Could happen, maybe someone was showing off and did not learn the first 6 times, sure whoever it was figured it out by now.

Sounds like what happened years ago in South Texas - a guy was ruled to have committed suicide - shot multiple times in the back with a single shot rifle - something to do with politics - either LBJ or Billie Sol Estes. Idiot didn't learn the first time, had to keep reloading, although I must admit it was kinda hard shooting himself in the back, but I guess where there is a will, there is a way.

None of this was anything near an accident. He knew the victims, or at least most of them. Maybe not the kid. Sounds like they're on the chase for him right now, he's been spotted.

"Police were searching a man suspected of shooting to death seven people, including one child, at two locations in this western Michigan city on Thursday."

I just wanna know how they were searching him in two different locales. Maybe he has a split personality.

Both locations were fairly close to each other.

KeithStone - you are no funnier than the immature posters who are calling this an accident. If the police don't know where he is but have suspect that he can be in either of two locations, they are obviously going to search both in case he is in one of them.

A couple of inaccuracies in the article. The two houses were not across town from one another. They are quite close , different streets, but same area. Nice area, nice home, family area.

He killed two women, maybe sisters, and one of the women's little 10 year old daughter. Went to another house nearby-ish and killed three more females and one male. He also got in a shoot out downtown and a woman got caught in the crossfire and was hit in the arm. He completely shot up a police cruiser. He also had a road rage incident during his chase where he shot another driver in the face. His family said they are even afraid of being around him. They say he is bipolar and not taking his meds.

Some of you people think this is funny? Make jokes? That is just sick and pathetic. Grow up. Grow a brain. It's a true tragedy. Just hope something like this never touches your lives.

And this is not a forum to promote or bash political parties either.

Very sad that this is happening, and anyone sick enough to shoot/kill a child should be shot too. No child should die over a domestic issue. Ever.

If my dad had been there, he would have told the guy to go ahead and shoot himself. Maybe the world is better off without another killer on the loose. ..

Aggie, you just fed the trolls :(

Another one-man well-regulated militia hard at work...

"Police were searching a man suspected of shooting to death seven people, including one child, at two locations in this western Michigan city on Thursday."

I just wanna know how they were searching him in two different locales. Maybe he has a split personality.

@KeithStone...learn to read. The police were looking for a subject that had shot to death 7 people at two different locations. Get it? He went to one house killed 3 then went to the other house and killed 4. He took hostages at a third home (people he didn't know) while trying to outrun the LEOs and the situation ended with the suspect shooting himself in the head...hostages safe. He also wounded two while shooting at the police.

Toasty - almost as well-regulated as Operation Fast and Furious, eh?

It's one thing for the NRA, who many credit for the lack of "effective" gun laws, to lobby for gun rights. It's another for an organization to encourage illegal gun sales. I assume the gun control advocates are relying on the same ATF to enforce "stricter gun laws"?

I think the price paid by society for the freedom to own a gun is steep, but still worth it. Some day that freedom may pay off ten-fold.

Did lax gun laws contribute to this man being capable on going on this somewhat impromptu rampage and killing seven? Maybe, I will admit that. If it was premeditated, then no... but if it was spontaneous then it's possible unless he was the type of criminal who always carried a gun. But I am simply not willing to give up my freedom to own a gun because there are sometimes mentally deranged individuals out there looking to do this sort of thing.

If only one person in those households had a weapon nearby and was trained in its use, then maybe this could have been averted.

I'm so happy criminals are evolving enough to take thier own lives.

That is one bright spot !

Some say that if we had stricter gun laws...this would have never happened

On the other hand, if this scumbag was still in prison...this would have never happened

Hey Z to AZ, maybe you are correct. Just imagine how much fun this story would be to report if he didn't get a gun and decided to use a machete.

The gun was a tool he used in his madness. Maybe it was too readily available (more laws could have been useful), but this guy could have walked into Home Depot and purchased a chainsaw.

Don't blame guns. Blame the guy that performed this atorcious act. People need to be better, and not rely on everything we do in life to be regulated.

Sad.

But, Gun Control is not the issue.

Toasty, I guess you missed the sentence that said he was an ex con. He was breaking the law by having a firearm. He didn't have the right to have a firearm in his posession. So what good would more laws have been?

To bad this POS didn't get shot when he did his breaking and entering 8) would have saved lives..

Do not waste your time explaining anything to Toasty he is staunchly opposed to the 2nd Amendment.

No, it's too bad that the POS was hunting down ex-girlfriends and their families. If these WOMEN AND CHILDREN had had guns, they would have done them no good.

Let's see what you do when you've got a 6+ foot, 250lb monster of a man bust down your door and start shooting. I don't care how big of a gun you may have legally registered, and responsibly locked up, when you're taken by surprise by a man who is literally hunting you down, you won't have time to go get it.

I comment on these boards all the time, and this literally all unfolded less than a mile from where I live.

My house is smack dab in the middle, on plainfield ave...and the house he busted into was less than a mile on the other side of the interstate.

And today, im finding the tasteless, heartless sense of humor on these boards to be a bit too much. It just sort of dawned on me...we, including myself, are part of the problem in this world.

The first inclination you all have is to make jokes (that arent even that funny, i mean...in our fear last night...I had far better ones)...rather than to put yourselves in the shoes of the people killed, or the family of those killed...

its a sad commentary on us...and im resigned now to step out of this BS.

good luck to the rest of you...

How long does it take to pick up a gun? Guns weigh less than a pound and what does 250# size have to do with it? Locked up is the problem, a locked up gun is just the first stage of outlawing guns. If it locked up, it is useless. I would be just as surprised if the man had a machete.

he should have turned himself in he could easily have gotten away with everything just like OJ and Casey.

Another case of "It's everyone else's fault that I am an @!$%#!"

Biometric gun safes keep your firearms fully loaded and at the ready and keeps little fingers away.

Keep 1 in the living room 8)

Keep 1 in the bedroom 8)

Black humor, meaning humor of the ghoulish kind, is a necessary release valve and promotes the ability to look upon tragedy. Moralizing against it is silliness.

Horrible is right. My heart and Prayers go out to the family and friends of his victims.

Nice of him though to save the State of Michigan the cost of a trial and incarceration before he's executed. Too bad we can't get more murderers, like that one in TX who was just executed to do the same. Would save a lot of people a lot of grief.

To me, he saved himself the most grief by killing himself. Once again, when a person who has been in prison faces more time behind prison bars, THEY CHOOSE DEATH.

The death penalty is less of a penalty than life in prison. Life in prison is far more harsh than a little prick and a long nap.

Life in prison costs us tax payers alot, so does death row. Either way, I agree with you. Too bad more law abiding citizens, don't own and know how to use guns. That is why they were invented, to protect!

Although I do defend all Americans their right to bear arms, I myself choose not to. I've never fired a gun. I have no desire to.

Life in prison is too good for scum like this. I'm just glad he saved us the cost.

Janine, I agree about the only good thing this scum ever accomplished was killing himself. I also agree, if you want no gun, then do not get one. There may be an occurance in your life when you will wish you had a gun. I hope not, but I, personally, am not going to wait until then for the ability to protect me, and my loved ones.

Sweet Revenge!....Is what it sounds like.

It couldn't have been an ex-con. They aren't allowed to have guns - it's against the law. Besides, I'm sure he was rehabilitated while in the big house.

This is such a tragedy. He was just getting his life turned around and this had to happen. He had pushed passed having no father he knew and having squandered all his free education previously. He was days away from living a normal life.

Signed

The Chimp Trainer

To racingfish, What an idiotic comment. If guns laws were so strict that practically no one could get a gun and then something like this happened, that would be proof that no matter what the gun laws , criminals will always have guns. This incident proves that the gun laws are not strict enough because an ex-con was able to get a gun.

Really, "just released from prison". Read the news idiot! Just released in 2005 maybe?

Funny, I read that he was not involved in the legal system since 2005 - 6 years ago.

Better not make assumptions and wait for the actual details. I know the righties will scream about the need for more guns, but this case does actually show that guns are too easy to get.

If he hadn't had access to a gun, this would not have happened. Convicted felons shouldn't be able to get guns so easily - a gun turns a deranged individual into his own avenging super hero.

What on earth does this story have to do with "no matter what gun laws are?" This story proves that the ridiculously lax gun laws that are on the books are not enough. As long as we're going to take "well-regulated militia" to mean any moron who likes things that go bang, this kind of tragedy will keep right on happening.

You people are crazy. There are no lax gun laws. CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY THE LAW if you haven't heard idiots! No matter how hardcore the law, criminals WILL ALWAYS be armed. And innocent victims-to-be, like your sheepish selves, will wish you took advantage of your second amendment rights. Just because you cowards know nothing about guns doesn't mean you tell other people who were born in AMERICA with the 2nd amendment, that we cannot defend ourselves against scumbag criminals who will ALWAYS have a way to arm themselves...... it's kind of like, if you can't beat em, join em. You sit in your house with a baseball bat or something. I'll read about you sometime..."dumb retards that hate their constitution died when they could have saved themselves"

Okay, okay, I'm good with better guns laws. I'm even okay with turning in the revolver I have for stronger more effective gun laws. But, I want you to guarantee me that if a 350lb psychopath breaks into my house wielding a baseball bat (or a gun) the police will be there as fast as it takes me to get my pistol out of the night stand drawer and protect me and my family from death or a very painful beating. Can you guarantee that Dave, if so more power to the government, if not, I'll be keeping my gun and staying alive. By the way, I thought we have gun laws that keep guns out of the hands of morons, or at least we try to.

I would like to know where he obtained these firearms as he committed a federal felony getting them. Further proof that guns laws do not work. Imagine that, a criminal broke the law again, that's kinda what makes them criminals.

