Watch Live: Second House Hearing on IRS Scandal

Check Out Today’s Hot Posts on TheBlaze Blog!

Crime

Here’s the Chart That Supporters of a Federal Assault Weapons Ban Won’t Want to See

Dec. 20, 2012 5:45pm Jason Howerton

While anti-gun advocates argue that banning semi-automatic rifles, like the popular AR-15, will help decrease shooting deaths in the U.S., FBI data suggests that the average American is more likely to be killed by “hands, fists” or “feet” than a rifle. The anti-gun crowd has intensified its calls for a federal assault weapons ban following the tragedy in Newtown, Conn. last week.

“Yes, massacres tend to be done with weapons like this. But not most gun murders in the U.S.: a vast majority of gun murders in the U.S. are committed with a handgun,” The Washington Examiner’s Timothy Carney writes.

FBI Data Shows Only Small Number of Murders in U.S. Committed With Rifles

(Source: Washington Examiner/FBI)

As you can see in the chart pictured above, the vast majority of murders in the U.S. are indeed committed with handguns, not rifles. More people were killed with shotguns (373), knifes/blades (1,704) and “other weapon[s]” (1,772) more often than they were with rifles in 2010, which were reportedly used in 358 murders that year.

Whether it’s a knife, gun or a fist, will a “ban” of any kind sway a deranged individual’s decision to take human lives?

(H/T: Weasel Zippers)

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (378)

SelfGovernor
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:17pm
Here’s the original source for that data, only from 2011:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:04pm
  Problem is, liberals don’t care about the facts.
  
  Report this comment
- TH30PH1LUS
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:20pm
  If my friend had kept his gun loaded and close instead of unloaded and locked away, he and his wife would still be alive today. They were murdered in cold blood by a punk with a knife.
  
  Report this comment
- Gold Coin & Economic News
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:31pm
  What, you mean Piers Morgan really is a loony bin? You mean he really doesn’t give a rip about facts and he’s just an emotional sissy Brit that wants to BAN GUNS. That’s right, liberals care nothing, NOTHING about real facts:
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezXakqpKHE0
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:53pm
  Interesting that the actual facts show that far more people are killed with knives than rifles. Just a few days ago there were a bunch of libs in another comment section claiming the opposite.
  
  Why am I not surprised?
  
  And besides, they never consider that TOTAL murder may go UP if you take the guns from those that obey laws. Heck, even if you could magically get all guns from the criminals, it could still go up. The root problem here is evil spreading to the hearts of more and more people, encouraged by liberals (more death, says Maher, let’s kill children say abortionists, you’re just a cosmic mistake say the atheists, etc.)
  
  We need to come back to God — who is Love. :)
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc33
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:59pm
  so chart clearly shows that guns are the lead cause of murder… oh and what constitutes as an unknown gun? a rifle perhaps? unknown guns are the second most popular way to kill someone behind hand guns. unknown seems pretty convenient. especially since it is not hard for police to identify the gun used by bullets and entry wounds.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:18pm
  Keaton, that’s a fair caution, but notice that knives and hands/other together still outweigh rifles + unknown by far.
  
  If Democrats were calling for a banning of handguns, too, then your other point may be valid, but they’re not. They’re calling for a banning of rifles and the like.
  
  And none of that changes the fact that violence can go UP if you take away the good people’s easiest means of self-defense. As has been shown so many times as with the recent school shooting which have happened in “gun-free zones”. (Criminals don’t care about gun laws or other things.)
  
  I don’t like that any more than you do, but it’s dangerous folly to try to wish that reality away rather than coming to grips with it. You libs may mean well, but the actual result of your ideas being put into practice is more deadly, so it’s time we all wake up to that and abandon those exploded ideas. Since we have evil people in this world, we should have means at our disposal to guard against them.
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc33
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:18pm
  so in short. guns accounted for roughly 2/3 of all murders in 2010
  
  Report this comment
- motherboard
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:37pm
  They can “ban” assault rifles” same as they did back in the 90′s, but can not and will not do anything about the ones out there right now. Furthermore, eventually, anything they do will be reversed as un-constitutional. One day folks, the adults, who are all out to lunch right now, will return to the table. Might be a decade from now, or even 2 or 3. Nothing this administration has done or plans to do will stand the test of time…nothing…Historically, it will all be remembered as being a very strange series of events in American history, all of which where eventually turned back. Remember that America invented the “cowboy.”
  
  Report this comment
- SUNTZU
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:38pm
  Never let the truth stand in the way.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:41pm
  Sounds like somebody is trying to copy my original article over on Patriots Do Not Comply. :) Though to be fair, I didn’t bring up fists and feet.
  
  Take a peek.
  
  http://www.patriotsdonotcomply.com/index.php/articles/myth-mass-murderer/
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:55pm
  Keaton: ‘unknown guns’ is probably shotgun variety, which don’t have barrels with rifling to leave marks on bullet, a shot is the same (for number size) size in all shotshells. In other words, Number ‘Six’ shot in a 12 gauge is the same size as Number ‘Six’ shot in a .410, despite the caliber/gauge/size of the ammunition. Ergo, ‘unknown gun’.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:31pm
  @Keaton You’re an idiot.
  
  Leading causes of death:
  
  Heart disease: 599,413
  Cancer: 567,628
  Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
  Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
  Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
  Alzheimer’s disease: 79,003
  Diabetes: 68,705
  Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
  Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
  Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909
  
  Should we ban ice cream, Doritos, McDonald’s, fried chicken, donuts, microwaves, vaccines, soda, candy, alcohol, and cigarettes?
  
  In the US, active smoking, adult obesity, medical errors, and drunk driving has killed way more people than firearms ever has. Firearms is not even the top ten leading causes of death.
  
  Americans used to be pretty healthy, but now we got lazy students, with no jobs, sitting on their arse for four years, and eating fast food, because liberals in Washington decided to give them easy credit regardless of academic performance. Now, we got high unemployment because these same sheep have no work experience whatsoever. They have nothing to show that they are responsible, respectful, on time, honest, accountable, trustworthy, thrifty, and economically sound. Liberals have made them out to be little pansies that cry when they get third or second place, and to not appreciate failure or any difficult learning experience. We reward their failure and allow them no opportunity to grow a set, learn, improve, and change for the better.
  
  Report this comment
- geminimoon
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:36pm
  In looking at that info you provided, the murders by handguns has increased while all other murders have decreased from 2010 to 2011.
  
  And we all know that handguns are the number one choice for these thugs of today to steal and use against innocent people…
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:40pm
  Yeah, sure, supporters of assault weapon bans don’t “want you to see this.” Thanks to the link that SelfGovenor supplied, I verified Keaton’s statement that 2/3 of all homicides in the US are committed by guns. Of course if you added accidental deaths by gunfire, and suicides by gunfire, you’d get a much higher percentage of deaths due to guns. But no matter. It’s all beside the point.
  
  The proposed bans on high capacity clips and assault weapons aren’t meant to address the murder rate – 2/3ds of which are by guns – but to address the ability of a single, disturbed individual, or terrorist, to walk into your local mall, or movie theater or your child’s school and kill twenty, thirty or fifty people in just a couple of minutes. Can’t you kill 100 people in a crowded place, like a parade, in about 30 seconds if you have a large clip and the right kind of gun?
  
  Why should we, as a country, make it so easy for anyone to kill so many people so quickly? No intelligent person trying to protect himself against a burglar believes he needs that kind of firepower. Not a rational one anyone, not a paranoid one anyway. This addresses the paranoid fantasies of those who are preparing for the zombie apocalypse. Or those who believe that preventing terrorists and mentally unstable people the ability to kill a person a second means that The Government is about to “take away their guns?”
- Evileye
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:41pm
  we do not need more Gun Laws. 20,000 plus is enough.
  We have a lot of young veteran out of work that could be armed and sent to each school.
  One person monitoring the cameras of the area and 2 to respond. not unlike the security
  in a casino.
  two ex marine riflemen would have met the Sandy Hook Killer when he broke the window.
  He would be dead instead of the Kids.
  Take some of the money that go,s to the Un and other fogien aid to pay these people.
  They have armed grauds at SS offices and other fed biulding ,Why not a school.
  These Vet are trained to meet this veery same situation.
  I sent a simular letter to my congress & senators creeps.
  I will not get an ans. They would sooner have a study and spend some more money.
  And Ban A bayonet Lug.I wonder when the last person was bayoneted in the USA.
  the Civil war?
  
  Report this comment
- badjujuu
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:42pm
  Today as I was sitting with my spouse and her friends and discussing the gun control, let me say that her and her friends are completely anti gun I asked them one question. Do they wish that someone was there to prevent that tragedy? If yes,and all of them said yes, how do you think someone would be able to prevent that from happening? By negotiations? Reasoning? How would anyone would be able to stop that psychopath? They knew where this was going. And none of them said a word. Last time I checked we were dropping warheads on foreheads in Pakistan with animals we couldn’t negotiate.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:47pm
  @SENDTHEMETEORS Idiots all around.
  
  It took ten minutes for police to arrive at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Had the maniac possesed two six shot revolvers, he could have killed 12 innocent, defenseless souls in less than two minutes, reload in less than two minutes, and killed 12 more innocent, defenseless souls in less than two minutes. They were all sitting ducks. That’s a total of 24 souls dead in 8 minutes. The police wouldn’t be able to do jack. Plus, calling this “gun violence” is like discussing drunk driving and calling it car violence. It’s ridiculous. Those brave teachers used their bare hands and feet to confront the maniac, had any of those courageous staff members had a firearm, the maniac would have a lesser chance of harming anyone else, and the school would have a greater chance of surviving. Why should police officers have the exclusive right to defend themselves with firearms to confront this maniac, but teachers in the care of 20+ children are left with only their bare hands and feet to confront this same maniac? It makes no sense whatsoever, and liberals who would defend such insane logic are sick. No doubt, had we had armed teachers, with certification and training of course, these maniacs would have run like the cowards they are. To even suggest we should punish guns, and not reform school security after this tragedy, blows my mind. Common sense has obviously escaped the liberal’s mind.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:53pm
  The second Amendment does not grant us the people any Rights. The second Amendment, and the whole Bill of Rights for that matter, only addresses and declares certain Rights belonging to the people, but does not create any for them.
  
  Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, the most influential legal commentator in early America, in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, said, concerning the second Amendment,
  
  “The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time ofanding armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facilee means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them…”
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:57pm
  “…And yet, thought this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How is it practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.”
  
  Not only does the Bill of Rights protect an armed citizenry, but demands that they be properly trained in the use of arms. This was done even thirty years back when many high schools in the US still had target shooting competitions and rifle teams.
  
  During WW2, Maryland’s Governor called upon its citizenry to be prepared in the case of an invasion:
  
  http://marylandshallissue.org/get-informed/historical-information/preparing-maryland-invasion-ww2/
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 10:01pm
  “The sincere hope of every person in Maryland is that our State may never experience invasion or attack. That we should consider such a thing as possible is in itself a terrible shock to the American state of mind. Nevertheless, with so much of the world overrun by the enemies of Democracy, and with the invasion of Java and New Guinea as well as other points in the Australian Archipelago fresh in our minds, we would be foolish, indeed, not to be prepared, as completely as possible, for any such happening, even here in Maryland…
  
  With the prospect that the regular Army units will be engaged in more important operations elsewhere, and with our State Guard and Military Police assigned to particular functions, it is felt absolutely necessary to have an additional protective force—: as a home guard—for the protection of our various communities…
  
  The Maryland Minute Men, armed with weapons with which they are thoroughly familiar from long use, operating in a community in which they are accustomed to every road and trail and stream, and aroused to fighting pitch by the knowledge that they are serving to protect their own homes, their family and all that they hold dear in life, will prove a staunch defense against any enemy activity…”
  
  Please, read the whole speech: http://marylandshallissue.org/get-informed/historical-information/preparing-maryland-invasion-ww2/
  
  Report this comment
- Lt_Scrounge
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 10:08pm
  Well Keaton, I would have to say that you are misguided as well as misinformed.
  Many handgun rounds are also used in carbines, hence it is perfectly possible for rounds that may be fired from either to result in “unknown gun”. There really isn’t any way to tell whether a 9 mm round was fired from a pistol or a carbine if they both have the same rifling pattern.
  
  As for being misguided, I can tell you that I have had 40+ years of handling guns and other than accidentally going into a restricted area, I’ve never had a gun cause me to commit a crime. I’ve even had a concealed carry permit for 10 of the last 20 years. I honestly believe that a guy was intending to mug me in my own apartment and changed his mind when he saw the pistol on my hip. 20+ children were attacked in China by a madman with a knife, and it was the second such attack in the last six months. Guns are tools nothing more. The mad man in Ct could’ve caused exactly the same amount of carnage with a pump action shotgun with an 8 rnd tube. All he needed to do was reload. Every 00 buck 12 gauge shell has a dozen pellets roughly 9 mm in diameter. IIRC No.4 shot is roughly the same diameter as a 223 round and there are DOZENS of those per shell. How much damage do you think would result from dozens of projectiles being fired with every squeeze of the trigger? What if the shooter had used the new hexagonal steel shot goose rounds? Then there are the myriad of types of IEDs that can be made from household i
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 10:16pm
  Send, that assumes that no assault on you at your home, school, etc. will involve more than one criminal. But there are gangs, and the law was made in the first place to protect against corrupt governments more so than random crooks.
  
  But more to the point, how exactly do you propose to keep these guns specifically away from lawbreakers by writing a law? The only people (you know full well) laws take guns away from are law-abiding citizens. It’s a nice dream fitting for a beauty pageant to say that any law you can concoct is “preventing terrorists and mentally unstable people the ability to kill a person”, but what you’re really doing is the opposite — making it easier for them to kill a person because that law-abiding person is not armed, but the criminal will get a gun on the black market if he must.
  
  If I’m wrong about this, then what libs need to explain is HOW a law gets the guns away from criminals specifically, NOT from law-abiding citizens?
  
  Report this comment
- rangerskippy
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 10:34pm
  Valiant –
  Keep hammering the truth. I like your style.
  
  You are one of the few folks that post, that I wish I could actualy know in person.
  
  Report this comment
- Black Horse
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 10:49pm
  Keaton,
  As usual, you miss the point entirely. All of those murders equal 12,996. There were 2,437,163 deaths in the US in 2010. There were 599,413 deaths from heart disease alone. Diabetes killed over 68,000 people that year. Alzheimer’s disease killed over 79,000 people. Accidents killed 118,000. So, all guns killed a tiny fraction of people that died in 2010. Care to guess how many people used a gun for self defense? Tough to get good numbers but a low estimate is around 40,000 a year.
  
  Report this comment
- Bub47
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 11:01pm
  I know this is anecdotal but when I was a kid back in the 1950′s and 1960′s there were not really any gun laws to speak of. I lived east of Oakland, CA, and we used to hitchhike with our .22 rifles over our shoulders at age 12 to go plinking in the hills. We would get rides no problem. Since then we have had more and more regulation and interestingly we have had more and more gun violence. So what good are laws??
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 11:17pm
  There were probably about 10 posts and, literally, 10,000 words posted in response to my last post, including a few thousand by Valiant quoting a Justice who lived 200 years ago talking about the value of personal ownership of muskets to defend against “foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers” as though that were relevant today.
  
  The other thing I’m hearing is that, on the one one hand, we as a country cannot ban assault weapons like those used so often in mass murders, nor the high capacity clips that have been used so effectively to kill innocent Americans with such awesome efficiency and in such a short period of time. That, you say, would make American’s less free, even though every other industrialized country on Earth has more restrictive gun laws than we do. The US has far and away the most guns per capita in the world, including lawless countries like Somalia. And the most gun deaths.
  
  Your answer? More guns. Give teachers A-15s. Give Summer camp instructors A-15s. Give convenience store owners A-15s. The answer to gun violence, you say, is to make sure more and more people have guns.
  
  Ultimately, according to that logic, if everybody has a gun and everybody knows that everybody else has a gun, then gun violence stops, because then everybody knows that if they pull a gun, the other person will too. And you’re having a good old wile west shoot out.
  
  Awesome.
  
  Report this comment
- Jim S
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 11:38pm
  ..were the 20 kids beaten to death?..I hadn’t read that…you know hardly any people were killed in hijacked airplanes sense 9-11…we have almost 12 years of zero deaths caused by hijackings,in the US, sooooo we don’t need to keep security at airports right?..I mean over a decade of statics show NO deaths..so there must not be a problem…more people killed by rifle or shotgun than hijacking planes…odd we could end one problem and don’t want to get together and tackle the other…more people killed by hands and feet than hijacking…wow…what’s your point? That you can’t make reasonable conclusions from raw data?…that point you have made…
  
  Report this comment
- Jim S
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 11:44pm
  …btw…over 2000 “unknown guns”…mmmm…wonder if any were rifles?…I bet some were but the rounds fired were not found or not identifiable…which a reasonable person would deduce “some” must have been rifle rounds…just a few hundred of the 2000 would neuter the argument..as if there was one..
  
  Report this comment
- drs1969
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 11:44pm
  Yes, it is Awesome! I’ve been the victim of several thefts in the last 6 years. Two weeks ago, I scared off two car burglars by firing my pistol in the air, then at their rear bumper. If this had been Texas I would have tried my best to kill them. Then the problem would’ve been solved. Turns out both of them were on probation for past crimes. They are now sitting in jail, the driver on $51,500 bond. The other on $90,000. Try living in the real world awhile. The justice system is a joke. They should have already been in prison, but were let loose. Awesome.
  
  Report this comment
- NonVictim
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:06am
  Hm… why do we need “assault weapons?” Let me take a shot at that one.
  
  To keep ourselves safe from tyranny in government. That’s why the founders wrote the 2nd Amendment the way they did, is to keep the government from enslaving the people the way King George did back in Britain. Because no government, no matter how well armed, can stand up against the American people as a whole. Removing these weapons off the streets would not address crime whatsoever because we still have to worry about our open border with Mexico. And I assure you… You can take people’s guns if you want (if you want mine, you better make sure I don’t have a pulse), but the moment you ban guns or even assault weapons… the same guns that were smuggled to the cartels by our government will end up right back on our turf being used to rape and murder our own people. Think about that one.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:06am
  @endthestupidity You are one ignorant, deluded, little nut. Justice Joseph Story was nominated to the Supreme Court by President James Madison, the Father of the Constitution. The first Amendment says “arms”, not firearms, muskets, swords, daggers, or clubs, neither does it limit arms by cosmetics or effectiveness. So, where you got muskets from, beats me. If you truly follow your logic, you can claim no right to free speech or the free press when using the internet or a mechanical pencil. You would have to use an ink jar and quail pen for the first Amendment to protect your Rights. Sadly, you’re blind to your own hypocrisy. In your ignorance, you dismiss the fact that the US was only ten years ago attacked by a foreign enemy, and seventy years ago invaded by a foreign nation. The same Constitution Justice Story comments on, is the same Constitution in force today. Justice Story was alive during the framing of this Constitution, and was appointed by a framer of it. Your denial of reality and of anything concerning facts and historical truth just proves how much made up BS spewed from the left’s rear end you eat up.
  
  Your arguments are largely based on wishful thinking. Mexico’s murder rate is two times higher than the US, though they ban assault rifles and have stricter gun laws.
  
  Your quick assertions and ludicrous presumptions are logically incoherent. BTW, there was less crime in the wild west than all of Chicago’s crime in 2012 combined.
  
