Join me on Facebook!
Follow me on Twitter!
More 'toons here!
Or subscribe here.
Boy are you misinformed... where the hell did you get that information. Prohibition didn't work you ding bat, that's why they reversed it.
I believe the rowboat comment was an attempt at humor...
What are you? Two?
A lot of people here are making comments similar to: If you think guns kill people, and therefore we should get rid of guns, well then while we're at it, let's get rid of cars, airplanes, matches, gasoline, scissors and knives too because they also kill people. There is a major problem with all of these arguments- because all of those other items serve different main functions. Their main function is not to be used as a weapon. Guns on the other hand, serve basically one purpose, and that is to kill. This is why certain things, arguably not very dangerous on their own, such as Chinese stars, Numchucks, and butterfly knives, are banned in many places. In fact, if technology can perfect the taser, or a tranq dart, then the self defense argument for guns basically goes away too, and guns that kill would no longer be needed.
there is also a type of non-lethal defense weapon being developed which operates a lot like a gun, except it fires a clump of this weird powdery stuff that falls apart on impact. The good thing is that it won't pierce the skin and usually won't break bones, but it hit's hard enough to knock the wind out of a fully grown person. It usually won't cause any lasting damage (unless perhaps you fire it at someone's temple) but it has the potential to be a very effective means of defense. I heard that some policemen are ALREADY using this weapons to stop criminals without killing them
i doubt that "weird powdery stuff" would have much of an effect. if its only strong enough to knock the wind out of a normal person i don't think it would help against someone trying to attack you. i've been punched in the stomach before it was a really strong hit and it knocked the wind out of me, but i was still standing and managed to keep up the fight sustaining multiple blows like that. sometimes lethal force is the only option. plus if guns become illegal then your gonna have a real pissed of public who would die for their freedom to bear arms.
This is an Israeli experiment an is "alternate ammunition" for standard weapons. This allows a standard load out to include both lethal and less lethal capacities with a magazin switch rather than multiple weapons. No law enforcement is using it as it is not fuly developed.
Non lethal, by the by, is a feel good term. Anything "non lethal" still has a level of lethality. Sometimes it's luck of the draw, some times it's how it's used that makes the difference.
Ok no one has mentioned this I don't think and almost all of you are way off the point. Guns don't stop bullets from being fired at you but they DO allow you to protect yourself if feel you need to. You will NEVER get rid of guns. It's impossible. Even when they are outlawed the same people you are scared of (the lawless) will still have guns because THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR STUPID LAWS!
The Second Amendment IS AND WAS put into effect so that the people of this country could protect themselves and their rights from the tyrant King of England. How ironic we are still trying to protect ourselves from tyrant King George. If you think that we are not "protecting" ourselves from an oppressive government right now, lets look at a little history shall we?
Consider: In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953 approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were round up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, Jehovah's Witnesses, and others, who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
That places total victims who lost their lives because of gun control at approximately 56 million in the last century. Since we should learn from the mistakes of history, the next time someone talks in favor of gun control find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated.
It has not been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed, a program costing the government more than $500 million dollars. The results Australia-wide: Homicides are up 3.2%, Assaults are up 8%, Armed robberies are up 44% in that countries state of Victoria, homicides with firearms are up 300%.
It's time to state it plainly: Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws only affect the law-abiding citizens. Take action before it s too late, write or call your delegation.
Sparky, or whomever you are. You need to analyze the figures you throw out there. 1911 Turkey??? No such thing at that juncture. Guatemala, who the hell do you think established the fascist government there??? Years you cite concerning China?? Are those stats for victims of Chaing or Mao???
Numbers mean shciesse w/o verification and elaboration.
Have a nice day cleaning your gun, try sipping a beer or smelling the roses.
Pre- and Post-World War I was definitely a JUNCTURE (good word choice) for the Armenians. Read about the Armenian genocide conducted by the OTTOMAN EMPIRE (You know, the Turkish people. The Republic of Turkey was not yet established). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide
"...there is general agreement among western scholars that over 500,000 Armenians died between 1914 and 1918. Estimates vary between 300,000 (per the modern Turkish state) to 1,500,000 (per modern Armenia, Argentina, and other states)."
Or if literature bogs your Liberal mind down, just watch one of these movies. Any good Liberal can take off their rose-colored glasses to watch a movie!
