The cartoon is divisive and unhelpful. A 22 rifle killed my cousin who did three tours in Vietnam. A shotgun killed his brother. Another cousin shot himself while on antidepressants.I have as much reason to hate guns as anyone, but I am also a gun owner. I like hunting, target shooting, skeet shooting, and have used a shotgun to make a drunk person who entered my first dwelling put down his own gun and leave.It is easy for me to see all sides on this issue.Mickey once posted the rules under which he lives in California. Were those the “law of the land”, I believe they would make a difference.The man depicted in this cartoon represents the tiniest percentage of NRA members, 84% of whom favor background checks. Mr. Morin would have been better off putting Mr. LaPierre out as the man making the pledge. His loyalty is not to the 2nd Amendment, or gunowners, but to gun makers for whom his organization has become a powerful lobbying group. Were every NRA member to pull out of the organization today, the NRA would still be active and vocal, they would just be getting their funding from the gun makers of the US and the rest of the world.Do not attack gunowners, most of them are sensible people who are as outraged by Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine, and Virginia Tech as the rest of us. If you direct your anger at ANYONE other than the politicians who blocked recent legislation on background checks, or the NRA leadership, not members, but leadership, then you are falling into the trap they have set for us. As long as we argue with one another, we cannot put a united front up against the real bad guys. The Gun Makers, the politicians, and the NRA LEADERSHIP.Respectfully,C.
“The libs want to get rid of the NRA so no organization will teach gun safety in America.”If you want to make wild, baseless accusations, you might as well say they’re also looking to kick puppies, fling poo at Jesus statues, and force everyone into polygamous marriages with gay animals. It’s almost as true as the crap you spew now.
Onguard, There is a Jihadist militant site on the web that has been shown on some of the news programs lately. In it, the speaker, a white skinned young man with medium brown hair, tells his viewers how they can get all of the guns they need by simply going to a local gun show.. That they’re likely to find fully automatic weapons and not have to submit to a background check and possibly not even show an I.D. He finishes by saying, “So what are you waiting for?”The current system is effectively, “aiding and abetting the enemy”. Every hunter and shooter I know supports background checks and are afraid of what will happen to their gun rights if some sensible legislation is NOT enacted. One friend told me that if another elementary school gets shot up with an assault rifle with a large capacity clip, the public is going to go nuts.You’re afraid if you give up anything, you’ll lose everything. It may well be that it’s the other way around. If you don’t support sensible, thoughtful regulation of guns, the war on guns can turn into something that NO gun owner wants to see. Not even “non objective” gun owners like me.I try to be objective and succeed often enough that only those who are certain I’m a liberal tree hugger, and the few who consider me a Republican in Name Only, will consider my objectivity in the matter to be “destroyed.”Respectfully,C.
Ok onguard. I’ll be your monkey for the moment.^This link provides proof that people can buy guns at gun shows with no background checks. Some states require that gun shop owners do a background check as if they were selling from their home, but I could go and sell my two guns to anyone who wanted them and had the money. There were others,but this one looked the most objective.^http://blogs.lawyers.com/2013/01/no-background-check-at-gun-show/^This next one shows that while most of the money the NRA receives comes from members, there is a “round up” program started by a gun dealer where in gun purchasers are persuaded at the point of sale to round up the price of their gun for money that goes into fighting anti gun legislation. While this money is voluntarily donated, a gun seller has a lot of influence over the buyer at the moment of that sale. I’ve done sales, upsales are an art. The last three paragraphs of the article talk about money the NRA receives from some gun makers.^http://factcheck.org/2013/01/do-assault-weapons-sales-pay-nra-salaries/^This next one from Business Week doesn’t give numbers but states that gun makers donate millions to the NRA. I liked the implication that gun makers are actually afraid of the NRA.^http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-14/why-gun-makers-fear-the-nra^The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms with 650,000 members supported the backchecks bill. Here is that story.^http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-14/politics/38537485_1_background-checks-gun-lobby-toomey-manchin^I’ve jumped through some hoops for you onguard.^I live in Virginia, it was much in the news that an effort to force everyone selling a gun at a gun show would have to prove that a background check had been made. It failed. There have been two gun shows within 100 miles of my home since then. I wonder if any jihadists bought guns there. I wonder if any mentally ill people bought guns there. I wonder if any gangbangers with criminal records bought guns there. There was NOTHING to stop them from doing so but the money in their pockets.^I suggest that I am much more objective on this issue than you are, sir.^I’m also not afraid of my gov’t, my police, or the soldiers who defend me. It seems that many of those who are “defending” their right to own high capacity clips, cop killer bullets, and to do it without proving they are mentally and legally allowed to do so are afraid of the men and women who serve under the flag of the United States. What are you onguard for?^You have any more questions about my comments, do your own google/bing/yahoo/ask.com searches. I’m not going to be your monkey any more.Objectively,C.