  Report this comment
- GoodStuff
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:07am
  @SendtheMeteors
  
  “value of personal ownership of muskets to defend against “foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers” as though that were relevant today.”
  
  You’re right, and the first amendment was only relevant to newspapers (the speech medium of the late 1700′s). Let’s ban internet news sites and television news stations. They clearly aren’t protected by the first amendment.
  
  Report this comment
- NonVictim
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:15am
  One more thing to add. Liberals typically decry violations of civil rights… here’s another thing to think about. Every country in which there has been ethnic cleansing and genocide has been in countries whose people have been disarmed, and left at the mercy of rogue governments and facitons. Take a good look at every form of genocide that has been commited in history and you’ll see that exact same characteristic on each one.
  
  Report this comment
- NonVictim
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:19am
  1st country = point in history. Why is there not an edit button!?
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:22am
  No one is proposing we just hand over a loaded handgun to any teacher and have them wave that handgun in the air and dance around with it for everyone to see, or to strap a machine gun on their shoulders and stand at a moment’s notice to go all out like Rambo. Apparently, reality escapes the liberal’s mind, every time. Do liberals ever even consider that that firearm may be stored in a locked safe, be worn concealed, be kept out of sight, or be kept unloaded until needed? The liberal shows no fact whatsoever to support his claim that a kid may steal or has ever stolen a gun from an armed teacher or guard and done harm to others. He bases his presumptions on mere fear tactics and lunacy. He lives in lala land. He ignores reality and the fact that maniacs have already forced their ways into 100% gun-free schools killing many defenseless souls who were in an environment with very little chance of survival because the school wasn’t adequately and appropriately prepared to equalize any threat or danger risking life and limb. You may present to the liberal numerous responses to his ludicrous assertions and he will deny every one, for his real intent is not solving the problem, but advancing his radical agenda on the masses at whatever cost and by whatever means. The Marxist ideologues and the rest of the leftist clowns hold no actual data in support of their ridiculous claims, but fiercely feed on the emotions and fears of the human mind and heart.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:32am
  @joinflightwiththenextmeteor I guess the slaughter of tens of millions innocent citizens by their own Government in this past century is “irrelevant”. Tell that to the poor souls that are dust, in ashes or under dirt who died in the hands of rulers from the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, militaristic Japan, nationalist Spain, fascist Italy, communist China, despot North Korea, dictatorial Cuba, or genocidal African states and tribes. When you stick your head out of your arse, please feel free to come back and enjoin an actual honest discussion based on fact and reality.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:09am
  “‘usurpations of power’ as though that were relevant today”
  It seems irrelevant only BECAUSE many among the citizenry are armed; that’s the whole point. ;)
  
  “Your answer? More guns.”
  I notice you didn’t give your answer. I repeat, HOW does passing a law get guns out of hands of lawbreakers??
  
  “wile west shoot out.”
  As opposed to a schoolhouse slaughter? Sounds good. ;)
  
  “‘unknown guns’…mmmm…wonder if any were rifles? just a few hundred… would neuter the argument..”
  Not at all — knives, other weapons, and hands/etc. still outnumbers rifles + unknown. Only if you ban handguns do you make a significant dent, and that’s not even being talked about.
  
  Think, people…
  
  Report this comment
- Pontiaku
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:14am
  • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
  Always read carefully at the oppositions comments. When they give “homicide” figures they never distinguish between “Justifiable Homicides” and “Murder”.
  I also don’t care about figures that include one criminal thug shooting another. Once you whittle down the frivolous numbers you’re left with all but a minutia of deaths in a population of more than 300+ million people. You cannot have a civilized nation without armed citizens. That would imply they are all uncivilized. Likewise you should not trust your children with school teachers if you cannot trust ANY of those school teachers with a gun.
  • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
  
  Report this comment
- spikebu
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:37am
  I took an Organic Chemistry class about 30 years ago. I’m fairly certain I could cause more damage with pool acid and water than I could with an AR. Heck. A glass bottle, gasoline, and a rag. Bleach, Ammonia, brake fluid? Every household in America has the means of mass destruction. Very few of us are bent that way. Are we going to ban all that? When Evil wants to act, it will find a way. Today, they want our rifles. Tomorrow, they’ll want our hand guns. Face it. If our government goes tyrannical, an AR would be pathetic defense against its weapons, but it would still be better than a pistol. JMO
  
  Report this comment
- Jerry Frey
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:51am
  @ WARMUNGER_AL: No one has a monopoly on the truth. George Bush was a sucker when he chose to invade Iraq.
  
  http://napoleonlive.info/what-i-think/dick-cheney-doinks-history/
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:55am
  “Today, they want our rifles. Tomorrow, they’ll want our hand guns. Face it. If our government goes tyrannical, an AR would be pathetic defense against its weapons, but it would still be better than a pistol. JMO”
  Very wise points. We can’t forget the step-by-step approach liberals take — whether it’s conscious as in Beck’s novel the Overton Window, unconscious as each new generation simply falls farther to the sin nature’s temptations and takes bad principles of their parents to more situations — or as I think, some of both.
  
  I recently got Netflix for Xbox and I’ve been watching MacGyver. In light of recent events I can’t help but think, what if some serial murderer, even if libs succeeded in literally removing all guns from the planet, decided to use even just a tenth of the tricks Mac uses (presuming that they don’t all actually work; Mythbusters have proven at least some)? Almost everything laying around in our modern society could be used to major and lethal effect.
  
  There is just no “ban the tool” solution that would ever truly work, short of locking every single human being in a padded cell… even then, how do they get food, how do you prevent suidice… etc….
  
  The whole line of thinking is folly. In reality, we need people’s souls to be healed. If they don’t want to murder, they won’t. That should always be our focus — that’s what the debate needs to center on, for the sake of future generations.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 2:04am
  “No one has a monopoly on the truth.”
  What does that even mean?
  
  I get that it sounds good, but it also sounds like (self-contradictory) nonsense… How would a monopoly have anything to do with truth anyways?
  
  Sorry, pet peeve. But also kinda curious if someone can answer…
  
  Report this comment
- N37BU6
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 2:26am
  Here is reality’s version of the chart:
  
  http://i.imgur.com/0bx7H.jpg
  
  Report this comment
- WATER-THE-TREE
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 3:32am
  The Aussies and the Brits are very regretful that they allowed there guns to be taken from them. There is a plot from the Bildeburg types to disarm this country so that they can have the world dominating NWO, have you noticed how many of the US presidents belong to one of and even the same secret societies. There is a reason for all of the stupid legislation and for the particular people that are made president. The liberals just happen to be stupid and indocrtinated, and like the emperor with no cothes they do not even know how ignorant they are.
  
  Report this comment
- YAHSHUARULES
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 4:09am
  I want to agree with MOTHERBOARD on the fact all this will be reversed; but there is alot more going on here then maybe you know:
  
  The agenda is not to educate, but to indoctrinate creating a people so dumbed down they not only want cradle to grave government care but they can’t exist without it – can’t critically think, they can’t serve on juries competently and can’t vote intelligently. Useful idiots for the state. Mindless little, robot zombies spouting the leftist line and not even understanding how they are being used being trained by cadres of intellectuals who want to drive this culture in a direction designed to destroy it:
  
  The breakdown of society in general is by design to take down a Judeo/Christian country from within to make the country so corrupt it stinks and drive us in a direction designed to destroy us. There is a deep cancer rotting us and there is no area this has not touched thanks to Fabians, Frankfurt School, Antonio Gramsci, Mattechine Society and Committee’s of Correspondence, Alinkski and his ilk – all the way to Obama. If America goes down the free world goes down and will be for a very, very long time!
  
  If you don’t know who all these people are and how they fit the Agenda to take America down
  This is the most comprehensive, best movie I have seen pulling all this together. Watch it. Share it.
  It is free on line for the moment
  https://vimeo.com/52009124
  if that is not working try this: https://vimeo.com/16647512
- FLDeb
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 5:20am
  Why is FL not on the list?
  
  Report this comment
- Quiata
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 6:58am
  @SENDTHEMETEORS Not to be pedantic, but here’s a hint so that when you’re speaking about guns you don’t sound uninformed. They’re not “clips”, they are called magazines.
  
  You sound like you’ve never even held, or fired, a gun in your life.
  
  Report this comment
- Quiata
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 7:13am
  An even more intriguing chart would then break down the number of gun-related murders by cities where gun prohibition exists: Chicago and D.C., for instance. Then factor in the aspect of race.
  
  If Obama and his corrupticrat opportunist media friends paid HALF the attention to the weekly violence and deaths in Chicago alone to that given in Connecticut (Chicago already having stringent gun prohibition), they’d have to face the public discussion which would reveal that the facts are not in their favor. That is a discussion they’d rather keep under wraps.
  
  Gun prohibition does not equal safety.
  
  Report this comment
- Quiata
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 7:15am
  @GOODSTUFF “You’re right, and the first amendment was only relevant to newspapers (the speech medium of the late 1700′s). Let’s ban internet news sites and television news stations. They clearly aren’t protected by the first amendment.”
  
  NICE. =)
  
  Report this comment
- rangerskippy
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 7:18am
  SendTheMeteors
  
  It is obvious that you are ignorant to your constitution and firearms, and crime stats.
  
  Rifles are very seldom used in crimes, and it is generally cheap or stolen handguns that are used.
  
  Libs want the rifles for one reason and one reason only. it is the weapon of choice to fend of a Marxist take over or to stop an uprising of the welfare crowd.
  
  Clips were used in the M1 Garand, modern rifles use a magazine.
  
  Notice also that in the first few days of this recent shooting, two handguns were found at the scene, and an AR was found in the back seat of the car. Supposedly, he (the shooter) met with the principle and the psychologist. Do you supposed the buzzed him in while carrying a rifle.
  
