficient to supply an Army platoon, or having every last yahoo on the street packing heat with the irrational expectation that they can be perfectly logical if a situation happens.

  12. Fourcrows

    Fourcrows said, over 3 years ago

    @Ajax 4Hire

    The first time I heard someone bring up Warren v Dc, I asked three of my friends about it – one is the current police lieutenant for our neighborhood, one a 15 year veteran who is now a counselor, and one a police dispatcher. All three are familiar with the ruling, and have said that it can only be used as protection against lawsuits if the officer or dispatcher could not be proven negligent. All three point out they are bound by an oath to PROTECT and serve, and will not be supported by the department or the state if they knowingly violate that oath. There are many details in that case not on the Wikipedia site, and the court decision came because the police followed current procedure based on information relayed through the dispatcher, and is used as a training example. I helped set up E911 systems in New Jersey, Manhatten, New Orleans, and Houston, the purpose of which is so people can dial 911 on their cell phone, and police can respond to the location immediately if no one speaks on the other end. They are there to protect you.
    But YES, if you want to own a gun to protect your home, by all means, own one, but register it and make it legal.
    Also, the second amendment is not there to protect you from our government, it is to protect us from insurgency, and from foreign/hostile powers. That is why it is contingent with a “well regulated militia.”

  13. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    OK Clark. Wonderful Idea. YOU go to china and start collecting them and when you get done with China move through the rest of the countires in Asia, omQ R can start in the UK and move throughout the EU. Get Maxine Waters to start in Egypt and cover all of Afirica, Nancy P can do all of the Middle East and let’s see Mr. “more flexibility” can pow-wow with Putin and the boys and Ms. Feinstein can come get the Americas (I suggest she start in Mexico). All ya’ll can take the collection to Australia where you can go to the outback where they have constructed the smelters and do the deed. I LIKE teamwork.

    Now don’t miss any little country just cause I didn’t say the name……

  14. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago


    Now let me suggest that you are being sarcastic and so your comment is an attempt at humor. However, if you take what you said in a more serious manner and think about it a tad you can get a reasonable answer.

    What is it about a community that makes it less likely to be a target of “home invaders”?

    Well we have some reasons:
    1. gated community w/guard
    2. organized neighborhood watch w/signs
    3. presence of police living in the hood (drive cars home from work)
    4. prevalence of security systems
    5. an armed citizenry

    My little community has 3 out of 5 factors. Shoot, I’m home most every day and if I see strange people walking or biking in the area, I make an effort to greet them and talk to them in as friendly a manner as I possible can. There reaction to my efforts is important. I’ve acquired several new friends and some good local contractors (tree trimming house painting handyman) for my trouble. I’ve also put those that may have nefarious plans on notice that well they were noticed and can be identified and given work to some that needed it.

    Home invaders – cowards that they really are – shy away from places that may prove difficult. Restricting the ability of a person to protect themselves will only embolden them.

  15. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago


    Yeah, Waco….and Janet Reno’s fame. Do you know why they were there? Because they tought they had “automatic” weapons. The search warrant was justified not on the basis there was proof that the Davidians had purchased anything illegal, but on the basis that they could be modifying legal arms to illegal arms, and that automatic weapon fire had been reported on the compound.

    So you are good with someone reporting they heard automatic gun fire, and the government being allowed to search your property on that basis? Someone could say "I walked by this house (your house) and other than the 3 dogs and 2 cats in the yard I smelled something that makes be think the occupant is smoking POT!!!!!! And while your land is currently in dispute over whether it is legal and under what circumstance the authorities could then put together a team and search your house for the little plants. Yeah, I know they would only find illegal catnip……

    A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have. – Thomas Jefferson

    But still, I want my government to be able to enforce the laws on the books and the ATF needs a director.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (27).