You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
The NRA has evolved into an extreme right wing hate group, using fear and conspiracy theories to alarm gun owners. It's only motive is profit and its present leaders are extremists. A poll taken last year shows that 75% of NRA members believe that there should be reasonable gun control policies/laws. 60% of the members favor banning assault rifles and closing gun show loopholes which don't to background checks. The NRA's leaders, however, continue through fear-mongering and political extortion to fiercely oppose ANY changes, including assault guns and "cop-killer bullets" bans. This organization is well on its way to fitting the definition of a hate group and is a clear threat to our country. Their campaign to lie and scare people into record numbers of gun/ammo sales when Obama was first elected was abominable. They relentlessly screamed, "Buy NOW because he'll take your guns and rob you of your freedoms!!!!" This dark clarion "call to arms" was insidious and false: Obama hasn't signed or promoted a single gun control policy in four years. With the massacre of 20 innocent children, only the most irrational adult would see how destructive the NRA has become. I say, let's declare a "call to disarm" before more mass shootings occur.
Correction: "With the massacre of 20 innocent children, only the most irrational adult would see how destructive the NRA has become"....................Read, "Only the most irrational adult would NOT see how destructive the NRA has become".
Many people like to urge more gun control because, frankly, they are not gun enthusiasts. So, in light of that, lets pick something MOST people do enjoy .... sex. Protected and unprotected sex, leads to the following: STD's, unwanted preganancies, welfare issues, divorce, emmotional issues and on and on. Conservatively it costs lives, money and emmotions. Strict regulation regarding sex would bring about a far greater change in society than gun regulation. Sounds a little rediculous when we start rugulating something YOU enjoy, doesn't it. Before you say "my sex habits don't effect others" tell that to a rape victim, the welfare system or and AIDS victim.
dibmax - Can you explain to us why "gun enthusiasts" need to have military-grade assault weapons and large-volume clips? Why can't we ban those?
Why can alcohol enthusiasts purchase 2 liter bottles? Wouldn't restrictions like 1 12 oz can of beer or one "aircraft" size bottle solve a lot of issues. 89,000 alcohol related deaths last year. If you throw in indirect health issues that number is far higher. We can continue to by CASES of beer and 2 liter bottles because we live in a free society. "But it was 20 little kids" and 100's more died from adults drinking habits than guns this past month alone. Instead of stopping that, we are moving to add POT to our legal vice lists and on and on and on and on.
The analogy of sex to assault weapons is absurd. VERY absurd!! One person having sex has yet to kill 20 six year olds. Get real! Not to mention 65 mass killings in the last two years. There is so little equivalence to these things that it's bizarre to even try to compare them. Not unlike the ludicrous posts comparing traffic fatalities to mass killings. Cars are for transportation and vital to most people's functioning; guns are (other than target practice) for one thing only: KILLING something or someone.
@mylittleid, I get the high-capacity magazine argument, and frankly have no issue with outright banning them. But please explain to me your definition of a military-grade assault weapon, and how it's any more deadly than a deer rifle.
Crstalbay, take me literally all you want. The point is, society is impacted 100 - 1 more by free sex, alcohol, cars and the like. So cars are essential? How about poisons, 79,000 poison deaths last year. 700 plus bycycling deaths. 500,000 to 1,000,000 over eating deaths. 150,000 alcohol related deaths. The point is, do you regulate everything else, or just the stuff you don't enjoy doing? I get that 20 kids were killed and the 4,321 that died in alcohol related crashes don't matter? Where is the more bang for the buck? Note I got my message to you without judging your comments? Are you sure your handle is CRYSTALMETH?
By the way, guns can also be used for target shooting, trap shooting and celebrating (firing in the air) the latest coup in your arab nation. None of which kill anything. The hammer (from the track and field) was also a weapon that what inteneded to kill that people now compete with. The bow and arrow also intended to kill and people compete with. So YOU ARE VERY WRONG when you make the blanket statement that guns only kill. You just don't like them. The first step in curing your sicknes is to admit that you are sick. One done, we can move forward.
Slider451 - "please explain to me your definition of a military-grade assault weapon, and how it's any more deadly than a deer rifle." ---- I am talking about weapons designed specifically for military use, such as the M-16, AK-47, AR-15, etc. Generalizing here, but these weapons generally have larger clips and use smaller caliber rounds (which allows for more shells in the clip). Semi-automatic deer rifles, since they use larger calibers, don't offer the user the opportunity to kill as many people per clip. These small-caliber assault rifles don't have any real practical purpose outside the military, in my opinion.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks