Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Gun Debate: How Did We Reach This Point?

February 28, 2013

To The Reader’s Forum: I have, I think, studied the debate about guns from several angles, and have reached the conclusion that any solution that would make our society more safe and secure is going......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(144)

GioAllie

Mar-11-13 12:24 PM

they do try sooo hard--and that safety in numbers thing. Personally I like the odds 4-1--sort of evens it up for them--almost.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-10-13 10:35 PM

Allie, you're making our argument for us. You just admitted that the criminals will not follow any new or increased gun control laws, otherwise, the police would not need weapons to match them. Also, how could you justify police needing to match criminal's weapons yet argue to say that the average law abiding citizen should be limited to less. It just shows that you have absolutely no understanding of this topic whatsoever.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-10-13 9:57 PM

pardon me--I thought that law enforcement officers who protect us without fear for their own safety, had a few rights--like weapons to match the bad guys. Apparantly the gun mfg. feel differentLy--and some have the gall to label them[gun mfg.]as "PATRIOTS?" Really sad.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-09-13 10:13 PM

Since you're having such a problem with the word, "Patriot: a person who regards himself or herself as a defender, especially of individual rights, against presumed interference by the federal government." Sounds exactly like what these companies are doing and the opposite of what you and your friends are pushing for. What does that say.........

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-09-13 9:43 PM

"patriots"-------"true patriots" ---LUNACY.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-09-13 9:07 PM

Allie, you are simply wrong-minded. Period. You keep giving away your rights, but do not ask us to follow suit.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-09-13 6:50 PM

Is this the "distraction" site? Withholding any weapon from a law enforcement office is "PATRIOTIC?" BEYOND LUNACY--How did they reach that point?

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-09-13 4:39 PM

They are true patriots for standing up to those posing tyranny and taking away constitutional rights. You again are on the wrong side of this argument as the NYS Sheriff's Assoc has officially announced they they are against the NY unSAFE act.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-09-13 4:05 PM

"true patriots" would support those who have sworn to defend them--true patriots, that is--not those beholding to the gun mfg.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-08-13 9:01 PM

No, they are demanding that the legislators live up to their oath to uphold the constitution. Until that time, they are holding the government to the same standard that they feel is appropriate for their citizens. They are to be commended as true patriots and defenders of the constitution.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-08-13 8:20 PM

Way to go, gun mfg people, you all showed those law Enforcement folks who put their lives on the line every day for ya, a thing or two---LUNACY.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-08-13 9:38 AM

And gun manufacturers and distributors have made their position quite clear. About 100 of them have made statements that they will not sell any weapon to a NY police agency or official that is banned to the rest of the public, as they unSAFE act is entirely unconstitutional.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-08-13 9:35 AM

Allie, you truly are pathetic. A typical lib pointing the finger at everyone else for your own failed views. Apologize for that.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-08-13 9:17 AM

I agree with the earlier post which condemns those who would use offensive terms like "race" and racism" as in the badnews post. An apology to the blog is in order. If we may return to the topic FOR A MOMENT, it's a bit troubling that we've not heard more[anything] from the gun mfg assoc on the issue --perhaps darryl Issa could convene a house hearing on the matter---NOT CLOSED DOOR OF COURSE.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-07-13 11:47 PM

Allie, please, I've read enough of your your thinly veiled references to Scalia as Billy Bob Joe and your comments about him, and the Voting Rights Act, on other threads to know exactly where your little pea brain is going. Give up the naive act. It's beneath even you, which surprises even me.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-07-13 7:45 PM

I don't recall anyone, using the terms "race" or "racist" on this site, aimed at a supreme court justice, prior to it's use in the 4:43pm contribution below.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-07-13 4:43 PM

Funny, when did you add anything to any discussion you've injected yourself into. I think the reality is that you have no idea what the Voting Rights Act does nor do you have any idea what the Justice actually said about it, without taking it out of context to make him look racist. Your race baiting is highly abhorrent and you should be ashamed of yourself.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-07-13 4:31 PM

3 branches of government?----2 will work in this case for billy joe bob scalia---no need to continue on this topic, scalia's feelings on voter rights are loud and clear, I have nothing more to add.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-07-13 3:40 PM

First off, it is the job of the Supreme Court to strike down laws that they feel are unconstitutional, so that applies perfectly. Secondly, you still haven't explained why it would be a problem if it was struck down. What is in this law that you believe the country cannot live without? Why do you keep dodging the question?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-07-13 3:32 PM

I believe this to be a first for our country--a conservative supreme court justice, supports taking the place of congress for the putpose of a direct route to striking down the VOTING RIGHTS ACT, without any interference from the house or senate. How did we reach that point?

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-07-13 1:07 PM

Allie, there were no voter suppression attempts, only attempts to stop fraudulent voting. Look it up, several people have cover forward and admitting to voting multiple time for Obama. If you have actual proof to the contrary, provide it. As far as the voting rights act, exactly what would striking it down do? What major catastrophe do you think will occur? You avoided the question again. What exactly does the voting rights act do? You obviously have a misinformed view of its purpose. I'd love to see a real response from you, outlining the details of the act and how striking it down would be detrimental. Should be easy, right?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-07-13 12:46 PM

"himself"

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-07-13 12:45 PM

on the voting rights act, scalia favors firing congress, and allowing hilself and his pals to strike it down----"-HOW DID WE REACH THIS POINT?" Perhaps scalia slept thru the failed voter supression efforts of his party in Nov. and the now renewed efforts.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-07-13 12:17 PM

Allie, how about you explain what the voting rights acts encompasses to you? It's obvious from your comments that you do not understand the act, nor do you understand Scalia's comments. Typical Lib twist of reality going on here.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GioAllie

Mar-06-13 8:48 PM

keeping with the juris prudence theme--billy bob joe Scalia, feelS that congress DOESN'T HAVE the you know whats to strike down the VOTING RIGHTS ACT, soooo he'll do his best to strike it down with his pals in black----another 5-4 decision?

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 144 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web