Dave in NM
I thought New Mexicans had more sense than what you are showing..
If a person that has just gotten out of prison, should have been on parole, ex/con can get a weapon, how do we stop them? For goodness sakes, all criminals will find a way to obtain a weapon, so make sure you take the guns from the legal law abiding citizen.. If these victims had been armed may be they would still be alive.. Then you would be bitching about them.
Nut jobs will always find a way to kill.

LOL gun control:

We also need Fork and spoon control to end Obesity

and keyboard, pen and pencil control to end bad spelling

Tech Nine, the artist, has choice words to say about these things. Take a listen to his profound poetry.

Criminals will always find a way to get a hold of a gun, whether through the black market or through someone else that they know (which is illegal anyway). So even if you take away the guns from everyone, you're really just screwing the families whom want to use the gun for protection's sake. I bet if any of the people whom had been shot had a gun, that sorry SOB would have been shot and taken down before the cops show up.

The purpose for the right to bear arms is for the law-abiding citizens to be able to protect themselves and their families. They also need to have a "Castle Home Front" type of law (like they do in some states) so that the SOBs that try to break in and got shot can't sue the people whose homes they broke into. You don't have to kill them to defend yourself. Just shoot the kneecap or arm or something to disable them. It's not rocket science.

Dave in NM
I thought New Mexicans had more sense than what you are showing..
If a person that has just gotten out of prison, should have been on parole, ex/con can get a weapon, how do we stop them?

I'll go really slowly this time. Please try to keep up:

By. Restricting. The. Supply. Of. Guns.

You're saying that because there isn't an easy, short-term solution to THIS problem with THIS guy, no solution will ever be possible, so why try? I'm saying that gun control will take time. Make getting a gun something that actually costs some time and effort, and the supply will dry up. It will be harder and more expensive to find them on the street. They will become rarer. Criminals will continue to ditch or destroy guns used in crimes, and the street supply will get tighter and tighter over time. This isn't some wacko theory, it's common sense. It just doesn't happen to comport with your love of all things that go bang, so you dismiss the obvious economics behind it as well.

And I'll ask again the question no one has bothered to try and answer: if gun control were per se ineffective, then why does the US have both the loosest gun laws in the civilized world AND the highest incidence of gun violence? Coincidence?

Why didn't any of the citizen malitia take this guy out?

For those who think gun laws are the fix to things like this,
here is a little food for thought:

Headline and opening sentence of another article:
36 guns found at alleged meth dealer's home
Police have seized 36 guns, including a homemade rifle, from the Port Richmond house of an alleged crystal meth dealer.

I can also recall an incident nearly a decade ago where police searched the home of a high school kid suspected in a shooting and found 5 guns in his bedroom; 2 stolen and 3 homemade.

I grew up in a fairly violent area where it was common for kids to get busted with homemade guns and pipe bombs over 30 years ago. Just a guess, but if kids could do this crap back then, I would think the internet would make it easy for a criminal to make their own weapons today.

Gun laws will stop shootings just like drug laws stop someone from driving under the influence of cocaine, and laws on alcohol prevent minors from drinking.

For those who think gun laws are the fix to things like this,
here is a little food for thought:

Headline and opening sentence of another article:
36 guns found at alleged meth dealer's home

Let me guess in what country this took place. Mmmm, the USA? If so, then what does your example have to do with the effects of restrictive gun laws?

Let me go slow here so that you can follow.

Guns are easy to make. This means that gun control will be as effective as prohibition was, and your argument to this point at 15.14 is wrong.

Not sure why you think the rest of the world has gun control and less violence, but you are wrong there as well. I've been to a number of different countries and violence is not something unique to the U.S. While in Korea my friend had a dead hooker thrown through his hotel room window and I was aproached on a street corner by a guy selling guns, he had a suitcase full of them. These things have never happened to me in the U.S.

And Dave,

The way you highlight a portion of my original statement, but leave out the parts about guns being homemade in order to ask how my statement is relevant to gun control just goes to show how you are manipulative in your arguments.

Rather than just proclaiming my statement "wrong," I challenge you to explain how the average citizen can manufacture guns and ammunition that are as effective at mass killing as the high-powered handguns widely and cheaply available on the streets today. I'm talking about accuracy, muzzle velocity and shot-to-shot intervals. I support my points with examples, and you respond with unsupported blanket dismissals. This also extends to your implied contention that the USA has average per-capita rates of gun violence compared to the rest of the developed world. Your personal anecdote is interesting and all, but it's hardly data.

This story is proof that we need a total ban on all types of guns.

Guns have evil personalities, and can never be trusted. They'll sprout legs and go on shooting rampages, with or without a user. Occassionally, they sprout arms and reload themselves. Sometimes they have accuracy problems when they get older, and strike an unintended target.

From time to time, they have even turned against their owners, even firing at them while they sleep; however it's very difficult to prove such an occurance, because no one else is ever around to see the gun in action.

One Colt .45 automatic that was suspected of an owner sleep shooting several years ago, was vigorously interrogated by local police. The gun just sat there, invoking its 5th amendment rights and saying nothing. Eventually, they had to release it, having no evidence with which to formally charge it. Apparently, the gun had cleaned itself, removed the slug from its owner, and returned to the gun case before the police arrived.

All nonsense aside, my condolences to those that lost loved ones in this incident.

If he hadn't had access to a gun, this would not have happened. Convicted felons shouldn't be able to get guns so easily

A criminal can get just about anything easily, and in this country there is something like 90 guns for every 100 citizens... trust me we are well past the point of no-return when it comes to a gun ban. Even if all the guns in the US were melted down, there would be a huge demand for them (this is the US afterall, consumer powerhouse of the world) and the demand WILL be filled by those looking to make money. Mexican gun industry anyone?

@STEVE 564412 - ROFL! your post is hilarious

Dave, we don't need to challenge anything you still have no point. You will just keep babbling BS until everyone is blue in the face.

The Second 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.

Plain and simple, if you don't like it, leave the country.

I agree with Chris Rock. Stop the gun control - just make each bullet cost $1,000. Gun laws only make it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns for defense.

It's a cute joke Carrie but as far as reality goes: How many honest working people will go to a gun shop and buy 6 bullets for $6,000? And how many criminals will steal or smuggle 6 bullets if they are worth $6,000?

@Dave

I'm just going to toss my two cents in. What kind of gun control are you talking about Dave?

Do we just stop selling guns to the public? If so, there are already millions of firearms in public circulation. A lot of illegal guns are either stolen from homes or passed down from family. Do we ask people to turn in their weapons? Good luck getting the criminals to comply. Or do we just invade homes and do searches?

Guns aren't the source of violent crimes, violent criminals are. Will strict gun laws reduce gun violence? Yes. Will there be an increase in other forms of violent crimes? Yes.

Oh, brother.

Improvised firearms aren't that difficult to make, though they do take a bit of doing. Effective? Somewhat. It depends on how they're utilized. There is a U.S. Army manual of improvised weapons and explosives. It's a bit dated, but I've seen copies of it from time to time; it's 'out there' and can be found with a bit of looking. It offers working drawings and precise instructions on how to make this stuff. And there's more than a few manuals written by private individuals through the years lurking around, too.

It seems to me that the main use of an improvised weapon, usually a single shot firearm or an improvised explosive type device, is to incapacitate or kill someone who has a much better weapon, so it can be 'liberated'. Originally, it was supposed to be, say, a member of the underground resistance neutralizing a sentry wearing a German uniform and gaining a 9mm automatic pistol or submachine gun for the effort. But, unfortunately, the same tactic could be used to obtain a Glock or Smith and Wesson .40 caliber pistol and several magazines full of cartridges from a law enforcement officer if that became the 'only' practical way to acquire such a thing. A law enforcement weapon could be quite valuable to the person taking it, for their own use, or on the black market it could fetch a pretty penny, too. As things stand right now, the weapons that police officers and deputies carry are equal to what one who can legally buy a handgun can get for $500 or so. A black market one may cost a bit more (or maybe not it it was merely stolen and resold), but not enough that anyone is willing to ambush a police officer because they want to take his or her service weapon. We should be thankful that things aren't currently THAT bad.

You see, it's not how easy it is for the common citizen to make or acquire a gun on their own, or how good such would be. The problem would be a relative handful of knowledgeable, skilled, and well equipped citizens building weapons which they sell at a handsome profit to people who will ultimately misuse them or traffic them to people who will be misusing them. Again, the demand is not currently there. I am fully capable of making just about any kind of weapon a person could want. But what I could receive in compensation for doing so is peanuts compared to the costs in my time and the materials it would take...literally, if someone paid me $500 to make them a pistol, it would take far longer than it would for them to just go spend that money on one made by Smith and Wesson or one of the other manufacturers (either new, or a good used one) and I'd be getting absolutely shafted on the deal at $500. At that rate, I'd be receiving a depressingly low hourly rate on the project and given that I'd have to shelf the other things I do to earn my income, it would actually cost me at least several times that. See how that works?

Of course, if you're an unemployed machinist and have lots of free time and access to a lathe and milling machine, it would be a different picture, though instead of losing money on that deal, you'd maybe be making $2-3 dollars per hour. It's still cheaper, and easier, just to go buy one.

This can all change if the availability of desirable weapons becomes significantly restricted. The kinds of people who would want to be obtaining them usually can come up with sizable amounts of stolen or ill-gotten money (like from drug sales, etc.) with which to buy a gun which they see as one of their 'tools of the trade'.

In foreign countries where guns are much harder to get, homemade weapons are much more commonly encountered. Heck, look at all the things the Palestinians make in clandestine workshops to harass the Israelis at. Just because no one was willing to sell them rockets and bombs was little determent; they just had to work a bit harder to make them themselves!

Average citizens don't go around doing illegal things and wouldn't be making guns in their garage, anyway.

