Virginia G.Assembly defeated bill allowing guns on campus

[White_Male_Canada]

Jan. 31, 2006

Gun bill gets shot down by panel
HB 1572, which would have allowed handguns on college campuses, died in subcommittee.
By Greg Esposito
381-1675

A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly.

House Bill 1572 didn't get through the House Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety. It died Monday in the subcommittee stage, the first of several hurdles bills must overcome before becoming laws.

The bill was proposed by Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Shenandoah County, on behalf of the Virginia Citizens Defense League. Gilbert was unavailable Monday and spokesman Gary Frink would not comment on the bill's defeat other than to say the issue was dead for this General Assembly session.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."

http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658

[North_of_60]

:puke

[chefmike]

More from the prevaricating pantywaist...we know how he likes it though, don't we?
So bend over and grab those ankles, WMC!! :actionsmiley :peanutbutter :P

[Somedude21]

Actually, if there's one place that I don't think guns should be allowed, it's in educational institutions. So I suppose that I'm happy with this ruling.

[Quinn]

LMAO... Careful, Chef, you might upset Tinkerbell. Being a "panywaist" is tough enough. ROTFLAMO.......... Damn........ It just get's funnier and funnier.

-Quinn

[specialk]

LMAO... Careful, Chef, you might upset Tinkerbell. Being a "panywaist" is tough enough. ROTFLAMO.......... Damn........ It just get's funnier and funnier.

-Quinn

I believe the pantywaste in question is our own WMC

[White_Male_Canada]

More from the prevaricating pantywaist...we know how he likes it though, don't we?


The moron brigade aka 3 stooges aka the anti-intellectuals. :lol:

As dumb as the "ban all guns now" kook left. 8)

This visitation of death against Virginia Tech University this week is a direct result of gun laws banning weapons within 1,000 feet of a school -- the victim disarmament zone is as advertised once more. Sure the shooter is to blame, but Congress shares the blame not only for shootings, but for any instance of disarming citizens who could have resisted with all legal authority and use of force. Why obfuscate or discourage this legal authority?

We’ll never keep weapons – knifes, bare hands, brute force and guns – out of the hands of the criminal, but we sure can disarm the honest. This is the concept, and to announce same.

Anti-independence officials think that somehow trying something that doesn’t work simply needs more work, or at least that's the claim. Victim disarmament zones is one of the better examples of this stubbornness.

[specialk]

More from the prevaricating pantywaist...we know how he likes it though, don't we?




As dumb as the "ban all guns now" kook left.[/b] 8) .[/size] [/i]


As a gun owner I strongly resist any "ban all guns now" legislation, however I don't believe gun ownership is for everyone.

[ezed]

More from the prevaricating pantywaist...we know how he likes it though, don't we?


The moron brigade aka 3 stooges aka the anti-intellectuals. :lol:

As dumb as the "ban all guns now" kook left. 8)

This visitation of death against Virginia Tech University this week is a direct result of gun laws banning weapons within 1,000 feet of a school -- the victim disarmament zone is as advertised once more. Sure the shooter is to blame, but Congress shares the blame not only for shootings, but for any instance of disarming citizens who could have resisted with all legal authority and use of force. Why obfuscate or discourage this legal authority?

We’ll never keep weapons – knifes, bare hands, brute force and guns – out of the hands of the criminal, but we sure can disarm the honest. This is the concept, and to announce same.

Anti-independence officials think that somehow trying something that doesn’t work simply needs more work, or at least that's the claim. Victim disarmament zones is one of the better examples of this stubbornness.

You are a dope. You are a dope. you're such a fucking dope, I tried to imagine what you were trying to say....I shook my head....why are you trying to argue with a dope.

So now we should send our children off to college with a laptop, extra bedding, micellaneous starter snacks and drinks and a loaded 45 with spare clip and a license to conceal.

Man, I must nominate WMC, as the most retard fuck in the Universe! You're not actually from Canada are you? Maybe you are, and you live in a hut on a melting ice pack on Hudson Bay,

[Jamie Michelle]

Actually, if there's one place that I don't think guns should be allowed, it's in educational institutions. So I suppose that I'm happy with this ruling.

The problem with that sentiment is the ignorance it expresses thereby. Guns already weren't allowed on Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and we see what good (or rather, grievous harm) came of that.

To express such a sentiment as yours above would be akin to a person saying "I don't think tornados should be allowed in my neighborhood. Laws should be passed prohibiting them."

The fallacy with such a sentiment is that tornados don't follow laws, and neither do law-breakers. The only people who would follow those laws would be law-abiding people.

Hence, the situation that results from passing such laws is that law-abiding people are disarmed and helpless, meanwhile law-breakers will arm themselves if they so choose, and will thereby be able to victimize the law-abiders without encountering any effective resistence (since the law-abiders are disarmed)--as we saw with this recent case.

The masses obtaining more guns is a wonderful thing. More guns in the hands of the common masses results in less crime.

[White_Male_Canada]

More from the prevaricating pantywaist...we know how he likes it though, don't we?


The moron brigade aka 3 stooges aka the anti-intellectuals. :lol:

As dumb as the "ban all guns now" kook left. 8)

This visitation of death against Virginia Tech University this week is a direct result of gun laws banning weapons within 1,000 feet of a school -- the victim disarmament zone is as advertised once more. Sure the shooter is to blame, but Congress shares the blame not only for shootings, but for any instance of disarming citizens who could have resisted with all legal authority and use of force. Why obfuscate or discourage this legal authority?

We’ll never keep weapons – knifes, bare hands, brute force and guns – out of the hands of the criminal, but we sure can disarm the honest. This is the concept, and to announce same.

Anti-independence officials think that somehow trying something that doesn’t work simply needs more work, or at least that's the claim. Victim disarmament zones is one of the better examples of this stubbornness.

You are a dope. You are a dope. you're such a fucking dope, I tried to imagine what you were trying to say....I shook my head....why are you trying to argue with a dope.

So now we should send our children off to college with a laptop, extra bedding, micellaneous starter snacks and drinks and a loaded 45 with spare clip and a license to conceal.

