Death Toll Revised Down to 24 After Monstrous Oklahoma Tornado…100+ Injured…Children Among the Dead…Stunning Pictures…Woman Finds Dog During Interview!

WATCH on TheBlaze TV: Latest Updates on Tornado Aftermath, Including Updates From Glenn Beck in Oklahoma

Government

Poll: Where Do You Stand On Guns, Gun Rights, And The Second Amendment?

Jan. 8, 2013 9:00am Mike Opelka

Almost anywhere in America, the topic of guns (gun ownership, gun control and the Second Amendment) will always inspire a spirited discussion.

President Obama, most Democrats and many in the media claim that a majority of Americans are demanding immediate and significant changes to our nation’s gun laws. With all of this attention focused on the issue, there is a belief among many that the average American’s access to firearms could undergo serious change in the very near future.

We would like to know exactly how you feel about guns, gun ownership, gun control, and the Second Amendment. We invite you to participate in several ways:

Take our poll on the topic (You can even suggest a question of your own. Questions must be answered either “yes/no/I don’t care”)
Add your comments below
Share this story and poll on your Facebook page
Link to this story on Twitter — and use the hash tag #2ndAmd

We will post a summary of the poll results on Friday.

Where Do You Stand On The 2nd Amendment?

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (591)

oldincarolina
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:02am
There is nothing wrong with the gun laws that are on the books now . other than the laws are not being enforced. Read Federal form 4473 … the form you have to fill out when purchasing any gun.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:13am
  Actually, a majority of the gun laws on the books now are unconsitutional.
  
  Report this comment
- texasranger
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:14am
  @OLDINCAROLINA…I am in total agreement. We have plenty of gun laws that just need enforced.
  
  Report this comment
- SimpleTruths
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:38am
  I suspect you say that about laws in general.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:41am
  @Simpletruths
  
  How observant. Many *federal* laws are in fact clearly and blatantly unconstitutional. State laws depend on the state constitutions they are subordinate to of course.
  
  How scary it must be to your kind, somebody who has a position that is clear, unassailable and who doesn’t compromise. No wonder y’all eventually turn to killing squads.
- civilwarcometh
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:01am
  All gun laws are unconstitutional PERIOD! People who think there should be gun laws when we have the 2nd Amendment need’s to move to another country and GTFO!
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:02am
  Wouldn’t the requirements for conceal carry permits be unconstitutional? In effect, you are “guilty until proven innocent” by background checks, including fingerprinting [like a criminal].
  
  Report this comment
- A_CALL_TO_CONSCIENCE
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:30am
  There are so many laws that literally no one knows how many we have. I would take a guess and say that at least 90% are not only unconstitutional, but not even needed. In a truly free society there would be very few laws. As the laws increase our freedoms decrease. People want a lot of laws, they think that somehow, the opinion of a group of men and women will protect them. Sadly, as our morals continue to spiral downward the amount of laws we have will go up; people think that is the answer and will fix the problem. What they fail to understand is treating the symptoms won’t cure anything, you must treat the cause.
  
  Report this comment
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:36am
  http://libertycrier.com/u-s-constitution/if-they-come-for-your-guns-do-you-have-a-responsibility-to-fight/?utm_source=The+Liberty+Crier&utm_campaign=1edca9ca36-The_Liberty_Crier_Daily_News_1_8_2013&utm_medium=email
  
  Great article on your duty as citizen. The gun laws on the books are illegal and a violation of our rights. The crimes committed with firearms are already crimes, what is the point of adding another crime to charge them with. Murder is bad, what does the weapon have to do with it? Does it make it more bad to kill with a gun than to kill with an axe, a stick, strangulation?
  
  Report this comment
- yougottabekidding
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:39am
  I’ll give you agun law I want to see!
  
  Hollywood must pay a large fine for every scene that depicts gun violence, and another for every death by firearm. Run a car into them don’t glorify gun violence, they would be just as dead
  Same with games!
  And WOW we would be out of a $20 trillion debt in no time. The dems are trying to fund them through Sandy. Let them fund us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- shorelineliz
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:41am
  How many gun laws are there already? about 2,000? I think we have enough gun laws. Alex Jones indicated there are about 11,200 gun related fatalities per year in the USA when he was on Piers Morgan last night and that 75 percent are CRIMINALS. So, what does that tell you? We need more law enforcement working on the criminal element of this problem. and we need more mental health help. We already have waiting periods, background checks but we need to stop the flow of illegal weapons and we need to clamp down on criminals. There is a revolving door for the criminal justice system. We know prisons let violators out the back door due to over crowding and that petty criminals are hardened in prisons. We definitely need prison reform in the USA. Just some thoughts.
  
  Report this comment
- Marine 1
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:42am
  The United States Constitution is quite clear on our rights under the 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.”
  
  One does NOT need a law degree to understand those words and they do not need to be debated or interpreted by a Supreme Court.
  
  We, the PEOPLE, are the militia and every one of U.S. American citizens has the GOD-given right to have firearms which enables U.S. to be the guardians against a tyrannical government. We now have a tyrannical government.
  
  GOD Almighty, The 2nd Amendement, and those of U.S. who understand the importance of the Constitution, are the only things standing in the way of tyrants in this nation from making U.S. all slaves.
  
  We did not elect people to go back to Washington, D.C. to take our GOD-given rights away but that is what they have done. They are following satan and not GOD.
  
  For U.S. this is as much about religious freedom as anything. Once guns are gone will the “state” then tell U.S. what religion we will practice if any?
  
  I choose to be a free man and worship GOD according to my own dictates.
  
  No 2nd Amendment – No 1st Amendment or otherwise. Pretty simple concept.
  
  Report this comment
- Concerned Green Beret
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:47am
  OLDINCAROLINA, you are absolutely wrong. Most of the laws on the books are unconstitutional. Just like the court rulings preventing religion on/in public/governmental domain!!! Please study the constitution and the founders before making such statements of extreme error.
  
  Report this comment
- SavvyCowboy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:51am
  The part of the 2nd Amendment the leftists hate is highlighted here in all capital letters:
  “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.”
  
  Report this comment
- z32tt
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:54am
  Yes – concealed carry laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and they ARE NOT an effective deterrent to gun crime. Why? Because: do you really think that a thug with an illegal handgun is going to choose to abide by a law that says he can’t conceal-carry it since he doesn’t have a permit? No, of course not!
  
  Report this comment
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:12pm
  Shorelineliz,
  You hit the nail on the head. We need the cops to go after the punks and drug dealers instead of running around soaking the people for silly traffic offenses. If they spent as much time dispatching the goons as they do chasing revenue the whole country would be better off.
  
  Report this comment
- naed5048
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:22pm
  Do you think the judges and prosecutors, should be held accountable when a person who has plea bargain, and then commits another crime, and should be prosecuted for the same crime?????
  
  Report this comment
- AxelPhantom
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:25pm
  O.K. gun laws are all unconstitutional. Now what?
  
  “Would-a, should-a, could-a” doesn’t change anything. Fact is that as things are today, removing ALL legislation regarding guns would be seen as unthinkable by most citizens as going door to door seizing all guns and it “ain’t happening” short of anarchy or a coup-de-ta. Whether the people are sheep or not is likewise an academic argument that solves nothing aside from further divisiveness.
  
  The question we have to address now in this plane of existence is which direction we go from here, more regulation of firearms or less and what can we DO to prevent slipping further down the well? We need to figure out how to stop decending before we can start trying to climb out.
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:35pm
  Every gun law is unConstitutional. Easy enough to understand if you’ve read the DoI, Constitution and BoR and the Bible.
  
  As to the poll questions, I wonder how many recent gun purchases have been made to defend the Constitution? Or are they being purchased just to defend the home?
  
  Report this comment
- yougottabekidding
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:45pm
  Wolf
  
  I think they are one in the same!
  
  Report this comment
- ChildOfTheKing
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:50pm
  Gosh, I can’t post the poll on my Facebook page because they have banned me for not providing a phone number as a security feature (my Facebook page is NOT who I really am), so I DON’T DO FACEBOOK AND NEITHER SHOULD ANY OF YOU!
  
  Didn’t you know that if you do a Facebook page that the government already knows everything about you and where you are?? duh…………
  
  Report this comment
- Anonymous T. Irrelevant
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:54pm
  I kept looking for the “Hell NO!!!” Button.
  
  Report this comment
- oneshiner
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:00pm
  @Yougottabekidding: What makes people go see these horrid movies in the first place? Indoctrination?
  We’re being fined and taxed for everything, perhaps it’s time to tax and fine the movie industry (who by the way, don’t pay taxes here, they film everything in Canada where they escape USA fees.)
  
  Report this comment
- John.Galt
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:03pm
  @Savvy.. Actually, you are wrong… the left argues that a “militia” is actually a military… what the left HATES is what comes after the comma… THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS…
  
  The lib-tards try to argue that the founders only meant the militia can have guns, but then why would they add “THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE?” Answer – they wouldn’t. The added it to make it clear it is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE, not a right just for militias, which the lib-tards try to argue were for STATE militias. The founders did not use excess language to make their points, so if they only meant militias, they would not have included the above text.
  
  Report this comment
- AUsername
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:09pm
  anyone should be able to purchase any weapon they have money for and have no limits to it at all.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:12pm
  Gun Appreciation Day:
  
  Make some time on the 19th to show up at a gun store or range. Open carry if you can.
  
  http://gunappreciationday.com/articles/broad-coalition-of-gun-rights-conservative-groups-proclaim-january-19-gun-appreciation-day
  
  Report this comment
- 19RANDY59
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:21pm
  To put it as simply as I can, so the low info voter can comprehend. the only thing a new law creates is a new group of outlaws.
  
  Report this comment
- stage9
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:24pm
  The ONLY GUN LAW that needs to be enforced is the 2nd Amendment!
  
  Report this comment
- DeOppressoLiber
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:24pm
  When I hear people complain about our Constitution and how we can never get anything done I agree. I tell them that most of what our government is try to do is not in the Constitution, thats why it can not get done.
  
  Two very good videos on how they frame part of the argument and how we can use this information.
  
  http://www.youtube.com/user/AmidsTheNoise
  
  Frame the fight in their own terms. The right to life is a Basic Human Right. Then the Self Defense is a Basic Human Right as it supports the individuals life.
  
