Tom Toles by Tom Toles

Tom Toles

Comments (42) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, almost 4 years ago

    Ya I’m sure the criminals will make sure all their “non-compliant” guns are dutifully turned in to the nearest police department.
    Btw Thanks Pops for letting me know how many bullets “should be enough” so I can protect my family.
    The Land of the Free is quickly disappearing.

  2. saywhatwhat

    saywhatwhat said, almost 4 years ago


    Umm, what are you protecting your family from? Try locking the door. If that doesn’t work, you might think about psychiatric help. Or do you live in the mountains of Afghanistan, Pakistan or somewhere in Somalia where everyone has the right to carry assault rifles?

  3. James Wolfenstein

    James Wolfenstein said, almost 4 years ago

    Yeah… right… that’s the problem… The worst part is that it has been done before and nothing changed. Regulating the instrument doesn’t change anything. The instrument is not the problem.

  4. sjc14850

    sjc14850 said, almost 4 years ago


    While you fantasize about marauding criminals bearing super-duper automatic weapons, dozens of people who just wanted to see a movie or live to see their eighth birthday die in terror and pain. What would you say to the children of Newtown? “Oops”?

  5. Doughfoot

    Doughfoot said, almost 4 years ago

    Most homicides are committed by people without previous criminal records, but many by people with known and diagnosed mental problems, and that is particularly true of the rampage killings that have become so frequent in the US in recent years. More effective means are needed to keep deadly weapons out of the hands of people like Adam Lanza. Any disagreement on that?

    If the weapon is not the problem, and liberty means arming yourself in any way you please, then why are hand grenades not available at Walmart? How about nerve gas? Stinger missiles? Land mines? Should they be available freely to anyone with the money? Or are there weapons that ought to be banned and kept out of the hands of civilians? Any disagreement on that?

    There ought to be a consensus that effective measures ought to be in places to keep some kinds of weapons out of the hands of civilians, and most kinds of weapons out of the hands of maniacs.

    Many people have a legitimate need for firearms, either for hunting (for food or against pests and predators) or self-defense. (No one should interfere with that.) The only other reason for anyone to have a gun is to practice a hobby. Historical re-enactment. Collecting guns as some collect stamps. Target shooting for fun or in competition. Hunting as a sport. Or, pathetically, because it makes the gun owner feel big and strong and powerful, and able to take down his neighbors, the police, the army, and the Marine Corps when civilization and democracy collapse. The last group is the scary one: that’s rather on the borders of paranoia.

    I have no doubt that many a crime has been thwarted by a good person with a gun. But how many times has it taken a semi-automatic rifle with a 30-round magazine to do it, when an ordinary shotgun or hand gun would not have been sufficient? Just wondering.

    It would be wrong to confiscate people’s property. But to require a special and very expensive permit to purchase powerful weapons would certainly lower the demand for them, reduce their sales, discourage their manufacture, and eventually reduce the number in circulation. Even criminals normally have to buy their weapons on a black market and are subject to the laws of supply and demand. (Except when the harmless law-abiding gun owner involuntarily supplies the criminal with his gun, as Nancy Lanza did her son.)

    There are any number of “best practices” out there that, if required of all gun owners, might be effective. If Nancy Lanza had kept her guns in a sturdy gun safe with a combination lock, she and a lot of kids might be alive today.

    There are very good reasons, even apart from the Constitution, to allow citizens to keep and bear arms. There are very good reasons, never considered in violation of the Constitution, to limit that possession to certain classes of weapons and not others, and to carefully regulate the possession of still others, like fully automatic weapons. And there are many types of gun control that do not restrict ownership, but only things like storage and sales. Most of the arguments made by rabid gun-nuts are bogus, attacking straw men of their own devising or based on paranoid delusions. (And some from anti-gun nuts are just as paranoid.) -- This should be considered as a question of public safety, period, and what laws are most conducive to public safety when it comes to weapons, whether explosives, chemical weapons, or firearms.

  6. ODon

    ODon said, almost 4 years ago

    The tobacco industry continues to feed business to the healthcare industry via “coffin nails”. The tobacco lobby has fed cash to our reps in Washington for years to facilitate this irrational costly exchange. Toles shows how this works with other industries as well.

  7. BillWa

    BillWa said, almost 4 years ago

    In the state of Wa. you don;t need to register guns. The Gov. has no business knowing what and how mny I have. And by the way Tom, did you know more people, the very vast majority of gun deaths are Suicides? Take away the gun, they will choose something else. Oh, how many deaths by cars do we need before we ban cars, or put in a governor to keep it from going over 55mph. Guns are not the problem, mags are not the problem, PEOPLE are the problem.

