Letter: Victims of gun violence deserve more than debate

You may also like...

  • DanH

    Until you acknowledge the 80,000 (FBI) to 2.5 million (Kleck) self defense uses of firearms a year you are nothing but a bunch of liars who are trying to make everyone conform to your own irrational fear of firearms.

    • webejustsayin

      Actually, no… given that over 2,000 terrorists have purchased guns in America. Are you one of them? We’ll never know, will we, because there wasn’t a background check done when you bought your gun.

      • DanH

        You have no idea if I bought from an FFL or not so your comment has just as much research as this drivel letter. With that knowledge everything you post can be discounted out of hand. Enjoy your day.

  • fsilber

    I am doing my part to reduce gun violence by educating gang members on the advantages of using crossbows with razor points and deadly poison applied.

  • RE Hafner

    Another gun grabber passing off unsubstantiated BS as facts. Maybe the author if this tripe forgot that firearms ownership has increased while crime rates decreased. Of course never confuse a liberal kook with facts.

  • the NRA convention held last year in Indy had over 70,000 supporters from around the nation who paid for their own expenses to come and celebrate the freedom to own firearms. At the very same time Beth and her MDA could not come up with more than a few dozen protesters,who mostly had all their expenses bought and paid for by Bloomberg so they could attend.

    Your “cause” is a loser, Beth. So are you.

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “universal background checks”

    Currently, there are only 2 ways to legally sell a gun in the US to a private citizen. One is a private sale between individuals (typically like between family and friends) or by a gun dealer licensed with a Federal Firearms License (FFL) from the federal BATF. Only individuals with an FFL can run a background check through the government NICS database of prohibited persons. Private citizens cannot. Note that a person can purchase a firearm online, but the physical transfer of the firearm still must go through an FFL at the seller and an FFL local to the buyer. So if you want to improve the process, you should encourage the federal government to do 2 things:

    1) Allow any small gun dealer to get an FFL without having a storefront. Currently, thanks to the Clinton administration’s effort to reduce the supply of guns, you can’t get an FFL if you want to sell guns only at gun shows (Google BATFE form 5310 FFL application and look at question 18a). As a result someone that wants to sell guns but can’t afford the inventory costs, zoning challenges and overhead of a storefront has to sell illegally or discretely at the edge of the law as a “private individual” and hence can’t run a background check. Rather than throwing these “kitchen table” sellers out of the system like Clinton did hoping they would go away, they should allow them to get an FFL and subject them to BATF rules, audits and oversight like they were before the Clinton administration let political anti-gun ideology get in the way.

    2) Give anyone free, public, anonymous online access to the NICS database. I don’t understand why a federal database of people prohibited from owning firearms can’t be available in the public domain like federal databases for sex offenders. Unlike the sex offender database, the NICS system is really a go/no go process and no useful information has to be displayed to facilitate phishing expeditions for identity theft other than what was already known by the user making the query. It’s certainly no more revealing than the FAA’s pilot and mechanic license query system, which provides more detailed information on presumably law-abiding citizens. Once this system is implemented, you then tell private sellers if you sell or give a firearm to someone and don’t retain documented proof that says you did a favorable NICS check on the buyer, you could be held liable if they commit a gun-related crime. This would effectively close the so-called private sale loophole and still preserve the anonymity of the parties involved the same way the current background check system does now. If a private sale firearm shows up at a crime scene, the BATF follows their current procedure of using the serial number of the firearm to contact the manufacturer and ultimately the last FFL that sold the firearm to a private citizen to obtain that citizen’s name and address from the ATF form 4473 the FFL is required to keep on file. That citizen is then contacted and produces the piece of paper from the NICS background check that identifies the second private citizen who is then contacted, and so forth.

