I can see no one cares about this family at all. Everyone is too selfish to see the problem and the unjust acts committed on many occasions by people that we have given the right to carry weapons.

We have given these people the right to kill innocents. There is a problem here.

People just cannot show any empathy for this terrible terrible act.

NO ONE IS SAYING THEY DON'T CARE!!!!!!!! geez come on. we can care and still debate over the gun control posts because they won't help. I feel AWFUL for that family because I can imagine if that happened to my child. but what do you really want to happen to that couple??? they are in jail and could be charged with murder. not sure what you expect us to do. we can still feel for the family and just because we are debating DOEAN'T MEAN WE DON'T CARE!!!!!

How selfish of you to claim you are the only one who can feel bad about the situation! How can you claim that the only ones capable of empathy are those who agree with you? That is rude, ignorant and offensive!

for the record....they DO NOT have the right to kill anyone. that's why they are in jail and being charged

you can change the stupid acts of others

I think that it has been made clear that ppl feel for the ones hurt, why keep harping on the fact that many carry? You should look deeper for the truth about how many lives are saved by Our liberties. They are not vastly publicated in order for you to have emotions such as these.
There has been over two dozen lives saved in my state in the last six months alone by right-to-carry holders.

I have yet to see any empathy. So call it what you will and I will also.

I have yet to see any empathy for this family who lost a son to legal gun owners when he did nothing wrong.

dragoness...don't forget..YOU ended the story with a remark about gun control laws. NOT "how sad for the family"

Since when does empathy = agreeing with you?

I have yet to see any empathy. So call it what you will and I will also.

I have yet to see any empathy for this family who lost a son to legal gun owners when he did nothing wrong.

Just a few points:

The problem here was not really about guns, it was about the people who used them and their obvious lack of brain power.

The gun used was a 12 gage shotgun. This gun is legal even in England and Canada. Few gun control laws want to list shotguns unless they have a sawed off barrel under eighteen inches long.

The police in England historically did not carry handguns but commonly do now in any situation where they think they might need one. They also carry military full auto assault weapons if needed.

The land the vehicle was shot on was reported as "belonging to the subdivision". This is not public property. If true, it would be by definition, private property.

The use of guns by private citizens is what gave all of us the right to live under the laws we now enjoy and was so important controls over the government's ability to remove that right from us was added to our constitution.

There is no possible conceivable way to remove firearms from the hands of criminals except by excution after being caught.

None of that is solace to this family and the many others who have lost innocents to legal gun owners.

Empathy or sympathy?

Empathy

There is no solace for this family. Nothing will bring back their son. What about all the families whose children were saved by guns. How will you feel when some innocent child is killed in an incident that could have been averted by a firearm?

You ever stop to think how many 7 year old lives have been saved by guns?I personally don't think it would have mattered if this man had a gun,baseball bat,crow bar,or just used his fist.Obviously he was very upset over something and was out for blood.You also fail to realize that 1 in 2 people in America own guns.That is approx 175 million people.I would say the news we read about deaths by guns is extremly small compared to the number of people who own them.Gun bans do not work.Washington DC has the strictist gun ban and one of the highest crime rates.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=15304

Crime up Down Under
Since Australia's gun ban, armed robberies increase 45%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 03, 2000
1:00 am Eastern


By Jon E. Dougherty
© 2009 WorldNetDaily.com




Since Australia banned private ownership of most guns in 1996, crime has risen dramatically on that continent, prompting critics of U.S. gun control efforts to issue new warnings of what life in America could be like if Congress ever bans firearms.
After Australian lawmakers passed widespread gun bans, owners were forced to surrender about 650,000 weapons, which were later slated for destruction, according to statistics from the Australian Sporting Shooters Association.

The bans were not limited to so-called "assault" weapons or military-type firearms, but also to .22 rifles and shotguns. The effort cost the Australian government about $500 million, said association representative Keith Tidswell.

Though lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation's crime statistics tell a different story:


Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent;

Assaults are up 8.6 percent;

Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent;

In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent;

In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily;

There has been a reported "dramatic increase" in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.

At the time of the ban, which followed an April 29, 1996 shooting at a Port Arthur tourist spot by lone gunman Martin Bryant, the continent had an annual murder-by-firearm rate of about 1.8 per 100,000 persons, "a safe society by any standards," said Tidswell. But such low rates of crime and rare shootings did not deter then-Prime Minister John Howard from calling for and supporting the weapons ban.
Since the ban has been in effect, membership in the Australian Sporting Shooters Association has climbed to about 112,000 -- a 200 percent increase.

"Yup, the great results of everyone having the right to guns"

IMO...this tag at the end of the story shows little empathy. it was using a tragidy to push an agenda IMO

but since you can't read minds or hearts....you have NO right to say you are the only one that cares

None of that is solace to the family and the many others who have lost innocents to legally licensed drunk drivers. Two idiots with a weapon. It was a shot gun. Could have used a ball bat. Should we then ban ball bats?

The accounts of that happening do not outweigh situations like this one by a long shot. There is no balance there.

We selfishly cling to something which allows innocents to die at the hands of legal gun owners.

There is no justification for it. There has been no empathy shown for the family and none of the so called rights will give this family or any family in this same situation solace.

zap...don't forget about those that have illegal guns...like gangs and others wanting to commit crimes. gun laws WON'T stop them from getting them

Perhaps if the victims had a gun in their car they could have defended their family and none of this would have happened.I often go to very remote places to photograph trains and fairly often I come across idiots like these packing guns.Since I am usually alone it is not good to be in the middle of nowhere talking to a drunk redneck who would shoot me for no other reason then for the thrill of it.Taking a gun with me at least gives me a 50/50 chance I will not be a victim.