It's proof that republican efforts to put 4 firearms on the street for every citizen have failed miserably, of from their eyes, been an overwhelming success.

What the gun freaks fail to always acknowledge, is guns are readily available because they are actively promoting them.

I'm not saying this person may or may not have gotten one, but the more put into the public, the easier they are to acquire, legally or not. IOW, criminals have access to guns because gun nuts have made them extremely abundant.

But like every answer to every gun death, they will invariably claim more are needed. "If only the kids were armed, all of this could have been avoided" will most certainly be one more ridiculous argument they will make.

police are looking for the suspect who had just been released from prison... Proof that no matter what gun laws are, Criminals will always have access to them.

Or proof that you idiots have put too many guns on the streets. Getting a gun in America is easier than getting drugs, and that is a high bar to beat.

That can't be put an anyone's feet, but people who want more guns, period.

@Scott

Or proof that you idiots have put too many guns on the streets. Getting a gun in America is easier than getting drugs, and that is a high bar to beat.

Okay, what? I don't even own a gun, but are you basically saying all gunowners are slack-jawed idiots who just leave their gun on the hood of their car (look at you Seattle Police Department)? I have a few friends who own guns and they're either on them, or locked in a bolted safe. They always tell me that if I ever get a gun, I need to take classes and read up as much as I can on gun safety and storage.

When the PHSYCHOS are either kept locked up or executed! We can only do away with mad dogs - mad humans are decreed to have been treated poorly growing up and are given a pass.

Every single person in the USA needs to go in for a mental health evaluation.

It would help the people and the country.

AnIndividual

Every single person in the USA needs to go in for a mental health evaluation.

It would help the people and the country.

If you feel the need to go yourself, it is not necessary to ask our permission.

ya, keep telling yourself that...i mean when the DoJ decided to let 1,000's of guns .50 and so on go into un named hands by calling off the ATF, one has to wonder whats really going on. it seems even when those who try to enfoce gun control are called off a sting operation, what is one to do? might as well take up arms and be done with it seeing how they are basically handing them over to not just criminals, but the cartels as well right?

thing is, you can cry, "bans guns" till your lips fall off, and it wont do a bit of good if the government lets guns freely go into the hands of those who are known criminals.... who they can even take down, and prevent these weapons from reaching the hands of those who kill witout remorse.

now, you can say fox news, and this and that, however, even cbs has been checking into this event, i am sure most have forgot about already. just remember it when you go to the vote booth....

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/gunrunnerprobe-doj-charlesgrassley-darrylissa/2011/07/06/id/402689?s=al&promo_code=C914-1

also if you dont like this search before you go bawling for the POS in the white house, as your saviour in chief, do a search, its all over everywhere.... well, everywhere but MSNBC it seems.

Megalodon - it is one thing to say gun control it is completely another to say illegal arms sales protected and encouraged by the US GOV.

They can say Gun Control all they want but they lack the will to control even our borders. Which by law the Fed's have to do. They going to pass a Gun Control law so they can ignore that too?

The guy is a convicted felon who just got out of jail. He is not allowed to own or have a gun. See how well gun control works? We dont even need to make a new law.

Good call Anindivadual: Can we start in the White House?

The guy is a convicted felon who just got out of jail. He is not allowed to own or have a gun. See how well gun control works?

i see how it works just fine. as you said, he cant even own a gub, he is a felon. So then, how did he get it? i doubt he went into a gun shop, and just bought it. so then, he got it by other means, and it want by legal means. if you want to further enhance gun control, by holding the last LEGAL owner partially responsible... i cant say i will go along with that, however a type of penalty could be taken into account. to ban all firearms..... not going to fix the issue, just make it worse imo.

Effective gun control would drastically reduce the supply of guns. The price would go up, and the number of unaccounted-for guns available in the wild to anyone with a small wad of bills would go down. How is that not common sense?

Because the people that want guns will still get them. This man is a criminal and can't legally own a gun. Yet 7 people are dead because this man had a firearm. Obviously gun control works. (Hold on a sec while I find the button that shows me rolling my eyes.) I mean Columbine was a gun free zone so I am sure the two kids there respected that too. Restricting guns only keeps them out of the hands of people who are responsible with them. It does nothing to stop someone who has the intent to hurt someone else with a gun.

You people are crazy. There are no lax gun laws. CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY THE LAW if you haven't heard idiots! No matter how hardcore the law, criminals WILL ALWAYS be armed. And innocent victims-to-be, like your sheepish selves, will wish you took advantage of your second amendment rights. Just because you cowards know nothing about guns doesn't mean you tell other people who were born in AMERICA with the 2nd amendment, that we cannot defend ourselves against scumbag criminals who will ALWAYS have a way to arm themselves...... it's kind of like, if you can't beat em, join em. You sit in your house with a baseball bat or something. I'll read about you sometime..."dumb retards that hate their constitution died when they could have saved themselves"

I was convicted of a felony DWI 11 years ago, got my rights restored, own 2 hand guns and a permit to carry. I didn't harm anyone fortunately, and I did not commit a violent crime, and I reserve the right to kill anyone trying to kill me or harm a third party. I'm a great shot too! Come try taking my guns you liberal nutbags! I have a bunch of .45 hollowtips that will win the argument.
Ban all guns, lol.....you seriously believe in unicorns and fairies too right? There will ALWAYS be guns, they are going NO WHERE, get over it and join those of us that legally take advantage of our right to defend ourselves or shut the f up. Take away guns from law abiding citizens, crime rates will SOAR through the roof! Just ask Australia! LOL

If somebody who isn't legally allowed to have a gun got one, how does that show that gun control helps? If you take away guns, you take them away from good people. Criminals will still have them. In one city, every household is required to have a gun. The crime rate dramatically decreased. Would you rob a house if you knew there's a good change you'd get shot?

I believe the gun laws in each state she be revised. There are too many fools running around out here. The state I live in, does not allow comcealed weapons why? I know of states with a lower crime rate and this law is allowed.

Do away with guns by gun control and it will become like drugs. They will be smuggled in and might even be easier for the criminal to get one. Plus, I'm not so sure most American people are going to let their britches back side be flapping in the wind, Dave.

If somebody who isn't legally allowed to have a gun got one, how does that show that gun control helps?

Because gun control restricts the SUPPLY of guns! Seriously - it's not that complicated. If it's hard to get guns, fewer guns are sold. If fewer guns are sold, fewer guns are made. If fewer guns exist, then fewer criminals can GET guns! People keep saying "if there were no guns, criminals would have them." Where do you think criminals would GET guns if there WERE NO GUNS FOR THEM TO GET?? I don't mean to shout, but honestly - the point I'm making is not that difficult to grasp.

Look at the rest of the civilized world. Guns are hard as hell to get, and gun violence is practically unheard-of. How do you explain that if you believe actual gun control (which we've never had) is ineffective?

If you take away guns, you take them away from good people

Have you ever once heard of someone (other than a paranoid gun nut) defining gun control as "taking away guns?" Pay attention. The argument is about restricting the supply of NEW guns.

Dave.............get a grip. jeeeezzzz. Prohibition sure worked well didn't it?? Oh, it didn't?????? Guns are NOT the problem, criminals are the PROBLEM!! Ya get it?? Probably not. Try to get some info before you run your stupid thoughts on the vine. Guns in the hands of honest citizens DETER crime. Godddddd, LIBERALS!!!!!

usa: I covered the prohibition argument in #15.14. Perhaps YOU can answer the question every other gun nut here is ignoring (in addition to every other point I'm making, which you are also ignoring): if gun control doesn't work, how do you explain the fact that every other civilized country has both restrictive gun laws and a negligible incidence of gun violence?

You know that everyone can bitch about the gun laws but lets get real the restrictions on guns can get tougher and it will not change a damn thing. if the freaks out there want to kill they will with or without a gun. dont get me wrong it is sad that it happen but it was the african american that did it not the weapon. NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NR

lets get real the restrictions on guns can get tougher and it will not change a damn thing.

Was that somehow an attempt to answer the question I posed in #15.16? If not, I'd be interested to see your data.

"Aww man. Another PSYCHO. When will this end?"

This post is for anyone that has knee-jerk responses to such issues.

I'm wondering when the ignorance in regards to and the bigotry against the mentally ill will come to an end. This guy was an ex-con, not an ex-mental patient. He was a violent career criminal. Why are you calling him a psycho? You can't even say with any level of credibility that anyone who was committed or deemed a danger to themselves or others is a psycho by default.

The stigma is so bad against the mentally ill in this country that so many people throw out the word psycho or nut-job as if you must be mentally ill to murder several people? The rights of the mentally ill have been trampled for all of recorded history. They get no respect and it's a bit like the gun issue itself, meaning it's the worst of the worst that give the rest a bad name.

I spent 5+ months in a psychiatric hospital for depression when I was a teen. It prevented me from getting into the Army despite my 92 ASVAB score and clean cut appearance and a 3.7gpa(college). There were ages 12-18 on that wing and they were good kids with problems and @!$%#ty parents for the most part. Most of them had eating disorders/somatoform disorders, anxiety disorders, other cognitive disabilities, or because the system failed them and foster parents cannot deal with their needs.

Perhaps a danger to themselves in some regards, but not the type to shoot themselves or be a danger to anyone else anymore than the hotheaded jerk in traffic that wants to get out and strangle you. Ya, that guy, the guy who has never stepped foot into a therapist's office, that society believes is "normal" up until he breaks a law.

Those kids in that hospital don't deserve to be thought of as untrustworthy or dangerous for the rest of their lives. Most of them won't get better. Some will. I did. Mental illness is not always permanent.