Man, I must nominate WMC, as the most retard fuck in the Universe! You're not actually from Canada are you? Maybe you are, and you live in a hut on a melting ice pack on Hudson Bay,

Let`s take a look at some facts.

1. To carry in Virg. one must be age 21 or older.

2. A US Citizen.

3. To obtain a carry permit must attend court.

4. Pass background check.

5. Pass profiency check.

6. Children attend elementary schools.Adults attend universities.

7. State universities are liable for gross negligence.

So based on these FACTS the only conclusion one can draw is that it is you yourself who is " the most retard fuck in the Universe". 8)

[Somedude21]

Actually, if there's one place that I don't think guns should be allowed, it's in educational institutions. So I suppose that I'm happy with this ruling.

The problem with that sentiment is the ignorance it expresses thereby. Guns already weren't allowed on Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and we see what good (or rather, grievous harm) came of that.

To express such a sentiment as yours above would be akin to a person saying "I don't think tornados should be allowed in my neighborhood. Laws should be passed prohibiting them."

The fallacy with such a sentiment is that tornados don't follow laws, and neither do law-breakers. The only people who would follow those laws would be law-abiding people.

Hence, the situation that results from passing such laws is that law-abiding people are disarmed and helpless, meanwhile law-breakers will arm themselves if they so choose, and will thereby be able to victimize the law-abiders without encountering any effective resistence (since the law-abiders are disarmed)--as we saw with this recent case.

The masses obtaining more guns is a wonderful thing. More guns in the hands of the common masses results in less crime.

True, as proven by Florida, more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens does reduce crime (or at least gun homicides). However, I still have to argue that on a place that's supposed to be a center for learning that students should be allowed to walk around with guns. Hell, with that line of thinking, why don't we allow high schoolers to carry guns too? No, I wouldn't think that would help anything. However, maybe security guards should be allowed to carry firearms? On campuses I can see that. But there is no way that I would want to see guns in the hands of students while on campus. The actions of the few should not dictate the actions of the many--or in more simple terms, just because one crazed lunatic decides to go and shoot up a school, it doesn't mean that it's going to happen everywhere, and thus everyone should get a gun.

[chefmike]

By all means, arm the frat houses!

Idiots.

[ezed]

Let`s take a look at some facts.

1. To carry in Virg. one must be age 21 or older.

2. A US Citizen.

3. To obtain a carry permit must attend court.

4. Pass background check.

5. Pass profiency check.

6. Children attend elementary schools.Adults attend universities.

7. State universities are liable for gross negligence.

So based on these FACTS the only conclusion one can draw is that it is you yourself who is " the most retard fuck in the Universe". 8)

Eeehh! No Man. You're the most retard fuck in the Universe. It's official.

[North_of_60]

The second amendment is from 1791 when men where fighting indians and savage animals with one shot muskets. This is totally irrelevant in 2007.

There are over 200 million fire arms circulating in the US. Each year, over 30,000 US citizens dies from fire arms. The gun factory is working 24 hours a day. Once in a while, these high tech babies must serve...

Give citizens more guns and sickos like Cho will start blowing themself like the kamikazes in the Middle-East.

[White_Male_Canada]

The second amendment is from 1791 when men where fighting indians and savage animals with one shot muskets. This is totally irrelevant in 2007.

.

That is not why the right to bear arms was the second right written after the right to free speech.

The right to bear arms can be traced back to Lk22:36. It`s a God given right. Peter carried a sword, just like the roman cops did. Peter used his sword and God told him to sheath it, not throw it away.

[White_Male_Canada]

By all means, arm the frat houses!

Idiots.

The only idiots in here would be you and the other 2 stooges.

What don`t you understand about Virginia laws, you must be age 21.

Fucking moron, your eyesight now match your incontinence in it`s severity?

Back to your corner ya old fart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After two armed southwest Virginia law students stopped a campus shooting rampage in January, a Second Amendment group at a northern Virginia law school decided it was time to change their own school's ban on guns.

"We are trying to build a detailed and persuasive brief that would include statistics on increases in safety, decreases in violent crime when you do have concealed carry permit holders in a jurisdiction," said Orest J. Jowyk, president of the Second Amendment group at George Mason University School of Law.

"I think the middle ground is to allow concealed handgun permit holders to carry just like they can anywhere else in Virginia," he said. "You provide extra safety to the student body that way."

Jowyk began researching his law school's gun policy following the January incident in which a disgruntled student at Appalachian Law School, Peter Odighizuwa, allegedly shot and killed the school's dean, a professor and a student on campus before being subdued by two armed students, Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges.

Gross and Bridges reportedly ran to their cars to fetch their own guns and returned to confront Odighizuwa, who surrendered after allegedly initiating a fistfight.

Jowyk was heartened by the students' intervention. But looking into GMU's gun policy, Jowyk found to his dismay that the school's board of visitors had in 1995 passed a ban on all weapons, concealed or otherwise, except by law enforcement officials.

Anyone who violates the school's gun ban would face administrative repercussions but not criminal charges, according to Jowyk.

Then in April, Virginia's Democratic governor, Mark Warner, signed a law prohibiting local governments from using administrative rules to pass gun restrictions that go beyond existing state law.

[North_of_60]

The right to bear arms can be traced back to Lk22:36. It`s a God given right. Peter carried a sword, just like the roman cops did. Peter used his sword and God told him to sheath it, not throw it away.

You are pathetic.


Sodomites provoking the wrath of God...

[chefmike]

The right to bear arms can be traced back to Lk22:36. It`s a God given right. Peter carried a sword, just like the roman cops did. Peter used his sword and God told him to sheath it, not throw it away.

You are pathetic.


Sodomites provoking the wrath of God...

And God said to White_Male_Pantywaist:

"Thou shalt take it up the ass!"

[White_Male_Canada]

The right to bear arms can be traced back to Lk22:36. It`s a God given right. Peter carried a sword, just like the roman cops did. Peter used his sword and God told him to sheath it, not throw it away.

You are pathetic.




And you pipsqueek, are an anti-intellectual idiot.

Here moron, allow me to distill all the reading you would have to do down to this:

"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." Zachariah Johnson, 3 Elliot,Debates at 646.