1975 – The Forgotten Genocide (dir. J. Michael Hagopian)
1983 – Assignment Berlin (dir. Hrayr Toukhanian)
1988 – An Armenian Journey (dir. Theodore Bogosian)
1988 – Back To Ararat (dirs. Jim Downing, Göran Gunér, Per-Åke Holmquist, Suzanne Khardalian)
1990 – General Andranik (dir. Levon Mkrtchyan)
2000 – I Will Not Be Sad in This World (dir. Karina Epperlein)
2003 – Germany and the Secret Genocide (dir. J. Michael Hagopian)
2003 – Voices From the Lake: A Film About the Secret Genocide (dir. J. Michael Hagopian)
2003 – Desecration (dir. Hrair "Hawk" Khatcherian)
2003 – The Armenian Genocide: A Look Through Our Eyes (dir. Vatche Arabian)
2005 – Hovhannes Shiraz (dir. Levon Mkrtchyan)
2006 – The Armenian Genocide (dir. Andrew Goldberg)
2006 – Screamers (dir. Carla Garapedian)
Speaking of reading fact not fiction have you read, "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" by Vincent Bugliosi?? Now there is some truth NOT from a "liberal", have you ever looked up that word BTW? Next time..( assuming the election isn't fixed again) hopefully we'll get a President who actually LOVES his country. McCain just loves power and the moment and Corp. $$. Let's get one WITH brains this time. not alzheimers.
>>find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated.
i think in this gent's case, it's clearly those suffering from diseases of the brain as he continually whined about the mentally ill not being adequately registered with the fedgov
On the other hand, you are picking facts out of history that don't have a proven correlation to guns. Canada has banned household weapons with restrictive gun laws, and there haven't been any massacres there. Nor in New Zealand, Sweden, or England. Since you mentioned Australia, let me just say that you can't just compare two years of statistics because there are lots of variations in that data. If you want your stats to be solid, you need multiple year baselines compared to multiple years of data.
Finally!! Someone with insight finally sees the REAL REASON that the people of the United States are being encouraged to give up their right to own guns. We no longer have a Democracy; we have an Oligarcy. A Democracy is one where the supreme power is vested in the people and is exercised directly by them or their elected agents. Definition of Oligarchy: A form of government in which the power is exercised by or invested in a few; a state so governed; the ruling few or class collectively. ( College Edition New Webster's Dictionary of the English Language, page 1034) In other words, we are governed by a few thousand rich and powerful people who care nothing for us and are seeking to enslave us. They wish to disarm the American People so there can be no grass-roots uprising of the People once they wake up to reality. The 16th amendment of the U. S. Constitution is a good example of the Oligarchy at work. They wanted to tax the income of the American People. They did not get enough votes to pass it, so the Oligarchy lied to the American People and said they did get enough votes. They then rewrote the 16th amendment of the Constitution and taxed the people's income. When the truth became known, the lie was illegally sanctioned by a Supreme Court judge. Today people who refuse to pay income tax on their wages are jailed and their assets taken from them. This would not happen in a Democracy. Keep your guns. Our founding fathers knew you may have need of them. Don't give up your right to bear arms. Giving up your right to own them will never prevent crime and it could cost you your freedom. WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
So you think the world is like an old western. The bad guy stands in front of the hero and the hero is faster on the draw because the villain is twirling his mustache.
The idea is so darn cute. In your mind brave Virginia students dive over tables firing automatic pistols. Not hitting anyone in the cross fire. In your mind the woman sees the rapist coming down a long alley, swigging from a bottle of moon shine leering at her with his one remaining eye. Our heroine gasps, her breasts bulging against the sheer fabric of her t-shirt, but then smiles and crouches removing the gun from her thigh before throwing her head back and letting out an Amazonian war cry the terrified rapist falls to his knees and finds god. She's certainly not spiked/unconcious and it's definitely a stranger and not a drunken friend (According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 38% of victims were raped by a friend or acquaintance, 28% by "an intimate" and 7% by another relative). In your mind hundreds of robbers itch desperately to kill someone in their own house, oh how they would love that. They certainly aren't just trying to get a bit of money, nope oh no no no,they're there purely to kill someone, because these people obviously have sub human morals.