  I am not into conspiracy stuff, but something smells funny that after the feds get involved, the investigator declares all those killed had to have been shot with a rifle?
  
  It seems so convenient and to fit the liberal narrative.
  
  Report this comment
- rangerskippy
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 7:26am
  send the metiors
  
  your stats are all messed up
  
  The US has 88 guns per every 100 people, but there are 25 countries in the world with higher murder rates than us
  
  Honduras has 6.6 guns per 100 people and has the current highest murder per capita rate in the world.
  
  in the places where we have the least restrictive gun laws, crime is going down. In places where we have the most restrictive guns laws (like Chicago), murder is the highest.
  
  Blacks make up 12.5% of the population in America; commit half the nation’s murders, but not one peep from the liberal media or democrats. If we could lower black murder rates to the same as whites, we would drop the nation’s murder rate by almost 40%, making us one of the safest countries in the world.
  
  The Swiss have one of the lowest murder per capita rates in the world, and they have a “assault rifle” in every house, with ammo.
  
  The Colorado shooter last summer picked the only movie theater in his area that did not allow for concealed carry for a reason.
  
  Schools do not have to have an AR on site, but if they get rid of the “gun free zone” mentality and signs, and replace with “we are armed and will protect the children”, this stuff will stop happening.
  
  Had the Sandy Hook shooter shown up in his mom’s car, and crashed through a fence, and run over 20 kids, no one would be looking to ban Chevys.
  
  Report this comment
- loriann12
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:03am
  You notice the wording has changed from “assault rifles” to “assault weapons?” They have no intent of limiting it to rifles. They want all our guns. Didn’t I read where they were going to ban the sell of USED weapons?
  
  Report this comment
- Zipit
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:10am
  Meteors! You are perpetually stuck on stupid! You keep alluding to the notion that someone can only kill or commit violence against a large number of people with an “assault rifle”, with “large clips! You wrote;
  “Can’t you kill 100 people in a crowded place, like a parade, in about 30 seconds if you have a large clip and the right kind of gun?”
  
  Answer, “yes you can”! That same person could also kill 30 people at a parade with a suburban! So should we ban……. Oh wait, you idiots also want to do away with my SUV! Never mind!!!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- PA PATRIOT
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:28am
  Fellow Patriots and foe.
  It is simple.
  “When they pry it from my cold dead hand.”
  Period
  
  Report this comment
- PPMStudios
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:29am
  @SENDTHEMETEORS – 20 DEC 11:17 Post
  
  First off, No Conservative would suggest we “give” anyone a gun. If they’re law abiding, they can “buy” their own. You liberals need to understand, nothing is ‘free’.
  
  Second, insinuating we would have a wild west shootout if more people had guns? That’s the most idiotic thing I believe you’ve written. The “wild west shootouts” is more Hollywood fiction than fact.
  
  You probably further believe each time men had a disagreement, it ended in a ‘quick draw’ duel to the death?
  
  Lay off the movies and study the facts please….
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:01am
  @Meteor aka JZS
  
  I’m not going to debate you on this. Your rationalizations mean nothing, and your words mean nothing. You are wrong. I will not only never give up my constitutional rights, I will resist any attempts to relieve me of them by your intellectual masters in the government.
  
  You are dismissed.
  
  Report this comment
- Dismayed Veteran
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:58am
  @Send
  
  One of those wild west shoot outs happened in Northfield, Minnesota. The James/Younger gang raided Northfield’s bank. They were met by Civil War veterans and other town folk who decimated the James/Younger gang.
  
  Report this comment
- SeekerEmerald
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:50am
  I love how people claim the “wild west” was so dangerous. Do these idiots really think that the “wild West Movies” reflect reality? I suppose the also think that James Bond movies are also historically accurate. Hollywood writes outrageous scripts for a reason. Who wants to watch a movie about a bank that DOESN’T get robbed in a spectacular fashion, and doesn’t get robbed at all? Pretty boring movie, but that’s real life. Banks don’t get robbed that often. That’s reality. Wild West shootouts didn’t happen very often. That’s also reality.
  
  How many police stations have been the scene of mass murders? not many.
  How many shooting ranges? How many gun stores? How many FOP lodge meetings?
  
  Criminals may be stupid, but they have enough sense to go after targets that they KNOW are not armed, versus rolling the dice if given the chance, and they certainly don’t go after targets that they KNOW are armed.
  
  How many gun stores have been robbed during the day, versus at night when there is nobody there?
  
  If you are a criminal, and have decided that a bank is the best place to hold up, do you choose the one with an armed guard, or one without?
  
  Is a little common sense too much to ask? Apparently so, for liberals.
  
  If a guy wants to kill 20 people, he’ll find a way to do it. Whatever way he chooses, an armed citizen is the LAST thing he wants to see.
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:02am
  How many innocent children were killed by cars? This is something that we test for, license for, inspect for, and have more laws and regulations than firearms. Yet, cars kill more kids every year than guns. Never hear one peep about banning cars. How many people does drunk driving kill? Yet no calls to ban alcohol (again) nor cars. The reason? Guns are scary. Guns allow for the resistance against The State, and the protection of the individual and allow the individual to protect themselves without needing to call upon The State. Gun control is not about saving lives, it is not about lawlessness nor accidents. It is about empowering The State and depriving the individual of liberty and power. People who want gun control are fascists, and desire you to live in fear and totalitarianism and will push you into being a slave using the force of The State if they can.
  
  Report this comment
- black9897
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:55am
  @SEND & KEATON
  
  It’s really easy to pick on guns. Wanting to ban guns (even just assault weapons) makes you a hypocrite. I don’t see you crying for alcohol to be banned. Or abortion. Or governments, which have killed far more people than any school shooter.
  
  In a free society like ours (although we aren’t as free as we think) people can do basically whatever they want to. As long as what they do does not violate anyone’s rights or cause damage. Yes, endangering someone does fall into that as well (such as driving on the sidewalk). Now, if you are afraid of guns or do not like them for whatever reason, then you are free to not own one. However, the moment you tell me I can’t have them you have crossed the line. If you are truly concerned about peoples’ lives then you would want to get at the root cause of violence and not just the easy thing to point at.
  
  Besides, even IF every single gun was taken and we didn’t have as many murders then that leads to the problem of being controlled by the only people who have them; take theirs away then that leads to the problem of being taken over by another country. Unless you want to disarm the world…good luck with that.
  
  Report this comment
- Anonymous T. Irrelevant
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:12pm
  BONES AND VALIANT
  It’s like talking to a brick wall. SENDMETEOR and KEATON cannot even fathom a legal citizen having a legal firearm to protect themselves and others around them. They just don’t seem to understand the concept. They keep repeating the same thing over and over “guns kill.” Yes, we know, but guns also even the playing field. I am probably just wasting MY time, too.
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:18pm
  I see several people have made the analogy between guns and cars. Cars are dangerous, so do you want to ban them? you ask. Yes, cars can kill people. And maybe, you’ve noticed, they are also highly regulated. You are registered as the car owner, required to buy insurance, required to have a license plate so your ownership can be verified, you have to follow posted speed limits, stop at red lights and so on. Why? To increase everyone’s safety and minimize deaths.
  
  In any case you guys are seriously missing the point of the debate. Few would argue that “the right to bear arms” applies to nuclear arms. Or surface to air missiles or RPGs or hand grenades. Those would sure be a big help if the government is trying to enslave you right? Why is is okay to ban those weapons? Seriously. Why? Why not allow people to have fully automatic weapons like machine guns? Wouldn’t that make us all safer? Sure would make it even easier to get the bad guys, even easier than all those stories you here about assaults weapons being used to take a bad guy out of action. Oops, sorry, that actually never happens with assault weapons, the only use of which is to slaughter innocent people in the shortest amount of time possible.
  
  So why do you draw the line at assault rifles? Why can’t Walmart sell machine guns? You know why, and it’s the same reason people want restriction on other types of guns.
  
  Report this comment
- Pearsontech
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:41pm
  @selfgovernor Interestingly I dug around and found the same info for 2011 as well. Not a huge difference in the numbers. I did some of my own comparisons out of curiosity and found that total murders with firearms in US was 8,583. Taking two of the most restrictive gun laws states California and New York combine having 1665 murders with firearms (California was 1220 of those) thats 19.3% of the total firearms murders in all of the US. Texas and Vermont have the least restrictive their total was 703 (Texas had 699 of those keep in mind Vermont is low due to low population and being mostly rural area) that is 8.19% of the total firearms murders in the US.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:00pm
  “Why is is okay to ban those weapons? Seriously. Why?”
  The Constitution’s reference to “arms” primarily meant rifle-type weapons. A nuke is (obviously ;)) not something you can protect against with another nuke on a citizenry scale. (Hello?) It’s not a “surgical strike” type weapon.
  
  It’s not an “arm”, in other words. Neither are missiles or RPGs. I suppose the case could be made for grenades, not sure. But the Constitution meant guns, and you know that.
  
  “So why do you draw the line at assault rifles?”
  Well, I’m not sure the line really SHOULD be drawn there. But as I said, what if a gang comes at you? Having much more bullets per weapon is wise. A mere handgun is not necessarily going to be reliable enough. And the argument for a more controlled semi-automatic versus fully automatic follows the same “surgical” reasoning, so makes sense.
  
  And you dodged all our points and questions, too. What good does banning rifles do against criminals who get them anyways? Seems you’re the one missing the point.
  
  And I’ll repeat my question from our previous convo — what are your motives and goals? Here, is it to actually protect people? Because the stats are clearly on our side that giving people modes of defense actually DOES protect them better. If not to protect, then what?
  
  Report this comment
- Raphiki
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:03pm
  This year in Chicago we have had almost 500 murders to date. 2/3 have been gang related. There are over 60,000 gang members in the city alone – not counting the suburbs. How many of you think that passing a law will make the gang bangers say “Well if it’s illegal I guess I’ll go turn in my piece.)? I don’t think so either. Gun laws only disarm the law abiding citizens not the criminals.
  