"THE great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun." Patrick Henry,3Elliot, Debates at 386.

"A "FREE people ought... to be armed..." George Washington, speech of january 7, 1790 in Boston Independent Chronicle, January 14, 1790

"THE best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed" Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8.

"ARMS in the hands of citizens (may) be used at individual discretion... in private self defence... "-John Adams'A defense of the Constitutions of the Government of the USA' 471 (1788).

"NO Free man shall EVER be debarred the use of arms"- Thomas Jefferson' Proposal Virginia Constitution' 1 T.J. Papers' 334 (C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950)


"A MILITIA, when properly formed, are in fact THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES... & include ALL men capable of bearing arms". -Richard Henry Lee, Additional Letters from the federal Farmer (1788) at 169.

"I ASK, sir, what is the militia? It is the WHOLE PEOPLE, except for a few public officials" -George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426.

"THE Constitution shall never be construed... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms". Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,86-87.


"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize,& as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens,the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear arms".- Tench Coxe in "Remarks on the first part of the amendments to the federal constitution". Under the pseudonym "A Pennsylvanian" in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at col. 1.

"Notwithstanding the military establishments in several kingdoms of europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments ARE AFRAID TO TRUST THE PEOPLE WITH ARMS. " FEDERALIST PAPERS XLVI PUBLIUS (Madison)

"GUARD WITH JEALOUS ATTENTION THE PUBLIC LIBERTY.SUSPECT EVERY ONE WHO APPROACHES THAT JEWEL.UNFORTUNATELY,NOTHING WILL PRESERVE IT, BUT DOWNRIGHT FORCE;WHENEVER YOU GIVE UP THAT FORCE,YOU ARE INAVITABLY RUINED' PATRICK HENRY 5JUNE1788

Class dismissed, Morons. 8)

[Quinn]

Careful there, Chef and North_of_60. You don't want White_Male_Bottom to get all fem on you and have one of his sissy fits.

-Quinn

[tsafficianado]

North_of_60 offers up the following nonsense

Each year, over 30,000 US citizens dies from fire arms.

Actually, the number is about 12,000. Of course, 30,000 sounds better so we can't blame you for trying. Fortunately your information is much more salient than your opinion. And about as accurate as your grammar.

[ezed]

The second amendment is from 1791 when men where fighting indians and savage animals with one shot muskets. This is totally irrelevant in 2007.

.

That is not why the right to bear arms was the second right written after the right to free speech.

The right to bear arms can be traced back to Lk22:36. It`s a God given right. Peter carried a sword, just like the roman cops did. Peter used his sword and God told him to sheath it, not throw it away.

Little Stanley, was right. This man is nuttier than a fruit cake. Wouldn't surprise me if he fucked baby seals and clubbed them over the head while saying it's my right as a Canadien fruitcake.

[yodajazz]

I don't think you guys are up for any common sense, but I'll try. I went to college. Even 21 year olds in college, away from much adult supervision are not mature enough to have free access to firearms.

So they are supposed to take loaded weapons to class? There would far more danger from the increased weapontry than the protective value. One time in college I drove a car dangerously, endandering my passengers because I was upset over a romantic relationship. No one was hurt, but having access to guns would not have helped anything.

[ezed]

I don't think you guys are up for any common sense, but I'll try. I went to college. Even 21 year olds in college, away from much adult supervision are not mature enough to have free access to firearms.

So they are supposed to take loaded weapons to class? There would far more danger from the increased weapontry than the protective value. One time in college I drove a car dangerously, endandering my passengers because I was upset over a romantic relationship. No one was hurt, but having access to guns would not have helped anything.

While attending college in Boston in the 70's, I had a workstudy job as a mortgage collector in Boston. My territory was Roxbury and Dorchester. After my first day in the field with a sixty year old bigot/hardass making the rounds, I ask my boss if I could get a gun. He said "Yeah, sure get a permit." I thought about it long and hard and came back to him and said fuck it, I'll take my chances.

Had some close calls in Boston, NYC (Bronx, Harlem, Bedford Sty), New Orleans. Never had a gun, but had a sense of humor and sense of compassion. And I'm still posting.

Arming kids is not the answer. I did not want the responsiblity. In the heat of the moment I was never sure I could act correctly. I'd rather rely on my wits.

[Tara Emory]

Actually, if there's one place that I don't think guns should be allowed, it's in educational institutions. So I suppose that I'm happy with this ruling.

The problem with that sentiment is the ignorance it expresses thereby. Guns already weren't allowed on Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and we see what good (or rather, grievous harm) came of that.

To express such a sentiment as yours above would be akin to a person saying "I don't think tornados should be allowed in my neighborhood. Laws should be passed prohibiting them."

The fallacy with such a sentiment is that tornados don't follow laws, and neither do law-breakers. The only people who would follow those laws would be law-abiding people.

Hence, the situation that results from passing such laws is that law-abiding people are disarmed and helpless, meanwhile law-breakers will arm themselves if they so choose, and will thereby be able to victimize the law-abiders without encountering any effective resistence (since the law-abiders are disarmed)--as we saw with this recent case.

The masses obtaining more guns is a wonderful thing. More guns in the hands of the common masses results in less crime.

Once again, I have to disagree with Jamie Michelle, but only mildly, because there is a certain logic to what she is saying.

Sure, the only people who would follow the (postulated) law (that students should carry arms legally too) would be law abiding citizens, but what kind of campus would that be? Students - yes, STUDENTS would be brandishing guns left and right- because they now had a "right" to. I can easily visualise a situation where a teacher (who is not armed) has an armed student approaching thier desk, letting the teacher see just the butt of their concealed pistol.. Were I that teacher, I would think twice about the consequences of giving that kid a bad grade.

Arming EVERYBODY just adds to the stress level and you might say that arming everybody means less crime-where are your figures to back this up? It seems that we are rapidly approaching a situation where nearly everybody is armed, and I don't think anyone would agree that there is less crime. I can think of one place where everyone had guns for protection or not.. Can you find it one the map and tell me that they don't have massacres every day?