  Self defense against an intruder, and all the way across the full spectrum against a tyrant like in Syria.
  
  It is not really about gun control but about what type of government we want to have. See how they are framing that fight
  
  http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/06/what-the-fight-over-guns-is-really-about/on-gun-policy-both-sides-have-something-to-fear
  
  I read it as Individualists/libertarians vs Communists/egalitarians
  
  Report this comment
- Speak2Truth
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:29pm
  What’s wrong with the current gun laws on the books are that most violate the US Constitution. As the Supreme Court reaffirmed in the Miller case, if a firearm can be shown to have combat usefulness then there can be absolutely no infringement upon your Right to own and carry and use it for just purposes. There can be no tax on it, no registration of it, no laws restricting your magazine capacity, no tax on the ammunition that is required to operate it (just as there can be no poll tax for voting)…
  
  We’re about at the point where George Washington is hollering down at us, “Hey, asking the King to obey the law didn’t work for us either!”
  
  “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation…” – US Declaration of Independence
  
  Remember, that’s a declaration of independence from a government that was forcing everyone into dependence.
  
  Report this comment
- Redhawke
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:32pm
  @AXELPHANTOM
  I will not give up my Constitutional natural right while you try to “figure” out how to stop descending. Ever!
  
  Report this comment
- AxelPhantom
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:35pm
  Auser,
  Therein lies the rub….Anyone? How about the schizo who only sometimes takes his/her medication?
  
  Personally, I think society would be better off if everyone was armed and knew how to use it (that is about as likely as returning fully to the Constitution), but there are just some among us who are incapable of living in reality because just like people develop diseases of the body, some have diseased minds.
  
  Do we just force these people to be detained in a mental institution or to take their meds so that the rest of us can live free? If so doesn’t that violate their rights to live their lives as they wish?
  
  So where should the line be drawn or should there be no line at all? Your thoughts?
  
  Report this comment
- AxelPhantom
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:39pm
  Red,
  
  I will not give up my right to bear arms either, but the point is that simply crowing about how some thing is unconstitutional does nothing to remedy the situation, it only calls it to light and begs the next question….what to do about it.
  
  Report this comment
- mrwonderful1942
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:42pm
  GhostofJefferson is correct! Virtually all federal gun control laws are unconstitutional. Individual states can be more restrictive, according to their State Constitution. My state, Washington, Constitution is very restrictive to the government as to what they can do to stop gun ownership. Our founding fathers were very clear on this; Trench Coxe (May 22, 1755 – July 17, 1824) put it this way: “The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American … the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain – In the hands of the people.”
  
  Report this comment
- American Soldier (Separated)
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:55pm
  This is how I explain things in arguments over the 2nd Amendment
  
  Go ahead and challenge them to make the 2nd Amendment from the original:
  
  “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.”
  
  To something that is more understandable in today’s terms, clarifying the words if you will….
  
  “[In order to have] a well regulated Militia, [which is] necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
  
  Pretty simple, doesn’t change much but it clarifies that the first half of the sentence is merely a qualifying statement. It’s saying that in order to have the militia, which is necessary for a free state, the right of the people (different than militia) to keep and bear arms cannot be taken away.
  
  It says nothing to the effect that the people is the militia or that the militia and people are mutually inclusive. They are separate entities, but for a militia to be possible, it needs the people to have the ability to keep and bear arms.
  
  Now flip the argument over to the anti-gun person. They have to redo the entire 2nd amendment in order to make it say what they WANT/THINK it says. Most of those types of people won’t listen to logic anyway, but this is a sound argument.
  
  Report this comment
- nehopson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:56pm
  Arming teachers. Only with periodic? update on training AND periodic? review on mental and emotional stability. My grandson’s 5th grade teacher had mental breakdown a couple of years ago resulting in an anger problem. A cowardly, disturbed person will go for weakest victum–kids! How many police stations have been attacked?
  
  Report this comment
- Techcon
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:59pm
  I keep hearing this nonsense right out of “The Berkley Basement” about guns and civility, that so-and-so weapon, “…doesn’t belong in a civilized society.” This is utter B.S. and proves the old adage, “Liberals only know what they’ve been told.”
  
  Lemme clear this up once and for all:
  
  “The MORE civilized the society, the LESS the gun control.”
  
  Think for once, “Stupids”: why would a society WITHOUT murder need to control guns, hmm? When you compare gun ownership, or, more importantly, bullets down range (six billion annually) to other countries, we find that America is the MOST civilized society on the planet—bar none!
  
  Of course liberals define “civilized” as absolute control over the population, in other words, a DICTATORSHIP.
  
  Report this comment
- LaTxGuy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:02pm
  the gun laws are good. problem becomes when the states of the strictest laws do not enforce them! Texas for example they say have gun laws too easy but do the crime and watch the results. The laws in the blue states forgive, rehabilitate, let them have another chance! Like the guy recently in Pennsylvania killing his grandmother with a hammer and set free only to kill again. If that guy was in the easy texas state with the harshest results he would not have been on the streets again.
  
  Report this comment
- LetUsReason
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:03pm
  “There is nothing wrong with the gun laws that are on the books now.”
  
  Except, the only problem with those is that they are on the books to begin with. I don’t know, something about “shall not be infringed…”.
  
  Report this comment
- Redhawke
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:15pm
  @AXELPHANTOM
  Oh, so your question is what to do about the Constitutional violations committed by the federal and state govts. ? I think there are only a few options. First, you vote in representatives that believe and follow the Constitution. If that fails, you can petition your “elected representative” and ask (demand) that they follow the Constitution. If everything else fails, you can try the peaceful protest path. Since none of the above works on a govt H*ll bent on denying you your rights, the not-so-peaceful path may be the last resort.
  
  Report this comment
- mel72349
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:18pm
  To the big government crowd, all laws are good, more are better, and too many are just about right.
  The eternal starry-eyed liberal believes if current laws don’t work, maybe somehow more will do the trick…
  
  Report this comment
- dogmeat
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:19pm
  ALL GUN LAWS are UNCONSTITUTIONAL! ALL THIRTY THOUSAND of them! How many laws do WE the PEOPLE need to say,If you use a WEAPON of any type to commit a crime it will get you more time for whatever crime is committed ? ROB a BANK you get TEN YEARS PLUS TEN MORE YEARS if you use a WEAPON! IT’s that SIMPLE! BUT that’s not why OUR GOVERNMENT wants to OUTLAW FIREARMS is it. NO SIR its all about TYRANNY and THE ENSLAVEMENT of WE THE PEOPLE!
  I WILL NOT COMPLY with any UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS! NEVER!
  
  Report this comment
- AxelPhantom
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:25pm
  Red,
  
  That is the problem. We tried the soap box. We tried the ballot box. The next thing is the ammo box, or so the saying goes.
  
  I pray each day that it will never come to that because it will destroy the Country I love along with families which is the glue that holds us all together, without any promise of good results in the end. I can accept that it may someday come to that but I hope with everything I hold dear that it won’t.
  
  Report this comment
- subic
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:30pm
  SIMPLETRUTH, and I suspect you are an efeminate soul.
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:39pm
  People keep saying “gun laws are unconstitutional.” In the United States the courts, ultimately the Supreme Court, decides what laws are constitutional and which aren’t.
  
  So who says these laws are unconstitutional? And if they are, why is no one challenging them in court?
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:44pm
  “In the United States the courts, ultimately the Supreme Court, decides what laws are constitutional and which aren’t.”
  ***
  
  And the SCOTUS always decides thing using logic using the U.S. Constitution as a starting assumption or starting point?
  
  “Ginsburg to Egyptians: I wouldn’t use U.S. Constitution as a model”
  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/06/ginsburg-to-egyptians-wouldnt-use-us-constitution-as-model/
  
  Such an unbiased mind, will decide the constitutional decisions in an unbiased manner?
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:08pm
  “Stark explains that the Constitution has no meaning at all”
  “Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), the lunatic who once told a constituent that he wouldn’t bother wasting urine on him, telling a crowd that the federal government has no real limitations in telling people how to live their lives. ”
  
  http://hotair.com/archives/2010/08/02/stark-explains-that-the-constitution-has-no-meaning-at-all/
  
  So Rep.Stark a Democrat like many others will violate the Constitution & Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg & other will parse words (lie) & find a way to explain it all.
  
  “It depends on what the meaning of the word is is” Bubba Clinton
  
  Report this comment
- YAHSHUARULES
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:10pm
  You gotta see this to believe it!
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjnUbds-JMU
  
  More of the agenda to use public policy to subvert America from inside, infiltrate and influence our culture driving us in a direction designed to destroy us. . No conspiracy – just verifiable facts! If you don’t know all this you need to find out!
  
  This is the most comprehensive, best movie I have seen pulling all this together. I have watched it 12X to absorb all that is in it…give it 5 minutes and you won’t be able to walk away
  
  Watch it. Share it. Arrange a showing in church, groups, clubs, with friends or family. Everyone who loves America needs to see this movie,
  It is free on line for the moment
  https://vimeo.com/52009124
  If America goes down, the free world will go down with it and it will be finished for a very, very long time…
  
  Report this comment
- Robert
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:10pm
  Should persons taking anti psychotic or mental state altering drugs for mental health issues be able to purchase firearms?
  
  That question is too vague. Million of American who are on anti-dispresents would be fine owning a gun but there are many who shouldn’t that is one area were gun control people are really pushing to prevent people from being able to buy.
  
  Report this comment
- Beepster
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:13pm
  What Feinstein wants to do is allow herself and her personal body guards (with that body, none are needed), any weapon of their choosing for protection, but skru you, you snivvling pieces of dung, you don’t deserve protection.
  
  Report this comment
- civilwarcometh
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:16pm
  @SENDTHE: Lol now you want to use the supreme court ? It’s part of the problem to. As the justice system as a whole is part of the problem. This country is corrupt from the top down. This is not the U.S.A.
  
  Report this comment
- OldNGrumpy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:20pm
  What part of “shall not be infringed” do they not understand.
  
  Report this comment
- pledgetodoright
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:22pm
  I wouldn’t be surprised if the government is collecting this info for future laws. They can track your IP and what we say.
  