  I have recently started to really pity progressives: they live their lives in fear; they feel they are powerless to control their own destiny; they need things to be provided for them. It may not be PC but I’m an American. I love my country and my Constitution. I provide for myself and my family without government help. I could have retired years ago but didn’t. I pay for my own insurance, run my own business and own my own Glock. If anyone wants to change any of this their lives will get more interesting.
  
  Report this comment
- Zipit
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:04pm
  Meteors! Cars are not necessarily dangerous! But a person determined to use a car as a weapon to hurt someone by running over them can render that car as so! A kitchen knife is not dangerous! a baseball bat is not dangerous! The shotgun in the cabinet in my den is not dangerous! SO off the top of your pointed kittle head, give us your definition of an “assault rifle”. It’s pretty safe to say that all SWAT Teams are equipped with rifles that would fit most reasonable definitions! Do you see those as weapons that do nothing more than slaughter huge amounts of innocents in a short amount of time?
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:07pm
  @begonewiththemeteor Let me enlighten you for a moment. The second Amendment protects the the citizenry’s right to own arms. These “arms” are those used for self defense and protection of the homeland. It is already legal to buy and own machine guns in the US. You obviously know nothing about US laws, history or firearms. There are restrictions and regulations in place for the sell of these machine guns, e.g. higher fees and taxes, more paperwork, waiting period, longer process, licensing, etc. Keep repeating your ignorance for all to see, so that in the future, when you decide to unwisely post again, they may know your that idiot that doesn’t know jack. BTW, Switzerland trains their citizens in the use of fully automatic firearms, gives them the privilege of taking it home, and pays them to practice with it at a range. Switzerland has the third lowest crime rate in the world. They were never invaded in WW1 or WW2, although Nazi Germany was their neighbor. Next time, before you spout for manure from your mouth, how about you try to educate yourself, do some research, and actually use facts to try to verify your outrageous claims.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:17pm
  “Sure would make it even easier to get the bad guys, even easier than all those stories you here about assaults weapons being used to take a bad guy out of action. Oops, sorry, that actually never happens with assault weapons”
  Well, that would be an interesting thing to look into, considering what someone just said on Glenn’s show; being in the know, that the media will often refuse to report stories where a gun was used to stop a crime. But someone has already pointed out one way those things obviously deter crime — you never see someone robbing a place they know is armed with them.
  
  Let’s all keep in mind a major rule of talking with libs is, never trust their claims about stats. Just the other day they were in here claiming rifles were used in the majority of murders, after all, and here we find it’s not even close. (And you can extend this to other categories like their exploded predictions about the economic Stifle-us.)
  
  And yeah, talking to SentFromBraineaters is like talking to a brick wall, but even a brick wall provides an opportunity to post helpful information for the sake of those reading along. ^_^ And I have faith that even the wackiest lib coming on here has a chance to repent — they tend to be victims of those that sneak their way into their blind trust, who they then go out and mindlessly parrot, and we do them a great service in encouraging them to realize they’re just being used.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:33pm
  I see SENTTHEMORON is doing his usual passive/aggressive troll routine and setting up false truths.
  
  Here’s the deal champ…we tried a ban on “assault” weapons. Guess what my slimy lefty friend? It didn’t work. Murder rates weren’t affected. You know why? Criminals don’t care about gun laws.
  “A 2004 critical review of research on firearms by a National Research Council panel also noted that academic studies of the assault weapon ban “did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence” and noted “due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban … the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small….”
  
  By all means SENTTHEMORON…please count how many words have been used to reply to your misdirections and obfuscations here today rather than face the truth. And make sure you start your post with “I see”. You’re an idiot.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 1:35pm
  SENTTHEMORON…I’d recommend you log in as your old name “JZS”…but you’d still sound like an idiot.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 2:33pm
  WalMart SHOULD sell machine guns actually. For the same reason it sells semi-autos.
  
  It’s not your place to determine what rights we need or don’t need, JZS. Your sophistry is tired.
  
  Report this comment
- desertspeaks
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 2:36pm
  In England, they outlawed hand guns, crime went up. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-ZNjHBXo-Fw#!
  Here’s Australia, after banning guns, their crime rate went up.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8RDWltHxRc
  Here is Bermuda’s police commissioner touting falling gun crime rates http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-2ewpm98pg
  THEN in BERMUDA where guns are illegal unless you go through a stringent background check along with a host of other laws. we have on December 11, 2012 where gun crimes escalate and catch govt flat footed when gun crime erupts http://www.caribbean360.com/index.php/news/bermuda_news/643161.html#axzz2FiTFYZoj
  BANNING GUNS DOES NOT WORK!!!
  
  Report this comment
- smv803
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 2:38pm
  To the liberals it doen’t matter…anything with a trigger needs to be banned.
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc33
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 5:21pm
  Valiant. How does this make me an idiot? first off these aren’t murders. these are thing people choose to do and live and die with the consequences. I choose to smoke, i don’t choose to be shot in a movie theatre… you see the difference right?
  
  Report this comment
- AmericanFightingMan1
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 5:21pm
  I suspect we are past the point of trying to convince each other. Meteor, like other lost libs, may learn the hard way what the 2nd Amendment is all about should government ever make a bad move.
  
  It is all about the means to insist on one’s liberty. That is it. Regular people with the means to be free.
  
  Take the tens of millions who were murdered in Europe between 1910 and 1950, and they all had one thing in common: they were disarmed.
  
  Meteor, you are a sad little man. Afraid. Cowering. But worst of all, you advocate disarming, even just a little, your fellow Americans. That, in my book, is a little dose of treason.
  
  Report this comment
- turkey13
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 7:51pm
  That chart about handguns is correct. In Oct this year a 12 year old girl was home alone during fall break in Durant Oklahoma. Someone kept ringing the doorbell and knocking on the door. He left & she called her mom. The mother told her to get her .40 Glock and hide in the bathroom closet. With gun & phone she hid and then heard the guy break in. Six minuets later while on the phone with a 911 operator she saw the door knob turn and then shot him. The 32 year old guy was arrested out front with a stomach wound.All my grandsons started out with a Cricket .22 rifle when they hit age 5.
  
  Report this comment
- dalek
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:54pm
  @valiant1776, you are right. I read a article where a study was done and about 100,000 people die from medical mistakes EACH YEAR. Should we outlaw Doctors? Their mistakes sure do kill a LOT of people.
  
  Just saying.
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:27pm
  Well obviously I can’t respond to everyone here, especially the people who post three or four times, unable to state their case in one. But I’ll respond to a few.
  
  GhohstOfJefferson, you said you wouldn’t argue, that my posts were meaningless and dismissed me from the conversation. And yet you come back at me. Maybe my posts aren’t so meaningless? And Walmart should sell machine guns? What about dynamite, a useful weapon if the government is trying to confiscate your guns and Godline gold correct? Unwilling to say here where you draw the line on what weapons should be legal and what should not be sold at Walmart? My guess is that you’ve never decided for yourself what sort of things, things with the potential to kill lots of people, should be available and which should not. Think about it.
  Bones says, ” The Constitution’s reference to “arms” primarily meant rifle-type weapons.” No bones, it says “arms” and if there was a reference it was to muskets. Stop pretending the Founders had a clue about what sort of weapons would be available 200 years hence. They couldn’t have guessed that future weapons could kill 36 innocent people in just a few minutes.
  Zipit says, “Cars are not necessarily dangerous!” Uh, sure they are. Huh? That’s why they are regulated. Ever seen a stop sign, or red light or speed limit sign.
  AverngerK – post links to your “stats.” You just make them up and I don’t even bother to read them.
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:24pm
  Here’s an opinion piece for those of you who are a little smarter than the average bear, which narrows the field quite a bit. The article is written by a conservative federal judge, one nominated by a republican president, one who says (in the article) that he prefers to get his news from FOX, is a gun owner and a hunter. He also happens to be the guy that sentenced Jared Loughner to prison.
  
  http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-burns-assault-weapons-ban-20121220,0,6774314.story
  
  Here’s a conservative making the case for more gun control. His view really is more intelligent than most here can comprehend, so I don’t expect many to follow the link. let alone understand it. But maybe one or two of the smarter people may accept the challenge of trying to comprehend his words. He isn’t addressing to lowest common denominator gun fanatics, but rather to the smarter and more reasonable gun owners.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:59pm
  You’re correct JZS, I shouldn’t have responded to you twice. My bad, I was trying by example to help others. And yes, dynamite is fine, it was sold until very recently to farmers to clear tree stumps, as you clearly do not know.
  
  Now, you’re ignored. Good luck, I’m informing others that playing games of sophistry is futile. You can’t admit error, you will never go against your dogma, what’s the point in discussion.
  
  Slainte
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 1:15am
  GhostofJefferson, of course you shouldn’t have responded to me given your dismissal of me and my ideas. At least you were trying “help others.” I guess that extenuating factor explains your knee jerk response. I think it’s cool that you want to help others though.
  
  You’re are correct that I didn’t know that farmers were prohibited “until very recently” from buying dynamite. I imagine that it wasn’t just farmers who can’t now buy dynamite. I imagine that nobody, not just farmers, can simply walk up to the Walmart counter and buy dynamite. I’m quite sure you understand why that is the case.
  
  You know what else farmers can’t do? They also can’t walk into a store and buy enough fertilizer to fill a Ryder truck, at least not without jumping through a bunch of government hoops. Many people understand why we, as a country, want those restrictions, just as we want restriction on buying dynamite.
  
