Mike Luckovich for June 19, 2016

  1. Kw eyecon 20190702 091103 r
    Kip W  almost 8 years ago

    Just don’t call something by its wrong technical name, or all your arguments against the killing of innocents are deemed void by the gunpowder fanciers (they’ll also complain that you’re not being specific enough, in hopes of getting you to put a hyphen in the wrong place).

     •  Reply
  2. Missing large
    BigShell  almost 8 years ago

    You are not going to stop the bad guys from getting whatever weapon they want. Law abiding citizens deserve to be armed as well as the bad guys.

     •  Reply
  3. Crow
    Happy Two Shoes  almost 8 years ago

    HYPOCRISY: Republicans Just Made Their Convention A Gun-Free Zone For Their Own Safety

     •  Reply
  4. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  almost 8 years ago

    The 1100 is a “semi-auto” shotgun used for bird hunting, and allows another shot faster than a pump action. The Colt 1911 was considered an “automatic” because it reloaded, even though today it’s recognized as “semi-auto”. A semi-auto can be fired nearly as fast as an auto, with better aimng. The REAL issue is MAGAZINE CAPACITY to dot massive harm.

    A rifle or shotgun, even semi-auto, with only a five round magazine cannot do harm as quickly and as massively as with a 30 or even 50 round magazine, like a barrel, or a belt-fed M-60. Which btw: having used all these types, the “gun nut” who insists on a difference between “clip”, which WAS the original loading mechanism on the M-1 Garrand, vs “magazine” is moot. In a year in Viet Nam, the word “clip” was used for the bullet carrier for either M-16s or Colt 1911’s carried by troops and officers. It’s faster to say “clip” than “magazine” when you need another one in a hurry btw.

    Of concern to me also is the “expertise” of some folks here who know, or should, the term REMF, as their “expertise” is often just Trumpish BS.

    Mike has also hit on the other real issue, we’ve turned too much of America into a battlefield, and without modern arms, and firepower, rational regulation blocked by the NRA and manufacturers, as CALLED FOR IN THE SECOND AMENDMENT; read SCALIA’s take in DC vs Heller, IS called for to reduce the carnage. Background checks and limited magazine capacity, to centerfire rifles being 5 rounds legal for hunting for instance, are simple steps that won’t immediately stop the disasters, but they are at least a start. Neither deprives legitimate citizens from owning firearms, but does when effectively enforced reduce illigimate sales and use by those who shouldn’t have them. When folks are discouraged through registration, as in New Zealand fer instance, from illegal sales and straw purchases, the numbers of those “bad guys” getting firearms drops by about 99%!

    With so many guns already out there, control will not be instant, but if we don’t start somewhere, how many kindergartners, movie goers, club or party goers, or church worshippers will continue to die? Hate btw, not “religion” is the driving force for the killings, and the weak-kneed dweebs with social media desires to make a name for themselves, will have a rougher time becoming famous, even posthumously.

     •  Reply
  5.  chevy
    Lyman Elliott Premium Member almost 8 years ago

    My father would think all this was insane. He always said that if you need more than 1 or 2 bullets to kill what you are aiming at you should not be holding a gun. Clips with 30 50 or 100 rounds are (or should be) only for military use. A case in point: Someone who worked in the same place I did was fooling around with someone’s wife. Her husband called him out and he pulled a pair of nunchucks. Her husband had a gun. If he had only shot once twice or perhaps three times he might have gotten away with self defense, but he unloaded his entire clip then reloaded and emptied that one. Far too many shots for self defense. He was charged with and convicted of murder.

     •  Reply
  6. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  almost 8 years ago

    ^Lyman: a concern about “professionals” as well. In Portland, Oregon a few years ago, a homeless street lady was thought to have a gun, the police pumped over 30 rounds into her in a panic. She was actually not armed. Even cops carrying large capacity firearms CAN BE DANGEROUS. BTW, “warning shots” should NEVER be used, by police, or citizens. That’s called immediate collateral damage.

     •  Reply
  7. Missing large
    hippogriff  almost 8 years ago

    Bruce4671Of course there are no statistics on that subject. The congressional puppets of the Nazi Revolutionary Army have outlawed the collection of them – and have been paid very well for that censorship.

     •  Reply
  8. Rachelalexandra
    TMO1 Premium Member almost 8 years ago

    The most stunning case of placing a gun in the wrong hands is that idiot mother in the Newtown case. I’ll never understand why anyone would think a person with an obviously defective brain should have access to ANY firepower, much less what she let him have. Guns are NOT THERAPEUTIC. That much-ballyhooed “American Sniper” had to learn that first-hand, too.

     •  Reply
  9. Noh8 tw
    socalvillaguy Premium Member almost 8 years ago

    Indeed.

     •  Reply
  10. Noh8 tw
    socalvillaguy Premium Member almost 8 years ago

    And so, the endless debate on gun control continues. There are so many defects in the existing gun laws (the gun show and internet sale loopholes, the no-fly list ban, undocumented private sales, etc.) that it seems to take an act of God to correct them because the NRA owns the Republican Congress (and some Democrats, no doubt). Meanwhile, America’s gun fetishism continues to grow after horrific events like what we saw in Orlando or Sandy Hook or San Bernadino and the one (lame) argument that continues to be made by pro-gun advocates is “The bad guys can get them, so I can get them to protect myself, too.” This “logic” has led to the US, just 4% of the world’s population, owning 40% of the world’s guns. Ain’t that just great?

     •  Reply
  11. Image
    alex Coke Premium Member almost 8 years ago

    Looks like the University of Texas.

     •  Reply
  12. Img 6025
    goblue86  almost 8 years ago

    I’m not sure what the “big deal” is about Orlando other than it was a large body count in one location by one shooter.

    Compare to the the 10,000 (yes, ten-thousand) deaths from guns in the US *every*single*year*

    I’ll do the math for you: that’s 27 deaths PER day, more than one an hour (that does not include the suicides by handguns which is 2X the homicide rate).

    And to think how much we “panicked” over ebola…if guns were a virus, it’d be a bona-fide health care crisis.

     •  Reply
  13. Tor johnson
    William Bednar Premium Member almost 8 years ago

    As long as people rely on any kind of weapon to resolve their differences, instead of reasoned discussions, this kind of scenario will continue to play out.

     •  Reply
  14. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  almost 8 years ago

    The Second Amendment was so we could repel INVADERS, not stage an armed coup against our own government. That “sovereign” and other nut group interpretation is dementia prime.

    There is sound reason, like the Los Angeles Bank of America robbery, that police and military outgun the “bad guys”. Thanks to the NRA and Congressional lemmings, the police have a tough time keeping up. At the same time, “conservative thinking” says giving police military armored vehicles, protective gear, and weapons is necessary to fight those with the weapons they won’t make any effort to limit.

     •  Reply
  15. Missing large
    feverjr Premium Member almost 8 years ago

    The founders did not write a suicide pact into the Constitution.When they said militia they meant it. The southern colonies had an economy based on slavery, they used militias to keep the slaves from rising up against the land owners and recover runaways. The south wanted assurances that these militias would be honored in other states if they ratified the constitution. Every free man had guns in his home in the 1700’s and was free to carry it anywhere, there was no reason to codify and protect this right.However, the southern states knew that escaped slaves could seek sanctuary in the north without this amendment. The second amendment has its roots in the protection of the south’s slave economy.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Mike Luckovich