Your claim that gun control leads to genocide is impressively flawed. Seriously, it's like saying Hitler was a vegan so soya causes slaughter. Its an unlinked fact, The idea that a militia can stand against a modern army is just weird. Unless it can shoot down a B 52 I don't think a hand gun will stop the American army carpet bombing your ass. Coincidently, thats one of the most arguments I hear to support the second amendment. Do you really not trust your own county?
Final point. Where do the bad guys get their guns in the first place. My guess? Something to do with gun shops. Gun shops with bad locks and window displays.
You said, "The idea that a militia can stand against a modern army is just weird. Unless it can shoot down a B 52 I don't think a hand gun will stop the American army carpet bombing your ass. "
The drivel above could easily be used to say in Iraq, "Insurgency, what insurgency? A militia can't stand up against our modern Army!"
As you probably know, the Iraqi militia, an unorganized and rag-tag bunch of gunowners seems to be holding their own pretty well. Politically-correct, Liberals would never allow our "modern Army" to carpet bomb their insurgent asses and an oppressive American government would never carpet bomb Americans either. That wouldn't be fair, now would it?
As for Gun Control, Liberals are all for it until they personally need protection from a known threat. You cited unknown threats. How convenient? Tell the abused ex-wife or girlfriend SHE has to wait to obtain a gun. Hopefully, it won't be your daughter being threatened.
If anyone needs protection, for what they say or do, it is Liberals!
Ask Rosie with her armed bodyguards.
"As you probably know, the Iraqi militia, an unorganized and rag-tag bunch of gunowners seems to be holding their own pretty well. Politically-correct, Liberals would never allow our "modern Army" to carpet bomb their insurgent asses and an oppressive American government would never carpet bomb Americans either. That wouldn't be fair, now would it?"
So in your mind how is the Second Civil War thought? No one being allowed to use planes, no artillery permitted, all bombs clearly signaled, clearly designated fight zones, no pushing at the back or running with scissors. Who exactly do you expect to be fighting? Over what? It's the two questions that no pro gun owners ever answer. America's, as well as almost all industrialized nations, wealth lies in it's production and consumption, not materials or resources. Fighting over it immediately destroys it and any global outside power would only damage itself with all the trade embargoes and lost trade and tourism.
"As for Gun Control, Liberals are all for it until they personally need protection from a known threat. You cited unknown threats. How convenient? Tell the abused ex-wife or girlfriend SHE has to wait to obtain a gun. Hopefully, it won't be your daughter being threatened."
The majority of rapes occur when a woman is unconcious, usually from being spiked, most burglaries occur when the house is unoccupied, most criminals aren't playing one up manship with how big a crime they can do. Heres a little story Steve is a mugger he bought a gun a year ago, he never fires it as the sight of it is enough to get what he wants (money), Dave is you. You carry a sensible small gun and are well trained with it. A pretty good shot even. Small paper targets tremble at your approach. As you see Steve's gun appear you reach for yours. Except you're terrified you hesitate you stammer your hands shake. But the problem for you is that Steve is also afraid. He's afraid someone else will see him, he's afraid you'll get a good look at him, he's afraid you'll put up a fight and he'll need to fire into the air. So you're both scared and you both guns out. But you're better trained! Ha Steve is in real trouble now. But your gun is still pointing at floor his has been pointing at your chest.
Heres another story that happened to my sisters friend. Held up at knife point she immediately dropped her purse and stepped back. The mugger grabbed it and ran without even looking inside. She lost $50 and had to cancel a credit card. She also says it would have been much, much worse if he had had a reason to use his knife. Instead everyone bought her drinks for a week and she worked out she was $20 dollars up. She now carries a dummy purse in her handbag and keeps the real one in an inner coat pocket. It's strange how personal defense advocated by the pro gun sect is so aggressive.
Why wouldn't this guy be against guns, he believes in man made global warming, which this site constantly claims.
The second amendment wasn't put in place to allow everybody to hunt or target practice. The second amendment was put in place by people who have left their homeland because of an oppessive government.They set up our constitution the way that they did to keep the people in power over a potentially opressive government here.
I would think that would be obvious that we already have an oppressive government to somebody that is preaching that the government has their talons wrapped around the health industry the way that it does. That is just ONE of MANY tentacles of our government.