  I see how interested you are in protecting the rights of farmers and that you see no need for them to fill out all those government forms justifying their need to buy dynamite, or Ryder trucks full of fertilizer. Me? I’m sorry that farmers have to justify their need for dynamite or buying large amounts of fertilizer. Farmers are the good guys. I’m not worried about farmers. I’m worried about the guys who exploit our system to murder people. Having learned your lesson, you are now dismissed.
  
  Report this comment
- Wyoming_Patriot
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 1:54am
  Let me get this straight… meteorboy wants all assault weapons and large clips banned. I have used large clips on many occasions to secure large wires in place while making an electrical connection. Why does he want them banned? And, by definition, an assault weapon is any weapon used in the commission of an assault. This would include rocks, sticks, scissors, knives, hands, feet, heads and the list goes on and on and on. So basically, he wants to ban everything including life. Yeah, makes perfect sense to me…..NOT!
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 2:39am
  Most important for us conservatives is to remember that we are NOT just talking to the liberal trolls who post here, but we are teaching things that urgently need taught, to those with open mind, who do value reason, truthseeking, and morality, who are reading along. Our goal is not primarily to convince people like Send, though that would be ideal, but to convince more and more people until we regain a majority.
  
  Just as the libs always worked hard regardless of how few they were to spread their ideas, confident that doing so would eventually pay off. We can’t copy their immoral tactics, but hard work is not immoral at all; especially considering the cause we are spreading is right, and very needed.
  
  “‘rifle-type weapons.’ No bones, it says “arms” and if there was a reference it was to muskets. Stop pretending the Founders had a clue about what sort of weapons would be available 200 years hence.”
  And there we go. I hoped you’d say it earlier, but that’s okay.
  
  Now, I have a question for you. Given that the sorts of weapons available now to the criminals have changed, and that our motives must be to protect people and finally that arming them with weapons appropriate for the challenge at hand now, including multiple thugs, in THIS day, is vital… Doesn’t this mean that the Constitution’s protection is most logically extended to weapons much like semi-automatic rifles? What other weapon is so ideal for this?
  
  Report this comment
- hawkeye1
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 8:49am
  The government sponsored abortions still outnumber all of the methods to kill. And we pay for it.
  
  Report this comment
- dcatkin
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 9:06am
  Then the problem witht that is that you can’t believe what the FBI tells you. They will do as Obama tells them. It’s charts like this that make it possible for the Obammy to push the removal of gums from the American people.
  
  Right To Bare Arms
  
  Report this comment
- DeOppressoLiber
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 9:58am
  The gun lobby is not forming the argument right. It is not the guns, it is the violence that the entertainment industry promotes.
  
  We are killing the enemy very well in the Middle East but we are not winning the War of Ideas. Ideas are not formed by the presence of guns.
  
  They are formed by different types of media selling the ideas.
  
  Report this comment
- black9897
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:53am
  @SEND
  
  If you’re really concerned about shootings, then you need to get at the root cause. I’m not worried about people having RPGs, machine guns, or even dynamite. I’m worried about who has them. Remember, if you are a good person who wants to use them for good then no worries. In fact, you could make a case to own all the things I just listed (as long as they were kept at home). Governments have murdered far more people than any school shooter ever has. So if you were to ask me what I feared more: a school shooter or the government, I would pick the GOV. Btw, you can already make homemade bombs.
  
  How many did Stalin murder? 20, 30 million? Hilter—millions and millions as well. Our own government throughout American history has murdered too many to count. Drone attacks, wars (I would also include abortion).
  
  Cont…
  
  Report this comment
- black9897
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:56am
  @SEND
  
  I read the article you posted. I honestly don’t care if he is a conservative or watches fox news, or owns a gun himself. I really don’t think that means anything, due to the fact those on both sides care nothing of freedom. While he may be honest in his opinion, I would still say he’s wrong. Even IF it were possible do we really need to spend that much time and effort to make sure no one has assault weapons or high capacity magazines? You think it’s ok to kick down someone’s’ door who has done nothing wrong but own an assault weapon and violently (with a gun) take it from him? Are you willing to go about immoral means to achieve a so called moral end?
  
  Look at where most of these shootings have happened. Sandy Hook, Batman movie, VA Tech all have a common theme….gun free zones. Sure, colleges have campus police, but they can’t be everywhere at once or always prevent this stuff. It’s very easy even on a college campus (large or small) to walk into a class room and shoot people. I’m actually surprised more bad guys haven’t targeted college campuses. Obviously we can’t arm kids from K-12th, but we can put security in every school and or arm teachers.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 1:08pm
  Great point, Hawkeye. It’s very hypocritical for libs to claim to be motivated to protect others from gun violence, while at the same time supporting murdering children of a certain age. It really helps spotlight that their real motives are all about power hunger.
  
  Report this comment
- SavvyCowboy
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 1:41pm
  @SENDTHEMETEORS – If you were just naive you would be sadly mistaken but you are a complete unadulterated MORON. If some insane idiot wants to kill hundreds of people he would simply purchase fertilizer, diesel fuel and a few 50 gallon drums. Then he would make a simple, cheap timer and blasting caps, provide a power source to the the system, set the timer then walk away. Oh!!! That was already done in Oklahoma City in 1995!!!!! The RIGHT answer “send-in-the-morons” is if an unstable jerk wants to kill lots of people in the US, he/she can do so with a little imagination and a few hundred dollars (or an ability to steal without getting caught).
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 8:20pm
  SavvyCowboy, right on — and the really bad ones like Adam Lanza don’t really need to worry about getting caught; they kill themselves in the act (he’s really a terrorist; not an Islamic terrorist, but a terrorist just the same). They just plain don’t care — about laws, about consequences, or anything. The only thing they “care” about is a bullet lodged in their heart if they’re caught in the act by an armed good guy.
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 10:23pm
  BLACK says, “You think it’s ok to kick down someone’s’ door who has done nothing wrong but own an assault weapon and violently (with a gun) take it from him?”
  
  BLACK, statements like that are a large part of the problem. You know that nobody, nobody, has advocated that. Nobody, no one, least of all a legislator. You know that. This is your fantasy, the one where you whip out your guns to protect your rights. Your paranoia is showing. Your fear of someone taking away your guns is sheer paranoia.
  
  How do you feel when I say that? How do feel I ask you to quote a single legislator on the state or federal level who has said something like that and you can’t. How do you feel when I ask you how you know that someone is going to kick your door in?
  
  Report this comment
- black9897
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:04pm
  @SEND
  
  I never said anyone has advocated for that. I was basing this largely on the article you posted. The guy from the article wanted the ban to come back but with some “teeth.” Besides, if there was a ban and no one would own them, how do you think they would be taken? With a “hi, sorry to bother you, I was just wondering if you could hand over your assault weapons.”
  
  I’m certainly not paranoid; however I’m not asleep and keep watch. After all, aren’t we supposed to? Ben Franklin said he gave us a Republic if we could keep it. I was just asking you a question anyways. I have a reasonable fear of people taking away any rights (including guns). This is America of course..nothing like that could happen…just like they would never force certain individuals to be sterilized, have prostitutes lure clients to a safe house so they could test drugs like LSD on them; threaten people with prison if they don’t give them money (taxation), threaten people with jail if they don’t’ serve on a jury. I guess you are more trusting than I am.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 23, 2012 at 2:10am
  Send, what, then, are you actually advocating? It sounds like you’re just being contrary just for fun, then. Yes, libs probably do have that as the endgame (or really a major step) in their “overton window” strategy, though nobody has yet said so here that I saw (of course, this is another common tactic of libs; construct straw men constantly).
  
  Or, worse, are you just arguing for the status quo? Just leave kids undefended?
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on December 23, 2012 at 2:18am
  “How do you feel when I ask you how you know that someone is going to kick your door in?”
  I feel like there is something seriously wrong with you, to even put that sentence together that way. ;)
  
  Anyways, the point of a precaution like a gun, a smoke detector, a burglar alarm, a first-aid kit, etc. is not that you know something bad WILL happen, but that you know it COULD, and in this case that’s not debatable. It’s happened before, and human nature hasn’t really changed.
  
  And the fact that you focus more on how you saying something makes someone feel, rather than on how they know or think or are cautious about something… that speaks once again to that obsession you apparently have with selfish pride (a typical trait of trolls). All you care about is making people feel upset by virtue of your unvirtuous actions. No?
  
  Report this comment
- Ovrwatch74
  Posted on December 23, 2012 at 9:06am
  Keatonc33 in response to what you said about how convienent it is to not know what kind of gun was used by bullet holes and exit wounds. Some bullets are made to fragment to cause more damage to the individual being shot so other bystanders don’t get injured. Also you have the way tissue responds to the bullet which doesn’t always act the same from person to person. Then there’s the fact that there are some rifle caliber that are the same as pistols, so there would be no definitive way to differinciate, between the two. Then there’s the fact that bullet ballistics vary from powder charge to primer used to the bullet weight there are many variables to consider before saying it was this caliber bullet. It would be nice if someone knew a little information before they post their ignorance.
  
  Report this comment
- Ubeefunny
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 2:43pm
  I have to wonder how people are so easily misled. I pulled up the crime statistics for my city which is generally ranked near the top in crimes. There were three stabbing deaths, two from being beat to death and several hundred from gun related crimes.
  
  Then I read the part of hiring vets and arming them and putting them into schools. Until you look back at the very same statistics I just mentioned and several of those murders were vets with PTSD. Maybe we arm the teachers? Not if you read the stories of teachers killing their students: http://www.dailypaul.com/94831/teacher-kills-student-says-just-doing-my-job. And of course the NRA in their moment of enlightenment decided that TAXPAYERS can foot the bill to put armed individuals into our schools. Sorry, conservatives have long complained about spending on programs that aid the public so if the NRA and gun owners want this then they should be taxed to pay for it – those opposed to this should NOT have to pay for your desires.
  