There were two troubling issues regarding the gun votes in the Senate: one, the agreement that it would require 60 votes to pass….now, if you want a lunatic registry, the senate would be a good place to start.
Second was the idea that the bills had to be defeated because of the way they were written: that there were unacceptable clauses. They must think we’re too stupid to understand the concept of introducing amendments. I submit that they may be that stupid, but we’re not. I can’t wait for the next elections.
To your item 1, that’s what the video from the jihadist stated, I quoted him. He wants to buy your guns.^To your 2nd item wanting me to find proof of Mr. LaPierre’s loyalty to gun makers, you got me. I can only draw on his statement in the 1990’s when he supported background checks, the nuanced/circumstantial presentations of various talking heads, and conversations with my friends who own guns and people I’ve spoken to at the gun store where I buy fishing bait.^ I cannot PROVE Mr. LaPierre cares more about gun makers than the 2nd Amendment. But he’s quacking like a duck, and he’s swimming like a duck. Hard to not think he’s not a duck.^I did provide links responding to the rest of your demands, but you did not mention those. Would you like the link to the Louisiana judge who released a felon who had an AK47, a 30 round capacity clip, and a 40 cal pistol in his possession when police pulled him for a traffic violation? The felon said under La.‘s new law, it was illegal for him to go to jail for possessing a firearm. The judge agreed. If it holds up, Louisiana may have to release all felons who were re-incarcerated after being found with guns. That will work with no background checks. All recently released felons can buy guns in Louisiana. Should make Mardi Gras interesting.^This is not the first time you’ve taken me to task for being a progressive moderate, Onguard. Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive Republican and he is my political role model. He banned child labor, he created the park service, and pushed forward the Panama Canal and other big projects. He was an innovator and he knew how to use the Military. Are those lib values?They used to be Republican values.^Your own lack of objectivity makes you an unqualified witness. You would suggest that I’m on the fringe left with Clark Kent. There might be a couple of conservatives who would disagree with you and there are a few liberals who have attacked me for my conservative views. Yeah… I laughed too. I try to be objective… I also have opinions based on history, philosophy, science, and 55 years of life.^Ultimately, onguard, you will see what you want to see, just like a couple of others whose names I don’t use anymore. In the future, I’ll try to avoid responding to you. You don’t want a conversation, you don’t want to build a bridge, you just want to attack people who don’t think like you. And I ain’t gonna be your monkey.Finally,C.
Ima’s comment that I quoted is absurd and has zero merit. I pointed this out with my own absurd statements. Show me Ima’s statement is based on anything remotely resembling a fact. You can’t so you just attack me and my comment.