  Report this comment
- boojycan
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:28pm
  Actually, gun laws now restrict us too much. Who is really going to take down an armed drone with an AR-15. I believe we should have access to resources to defend against our government the same as our soldiers do to defend themselves against foreign governments.
  
  Report this comment
- shary
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:30pm
  Many gun laws in the books are unconstitutional. Gun laws do not have any effect on criminal getting and using guns. Law makers respond to few who scream loud. If we start blaming police and government when they are not there to save people and demand that every citizen to be given a gun; we shall have our guns. It is our right to have a gun and they not pay for, it is not our right to abortion and they pay for it. Think about it, this is evil: I will take your gun so criminal can rape and kill you easily. They are alo making it easy for you to kill innocent baby. Remember supreme court ruling, police are not there to protect, they are there to investigate crimes. We cannot hold them responsible to come in time to help you when you are getting killed. How about Sarasota and Bradenton: Police did respond to multiple people calling in telling them about women being abducted. Husband went to court and lost. Approach this in angle of all crimes that occured that victim did not have guns and criminal had guns. Must be graphic. Do not be nice. Radical do not understand it.
  
  Report this comment
- DrSique
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:31pm
  Well, if the current gun laws were being enforced, Barack Obama and Eric Holder would both be looking out through the bars of a federal prison. Fast & Furious was as illegal as can be and noone was held accountable.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:34pm
  @JZS
  
  That’s a straw man you just set up and knocked down there. Show me the exact clause that grants SCOTUS the ability to *interpret and decide what is Constitutional*.
  
  I can save you time if you’d like, but I’d prefer you do your own research.
  
  We don’t run to the courts, because most of us ignore these invalid “laws”, and will continue to do so. Your side is out of luck, Chuck.
  
  Report this comment
- AxelPhantom
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:50pm
  Robert,
  In another life, I “counseled” mentally ill young people , some were temporarily messed up and some were just wired wrong out of the factory so to speak. There are some of them that should NEVER be allowed access to ANY deadly weapon much less ownership, period.
  
  I agree that some people who have sought mental health (such as grief counseling) help in the past would be responsible owning a gun, but this is such a complex issue and as long as there is an all or nothing approach, nothing can be resolved.
  
  The conundrum for people on our side of the coin (pro-constitution), a question that remains unresolved even in Libertarian circles, is whether or not it can be “Constitutional” for a government to strip a citizen of their God-given rights if they have broken no law but are unable to mentally function (either through no fault of their own or by choice, such as refusing to take medication). It is a real legal issue that is differentiated from criminal incarceration by the fact that these people have not necessarily broken any laws, they are ill. Who would decide who is competent and who is not? Blanket diagnosis and supposition based on a DSM manual is in part what has gotten the country in this mess.(Identity politics)
  
  The liberal need to eliminate all danger from living life is all encompassing. It is this that is responsible for an emotionality, void of reason, that seems to be directing the mood of the populous and we lap it up.
  
  Report this comment
- ConstitutionalPatriot
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:59pm
  Yes the laws on the books that aren’t specifically regarding criminals are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, if you are unsure please see the 2nd Amendment
  
  Report this comment
- Shrugged
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 4:02pm
  @sendinthemeteors — the supreme court, long ago eyed by liberal america haters as a lever of change, is one of the “easy catches” of controlling the government. Yes, they have final word, unless the majority of America disagrees. They can be overturned. However, the horsepower needed to do that is often greater than current will-power to do that. Santa Clause isn’t real.
  
  Report this comment
- JRook
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 4:43pm
  No question too many gun laws, so let’s keep it simple. Guns can only be purchased by individuals who have no criminal record (as an juvenile or adult), All guns need to be registered by the state and the federal government. Any guns purchase from individuals should be registered in a manner similar to what happens when you purchased a used car. Gun owners are criminally and civilly responsible for any and all actions committed with a gun registered to them unless it was reported stolen within 72 hours. Case in point there is no excuse for Lanza’s mother to not keep her guns under lock and key when she was not home. If she were alive she should be subject to criminal charges and civil liability from the victim’s families.
  
  Report this comment
- LetUsReason
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 5:39pm
  @ JROOK
  
  Sorry, that doesn’t cut it. Are you saying that anybody with a “criminal record” should not be allowed to own guns?? The problem with that is that if the government doesn’t want a certain person or group to own guns, they just have to make sure said person(s) have a record created. Go tell your friend Bloomberg that he’s not going to win this one.
  
  Report this comment
- TH30PH1LUS
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 5:48pm
  @ SendTheMeteors
  
  That’s exactly what they are doing http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57558601/federal-court-overturns-illinois-concealed-weapon-ban/
  
  Report this comment
- VMA214
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 5:49pm
  Anything that is a roadblock to exercise your right is unconstitutional, BTW, Senator Dodd had the Nazi gun laws translated to implement the Gun Control Act of ’68, that should tell you everything you need to know. The commies in power would like to have all believe otherwise on the meaning and intent of the 2A.
  @SAVVYCOWBOY, pretty much sums it up…
  
  Report this comment
- pekel69
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 6:11pm
  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. There fore All laws on the books are unconstitutional.
  
  Report this comment
- dstrit
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 6:22pm
  I disagree. By transferring a behavior problem to a object problem we lose the debate and our liberty. We already have laws against murder, assault, rape, etc. The object isn’t the issue but the behavior is. If we don’t defend our right to arms we forfeit the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness guaranteed by our Creator and allow the government that is supposed to defend those rights to subjugate us. We must win this now or our posterity will curse us for our cowardice. Shall we trade the liberty won and preserved by the sacrifices of millions since the Revolution for a false sense of safety? Not me.
  
  Report this comment
- davidkachel
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 6:27pm
  Are you OUT OF YOUR MIND??!!!
  There is EVERYTHING wrong with the guns laws in this country.
  Which part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is it that has YOU confused???!!!
  
  Report this comment
- Tucker13
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 6:36pm
  The ((cough-cough)) legal pot smokers are in for a big surprise.
  
  Report this comment
- RIDEMODELS
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 6:56pm
  They have very tough gun laws in Chicago and look at it now. A bullet can sit forever and never kill anyone until the wrong person chambers it. If this president and the liberals in this country, who might I add have made millions and millions off of Joe public,take away our constitutional rights after we stood by and let them make movies about the Killing of Geroge Bush. Then this country will not be America any longer and Hollywood will rot in eternal damnation for what they have done to “We the People”…Well I guess with the Crank problem Hollywood actors have and the urinating in a public airport(TMZ), ” We the People” can watch the collapse of Hollywood.
  
  Report this comment
- damnedifwedont
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 7:23pm
  How CONVENIENT!!! Tried to take the poll but is down for maintenance. Ummm-hmmm.
  
  Report this comment
- Unix
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 8:48pm
  Annoymous – now THAT was a great line there buddy!!!!!!!!!!! I laughed my arse off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hell NO!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- Trigus
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 8:49pm
  “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.”
  
  This is not something Jefferson wrote, but rather comes from a passage he included in his “Legal Commonplace Book.” The passage is from Cesare Beccaria’s Essay on Crimes and Punishments.
  
  Also, some of these questions asked in the poll must have come from people and leftist liberal blaze staff that do not own or have discharged a firearm.
  
  Report this comment
- Unix
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 8:57pm
  Ummm, may I point one thing out to you people who say ALL gun laws are unconstitutional? What about the law that gives us the right to own/bear arms…EG: The 2nd Amendment. I will say there is ONE law that is constitutional, well…that’s my two cents!
  
  Report this comment
- jimmymac1
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:17pm
  A lot of good comments today, Call_ that was a good post. Ghost we agree alot and I looked at your site it is pretty well put together. Iam not a big fan of open carry only because many would chose not to carrry and it would make them unduly nervous. I however agree with concealed carry and do, contrary to popular opinion many of us in Cal carry in the counties that allow (they all should) and it should be allowed across state lines.
  We will never get rid of violence especially by being too liberal, hence the need to be prepaired. unfortunetly our society makes up excuses for everything, and attorneys just keep making up rules so we can continue to screw each other and feel good about it.
  I feel that the real issue now is that our country is so large and diverse that we cannot come together to solve the issues we are faced with a little too much me instead of us. Self reliance is very important but we must come together to make this country work, there is a need for all of our talents. But we must be mindful of the need to protect America and our ideals ultamently or we will fall.
  I have been all over the world and am a combat vet and have pulled the trigger for this country I believe it is the best place in the world and everyone should be willing to pay something for the priviledge of living here there should not be a 47 percent who pay no taxes everyone should be willing to pay something. We need to be providing jobs for all of our people and this will work.
  
  Report this comment
- SendTheMeteors
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:27pm
  Ghost, no need to look it up! You’re correct. Judicial review of the constitutionality of laws is not written into the Constitution. In fact there are a lot of things not written into the Constitution. That’s why we have federal, state and local laws. But that’s the precedent and the reality. I guess you’re making that anarchist case that no one has to obey any law they don’t like. Okay, whatever Ghost.
  
  There is a legitimate topic for discussion here. Does the right to “keep and bear arms” mean I can have nuclear arms, or chemical arms (like cholinesterase inhibitors or HCN) or biological arms such as those used in terrorist attacks through the mail during the Bush administration?
  
  You’ll probably agree there is some limitation. What about owning RPGs or surface to air missiles or flame throwers? Do you have a right under the Constitution to own those? Yes? No? Can I have a fully automatic belt-fed machine gun like Rambo uses? Somewhere there’s a line to be drawn. You’ll agree it’s somewhere short of nuclear or chemical arms. Where do you draw that line?
  
  What about the Constitutional right to “bear arms”? Can I walk around in a public place with a sawed-off shotgun? Suppose there’s a school or movie theater that doesn’t have a “gun free” sign? Can I walk in there with an AR-15 with a hundred round magazine and just hang out? That’s my Constitutional right?
  
  Report this comment
- JustMeHere_01
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:32pm
  @SimpleTruths
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:38am
  I suspect you say that about laws in general
  ———————————————————–
  Although this comment was not posted to me, I will tell you that we have way too many laws as it is. Every time something happens it seems a bunch of blowhards want to create a new law when there are already laws in place to handle the situation.
  
  It is called a feel good law to these types of people and unless enforced they will have no effect. You already know that but just want to put your 2 cents in and take a jab at someone.
  
  Report this comment
- dmerwin
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:53pm
  If state parole systems did their jobs and physically search known felons and gang members crime rates would drop dramatically, I favor a mandatory minimums, get judges out of the way, for CRIMES committed with a gun OR the threat of a gun. Shoot someone in commission of a crime charge as pre-meditated attempted murder with a minimum of 25 years. That will reduce gun crimes. The issue with new laws is that they will be selectively enforced by liberal judges who “know better”.
  
  Report this comment
- Unix
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:22pm
  meteors, you point is moot! Evil people kill other people, he strangled a few too, want to outlaw hands now? Your ad hom attacks are useless, give up the ghost already!
  
  Report this comment
- Beck_Art_Of_Obama_In_PeePee
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:37pm
  “Poll: Where Do You Stand On Guns, Gun Rights, And The Second Amendment?”
  
  READY … AIM … FIRED!
  And when they don’t leave?
  READY … AIM … FIRE!
  And in style …
  http://www.theunclegun.com/imgs%20gallery/P-38%20UNCLE%20GUN%20CARBINE%202.JPG
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:41pm
  “Can I walk in there with an AR-15 with a hundred round magazine and just hang out? That’s my Constitutional right?”
  ***
  It is called a private business on private property. They can set their own rules. There is no conflict. A person can choose not to patronize the business.
  
  Where I live there are 2 malls. there is the mall where the gang bangers hang out & fight each other & there is the mall specifically designed to prevent gang bangers from loitering. As a private citizen I can choose where to take my business. The privater businesses since they are on private property can set certain rules for potential clients such as “no shirt, no shoes nor service” or no guns.
  
  There the solution was easy. No setting up of strawmen or tilting at windmills as certain trolls are wont to do. Maybe the trolls here can have a contest to see who can knock down strawmen faster. They better not invite their god obama. That is if they wan to have a chance at winning LULZ!.
  
  P.S. A gun free zone theater is pretty useless in the day & age of wide screen TVs, people using cell phones, gangbangers & rude people. A gun free zone is to be avoided as much as being victim of a great sword hunt.
  
  Report this comment
- A_CALL_TO_CONSCIENCE
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:04pm
  @SEND
  
  No, it does not mean you can own a nuke. You wouldn’t be able to afford a nuke anyway. I’m not sure how owning one would be very effect anyhow. I don’t think anyone would consider it a smart idea to drop a nuke on their own country. As far as other countries go, that’s the purpose of the military.
  
  I actually don’t see a problem with people owning RPG’s, as long as they are kept at home. I know some might go crazy from me saying that. I’m not sure anyone uses flame throwers anymore. Fully automatic machine-gun is the same as RPG..as long as it’s kept at home in a secure place.
  
  Yes, you could walk around with a sawed off shotgun holstered. I’m not sure the purpose of that. I don’t think you understand. Having that right doesn’t mean you go show off and walk around with rifles and shotguns. I don’t think anyone here is suggesting we all strap up like Rambo and go out. Unless we lived in a place that was at war and the enemy was in our country so we needed more powerful weapons. Other than that walking around with AR’s, shotguns, machine guns, is not needed. Simply because I may have that right, doesn’t mean I should do it or that it would be a good idea.
  
  The vast majority of us who own guns are responsible people who just want to live a peaceful life.
  
  Report this comment
- A_CALL_TO_CONSCIENCE
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:15pm
  Another thing I wanted to mention.
  
  We live in a society where most people are governed by their feelings. They are all about feeling safe and secure. Not that its a bad thing, of course we should feel safe for the most part. However, people would rather have a false sense of security than actually be safe. Many gun laws, drug laws etc make them feel “safe.” If laws were passed banning the evil, killing machine AR-15′ and “assault weapons” people would feel “safe” regardless that it is false, regardless of the facts, purely based on their emotions.
  
  Report this comment
- Lindsey72
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 1:27am
  If Guns KILL People then…………Pencils mispell Words, Trucks make drunk people drive drunk, Spoons make people FAT, Matches cause Arson.
  Someone asked about the CT School Shooting and killing of all those kids, ‘God why did you allow this to happen?’ GOD replied “I had nothing to do with it, I wasn’t allowed in the school”.
  We must Reject the idea that everytime a Law’s broken, society is guilty, rather than the Lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each Individual is accountavle for his action.
  
  Report this comment
- ishka4me
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 1:38am
  about 2 months ao many predicted that gun bans would be priotity#1 of Obama’s 2nd term, boy were they stupid.
  
  Report this comment
- desertspeaks
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 3:34am
  when and ONLY WHEN, the government “in all it’s incarnations” gives up it’s weaponry, will i remotely consider giving up my weapons!
  
  Report this comment
- historyguy48
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 6:38am
  Outside of their being unconstitutional, and that they limit what a citizen can purchase which is part of what makes them unconstitutional.
  In order to purchase a fully automatic weapon you must go through heck and then they tax you to death on top of that. This is also unconstitutional. The 2nd amendment has no “buts” in it. If I desired to purchase my own fleet of Abrams M1A2 or A3 tanks, along with the armaments for said vehicles, under our constitution I have the right to do so.
  Although just the gas mileage is killer enough to stop me from making such a move.
  
  Report this comment
- Trigus
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:07am
  the problem with: sendthemixnutz: he lives in the movie world. All his comments are based on the movie industry. He has no hard facts and when confronted with them will slither under the base board on a issue.
  
  “Can I have a fully automatic belt-fed machine gun like Rambo uses?” example of sendinthemixnutz reply.
  
  Oh, yes, you can own a belt feed machine gun, and yes the federal government regulates it for honest citizens. The key words are “Honest Citizens.” What you should be concerned with sendthemixnutz: Government agencies not enforcing gun laws on known criminals or criminal organizations (gangs)
  
  Report this comment
- Trigus
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:10am
  here you go sendinthemixnutz:
  
  STEPS FOR BUYING NFA (CLASS III) WEAPONRY
  
  Class III includes, but is not limited to: machine guns, silencers, destructive devices, all other weapons (AOW: cane guns, pen guns, etc.), short-barreled rifles (SBR), short-barrel shotguns (SBS).
  
  1. You must be at least 21 old and legal buy a handgun (meaning no felonies, violent misdemeanors, dishonorable discharges, etc.).
  2. Call your local CLEO (chief law enforcement officer – sheriff, police chief, etc.) and ask what his procedure is for signing Form 4 (federal applications for NFA transfer and ownership-the dealers supplies).
  Make sure that he will sign for you BEFORE you buy the firearm. If he won’t sign, you can’t get the gun.
  
  6. Bring the two copies of the Form 4 and both completed fingerprint cards with a money order or certified check made out to the BATF ($5.00 for an “AOW” or $200.00 for silencer, machine-gun, destructive device, SBR, SBS). This is a one time fee for life! Note that each firearm, device, etc. requires that a separate tax be paid. E.g., a machinegun with a suppressor would require a tax payment for the machinegun (actually for the receiver) and another tax payment for the suppressor.
  7. You also have to send in a form (Target World supplied) to the Department of the Treasury. This form is called the Certification of Compliance, 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5)(B), ATF Form 5330.20, which simply states that you are a United States citizen.
  
  Report this comment
- 2ndOpinion
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:12am
  Ask any of the 6.9 million in the U.S. prisons whether the law prevented them from doing their crime.
  Since they’re IN prison you can figure out the answer.
  6.9 million examples where the law FAILED to prevent a crime.
  
  Report this comment
- Trigus
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:14am
  8. The BATF will first remove the money order and examine the paperwork for completeness. It will be assigned to an agent, who will have a nationwide FBI background check performed on you. Once you pass this (all legal folks over 21 should pass it), the BATF will mail back one certified copy of the Form 4. On this copy will be a stamp that looks like a postage stamp. This is a Federal tax stamp indicating the transfer tax is paid and the item is officially yours.
  
  1. Once you have legal possession of the Class III item (except suppressors/silencers for which this does not apply) you may not take the item across state lines unless you notify the BATF in writing with the ATF Form 5320 before doing so. These forms are available on the Internet, or we can make a copy for you. You are not asking for their approval but, instead, merely letting them know you are taking a Class III item across state lines and when you will depart and return.
  
  2. You may not loan this Class III item to anyone. 3. You may not store this item at a friend’s home who has access to it.
  4. This is a restricted distribution item. To possess it requires (at the very least) an extensive background check. You are obligated by law (and common sense) to prevent unqualified people from gaining access to it. You may let others use the item if they remain in your physical presence.
  
  Report this comment
- old white guy
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:30am
  agree with ghost of jefferson. all gun laws currently on the books are unconstitutional.
  
  Report this comment
- Trigus
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:40am
  @sendinthebagofmixnutz – you should not be concerned with firearms. You should be concerned with the government not doing anything about terrorist based camps inside the United States.
  
  Yes, this one group of people get away with it because they claim its part of their religion. They train in hand to hand combat, Firearms proficiency, and demolition. They learn how to assault a building and clear it. This should concern you.
  
  35 training camps across the Untied States. You should ask the question: How is this possible? Why do we allow this group to function inside the United States? How many acts of terror have they committed on US soil? 53? Do you think this group will turn over their firearms or explosives if banned? NO
  
  Wake up America – the Terrorist are already here and training in your back yard< Do we really want Barry and his band of 40 thieves to disarm us?
  
  Report this comment
- enzomedici
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 9:37am
  No law you pass will stop a crazy person. Even if you banned all weapons and confiscated every last one of them. A crazy person could walk up to a cop and stab/hit/club him in the head and take his gun and start shooting people. A crazy person could ram his car right through a fence at a school plaground or a mall and start mowing people down. Crazy is crazy and there’s no stopping it.
  
  Report this comment
- jeffersonian1776
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 11:12am
  Remember that when the leftist loons try to throw the old “what don’t you understand about ‘well-regulated’” at you, that the term ‘well-regulated’ meant during the latter 18th century–’well-trained.’ In fact, the 2nd Amendment in the U.S. Constitution would be hypocritical if it was saying that guns should be well-regulated by the state and then right in the same sentence saying that it is to “not be infringed.” When the Anti-Federalists like George Mason and Thomas Jefferson wanted all Natural Rights to be in writing–hence the Bill of Rights–they wanted the 2nd Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms to be protected in the Constitution and used the term “well-regulated” (i.e., “well-trained”) as something to not be infringed by gov’t. In other words, they didn’t want the gov’t to be able to take one’s guns away on puny charges like, you’re not smart enough, or well-trained enough, or safe enough person to own said arms. They can’t take them on the grounds that you aren’t responsible enough of a person to own the gun, or that you have not gone through the proper training (or regulating of) on gun safety.
  Otherwise, why would they say at the same time the govt can regulate firearms as well as the govt cannot infringe on anyone’s right to own a firearm. Just do your research of several, and I mean several, usages of “well-regulated” during these times, you’ll find it has nothing at all to do with today’s definitio
  
  Report this comment
- eric55
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 12:03pm
  there is nothing wrong with the gun laws?! how about not being able to buy an M16 if i want one? you all forgot about that?
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 1:10pm
  Simpleton, I suspect you are wrong. State and federal laws are two different things. We realize you marxists don’t believe we have 50 individual states, that we only have one central govt and the “states” are merely districts. But state law supersedes federal law when the federal govt is not specifically granted that power by the Constitution. There are MANY federal laws and agencies that are unconstitutional.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 1:12pm
  Deavon, yes CHPs are unconstitutional. One does not ask permission to exercise a right. No, I do not have CHP. I did, it expired, I didn’t renew it on purpose. I carry anyway.
  
  Report this comment
- lovenfl3
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 7:46pm
  If you truly believe in the second amendment, you have to share this incredible video with Ted Nugent. Nobody has been a better representative of freedom that the Nuge!
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbY1whAjGls
  
  Report this comment
- mtman2
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:33pm
  Just lets NOT add any more!!! Crimes w/guns are crimes just as running people over w/a car, or over serving booze that results in an accident, making the server a criminal. They tried prohibition. Vehicles laws up the ying-yang still over 100 people a day die[more hurt] in accidents!!! What value is legislating people into subservient slavery? Other then complete control over them, NONE!!!
  
  Report this comment
- fpc123
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 9:33pm
  To the person who complained criminals would not bother to get a carry permit I would say DUH? Are you sure? If we all behaved like the people who do have carry permits we would need no prisons. Since not everyone does those with carry permits save lives by shooting or threatening to shoots the lawless.
  For every person killed with a firearm by a criminal 50 crimes and countless lives are saved by responsible gun owners. When some wack jobs decides to kill you pray someone without that intent is armed and trained to stop them.
  
  Report this comment
- Pigpen
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 12:47am
  Um, why is theBlaze asking me if I own a gun? Why should I answer that? Did I get asked if I was straight or gay when the poll on Prop 8 came out? Uh, no. Too much information is required to take this poll, and I notice EVERY time gun law polls come up, we are asked if we own a gun, and the poll is never really anonymous now is it? The hospitl, my pediatrician, they all feel perfetly free to ask if I own a gun as part of “risky behavior” questionnaires, BUT I am NEVER asked in those questionnaires if I have gay sex, pemiscuous sex, use needles, etc. WTF? Oh, wait, yes, the “beautiful people” (i.e. “the rich and well-educated”) all agree that pigs like you and me shouldn’t have ANY POWER, and we shouldn’t ever be allowed to catch on that they are constantly draining any power we DO HAVE NOW away from us. [Yeah, sorry folks, we have to include theBlaze editors in that "beautiful" group too.] Ever read Plato’s analogy of the cave? Oh, wait, I just outed myself as a thinking patriot, I am now SCR3W3D for sure!
  
  Report this comment
- jettson
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 8:51am
  “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.”shall not be infringed.”shall not be infringed.”shall not be infringed.” Understand.
  
  Report this comment
- martinmeyer
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 4:27pm
  Most gun laws on the books are unconstitutional and should be struck down. The reason they are not enforced is because they are unconstitutional and those who are supposed to enforce the laws know it and are just saving them selves from law suits that would result in their enforcement.
  
  Report this comment
- at_liberty
  Posted on January 14, 2013 at 10:49am
  It’s the corruption in use of the resulting database that is the problem. These laws always sound okay until the regulators corrupt the spirit of the law. The best example is the need for “shall issue” laws to force the regulators, typically the state police, to respond to applications for concealed carry licenses. Then there is the nasty little habit of assigning sentences longer than 365 days to make one technically a felon and ineligible to thereafter own firearms. Never trust a government lawyer with your rights.
  
  Report this comment
SREGN
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:02am
High School classes in gun safety and marksmansip should be mandatory for all students. After successful completion, a learner’s permit shall be issued and one can target or hunt only with a responsible permitted adult. Upon reaching the age of majority, a background check with medical history, and a doctor’s evaluation are performed, and then a permit to purchase and permit for concealed carry shall be issued to all who apply and are medically approved. Permits must be reissued every five years. Any individual who commits a violent crime with a firearm must serve a mandatory five year sentence in addition to criminal sentence for the crime itself. Any individual convicted of theft of a firearm must serve a mandatory ten year sentence in addition to criminal sentence for the theft itself. It shall be a criminal offense to allow unpermitted persons access to firearms.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- individualrights1st
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:09am
  If you need to get permission (license) from the government to do something, is it a right or a privilege?
  
  Report this comment
- 9111315
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:24am
  Only after we do the same for breeding.
  
  Report this comment
- MAEBE
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:49am
  Are you in America? Because that does not sound like a right anymore….just sayin’
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:56am
  SREGN
  
  No thank you. I wouldn’t comply with that.
  
  Report this comment
- frust@ted
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:20am
  sergen,
  
  I agree that I think teaching gun safety in school would be a good thing. Granted it would not stop nut jobs like the Newton or Colorado shooter, but it would help teach kids the proper respect for firearms.
  
  Also I’m not sure how any supporter of Sex Education in the classroom could argue against gun safety being taught in a classroom. Oh wait that irrational fear of guns that they have, that’s why they would be against it, not for any logical reason.
  
  Report this comment
- Zeb
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:38am
  The progressive mantra personified.
  If you are a victim of a criminal act ‘ you caused it and are a criminal yourself.’
  
  IF you are an attractive woman and are raped ‘ you caused it and are a criminal yourself.’
  
  YES The victim is always conspiratorial in the crime, ‘No victim no crime’
  We need to take all criminals and victims > ‘criminals’ off the street and there will be no crime.
  Progressive-ism is a mental illness,
  OUR NATION IS VERY ILL
  The cure is a return to rational thought, self reliance and moral values. Use that God given free agency.
  
  Report this comment
- STOP AND THINK
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:45am
  Here we go with MORE GOVERNMENT INTRUSION. How about PARENTS teach their children safe and responsible skill at arms? If the parents haven’t learned safety and responsibility, let them learn WITH their children.
  
  Report this comment
- ChildOfTheKing
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:23pm
  A good and excellent example of what could happen is in the movie, RED DAWN (with Patrick Swayze). Luckily these kids lived in Texas (I think) or one of those states that allowed guns and they were able to fight back. However, if you remember, THERE WAS A RECORD OF ALL GUN OWNERS AND THE RUSSIAN/MEXICAN ARMY DEMANDED THAT LIST SO THEY COULD GET RID OF ALL THOSE WHO HAD GUNS, but either taking them away and/or arresting the owners.
  
  Something similar like this WILL HAPPEN, only it will be our own government doing it behind closed doors. WE, THE PEOPLE won’t know what happened until someone comes knocking on your door to seize your gun. SO…………………
  
  Take some of your guns and bury them properly NOW,. WHAT IS COMING WILL HAPPEN VERY, VERY QUICKLY. MARK MY WORDS. If you think it won’t happen here, think again.
  
  Those russian/mexican forces could have been substituted with our beloved (sic) UNITED NATIONS, who have no love for Americans.
  
  YOU THINK YOU MAY KNOW WHAT IS COMING AND IF YOU DON’T KNOW YOUR BIBLE, YOU WON’T UNTIL IT IS UP FRONT AND PERSONAL.
  
  Bury your guns within the next 2 months. PLEASE TRUST ME ON THIS.
  
  Leave 1 gun that they can confiscate. Tell them you sold the others at a gun show or from the newspaper that you don’t remember who you sold it to. IT IS OK TO DO THIS. GOD WILL NOT HOLD THIS AGAINST YOU BECAUSE WE MUST DEFEAT THIS EVIL FOR AS LONG AS WE CAN. Soon, it will overtake us anyways (Bible prophecy).
  
  Report this comment
- Priscilla King
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:34pm
  Nice thought…that’s where I was, philosophically, in college. But it DOES NOT WORK. After college I lived in Washington, D.C., which had laws like that. The murder rate did not decline any more than it would have been expected to decline after the drug dealers had killed each other off and established turfs in neighborhoods nobody else cared about. And I also grew up reading about how Irish people who didn’t have guns killed each other with bombs. I’ve learned from recent events. While you’re busy “monitoring” firearms, violent people are doing more harm to more helpless children and more innocent bystanders.
  
  Serious about reducing the murder rate? Three suggestions: (1) Spread out the population so that everyone can have adequate personal space, so kids don’t become violent over “disrespectful” looks. (2) DON’T legalize and promote drugs like cocaine and heroin, but DO end the hypocrisy and treat the users. (3) “Monitor” people who are known to use drugs–including even drugs like Flomax, which are prescribed to meet medical needs and don’t make the users “high,” but do unfortunately have some risk of causing genuine momentary insanity.
  
  Report this comment
- BlackCrow
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:39pm
  My son was the captain of his high school RIFLE team.Yes in Alaska the high schools have rifle teams same as football and basketball.
  
  However the idea of needing a license, permission from the government to exercise one of everyone’s fundamental rights is repugnant to liberty. Would you support a license for speech in the Internet age? Repugnant to liberty most would agree but where’s the difference? None!
  
  Report this comment
- Zeb
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:40pm
  PASSING ON A REMARKABLE STATEMENT
  A_CALL_TO_CONSCIENCE
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:30am
  
  There are so many laws that literally no one knows how many we have. I would take a guess and say that at least 90% are not only unconstitutional, but not even needed. In a truly free society there would be very few laws. As the laws increase our freedoms decrease. People want a lot of laws, they think that somehow, the opinion of a group of men and women will protect them. Sadly, as our morals continue to spiral downward the amount of laws we have will go up; people think that is the answer and will fix the problem. What they fail to understand is treating the symptoms won’t cure anything, you must treat the cause.
  THANKS A_CALL_TO_CONSCIENCE
  
  Report this comment
- dogmeat
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:29pm
  NO PERMITS! NONE! Classes OK,permits is an Infringement!
  