One fact that you may want to consider. There have been more Genocide going on in the world by their OWN government THAN ALL OTHER GROUPS COMBINED!
As far as gun control goes. If these FOOLS think that they can walk into a gun show and purchase a gun without a background check they too have been brainwashed by the media and I have some ocean front property to sell them in Arizona.
I am more afraid of driving to work on the highway. It's like playing Russian Roulette. There are plenty of Morons out there that have a 4000 pound weapon that threaten me every day. The only reason that I don't give them an attitude adjustment if my fear of them having a gun! They have already proved they have no respect for anybody's life by the way they drive. (I myself speed too, I'm talking about the reckless drivers that swerve in and out of traffic at a high rate of speed). I think we need to ban cars...they're dangerous.
It's NOT THE GUNS. IT'S THE LACK OF RESPECT FOR OTHER PEOPLE'S LIVES. Just think if every teacher in that Virginia college was REQUIRED to take a gun handling class (for you city dwellers) and was REQUIRED to have them on hand at all times during school hours. How far do you think that Moron would have made it then?
Remember, Sept,11th was caused by little box cutters and Airplanes. I think we need to ban knives and any metal that could be turned into a blade and of course ALL airplanes.
This site has some good health information but they are clueless on just about everything else.
"Why wouldn't this guy be against guns, he believes in man made global warming, which this site constantly claims."
global warming IS man caused!!!!!
you should really try reading both sides of the argument before you go throwing words around so recklessly.
dude. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that global warming is our fault.
Right. Because it's a no-brainer that the 0.0007 percent increase in a gas making up less than 0.12 percent of the atmosphere is obviously what fully dictates Earth's climate.
And I say 'bah' to all that other 60,000 years of established climate patterns, Medieval warming period, sunspot theory, water vapour theory, volcanic theory, temperature-rise-precedes-CO2-rise scientific gobbledygook.
Those nice corporations that are always trying to scare us into buying crud we don't need would never swindle us into buying shiny, new low-CO2 versions of everything we already have. And they would never set up a massive, totally useless, wealth transfer engine from poor to rich with 'carbon credits'. In fact, I think we should trust those nice corporations so much that we should just ignore all that icky science stuff, shouldn't we, dude?
I mean, it would take a genius to figure that stuff out.
By "OUR" fault I meant the fault of human actions. Humans thicken the atmosphere with greenhouse gasses. This traps more and more of the suns heat. This (duh) causes the temperature to rise. As the amounts of co2 we released rose, so did the temperature.
You obviously missed the controversy where Mr. Gore was berated by scientists for sliding the CO2 curve back in time so that it preceded the temperature curve.
The causal relationship (evident in the actual, undoctored graph) is that rising temperatures eventually cause CO2 release into the atmosphere, and is accounted-for by well-established geological processes. Mr. Gore has since contended that the heat-causes-CO2-release relationship doesn't discount the possibility of climate change being man-made, but it begs the question of why he doctored the graphs in the first place.
Some might say that cheating the truth is acceptable so long as it 'helps the environment', but cheating accomplishes just the opposite. Funding and research are pulled away from far more serious (and far less imaginary) environmental problems.
A case in point: recently in home province of Ontario, Canada, federal funding for heavy-metal scrubbers in the smokestacks of nickel plants was scrapped because the scrubbers didn't have any effect on CO2 production. Never mind that airborne heavy metal toxins have been reliably linked to dozens of serious respiratory ailments in thousands of people--we want our funding to go to slaying that phantom carbon dragon.
My point being that the 'it can't hurt anybody' mentality about cheating the facts to create global warming hysteria is itself dangerous.
There is a simple concept to it. The greenhouse effect. When you put CO2 into the atmosphere, it makes it better at trapping heat between itself and the earth's surface.
Basically, regardless of what Gore may have done, if we continue to pump CO2 into the air, the temperature will rise. Ice will melt (this has already started to happen) which will cause the sea level to rise.
It's pretty simple really.
Everything you know is wrong. Watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle" documentary that the BBC put out and educate your propaganda-addicted mind. The issue is not as simple as 'Greenhouse gasses cause warming" no matter how hard you put your hands over your ears and say "nyah nyah nyah I can't hear you scientists, global warming is man-made nyah nyah nyah".