  The sad fact is outside of health issues the #1 killer in this country is guns. In the past month there have been 0 drunk driving accidents or deaths in my town. There were more killings with guns than I can count. Do they blame the person? No, they blame the alcohol.
  
  But, of course Republicans want to regulate porn. Something that doesn’t result in ANY deaths at all.
  http://jezebel.com/5938704/anti+capitalist-piece-of-republican-platform-seeks-to-regulate-porn-entrepreneurs
  
  Have fun hyp
  
  Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:16pm
The idiots in congress and the Marxist POS will use the massacre at Newtown and every gun death to strip us of our right to bear arms,they’re ghoulish freaks indeed. Exploiting those deaths to advance their un american agenda is sickening,how do those ghouls sleep at night? Congress can’t make a law restricting our right to bear arms yet they’ve created thousands of unconstitutional laws to do just that.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 2getherWeStand
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:39pm
  I’d just like to add…not every gun death. How many times has the president trotted out there to condemn the thousands of shooting deaths in the inner city? Black on black crime. Where gun laws are the tightest, and gun violence is the highest.
  
  There answer is always to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. It’s not a gun issue. It’s a heart issue. What’s to be done about that? No one wants to answer the hard question.
  
  Report this comment
- Bum thrower
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:46pm
  Hey!! The Feds ran guns to Mexico….AK’s, AR’s you name it. And now they want to disarm citizens; maybe we could just pass a law making schools ‘gun free zones’. Let’s see how that works out. before we do anythig ‘stupid’. Pierce (on CNN) said there was no reason to own a firearm; Had that happened in colonial days, our national anthem would be ‘God Save the Queen’….think about it.
  
  Report this comment
- 2getherWeStand
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:50pm
  Their, not there. Getting over the stomach flu…although I don’t have an excuse of a concussion….
  
  Report this comment
- Norm D. Plume
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:13pm
  Can someone tell me if Beck has fired CheaperThanDirt! as a sponsor yet?
  
  My BlazeTV account is on hold right now (moved, changed banks, etc.) and I want to know if it’s worthwhile paying for it again.
  
  If he hasn’t fired them by tomorrow, I’ll cancel outright.
  
  Thanks,
  
  –Norm
  
  Report this comment
- BODYBAG
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:46pm
  “The welfare of the people has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of
  giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.”
  ~ Albert Camus, 1948
  
  “All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns,
  that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.
  ~ Mao Tse Tung, “Problems of War and Strategy”, Nov 6 1938
  
  “Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.”
  ~ Janet Reno, Attorney General of the United States, Clinton Admin, 1993
  
  Report this comment
- BODYBAG
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:51pm
  @BUM THROWER
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:46pm
  Pierce (on CNN) said there was no reason to own a firearm; Had that happened in colonial days, our national anthem would be ‘God Save the Queen’….think about it.
  ———————————————-
  Yup. And no one yet has had the b@lls to give a straight answer to his badgering question —–
  “Why do you need to own the kind of weapon that can fire 25 rounds per second — thats not for hunting”
  
  So that we are equalized against a TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT like the one where you came from Piers —- you english ****.
  
  Report this comment
- mercenary4freedom
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:06pm
  And the marxist says, “you cannot have a police state with an armed population, right Joe?”
  
  Governments evolve over time, eventually leading to tyranny. The people need military style weapons to maintain the balance of power between freedom and tyranny. Look back in recent history to the gun controls that preceded mass exterminations in Germany, Russia, China, Cambodia, Guatemala, Turkey, and Uganda.
  
  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 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  
  Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, 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 defe
  
  Report this comment
nesmond
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:15pm
Once again, you try to show progressives those pesky facts, which only results in causing their little heads to hurt. They feel that this chart is unreliable and is just another tool being used by the right to fool Americans. Progressives say what a tragedy that this nation’s lax gun laws resulted in the deaths of those poor children in Connecticut, yet all the while defending Roe v Wade resulting in the murder of 3,700 children per day. “There are none so blind as those who refuse to see”.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
sbenard
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:14pm
So even with the most deadly form of gun, a handgun, the probably of getting killed with one is about 1 in 50,000. I’m more afraid of dying on an airplane than from a gun!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
sbenard
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:11pm
I can imagine Piers Morgan now, demanding the banning of hands, fists, and feet.

You first, Piers. You fall on your sword — or better said, your STUMP — first!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- justangry
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:19pm
  Oh, that douche bag needs to go back to England bad.
  
  Report this comment
- calamityjane85
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:20pm
  I say we ban feet. I mean they are so dangerous. Good Grief.
  
  Report this comment
- sparkyrules
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:34pm
  Our founders whipped Morgans ancestors ass’s pretty good didn’t they?The hoity toity tyrannical British against strong men of great character honor like George Washington and his valiant troops.
  Screw Piers Morgan.I’m glad I don’t have to flip channels and see the likes of him anymore.
  
  Report this comment
- pissantno.10
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:38pm
  why is this guy even here england is his kind of utopa. may be they make him pay taxes there.
  
  Report this comment
- 1TrueOne55
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:38pm
  He left the UK because he wanted the “Freedom” to make his own choices and lots of money with less taxes. I watched a Youtube video about an English property owner that had been burglarized 3 times and the last time he used a gun and killed one of the intruders inside his house, the one that lived got 3 years and is out in 18 months or 50% percent of his conviction. The home owner Mr. Martin is in prison for longer and not probation.
  And according to the reporter in the video gun crimes are on the increase by between 35-60% depending on the region. And now only the criminals have guns and the UK Citizens are marching on Parliament but it’s not being told here but those in the UK are warning US Citizens to not give up our 2nd Amendment rights given to us by God.
  
  Report this comment
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:07pm
  England, land of the never been free. They are under constant surveillance, no rights to say what they want to say, no rights to anything for protection (guns or knives) and yet, they still have murders, muggings and all sorts of crimes. We left Britain for a reason.
  
  Report this comment
- mercenary4freedom
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:16pm
  SPARK, don’t forget General Dan Morgan (no relation to Piercipoo), kicked the living **** out of those tyrannical royalists. This was the battle @ the Cow Pens (depicted in the movie The Patriot) I believe where he asked the militia to fire 2 rounds before retreating so the Colonial forces could come from below the rise and hit them head on while the remaining militia and reserve blue coats flanked them to seal the deal.
  
  Report this comment
FaithfulFriend
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:08pm
In the graph, they obviously didn’t get the memo and forgot to put the dripping blood around the rifle tube.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- integrican
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:34pm
  …or a child sitting atop it.
  
  They will most certainly ban 30 round mags for the ARs, which is when I will promptly open a cash only business welding 2 or 3 together and insert some longer springs. Who said Obama isn’t creating jobs!!!
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:24pm
  @Int
  
  Now *that* is a traditional American attitude. Well done, and I hope you’re serious.
  
  Report this comment
All Pro
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:06pm
Three weapons were recovered from the school: a semi-automatic .223 Bushmaster found in a car in the school parking lot, and a Glock and a Sig Sauer found with Lanza’s body, a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation said. The weapons were legally purchased by Lanza’s mother, the official said.
http://www.local10.com/news/Police-26-dead-in-Conn-school-shooting/-/1717324/17777166/-/format/rss_2.0/view/print/-/l87phtz/-/index.html

For the love of God I’m begging you! Can somebody please forward this to Glenn Beck. Unless you think a dead man got up and placed his weapon in his car before laying back down. And what about the other shooters? I have the video from ABC’s helicopter! These people are lying through their teeth. Click on the link.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:15pm
  The supposed “other shooter” was a father trying to enter the building from a different entrance to assist with some gingerbread cookies. He is the guy who was taken into custody and handcuffed by the police. Sorry, but I have forgotten his name from yesterday.
  
  Report this comment
- calamityjane85
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:22pm
  RJJ… and what about the one in the woods?
  
  Report this comment
- Polarized America
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:21pm
  ALL PRO………………your link is from
  Author: By Susan Candiotti and Sarah Aarthun CNN <—— CNN
  
  and it came out shortly after the shootings. i heard somewhere that the weapon found in the car turned out to be a shotgun in the trunk ….so your link may be worthless
  
  Report this comment
- Dustoff
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:55pm
  I have to wonder, if it was found in the car. Then we must admit he didn’t use that during the school shooting. Just hand guns only?
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc33
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:11pm
  the weapon in the car was a shot gun… there was a lot of miss information the came out right after the shooting.
  
  Report this comment
- StronzateDiDestra
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 10:10pm
  No AR type weapon has a charging handle on the right side of the weapon.
  
  The gun in the trunk is a “semi-auto” shotgun.
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ju_NllT1iDo#!
  
  Report this comment
- TwoLazy
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:20am
  I read that also, you gotta wonder how a law enforcement officer can make an error like saying the AR was in the car, and the medical examiner saying they were all shot with the AR.
  
  Anyway, what is is what is and you really don’t want a liberal progressive to waste a good emotional gun ban, now do you?
  
  But still gotta wonder …
  
  Report this comment
@SoquelCreek
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:05pm
Using data from the United States Census Bureau, here’s a chart showing how murders from firearms compares to some other major causes of death in the United States. The facts will likely surprise most people, who are blissfully unaware.

CHART: Number of Deaths in USA by Selected Cause
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-S54l7mN7p_Y/UMz-mGvo3tI/AAAAAAAABko/hrmU4rY4G6w/s1600/abortion_vs_gun_deaths.png

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:18pm
  I don’t find that at all surprising. But, why would the left let actual statistics get in the way. Besides, most just consider those abortions to have been nothing more than blobs. Apparently, that is how they see themselves in a mirror anyway.
  
  Report this comment
- nighttrainno9
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:33pm
  The very thing liberals push hard (abortion) causes more deaths than all other
  causes combined.
  
  Report this comment
- RLTW
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:56pm
  Should we not as Americans be able to remove all gun deaths committed by illegals from these stats and place them at the feet of the progressives?
  