  Report this comment
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:38pm
  That is total prog crap.
  
  Report this comment
- American Soldier (Separated)
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:58pm
  I agree with Jefferson, your suggestion was beyond ridiculous IMHO. Sure, I suppose youth being educated in firearms, but your proposal had too mane “Permits, Permitted, Permissions…” because you can set up all the laws like that all you want, but who has the power to grant these permissions? Just look at California. You are able to carry a concealed fire arm, but you have to get permission from the county sheriff, who can judge on his own accord whether or not to permit you that privileged, which most sheriffs DENY.
  
  So what good will your proposal be if all, or most, who apply are denied?
  
  Unacceptable.
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:59pm
  Sregn, I agree that every student in every school should be required to take a gun safety and shooting course and be taught the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence. Upon completion and reaching age 16, they should be issued an M-16 and ten magazines, loaded, and a 1K round box of ammunition to keep in their homes or carried whenever they want. Beyond that, there are no compromises or restrictions.
  
  That’s called a Well Regulated Militia and following the Second Amendment.
  
  Report this comment
- paxchgo
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 6:05pm
  Uh, not in this lifetime. The Constitution says I can have it and my right to own it cannot and will not be infringed upon by the government. Any questions? Seems like a no-brainer to me.
  
  Report this comment
- RIDEMODELS
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 6:59pm
  Many many many “MEN” have died for our constitution. It is not just a piece of paper and the problem with this country is its a police state. The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
  
  Report this comment
- Unix
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:04pm
  SRGEN, ummm, I don’t think so fella! Take a gun safety class, like we do for a CCP, know the laws and that’s about it. You can take the rest of your gibberish and bury it somewhere!
  
  Report this comment
noslave
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:59am
in light of all the liberal democrats BIZZAROWORLD?? logic toward solveing guns in the hands of criminals????they’ve had buy backs,barter??short of free hookers??even nwks mayor is offering $1000/gun annomisouly?whats next an easter egg style gun hunt on the white house lawn??you find lots of money and leave a gun??what a bunch of morons?they got to be getting a kick-back?or skimming money from these stupid programs?,since they dont work but they keep doing the same thing??get the cops and politicians were paying to do their job?? good greif its like hireing lifeguards to just be OBSERVERS??

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- rosecityken
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:02am
  not to mention the highest gun violence is in cities with more than 250 k who have the strictest gun laws…..why arent we outlawing gangs? adam lanza broke a law when he stole his moms guns, he broke a law when he shot her in the face, killing her. he broke a law bringing the guns to the school. he broke a law breaking into the school and broke a law when he slaughtered 27 innocent people because he was mentally disturbed…..why are democrats treating everyone like they are adam lanza? why are we being punished? how does taking my gun stop a mentally deranged person from killing someone else?
  
  Report this comment
- seayalater73
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:36am
  The sickest part to all of the proposed measures by democrats and the media is that there WILL be another mass shooting. If we take measures along what the NRA proposed, then there will be a far lower probability. I don’t like having a uniformed armed presence in schools, but having some type of armed QRF hidden behind a closed door monitoring security cameras is another approach.
  With both courses of action we still face the prospect of a another incident. At least us “gun nuts” are talking about effective prevention. The left wing is willfully putting kids at risk in order to achieve political ends. Every “round” of debate that is triggered by each incident give them greater and greater emotional leverage. In essence they get immediate, and repeated reward for allowing kids to be killed, rather than taking measures to shut down the atrocities.
  It could almost lead one to believe they are enjoying this.
  
  Report this comment
LIBSALWAYSLIE
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:58am
If obama and the progressives in government were to ban guns, would that mean that the president would no longer be surrounded by armed secret service agents? NO, of course not! So he gets to defend himself, but WE DON’T?? This is bull crap. This one point should be enough to convince all thinking people that banning guns is wrong. There were more guns per capita 100 years ago, but less of these type of mass murders. The reason is the decay of morality in our society, brought on by progressives. There is no progress in the agenda of progressives.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- happygranny
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:13am
  Thank you, you said exactly what I believe in. Stop this nonsense of gun control and start attacking the real issues, like gangs, unemployment, lack of responsibility of individuals and the moral decay that is everywhere.
  
  Report this comment
- shorelineliz
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:45am
  And…PIERS MORGAN needs to go! There are 10 times the Home Invasions in Great Britain than the USA because they are disarmed! People are stabbed to death in their homes by youths and punks and career criminals who can run around terrorizing people. A millionaire named John Monckton had a state of the art alarm system and was stabbed to death when he opened his front door. Alex Jones needed to point that out to Piers Morgan last night that Great Britain has a huge CRIME Spree on home invasions. A woman as burned by a punk who put her own iron on her! Don’t forget Great Britain??? We got your **** out of a sling in WWII and you actually were BEgging the USA For guns to fight HITLER! Wow! Great Britain has gone down the toilet because they have essentially been disarmed. Look up the statistics for HOme Invasions in Great Britain yourself! Our SEcond Amendment Rocks!
  
  Report this comment
- ChildOfTheKing
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:35pm
  The question is: WHY WOULD THE PRESIDENT NEED ARMED SECURITY OF WE, THE PEOPLE HAD OUR GUNS TAKEN AWAY?
  
  The answer is: the President KNOWS there will be those who have guns illegally, SO it is safe to say that along with the govt banning anyone from having guns, will be a penalty of DEATH if you are found with one.
  
  Report this comment
- dnewton
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 3:31pm
  I am not sure that there is a moral slide. I think that we are just as immoral as ever, it only shows in different ways. We don’t sacrifice children on alters to assure blessings from Baal or Molech, but we do abort babies to make sure that we are not burdened with the cost of raising children, about a third of a million every year. Stealing used to be a private affair between people but now we may get our government to steal for us by progressive taxation. We don’t put clay in the flour to make make more money from contaminated bread but we do make people pay for more government services than they really need. A person paying 60% of his income to the government, is being cheated because he could does not consume all of the services that he paid actually for. The government forces every private contract involving money to be breached by inflating the currency, thus cheating the lender. The government forces banks to lend to those who can not pay, thus setting the stage for a bubble economy based on a lie. Social justice assumes that the offended party is a person, which is sometimes half true but in any unsavory act, it is God who is the offended party. Our attitude about slavery is nothing but hypocrisy when we advocate with such fervor tax slavery to create the alleged perfect nation.
  
  Report this comment
Mike Benton
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:53am
Isn’t shooting people already against the law?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- individualrights1st
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:03am
  We need to pass a law that makes it illegal to break the law. That will fix everything.
  
  Report this comment
- IndyGuy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:04am
  Very good question for the Anti-2nd amendment crowd…
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:05am
  No shooting people trying to harm you or others is totally legal.
  
  Report this comment
- woodyee
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:17am
  Good THINKING, NaughtyCal!
  
  Report this comment
- Pokerjoe
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:14pm
  Their are enough laws for everything.
  
  Report this comment
- IndyGuy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:16pm
  Naughtycal writes: “No shooting people trying to harm you or others is totally legal.”
  
  Then D.C. is in some serious trouble…
  
  Report this comment
- RIDEMODELS
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 8:35pm
  I am sure the New Black Panthers will never ever give up their guns, so why should anyone else?
  
  As long as actors have armed security with them, then I would like my constitutional rights as well.
  
  Report this comment
ChiefGeorge
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:45am
Extend your NRA membership now!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- rosecityken
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:06am
  I did, but i have to tell you i am a little troubled by their silence at this point.
  
  Report this comment
- civilwarcometh
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:25am
  I’m more troubled about the silence of the people not the NRA. Quit depending on a organization to defend what you should be defending in the first place. We need to stand up for ourselves!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- ChildOfTheKing
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:31pm
  @civilwarcometh :
  Absolutely! Support the NRA, BUT stop worrying about what people say WHEN YOU ARE VOCAL ABOUT THE 2ND AMENDMENT.
  
  God gives us rights and therefore, each RIGHTEOUS or GOOD PERSON has a right to own and use a firearm to defend themselves AGAINST someone who is evil. They did so in the OLD TESTAMENT AND IN THE NEW TESTAMENT and the only thing that changed was man. MAN TAKES GOD’S LAWS AND TWISTS THEM TO FIT THEIR AGENDA., ESPECIALLY THE LIBERALS.
  
  And, Obama doesn’t really believe in God or he would be more supportive of God’s laws, which to me, MAKES OBAMA A HYPOCRITE. How can you trust a hypocrite?????
  
  Report this comment
- webb
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 2:26pm
  SOMEONE HERE COMMENTED ON WHY “ALL AMERICANS ARE NOT STANDING UP” for Gun Rights in this Country!! I ask myself that same Question every day,,We have given up so many rights and liberties since the early 60′s!! WHY?? We become complacent,we don’t speak out on these kinds of subjects,we Must Be Heard,,Don’t give up your 2nd Amendment Rights!! I’m an Old Man, I served Our Country in Vietnam,I raised my 3 sons to STAND UP FOR AMERICA AT ALL TIMES,,Please Speak Out to all of our Congress and continue to do so!The Constitution Gives us this Right,,Stand Up For Americas Gun Rights
  
  Report this comment
rockymtngal
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:42am
I wonder how many of our politicians own guns? Obama’s daughters attend a school who have had armed guards for years. Why hasn’t anyone in the media spoken about Sen R.C. Soles (D-NC) who shot an intruder in his home? Are politicians exempt when it comes to publishing who had gun licenses? Aren’t our families considered just as important to us as theirs? How many members of the ACLU own guns or will stand up for the rights of illegals to own them? How about the NAACP? This is a bunch of hogwash. Obama has yet to declare the Ft. Hood shooting as a terrorist attack & that guy was in OUR military! Obama is stripping away our freedoms one by one, most behind closed doors signing off on one executive order after another. I’m guessing most Americans haven’t taken the time to read the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. This administration, along with Obama do not care about either!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Honestybefore truth
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:53am
  Of course the will exempt themselves and their families, that isn’t even a question! What I most fervently want is for some patriotic Federal Judge to issue a summary judgement that sways that the only legal way to restrict guns is by amending the Constitution.
  