And okay, lets argue gun control. Anyone who is a gun owner you and me, let's argue gun control! Let's try it. i'll state my opinion and you'll state yours. Oh Wait, you're PACKING HEAT? Sorta puts me already at a disadvantage! And some of y'all, like White Male Canada- get soooo emotional about their pro-gun stance, that you're one or two steps away from writing your own manifesto against "libtards" before jumping on a gun toting rampage yourself. Come'on, given the right circumstances, you can be a mass killer too! Which brings me to my new favorite quote, which I think I made up myself, but I'm sure someone else already came up with. Anyway, here it is.

Guns don't kill people, GUN ENTHUSIASTS kill people.

If you argue about the accuracy of article about the VT killer mentioning that he bought a "22mm" or a ".22 gun", you might be a gun enthusiast!

If you need to own guns so that you can use them to protect..... your prized gun collection, yep! you're a gun enthusiast!

Okay, so I've never been mugged, and my house have never been robbed. As a TS, I have been in couple of sticky situations with men, but NEVER ina situation where a adding a gun to the equation would have made things better. And I have dated men only to find out that they are into guns (and they ALWAYS say they need to protect themselves, or their stuff, or from the guy who wants to break into their house and steal their $40 DVD player or some idiot nonsense), and that's where I draw the line.. Because to me, it's an instant threat over my head.. Guess I shouldn't cross this guy, because he might shoot me later if he gets to obsessed with me.

And oh yeah, you CAN buy your guns when you are sane, and go nuts later on. Although apparently in Virginia, you can be declared "a threat to yourself and others" by a judge in 2005, and still buy guns legally.

Something's wrong. I can't put my finger on it, but something is wrong.. And I hope my finger isn't on a trigger..

-Tara

[North_of_60]

tsafficianado wants to have a talk, and even offers me a little lesson of english...


North_of_60 offers up the following nonsense

Each year, over 30,000 US citizens dies from fire arms.

Actually, the number is about 12,000. Of course, 30,000 sounds better so we can't blame you for trying. Fortunately your information is much more salient than your opinion. And about as accurate as your grammar.

This from my infos...

According to Americans for Gun Safety (AGS, www.americansforgunsafety.com), a new centrist organization that supports a “gun rights, as well as gun responsibilities” approach, the United States loses over 30,000 men, women and children to gun violence every year. On top of that, about 90,000 Americans of all ages are injured by guns each year.

Yes, my grammar is total shit. I'm practicing on a TS board ; my english teacher would be poud of me. :P

Now, tsafficianado, let me tell you : this is our first talk and you got yourself way too close to me. Stepback. It stinks. Is this salient enough, or do want me to be more accurate and spell F-U-C-K O-F-F to you ?

[tsafficianado]

North_of_60
I apologize for the grammar shot, I post on a number of boards and am constantly amazed at the miserable grammar skills of supposedly intelligent posters. It is apparent that this board is more international in scope than those I normally frequent and I will have to learn to be more patient. If in fact English is your second language then you are doing very well. So for that, my apologies.
The number of Americans killed in civilian crime each year is on the order of 12,000. The figure you are quoting includes suicides and I do not consider that part of the equation. It offers an expedient solution, but someone who wants to bring an abrupt end to their own life certainly has a variety of options.
Certainly the 12,000 figure in itself is reason for pause. Canada has one tenth the population of the US, about half the per capita rate of gun ownership and a firearm murder rate that is 2% of the rate in the US, so on the surface it would appear that there is something culturally askew in the US and that the broad availability of guns and the cultural penchant to own are not universally correlated with high rates of gun violence.

[LG]

tsafficianado wants to have a talk, and even offers me a little lesson of english...


North_of_60 offers up the following nonsense

Each year, over 30,000 US citizens dies from fire arms.

Actually, the number is about 12,000. Of course, 30,000 sounds better so we can't blame you for trying. Fortunately your information is much more salient than your opinion. And about as accurate as your grammar.

This from my infos...

According to Americans for Gun Safety (AGS, www.americansforgunsafety.com), a new centrist organization that supports a “gun rights, as well as gun responsibilities” approach, the United States loses over 30,000 men, women and children to gun violence every year. On top of that, about 90,000 Americans of all ages are injured by guns each year.

Yes, my grammar is total shit. I'm practicing on a TS board ; my english teacher would be poud of me. :P

Now, tsafficianado, let me tell you : this is our first talk and you got yourself way too close to me. Stepback. It stinks. Is this salient enough, or do want me to be more accurate and spell F-U-C-K O-F-F to you ?

Oooh, things are getting nasty here...

Since we're talking about proper English, I'd just like to note that the word is AFICIONADO (with an 'o' and not an 'a') with AFFICIONADO (again with an 'o', but with double 'f') an acceptable variant. Nothing personal, there, just a factual statement.

And, before you ask, English is my second language.

[LG]

Actually, if there's one place that I don't think guns should be allowed, it's in educational institutions. So I suppose that I'm happy with this ruling.

The problem with that sentiment is the ignorance it expresses thereby. Guns already weren't allowed on Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and we see what good (or rather, grievous harm) came of that.

To express such a sentiment as yours above would be akin to a person saying "I don't think tornados should be allowed in my neighborhood. Laws should be passed prohibiting them."

The fallacy with such a sentiment is that tornados don't follow laws, and neither do law-breakers. The only people who would follow those laws would be law-abiding people.

Hence, the situation that results from passing such laws is that law-abiding people are disarmed and helpless, meanwhile law-breakers will arm themselves if they so choose, and will thereby be able to victimize the law-abiders without encountering any effective resistence (since the law-abiders are disarmed)--as we saw with this recent case.

The masses obtaining more guns is a wonderful thing. More guns in the hands of the common masses results in less crime.

Once again, I have to disagree with Jamie Michelle, but only mildly, because there is a certain logic to what she is saying.

Sure, the only people who would follow the (postulated) law (that students should carry arms legally too) would be law abiding citizens, but what kind of campus would that be? Students - yes, STUDENTS would be brandishing guns left and right- because they now had a "right" to. I can easily visualise a situation where a teacher (who is not armed) has an armed student approaching thier desk, letting the teacher see just the butt of their concealed pistol.. Were I that teacher, I would think twice about the consequences of giving that kid a bad grade.

