There’s an ever so slight difference in a right to bear arms and a right to be armed to the teeth with high capacity, military grade assault rifles.If someone wants a rifle for hunting or a handgun to make him feel safer in his home, I support that 100%. However, I cannot support citizens owning AK-47s and so called “cop killer” bullets. There need to be sensible limits.
When we move past the “I believe it because Fox said it’s true” morons, and the misconceptions about the second amendment, and half baked notions of losing one’s property rights, we come to the fact that mental illness is on the rise, more and more “soldiers” return from ill conceived war zones with post traumatic stress syndromes and an unnatural comfort with assault weapons and the ability to turn off the innate moral imperative against the taking of human life. We are faced with a truly silly reluctance to regulate access to these weapons, as if, somehow, we are going to rise up against the U.S. military forces to “defend our freedom”, but, instead, we end up permitting unbalanced individuals to arm themselves and attack groups of people in the most relaxed and undefended situations, such as in schools or movie theaters or malls. I think a sane society would immediately make it harder for unbalanced personalities to acquire these weapons, whatever it takes, and it would certainly not respond to this crisis with the idea that the answer is in arming more people. Unfortunately, we don’t live in a sane society, witness the stupid responses above (and to come). We are in deep trouble over this issue.
mikefive: I have. They were at an adult Boy Scout meeting recruiting a genocide team to kill blacks. Except they weren’t rank and file gun nuts, but regional leaders, openly identifying themselves as such, and well-provided with membership forms, literature, etc., and bragging about how “those commies in Washington are providing the ammo.” (The NRA/Pentagon “American Marksman” program which they were hoarding).
I’ve shot a lot of bears, with darts, never a bullet. I’m sure quite a few of them would have liked to return the “favor”. Wiley did this toon better, many years ago.
Pete Rogan: Well, let’s see. White? most of my gene pool blew over in the 18th century, but some walked and/or paddled over some 8,000 years earlier. Christian? Bishop Martin believed it when he ordained me. Native born? Yep, 5th floor, Methodist Hospital, Dallas, TX. Paranoid? I haven’t found a psychiatrist nor clinical psychologist who thought so.Am I therefore spared? Not if I keep fighting the Nazi Revolutionary Army and other such terrorist groups! See earlier comment today.
Oh, yes, the NRA will protect us all, but if we ask for any gun ownership restrictions we are confronted with guys frothing at the mouth and screaming that “1776 will happen again.”Assault rifles are a peril; and if you need that much gun, you can’t be much of a man.
Jason Allen over 11 years ago
There’s an ever so slight difference in a right to bear arms and a right to be armed to the teeth with high capacity, military grade assault rifles.If someone wants a rifle for hunting or a handgun to make him feel safer in his home, I support that 100%. However, I cannot support citizens owning AK-47s and so called “cop killer” bullets. There need to be sensible limits.
Tuner38 over 11 years ago
Why anyone would want to restrict the rights of others to own property only speaks to a disrespect for that which is theirs.
tcolkett over 11 years ago
When we move past the “I believe it because Fox said it’s true” morons, and the misconceptions about the second amendment, and half baked notions of losing one’s property rights, we come to the fact that mental illness is on the rise, more and more “soldiers” return from ill conceived war zones with post traumatic stress syndromes and an unnatural comfort with assault weapons and the ability to turn off the innate moral imperative against the taking of human life. We are faced with a truly silly reluctance to regulate access to these weapons, as if, somehow, we are going to rise up against the U.S. military forces to “defend our freedom”, but, instead, we end up permitting unbalanced individuals to arm themselves and attack groups of people in the most relaxed and undefended situations, such as in schools or movie theaters or malls. I think a sane society would immediately make it harder for unbalanced personalities to acquire these weapons, whatever it takes, and it would certainly not respond to this crisis with the idea that the answer is in arming more people. Unfortunately, we don’t live in a sane society, witness the stupid responses above (and to come). We are in deep trouble over this issue.
tcolkett over 11 years ago
Appealing…but simplistic. It’s just a feel good “solution” that won’t work.
Kali39 over 11 years ago
Lots of guns are already owned by morons. What more does he want?
hippogriff over 11 years ago
mikefive: I have. They were at an adult Boy Scout meeting recruiting a genocide team to kill blacks. Except they weren’t rank and file gun nuts, but regional leaders, openly identifying themselves as such, and well-provided with membership forms, literature, etc., and bragging about how “those commies in Washington are providing the ammo.” (The NRA/Pentagon “American Marksman” program which they were hoarding).
Dtroutma over 11 years ago
I’ve shot a lot of bears, with darts, never a bullet. I’m sure quite a few of them would have liked to return the “favor”. Wiley did this toon better, many years ago.
remrafdn over 11 years ago
Notin least bit funny or realistic.
hippogriff over 11 years ago
Pete Rogan: Well, let’s see. White? most of my gene pool blew over in the 18th century, but some walked and/or paddled over some 8,000 years earlier. Christian? Bishop Martin believed it when he ordained me. Native born? Yep, 5th floor, Methodist Hospital, Dallas, TX. Paranoid? I haven’t found a psychiatrist nor clinical psychologist who thought so.Am I therefore spared? Not if I keep fighting the Nazi Revolutionary Army and other such terrorist groups! See earlier comment today.
McSpook over 11 years ago
Oh, yes, the NRA will protect us all, but if we ask for any gun ownership restrictions we are confronted with guys frothing at the mouth and screaming that “1776 will happen again.”Assault rifles are a peril; and if you need that much gun, you can’t be much of a man.