"I think cartoonists should be like burrs under the saddle of some egomaniac, kind of gnawing away every day," says two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Paul Szep. "I think the public likes cartoons because it gives them a vicarious pleasure that they normally can't get in any other way."
© Creators Syndicate, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.
Dana Summers by Dana Summers
(th)ink by Keith Knight
Comments (24) (Please sign in to comment)
lisapaloma13 said, 4 months ago
☺
Tigger
said, 4 months ago
Protected
Adrian Snare said, 4 months ago
@Tigger
There is NO earthly need for lethal self defense.
There is a need for 100% computerized “background checks, my version”.
zoidknight said, 4 months ago
@Adrian Snare
No, there is a need. When seconds count, the police are minutes away. The only ones who think that we do not have the right to defend ourselves are those criminals who are protecting the criminals.
Harleyquinn
said, 4 months ago
What about cannons? protected. what about a blunderbuss? protected. or how about the sniper rifle of the time the Kentucky long rifle? protected. how about the bayonets that are still used today Mr. President. protected. Obama an expert on the constitution, not, or history, not.
Again the 2nd is about personal responsibility and what mommy government “shall not infringe” on you. Not the other way around.
Harleyquinn
said, 4 months ago
@Adrian Snare
New button “I only use non lethal self defense in this house” I will put that with my bullet proof “gun free zone” sticker and your button “I know how to call 9 11”
ODon said, 4 months ago
@zoidknight
When seconds count I don’t want to have to get to my gun safe. I’d rather call 911 and grab a can of mace. My family may get teary eyed but they can live with that.
furnituremaker said, 4 months ago
the average person will hesitate before using lethal force…
the average criminal probably won’t…so who gets shot?
mickey1339
said, 4 months ago
@Adrian Snare
“There is no earthly need for lethal self defense.”
Home invasion robberies, sometimes including rapes and murders were gaining popularity amongst the criminal elements, hitting those “quiet middle class neighborhoods.”
Then an amazing thing happened, people started shooting the home invasion types and the frequency dropped off amazingly quickly. To the credit of the police they just considered it ’self defense."
tranquil-d
said, 4 months ago
the 2nd amendment doesn’t say anything about guns either. it says “arms”, which are any weapon. And unless we are going to go all the way and say govt can’t regulate nuclear weapons, rocket launchers, etc., then why not guns. there is nothing in the Constitution or bill of rights that protects all guns specifically. we regulate speech, why not arms. let’s debate what is “reasonable” regulation regarding arms as a Constitutional issue and then lets also have an evidenced based discussion on the effectiveness of public policies. the screaming 2nd amendment defenders and the anti-guns crowd calling anyone that supports guns as crazy doesn’t help, unfortunately it all plays well in the lazy mainstream media (no, not left or right, just lazy and greedy).
Kylie2112 said, 4 months ago
@Harleyquinn
Cool, I want some anti-aircraft turrets and a nuclear missile silo in my backyard.
Bruce4671 said, 4 months ago
At the time, muskets WERE assault weapons.
mickey1339
said, 4 months ago
@Mr. King
King, that’s why one reason they need to add in a ’secure storage" clause to the law.
Gresch said, 4 months ago
…so what stop Washington from declaring himself King?
cb1966 said, 4 months ago
It seems that Mr. Szep is suggesting that the 2nd amendment was written in the 18th century when “arming” oneself was completely different in scope and magnitude, and that now that times have changed, it is time to modify the 2nd amendment to reflect current “arms”.