Arming EVERYBODY just adds to the stress level and you might say that arming everybody means less crime-where are your figures to back this up? It seems that we are rapidly approaching a situation where nearly everybody is armed, and I don't think anyone would agree that there is less crime. I can think of one place where everyone had guns for protection or not.. Can you find it one the map and tell me that they don't have massacres every day?

And okay, lets argue gun control. Anyone who is a gun owner you and me, let's argue gun control! Let's try it. i'll state my opinion and you'll state yours. Oh Wait, you're PACKING HEAT? Sorta puts me already at a disadvantage! And some of y'all, like White Male Canada- get soooo emotional about their pro-gun stance, that you're one or two steps away from writing your own manifesto against "libtards" before jumping on a gun toting rampage yourself. Come'on, given the right circumstances, you can be a mass killer too! Which brings me to my new favorite quote, which I think I made up myself, but I'm sure someone else already came up with. Anyway, here it is.

Guns don't kill people, GUN ENTHUSIASTS kill people.

If you argue about the accuracy of article about the VT killer mentioning that he bought a "22mm" or a ".22 gun", you might be a gun enthusiast!

If you need to own guns so that you can use them to protect..... your prized gun collection, yep! you're a gun enthusiast!

Okay, so I've never been mugged, and my house have never been robbed. As a TS, I have been in couple of sticky situations with men, but NEVER ina situation where a adding a gun to the equation would have made things better. And I have dated men only to find out that they are into guns (and they ALWAYS say they need to protect themselves, or their stuff, or from the guy who wants to break into their house and steal their $40 DVD player or some idiot nonsense), and that's where I draw the line.. Because to me, it's an instant threat over my head.. Guess I shouldn't cross this guy, because he might shoot me later if he gets to obsessed with me.

And oh yeah, you CAN buy your guns when you are sane, and go nuts later on. Although apparently in Virginia, you can be declared "a threat to yourself and others" by a judge in 2005, and still buy guns legally.

Something's wrong. I can't put my finger on it, but something is wrong.. And I hope my finger isn't on a trigger..

-Tara

Wonderfully put Tara. A girl with brains as well as looks.

[North_of_60]

Certainly the 12,000 figure in itself is reason for pause. Canada has one tenth the population of the US, about half the per capita rate of gun ownership and a firearm murder rate that is 2% of the rate in the US, so on the surface it would appear that there is something culturally askew in the US and that the broad availability of guns and the cultural penchant to own are not universally correlated with high rates of gun violence.

Here are some stats from 1998. 30,708 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths - 12,102 (39%) of those were murdered; 17,424 (57%) were suicides; 866 (3%) were accidents; and in 316 (1%) the intent was unknown.

So we both agree on the premiss. Whether suicide counts or not is another issue. You seem like a clever person and that's why I overreacted a bit. The only insults I take here are those from White Male Clusterfuck... cause everybody knows he's mentally challenged.

[White_Male_Canada]

Certainly the 12,000 figure in itself is reason for pause. Canada has one tenth the population of the US, about half the per capita rate of gun ownership and a firearm murder rate that is 2% of the rate in the US, so on the surface it would appear that there is something culturally askew in the US and that the broad availability of guns and the cultural penchant to own are not universally correlated with high rates of gun violence.

Here are some stats from 1998. 30,708 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths - 12,102 (39%) of those were murdered; 17,424 (57%) were suicides; 866 (3%) were accidents; and in 316 (1%) the intent was unknown.

So we both agree on the premiss. Whether suicide counts or not is another issue. You seem like a clever person and that's why I overreacted a bit. The only insults I take here are those from White Male Clusterfuck... cause everybody knows he's mentally challenged.

More BS from the NDP canuck. More people die in car accidents, let`s ban cars/sarc off.

The facts are incontrovertible. The second amendment allows citizens to own firearms,period,end of story.What the radical left wants is people control, not gun control.
Research has proven that states that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60% and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80%.

[insert_namehere]

Just as a point of fact - I've been shot, and shot at - by folks who where either believed they were protecting their property/life with a handgun or enjoying the great American autumn pastime of going out into the woods with the proper license and firing away at things that move in the hopes of actually kitting the thing they had a license for.

In both instances, these folks acted in an irresponsible manner.

When I was shot, I was living in an apartment above a fellow that had a handgun for protection. I have no idea whether someone was actually breaking in to his place or not, but the first I knew about anything was when I woke up in agony from a sound sleep in my bed because the bullet he fired when through his ceiling, through MY bedroom floor, through my boxspring and mattress and into my hip. Trust me, until you've been the recipient of a .50 caliber Action Express slug (at least, that's what the investigating officer told me and I have no reason to doubt the veracity of said cop), you have no idea how frail your skeletal system really is. The state I was living in had passed a "Make my Day" law - unfortunately, most of the folks that stuck firearms around their homes after the law went into effect really didn't understand what it covers and what it doesn't. In this instance, they guy downstairs was charged with reckless endangerment, illegal discharge of a deadly weapon in violation of local municipal ordinances and assault. The police were anxious for me to press the assault charge - however, I felt the guy was just an irresponsible dork. Since I was suing him in a civil case to recover my medical expenses, loss of livelihood for several months, etc. - I would rather have him WORKING to earn the money he eventually had to pay me (as well as my legal fees, court costs, etc. - which wound to be pretty substantive), I'd rather have him free to KEEP working rather than sitting in some country lockup wondering if orange was really HIS color. I still have a slight limp - cannot jog or run for more than 20 minutes without my hip feeling like it's been pounded on with a ball-peen hammer, suffer agonies when the barometer shifts radically and any sport like basketball, where being able to cut right or left immediately is right out of the question.

I try to be a fair and equitable guy. I'm the first to recognize that life, in and of itself ISN'T equitable - not everything that happens to us in this world is justified on some cosmic scale wherein the good guys only have good stuff happen and the bad guys receive their just desserts. Life doesn't work that way.