    The real benefit of this proposal is how it can help identify the illusive killer with questionable behavior patterns or mental health issues that is causing so many problems. As it stands now there is no easy, fast, non-bureaucratic method for someone to determine if a suspicious person (client, neighbor, employee, student, etc) is a potential threat to society. If someone thinks an individual could be a threat, a query to a public NICS database would at least tell him or her in a few seconds if the individual could obtain a firearm. Then, armed with that information the appropriate authorities could be notified and they could decide if it was erroneous information or whether to investigate further. As it stands now, if you tell authorities you know a suspicious person they will probably ignore you, but if you tell them you know such a person and by the way according to the NICS database he can buy a firearm, they will probably be more inclined to investigate rather than risk embarrassment later if the worst happens. The same would be true if you see a suspicious acquaintance with a firearm when the NICS query says he’s prohibited from having one. It would also help provide piece of mind and a method for victims of violent crimes to ensure their assailants either on parole or still at large have not been excluded from the database because of some bureaucratic foul-up.
    Other specific public safety issues where it would be useful are:

     allow potential victims to vet known stalkers or acquaintances under a restraining order
     allow gun clubs to vet potential members
     allow shooting ranges to vet suspicious customers
     allow mental health workers to vet troubled individuals like the Aurora Colorado theater killer
     allow resource officers and school officials to vet suspicious students like the Arapahoe High School killer in Colorado
     allow the family of the mentally troubled Lafayette, LA killer to verify he couldn’t purchase a firearm
     allow police officers to vet anyone they contact – (note the routine background checks performed by police often do not include information about firearms because they don’t directly access the NICS database)

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “There are sensible solutions we can undertake”

    In 1934, 1938, 1968, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1993 and 1994 I suspect similar arguments were made for “sensible solutions” when more restrictive federal gun laws were passed. Since all of the regulations derived from these laws are apparently not enough, maybe you can understand the reluctance of gun owners to entertain the idea of quietly accepting the any more. The problem is the real agenda of the people leading the charge for more gun control is to ban all guns except for the government and governments (unlike individuals) have the track record for killing people that don’t agree with them. This is really just about using relatively infrequent, isolated incidents of gun violence to whip lawmakers into an emotional frenzy to goad them into quickly advancing the agenda of gun control irrespective of any facts in more incremental “progressive” steps in order to set a new baseline and move the goal posts to the point where an unscrupulous government would have the option to do what ever they please.

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “stop this scourge on our communities”

    According to the CDC in 2013 there were about 11208 people murdered by firearms in the US which works out to about 31 people per day. These are the “word doctored” figures the news media and anti-gun folks like to publicize because people relate to the magnitude of those numbers and it sounds like a lot of people until you realize this is out of a population of 319 million Americans. In that context, it works out to about 1 person out of every 28,000 people being murdered by a firearm. Dwell on the magnitude of your individual significance next time you are in a stadium with 28,000 people. To me, 1 in 28,000 is an acceptable cost to help ensure the security of a free state and the right to own a firearm that has harmed no one. It is also estimated there are 70 million gun owners in the US which means on any given day 69,999,969 gun owners didn’t kill anyone yet because the news media magnifies these relatively isolated and infrequent events to the level of an epidemic, the anti-gun folks answer is to take the guns away from people who harmed no one. The number of homicides with a firearm will never be zero. So given the fact that deranged individuals and murderers are an intrinsic part of the human race and we currently live in a free society, what number would ever satisfy you to the point you would say “we don’t need any more restrictions on the private ownership of firearms”?

    • webejustsayin

      Some safety features to prevent terrorists from purchasing them. (2,000 already have.)

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “The time to start fixing this problem is right now”

    Maybe you should start by enforcing the laws that are already on the books and quit allowing people who use a gun illegally to plea bargain away the illegal firearms offense. The feds pass all these laws and then don’t enforce them. Straw purchases and lying on the 4473 form you have to fill out for a background check to purchase a firearm is a felony punishable by 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine – yet in 2010 76142 people failed the background check, 4732 were deemed worthy of prosecution and only 62 were prosecuted.

    • webejustsayin

      that was 2010. Stats that are a little more current would be helpful. Surely you can find something for 2013, at least.

  • jhwarner1

    Pure BS of course. All states require a background check – it’s FEDERAL LAW. The NICS system is required when purchasing a firearm. Legal transfers among individuals (i.e. father to son, friend to friend, etc.) are legal as well. As for “Mom Demand Action” we know that this is a very tiny Bloomberg sponsored anti-gun group with makes up their own stats. In fact FBI stats confirm that states with more guns and gun freedom have much lower crimes rates as opposed to cities and states with gun control (just check out liberal “paradises” like Chicago and Baltimore with very strict gun control for example). We have long come to know that “Moms” is a sham astro-turf organization. Nothing new here.

  • Koba Solzhenitsyn

    Bought and paid for Bloomberg boiler plate rhetoric. “Universal Background checks” are nothing more than building a database of who has what, for confiscation at a later time. What is “gun violence”? I never seen a gun be violent.
    “Tis not a good thing to be a useful idiot for a totalitarian Beth. Bloomberg will be wanting to check on your salt and soft drink use too.

  • ramrodd

    Unconstitutional Background checks..

    Mental health as a weapon against the people is communist in origin..

    Deceptive Transformation: The Truth of Soviet Influence in America and Gun Control..

    The idea of using mental health as a weapon against the people is communist in origin, and the social sciences, or the studying of human behavior has its roots in early twentieth century Russia when Ivan Pavlov
    developed his “classical conditioning” theories. In fact, Pavlov was
    disturbed that Vladimir Lenin would use these conditioning methods against the people in order to get them to accept communism. Since that time the social sciences have been used as a means of maintaining control over populations and getting them to accept their own down fall. This is happening today in the United States as our universities and public schools have long ago adopted educational techniques based on the social sciences and classical conditioning methods. Subjects like White Privilege and Multiculturalism are used to demoralize our population, create a guilt consciousness and silence us into accepting a new agenda based on the idea that we have been unfair, and our lifestyles are oppressive, and offensive to others. This agenda dates back to the early twentieth century; however, it saw some of its most major advances in the mid 1900’s after the U.N. was created in 1945. While many people today view the Democrat Party as being made mostly of communists or socialists; the sad truth is that the Republican Party is just as responsible for what we are seeing in education and culture in the United States today.

    As I wrote in “Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education,” Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan, two presidents that were considered American Patriots, actually signed agreements with the Soviet Union that gave them influence over U.S. education, culture, scientific and technological research, radio, television and finally, medicine. This is according to U.S. Department of Education whistle blower, Charlotte Iserbyt. It is the area of medicine that should draw your attention because as mentioned earlier, Soviet medicine revolved around the idea of mental health, and classifying people that were opposed to communist objectives as being mentally ill. This is where the Surgeon General’s claims about banning guns being a part of medicine comes from. Slowly but surely, they will work to associate gun
    ownership with mental illness. From the 45 goals of the Communist Party

    Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

    (Note: Many websites are now appearing claiming this list of communist goals to be a hoax. If you read them for yourself you will see many have been accomplished and that they bear a striking resemblance to many things currently happening in the U.S. The claims that they are a hoax could be
    a deliberate misinformation campaign headed by the Information Regulatory
    Affairs office led by none other than Cass Sunstein. Just looking at the state
    of our society, it is clear that these goals are not a hoax.)
    While the move for an Article Five Convention seems to be gaining momentum, you should take heed. There is another constitution waiting in the winds and it won’t protect your rights to keep and bear arms.


    • Mike Carmel

      What the hell are you talking about?

      • ramrodd

        stop using the bodies of dead children as your battle cry!!

        and then hang a gun free sign on your home………..

        • Mike Carmel

          Ok. Instead I’ll mention the church members killed a few months ago. Or maybe the Sikhs who were gunned down by the moron in Wisconsin who was looking to kill someone wearing a turban, because he was just that stupid but was still able to buy firearms. Or maybe I’ll mention the people killed in the movie theater in Colorado. Or maybe the people killed at the college in Oregon. Would you rather I use them as a battle cry? Does that make more sense to you? Here’s a clue, we will never shut up until some sensibility is brought to the problem.

