Friday, December 14, 2012

At Least The Second Amendment Is Still Alive

State House passes bill allowing concealed weapons in schools, day care centers, stadiums, churches


  1. At Least The First Amendment Is Still Alive!
    Neither Amendment has a mental illness clause but maybe they should.

    1. Ahh, as expected, we start with the voice of the anonymous hero who reduces a serious problem to bumper sticker slogans.

      (P.S. most states have mental health restrictions on gun ownership that are, unfortunately, easily circumvented.)

    2. So are you turning YOUR gun in? Hypocrite.

    3. GLADLY, when everyone else has to!

    4. And I believe that there should be financial compensation for doing so.

    5. the real problem is that 40% of gun sales in the U.S. do not require a background check. Even 74% of NRA members believe that a background check should be required to purchase a gun. Beyond that, there is absolutely no realistic justification for individuals to own assault weapons.
      Instead of being a complete anonymous ass, why don't you seriously try to deal with the issue instead of playing your sophomoric game of "gotcha".

  2. I am really disturbed about this , why would the mother have these kinds of guns registered to her, why would she keep them in her home knowing her son has mental issues,those questions need to be answered. My heart goes out to those families that have lost there children in this devilish act.

    1. "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable ... the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good."

      ~ George Washington

  3. “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

    ~ Thomas Jefferson

    1. One: Do you really believe that the prospect exists in the way it might have in the 18th century for a tyrannical government?

      Two: Even if you believe that, do you really believe that possessing a few firearms would allow you to stand up to the military machine we have put at the disposal of such a government?

    2. Definition of Tyranny:

      Tyranny is usually thought of as cruel and oppressive, and it often is, but the original definition of the term was rule by persons who lack legitimacy, whether they be malign or benevolent.

      [The Methodology of Tyranny]

      1. Control of public information and opinion:
      2. Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers:
      3. Undue official influence on trials and juries:
      4. Usurpation of undelegated powers:
      5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force:
      6. Militarization of law enforcement:
      7. Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform:
      8. Suppression of investigators and whistle blowers:
      9. Use of the law for competition suppression:
      10. Subversion of internal checks and balances:
      11. Creation of a class of officials who are above the law:
      12. Increasing dependency of the people on government:
      13. Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them:
      14. Use of staged events to produce popular support:
      15. Conversion of rights into privileges:
      16. Political correctness:

      Principles of Tyranny by Jon Roland @:

    3. Such an expansive definition of tyranny borders on meaningless when applied to your earlier context.
      Which of the above would you classify as warranting armed rebellion?

    4. Recognize any of these tyrannous traits taking place in our own local government? I do!

    5. Have citizens been deprived of their right to vote to change things if they so wish?
      The real tyranny is the tyranny of apathy.

  4. Tax guns, tax ammo and tie the tax rate to the gun homicide rate. Throw the book at anyone who violates gun laws and throw away the key. Make it uncool to use guns as a plot device in everything from movies to video games (by requiring producers to pay a fee for their use?). People on antipsychotic medication should be required to spend time in a hospital.

  5. tax anything you don't agree with is that your platform ?
    the heck with civil rights huh? Even the mentally ill have civil rights and the aclu will have a problem with what you are suggesting.

    1. Once again, the voice of another(?)anonymous internet troll.
      Not brave enough to use your real name?

    2. As far as taxes go, you betcha. I own guns and I enjoy target shooting. I also recognize that my hobby involves using some very dangerous tools. If paying additional taxes helps keep this things out of the hands of lunatics that will walk into a crowd, a mall or an elementary school and start shooting up the place then I'm all for it. I never bought into the nonsense that guns keep us free. WE THE PEOPLE are the government so what exactly are guns defending us from? Our neighbors? If you want to own guns then you have to take responsibility for the tremendous harm they can cause. God bless those little kids and their families.

