state + local

Thank you for confirming for whom I'll never consider voting: Waltz, Bachmann, Paulson, and Kline. Anyone who's assigned an "A" by this gun lobby group has lost all my respect. Call me "single-issue" if you wish, but being "graded" by the NRA marks having sold-out in my book.

I am a registered Democrat that voted for our president. Had he had a history of going after our firearms I would have most certainly voted for Romney. Obama sure didn't run on the platform of gun control, he is as phoney as a $3 bill. I will be switching parties this week.

The people will speak that is for sure especially if there is a ban just like the last time. I was a borderline democrat and will for sure be backing republicans in the future! You never know when you will need a AR-15

meathunter, I hope you are being sarcastic. It's hard to tell, given the hyperbole on both extremes around this issue. Looking for middle ground, I find it hard to believe discussion of access to AR-15 translates in the minds of some to taking away all guns. And, I fail to understand people who deny across-the-board the need for a means of self defense.

An ar-15 rifle is widely used in rural ares of the country as a varmint rifle It is frustrating as a gun owner to always see the ar-15 demonized as everyone saying their is no reason for anyone to own one. In my area of southern Minnestota I know of over 50 coyotes shot with ar-15 rifles each year. In South Dakota hundreds of prairie dogs are shot with ar-15 rifles on ranches. Ar-15 rifles are widely used in Texas and other southern states to control wild hogs. The catch phrase of why anyone would need an ar-15 or no one hunts with an ar-15 are simply not true.

Doggone1, thank you for being one of the only posters to the Trib since Sandy Hook to offer a reason for use of an AR-15. But are you saying that no other (less military style) gun would serve to accomplish the need to shoot coyotes, prairie dogs, and wild hogs? Or do these wild critters serve as an excuse to use the AR-15 that the owner bought because he could, and wanted one? What do people who don't own AR-15s or similar weapons to shoot coyotes, prairie dogs and wild hogs? Couldn't they get along and accomplish killing these animals without these weapons, in the interest of not having them broadly available there and elsewhere to the mentally ill or criminal element? This is a sincere question.

Please write these people and let them know how you feel about your civil rights and those who would attempt to unlawfully abridge them.

The AR-15 has been the most popular rifle in America in the past five years. Millions are now in circulation. The vast majority of magazines also purchased within that period hold more than 10 rounds. Every gun owner I know has something that is likely to end up on the proposed 'banned' list. Politicians who go after these items owned by law-abiding citizens will spur many angry constituents to work to defeat them at the first opportunity. Democrats discovered this after passing the first AWB. The rallies Saturday are just the beginning of what is likely to be a huge groundswell of resistance if they push these plans forward.

I would scrap the idea of an assault weapons ban and focus on expanded, more effective background checks, closing the gun-show loophole and trying to find some reasonable accountability with private sales. I sure would like to see improvements in referral, diagnosis and treatment of the mentally ill, including ways to keep guns out of their hands.

In Texas, people use AR-15 to hunt wild Boar. Use something else, you say? So the people who obey the law and enjoy their sport should use something they don't prefer because some crazy dude wrecked it for them? If somebody runs into a crowd with a Honda Accord, will you please switch to a Smart Car "for the children?"