  Report this comment
- MAEBE
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:55am
  Amen to that
  
  Report this comment
IndyGuy
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:39am
Did you not answer the questions about owning guns so there won’t be a data base with you on it?

………….Yes

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- johnpaulkuchtajr
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:45am
  Smart lad!
  
  Report this comment
- lordjosh
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:47am
  Exactly. First question, “Do I own a…” Brilliant job, Beck. The CIA help you with this one?
  
  Report this comment
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:57am
  considering most are NRA members, they already know you own guns. Registered republican? they will assume you own guns. Ever bought a firearm from a FFL holder? They already know you own guns and what type. The dealers are required to keep permanent books with your purchase and personal information for every firearm sold. So they know, unless you purchased only private seller or off the street dealer.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:06am
  I already have a detailed file kept on me. I was informed of this when I was debriefed about the ramifications of my (former) top secret security clearance when I discharged from the service. Thus, “they” already know, and frankly, I could give two sh*ts. What are they going to do, kill me twice?
  
  Report this comment
- Yeah_Buddy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:04am
  No I lied about owning guns. Excuse me while I cower and hide now…come on, grow a pair.
  
  Report this comment
- TADTAD
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:22am
  I too am like GhostofJefferson; there is already a file on me. Having had an adjudicated SBI, and such and having been the Commandant’s courier and an Army intel officer, they know. They know I know that they know that I know that they know I know. They know that I’m a strict Constitutionalist, and that I regret that I only have one life to give towards the support of our Constitution. But as G.S. Patton said to the effect of “no dumb bastard ever won a war by dying for his country; he won the war by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his.” Ditto that. Semper Fi. And yes, that list is long. Time to go P.T.
  
  Report this comment
- IndyGuy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:30am
  Yeah_Buddy…Let me know when they kick in your door O.K???
  
  Report this comment
- IndyGuy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:33am
  P.S…If you want to be on a Government Data Base as a gun owner just have a little read here…http://www.theblaze.com/stories/in-the-third-reichno-one-saw-that-coming-until-it-was-too-late-who-issued-this-warning-about-gun-control-in-u-s/
  
  Report this comment
- Trigus
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 8:55am
  @Indy – to late as some have replied: we have extensive files already on us. Also, If you bought a firearm legally thru a FFL dealer and had a background check – then you are on the list to – sorry.
  
  “We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.”
  -In the Continental Congress just before signing
  the Declaration of Independence, 1776.
  
  Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:38am
QUESTION –

Would you prefer to surrender your 2nd Amendment Rights to the government, in exchange for a promise from the government to protect you from all harm?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- barber2
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:47am
  What ? A ” promise ” from the Chicago radicals who are all about ” change ? ” Duh. Only their dumb base would trust these dudes not to ” change ” their promise !
  
  Report this comment
- Chromo200
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:48am
  no .. the gov’t is like muslims never trust them.
  
  Report this comment
- woodyee
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:57am
  THAT IS PRECISELY my point – it is this question regarding the 2nd Amendment that has any legitimate link to it’s cause and effect.
  
  See Bowers vs. DeVito – gobblement has NO obligation to protect YOU from harm (YOU being the INDIVIDUAL)
  
  LEARN kiddies.
  
  Report this comment
pohknee
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:37am
If spears were the only weapon left, would they be regulated and subjected to background checks and registration? How about pencils that exceed 6 inches? Hammers weighing more than two ounces, or plain old household scissors. If you think that unlikely, check on the annual deaths by hammers or scissors. Freedom is freedom and there are risks associated with an open society. It cannot be subject to ifs ands or buts. Nobody thinks that children, criminals and mentally ill people should be allowed to own or have access to deadly weapons.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- isarose
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:02am
  i totally agree with you. anything can be used as a deadly weapon. only problem is that wasnt there primary use. guns were made to kill. with that being said we are destructive creatures if you snap or want someone dead you’ll find a way to do it.
  
  Report this comment
SilentRunner
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:34am
So where’s the poll?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:40am
  Next to the Czech and Russian.
  
  Report this comment
- IndyGuy
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:45am
  Good one Ghost…
  
  Report this comment
- Mike Benton
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:45am
  Good question…it didn’t appear for me either at 9:46 EST
  
  Report this comment
- willbedone
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:49am
  Only an idiot would answer questions to this poll. Do you have guns, do you have more than one gun, do you have? With answers to these questions and your IP address, WHO do you thing is interested in this information. Gesh, Blaze I thought you were better than this.
  
  Report this comment
- Fecal_Matters
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:52am
  Why do you have to be racist? Where’s the Poll…I’m offended. lol
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:53am
  Its right below the final line in the article. Might want to refresh the page.
  GHOST, that was an excellent response. Glad that I hadn’t take a sip of coffee before reading it.
  
  Report this comment
- Mike Benton
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:56am
  The next question is there, very near the top, partly out of sight.
  
  Report this comment
- Zipit
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:07am
  I thought it was down at my favorite bar!
  
  Report this comment
- ChildOfTheKing
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:48pm
  @willbedone:
  No, no, no. Not all of us will agree. I HIDE MY IP ADDRESS and therefore, I do not mind answering, but GLENN BECK IS TRUSTWORTHY. He would never reveal any personal info about anyone, even to his dying breath. I DO BELIEVE GLENN, but if you are that afraid then WHY AREN’T YOU HIDING YOUR IP ADDRESS? There are LOTS of freeware apps that allow you to do these. Just search for them on freewarefiles.com.
  
  In fact, any smart person would never use their REAL NAME on a blog, a comment site (like this) or when they take a poll. WHY DO I WANT TO SET MYSELF UP FOR PUNISHMENT (so to speak)?
  
  I am a SW Engineer so I know how to bounce an IP address. If you don’t, you’d better learn or download something that will help hide you cause when the government ends up taking over the Internet, you will need it.
  
  Report this comment
firman
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:34am
It is self evident to anyone with half a brain what the founding fathers intent was in regards to the second ammendment. If the left doesn’t like it, then they must try to ammend it legally. In the meantime, all 3 branches of govt. are sworn to uphold it. But as we have seen, this president and his minions do not repect the constitution and there are no repercussions. It will continue until people wake up and start paying attention. I.m afraid that won’t happen unless things get much worse or there is a national disaster.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- barber2
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:44am
  FIR: Remember that the Chicago radicals are following the advice of Alinsky, their community organizing mentor , to “use the legal system to CHANGE the system.” Gun control and the Second Amendment are on their list for ” CHANGE.’
  
  Report this comment
- firman
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:15am
  Barber: And they will do it as soon as they can. The 2008 supreme court ruling in Heller vs. D.C., upheld the second ammendment by 5-4. You can guess who voted to support and who didn’t. All it will take is for one SCJ that voted to uphold the ammendment to die or retire and we are screwed. Most people don’t pay attention to this stuff before they vote. Pray nothing happens in the next 4 years.
  
  Report this comment
kat747
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:34am
For the first part, the USA has immigration laws. The current administration ignores the immigration laws.
For the second part, the USA has a Constitution. The current administration ignores the Constitution
and furthermore, signed 950 Executive Orders trying to change the Constitution.
For the third part, the current administation dumped ObamaCare onto the American People. The current administration has given corporations and individuals “waivers” so that they do not have to participate in ObamaCrap.
Now….do YOU see where this is going ?
For the fourth part….the current administration is attempting to violate the Constitution’s Second Amendment by passing gun control laws…..without first providing for all IL-Legal handguns, etc., to be
taken away from criminals.
Therefore,
DO YOU ACTUALLY THINK THAT THE NEW & IMPROVED GUN LAWS ARE GOING TO MATTER ?
The current administration has set a precedent that you can ignore the law.
What part of “stupid” don’t you understand ?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:32am
Where do I stand on the right to self defense?

This simple: Any non-criminal should be able to walk into a store and buy a full auto/select fire firearm, without any checks from the government, without any restrictions, and walk out without question. 16 year old boys should be able to carry sidearms peacefully (before you wince, 14 year old boys can legally open carry a sidearm in Wyoming). Alcohol-Tobacco-Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a department of the federal government.

Any questions?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:39am
  exactly. In the 1800′s a boy became a man at age 12, would often be left in charge of the farm/ranch for months at a time while the parents went to conduct business in town. The only difference is people now days are not raised to be responsible adults, so you have 25 year old “kids” running around instead of 12 year old men and women.
  
  Report this comment
- Ramcharger
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:41am
  Amen brother
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:43am
  Copy all that.
  
  Report this comment
- Shamrock241
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:48am
  How do you know they are a Non criminal if you do not perform a background ( check ).
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:05am
  @Sham
  
  The presumption of innocence. Also, and this may seem odd in this day and age, you should know the folks in your neighborhood, especially if you’re a merchant.
  
  The merchant of course always has the ability to say “no” (or, perhaps, should, again this may be a dinosaur concept). End of the day, there rarely are actual escaped convicts out at legal merchant shops looking for firearms. Most mass murderers had spotless clean records. You simply do not, and can not, know. I’ll take the dangers of liberty over the false safety of statism any day of the week.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:08am
  I’m with you on that GHOST. Too many sold out once before back in 1935.
  This is how the Thompson was originally sold to the public.
  http://www.nfatoys.com/tsmg/web/coltguns.htm
  
  Report this comment
- Dismayed Veteran
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:06am
  How does one know who is a non-criminal? Do you propose a data base identifying violent offenders? How can it be searched in there is no background check?
  
  Ghost I do agree with you. My questions are there to seek your insight. I have come to respect your answers.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:14am
  @Vet
  
  You may not have gotten down to it yet, but I answered the question. You wouldn’t know. You don’t know now. Escaped convicts will have fake ID if they seek to buy firearms in a legit shop, or have a straw man who is clean, and mass murderer types are normally people with spotless criminal records prior to their massacres. You just can’t know.
  
  I shouldn’t have said “non-criminal” except that I wished to indicate that if a shop owner is selling to a guy standing there saying “I just busted out of the federal prison, sell me this here Winchester so I can go slay the sheriff”, then the shop owner may wish to not sell to him.
  