    3. Well now a civil response - how rare!
      However, the logic you used is illogical. Please explain how taxing guns will keep them out of the hands of lunatics? Monetary worth alone does not keep guns out of the hands of lunatics. Your plan would also violate the 2nd amendment!
      Keep in mind the legal gun owner in this case was well off and not the shooter.
      Having stricter gun security within the home I'm good with that!
      In some cases, yes, guns do keep neighbors at bay from doing something stupid. They tend to go to homes without gun owners for their irresponsible actions.
      Agree God bless the little ones , their families and everyone in the town of Newtown

    4. Tax guns and ammo to incentive owners to keep them safe and secure. This also raises the acquisition cost and so makes it more difficult to acquire a personal arsenal. Heavy taxes and fees on the manufacture and sale of weapons would help secure the supply chain. None of this prevents someone from owning a gun so there is no violation of the second ammendment. I have a right to own a gun. Because I choose to exercise that right there is a thriving industry devoted to supplying me with what I want to exercise that right. I am willing to pay more, to shoot less often, to make sure that these toys (because, for me, that's what they essentially are) are a lot less likely to end up in the hands of a lunatic that wants to express himself by murdering children.

    5. But you didn't address how making guns and ammo more expensive for people, putting a burden on the gun businesses, will absolutely keep guns out of the hands of lunatics that would use them in this way.

      You are assuming that rich people are exempt from being lunatics or who have family members who are walking time bombs. This is an assumption but, THIS ISN'T TRUE!

      Taxes kill business - taxes don't prevent killings!

    6. Nothing is absolute. Arms are supposed to be well regulated. They are not right now. I don't assume rich people are exempt from being lunatics. I do assume this is a societal burden but I suggest a large part of the financial burden needed to produce a well regulated industry needs to be borne by the manufacturers and users.

    7. Supposed to be well regulated? They are already!
      Ma is the third toughest gun control state and Conn is the fifth.

      Societal burden is to educate gun safety and to properly secure your weapon. Educating someone mentally unstable to use a weapon meets neither of those burdens.

      Keep your hands out of my tax pockets

    8. We'll have to disagree. The evidence is all around you that the existing regulations aren't sufficient. Something needs to change.

    9. I agree in that we'll have to disagree . The regulation is already in place and gun sales are skyrocketing because of the threat of like ideology like yours. The geni is already out of the bottle Guns are here to stay but what I'd like to see is a societal pressure on being personally responsible for yourself and your weapons.
      Merry Christmas

  6. ken.....i agree with in some aspects. #1. i feel that assault weapons should only be in the hands of the military or law enforcement. #2. i feel there should be more strict background checks to purchase a firearm. BUT, i do feel that a hand gun, purchased and owned legally shouldn't be a bad thing and here is my reasoning. the town of kennesaw, GA for 1982 they passed a law REQUIRING all home owners to own a gun and ammunition. within weeks the crime rate dropped 89% and continues to this day to have the lowest crime rate of any town in the country. why? because everyone knows that guns are readily available and will be used if needed. a thief for instance, feels empowered by his/her illegal gun....but if they knew more people had them and were properly trained to use levels the playing field and makes them think twice. another example is Israel, they require all teachers to carry a handgun and require training. which is more apt to stop what happened yesterday, a sign that says "no guns allowed on the school property" or "all staff on this property are armed and will protect the children at all costs"? and before everyone jumps on me and says i'm crazy, i am atleast presenting thoughts from each side of the isle.

    1. Dan:
      I appreciate your reasonable approach to the issue. However, consider the following:
      It is claimed that public safety improved greatly in Kennesaw, Georgia after the City Council passed a law requiring every head of a household to own a gun in 1982, while the community of Morton Grove, Illinois passed a handgun ban in their community earlier in 1982.

      Gun supporters misleadingly claim that Kennesaw is now much safer than Morton Grove by the select use of some statistical percentages of claimed crime reductions. However an honest comparison of the actual crime figures of the two communities certainly fail to prove the case of the gun advocates that more guns in a community improve the public safety compared to less guns. In general, guns do correlate with 33,000 national incidents that result in death each year including teen and adult suicide, accidents, domestic violence and murders.

      Morton Grove, Illinois is a suburb of the huge city of Chicago, where no doubt, some Chicago residents will travel by car for the purpose of armed robbery and other crimes. Kennesaw is a far more rural community, much farther from a larger community, where most crime will be by local residents.

      FBI crime statistics for 2003 provide the most recent equal models for comparison of the two cities which are roughly comparable in population. Morton Grove has 22, 966 and Kennesaw 25, 183 for the purposes of this 2003 actual crime figures comparison.