  Report this comment
- PatienceNReason
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:23am
  Abortions in 2011: ~1.2 Million! Source: Alan Guttmacher Institute
  How does _that_ skew the chart?
  
  Report this comment
- Schitzoid_Avenger
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 6:28pm
  This chart proves the progressive point! Congress should stop worrying about a few conservative fanatics crying “UNCONSTITUTIONAL!” and just finally pass some common sense laws that make Diseases illegal. The lives of thousands of people, including children would be saved every year!
  
  Wait..what? Stuff that is illegal can still happen?
  
  Report this comment
Armyof One
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:03pm
Wouldn’t matter. Their ire will simply shift back to handguns. Shades of the 1980′s.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
AllLost
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:03pm
When the left talk about assault weapons they are not talking about assault rifles. The left consider any weapon that is semi-automatic to be an assault weapon, which includes handguns. This is why there is such a ruckus about large capacity clips.

This chart actually bolsters the left’s argument as I see it, and I am not for gun control or gun banishment.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- mercenary4freedom
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:27pm
  If I hit a lib with a bat, it’s considered aan “assault bat”, right?
  
  Report this comment
@SoquelCreek
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:00pm
In the usual fashion, society focuses on the sensational and completely ignores the real story.

What 100% legal action takes 100 TIMES MORE innocent lives EVERY SINGLE DAY than the Sandy Hook shooter?

Putting Gun Violence into Proper Perspective
http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2012/12/putting-gun-violence-into-proper.html

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DougHuffman
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:13pm
  Merry Christmas once and future neighbor.
  
  I summered at our beachhouse on Oakland Avenue – now gone to erosion. Mom, now on the beach at the Esplanade, and Dad (flushed) retired to 300 Plum Avenue. The Reynolds RIP on Wharf Road, across from the Venetian, were very close friends.
  
  Report this comment
athiest-infedel
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:59pm
Are you going to belive what we tell you or your lying eyes.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RLTW
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:17pm
  Coming from someone whose ideology exists purely based on ignoring the history of man; yeah you’re a liar.
  
  Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:59pm
Why will it matter to the left, Obama is hell bent on disarming all of us and will make it happen.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- normalmom
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:20pm
  If he tries he will become probably one of the bloodiest dictators in history. I know my family won’t just sit aside and let them me taken it will be out of cold dead hands.
  
  Report this comment
- drs1969
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:00am
  No, he won’t. Wal Mart is selling out. I had my eye on a new 8 shot 12 gauge a few months back. BHO gets elected and they’re all sold out! He’s the greatest gun salesman of all time. The prices will never be higher than now. People aren’t going to give them up w/o a fight!
  Bring it on!
  
  Report this comment
Diane TX
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:57pm
I’m sure that ALL GUNS are already on the Socialists list to ban. (baby steps baby steps)

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Mess23
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:57pm
1.2 million kids were killed last year. Just imagine if we banned abortions? Or even just a ban on government subsidized abortions?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- chips1
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:07pm
  Murder by doctor. Where was the chart?
  
  Report this comment
- andrew36
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:21pm
  There not kids there foetuses. If you dont know the difference you seriously need help.
  
  Report this comment
- Improvise.Adapt.Overcome
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 9:29pm
  In response to Andrew36- What are “foetuses”?
  
  Report this comment
- chewfatlip
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:57am
  @Andrew36 – before the Civil war, slave owners would say “They aren’t people, they are N****”
  Whether its called a fetus or a baby – it’s alive.
  
  Report this comment
- Techcon
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 5:04pm
  @CHEWFATLIP
  
  To your stellar point:
  
  The ONLY difference between a fetus, a baby, a child, and an adult is…time.
  
  It is NEVER importance (what the death-o-crats call, “viability”).
  
  Report this comment
NOTYERHUCKLEBERRY
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:56pm
Don’t let a good crisis go to waste. Where have we heard that before? What I want to know is’ :Who do the anti-guners think is going to protect them when the government comes for them?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
do_in_it_2
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:56pm
I don’t see tools used for abortions. forceps, scalpels etc

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- UNALIEN
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:21pm
  1.2 million murders per year
  
  Report this comment
- TwoLazy
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:24am
  Cars need to be banned too. 32,367 traffic related deaths in 2011 … lemme say that agan 32,367. Assault vehicles … OH MY
  
  Report this comment
All Pro
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:55pm
A CNN reporter said police recovered three weapons at the scene: a Glock and a Sig-Sauer, which are handguns, as well as a .223 Bushmaster rifle. The rifle was in the back seat of the car the gunman drove to the school, the handguns were inside the school. The car belonged to Nancy Lanza.
Read that as many times as necessary!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JustTryn
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:34pm
  Are you trying to trade off rifle ban vs pistol ban?
  Just a question, ~as I own, and consider BOTH authorized by the 2nd Ammendment.
  So, my opinion is~ I have a right to bear arems, in order to defend myself from a tyrantical government. I also have a DUTY to do the same, as an American citizen, and because the OATH I swore to many times over, had NO EXPIRATION DATE!
  No qualifications.~ that is “.” (period)
  Please do not take this as a challenge, or an insult~
  
  Report this comment
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 2:36pm
  Just,
  Read it again. He is simply stating that the evil AR was found in the car and not in the school. The govt liars are lying when they said the AR was used. They just don’t want us to be able to fight back against them. They don’t want us to be equally armed. He wasn’t trading anything for anything. Wake up.
  
  Report this comment
- dalek
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:22pm
  There is a video showing them removing it from the trunk. The video is not good but it looked more like a shotgun. The reason I think this, you unload a rifle with your right hand. You pump a shotgun with your left. The guy in the video appeared to be using his left hand to empty the gun. The video is not good but that is what I am thinking. I have also noticed that this story is changing over time too. That bothers me. First they said he used handguns then they said he used a rifle. If the rifle is in the trunk, how did it get there when the shooter is dead in the building.
  
  Questions that I’m not sure about yet. One thing I do know, they are not letting this tragedy go to waste.
  
  Report this comment
nonofmybiznez
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:55pm
A picture is worth a thousand words…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
HMNSC
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:55pm
They will not let facts get in their way.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:54pm
“Yes, massacres tend to be done with weapons like this. But not most gun murders in the U.S.: a vast majority of gun murders in the U.S. are committed with a handgun,” The Washington Examiner’s Timothy Carney writes.

He’s only half right. Since Columbine, only 10.3% of the mass murders were committed with Assault Rifles and of those they actually have lower body counts that Shotgun/SemiAuto pistol events.

It’s a myth through and through.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- progressiveslayer
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:38pm
  The stats are meaningless because it doesn’t matter how many people are killed with firearms because the second amendment doesn’t address deaths attributed to the use of firearms. It just says that congress can’t create a law to infringe on our right to bear arms.
  
  Report this comment
- Norm D. Plume
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:18pm
  It doesn’t say Congress can’t. It says, “shall not be infringed.”
  
  By ANYONE.
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc33
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 8:21pm
  Progressiveslayer… It also says there shall not be infringement on free speech, freedom of press, and no law should be made in respect to any religion… but thats never stopped anyone.
  
  Report this comment
- mgh999
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:09am
  To KeatonC33
  
  Imagine how they’d go without the second? The founding fathers understood the oppressive nature of power, they put the second into the Government they just created.
  
  But the sheeple have been convinced all must suffer, ignoring this was the action of a single individual.
  
  Report this comment
- WildschweinJager
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 6:36am
  @Keaton33
  The Communist Chinese government, via its state-run media front Xinhua, has called for Americans to be disarmed, arguing that the Sandy Hook school massacre demands “no delay for U.S. gun control.”
  Calls on Obama to exploit the tragedy to push his gun control agenda, adding that his lame duck situation represents “the best position to promote it,” while blaming the National Rifle Association for curtailing previous attempts to regulate firearms in the United States.
  
  The Chinese, Russia, Communist South America and Islamic countries don’t want the USA’s citizens to have guns. Why do you think that is?
  
  Report this comment
- retiredfire
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 12:23pm
  Keaton,
  go read your Constitution again.
  First Amendment = “Congress shall make no law.”
  Second Amendment = “shall not be infringed” (by anyone) – my parenthetical addition.
  
  Report this comment
- dalek
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:41pm
  @Keatonc33,
  
  Maybe your google is broken. Here you go:
  
  1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
  
  2nd Amendment: 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.
  
  The first one says “Congress shall not”. The second says “shall not be infringed” and as others mentions, that means not by anyone including States and other Government types.
  
  In my opinion, ALL gun laws infringe on the 2nd Amendment. Anything that infringes on that right is unconstitutional. Period. Any rifle, any pistol, any shotgun. I don’t care how fast it shoots, how many bullets it holds. It “shall not be infringed”.
  
  Report this comment
oriondma05
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:52pm
Don’t forget railroad ties in Chicago. Thugs can easily kill your kids with one of those.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
OlefromMN
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:52pm
Just wait for the cries to ban handguns as well.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DougHuffman
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 6:03pm
  And cry is all they’ll do.
  
  I have no desire to live a disarmed subject in the Obamanation. “From my cold, dead hands” works for me. My guns will be confiscated only by some sort of force.
  
  I am shriven. My daughter is an independent adult. Milady wife, light of my life, is provisioned for life.
  
  Report this comment
- gentugo
  Posted on December 20, 2012 at 7:35pm
  They will, as soon as the ban on semi autos fails to reduce crime. Then will be confiscation. Americans have to prevent this crap. Like all communist takeovers, history will repeat itself and the government will be the ones murdering millions. All commie sits do the same crap because they do not value life, they value power.
  
  Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:51pm
I can’t wait to see the charts and stats from the Biden Board! Bet that those will fit Mark Twain’s definition.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The_Jerk
Posted on December 20, 2012 at 5:48pm
Why say more?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.