  8. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, almost 4 years ago

    @ Night Gaunt – If a person hasn’t hit a target in 10 shots, the deer/bird is gone, or one needs to reload and adjust the sights on the weapon at the range. Btw, have been enjoying a lot of your posts over the last days. Keep it up.
    @ ConservGov – Libs will not use violence to take your guns away. They will circulate petitions and vote for anti gun advocates, and try to pass laws, but NO ONE IS COMING TO YOUR DOOR TO TAKE YOUR GUN.
    You, Rightisright, and a few other conservs are scarey. Right’s comments that a revolution is way over due makes me feel I need to go buy a M4 and high capacity clips so I can help local law authorities when your militias start your revolution. Some of you sound as if you’re on the brink. Saw the Piers Anthony interview with Alex Jones, I don’t watch Piers, but Jones was, like you and Right, scarey
    I have pity for people who are so afraid of their neighbors as to feel they need weapons of war in order to protect themselves from an illusion of their own creation. When you look out your window, do you see neighbors, or enemies? There is no large group of people wanting your guns, we just want fewer bullets fired before you have to reload, and 100% background checks in order to prevent the “mentally ill” or other inappropriate purchasers from buying the guns. Stronger consequences for straw purchasers would be good too. So much hate, Gov. Not good for your digestion.
    @ Michael WME – My 20 gauge Browning has an odd piece of wood, almost looks hand carved, that can be removed to increase the capacity from 3 rounds to 5. When skeet shooting, I have removed the plug, but before leaving the field, reinstall it.
    @ James Wolfenstien – as is the case with many bills, by the time it has gone through committees, examined and tweaked by lobbyists, and diluted by special interests at legislators home districts, the end result is a conversational success, but a legislative piece of….uselessness. Hold your legislators to a standard and write to them. Send a $10 donation to ppl running against them, not because it will necessarily get a person elected, but because it makes both sides think. Remember, we have the best gov’t money can buy. ick. just ick.
    Tigger – Laws banning drinking and driving, punishing bars for letting patrons leave drunk, lowering the legal limit for intoxication, etc have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.
    Why can’t we see if lowering the legal limit of bullets in a gun would help? Why can’t we punish gun sellers for selling guns to people they can’t identify as legal buyers? Why is it wrong to ban bullets that can kill a police officer wearing bulletproof armor? ConservGov and RightisRight might say we need to be able to kill the police who come to enforce laws that violate the 2nd Amendment.
    We’re talking about Apples, and sometimes Oranges…you’re talking about Applejack(the liquour), and Orange Triple Sec.
    You don’t like liquor, we get it. How do you feel about guns?
    and a bit nervous,

  9. pavlov

    pavlov said, almost 4 years ago

    WASHINGTON (CBS DC) – Annual FBI crime statistics show that more people are killed with clubs and hammers each year than by rifles or shotguns. and neither a hammer or club needs to be reloaded.

  10. corzak

    corzak said, almost 4 years ago


    “how many deaths by cars do we need before we ban cars”

    Guns are built for killing. Cars are built for transportation.

    Nevertheless, with cars, we have enacted stricter blood alcohol limits, raised the drinking age, ramped up enforcement penalties for drinking or texting while driving, charge bartenders for serving drunks, and launch huge public awareness campaigns to stigmatize dangerous driving behavior, and we do all those things because it might just help bring driving fatality rates down. Which it has. By 2/3s in a few decades.

    The stock NRA talking points are worn out, Bill. Too many dead innocents.

  11. corzak

    corzak said, almost 4 years ago


    “crime statistics show that more people are killed with clubs and hammers each year than by rifles or shotguns”

    The next time an angry killer beats 20 children & 6 adults to death with a hammer . . . with 8 to 10 blows each . . . in 10 minutes . . . then yes, we should address the issue of hammer safety.

    The stock NRA talking points are worn out. Too many dead innocents.

  12. corzak

    corzak said, almost 4 years ago

    “Cigarettes? Alcohol? Distracted driving thanks to electronic gadgets is a fast up and comer”

    All of these, as you must have heard by now, are heavily regulated, with ramped up enforcement penalties for unlawful use or distribution.

    The NRA ‘free rein’ has run its course. It’s time to talk about sensible regulation.

  13. corzak

    corzak said, almost 4 years ago

    Oh, Right, I forgot- because it wasn’t designed to kill, it isn’t as bad. Works about as well as “I didn’t mean to kill”

    “I meant to kill” – Murder. Illegal.

    “I didn’t mean to kill” – Manslaughter. Also illegal, but lesser penalty.

    The purpose of both laws is to reduce the numbers of unnatural killings of one person by another.

  14. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, almost 4 years ago

    @ Billy Sargent – saw a pic of some feral hogs on my mom’s land. You have a valid point. But I am pleased you qualified your comment to me about specialized application. Clips can be changed out quickly, but when bullets fly, seconds save lives. Good comments, and great tone. Thank you.
    @ Fredgold – I have nearly every book Piers ANTHONY has written. Thank you for the correction. X(an)th? His Space Tyrant series had some interesting political insight too, don’t you think?

  15. corzak

    corzak said, almost 4 years ago

    “China, Same day as Sandy Hook. You’re welcome.”

    No one was killed in the China attack. No one.

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