Tue Elung-Jensen about 11 years ago
Yes, fail as in you fail to comprehend the meaning of the comic…
chazandru about 11 years ago
The cartoon is divisive and unhelpful. A 22 rifle killed my cousin who did three tours in Vietnam. A shotgun killed his brother. Another cousin shot himself while on antidepressants.I have as much reason to hate guns as anyone, but I am also a gun owner. I like hunting, target shooting, skeet shooting, and have used a shotgun to make a drunk person who entered my first dwelling put down his own gun and leave.It is easy for me to see all sides on this issue.Mickey once posted the rules under which he lives in California. Were those the “law of the land”, I believe they would make a difference.The man depicted in this cartoon represents the tiniest percentage of NRA members, 84% of whom favor background checks. Mr. Morin would have been better off putting Mr. LaPierre out as the man making the pledge. His loyalty is not to the 2nd Amendment, or gunowners, but to gun makers for whom his organization has become a powerful lobbying group. Were every NRA member to pull out of the organization today, the NRA would still be active and vocal, they would just be getting their funding from the gun makers of the US and the rest of the world.Do not attack gunowners, most of them are sensible people who are as outraged by Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine, and Virginia Tech as the rest of us. If you direct your anger at ANYONE other than the politicians who blocked recent legislation on background checks, or the NRA leadership, not members, but leadership, then you are falling into the trap they have set for us. As long as we argue with one another, we cannot put a united front up against the real bad guys. The Gun Makers, the politicians, and the NRA LEADERSHIP.Respectfully,C.
drkala about 11 years ago
Why can’t the membership change the leadership if it doesn’t represent them?
Jason Allen about 11 years ago
“The libs want to get rid of the NRA so no organization will teach gun safety in America.”If you want to make wild, baseless accusations, you might as well say they’re also looking to kick puppies, fling poo at Jesus statues, and force everyone into polygamous marriages with gay animals. It’s almost as true as the crap you spew now.
chazandru about 11 years ago
Onguard, There is a Jihadist militant site on the web that has been shown on some of the news programs lately. In it, the speaker, a white skinned young man with medium brown hair, tells his viewers how they can get all of the guns they need by simply going to a local gun show.. That they’re likely to find fully automatic weapons and not have to submit to a background check and possibly not even show an I.D. He finishes by saying, “So what are you waiting for?”The current system is effectively, “aiding and abetting the enemy”. Every hunter and shooter I know supports background checks and are afraid of what will happen to their gun rights if some sensible legislation is NOT enacted. One friend told me that if another elementary school gets shot up with an assault rifle with a large capacity clip, the public is going to go nuts.You’re afraid if you give up anything, you’ll lose everything. It may well be that it’s the other way around. If you don’t support sensible, thoughtful regulation of guns, the war on guns can turn into something that NO gun owner wants to see. Not even “non objective” gun owners like me.I try to be objective and succeed often enough that only those who are certain I’m a liberal tree hugger, and the few who consider me a Republican in Name Only, will consider my objectivity in the matter to be “destroyed.”Respectfully,C.
chazandru about 11 years ago
Ok onguard. I’ll be your monkey for the moment.^This link provides proof that people can buy guns at gun shows with no background checks. Some states require that gun shop owners do a background check as if they were selling from their home, but I could go and sell my two guns to anyone who wanted them and had the money. There were others,but this one looked the most objective.^http://blogs.lawyers.com/2013/01/no-background-check-at-gun-show/^This next one shows that while most of the money the NRA receives comes from members, there is a “round up” program started by a gun dealer where in gun purchasers are persuaded at the point of sale to round up the price of their gun for money that goes into fighting anti gun legislation. While this money is voluntarily donated, a gun seller has a lot of influence over the buyer at the moment of that sale. I’ve done sales, upsales are an art. The last three paragraphs of the article talk about money the NRA receives from some gun makers.^http://factcheck.org/2013/01/do-assault-weapons-sales-pay-nra-salaries/^This next one from Business Week doesn’t give numbers but states that gun makers donate millions to the NRA. I liked the implication that gun makers are actually afraid of the NRA.^http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-14/why-gun-makers-fear-the-nra^The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms with 650,000 members supported the backchecks bill. Here is that story.^http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-14/politics/38537485_1_background-checks-gun-lobby-toomey-manchin^I’ve jumped through some hoops for you onguard.^I live in Virginia, it was much in the news that an effort to force everyone selling a gun at a gun show would have to prove that a background check had been made. It failed. There have been two gun shows within 100 miles of my home since then. I wonder if any jihadists bought guns there. I wonder if any mentally ill people bought guns there. I wonder if any gangbangers with criminal records bought guns there. There was NOTHING to stop them from doing so but the money in their pockets.^I suggest that I am much more objective on this issue than you are, sir.^I’m also not afraid of my gov’t, my police, or the soldiers who defend me. It seems that many of those who are “defending” their right to own high capacity clips, cop killer bullets, and to do it without proving they are mentally and legally allowed to do so are afraid of the men and women who serve under the flag of the United States. What are you onguard for?^You have any more questions about my comments, do your own google/bing/yahoo/ask.com searches. I’m not going to be your monkey any more.Objectively,C.
