21 - 30 of 99 Comments

1. Jerry N

   4 months ago

   "...that's still a hundred and fifty potential Lanzas. They won't all go over the edge. But for those who do, wouldn't it be better if they didn't have access to guns?"
   
   The statist regime running the US federal government apparently has no interest whatsoever in finding and constraining any "potential Lanzas". After all, that could possibly violate the privacy rights of a crazed maniac. Besides, Obama and crew have no time to hunt for 1 in a million crazed maniacs, because they are fully consumed with attempts to violate the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of the sane 999,999 in a million.
   
   Since these 1 in a million people will not be identified and controlled by the authorities, is it not then better to have armed and trained law-abiding citizens available in large numbers and in myriad places, ready to quickly limit any carnage the Lanza's of the world attempt to perpetrate on innocents? This approach worked well in the attempted San Antonio theater incident that took place only 2 days after the Sandy Hook killings.

2. Paul G

   4 months ago

   I look at it this way. I believe the population of the U.S. is about 300 million. Suppose the kind of person who's liable to go on a rampage is one in a million. That's three hundred potential mass killers, with access to guns and previous examples of what to do when they finally go over the edge. If it's one in two million, that's still a hundred and fifty potential Lanzas. They won't all go over the edge. But for those who do, wouldn't it be better if they didn't have access to guns?

3. judy claar

   4 months ago

   SaraPalen,
   
   Thank you for answering my post. I especially liked your quote from Pope Pius XII and Dostoyevsky. Excellent. This shows how long ago we have (some) been on the front lines.
   I also liked your post of two days ago. True. True. True.
   
   Yes, I will pray for you and yours. Our Holy Catholic Church and our country. We have only to rest under the mantle of Our Lady of Grace, whispering in her most blessed ear, for our wants and desires; Especially making known to her our good but humble Intentions. She hears as Our Lord hears; with her as the Queen of Intercessors, how is Our Lord not to hear us? He does. And like Mary, the Most Sorrowful Mother," thy will be done". Never lose Faith my friends. Prayerful Blessings...

4. SaraPalen

   4 months ago

   Karl, my right to send my kids to school and not have to pay for abortion, contraception, and sterilisation is gone. Does it not bother your conscience Karl, that Catholics will now be forced to pay this? This is not rhetoric and exageration. My points are missed on you.
   
   What is rhetoric however, is what you are doing, the same thing Obama peeps do- well, you're rights are not really being infringed, even though technically I have the power to do so by Obamacare, but, I could change that later via Ms (show me the papers) Sebelius. I haven't actuallly done anything-yet but, these intrinsically evil acts are, I deem in fact health care. But you gonna have to pay up, get that insurance plan in place, post haste.
   
   and why on earth would I trust a congress or a president who, has watch over the DOJ, who under their watch federal agents knowingly gave weapons to criminals in Mexico, (yeah, big joke, Karl). The list of deaths from that rediculous operation has not even been totalled yet. It could be in the hundreds. They are gonna come up with solutions to keep better control on guns? (How many in congress right now would have to give up what they carry around for protection, or would that be another exemption not meant for the commoners)
   
   It's all related, Karl. Homicide is homicide. and we have become a "tyrant state", the state itself, Karl.
   The rhetoric will come, by demanding a fast and furious remedy to something that needs serious considerations where none will be given.

5. Jerry N

   4 months ago

   Karl: "I stated a FACT. The countries with stricter gun laws than ours have less gun violence than we do."
   
   Even in all CAPS, your FACT is still a lie. You have cited no source whatsoever to support your fictitious "FACT", while I have posted cited factual evidence, that clearly shows it to be a lie, numerous times.
   
   If you don't like the FACT that Mexico has fewer guns but more gun murders per capita , then maybe you would like the FACT that the same is true in all these countries:
   
   Anguilla
   Argentina
   Barbados
   Brazil
   Belize
   Colombia
   Costa Rica
   Dominican Republic
   Ecuador
   El Salvador
   Guatemala
   Guyana
   Honduras
   Jamaica
   Nicaragua
   Paraguay
   Panama
   Philippines
   Puerto Rico
   Saint Kitts and Nevis
   Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
   South Africa
   Venezuela
   Zimbabwe
   
   No data is available for several other countries where it is also well known that gun murder rates are higher than here, such as Thailand, Pakistan and Russia.
   
   In addition, Cyprus, Finland, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, and Uruguay are in the top ten countries for gun ownership rates per capita, but yet have low gun crime rates.
   
   Karl: "You'll have to come up with something a little more realistic than Mexico. I say you cannot. "
   
   I say I can and just did. I also say you have just been proven a FACTless propagandist. Again.

6. Jerry N

   4 months ago

   "When you find a country that has significantly fewer deaths attributed to guns, do a little research and find out what steps citizens in that country have to go through to own a gun."
   
   Another variation of the "all we need are gun control laws" lie.
   
   I have done the research suggested by the author of the lie quoted above, and found there is little correlation between per capita gun ownership and per capita crimes involving guns.
   
   According to UNODC data - same source data cited by nationmaster.com - the USA has the highest gun ownership per capita - higher by almost a factor of 2 than the next highest which is Yemen. Yet, there are 27 other countries that have higher rates of gun homicides per capita than does the USA and Yemen is not among those 27. The worst country for gun homicide is Honduras which has 14 times fewer guns per capita than USA, but yet has a 23 times higher per capita gun homicide rate.
   
   The full list of data can be found here:
   http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list#data
   
   
   

7. KarlVDH

   4 months ago

   Sara... to be clear... you still haven't presewnted a right you ever had that you no longer do. I agree... abortion is murder. Obama's pro choice stance is death. But isn't there enough REAL harm being done that we don't have to engage in this kind of rhetoric, exaggeration and hysteria?

8. KarlVDH

   4 months ago

   Please, man. You went with Mexico... parts of which are virtually lawless... a country where the bribe is part of the legal system. Give me a break with this sanctimonious "refutation" of my post with "facts." That's nonsense and you know it; it's YOU who are engaging in propaganda. I stated a FACT. The countries with stricter gun laws than ours have less gun violence than we do. You'll have to come up with something a little more realistic than Mexico. I say you cannot. But I'm sure the NRA and other gun violence apologists- and their bank accounts- appreciate your effort.

9. Dave Horne

   4 months ago

   Gun related deaths have nothing to do with our moral compass.
   
   What many of you should do is go to nationmaster dot com and simply look at the gun related deaths statistically (per capita) by country. You can look at just about any set of statistics you want to on just about any topic.
   
   When you find a country that has significantly fewer deaths attributed to guns, do a little research and find out what steps citizens in that country have to go through to own a gun.
   
   Here in the Netherlands you must first join a gun club for one year before you are even considered to be allowed to buy a gun. For that year you can only use the guns from that club. The government also investigates you and if the club does not think you are qualified to own a gun, you don't get to own one.
   
   This is not a moral issue, this is simply having a few more checks and balances.
   
   

10. Jerry N

    4 months ago

    "Jerry... seriously... Mexico? That's your example of "strict enforcement?"
    
    Karl, I am happy you found my post amusing, but I find yours neither funny nor factual.. You continue to demonstrate that you are a blatant propagandist and that you are not interested in any facts or the truth. Rather than commenting on the things I wrote that factually refute your numerous postings of falsehoods, you make up yet another falsehood and follow it up with a weak attempt at sarcasm.
    
    I wrote nothing about Mexico being an example of "strict enforcement". I wrote, based on actual cited facts, that Mexico has much stricter gun control laws than does the USA which is absolutely true.
    
    Your posts have promoted stricter gun control laws, not stricter law enforcement, as a remedy for gun violence. Until now, you have written virtually nothing about gun law enforcement. Conversely, my posts, supported by source material citations, have clearly documented that strict gun control laws have either no effect or an adverse effect on reducing gun violence. If you don't want to accept the example of Mexico and tens of other countries in the world, then look no further than Washington DC, the gun violence and gun control law capital of the nation
    

Leave a Comment