While I don't disagree that we need to be less or non-dependant on oil and other fossil fuels, and need to get the heck out of the Middle East, creating an entire inustry out of a giant propagandist lie in order to convince people to do the right thing is ultimately just evil. Yes, I'm talking to you, Al Gore.
everything you know is wrong??? Duh. Now that's perverted!
It is well documented that the Earth cools and warms on a cyclic basis. It's been going on for longer than humans have been around.
It's also well documented that humans have altered the cycle. And this is easy to test. Just take a drive into a rural country area with lots of trees and little asphalt. You won't need a thermometer 'cause you should be able to feel the difference in temperature.
For all of those liberal bashers who don't think we have a clue, get a life. I don't consider all Republicans trigger happy idiots just because Cheney shot his friend in the face with a shotgun. I have guns
but not primarily for protection from thieves or burglars but they are there if i need them for that and I don't believe guns kill people. People kill people. Just because I'm a liberal VET for Peace doesn't mean I want my guns taken from me at gun point or threat or any republican lie.
If you think that global warming isn't our fault, then you REALLY shouldn't be pointing fingers at people for ignoring science.
I think we just did, and were right in doing so.
I'd say more but... you know... the claustrophobia.
"I think we just did, and were right in doing so."
well yes you did just do so, and yes technically you DO have the right to say what you want about things. However you were, in fact, incorrect in saying that global warming has nothing to do with CO2. Cause' it does!
"I'd say more but... you know... the claustrophobia."
I cracked up when i saw this part.
this one's just to get thinner!
"I can't hear you scientists?"
What do you think the overwhelming majority of scientists are concluding about global warming? Turn off the AM radio and investigate it on your own.
In the end I suppose, all that REALLY matters is that we stop polluting. This is because even if you don't believe in global warming, pollution is still an obvious threat. We need to stop using fossil fuels.
how did global warming come up?
Our Forefathers did give us the right to have arms that was done to protect us from the British and other foreign invaders, but now times have changed. And their is a big huge problem since most states do not submit to the national database
Actually, they gave us the right to have arms in order that we can protect ourselves - not only from foreign powers - but from our own government, should it devolve into tyranny.
Has anyone ever noticed that this strange compulsion about the importance of a population to be armed like Rambo is only found in a handful of countries? The Second Amendment to the US Constitution allows the bearing of arms in the context of having a "well regulated militia". There may just be a hitorical context to this that doesn't find application in the modern day.
I call on all weapons manufacturers to face war crimes... who needs guns
So the Health Ranger is Anti-Gun? It figures. I had hopes that he understood the concepts behind true freedom. But once again I am disappointed by a "Leader" of a "Movement". Eventually the truth will out.
Me, too :-(. It's really difficult to recommend him to other people when I'm not sure whether or not this sort of drivel will be on the front page.
btw, if the university hadn't been a gun-free zone, that shooter would've been taken out after the first murder.
There's a reason our founding forefathers included the 'right to bear arms' in our Constitution...and that reason VERY important (and possibly critical to basic survival)! (ever hear of a tyrannical government that's oppressive? did you know that there are several empty but manned concentration camps in every state?
There's also a reason that we're seeing a rash of people 'going postal'...virtually every one of them have been taking or are withdrawing from chemical 'psycho-pharmaceuticals' to 'heal' totally unnatural 'diseases' caused by the chemical poisons in our food sources, prescribed drugs & vaccines, water, and the air we breath
If you haven't yet familiarized yourself with the Power's That Be plan (United Nations & World Health Organization) to depopulate the planet and create a one-world government, then it's difficult to see the links between all of this. The more killings we see, the more likely we are to willingly give up our guns...and when that happens, how can fight or protect ourselves.
Be sure to check out the link above (and check out the homepage).
"Geez... guns are neither good or bad. They're an inanimate object. Having a fear of an inanimate object is irrational. Are people scared of a knife. Scared of the gas in the tank of your car? How about a baseball bat?"
» I like freedom the MAN tryin to tell me ride da bus, aint down wit dat. I like rollin down da'street. I don't care how much gas cost. They already took my guns,had 9mm AR 12 gauge pump next they commin for my Baseball bat. The Man gonna take my bat but it ok for the Man to sell my kid taint food and toys. What we really need is an over-bearing, control-happy Government directed inward at the people who are supposed to be the ones in control.