      In 2003, Morton Grove had 2 murders and Kennesaw just 1. But both figures are subject to yearly fluctuations, where some years neither community will have an incident classified as a murder.

      In 2003, Morton Grove had 4 robberies compared to 7 in Kennesaw. The Kennesaw figures are much higher than Morton Grove's for that year, and guns are often the weapon of choice in a robbery.

      In 2003, Morton Grove had 12 aggravated assaults compared to the higher number of 15 in Kennesaw.

      In 2003, Morton Grove had 70 burglaries compared to the much higher number of 89 in Kennesaw. Many burglars may carry a gun in case of being surprised by security or a property owner.

      In 2003, Morton Grove had 390 incidents of larceny and theft compared 455 examples in Kennesaw.
      Gun advocates may use misleading statistics to support their wholly absurd claims that more guns in a community improve the public safety. But no good statistics have ever proven this absurd premise. More guns always correlate with a higher number of unfortunate incidents of some type.

    2. very good arguments. i honestly don't know a "solution", and i don't think anyone does because most of us a rational human being with a conscience and feelings.....and just a few, the ones who commit this terrible acts are somehow mentally broken, and we can't begin to understand what goes through their mind. we all want that "fix it now" answer but i don't think there is one, or ever will be. i know that one thing we SERIOUSLY need to look at is mental health. there are always signs before hand.....but we never seem to find them until after the crime. taking guns away completely wont solve the issue, BUT like i said i agree with you that assault rifles (which we hear now is what was used to kill all the victims in CT) have no business in the hands of anyone but military and law officials. i do want to ad that current gun laws were followed in this situation, as they have now stated that the killer tried to purchase a gun at a sporting goods store in Danbury, CT......but he was turned away because of the 30 day waiting period for background checks. unfortunately he then stole his mother's legally owned gun and shot her with it. it has not been stated yet whether her gun was properly locked or not while it was in her home (i'm not sure if CT has that law but i know MA does). also....i agree with your above statement, i will also say it, "i will hand over my gun, when and if i know without a doubt that everyone else turns theirs in".....but i don't ever see that happening. unfortunately it would be us rational people who would hand them over in trust and hope.....but there will always be bad guys out there who will find a way to get one, and protecting my family is my #1 goal.

    3. Boy I have to start going back and re-reading what I write before I click "publish" lol......i usually type from the hip so i don't lose my thoughts

  7. Five Lies The Gun Lobby Tells You

  8. Charlotte Bacon, 6
    Daniel Barden, 7
    Rachel Davino, 29
    Olivia Engel, 6
    Josephine Gay, 7
    Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 6
    Dylan Hockley, 6
    Dawn Hochsprung, 47
    Madeleine F. Hsu, 6
    Catherine V. Hubbard, 6
    Chase Kowalski, 7
    Jesse Lewis, 6
    James Mattioli, 6
    Grace McDonnell, 7
    Anne Marie Murphy, 52
    Emilie Parker, 6
    Jack Pinto, 6
    Noah Pozner, 6
    Caroline Previdi, 6
    Jessica Rekos, 6
    Avielle Richman, 6
    Lauren Russeau, 30
    Mary Sherlach, 56
    Victoria Soto, 27
    Benjamin Wheeler, 6
    Allison N. Wyatt, 6

    May they all find peace with God.

  9. Trying to make sense of Sandy Hook massacre. This may help explain it.

    Dear God,
    Why do you allow so much violence in our schools?
    a concerned student

    Dear Concerned Student,
    I’m not allowed in schools.

    1. Kids can bring their god to school with them and pray whenever they want. Adults can't push their god on other people's kids. That's what's not allowed. How would you like to be a jewish kid listening to Jerry Falwell every morning?

    2. Put a sock in it you pious hypocrite. Religious loons have inflicted more bloodshed on humanity in the name of their various gods than any other cause throughout history. The sooner we free ourselves of your delusional mythology the better off mankind will be.


All comments subject to moderation. All commenters must use their own name or a screen name. No comments labelled as "Anonymous" will be published. To use your name or a screen name select "Name/URL" from the drop down menu. Insert you name in the "Name" space and leave the "URL" space blank.