On the other hand, the chances of me being shot by someone who felt they were within their legal rights to do so would have been significantly reduced if there were some sort of gun control in place in this country. I will grant you, being shot in the hip by a guy violating the law would have felt pretty much the same, but when you look at the statistics behind handgun accidents versus criminal violence perpetrated with handguns, I think you can see my point.

Well, actually - I amend that to say, those who aren't huge handgun fans will see my point.

[Tara Emory]

Certainly the 12,000 figure in itself is reason for pause. Canada has one tenth the population of the US, about half the per capita rate of gun ownership and a firearm murder rate that is 2% of the rate in the US, so on the surface it would appear that there is something culturally askew in the US and that the broad availability of guns and the cultural penchant to own are not universally correlated with high rates of gun violence.

Here are some stats from 1998. 30,708 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths - 12,102 (39%) of those were murdered; 17,424 (57%) were suicides; 866 (3%) were accidents; and in 316 (1%) the intent was unknown.

So we both agree on the premiss. Whether suicide counts or not is another issue. You seem like a clever person and that's why I overreacted a bit. The only insults I take here are those from White Male Clusterfuck... cause everybody knows he's mentally challenged.

More BS from the NDP canuck. More people die in car accidents, let`s ban cars/sarc off.

The facts are incontrovertible. The second amendment allows citizens to own firearms,period,end of story.What the radical left wants is people control, not gun control.
Research has proven that states that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60% and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80%.

okay.. so it reduced "multiple shooting attacks". That's a pretty specific fact, and I wonder where you got it from. What are the stats for just "single shooting attacks" from places that allow citizens to carry conceled weapons? It seems like you're cherry picking facts that fit your arguement.

And your generalizations about liberals really shows- not so much your political leaning, but your general hatred towards people who don't think like you. "Libreals want people control" you say. Wow, how full of BS is that? Unfortunately WMC, you don't know any liberals, so that's why so have all these wild theories about them. And you don't want to get to know any liberals, because you might see how wrong about them you are. We liberals want gun control because we're PACIFISTS, that's why! Pansy ass pacifists, who want to spread peace and prosperity and stability to all people- which would help reduce violence. I swear to god I think that you people go around thinking that liberals are all like "man! I can't wait to get my hands on that tax money to use it irresponsibly"

You think you're good, and liberals are evil, and that you have a right to defend yourself against evil.. That sort of us-or-them mentality is what makes people start wars and all that crap. Sure that's a sweeping generalization, but that's the heart of all conflicts, when you can demonize your enemy so much that they are no longer human. To you, "libtards" are not human.. Well, fuck you too. Why don't you get to know some of us and our motovations instead of making us the enemy.. We both want the same solutions to the world's problems.

And your logic of "oh yeah, If cars cause car accidents, then why don't we ban cars- duh" Well, nuclear weapons kill people, chemical weapons kill people, and I hardly hear anyone going around defending nuclear weapons or chemical weapons (like it's not the anthax's fault, its the fault of the nut who used it!). In the case of the VT shooting the weapons of choice is guns- plural, A LOT of guns and LOT of ammo. Let me get one thing straight- I'm not too bothered by anyone owning one or two guns. but the sheer amount of firepower this guy had- yeah, that should be controlled. Anyone who thinks they need a friggin arsenal is a gun nut amd just plain nuts-

I know why the 2nd amendment is there- essentially its a check on the government that if it gets out of hand, we can take it over by force like the original Revolution.. I get that, and I actually believe it. However, I don't like the idea of the government (or me) feeling threatened by gun owners, who are basically saying they want to overthrow the government if they take away their 2nd amendment rights- which if that's not a self fullfilling prophecy, I don't know what is.

-Tara

[yodajazz]

Just as a point of fact - I've been shot, and shot at - by folks who where either believed they were protecting their property/life with a handgun or enjoying the great American autumn pastime of going out into the woods with the proper license and firing away at things that move in the hopes of actually kitting the thing they had a license for.

In both instances, these folks acted in an irresponsible manner.

When I was shot, I was living in an apartment above a fellow that had a handgun for protection. I have no idea whether someone was actually breaking in to his place or not, but the first I knew about anything was when I woke up in agony from a sound sleep in my bed because the bullet he fired when through his ceiling, through MY bedroom floor, through my boxspring and mattress and into my hip. Trust me, until you've been the recipient of a .50 caliber Action Express slug (at least, that's what the investigating officer told me and I have no reason to doubt the veracity of said cop), you have no idea how frail your skeletal system really is. The state I was living in had passed a "Make my Day" law - unfortunately, most of the folks that stuck firearms around their homes after the law went into effect really didn't understand what it covers and what it doesn't. In this instance, they guy downstairs was charged with reckless endangerment, illegal discharge of a deadly weapon in violation of local municipal ordinances and assault. The police were anxious for me to press the assault charge - however, I felt the guy was just an irresponsible dork. Since I was suing him in a civil case to recover my medical expenses, loss of livelihood for several months, etc. - I would rather have him WORKING to earn the money he eventually had to pay me (as well as my legal fees, court costs, etc. - which wound to be pretty substantive), I'd rather have him free to KEEP working rather than sitting in some country lockup wondering if orange was really HIS color. I still have a slight limp - cannot jog or run for more than 20 minutes without my hip feeling like it's been pounded on with a ball-peen hammer, suffer agonies when the barometer shifts radically and any sport like basketball, where being able to cut right or left immediately is right out of the question.

I try to be a fair and equitable guy. I'm the first to recognize that life, in and of itself ISN'T equitable - not everything that happens to us in this world is justified on some cosmic scale wherein the good guys only have good stuff happen and the bad guys receive their just desserts. Life doesn't work that way.

On the other hand, the chances of me being shot by someone who felt they were within their legal rights to do so would have been significantly reduced if there were some sort of gun control in place in this country. I will grant you, being shot in the hip by a guy violating the law would have felt pretty much the same, but when you look at the statistics behind handgun accidents versus criminal violence perpetrated with handguns, I think you can see my point.

Well, actually - I amend that to say, those who aren't huge handgun fans will see my point.

I just want to acknowledge you for sharing your experience. I have to respect your opinion, more because of it.