Nice Trick ,Huh...
Sounds logical...I guess we should take away everyones cars, just in case a crazy person gets behind the wheel of one those. We should take away everyones matches and lighters too, fires could be started by crazy people. Close up the gas stations...they might need an accelerant.
you're completely missing the point.
Please no more murder !!!
Please no more people hurting each other at all !!!
Fact: In the US, approximately 30,000 people die each year as a result of having been shot. (I won't say "killed by a gun"--this is inaccurate. Guns have no independent will). 15,000 of those are people who have chosen a loaded gun as the tool to use to end their own lives. So roughly 15,000 people per year, who did not choose to die, die as a result of a gunshot. And every single one is splashed all over the front pages, with many picked up by the national media. Stats are from the Justice Dept.
Fact: In the US, depending on whose study you want to use, anywhere between 40,000 and 250,000 times per year, a gun is used in self-defense. The vast majority of the time, the gun is never fired. If these incidents are reported at all, it is usually only in local press where the incident occurred. Even the Brady Campaign will admit the 40,000 number is valid.
Do the math. Guns are used far more often in self-defense than to kill.
Oh, & by the way, the major purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to give the people the power to resist tyranny. Even with a modern military, this is possible. Armed Iraqi citizens have been resisting the world's most modern army for the past several years now.
One last thing: A criminal is defined as someone who does not follow the law. Most people who commit crimes with guns are in violation of multiple laws, including gun control laws. The ONLY way you will EVER really keep guns out of the hands of criminals is to repeal the laws of physics that enable gunpowder to go BANG! Have fun with that.
Two murders in my little town in the past 5 years. One was committed with a hammer (guy killed his wife) and one with a pair or scissors (police haven't figured out who did that yet). I'm stocking up on hammers and scissors before the ban takes effect!
As always, Mark Fiore is right on the money with this cartoon. Purchasing firearms is alarmingly easy here in the United States.
However, I was taken aback with his portrayal of Cho Seung-Hui. The mentally ill are just that - ill. They do not elect to hear voices in their head, nor do they do not voluntarily allow themselves to succumb to delusion. Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, etc. are medical conditions no different than heart disease or cancer.
What Cho Seung-Hui was horrible, but we must refrain from ridiculing people with mental illness. Drawing the mentally ill with broken-flowerpots on their head does nothing to help alleviate the stigma of mental illness.
Society failed on so many levels here. Cho was not given the care and treatment he so desperately needed, but was allowed to entertain his 'God given' right to own a deadly weapon.
who Ever the cuke was that wrote that article is a left winger if I ever read one ,,, naturally you don't sell hand guns to anyone that does not qualify ,, and one of the qualifications is no mental illness ,, what stupid state do come from ,,or if you are charged of a felony ,,,,,,come on lets get real and be an AMERICAN
Reality isn't pretty. I WISH that many things didn't exist. The list includes cancer, poverty, drug dependence, heart disease, old age, and yes...GUNS and weapons of all kinds. I am by nature an idealist. Unfortunately I have had to learn, as I've left childhood behind, that there ARE things in life that aren't the way I WISH they were and I have to take life as it is. Therefore I have made the decision to protect myself from as many of the dangers of life as I reasonably can, the best I can. For that reason I try to eat healthy food, I work out, and I have learned how to safely and effectively use firearms including handguns. I don't love guns any more than I love the exercise equipment at the gym. I believe that if you own a firearm you need to take that responsibility seriously and know what you are doing, as well as being a sane and law abiding citizen.
I was just sitting here thinking about the recent killings in Illinois at the university. Illinois has the most strict gun control laws of any state in the U.S. The killer had a long and well documented history of major mental disorder and was previously hospitalized. He obviously should not have had access to guns of any kind and clearly the university (as well as the rest of Illinois) is a "gun free zone". People got murdered anyway. I was wondering what if the outcome of that incident might have been different if someone in the room was armed, trained and responsible. I know, that is an unanswerable question, but you can't help but wonder. One thing I DO know for sure is that there are no quick, easy and 100% sure answers to anything in real life. JMHO
So you are proposing that we have an armed and trained gunman in every classroom across the states? I for one would not want to learn in an environment like that.
More information about formatting options