TruthfulTheocracy about 11 years ago
¿Tu sabes que tu propia statistics are calling you a liar, si?
I Play One On TV about 11 years ago
There were two troubling issues regarding the gun votes in the Senate: one, the agreement that it would require 60 votes to pass….now, if you want a lunatic registry, the senate would be a good place to start.
Second was the idea that the bills had to be defeated because of the way they were written: that there were unacceptable clauses. They must think we’re too stupid to understand the concept of introducing amendments. I submit that they may be that stupid, but we’re not. I can’t wait for the next elections.
cjr53 about 11 years ago
Ms ima wants you to send all of your money to it.
chazandru about 11 years ago
To your item 1, that’s what the video from the jihadist stated, I quoted him. He wants to buy your guns.^To your 2nd item wanting me to find proof of Mr. LaPierre’s loyalty to gun makers, you got me. I can only draw on his statement in the 1990’s when he supported background checks, the nuanced/circumstantial presentations of various talking heads, and conversations with my friends who own guns and people I’ve spoken to at the gun store where I buy fishing bait.^ I cannot PROVE Mr. LaPierre cares more about gun makers than the 2nd Amendment. But he’s quacking like a duck, and he’s swimming like a duck. Hard to not think he’s not a duck.^I did provide links responding to the rest of your demands, but you did not mention those. Would you like the link to the Louisiana judge who released a felon who had an AK47, a 30 round capacity clip, and a 40 cal pistol in his possession when police pulled him for a traffic violation? The felon said under La.‘s new law, it was illegal for him to go to jail for possessing a firearm. The judge agreed. If it holds up, Louisiana may have to release all felons who were re-incarcerated after being found with guns. That will work with no background checks. All recently released felons can buy guns in Louisiana. Should make Mardi Gras interesting.^This is not the first time you’ve taken me to task for being a progressive moderate, Onguard. Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive Republican and he is my political role model. He banned child labor, he created the park service, and pushed forward the Panama Canal and other big projects. He was an innovator and he knew how to use the Military. Are those lib values?They used to be Republican values.^Your own lack of objectivity makes you an unqualified witness. You would suggest that I’m on the fringe left with Clark Kent. There might be a couple of conservatives who would disagree with you and there are a few liberals who have attacked me for my conservative views. Yeah… I laughed too. I try to be objective… I also have opinions based on history, philosophy, science, and 55 years of life.^Ultimately, onguard, you will see what you want to see, just like a couple of others whose names I don’t use anymore. In the future, I’ll try to avoid responding to you. You don’t want a conversation, you don’t want to build a bridge, you just want to attack people who don’t think like you. And I ain’t gonna be your monkey.Finally,C.
Jason Allen about 11 years ago
Ima’s comment that I quoted is absurd and has zero merit. I pointed this out with my own absurd statements. Show me Ima’s statement is based on anything remotely resembling a fact. You can’t so you just attack me and my comment.