I was robbed at gunpoint last year. He got like $3.50. Even if I had a gun then, it would have been worth it.

Another point that I want to add to this discussion is that I believe that guns have to increase the suicide rate because it can be instantaneous once you get that finger on the trigger. In other words, a suicide death by a handgun is still a death by a handgun.

[White_Male_Canada]

Certainly the 12,000 figure in itself is reason for pause. Canada has one tenth the population of the US, about half the per capita rate of gun ownership and a firearm murder rate that is 2% of the rate in the US, so on the surface it would appear that there is something culturally askew in the US and that the broad availability of guns and the cultural penchant to own are not universally correlated with high rates of gun violence.

Here are some stats from 1998. 30,708 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths - 12,102 (39%) of those were murdered; 17,424 (57%) were suicides; 866 (3%) were accidents; and in 316 (1%) the intent was unknown.

So we both agree on the premiss. Whether suicide counts or not is another issue. You seem like a clever person and that's why I overreacted a bit. The only insults I take here are those from White Male Clusterfuck... cause everybody knows he's mentally challenged.

More BS from the NDP canuck. More people die in car accidents, let`s ban cars/sarc off.

The facts are incontrovertible. The second amendment allows citizens to own firearms,period,end of story.What the radical left wants is people control, not gun control.
Research has proven that states that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60% and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80%.

okay.. so it reduced "multiple shooting attacks". That's a pretty specific fact, and I wonder where you got it from. What are the stats for just "single shooting attacks" from places that allow citizens to carry conceled weapons?

You think you're good, and liberals are evil, and that you have a right to defend yourself against evil..

-Tara

I suggest that you never become a firearms owner. To imply I`m going to begin to shoot leftists is utter clap-trap and allows us a glimpse into the mind of a leftist whom we would never trust with any dangerous inanimate object, be it a large knife, longbow, firearm, chainsaw, weedwhacker.

In one post you postulate that "...what kind of campus would that be? Students - yes, STUDENTS would be brandishing guns left and right- because they now had a "right" to" thereby suggesting some people be barred from ever owning firearms,specifically young adults. That argument is patently ridiculous(see links below). On the other hand you grudgingly admit the right to self-defense.

Statistical data proves the right to bear arms help reduce certain crimes. Simply slog through county-level data from 3,054 counties in all 50 states, crunch the numbers and voila. The only argument against the data is to state, " well the violence was cyclical in nature and was gonna go down anyway." Seriously, that is the argument of the left.

It is unfortunate that there are those who buy firearms and never allow time for training then have accidental discharges and shootings. It happens to the best of them, even police officers have discharged firearms mistakenly.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - MIT edged out host and defending champion U.S. Military Academy by seven points (6,372-6,365) to secure the pistol program's fifth NRA Intercollegiate National Championship and second in three years.(PS: take a gander at the pic of all those evil almond-eyed gun owners, Ooohhh double scary!/sarc off.)

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=17820


One tough beauty queenVenus Ramey, 82, shoots tire, stops intruders

Venus Ramey has earned lots of fame in her 82 years.
She was Miss America 1944 and later a candidate for Cincinnati City Council and worked to save Over-the-Rhine's historic buildings. She performed on Broadway and in movies.
Now, though, she's in the news for another reason.

After confronting a man she said was stealing from her Kentucky farm, Ramey pulled out a gun and shot out a tire on his truck so he couldn't leave, allowing police to arrest him and two others.
"He was probably wetting his pants," Ramey said Thursday from her home in Waynesburg, about 140 miles south of Cincinnati.
She had to balance on her walking stick as she pulled out a snub-nosed .38-caliber handgun.
"I didn't even think twice. I just went and did it. If they'd even dared come close to me, they'd be 6 feet under by now."

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070420/NEWS01/704200369

[svenson]

I like toping Tgirls aka chicks with dicks. I also like being topped by men. Makes me feel like a panywaist after but it feels so good. 8)

[North_of_60]

"More guns" is, in no way, a solution.

Your beloved 2nd amendment is referring to a well regulated armed milicia, not the right to bear a Gluck 9mm handgun.

I know you love stats so I've been digging some more for you :

* Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 43 times more likely to kill a family member or friend than to kill in self-defense. [ Kellermann and Reay, N.E. Journal of Medicine]

* American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.

Nine out of ten young people who are murdered in industrialized countries are slain in the United States [United Nations Children’s Fund report, "The Progress of Nations" quoted in St. Paul Pioneer Press, 9/26/93].

* In 1996, 2 people were murdered by handguns in New Zealand, 15 in Japan, 106 in Canada, 213 in Germany, and 9,390 in the United States. [FBI Uniform Crime Report]

The US gun culture is the dark side of this freedom loving country.

[chefmike]

We Are Getting Tired of Prying Your Guns out of Your Cold Dead Hand...
Elayne Boosler

If 33 people were killed by apples instead of guns at Virginia Tech, there wouldn't be an apple left on the shelves or in the homes of this country until apples could be made safe. Screw your "constitutional right" to have an apple, there is something called the "greater good", and the good of the country takes precedence over your "interpretation" of any amendment in the now defunct anyway constitution. Just ask the spinach growers, and the people who love to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. And why do you always forget the words, "well regulated militia"?

2500 Children Left Behind

If 2500 children under the age of 17 were felled by apples instead of guns every year in America, there wouldn't be a congressman or senator left serving who took one penny from the National Apple Association. The shame and admonishment would be too great. And if there were even incremental steps to take to make apples safer, and even they were fought tooth and nail by your blood money National Apple Association, claiming the straw man of the "slippery slope" to "regulation", America might better see you for the mercenary and shameful organization you truly are.

We are getting tired of prying your guns out of your cold dead hands.

Here's a news flash for you gun waving "real Americans": It's not about guns. It's about money. Follow the money. The NRA raises hundreds of millions of dollars by convincing you they are fighting for your "rights". Wake up. It's a business. Just like any other business, except with the help of their bought off representatives, they are the only UNREGULATED consumer product in America. What do they sell? FEAR. Fear, fake patriotism, and fake bravado, just like their commander in chief, President Custer. You're being played.