Are we psychos? No. We were kids that needed help. One girl was wearing handcuffs and ankle cuffs at all times when I first got there, she had violent urges to attack. A few months later they took the cuffs off, but she did try to hang herself with her curtains. I made friends with a young kid that was there for no other reason than having a crap life. His parents sexually assaulted him, used a bat to hit him with if he wet the bed, etc.. Is he a psycho because he is not socialized properly? Psychotic means being out of touch with reality/consequences. He loved Bone Thugs n Harmony and wanted to be a rapper.

A good kid in a bad spot that will forever be labeled by this simple minded society that loves to make ill-conceived judgments when they themselves don't even have a degree in Psychology.

Offending entire groups of people like that is absurd.

Now about 15 years later, I have my own place, my own car, and a degree from the University of Colorado. Stop associating violence with mental illness. It's not fair. It's not accurate. It's ignorant. It's offensive.

Just so everyone knows; Dave in NM is an idiot (but can be applied to many others on this board). Apparently he seems to think that only large manufactureres can make guns and ammunition.

Being a black powder fan, making guns, ammo, etc is very a simple task. Of course it is much easier going to Cabelas, but if needed it can be done at home without issue. Reloads are also easy for modern weapons, so ammo is not a problem. No different than 200 years ago, only todays tools are much better.

Since Dave in NM is complete a dependent of manufactured goods he has no idea how simple it is to live without stores, malls, auto repair shops, even electricity.

Dave is very dependent on everyone else, yet insists that everyone follow his beliefs/opinions

I agree Tony, and I also want to add that even if every american arms maker quit making weapons, the rest of the world would not have to follow suit. The Germans make excellent weapons, as do the Czechs, the UK, China, Korea and Russia. I would consider them civilized countries, and maybe their levels of violence are not as high as the USAs but a restrictive law in the united states would never stop a flow of weapons from these and other countries. Dave in NM is living a pipe dream. It would take the entire world cooperating to make guns scarce and that frankly, isn't about to happen.

Tony, I feel your pain, man!

Some posts back, someone suggested making ammunition $1000 a round, presumably with an excise tax.

1) What a great way to get a political party kicked out of elected offices for a good, long time! Somebody would have to implement it, but I don't think anyone wants to at this point. They learned not to play games with that after about 1993-94 or thereabouts...

2) Those people out there who load cartridges, especially those who cast their own bullets, could become almost filthy rich in short order. Namely, those who have a decent supply of components and/or lead ingots stashed away. Legal? No, you're not supposed to. But everyone has their price, right? If commercial pistol cartridges were $1,000 each, a box of fifty would be $50,000. Would you take a thousand dollars to load fifty cartridges for somebody who had cash in hand? Hmmmm......

I doubt we're ever going to see the day, and that's why! If we do, it'll probably be after absolutely everybody who lived through or heard about prohibition is dead and gone and its lessons have been forgotten.

I have only had time to skim all the various posts calling me an "idiot," and saying that of COURSE every lunatic can make a perfect working copy of a Glock 9mm in a half-hour on his kitchen table from paper clips and dog food, and that the only cause of gun violence is not enough guns, but has anyone YET tried to explain why our rates of gun violence are so astronomical, if it has nothing to do with the fact that it's also easier to buy handguns and assault rifles here than anywhere else in the developed world?

Until our constitution is amended I will support gun rights, that stated, Dave in NM is absolutely correct concerning supply. Gun demand curves are very elastic compared to those of drugs or alcohol. Thus, increasing supply pressures/cost decreases demand on these goods. The comparison to drugs/alcohol is simply not born out with econometric analysis. Some criminals will always find a way to get a gun, but the majority of criminals would be without a gun if supply restrictions were in place.

Secondly, beyond theory, these principles are shown true in other developed countries. Simply put, they have lower gun crime than the US due to limited availability of guns. We pay a price for gun ownership with blood.

Lastly, homemade guns are possible, but require a large time investment. Further fully automated guns would likewise be even more rare. Just because some people will make guns doesn't have a major impact upon overall supply.

Again, I support gun ownership as a constitutional right, but being blind to reality doesn't help when debating the issues.

Dave in NM

Due me a favor and look at coutries with the most guns and rate of vilence. Canada has a higher rate of guns per person than we do yet lower violent crimes.... there it is

Dave, I'll tell you why.

It's cultural.

There is a certain segment of the population that consists mostly of males who take themselves too seriously and when they feel someone isn't treating them with as much respect as they think they deserve or when society in general isn't giving them the things they feel entitled to receive, they get ugly.

The tragic comedy of this is that these people, legends in their own minds that they are, don't have the insight to understand that they are not deserving of the respect nor are they entitled to receive what they think they should be getting. It's their own fault, mostly because being selfish and lazy never got anybody anywhere. But when they lash back at all the perceived slights the world has inflicted on them, they use the approach that looks the easiest and takes the least amount of work - they shoot people.

A lot of the problem is entertainment. Those of us up to about middle age have been exposed to violent movies and television programs our entire lives. Monkey see, monkey do. It is very effective behavioral conditioning. In a nutshell, a number of people who were receptive to that 'message' have been taught that if you're a bad guy, you're feared. Fear equals respect, and hurting other people equals revenge. All bad guys have and misuse firearms, as television and movies would have us believe. Therefore, if you want to be respected and lash back at those who have offended you, you need to be a bad guy and strike back with a firearm.

Sure, there's any number of other things that can be used. But, they're not 'cool' and they don't say 'bad guy' like a gun does, you hardly ever see it on TV, so you're not probably not going to do it lest you look like a wuss or a weirdo instead of a bad guy.

Edged weapons are very effective. They also take more careful planning and somewhat more skill to use well; you have to sneak up and take your victims by surprise, yet attack very aggressively when you do. They're not any more or less messy than guns are, really, but most people think that shooting someone isn't as messy, which isn't true. The gun vs. knife choice is often an ill-informed one made by someone who wants to hurt somebody but is still squeamish about blood and getting their hands dirty. Knives also require that you physically go up and get personal with the person you're attacking. If you're really out to get someone, this isn't a problem, as you'd probably gladly beat and/or strangle them, too, for that matter. But if you're only wanting to eliminate them from your life because they said or did something that seems to detract from you personally, shooting them from a distance seems to be a quick yet neat way of doing it. No struggle, no mess, at least not on your clothes. You just press the trigger, watch them hit the floor, and walk away from it all.

People who do this take themselves so seriously that not only can they forgive other people and politely ignore insults, they don't stop to think that most of what they 'know' from TV and movies isn't true.

It's cultural.

This exactly. I can't stand Micheal Bay but he makes a valid point that American cultural is one that is instilled with fear..... Bowling for Colombine is proof of that. Its not gun laws or too many guns... it's the mentality that Americans have... "@!$%# with me buddy and I'll kill you cause its my right".

It's intresting how the U.S. has more murders than Canada, U.K., Germany, etc. combined with roughly the same number of guns and laws...

You ignore the gun deaths per 100,000 facts. Getting rid of the guns that are owned legally wouldn't amount to a hill of beans. With our culture the guns would be replaced with ball bats, machetes, knives, cars, etc. I will personally keep my gun and use it only when it becomes necessary for me an my family's protection. Lowering the number of guns is useless because we have enough to kill each other, all of us, already in circulation. We could lower our gun crime rate drastically just by lowering the number of people with black skin living in this country. (Look at government crime statistics) . We aren't going to outlaw black people in this country, are we? We cannot outlaw everything that could be used to kill people, can we?

In those other countries, that subculture of people who have the

"@!$%# with me buddy and I'll kill you cause its my right".

mentality essentially does not exist.

First, the people who do think like that are dealt with rather severely and they generally get reformed after they start acting up at a young age.

Second, there aren't too many people who grow up to be like that. It's actually shameful to be like that in those other countries. Here in the US, it's practically celebrated.

Another problem somewhat unique to the US is our mobility. In 'the old countries', the majority of people live near where they grew up and their living ancestors and extended family are all around. If you get in trouble, word gets around quickly and isn't likely to be forgotten anytime soon. Where I live, most of the trouble makers aren't from here. They're from somewhere else. If they get arrested for something and get their name and photo in the paper, no one who really knows them is likely to see it.

Of course, if you're estranged from your family anyway - or never really knew them in the first place - I guess it isn't likely to make a whole lot of difference what your reputation is, would it? And, if your parents, your siblings, your aunts and uncles, and cousins have all been in and out of jail numerous times for various offenses, you probably wouldn't care a whole lot what they thought about you committing crimes, either.

I'd be worried about being an embarrassment to my family if I was a criminal. On the other hand, I have had neighbors that had two sons out of seven or eight children who were incarcerated for felonies. One was convicted of dealing cocaine and shortly after his release from custody he ran a motorcycle into a truck at 90 mph, roughly an hour after he got it. The other son stole a van, lead police on a high speed chase, and crashed it into an open trench in a construction site. I don't expect to see him for a few years. In these cases, every member of that household has a different last name, and none of them call the man who lives there 'Dad', but rather by his first name or by 'a$*^#!*', depending on their mood at the moment. They don't seem too rattled when one of the kids is listed in the District Court report in the newspaper here...

Dave in NM #5.25: www.tincher.to/deaths.htm

In the above reference you will find that only 30% of all gun deaths are intended as such, and over 35% of those are police shootings. 56.5% are caused by drugs and/or suicide. I note that you state some nebulous statistics but not your sources...leads to doubt your credibility.

You mention a while back that most of the guns used by the Cartels, in Mexico, come from the USA.....You couldn't be more wrong. In fact, most of the guns used by the Cartel are fully automatic and not something that you can buy at Lone Wolf gun store. Essentially, what happens is that the US Government supplies military grade weapons to the 3rd world countries in South & Central America. Anyone that has spent anytime in Central America will quickly tell you that there is no Country as corrupt as Mexico other than any other Country in South & Central America.

The military weapons the US gives to the 3rd world countries ends up being sold to the Cartels. I defy you to name one gun shop that sells full auto weapons to non-licensed buyers. I would venture to say that there are not 1 in 10,000 that even stock auto weapons, as they are heavily controlled.

I own a suppressor (silencer) for a pistol. The Suppressor cost $200. The BATFE Stamp cost another $200. The background check took 8 weeks by the County and 10 weeks by the BATFE, and I'm clean as a new pin.

If the Cartel, or anyone else, is getting fully auto weapons, they are either being stolen from the Military or they are coming across the southern Mexican border. Nobody sells fully auto weapons at a gun show unless it's to Class 3 licensed owners.

You will not buy explosives, RPGs or any heavy weapons at a local dealer or in the parking lot of a gun show. The only place that has more undercover agents than the local police station is the BATFE at the gun shows.

Mexico has severe gun control. You cannot legally own any weapon that fires a military caliber. That takes in 90% of all guns. In Mexico you may have a license for a shotgun or one of the lessor calibers...NO HANDGUNS. And yet, the gangs get all they want...but not from the USA. AK47s, fully automatic, were the guns retrieved from some drug runners at the Arizona border, just west of Nogales...you will not find any gun shop in Arizona selling these guns.

And, the above illustrates that no matter how much control you think you have on weapons of choice, there will be someplace you can get them...imports, theft from the Military, adjacent countries. Just like Atomic Weapons, once the Genie is out of the bottle, there is no putting him back in.

Not one of Arnold's best movies but better then Twins.

I am sorry to hear people were killed before their time.

jgarizona: What a dumb remark, just when is their time to be killed?

Maybe jgarizona meant they were killed before it was their time to pass on naturally?

Did the victims have duct tape over their mouths? Set the shooters free.

Casey Anthony Did It!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nobody knows what Casey Anthony did becuase they can't prove how the child died.

Misfire

Right. Because the sheer fact that you have a gun is enough to defend yourself in the mere seconds it takes for a gunman to surprise you and shoot you.

Really? Guns save lives? What life would that be?

yourworstnitemare, You are so correct.. Takes just about anything for them to crawl out as cockroaches.. GET SOME EDUCATION YOU PEOPLE....
Guns don't kill, the idiot pulling the trigger does..
Wish these women would have had a gun to protect themselves...
They need to get him and nail him.

I really doubt this was a stranger to stranger killing. BTW & for your information, your personal defense timing is only two seconds. Do you feel secure with an assailant who's 20 feet away from you and only displaying a knife? Well, 2 seconds is the time required for that assailant to cover the last 20 feet & stick that knife into you. It's also how much time it might take to draw a concealed weapon & fire at least one shot. I really suspect it took much longer than 2 seconds for this psycho to kill all seven of these people. Any one of them, properly armed and trained, could have taken this nutcase out. Read that last sentence "PROPERLY ARMED AND TRAINED"!

It has saved mine and my family. Knowing when and how to use a gun can make all the difference. I am certain that the police could have made it there in time to save them had they called 911 and he only had a knife

rock n roller - It's loud pipes that save lives - according to harley-davidson riders. Think of all of the people being saved. By now the loud pipes should have saved everybody that needed saving and they should be starting to bring people back to life. How compassionate of the h-d riders.

Oh, goodie! I love logic games!

Guns don't kill people, psychos with guns kill people but less guns means less psychos with guns THUS less pyschos with guns kills less people. YAY!

Guns don't kill people, pyschos with guns kill people... then gun nuts with guns show up and kill the psychos... then the cops arrive, see the gun nuts with the guns and kill those people... then psychos with bulletproof armor show up and kills those people... wheee!

Guns don't kill people, but its sure faster than swordplay.

Guns don't kill people, but you can't really throw bullets hard enough to do any real damage.

Guns don't kill people, but try telling that to a gun

Finally, guns don't kill people.. aw, who ya kiddin'?

Guns don't kill.... psychos pulling triggers kill!

So, using this logic: all gun owners are psychos!

In a separate incident today, not mentioned by the article, I don't believe, but by the same guy, shot another guy who also had a gun. Both of them having guns didn't stop him from getting shot.

yourworstnitemare you are so right!!!! the right people with guns cause no harm. the wrong people with guns and we are all in trouble. the wrong people get guns and then all of us who use guns responsibly are the ones they force the consequences on

Seriously now people...yourworstnitemare is totally right! If someone broke into your home, what do you see happening?? Which situation is reality...would you rather pull a gun and defend yourself, or do you think you should ask the fella if he would like to sit down at the table for milk and cookies and have a peaceful conversation about why he broke into your home......GET REAL!!! Guns don't kill.....idiots kill! Ya know your bare hands can be a self defense weapon too, do ya really think I want anyone to take my hands away? Ummmm...NO.

Guns do kill. I can prove it. Pretend that you are holding a gun in your hand. (There should be no gun in your hand, OK?) Now, point the pretend gun at your head. Now, pull the pretend trigger. If my theory is correct, you will not be harmed.

Now, pick up a hand gun and point it at your head, and pull the trigger. If my calculation is correct, you will be dead. The only difference between the first and second attempts was an actual gun in your hand (why am I still talking to you? you are dead). Therefore, the gun killed you.

For all those idiot tree hugging morons out there trying to blame this on a cold piece of metal.

I'm 43 yrs old and guess freaking what... None of the dozens and dozens of guns my father kept in our house not once killed a human being. Its a freaking miracle they didn't break outta the gun cabinet/safe and shoot us all. Oh yeah, thats because it take some psycho idiot on the other side of that gun to pull the trigger, you know a warm blooded thinking creature to pull the trigger, they just don't pull them on their own.

Stop trying to take away our rights and get a clue...

You have no common sense . Your theory still has you killing yourself not a GUN killing you. Wake up .

I really do want to round up all you gun control nuts and give you a tour of Juarez, Mexico (where I live). Last year over 3600 people were killed here and guns are ILLEGAL. I've lived where guns are legal and I've never worried more about being shot than living here were guns are illegal.

You gun control advocates have no idea what you are talking about.

Last year over 3600 people were killed here and guns are ILLEGAL

Where did the guns come from?

@edgeseekr First off, this isn't Juarez Mexico. You're definition of "Illegal" is NOT THE SAME as the U.S.A.'s definition of "illegal". Period.

If you can simply think beyond the last 5 seconds, you might be able to understand that the U.S.A. has a town called Tombstone, AZ. Back when it was founded, it wasn't the best place to raise children. In fact, it wasn't the best place for any growth until the law came to town (by "law" I mean US Law, not the Mexican government). Can you guess why it was called Tombstone? Sorry to rain on your parade, being so close to the 4th of July holidays and all... but sometimes people get the government they deserve.

rock and roler

Has saved my life multiple times. I have put three people down here in Chicago that would have took my life.

hey mark......BS and you know it

you are nothing but hot tea bag air

I really do want to round up all you gun control nuts and give you a tour of Juarez, Mexico (where I live). Last year over 3600 people were killed here and guns are ILLEGAL

The supply of guns in Mexico is out of control due to two factors: the US "war on drugs" (demand) and the US come-and-get-'em policy on guns (supply).

By the "guns don't kill people" logic, then shouldn't everyone be allowed to have a nuclear bomb, too? After all, they don't kill either.

First of all Steve you have no idea what you are talking about, so you should probably learn before you spout off and look like a fool on a public forum.

Guns are illegal in Juarez, but you are correct in that illegal in Mexico means something different than illegal in the U.S.

In Mexico the penalty for having possesion of a gun (or even ammunition) is prison. No question asked - prison. Immediately. For you to imply something else just shows your ignorance.

For the rest of you clowns. I am a U.S. citizen who lives in Juarez because the U.S. Government sent me here. There is no possibility that you know more about this topic than I do. You just don't like my facts because they don't support your rabid gun control theories.

Yep, everyone should have the constitutional right to bear nukes. In my experience though, I've found that drinking and nuking don't mix.

..but seriously though, I hope the hostages will be all right. I can imagine a whispered command given on a police radio channel to a SWAT sniper: "As soon as you have a clear shot ...take him out."

My 12 gauge saved my life one night when two thugs tried to break into my home. Just the sound of a round racking into that beast sent them packing. I never had to pull the trigger. But I would have splattered those two evil bums to hell and not thought twice about it. Levels of force you know.

Dude, you started this conversation. Keep your gun, but have a right to be armed. But the Constitution didn't say anything about assault rifles and it does say they should be "well regulated".

Obviously there is a problem here as we have so many gun deaths here. We even rank above Mexico (well maybe not recently, but probably very close). Our neighbors to the North, Canada, have just as many guns as we do and only a fraction of the guns deaths we have here. We have a problem. Part of the fix might be tighter regulation, but I also think for some reason here, guns are intertwined with the way we think about protecting our land and guarding ones self against violent insurrection or a government that could one day decide to curtail freedom and confiscate property and rights. Our founders based the constition and the Declaration of Independence on what was at the time, a very real threat and not unimaginable at all. Guns earned our freedom from England. I get it. But that way of thinking has made us gun toting, trigger happy, nut bars with short fuses. Canada sees gun ownership and use differently than we do. Guns are a sport, recreation, used for hunting and not necessarily because there is some unknown threat lurking around the corner. That fear of the boogie man and our belief that we are entitled to own any gun we damn well please, makes for a lot of needless deaths every year.

But go ahead. Keep your guns. Just keep them locked up and only take them out when you intend to use them. There's no reason to walk around with a gun strapped to your thigh for the whole world to see and fear you. What you actually look like is a douche whose only concern is himself.

Yourworsenightmare

You are the problem in this country ! I would bet many of these 35 000 americans killed every year, ARE gun owners. You and others like you better start carrying your gun to the bathroom, you never known, there may be some one that want to kill you while your on the throne.

