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

As Heard on Beck Radio: Unbelievable TV Interview — Woman Describes Losing Her Dog…and then he emerges from the Rubble!

Government

Retired Cop Wants Law Mandating Gun Ownership for Every Household in His Town — Do You Agree With Him?

Mar. 5, 2013 10:46am Billy Hallowell

David Marsters Wants Every Home in Sabattus, Maine to Own a Gun

Credit: AFP/Getty Images

David Marsters, a resident of Sabattus, Maine, is pushing a controversial proposal that is certain to frustrate gun control advocates. The retired cop is arguing that every head of household in the town be required to have a gun in his or her home.

According to the Bangor Daily News, Marsters believes that by enacting such legislation, “it would provide and protect safety of the city.” On Tuesday, the Sabattus selectmen will meet to hear his proposal.

The former law enforcement officer told the outlet that a similar law has worked well in Marsters, Ga.

“I’ve been reading about a Georgia town, Kennesaw,” Marsters told the Daily News during a recent interview. “Since 1982, they’ve had an ordinance requiring all homeowners shall be armed and ready to go at all times”

And it seems Marsters has thought through the details of his plan. As far as exemptions go, those who have religious restrictions and individuals with mental illness would not fall under the requirement. He’s hoping the proposal is accepted by local leaders and placed on the docket for consideration at the town’s June meeting.

The local resident, who is active in politics, has lived in the area for a few years. While the crime rate in Sabattus isn’t high, he believes that more guns is the key to cracking down on the crime that does exist.

Marsters decried gun control advocates as being misled, telling the Daily News that guns are not to blame for violence. He also warned that the move to take away firearms could lead to other fundamental rights being eroded, like the freedom of the press to report on important events.

But while Marsters is hopeful his gun law will be adopted, local officials predict it will be rejected. Police Chief Anthony Ward told the Daily News that the Second Amendment affords Americans gun rights, but that an “unsafe environment” could be created if people are forced to have weapons.

Town Manager Andrew Gilmore also weighed in, noting his opposition to the proposed requirement.

“Compelling someone to own a gun is a new one to me in post-Colonial times,” he said.

Marsters’ plea will be heard at tonight’s meeting.

What do you think? Let us know in the comments section.

(H/T: Bangor Daily News)

–

More Stories From Billy Hallowell:

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

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (158)

siguy62
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:12am
This is just as stupid a suggestion as Obamacare. It’s wrong to tell people what to buy, even if it works. Mayor Bloomberg in NYC keeps increasing his fascist tendancies in the name of ‘it’s for the good of the people.”

Government, at it’s least bad, can only hope to encourage good behavior. If they really want to encourage intelligent gun-ownership, how about a FREE gun safety class, and property tax rebate for those who buy and keep a gun. Not a home owner? There are other incentives that can be used to encourage ‘desired behavior.’

The problem, in general, is that people fall in for the false notion that punishing ‘undesired behavior,’ or forcing ‘desired behavior,’ works. Want people to act a certain way? Reward them for that.

The statists use this model to crush those who work and are law abiding, by rewarding dependancy behavior and punishing self-sufficiency. Until we as a society start getting behind ideas that reward independant behavior we are doomed.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- ChildOfTheKing
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:20am
  “Do You Agree With Him?”
  
  NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
  
  WHAT A STUPID QUESTION.
  
  Report this comment
- Ghandi was a Republican
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:22am
  People should be rewarded for protecting their community. Don’t force them to own a gun then. But if they are going to make the community safer AND sace all the cost of a police force of a size they would not otherwise need — Rebate time. This is not a phantom issue like ‘healthcare”. obamacare is an abiuse, a word game, a scam, an intrusion.
  The CONSTITUTION directly addresses a RIGHT and a reason for gun rights.
  In short, one is a right and one is a ruse.
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:22am
  IF YOU DO NOT OWN A GUN, PAY A TAX
  
  Everyone must own a gun. They can lock it up if they want. it must be made part of the LIVE AND GROWING US CONSTITUTION.
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:26am
  BLACK PEOPLE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN SLAVES IF THEY HAD GUNS
  
  Guns are a black issue. If Jews in Germany refused to surrender their guns to Hitler they would not have been shipped in box cars to their death. A gun is a life preserver in a World of so much Socialism.
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:28am
  The Guns should be provided free by the government. This government gives guns to Mexican Drug Lords and our enemies so they must be forced to give them to us.
  
  Report this comment
- johnpaulkuchtajr
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:32am
  Town Manager Andrew Gilmore probably doesn’t get to Europe very often. Fact is, for his own safety and that of others, he may not even be allowed past the City limits.
  
  If he traveled or read books, he might learn that the entire country of Switzerland has a very similar gun mandate to the one proposed by stalwart citizen Marsters. Swiss citizens are even required to pass a firearm proficiency test!
  
  “Remember Benghazi and ALL the Traitors!”
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:34am
  This isn’t new. Other communities have tried it, although I don’t think legitimately. I think in the past it has mostly been political stunts, but I could be wrong. Mandating something no longer makes it a right. Like forcing speech, or assembly. There are quite a few hoplophobic people that would rather die cowering in a corner than touch a firearm. Others are so fearful they would use jackbooted thugs and willingly march themselves to concentration camps than have firearms around.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:36am
  @Siguy62
  
  Well said; I agree with everything you stated!
  
  Report this comment
- AUsername
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:46am
  blowback for the neo libs on Obamacare lets do it so they understand.
  
  Report this comment
- Ben__Franklin
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:07pm
  NO! I do not agree.
  
  Just like I should have the right to own a gun, people should also have the right to not own one.
  
  Report this comment
- banjarmon
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:12pm
  Sure DO IT…Let all citizens have guns, Just do let the dems and libs have bullets!!!
  
  Report this comment
- Mudd
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:48pm
  No, I don’t agree. A lot of folks out there who shouldn’t have guns, just like there are a lot who shouldn’t vote. Allow the option but don’t force it. To MUFFYTHETUFFY; I don’t think the Jews in Nazi Germany would have been able to save themselves from the concentration camps even if they had been armed. They might have been able to hold the Nazis off for a while but even a well organised armed militia can only hold the State off for so long.
  
  Report this comment
- UnbridaledPursuit
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:57pm
  The mandate has loop holes that make it easy to not participate in owning a gun. Citizens in that area don’t feel like their rights are being violated in any way.
  However the results are somewhat fantastic. Kennesaw Georgia is less than 20 miles from the center of Atlanta. It has a crime rate of 100 violent crimes per 100,000 citizens vs Atlanta which has 2750 violent crimes per 100,000 citizens. The national average is 500 violent crimes per 100,000 citizens. That puts Kennesaw at 1/5 the national rate and Atlanta at 5 and half times the national average. Guns save lives.
  
  Report this comment
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:25pm
  Gun ownership should be required of all citizens. It is the citizens duty to protect the nation, can’t do that if you are not armed. Just like jury duty is mandatory.
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:26pm
  A User- is that you Individualism? Why did you drop your Paul pic and handle??? Same neo crap and stoned posting sort of was a tell…
  
  Report this comment
- WarMunger_Al
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:28pm
  Cavallo-
  it is not just a right, but a duty. Citizenship has costs and duties associated with it.
  
  Report this comment
- FreedomChick
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:34pm
  Owning and using a gun should be a personal decision – keep the government out of it! Make guns AND ammo available and teach children to handle guns responsibly. A gun safety course should be taught in all schools to stop the fear associated with weapons.
  
  Report this comment
- banjarmon
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:47pm
  Corrected comment!!
  Sure DO IT…Let all citizens have guns, Just do NOT let the dems and libs have bullets!!!
  
  Report this comment
- JRook
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 2:29pm
  A) You clearly do not understand healthcare economics and thus Obamacare. B) Your point about government incentives is a good one and thus all tax loopholes, particularly those for the wealthiest Americans should be abolished because they provide perverse incentives in terms of spending, investments and overuse of lawyers and accountants.
  
  Report this comment
- KyleD
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 4:10pm
  Another classic example of overcompensation. We’re feeling threatened so we push back but you have to be careful how far back you push otherwise you’ll find yourself in the same exact position as those who threatened you. Mandating everyone to own a gun is just as disturbing as removing them.
  
  Report this comment
- ALL4FREEDOM
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 7:07pm
  Every right has a corresponding responsibility. I see no problem with the idea. Switzerland does it. I’m in favor of constitutional carry; once a background check is performed (from the local level) and it is shown that the citizen has not disqualified himself from owning a weapon, he or she should then be OK to purchase the weapon of choice and become proficient in it’s use. That’s the only ‘gun control’ America needs. Settled in 1791!
  
  Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:10am
Think about this. Would any of you want ENCINOM anywhere near a gun, much less in the same house with one or more?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ghandi was a Republican
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:16am
  If he was backing into a window? sure!
  
  Report this comment
- scuba13
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:18am
  Hmmmmm…Let me think about this. Encinom with a gun what could go wrong?
  
  Report this comment
- RightUnite
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:19am
  Well now, to be honest, don’t they already not allow those with a criminal history not have guns?? I’m sure it has a ton of felonies on it’s record.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:27am
  As long as he’s properly trained…as in, he knows the end with the round hole needs to point towards himself.
  
  Report this comment
- nightmare must end
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:55am
  Just like I suport the right to free speech, not everyone should be made to speak.
  As demonstrated here, Rights come with responsiblity.
  
  Report this comment
Ron Staiger
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:10am
I don’t appreciate any law that “mandates” anything. There are enough regulations controlling our lives without some moron mandating gun ownership. Frankly, I would prefer that none of the low-life toads I locked up during my 25 years on the force would be required to own a gun. I am an avid hunter and sport shooter as well as a retired police officer and find it embarrassing that a brother retired officer would want to force me to keep my guns if I decided to sell them. Just who does he think he is?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Female
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:35am
  “Highly encouraged” with deductions on the cost of theft insurance and taxes for gun owners.
  
  Insurance: when a gun, a gun sticker, or a dog is reveal to a robber, they tend to choose another victim.
  
  Homeowners Taxes: police won’t need to be as concerned about your house being robbed, and could even justify a slower response to an armed homeowner than the willy kneed. Potential decrease in need for prisons but increase in coroners.
  
  Some communities crime is petty and just having guns works to deter the criminals. The idea of a “mandate” in that particular community, especially, if very rural might work well for the citizens.
  
  Report this comment
- GuruMeditation
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:56am
  Roger that!
  
  Report this comment
Norsepagan
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:10am
Since I am mandated to have health care even if I don’t want it then I don’t think i should be mandated to have a gun. We as Americans are supposed to have a “choice”. I believe that having a gun, rifle, AR etc. will deter criminals. My 1911 has deterred some shady characters. If you want to have a motion sensing, auto-tracking .50 cal machine gun then you should be able to have it for protection of your family. If you choose not to have any protection then don’t come crying when the criminals come calling to your residence. It may take the police 15 min to get to your house to protect you but my 1911 can protect me at 1000 Ft. per second.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ghandi was a Republican
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:18am
  One is an invasion of your rights, the other is an assurance that you can protect your rights.
  
  Report this comment
xjjames
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:06am
How I would love to see an armed society. I would have to say it should not be mandated. We are currently watching the painful results of a mandate. We should not push our beliefs onto others.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 00100111
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:20am
  I agree, shouldn’t be mandatory. Of course, now that Obamacare was upheld as a tax, people can decide to be unarmed, and they can pay a tax because everyone else has to carry their weight.
  
  Report this comment
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:44am
  While countries like Switzerland mandate this, since every Swiss citizen it a member of their militia and can be called up at any time, the whole idea of a mandate is kinda anti-American. Should it be strongly advised…yes….should the city possibly give incentives or tax breaks or home insurance breaks for it… sure…should it be a mandate…no..should the city keep track of who does or doesn’t get armed.. HELL NO…
  
  Report this comment
The Big Mick
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:03am
Every day, starting today, from now on, I am going to ask Glenn and The Blaze “Glenn’s Tough Question of the Day”, and I will keep asking it till I get a Cogent Answer.

Today’s “Glenn’s Tough Question of the Day” is: “What is Glenn’s point in talking about Militias, and the Right to Bear Arms, and all the Stories of “Guns save lives and prevent rape”, when Glenn is simultaneously saying to us that our PROPER RESPONSE to TYRANNY should be Jesus/Gandhi Pacifism? Why the deafening Cognitive Dissonance between Violence in Defense of Our Own or Another’s PERSON and Non-violence in Defense of Our Sacred LIBERTY?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ghandi was a Republican
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:16am
  Because…. Once tyranny invades your community or home, it becomes war. Prepare for war. Until then – relax and stock up! obama is a lowly tyrant wannabe. He is too stupid to understand that he is losing a fight that can never be won. The line has been drawn. If he continues his weaselly attack on innocent Americans right to defend themselves he will cross the threshold of resistance – war. that’s what he wants. Like the sequester, that’s what he will get.
  
