This is a great time to be a firearms manufacturer or a gun shop owner, because of idiot liberals gun sales will soar and these business will rake in huge profits and I am sure they will be thanking the wacko left all the way to the bank. This is the PMRC all over again, it will solve nothing because the 2nd amendment is not going anywhere.

Simple minded people will be focus on an inanimate object because its easy to do due to the fact it doesn't move rather than focus on the real problem. The object in question is firearms, the problem is the mentally ill roaming the streets because it violates their civil rights to involuntarily commit them to a hospital where they just might get the help they need.

I see some gun nuts that we could put up in the padded cells

No they aren't, or I wouldn't have asked them.



Gun radicals, and people with a political agenda don't ask questions; they make statements (and often through subtle use of innuendo disseminate propaganda with such statements).



There can be no agenda attached to questions; they are often just a response to statements asking for clarification of an expressed view. (it is only statements that even can have an agenda.)



As I said before, I agree.



Don't worry; my views are totally rational and my motives are pure. The only agenda I have is to see sane gun laws and justice for the American people.



You have not given me any answers, and have only repeated your statement that would deny other people their right to freedom of expression and stifle intelligent debate. Why would you want to infringe on the rights of your fellow citizens? Don't you believe that we are all equal under the law? Don't you agree with the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights in The American Constitution?



You contradict yourself. If they cannot participate in the debate, they cannot express themselves. If they can express themselves without being heard, that is of no logical use to anyone. It is discounting the opinion of your equals in law and that is the elitist view of a tyrant who would deny people their most basic of rights.



I did not implement an "extremist tactic" of any sort and resent the implication by you that I did. Clearly you know what you are saying, and so I must point out to people that you are not so innocent as you appear. YOU are the one employing propaganda techniques, specifically projection of your own tactics and extremist views, ascribing to others the very techniques you are employing and the extremist views you hold. You insidiously suggest that others are of the extremist view when it is you yourself espousing the view of an extremist with an underhanded agenda.


statistics for crimes with weapons are available thru the justice dept. I can't remember the sources but you are welcome to research it. Most of what I have read is either news stories or justice dept stats. It is not my job to remember the sources I read in order to inform you.


Thanks for nothing. I HAVE pored over many of the reports and stats from the Justice department and elsewhere, and found nothing in the way of valid statistics that support your assertion, which is what prompted me in the first place, to ask for the information that supports your claim. Since it was YOU that made the claim, the burden of proof of your claim falls upon you, not me. Since you have not backed up your assertions with verifiable evidence, you leave me no choice but to believe that your assertions are false, and that you know they are and are trying to dump your burden of proof onto me in a vain effort to make me responsible for your (deliberate?) failure in due diligence.



What is a "licensed citizen?" Obviously anyone with a licence cannot by definition be doing anything illegal. The whole idea of a licence is to have government permission to do or have what would otherwise be an unlawful to do or possess. (007's licence to kill is an excellent example). Would the recent kindergarten slaughter have been OK if Lanza had been licensed by the government to murder children?



That is entirely contingent on what limits you are talking about. It is not reasonable to be vague about precisely which limits you are referring to.



So anyone seeing the evisceration of the Constitution by government as a punishable act of treason by a government sworn by oath to uphold it is an "extremist?" Who is using scare tactics here, the people or the government?



I thank you for your directed response while noting that you didn't really answer any of my questions. You did, however confirm many of my suspicions. I now see you as an insidious extremist and propagandist who ought not be heard in any rational discussion regarding gun control. I will therefore do as you recommend and put you on the sidelines where you can rant to your heart's content about your extremist views without being heard in the rational debate about gun control. As you might say, the opinions of an extremist are not worth noting and should be ignored in any intelligent discussion or debate. I will in future ignore your irrelevant, extremist opinions.



What did she say?

This is a public forum, he asked you some good questions. You seem to have an opinion on the subject so I am interested in seeing you answer his questions.

seems like no one wants to address the real issue here, as to why all the mass shooters have been on some form of anti-psychotics when they were doing the shootings... guns are not the problem here, the pharmaceutical companies and doctors handing out pills like candy should have some of the blame also

By no one you mean the media and the government. Several people (apparently with no voice) have mentioned drugs.

Others make the lame claim that "investigators found no evidence of drugs in his apartment."

Then they simply drop the subject.

Either the shooter was a disturbed drugged out nut, or a pawn of the secret police to terrorize America into giving in to gun control.

Who were the other two people arrested and why have they "disappeared?"

When speaking of blame, let's not ignore the apparent utter failure of the legislators in not even addressing this highly important issue. It is nothing less than a gross failure in their due diligence to investigate what may be a major determining factor in mass murders, and might be ignored in order to promote unconstitutional (and therefore treasonous) reintroduction of legislation that has already been tried and proven to be a dismal failure.

Something smells rotten here, and I don't think it's wafting over from Denmark...it is probably much closer to home.

when a "doctor" prescribes a pill, it becomes legal, so they don't advertise it because the pharmaceuticals won't allow it... they want no bad press whatsoever... the government will keep it quiet so they can use it as a tool... hence, gun control

the government likes to mix half truths and half lies to keep the people ignorant, so further their agenda, whatever it may be...