YOU CAN RUN FROM A KNIFE BUT YOU CANNOT RUN FROM A BULLET!

In these mass shootings, if the person had used a knife, MANY people killed by bullets, would be ALIVE today.

Is this freedom of owning a gun worse the lives of 35 000 americans killed by bullets, every year ?

Many of these killings are commited by people that have never commited a crime, before.

And finally, in all case, you won't have your gun with you to defend yourself. You cannot carry your gun 24/7 and if you could who wants to live in this kind of world? if you do, it truly become paranoia and I suggest you check into a mental institution.

You pro guns are the most idiotic people on earth.

I've seen this debate a 100 times before, and everybody offers their own loud opinions, while keeping their fingers stuck resolutely in their ears. This is equally true on both sides.

I'm certainly of the opinion that we need tighter gun controls. But I've lost hope that many people are capable of a civil debate on this issue.

So be it.

The story, in and of itself, is tragic.

I've said this before but here we go again..

Gun's don't kill people..........bullets do.

Yes yes, I understand your weak logic OP. Guns will protect you from anything. They will make you immortal. They will turn you into a god. If you have a gun, and someone fires at you, your gun has this special psychic ability to stop that bullet heading at you, and allow you to shoot that other person.

@good socialist

And that's suppose to be strong logic? If someone is coming at you with a gun, I can bet my first born child that your chances of living are better if you were armed, with proper training, than not.

Gun nuts are like Catholics... they don't need to have any logic behind their beliefs, they just keep chanting away, "my daddy had guns and never killed noone" "Stop takin away ma rights!" "Guns don't kill people". Ahem... Please listen. The purpose of any firearm is to kill another living creature. That was why they were invented, why they are built, and what they are used for. You don't use a gun to hammer in nails (unless a nailgun - similar but different), you don't use a gun to cook with... they have no other purpose besides causing grave bodily harm. It .... is ... freaking ... illogical ... to ... say ... guns ... don't ... kill. That, literally, is ALL they do. I don't care if you're the nicest person on earth, that doesn't change the purpose of the weapon. Also, yes, if the guy had a knife, there is a much stronger possibility that he would not have been able to murder the same number of people prior to being stopped. Your argument is illogical.

Also, for the last idiot who posted above me... what is the person coming at you with a gun no longer had a gun. I'm guessing that your chances of living would considerably higher than the situation you proposed.

"I'm certainly of the opinion that we need tighter gun controls."

Why that sounds good in theory, how is that going to do anything about the people who ALREADY break the existing laws and illegally acquire guns? Do you honestly believe that a few more rules are going to stop them? No. They're called criminals for a reason -- they don't follow the law. The only thing more gun control laws will do is make it harder for LAW ABIDING CITIZENS to acquire them.

Guns are like condoms. I'd rather have one and not need it than need one and not have it.

And Travis, seriously? So you're saying the millions of people around the country who own guns or grew up around them and never killed another person are LYING? And if guns have absolutely no chance of SAVING lives, why do the police carry them? Your entire point of view is illogical.

@Travis

Oh, great, so you can personally guarantee that no one will ever try to harm me or anyone else with with a firearm once you get your way? Or if I call the cops when someone is breaking into my house that they'll be there in under a minute? Use that mass in your head before you call someone an idiot.

The average American gunowner has a gun for self defense, target shooting, or hunting. Yeah, it's designed to put a hole in something far away, but if you consider a gun to be something other than the things I listed inside the US, then you are either a criminal, or need help.

I grew up around firearms and have owned two pistols and an AR for over two years now. It's amazing I haven't shot anybody yet since that's OBVIOUSLY the only purpose they serve! Maybe they're defective??

I'm not going to scream gun control, but was his daughter or the niece of his other ex supposed to have guns to defend themselves as well? What about the guys in the truck, or the ladies downtown. Were they supposed to start shooting back in some wild gun blazing car chase like in the movies? The whole "they should have guns to protect themselves" argument fails miserably with this story.

Walking around town, you're right. Most people who own guns (legally) generally don't carry them with them at all times. In situations like this, owning a gun probably won't help you at all since it probably won't be with you. However, if you're at home and wake up in the middle of the night to the sound of somebody kicking in your front door, I think your chances of successfully using a gun to defend yourself are much higher... especially if all you have to do is slap in a magazine and rack a round into the chamber.

And also, let's keep things in perspective... when was the last time the media reported on a story where a gun WAS successfully used against somebody performing a home invasion? I honestly can't think of a single story, which means one of two things:

1) A gun has never been successfully used in self defense in the history of this country, or...

2) The media simply does not report these stories because it would damage their liberal, gun-control agenda.

Which one do you think is the truth?

All the responses to my post... I noticed none of your repeated the line, "Guns don't kill people"..... thanks! That was really the only thing that was irking me.

Yes, keeping guns for self defense does not make you a crazy murderer. It simply makes you 3 times more likely to be killed by a firearm than if you do not own a gun.

We don't live in a perfect world, and we're not going to see a time where bad guys can't scrounge up a gun for evil deeds.

However, in an ideal world, where gun control was extreme and the punishments for illegally obtaining or possessing a firearm were extremely long prison terms... it would mean bad people would have less easy access to firearms.

But anyways. I'm just tired of seeing repeated chants of "Guns don't kill people". Of course they do. That's just stupid. That's what they're made for.

Also, Sean, police carry guns for the purpose of having the ability to put large holes in bad guys. It's an effective threat/last resort. They're not life-saving tools. They're not freaking using them for CPR on car crash victims.

@Sean

Because home defense with a firearm is a common day thing and mass murder isn't.

@Travis



Are you talking about shooting yourself accidently? According to the CDC, fatal accidents involving a gun is .5% of the total. Suffocating yourself is 5%, and falling is 14%. I guess I should stay away from pillows and stairs?

And honestly, if you aren't safe enough to prevent shooting yourself by accident, you really shouldn't own a gun in the first place.

No, I'm just stating the statistical fact that if you own a firearm in your home, you are overall 3 times more likely to be shot and killed by a firearm. As a matter of fact, The University of Pennsylvania conducted a 2 1/2 year study that concluded the actual number is 4.5 times more likely to be shot, 4.2 times more likely to be killed. The study is here: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

I'm not saying whether these are accidents, burglary, crimes of passion, or whatever. Just stating, simply, that the act of owning a firearm statisticly greatly increases your chances of being killed by one.

Therefore, all of the wonderful, magical scenarios where you're able to blow away the boogieman who breaks into your house are taking into account that you're 4.5 times more likely to be shot in this situation.

Saying that guns saves people might be true in isolated situations, but overall gun ownership is demonstrably more hazardous to your health.

Oh, and here's a link to the Kellerman study in the New England Journal of Medicine that showed there was a 3x higher chance... but it was back in 1993, so the 4.5x report is more recent. http://www.guncite.com/gun-control-kellermann-3times.html

I've said this before but here we go again..

Gun's don't kill people..........bullets do.

LOL Steve, you had me going with your post. I was all set to send back an irrefutable retort, when I thankfully reread you message and realized you were more of my opinion in this eternal debate about the benefits of unrestricted gun ownership.

Good one!

@Sean

Because home defense with a firearm is a common day thing and mass murder isn't.

Desertmo, funny that you should claim this for a fact. In over 50 years of living in this country, I've only once heard a person relate a story of defending their home with their gun, and in this lone case there was no overt or explicit threat; two people came to his door, claiming car trouble, and asking to use his phone. He was suspicious; so before unchaining the door, he retrieved his shotgun and held it in one hand while opening the door with the other. The two people declined to enter.

Did my friend defend his home that night? Perhaps. But that is one incident I had directly related to me, in over 5 decades of life. Seems to me that if this were a common occurrence, it would spark a lot of lunch time, or cocktail party stories, as people told of repelling would be home-invaders.

Yet you say it happens quite often.

Well, if Roscoe goes around his house 24/7 with a pistol on his hip and a 12 gauge leaning in the corner, and his house isn't invaded, obviously it's working, right?

Hard to prove a negative.

(?)

Typical of msnbc. "The world will end at 10. Details at 11."

There isn't a lot of story to tell at this point, they're just chasing the guy down right now.

around here all you need is a headline and the comments fill in the detail....people dont read anyway..they read the headlines and go straight to the comment section

Dexter-morgan: Would that be you, going straight to the comment section?

i read enough.....the comments were more entertaining and as screwed up as some are....theyre less violent

Not all of Michigan is like this. It is still a great place to live. We have lunatic people like every other state. Sad that you feel this way.

Hey Mary Manson, after they catch him, what do you think they should do to him?
My feelings is he should be executed, very soon.

I totally agree, he should be executed, but in reality, he will be given a trial possibly. But lets not send him to Florida for the trial, right? I mean, he could just get off with a slap on the wrist. He can say his dogs did it or something.

You said it Mary...

I mean the guy just got out of jail. They will let him off for time served. I am sure it was not his fault but the Mexican Nanny.

You hit the nail on the head jgarizona! I bet that will be the situation to. Let's cross our fingers and hope for the worse for this moron. He shouldn't have gotten out of jail to begin with. Old vendettas never get old with people like him.

I have lived in this city all my life and have considered it a safe city...compared to Detroit/Flint. My only complaint about this state is no death penalty. So if the cops catch him with out killing him first, he will live for what horrible things he's done to these families.

KMA - No thank you I will keep mine. Banning guns is not the answer. Let's ban fast food because of fat people, let's ban (fill in the blank) because (fill in the blank) guns are not the problem, stupid people doing stupid things are

Kynhart, you are absolutely nuts.. No brains in which to think with..
When all people out here are unarmed, the bastard criminal will have many guns..
So we just beg for them to not kill us?
Go weave a few baskets...

kynhart wants WWII Germany all over again.

it will be if Repubs are elected again

You're an idiot.....banning guns will just make things worse ....think about it...the law-abiding citizen will have nothing to protect themselves with when a crazy psycho can get one on the black market or from some a-hole selling one on the corner. It will be IMPOSSABLE to ban ALL guns...If these people saw this psycho coming their way and had a gun they might have had a chance to defend themselves.