  Report this comment
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:54am
  1 – Glenn doesn’t talk about “militias” in the sense of getting together with your buddies and becoming a survivalist commune that prepares for armed resistance to the government. He uses the correct meaning of militia that the Founders understood… ALL citizens are part of the militia that is DUTY bound to defend and protect the nation in times of war…like Switzerland. When the militia is called out, you should be prepared to take part. The militia does NOT start the conflict, they respond to it.
  
  2 – Glenn talks about the 2nd Amendment because this nation used to believe in “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” which means every citizen has a God given right to protect their family, property, and livelihood by any means necessary. Again, protection does not mean aggression. It is a DEFENSIVE posture, not offensive.
  
  3 – You should read more about Jesus and Gandhi and MLK. While they all believed in non-violence as a means to grow their movement, they were NOT pacifists. Gandhi actually spoke of being true to your nature and if your nature was for violence, then do not deny it but embrace it but have the responsibility to use it appropriately. MLK knew that he could win the hearts and minds of the American people by not using violence and effect change and he was right. Jesus was the ultimate fighter but He came to fight also for our hearts and minds and bleed and died for it. 1 death = freedom for billions
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:58pm
  GANDHIWAS—VRW Thanks for the responses. nice work
  YOUR positions are internally consistent and cogent. But it doesn’t answer the question to GLENN because it is not coterminous with HIS position. The point of DIScogency–of Cognitive Dissonance is that ON THIS very ISSUE—the relationship of “The State” to The Constitutional Right to Bear Arms, I have HEARD him say, and READ, that he advocates Non-violent, and NON-violent WOULD be Pacifist, response to any Government Attempt to TAKE your Arms. Thus GandhiWas’ “then it’s WAR” and VRW’s “defensive” arguments are not, strictly speaking, germane.
  I get your point, see the point, but it’s not GLENN’s position. Unless he has mitigated his “overload the legal system” advice somewhere I have not seen or heard. Similarly I can think of many excellent reasons why Glenn would not WANT to advocate Armed Rebellion, that STILL doesn’t resolve the Cognitive Dissonance.
  Excellent points, both, and I am not in substantive disagreement, but, Glenn’s position remains Unresolved.
  VRW, I am not familiar with Gandhi’s flavor of Pacifism, but I did read a thought provoking SciFi Story once where the Nazis won WW2, took India, machine gunned the protests, executed Neru The Organizer and left a pathetic and helpless Gandhi to pedal his wares to the defeated. King I know more of, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” and I agree his thinking is rooted in some of the arguments of the Founders.
  But again, it is N
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 2:13pm
  But again, it is NOT the details of the Pacifism of these men that is in Question. It is the USE Glenn would MAKE of it.
  THAT remains essentially a “don’t use violence to resist Government Action” and thus remains in Cognitive Dissonance with “guns stop rape”. Both are rapes, one is simply by the Government.
  Have you read Walter Williams’ April 7, 2010 Column “Parting Company” I argue Williams is arguing for the DISSOLUTION of the UNION. I believe that will not be accomplished without great bloodshed. Thus I believe your Sacred Liberties CANNOT be secured WITHOUT great violence.
  
  Which brings me to another point I seldom share here, VDW.
  I believe the Romans 13 passage–applied to The Founders’ Premise that THE INDIVIDUAL is SOVEREIGN by GOD ENDOWMENT of UNALIENABLE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, and Each Individual only DELEGATES a small portion of that Sovereignty TO Government. Thus, IN OUR REPUBLIC the Rom 13 GOD MANDATED DUTY for SLAYING (“they do not bear the sword in vain”) the Evildoer FALLS ON EACH INDIVIDUAL CHRISTIAN IN THIS REPUBLIC!
  It is OUR DUTY to “cast down the high places and put the Prophets of Baal to the sword”. It is our DUTY to Slay Tyranny. It is our DUTY to Defend Liberty WITH The Sword. In this I extend Bonhoeffer.
  It is a Theological Position consistent with what I call Theistic Anarchy AND The Founders. The Founders were influenced by The Great Awakening and Colonial Preachers were very instrumental in fomenting Rebellion.
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 2:14pm
  It is a Theological Position consistent with what I call Theistic Anarchy AND The Founders. The Founders were influenced by The Great Awakening and Colonial Preachers were very instrumental in fomenting Rebellion.
  I maintain William’s Dissolution will be bloody and that this time Revolution will PRECEDE Revival.
  
  Report this comment
KMHArms.com
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:03am
Amen we here at KMHArms.com agree

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:41am
  Hey…you at KMHARMS need to stock up…went to your site to get some ammo and a decent, yet cheap AR-15 and EVERYTHING was “out of stock”… WTH???
  
  Report this comment
- GuruMeditation
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 3:14pm
  It’s that way everywhere dude.
  
  Report this comment
RaydocX
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:01am
@Zipit is spot on…
I do not endorse all households being forced to have a firearm… That would be as wrong as denying law abiding citizens ownership of firearms including AR platforms and high capacity magazines.

BUT to any ‘control’ law that is proposed, thinking egislators should amend the unconstitutional measures with such demands.

Fight fire with fire.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- OldSurfRat
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:11am
  Ray
  
  I agree with your comments. Also fight fire with fire is spot on.
  It’s time to start fighting back with the same tactics that are being used against us.
  
  Report this comment
Dodsfall
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:00am
Forcing citizens to do or buy anything against their personal beliefs smacks of tyranny. There has been a precedent set with Obamacare, however. Something like this could potentially pass Constitutional muster today.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:30am
  http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/245395/158/A-Town-Where-Every-Household-Owns-A-Gun
  
  Report this comment
- IndyGuy
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:35am
  Perhaps we should let SCOTUS’ John Roberts decide…..NOT…
  
  Report this comment
ladyofthelakenc
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:00am
Sounds like one way the bad guys would KNOW danger just might be around the next corner.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
COFemale
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:59am
I don’t think it should be mandatory unless you live out in the wilderness and the nearest help is an 30 or more minutes away. Most people in Alaska have guns, even in the cities due to bears.

Having said that, you need to be careful on whom you arm in your city.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
john vincent
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:59am
Mr Marsters has taken a quantum leap- his intentions are good, but the idea is bad.
He is probably speaking out of frustration due to all the attacks on America’s liberties, but there are some folks who are ‘scared to death’ at even holding a gun, let alone shooting one.

‘Folks should be armed and ready to go,’ is certainly an ideal, but I have seen men and women who cant handle a broom…..

Having a firearm in the home as a deterrent is one thing; commanding the usage is another. With such a drastic rule in place as this, this challenges the very liberty and freedom he is trying to protect.

This will not go anywhere.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
DougHuffman
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:58am
Mandatory? No. Good idea/encouraged, absolutely.

It is a JBT cop’s mindset to tyrannical mandatory. MOLON LABE Lord of Flies.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
wingedwolf
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:58am
I own many guns. However, I think people who don’t want them shouldn’t be forced to own one. We are only begging for some accident to happen to someone who is uncomfortable with guns, and opening up local municipalities to lawsuits when the accident happens if they are mandated.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Lloyd Drako
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:57am
Latest count: under “Stories,” TheBlaze currently has 8 out of 25 dealing with guns, guns rights, gun control, fake guns, gun manufacturers, etc. Overkill? Wrong choice of words maybe, but. . . .

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:17am
  How odd, that being a major topic in the news these days. Funny thing how there were so many campaign topics here prior to the election. Bet if turned on BSNBC any time today you will see the same topic at certain points. Just absurd, isn’t it?
  
  Report this comment
- Lloyd Drako
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:28am
  I think TheBlaze tailors its choice of stories to the perceived interests of its subscribers/readers, a lot of whom seem to have an unhealthy firearms fetish, which I am doing my best to counter. I doubt that fully1/3 of the stories on MSNBC, CNN or Fox are gun-related. Just commentin’.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:28am
  Do guns make you feel “uncomfortable”? Does it remind you that you’re not a man?
  
  Report this comment
- Lloyd Drako
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:22pm
  Tight shoes make me uncomfortable. I do not require a man-made hand-held protuberance capable of delivering large loads to feel masculine. Do you?
  
  Report this comment
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:41pm
  Hmm Lloyd… NBCnews.com (MSBNC no longer exists by the way) 2540 stories concerning guns… some updated just hours ago as of 3/5/13 @ 12:30 EST
  
  CNN.com 17,206 stories concerning guns in some way, 15,918 of them CNN stories – meaning directly published by them not just covered from another site or source…
  
  Foxnews.com 1,636 stories concerning guns in some way…. 135 in the last month alone…23 in the last 4 days, 14 in the last 24 hours…
  
  seems the Blaze is behind the times with everyone else….they would have to put up 6 more just to be on par with FoxNews.com and a WHOLE truck load more to be with CNN…the only slacker in the bunch is NBC….gee..wonder why…maybe because they are the mouthpiece of the WH and only run approved stories and ask approved questions…
  
  even the BBC has 7 in the last 5 days….on the news site… 3670 overall from all BBC sites…
  
  Report this comment
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:50pm
  ABCnews.com 73 stories on guns in the last week
  Foxnews.com 14 stories on guns in the last week
  TheBlaze 8 stories on guns in the last week
  BBC.com 7 stories on guns in the last week
  NBCnews.com (MSNBC) harder to figure out since you can’t restrict by time period like the other sites.. but over 25 stories found on just a quick browse…
  CBSnews.com 20 stories in the last week…
  
  so by your assertion…EVERY other network other than the BBC is catering to the right-wing gun loving nuts??
  
  umm…i think a NEWS site should cover the news of the day…right now, in this country…the gun debate is right up there with the economy and healthcare..
  
  notice that nobody really cares about the sequestation…and POOF…the news and the WH stopped talking about it…because the people told them “GOOD, now cut another $500 B a year and we can really get somewhere”
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:23pm
  Lloyd, anxiously awaiting your non-rebuttal, again. Your msm has a meme and narrative…just checked and the omniscient lloyd was not in their comments section. Why lloyd? Share dude, don’t just leave your droppings here. Spread that fertilizer around and don’t be a 1%er here.
  
  Report this comment
- FreedomChick
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:42pm
  Lloyd Drako: Of COURSE Blaze carries multiple stories on gun issues… this is THE hot topic of the time. Our constitutional rights may be taken away and it could be the first of many. To the rest of you liberal fools out there…. when will you care about losing rights? Freedom of speech? By the time the government nixes that one there will be no one left to protect it.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 2:22pm
  I suspect Lloyd is uncomfortable that the stories are kept in the forefront where we can all see every single action going on and respond and keep our focus on the target. The very last thing that the Left needs right now is its opposition keeping focused and building more and more opposition to their goals.
  
  Report this comment
- Bullitt2008
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 4:59pm
  LLOYD DRAKO, one trip to the gun range would make you change your mind. Target shooting is fun. I doubt that guns make the female gun owners feel “more masculine” with their large loads.
  
  Report this comment
Gonzo
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:56am
Although I favor gun ownership, I oppose government mandating the purchase of anything, including a gun. I once lived in Kennesaw and am only 5 miles away now. The law was never enforced. You can’t endorse this and oppose Obamacare if you exercise any intellectual honesty.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- KickinBack
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:02am
  I concur.
  
  Report this comment
- Ghandi was a Republican
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:09am
  It’s a local Government. It has to do with defense, protection. I see what you say but this is one that is actually for the common good. This is a community that would see home invasions go to zero.
  I see what you say though. It should be handled with a ‘rebate’ up to $500 for any household that can show it owns a gun and the occupants have completed a safety course. That could come from a one time tax hike spread over a few years. Something along those line.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:13am
  While it seems to be working well for Kennesaw, Georgia since 1982. But, I do have to agree with you on that GONZO. There are certainly a good number of people who do not need to be anywhere near a gun.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:16am
  Ghandi, “this is one that is actually for the common good”. Same argument the left made for Obamacare. Can’t have it both ways.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:32am
  R.J., I owned property in Kennesaw. I was never asked by anyone to show proof of gun ownership.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:37am
  Hi Guys,
  
  Rand Paul is going to have an important announcement on Glenn’s radio show.
  
  Report this comment
Carrie3570
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:56am
Personally, I don’t approve of any law that forces people to buy something. However, I think any law that says you can’t buy something is just as wrong.