          • ramrodd

            How to stop school shootings – 60% of convicted felons admitted they avoided committing crimes when they knew their potential victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed. So criminals are not only undeterred by gun-free zones, they actively seek them out and knowingly
            capitalize on them to ensure their attack go unchallenged.Consider this: When James Holmes planned out his attack on movie goers attending the midnight showing of The Dark Knight Returns, he visited neighboring theaters, took photographs of the layout, bought his ticket nearly two weeks in advance
            and out of the seven theaters within a 20 minute drive of his apartment, he chose the only theater posting signs banning concealed guns.Whether it’s on the elementary school playground or on a college campus, our students’ lives deserve to be protected. By any means necessary.

          • Mike Carmel

            So your answer is to arm everyone? Have armed guards everywhere? Again, the NRA’s romantic notion. What is the source of statistics? Point to a an actual unbiased study and I will read it.

          • ramrodd

            wake up Carmel – you live in a free society…
            all studies are biased!
            you want a disarmament of 500 million firearms that will never work or that will never happen..

    • webejustsayin

      Did it ever occur to you that terrorists can also freely purchase weapons here? 2,000 terrorists already have. It would be far more beneficial to America if you would spend your time developing a plan that prevents those who *should not* (again, think terrorists) be able to purchase weapons on American soil or from American dealers. And btw, you might want to start with background checks of guns dealers – because right now that’s not regulated either. And at this point, if you are still 100% against ANY form of safety measures when it comes to buying or selling arms, we can safely surmise you’ve got an ulterior motive. (If you DON’T, I’d like to hear some suggestions.)

      • ramrodd

        the US borders have been swinging wide open for decades…I am guessing that you are fine with that!

        but you want to make it more difficult for US citizens to defend them selves…you would prefer Paris style restrictions HERE

        how did that work out………

  • Barry Hirsh

    Moms Demand Action is a group of leftist busybodies who seek to place more restrictions on the 99% of gun owners who do not commit crimes, violent or otherwise.

  • Al Ways Thinkin

    “…safety versus constitutional rights…” In one of these four words lies the delusion: safety. It never truly exists, no matter how hard we believe in it. One may choke to death on one’s dinner. A toddler may upend in an abandoned bucket or even a toilet and drown. Our short car trip may end in a deadly collision. As a society, we attempt to minimize the risks involved, but they exist, and they cannot be avoided forever. Eventually, for those fortunate who pass through these hazards, old age, or disease will eventually kill us all. None of us are immortal, and that, my friends, is an unassailable fact of life: it will end.
    Sometimes, people choose evil (or stupid) and deaths occur. It may be an automobile driver at excess speed around a curve (stupidity) that kills. Or that driver may be fleeing police intervention after a criminal (evil) act. When a person chooses evil (murder, robbery, rape, mayhem, etc.) it is a choice that will have consequences. Some of those consequences will affect the actor, and some, his victims.
    How could ubiquitous safety be created? Think a universal prison, with the prisoners guarded and controlled by an all-powerful, overbearing, and ever-watchful government… but, who watches the watchers, and what prison would serve as an example for a perfect place to live in peace and harmony? None that I know of, and, methinks, the author of this utopian vision knows of none either.
    A man (or woman, lest we offend) may own many tools. Hammers, knives, axes, saws, vehicles, crowbars, or even firearms… each may be used for good or ill.
    When such evil manifests, don’t we call forth police? Don’t they have these same tools of destruction? It isn’t the tool, it is the intent of the individual that makes all the difference, and until a person exhibits evil intent, don’t we all want them to live in peace, having the tools for their own betterment and preservation? Logic dictates that we do. It is only the delusional utopians who believe that mankind is pure, and would live in peace if only…
    The history of weapons has always been a tool to even the contest between good and evil. A woman, smaller and less massive than a man, needs a tool to combat an evil man. One man needs such tools in the face of several attackers bent on his injury or demise.
    Yes, evil people will use these tools, these weapons, but removing them from the law-abiding will only empower evil.

  • Mike Carmel

    Those commenting below fail to explain how they are going to bring those children back to life at Sandy Hook, or Virgina Tech. Or better yet, how to prevent it. It’s unfathomable that we have children being gunned down in our schools and this seems to be an acceptable price to pay to avoid whatever non-sense you are screaming about; background checks, invasion of privacy, whatever. Think about it. Gun control isn’t really about controlling guns, it’s about controlling people who should not have guns. Arming teachers and everyone is not the answer. That might be some NRA romantic vision of every man, woman and child packing heat, but that would be more dangerous than what we have now.