  Report this comment
- MAEBE
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:18am
  OMG…WARMUNGER_AL you hit the nail on the head…we don’t have responsible people growing into adulthood anymore…just overgrown spoiled rotten kids with no sense or direction and along comes smooth talkin’ walkin’ Obummer who gives them a gold star for their inability to think for themselves…ooo man don’t get me started…someone needed to slap the parents upside the head years ago…..
  
  Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:30am
I stand on the Second Amendment.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- searching for the Truth
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:59am
  But, the ” King James Bible, ” is on top !
  
  Report this comment
RaydocX
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:29am
JCLDWL,
Well spoken… while i am amused at some of those who advertise here, people with a clear position that would oppose the blaze (the mayors against firearms [sic] being one), there is no reason anyone would volunteer information they need not in the world today.

The poll should simply ask about favoring or opposing gun control, vs. better reporting of mental illness.
It’s funny, the ACLU will oppose lifting the HIPPA ban on reporting to the Feds people committed or being treated for psychiatric illness (even if just in the setting of a firearm purchase), but they will sit back and cheer the Left on in trying to take firearms away from law abiding citizen…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:36am
  Just my own opinion, but the time to hide is over. I’m not one of those types who believes in burying his firearm in the ground in a tube, and I don’t believe in hiding my peaceful exercise of my rights. I’m an open carrier and open carry advocate, so of course my position may be a bit more than some are comfortable with, and I understand that. I will not however hide. I have semi-autos, I have sidearms, I have all kinds of scary things. It’s my right, and I’m proud of it, and will not hide.
  
  Report this comment
- jcldwl
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:51am
  @ ghost
  Who said anything about hiding? I just am not going to answer poll questions that have you admitting to owning a non existent assault weapon. Read the first question. I just don’t feel the need to answer those types of questions. I prefer to leave them not knowing.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:12am
  I read your statement. If you purchased your firearm (theoretical firearm, heh) through a dealer, “they” already know. If not, good for you and good luck. As far as I’m concerned, if you’re here they know who you are or can find out easily enough, and if you have a member ship in *any* pro-liberty association or group, “they” can and WILL assume you’re heavily armed.
  
  Report this comment
Eastinfection
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:29am
“President Obama, most Democrats and many in the media claim that a majority of Americans are demanding immediate and significant changes to our nation’s gun laws…”

This is true.

What they are leaving out, however, is that many demanding change want the gun laws, especially those regarding conceal/carry, to be relaxed.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:42am
  anti-concealed carry laws are illegal.
  It isn’t a right if you have to ask permission. No permit required to exercise any of your “rights”
  
  Report this comment
- ChuckHarding
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:54pm
  Most of the people I ask about it say they would like the gun control laws *repealed*!
  
  Report this comment
BlackCrow
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:28am
Sight picture

Breath control

Trigger squeeze

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
barber2
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:24am
Why don’t you ask me what I think about the Chicago radicals who now control the Democrat Party ? They have changed my opinions on gun control . I no longer trust my own government to defend me from foreign enemies or from that very government. These radicals are not about protecting law abiding / tax paying citizens; they are about punishing , redistributing , and ” changing.” Very bad juju coming out of this White House.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
starman70
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:24am
TO THE BLAZE:

You did not provide a way to correct mis answered questions on this poll. I answered too quickly on a couple of answers and wanted to re set the poll.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
lynnissmart
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:24am
I stand with the second amendment!!!! Gun owners do not let them get away with this fraud of trying to disarm the citizens of the USA! Lobby, lobby all that you can….! Get business to support you just the way the lefting are co-opting Walmart!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
daveleeander
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:22am
Our county high schools have an armed policeman inside during school hours. He is there for various reasons, one of them being to keep the school safe from violence, either from inside or outside. He carries, and has the sheriff, State Police Highway Patrol, and the city police (where school is inside city) top respond to any call for help. They all monitor the same radio frequency.
At our Highschool, they have taken knives, drugs, and guns away from students and expelled some.
An armed policeman inside all schools would be a good thing to not only keep them safe from violence as a first responder, but also would give the students a better feeling about policemen. The students in our high schools will tell you that they get to know the policemen and the majority have a lot of respect for them and like them as people.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- banjarmon
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:53am
  Concealed Carry Teachers and office personal would be better! Trust them with their education. Trust them with their lives!
  
  Report this comment
- katzkiner
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 1:36pm
  A cop on campus solves so many problems. It is just common sense. Cost wise. I’d be glad to pay $100 + a year EXTRA to know my child had professional protection from not just maniac shooters but also kidnappers, child molesters, rapists pimps and drug dealers.
  
  Report this comment
CONTUMACY
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:21am
We need to be careful and smart in how we defend the second amendment. I think we are not thinking two steps ahead here. This is an attack on our freedom on two fronts. Front 1 an head on attack of the second amendment just to see what they can get. Front 2 they are not menioning anything about controlling the psy drugs that a lot of people take in our society, my theory is that they are going to control guns by determining who is mentally sane or stable enough to own guns. Do you not think that most of the people that comment here on the blaze will be considered mentally unstable by the left, therefore disqualifying your ability to own a firearm. We have no problem with not letting felons own guns…..Hope you think about this before you allow them to form your argument for you.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:53am
  the only careful and smart way of handling these proposals is straight up refusal. Do not give an inch and be prepared to met out punishment to any group or agency that attempts to push the agenda. There should be zero negotiation.
  
  Report this comment
- jcldwl
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:58am
  Yes you are right and they are now going behind the scenes to co op the retailers. I just closed the one Bank of America account I had because of what they did. If Walmart caves to the pressures of this admin I will find somewhere else to shop.
  
  Report this comment
Cavallo
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:18am
Gun control is about empowering The State. Any other excuse is a lie to get support from people who may not want a more powerful tyranny. Access to weapons empowers the individual, lack of access empowers tyranny.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- grimmster
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:25am
  “Gun control” is’nt in place to “control” guns,but to control law abiding citizens.Not one gun law applies to criminals,and encinom,is so, prove it.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:49am
  That is spot on. The really scary part is how those who wish for the government to just take over every facet of our lives fail to see that it includes their lives as well. What happens when their then perceived freedoms are also removed by the government. There will be next to no way to redress such a powerful government. Fools!
  
  Report this comment
jcldwl
Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:15am
Would love to do this survey but what weapons I own are my business and my business only. Sorry blaze but it’s not you it’s the political environment.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- justangry
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:32am
  Yeah, these questions didn’t leave me feeling confident in the Blaze’s motives at all. I mean really asking gun owners if they’d give up their guns if the government came for them? Anyone answering that question the wrong way just basically signed up to be on a subversive list.
  
  Report this comment
- BODYBAG
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:33am
  @JCLDWL
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:15am
  Sorry blaze but it’s not you
  ———————————————————-
  Yes it is. Dont think for a minute they wouldnt use your info just like everyone else.
  Dont think for a minute if contacted by the government these people wouldnt flip you
  like burger king on a friday night.
  
  Divulge your personal info at your own peril.
  
  Report this comment
- BODYBAG
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 9:36am
  Get over the silly notion that The Blaze or Glenn Beck are any different than all the rest.
  
  Report this comment
- dont_drive_slow_in_the_left_lane_obliviot
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 11:14am
  If you’re so over the blaze then why are you here?
  
  Report this comment
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 12:33pm
  Yeah defintely dont feel comfortable displaying this info over the web, who knows what CIA data-box gathers info of theblaze surveyors IP addresses…
  
  Report this comment
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 5:40pm
  @ Just
  
  umm..after seeing your posts on here and the thoughts they come from…you already are…as are most of us just because of our points of view and how we vote and what we believe…
  if the FBI or CIA or any of the other alphabets wanted me, they could already get me…I have been FBI fingerprinted for 17 years now due to my employment history…
  they track me big time…they know all the quasi-legal things I have done…up until now I have not been a threat…but after hearing that I am now on a “Hold for further review” FBI gun buying list…the 5 hours I spent waiting last time wasn’t fun by the way….I figure I have someones attention..
  
  and you know what.. WHO CARES!! COME and get me if you think you can….
  
  for all the whining, crying, moaning, and BIOTCHING most of you do on here…you would think you would have a bigger pair in your pants…
  
  they already know..they have known since the 1970′s when the Echelon system was put into place.. the NSA already knows everything you do, say, and where you go…they just have to get the data and compile it and then send the dogs of war out to pick you up…if they really thought you were a threat or cared what you were doing…
  they don’t and won’t until it is too late for anyone to do anything and they control the military as well.. One more piece to the puzzle and it is lights out…
  
  Report this comment
- Spitfire1938
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 11:07am
  Wow… for a few minutes, while I was scrolling through these comments, I was beginning to think no one else noticed the suspicious character of this survey. When I served in the USASA (US Army Security Agency) the military branch of the NSA, NSA had significant surveillance capability. Now they can connect Name and Address to every ‘Post’ EVER to appear on the Blaze with REEMS of printouts in minutes. I think Glenn, wittingly or unwittingly… SOLD OUT those members who took the survey. It’s not like I had no clues… but Glenn I thought you were trying to actually be constructive?!?!
  
  Report this comment
- Spitfire1938
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 12:41pm
  @VRW CON….
  Of course your correct. The difficulty is the ‘majority’ of posters on the Blaze predate, and many ‘significantly’ predate, the beginning of surveillance consolidation in the 70s. Easily 50% of ALL weapons extent are unknown to the the government. Officially or otherwise!
  I was struck by the almost universal distain shown for protecting this ‘Personal’ information found in most ‘commentaries’. It’s not whining to question the motive behind the Blaze doing this survey NOW when the results can directly tie 1000s to firearms who may have gone unnoticed before. Direct confrontation and NO FEAR is in my view always most effective policy, but not everyone agrees.
  Perhaps, instead of wasting time writing ‘comments’ if we began organizing quick response groups to give “Authorities” more to think about than their assigned “Confiscation Target”….
  
  Report this comment
- Xyskalla
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 2:34pm
  For crying out loud, how many questions are in this poll? I thought it would be a quick 10 or so questions, but I just realized I’ve been clicking answers for the past 10 minutes! I went back and counted over 80 questions that I’ve answered already (some of which were redundant), so I gave up.
  
  Has anyone made it to the end of the poll?
  
  Anyway, an out-of-control government that is widely known for it’s massive power grabs coupled with an unarmed population scares me a thousand times worse than an occasional crazy person with a gun.
  
  Report this comment

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.