In America, we are suppose to be free. Free to buy a gun or not buy a gun. Free to buy health insurance or not buy health insurance. Free to buy a big soda or not buy a big soda.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Nevermind
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:54am
So you guys were agaisnt Obamacare becasue the government cannot force you to buy something but you are for this when the government is forcing you to buy something? The hypocrisy of the right never ceases to amaze

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Xanderson
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:03am
  I read them all (so far) and no one said that.
  
  Report this comment
- Carrie3570
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:06am
  I don’t see the point of your comment. The majority of comments that are posted, which aren’t many at this point, are against this law because it forces people to buy something. Did you assume because this article was about guns, people would actually change their views on the government passing a law forcing people to buy something?
  
  Report this comment
- john vincent
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:15am
  -nevermind
  
  appears you have ‘jumped the gun’
  would you do the right thing and apologize to they who have disproved your point???
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 3:07pm
  Strangely, almost all of the comments are against compelled ownership. Where do you find your point of contention precisely?
  
  Report this comment
Sargeking
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:54am
You likely couldn’t find a more pro-gun guy than old Sargeking but I must take a certain umbrage in demanding that every household garner a gun. Trust me on this. I’ve served with both soldiers and police that are dangerous with a real gun. “If” each “household” received proper safety and handling training that’s a different deal. I’m just saying, “Let’s not go crazy with new laws”. Look at what we are now dealing with under the horrific anti-gun people? Do we really need granny shooting a bullet hole through her apple pie?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- theBru
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 11:28am
  Sure hope joe bitin don’t move there if they pass this law…can you imagine…
  
  Report this comment
- objectivetruth
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:35pm
  Well if you had my granny god rest her soul it would be different.She could hit anything she aimed at.Don’t even dream of shooting a hole in her apple pie.
  I see your point in all respects.Just go up a few posts to Ron Staiger and his viewpoint.It shows for all the world to see.
  
  Report this comment
- afvetfirewoman
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:51pm
  Barney Fife…met a few of those. Agree with most, we should have the freedom to choose whether or not to own or carry, provided we aren’t otherwise prohibited for reasons already stated.
  I also believe that more folks would be more proactive in their self defense if they had to pay a fee for Police visits that are deemed “unnecessary” just like they do for EMS and Fire in many locales. Just a thought.
  
  Report this comment
cdn1979
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:53am
this is a stupid idea. you can’t force anyone to own a gun. and if you support this stupid idea than that means you would support obamacare. forced to something that you currently have the choice to do today. completely silly, both of them.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Fubared
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 1:17pm
  But you salivated over forced healthcare, no? This is for health and well being also. Cry over one, and praise your emperor over another. Duplicitous perhaps?
  
  Report this comment
Southerner01
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:50am
HIs proposal is essentially identical to the Kennesaw Georgia ordinance. After the Kennesaw ordinance passed, violent crime dropped 82% over the next two years, as Atlanta criminals stopped going to Kennesaw (which is middle to upper-middle class) to rob, rape and plunder. SInce the ordinance passed, there have only been three murders in Kennesaw, two were done with knives.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
naughtycal
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:50am
No one has the right to force people to purchase guns. What he should do is offer free range training and gun safety courses for all gun owners. Make it a BYOA training program.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- UBETHECHANGE
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:58am
  I agree naughtycal.
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 12:06pm
  Well said NaughtyCal- would go a lot farther. Who wants stoned A User with a weapon? Or encidiot, or baldbeagle, or wangdang, or rookie, or meateeyors, etc. Or BarryMeth?
  
  Report this comment
media-bias-steals-elections
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:50am
Unless you are going to give them the firearms, no – without leaving an out for people that don’t want them.

This is not an issue, forcing women into combat during a military draft is unacceptable? They bear your kids, and you want them to fight for you too? If that is not selfish and greed, what is?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Zipit
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:50am
NO! But, when pushed, pushin back a little is ok with me!!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
carhouse
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:49am
Agree, and it should be issued to every housold by the gov’t like an Obama phone.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Sargeking
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:59am
  Funny. Humor works. Good post!
  
  Report this comment
- carhouse
  Posted on March 5, 2013 at 10:59am
  at leat to the people that pay taxes
  
  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.