  • Frank Clarke

    There is this weird meme prevalent through the anti-gun community that gun shows are some sort of underground economy where normal laws don’t apply. Nothing could be further from the truth, and when you write things like this everyone who has actually been to a gun show snickers at your naivete.

    Let me set you straight. If someone buys a gun from someone who is not a federal firearms licensee (FFL), there is no requirement to perform a BGC. In all other cases, a BGC will be performed. ALL other cases, period. At their store, in your garage, behind the cathedral at dawn, or at the gun show, it doesn’t matter where, it doesn’t matter when.

    Virtually NO ONE who sets up a (gun sales) table at a gun show is NOT a FFL. Now for the logic problem: what %age of gun sales at a gun show will NOT be accompanied by a BGC?

    A: virtually none. It is possible that Jed will walk the aisles with a cardboard sign around his neck saying “Colt .44 Magnum; make offer” and it is possible that someone will make him an offer that he accepts, and a gun will be sold w/o a BGC. This will happen rarely, but the laws you’re talking about would require me to BGC my daughter before I sell her my old pistol.

    No. Take a hike.

    • Nicernogent

      There is this weird meme prevalent through the anti-gun community that gun shows are some sort of underground economy where normal laws don’t apply.

      Yes, and I’m wondering if it just might have something to do with members of the pro-gun community making statements like this:

      “I have made very good money – even tripled or quadrupled my
      money in guns. Buy top quality firearms and bulk milsurp ammo and you will make
      very good profits. Has worked for me for over 30 years – much better than the
      stock market and slightly better than real estate.”


      And this, FROM THE SAME POSTER who brags about profiting from gun sales:

      “Make what gun laws that you will, I will simply ignore them as I always have.”


      • Joe

        That was one man. He doesn’t represent the other 100 million…

    • Atticus

      Indiana gun laws are among the most lax in the US – anyone who is even marginally informed on this topic knows that buying a gun in Indiana is an absolute piece of cake – it is because of the background check loophole that Indiana is a PRIMARY source state for crime guns. And to that point, Chicago has Indiana to thank for **30%** of the confiscated crime guns used in homicides. This is easily attainable data, requiring a minimal amount of research.

      People buy guns at gun shows in Indiana with zero BGC’s, zero ID, and zero questions asked – all day long.

      What a pity that you and so many arm chair quarterbacks like you are too invested in winning a fake argument than you are in solving a a problem that is plaguing an entire generation. Then again, people like you don’t care until it’s in your back yard.

      Stop vilifying the people who take the initiative to work on this shameful problem. Send them a thank you card. Oh, and please, don’t flatter yourself, they don’t want your guns.

    • webejustsayin

      What I find most interesting, Frank Clarke, is how often gun owners like you (and the “like you” part is important) are so freaking defensive about having, owning, buying, selling and keeping whatever weapons you want to have on you, with you, and wherever you go. What I DON’T hear from gun owners like you (there’s that distinction again) are ANY ideas or suggestions on how to prevent those who really should not own or have access to a gun from owning or having access to a gun. (Think: terrorists, for one.)

      Guns have one purpose: to hit and destroy targets, living or otherwise. So your inability to empathize with parents – especially mothers who have lost children to maniacs brandishing weapons in supposedly safe places – is, in a word, underwhelming.

      When someone like you (aha!) starts offering ideas on how to make the world a safer place so that your own daughter can walk about more freely, I’ll listen. In the meantime, you can take that hike. And I hope you enjoy the view.

  • MasterWildfire

    So much naivety and lies and so little intelligence.

    You state: “I am tired of hearing people say what a shame gun deaths are, as if we are powerless to stop this scourge on our communities.
    I am tired of the inevitable discussion of safety versus constitutional rights, as if the two cannot coexist.”

    Rendering the law-abiding helpless, won’t render the dangerous predators harmless; Despite what you’ve been told to believe by the guy with the heavily armed security detail that’s funding your organization.