You are right therecruiter. Where I live you don't know who has a gun and much less random violence, armed robbery, carjackings, etc. because odds are the person you are about to victimize has a gun or someone close by does and they will use it. The freaks will always find a way to get one and it won't be at Cabela's either.

@kynhart

Did they release you out of your padded room too soon? This wasn't even the fault of a gun. It was the OPERATOR! They pull the trigger, and THEY are the ones that are at fault. Take THEIR GUN RIGHTS away. The people that have records of anything involving a gun. But that won't even stop, he could just get one from someone in Detriot, or any other city/town etc.

You can't take guns away from everyone.

Wait... please tell me, I'm begging you.... Hypothetically speaking, what would you do if some 4-6 people show up in your lawn with a gun, you gonna protect yourself with your OWN gun, or you gonna TRY and protect yourself with a bunny slipper? Which one sounds logical?

Why don't you look and see how well the "War on Drugs" is going. Let's see how well alcohol prohibition goes. Oh wait, that already happened and Al Capone rose to power because of it. Prohibiting something is not going to make it go away. History has proven that. It usually becomes more popular because of the mystique of it all.

The Second Amendment. Hunting, sport, and defense.

You can have mine when you pry them from my cold stiff fingers. Hey Kynhart, you should google Tree Huggers Crying in the forest and watch it, some friends you might like!!

You won't take them when there still warm.........try it buckwheat.

Prohibition didn't solve anything because alcohol is too easy to manufacture, and other countries produced a vast supply that could easily be smuggled in. Gun control would be much more effective, because guns aren't easy to make, and without a legal market here, worldwide supply would drop sharply. Criminals would continue to have guns, but the supply would drop steadily over time. If the "prohibition didn't work" argument applied to guns, we wouldn't have a per-capita gun-death rate far in excess of every other first-world country - it would be like this everywhere. Or are you people saying Americans are somehow inherently different from every other civilized country?

Dave in NM guns are actually quite easy to make. If you are talking about a .50 caliber rifle with a 3x optic scope that is calibrated to half a mile then no they aren't but you should look up zip gun some time. You can literally make a one shot gun out of a piece of plastic a rubber band and a nail and a bullet. Saying that it will go away because something is hard to make without really knowing anything about how easy it is to manufacture something like this. I am not saying go make one they are extremely dangerous but where there is a will there is a way. Why do you think we have bullets that can shoot threw a concrete block and then explode.

No, it's not the guns fault- it's the crazy people. If all those people had guns strapped on their hips maybe 3x as many people would be dead due to bullets flying from everywhere, but at least the bad guy would be dead- that's some logic eh?

Dave in NM[:] guns are actually quite easy to make.

A device that will cause a round to go off is hardly a "gun." I'm talking about a usable weapon; something with a ballistically rifled barrel that will send a round a long way with accuracy and high velocity. A zip gun is no use much beyond hand-to-hand combat. Besides, if you restrict the firearms themselves, you also restrict the ammo. Are bullets easy to make too?

You have absolutely no idea Dave. None at all. Bullets are extremely easy to make. All you need is a mold and some low melting point metal and a combustible powder to propel the projectile. A zip gun is most certainly useful beyond hand to hand combat unless you somehow have go go gadget arms and can hit someone from 30 feet away. Please stop trying to take away our rights before you and your fellow cronies find some way to get this one taken away then wonder why all your other rights are going away because we no longer have a protection in place against a dictatorship. First rule of all dictatorships is take away all access for the average citizen to defend themselves. Sure one man against a group of cops is going to lose but when you have 1000 men the odds change.

This isn't about "taking away your rights," unless you are a member of a "well-ordered militia." And saying that a zip gun is the functional equivalent of a 9mm Glock is disingenuous at best. A gun with a 30-foot effective range, no real accuracy and no real repeatability is no more effective than the guns the founders knew and intended to allow. I have no beef with the idea that you are entitled to own such a weapon as a member of a well-ordered militia. If, on the other hand, you want to talk about the actual world, I'll be around. I'm also interested to know how you intend to support your implication that every country with gun laws more restrictive than ours is a "dictatorship."

Clearly this was another well-regulated militia like Dylan Klebold, Eric Harris, and Jared Loughner.

By the way Dave, I met a guy in tin shack in Afghanistan who made fully functional AKs.. by hand. Excellent quality.

The un-informed anti-gun lobby rhetoric used here is evidence that the knee-jerk response is to “impose new laws!” Laws that only target law abiding citizens, people who OBEY the law.

Alas, in order to give the appearance of actually doing something about
crime The hue and cry is for more ill-conceived laws and regulations that only
affect those who are not criminals..

These key points always seem to be ignored:

1. Law abiding citizens are the only ones who can legally purchase and possess firearms.

2. Firearms purchasers must have no disqualifying
criminal history.

3. Firearms must have no disqualifying psychiatric history.

4. A criminal records check is done on all firearms purchasers
and if owners violate the law, their right to possess firearms is
revoked.

5. All firearms purchases are strictly regulated, both on the federal and more
strictly, on the state level.

6. It is the right of all law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, according
to the 2nd amendment and current federal law.

And I can’t say it enough, sane law abiding citizens do not; rob banks, deal
drugs, break into homes, buy and sell illegal firearms, buy and sell
firearms illegally, assault people at random or shoot people for unlawful
reasons. Further restricting law abiding citizens their right to bear arms and protect their homes and persons, makes no bloody sense at all. Criminals do not ask the state for permission to have, use or sell a firearm. We need to enforce
existing laws before imposing other laws or restrictions that will do nothing
to reduce crime. Enough pandering to a rightly concerned and fearful
populace, it’s time to step up and start a valid effort to reduce crime, or
shut up..

NDG: the laws on the books pertain only to the purchasers of guns, not to the manufacturers. As long as there is a flood of legal guns on the market, they will find their way into the hands of criminals. Stores get robbed. Homes get robbed. Law-abiding gun owners get shot and their guns stolen. People buy guns and resell them on the street. Gun-show loopholes alone have unleashed a deluge of weaponry onto the streets. The problem is supply, plain and simple. Until that is solved, the problem continues.

As to your buddy in Afghanistan, leaving aside his manufacturing tolerances, materials supplies and R&D investments, (1) how quickly can he turn out an ersatz AK, and (2) how many others have skills like his? Taking him as you describe him, he is an infinitesimal drop in a gargantuan bucket.

And on your 2nd Amendment argument, are you a member of a well-regulated militia? Was the shooter today? Is there a requirement that membership in a well-regulated militia be a prerequisite to the purchase of a handgun or assault rifle? Did the founders really foresee weapons with the capabilities readily available in any urban area of the US today? Is there ANY effort to reflect the founders' intentions in current gun policy?

And how do YOU respond to the fact that the rest of the developed world has both restrictive gun laws and gun-violence rates far less than our own?

The right to keep and bear arms has ZERO to do with membership in a "well regulated militia"-you are simply regurgitating BS spread by people like Dennis Henigan , Mayor for life Bloomberg,the VPC,the Brady center etc. everything you say is the exact same things said by every Anti-gun group out there.

Second amendment and firearms ....From heller 2008 SCOTUS decision.....

"The Court ruled that “[T]he operative clause [of the Second Amendment] codifies a ‘right of the people.” And went on to explain: “In all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention ‘the people,’ the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset. . . .’”

"Put plainly, the Heller decision says that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms for legal purposes, including for sporting use and for self-defense. In coming to this conclusion, the courts examined the meaning of the words in the Second Amendment, including the meaning of “arms” the phrase “to bear arms” and to “keep “ arms. The court also carefully considered the meaning of “militia” and the relationship between the militia and the “right to keep and bear arms.”

"The court concluded, “We have found no historical evidence that the Second Amendment was intended to convey militia power to the states, limit the federal government’s power to maintain a standing army, or applies only to members of a select militia while on active duty. All of the evidence indicates that the Second Amendment, like other parts of the Bill of Rights, applies to and protects individual Americans. We find that the history of the Second Amendment reinforces the plain meaning of its text, namely that it protects individual Americans in their right to keep and bear arms whether or not they are a member of a select militia or performing active military service or training.”

"Just as the First Amendment applies to the modern printing press and the Internet, the Second Amendment applies to modern firearms. The most important aspect of the Second Amendment is the philosophy on which it is founded: that all free people have the right to defend themselves, their families, communities and nation. In 1789 it applied to the freedom to keep and bear arms just as it does today. The technological advances of the past two centuries do not make that principle obsolete, any more than computerized printing cancels the First Amendment."

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?id=192&issue=010

Pay special attention the the footnotes-notice the sources for the info. presented.

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.

You see that comma there after being necessary to the security of a free State?

That right there says that anyone is allowed to own a gun and not just the state to protect them from the well regulated Militia controlled by the State. You really need to learn the 2nd Amendment before you start trying to take everyone's right away.

You see that comma there after being necessary to the security of a free State?

That right there says that anyone is allowed to own a gun and not just the state to protect them from the well regulated Militia controlled by the State

Wow. You really believe that? That one comma (without which the sentence would just be grammatically wrong) means that everyone needs to own a gun to protect them FROM the state? And you think that's the inevitable, sole conclusion that can be drawn from that sentence. I'm just verifying that you're really saying, in a public forum, that that is what you honestly believe. Because it is such a ludicrous, nonsensical thing to believe, that I am having a hard time untangling it. You are clearly neither a historian nor a grammarian. Gun dealer, perhaps?