With their hundreds of millions of dollars raised on the blood of murdered Americans, they pay themselves, they keep their product manufacturers flush, and they buy their government officials. They exist to convince you you need their product. And when sales slow, they target new markets. They market fear to women, then sell them "feminine little purse guns". They market to children. The cartoon character Joe Camel is banned, but sure shootin' Eddie Eagle is alive and well to shit again on Friday. (He teaches children "gun safety", meaning, he teaches children to use guns.)

We're Number One!!

The number of children under the age of 17 shot by guns in America every year is greater than the gun-related deaths of children in all the industrialized nations of the world COMBINED.

Here is the population of Japan: 127,463,611.

Here is the number of children killed by guns in Japan every year: 0.

A 2001 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) study found that in homicides among intimate partners, women are murdered more with guns than with all other means COMBINED.

In 2004, guns were most commonly used by males to murder their female partners.

A 2003 study found women living with a gun in the home were almost three times more likely to be murdered than women with no gun in the home.

"If we ban handguns only criminals will have guns." Well then let's not have any laws in America at all. No drug laws, no traffic laws, no laws at all, right? Duh.

"Cars kill people!!" Yes, cars kill people when something goes wrong. Guns are MADE to kill people. Handguns have one purpose, to kill people.

Stage Rule: If There is a Gun on the Wall in Act I, It Will Go Off in Act II.

Bush's Unmitigated Gall

I watched President Custer speak at the Virginia Tech memorial yesterday. How dare he "express condolences". How DARE he. Here is how his administration helped kill 33 people at Virginia Tech:

Passage of gun industry immunity bill. That's right, you can sue every industry in America, except gun manufacturers and dealers. Your family gets murdered by a madman? Tough.

Refusal to aid in renewal of federal assault weapons ban, even though the law had already been eviscerated by the gun industry. Get it? INDUSTRY.

Fighting background checks. The Virginia shooter had been committed to a mental institution. In Virginia that means you can't buy a gun. Oh yeah? Thank goodness the gun shop owner who sold it to him can't be sued.

The president does not support the police when citizens can have assault weapons.

The president does not support the police when citizens can have armor piercing bullets.

The president helps the terrorists when anyone can have a shoulder rocket launcher that can take a plane out of the sky. And I'm taking my shoes off at the airport?

The president helps the terrorists when he supports a ban on release of federal crime tracing data necessary to identify patterns in illegal gun trafficking.

The president helps the terrorists when he requires the ATF to immediately destroy gun sales records previously allowed to be kept for 90 days under Brady Bill background check.

We Found the WMD. They Are Here.


Guns are for cowards. You can kill from a distance. You are detached, removed. You don't get your hands dirty. You don't feel the life draining out of another human being in an eye to eye struggle, face to face, with your hands squeezing or beating soft, human, flesh, one on one. We had just as many disturbed, sick citizens in America in the last century as we do in this. The difference now is access to weapons of mass destruction. Anyone can have a gun. Anyone. It did not used to be like this. It's easy to kill now.

The Gang that Couldn't Shoot Straight

"Two Secret Service officers were injured yesterday after a gun held by another Secret Service officer accidentally fired inside the White House gate. The officers received wounds to face and leg."

"Vice President Cheney shoots hunting companion in the face."

So really, what chance do thousands of children a year have?

3,300 Americans have died in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last four years. 120,000 Americans have been shot to death in America in the last four years. Where is the outrage? If we can elect a new congress based on its commitment to end the war overseas, we can elect a congress committed to end the war here at home. End both wars.

Here's the Punchline

Today the supreme court overturned thirty years of supreme court precedent, and overturned the findings of six federal courts, to declare war on women, their health, their privacy, and their lives, by upholding a ban on dilation and curettage abortion that contains NO exception to preserve the health or SAVE THE LIFE of the woman. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, writing for the four dissenting justices, called the decision "alarming".

Wait for it...

President Custer - "Today's decision affirms that the Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and humanity of America. This affirms the progress my administration has made to defend the "sanctity of life".


Some sources:

www.cdc.gov
www.psrla.org/program_gun_violence.htm
www.vpc.org

[White_Male_Canada]

Your beloved 2nd amendment is referring to a well regulated armed milicia, not the right to bear a Gluck 9mm handgun.

The 2nd never was a "collective right:
"I ASK, sir, what is the militia? It is the WHOLE PEOPLE, except for a few public officials" -George Mason



Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 43 times more likely to kill a family member or friend than to kill in self-defense. [ Kellermann and Reay, N.E. Journal of Medicine]

Kellermann/Reay admitted that a that a true risk-benefit consideration of guns in homes should have used, " cases in which burglars or intruders are wounded or frightened away by the use or display of a firearm [and] cases in which would-be intruders may have purposely avoided a house known to be armed...." , which they DID NOT. Therefore their research is ripe with methodological and conceptual errors.

In Kellermann/Reay`s 43-to-1 figure, suicides account for nearly all the 43 unjustifiable deaths in homes.


American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.

According to mortality rates from the CDC, they classify 19 year old adults as "kids". Enough said.

The suicide rates are higer in Japan and other countries.

[guyone]

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

What part of "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. " do you not understand?

[White_Male_Canada]

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

What part of "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. " do you not understand?

Hell Guy, if the obvious escapes them how do we explain commas that separate ideas ! Then there is the phrase well regulated militia. Regulated then meant well-trained and we`ve already proven militia was the whole people.

[guyone]

Commies. Gotta love 'em.

[North_of_60]

I still read " a well regulated milicia"... Nothing about a young man who was diagnosed autism at 8 yrs old and described as mentally ill by a judge.

I have many fire arms at home. I use them for hunting deers and snow gooses.

Gun control is not about banning firearms. It's about making sure that sick Cho won't have access to them.

[guyone]

No one wants maniacs to have any kind of weapon.

[chefmike]

No one wants maniacs to have any kind of weapon.

You elected one, didn't you?

[guyone]

I didn't elect anybody. I voted for George Bush. The maniac candidate John Kerry lost. Unless you're talking about the other maniac candidate Al Gore, but he lost too.