    You state: “As a parent of two small children and a member of the Indiana chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, I
    know the victims of gun violence deserve more than sympathy or academic debate. They deserve action.”

    But doing foolish things that only make the situations WORSE is not the answer.

    What new gun control ideas, proposed by your organization would have PREVENTED “Gun Free” Sandy Hook? “Gun Free” Virginia Tech? Or either “Gun Free” Fort Hood slaughter of unarmed victims?

    You state: “There are sensible solutions we can undertake to curb gun violence and uphold our Second Amendment rights.”

    That is of course a lie.
    Proof: What new gun control ideas, proposed by your organization, would have PREVENTED “Gun Free” Sandy Hook? “Gun Free” Virginia Tech? Or either “Gun Free” Fort Hood slaughter of unarmed victims?

    Proof: How much of the “GUN VIOLENCE!” that we hear so much about, is ILLEGAL ACTS committed in VIOLATION of numerous currently existing laws which TOTALLY FORBIDS the acts?

    So what new gun control laws, do you honestly believe, those who ignore the current and more serious laws against rape, robbery and murder, will obey? And why won’t they simply ignore the new gun control laws as well?

    You state: “In the 18 states that require criminal background checks for all gun sales, gun violence is significantly reduced for many

    Even if that were true: Why is the TOOL used to commit rape, robbery and murder significant?
    What was the NON-GUN violent crime rates?
    Gun control laws, which only disarm the law-abiding, are not effective against reducing criminal violence.
    That’s why criminals are called “CRIMINALS”.
    Proof: name the US cities with STRICT gun control laws AND violent crime rates LOWER than the national average.

    You state: “Forty-six percent fewer women are shot to death by their intimate partners.”

    What were the actual NUMBER of victims in both comparable years?
    How many were instead stabbed or simply BEATEN TO DEATH?

    According to the FBI, in 2014 there were 248 people murdered with the BLACK semi-autos that the ignorant and tyrant-wannabes call “assault weapons”, while there were 658 that were murdered by “unarmed” assailants using only their fists and feet.

    You state: “Forty-eight percent fewer on-duty law enforcement officers are killed with handguns that are not their own. ”

    What were the actual NUMBER of on-duty cops that were murdered?
    Why don’t we simply make murdering cops illegal?
    How many of those on-duty cops that were murdered, were ILLEGAL murdered in VIOLATION of numerous currently existing laws?
    And you are gullible enough, or well paid enough, to believe that someone who would murder a cop or a loved one, would obey new gun control laws?

    You state: “Gun trafficking is 48 percent lower.”

    What you’re too naive to understand: Simply making up “statistic” doesn’t make it true nor relevant.
    If one gun was trafficked on year, and two the next: “That’s a HUNDRED PERCENT INCREASE IN GUN TRAFFICKING!!!!”
    But it’s really an insignificant number.

    You state: “Despite these statistics, many states, including Indiana, refuse to enact sensible gun laws. Did you know that in Indiana,
    individuals can legally purchase a gun without any kind of background check?”

    For Freedom and Liberty!
    So how does Indiana’s murder rates compare to Illinois with “Gun Free” Chicago? (Chicago has some of the STRICTEST gun control laws in the US!)

    In 2014: Illinois 721 murders, 5.6 per 100,000
    In 2014: Indiana 312 murders, 4.8 per 100,000

    You state: “Opponents will say that universal background checks won’t fix the problem – that the cost of action is too steep. Yet for
    years now, we have all been paying the price of inaction related to gun violence.”

    What you don’t understand, with the HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars that has ALREADY been spent on the CURRENT background check system, there isn’t a single confirmed case where a background check PREVENTED a murder.
    Do you know what these people have in common:
    Jared and Amanda Miller (Las Vegas)
    Aaron Ybarra (“Gun Free” Seattle Pacific University)
    Elliot Rodger (Santa Barbara)
    Ivan Lopez (“Gun Free” Fort Hood 2014)
    Darion Marcus Aguilar (“Gun Free” Maryland mall)
    Karl Halverson Pierson (“Gun Free” Arapahoe High School)
    Paul Ciancia (“Gun Free” LAX)
    Aaron Alexis (“Gun Free” DC Navy Yard)
    James Holmes (“Gun Free” Aurora theater)
    Jared Loughner (Tucson)
    Nidal Hasan (“Gun Free” Fort Hood 2009)
    Seung-Hui Cho (“Gun Free” Virginia Tech)
    and Naveed Haq (Seattle)
    They all passed your background checks for their firearms.
    And most slaughtered their victims in “Gun Free Zones”.