Place a gun on a table and don't touch it. See how long it takes to kill somebody. Guns don't do a damn thing until somebody makes them go off.

If all you brain dead libs want to ban guns, why stop there? We should ban all knives because they can be used to stab people. Cutting and preparing food will now be next to impossible but whatever. Next, ban cars since they can be used to run people down. It will make it impossible to get anywhere fast but whatever. Next, ban people's hands and feet since they can be used to repeatedly strike a person's face until they're dead. You won't be able to walk or hold anything but whatever. Liberals absolutely cannot deal with facts or logic... they think that all it will take is a few more laws to make those criminals fall in line and "see the error of their ways." Yeah, that's going to happen.

No Dave constitutional scholar :D That is what that one comma, which if it wasn't there, would not allow people to have guns on their own unless they were part of a militia. It isn't grammatically incorrect without the comma. Our language has evolved over time.

Guess what I don't even own a gun. I was in the Army though and have seen the countries that regulated who got them and who didn't and got to fight for the people that didn't have them. Who is going to fight for you Dave if our next president decides that all people named Dave need to be hung from the gallows? I guarantee that you would want some way to protect yourself then. That is what the Second Amendment is all about. A way to protect yourself from a tyrannical government and making sure not just the militia (Army, Navy, Police, and so on) have a way to defend themselves from someone who is most likely in charge of the militia in the first place. Really it doesn't do any harm to learn some history.

Dave in NM 15.19: Sorry Dave, but the Supreme Court settled this issue a long time ago...it is an individual right, not a collective right. And if you confiscate legally owned weapons, you violate the 2nd Amendment and the 4th Amendment, not to mention several other minor issues. The average market price for my pistols is $1,700 and the rifles start at $3,000 and go up. I own a pair of shotguns that are outrageously valued. I don't think the government wants to comply with the 4th Amendment requirement the I be given reasonable compensation, do you?

As a matter of fact, my ownership may be protecting you if you are my neighbor. I am a security nut, with cameras, lights and a lot of other stuff protecting my property, and my neighbor's properties as well. The fact that I am armed to the teeth is well known and my neighborhood hasn't had a theft since 1993, and I live in Phoenix, Arizona.

How do you know he was an illegal alien? Was this reported.
Please tell us.

Curious as to where it said he was an illegal mexican immigrant and aren't you quick to judge

I learned everything I know from talk radio, it must be correct.

Al Franken is off the air so that static you're hearing is in your head.

It was Al Franken blaming all the world's problems on Mexican illegals? Sounds like you can't tell left from right.

Lots of German & French extract in Mexico.

Education Joseph...Education.. Republicans are the only way to go when it comes to changing this economy.. You need to study this and you will understand..
You can't give everyone money and expect the economy to grow..

Jean, I think Joseph is saying he doesnt have millions in the bank to heard by the Republican party. Joseph does not "support the Dems". Then again thinking americans who arnt looking for hand outs dont support them.

Gee Sean, you're the liar. First, you say you think pretty well but you screw up with the 10%/95% thing. Second, you miss you're chance to edit it. Third, you're quite conceded: I can kick in your door and take you out , I earn in the top 10%, I probably think pretty well, I obviously need no handouts, you earn far less than I do, education that I pay for. No Sean, you're the liar alright. And, most people don't like a bragger.

Jean, Republican economic policy is what CAUSED this depression in the first place.

Really Toasty? I didn't know Clinton who told the banks to allow people that work at McDonald's for minimum wage to give them loans so they can buy 100 grand homes was a Republican. Here I was working for a Republican when I was in the military and all this time I thought he was a Democrat and didn't even know it!

No, Joe, liberals cannot stop - everything in life is political to them - it feeds their hatred of those who work for a living....

That's better Joseph...Little better.

Because you might be an idiot, Sean? Just asking.

Sean, if a guy like this came through your door would you want a gun? Things like this will increase in tough times and Americans need the right to protect themselves.

So the "purpose of these tools" is so other children and families don't fall victim to a coward like this. Lets not forget hunting. Just cause you don't hunt doesn't mean nobody else does for food , in fact LOTS of people depend on it myself included. So open up your mind a little bit. I've had "liberal democrats" hound me about guns imagine that, what is liberal about that??

tAlso how does jamming your pie hole full of food with a spoon have anything to do with this.

Sean I can kill someone with a spoon just so you know.... It might be a bit harder then with a gun but I can kill someone with a spoon. Why do you think that they are constantly searching for shanks in prison. Why do you think they took out metal spoons from maximum security prisons.....

Sean, we already have strict laws on gun ownership, they just don't work, just like all other laws that people break. If you break the law, you have done something illegal, we seam to have forgotten the consequences of it. Maybe it's because we don't punish the offenders until the do something drastic, then it takes years for them to go through the system, then they get turned loose. Go figure.

Don't bother trying to reason with Sean, he's too full of himself and he lies all the time! Just try to ignore him.

we already have strict laws on gun ownership

Insofar as we have laws that purport to place "restrictions" on gun ownership, granted. But do you seriously contend that our gun laws are restrictive compared to the rest of the developed world?

You know what Dave since you like the rest of the developed world so much go live somewhere else that has gun control. When you get shot by someone who wants your wallet don't come crying back to us here in the U.S. about how they should have guns because frankly you spouting off about how great the rest of the world is is sickening. I don't have to pay taxes here to pay for a wealthy celebrity on top of the politicians and everything else like Britain does. I don't have to worry about getting railroaded into prison based on speculation like a lot of other countries. I don't have to worry about my elected officials taking over and controlling everything (like some countries have) because everyone has access to firearms from the get go. Go ask Cuba or Libya or Syria or Iran or Iraq (during the Saddam years) how well they were able to defend themselves when they were controlled by a tyrant. Hopefully you will wake up and realize that just because their grass looks greener that it might just be a fresh coat of paint on the lawn instead of it actually being greener.

Bobb: you must have seen Robin Hood. The sheriff of Nottingham threatened to cut Robin's heart out with a spoon. Good one.

Can you get me a rough number of citizens who successfully defended themselves in armed robberies with their weapons? Let's compare that to the number of gun owners who shoot a relative or themselves during domestic dispute. Let's also establish the number of weapons and types of weapons it would take for the Libyan Rebels, Iranians or Cubans to topple their governments. Do you honestly believe that your right to bear arms extends to your right to have Stinger Missiles, 50 cal machine guns, cannons, tanks, bombs? The two "rights" are unrelated.

I been all over this world and in no country do so few people want so desperately to arm themselves for no reason. When is the last time you had a confrontation from your easy chair that required a gun? Would Jesus have a sidearm? Then why you?

You want to live in a country free of all the restraints for guns, go to Afghanistan.

If you have 200 million people armed and ready to fight because someone decided that President of the United States meant El Presidente for Life and wanted to abolish any rights they have (like the Cubans, Libyans, Iranians, Syrians, and Iraqis) then it is a whole lot easier when one side has guns. You know why the Rebels are having such a hard time? Because they are just now getting to the point where they have weapons to fight back in Libya. Half the people in Libya are in Gadaffi's (know it isn't spelled right depending on the source) pocket. They were the ones that were in charge with the guns. They went around telling people that you do what we tell you or we will kill you. They went and raped and pillaged what they wanted and finally the rebels got the means to start fighting back. Why do you think they were able to take a city from him before we even got involved. Ah well no matter how much people can't see why we should have the right to defend ourselves on equal terms some people you just can't reach. Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it. If you don't understand that go look up the Revolutionary War and how one of the first acts of King George was to take weapons away from the colonists.

@eazyeazy

I can only find the first part for you. According to the Journal of Quantitative Criminology US citizens use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.

You know what[,] Dave[,] since you like the rest of the developed world so much[,] go live somewhere [] that has gun control.

So are you completely conceding my point, or just sidestepping it because you can't bring yourself to admit you have no evidence to the contrary?

In the developed world: Are our gun laws unusually lax? Is our rate of gun violence unusually high? If you believe the answers are no and no, then please show your statistics. If you admit the answers are yes and yes, I await your apology.

The other Sean makes me ashamed that I share the same first name with him.

Ok Dave so because the violence is caused with a knife then it is somehow better. I will play your game. Mexico is part of the developed world. They have some of the strictest gun regulations in the WORLD. It is next to impossible to legally own any weapon of a higher caliber then a .22 caliber weapon. Just so you know the average person can take a .22 to the arm or leg and be just fine. The number of deaths by firearms for Mexico is higher per capita then the United States. So is South Africa another hard to get a firearm legally country that I would most definitely consider a developed nation. Here is the link www dot (replace dot with.) nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-crime-murders-firearms-per-capita to the statistics. I am still a new user so I can't insert the link sorry. Remember to that the United States is oh 50 times the size + compared to Thailand, probably about 2 times the size (never was good at geography but loved history) of Mexico and ahh screw it. When you can come up with a good reason for everyone to get rid of their rights and only allow criminals to have weapons so they can shoot us all let me know. Until then I really suggest you pick up a history book concerning the Revolutionary War and really try to understand why we have the Bill of Rights.

Sean-3072161 #23-19: Just be glad you don't share his last name.

SUV's are the cause of global war,er,er, climate change. Blaming the gun for violence is the same thing.

There IS justified killing, Sean. That isn't murder.

My friend killed an intruder in his home, who was threatening the homeowner's family. That is justified, and has nothing to do with ratios, skin color, etc. My friend had a little paperwork to fill out, and it was over.

In NY your friend might be arrested, his intruder called a straight "A" student, and have to get crucified by the press. Here, they HATE that we citizens have guns. Yet we have plenty of illiegal guns, because criminals do not follow laws, obviously. Very few, can make the destinction. It's rediculous.

mom, that is the pity of the gun issue.