    You ask: “Isn’t it time for us to do something?”

    Try and THINK: If your car won’t start, “Doing something” like smashing out the windshield, won’t make things any better.

    So where has the cowardly ideology of “The more helpless you are when attacked with deadly intent, the SAFER you are!” actually saved lives?
    “Gun Free” Red Lake High School? – 9 slaughtered, 5 wounded
    “Gun Free” San Ysidro McDonald’s? 21 slaughtered, 19 wounded
    “Gun Free” Columbine? – 13 slaughtered, 21 wounded
    “Gun Free” Sandy Hook? – 26 slaughtered, 2 wounded
    “Gun Free” Virginia Tech? – 32 slaughtered, 17 wounded
    “Gun Free” University of Arizona College of Nursing? – 3 slaughtered, 5 wounded
    “Gun Free” University of Alabama (Huntsville)? – 2 slaughtered, 3 wounded
    “Gun Free” Northern Illinois University? – 5 slaughtered, 17 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Umpqua Community College? 9 slaughtered, 9 wounded
    “Gun Free” Fort Hood 2009? – 13 slaughtered, 32 wounded
    “Gun Free” Fort Hood 2014? – 3 slaughtered, 12 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Century movie theater in Aurora? – 12 slaughtered, 70 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church? – 9 slaughtered, 8 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Chattanooga Recruiting Center? -5 slaughtered, 2 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Gabby Giffords meet-n-greet? – 6 slaughtered, 13 wounded

    And yes, the Gabby Giffords meet-n-greet shooting was indeed “Gun Free”, because while most of the victims COULD have been legally
    armed, NO ONE actually at the shooting took personal responsibility for their own safety by BEING armed.

    There was NO “concealed carry holder at the Gabby Giffords shooting that ALMOST SHOT THE WRONG PERSON!”
    That was simply a LIE, told to encourage the stupid and cowardly, future victims, to stay UNARMED for the violent predators’ convenience.

    REALITY: By the time Joe Zamudio arrived at the shooting scene, the goblin had already been disarmed and was no longer a threat.

    “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein

    What “same thing” do we see being repeated “over and over again and expecting different results”?

    DISARMING the intended VICTIMS!

    You state: “Moms Demand Action is a grassroots, non-partisan movement of not just moms; but dads, grandparents, aunts and uncles who are fighting for public safety measures that respect the Second Amendment and protect people from gun violence.”

    No, no it’s not a “grassroots, non-partisan movement” at all.
    It was funded and supported by a billionaire that surrounds himself with heavily armed security details.

    But who cares about the truth, when you have a paid agenda? Right?

    • Nicernogent

      That has got to set some kind of record for a gun shill Gish Gallop. Archived.

      • MasterWildfire

        Tell you what, instead of posting stupid and meaningless comments: Simply REFUTE what I posted . . . if I’m wrong.

  • ramrodd

    Having served honorably in the German Army in World War I, in 1932 he
    dutifully registered three handguns under a post-war German law. Government officials warned that registration records must be carefully stored so that they did not fall into the wrong hands. But the Nazis, under Adolf Hitler, seized power in 1933. In 1938, the Nazis used those records to disarm enemies of the state, including Flatow, who had committed no crime. His arrest record October 4, 1938, stated, “Arms in the hands of Jews are a danger to public safety.” Can you hear the plaintive whistle of the locomotives pulling boxcars loaded with God’s Chosen People off to the death camps? Can you hear the German congregations singing loudly so as to not hear those trains?

    Nation after nation that has registered firearms has eventually moved on to
    confiscation. Gun sales growth and New Yorkers’ civil disobedience are a strong clue that Americans are not willing to chance German style gun laws. Safer for whom? Not for us.