How heartbreaking.

Good Lord Cletus, how can you be so ignorant? NJ has the 2nd toughest gun laws in the nation and Camden is the murder capital of the world. FACT – You can go to jail in NJ for having an “illegal” BB gun. Only NYC has tougher gun laws than Jersey, and they too have shootings everyday!

Now let me tell you some more Real Life FACTS! People get shot and die every day in Camden, Newark and Trenton. Know why? Because the gangs control the guns! They dispense them and they steal them, and they control them, so they know who has them and who doesn't! Wrap your head around that one oh silly boy! They don’t want an open gun market, NO! They want even tighter gun laws to ensure they stay in charge of the guns. Do you have any idea how much it would mess them up if a “citizen” could walk into Wal-Mart and buy a handgun? Good lord Cletus, they wouldn't know who to mug tonight, or whose house to break into!

Cletus. Ever think about running for POUS? First qualification is “Clueless,” you know!”

Bill, the guns on the streets of the NJ cities you mention, like NYC, come from nearby states where the requirements for purchasing a gun are lax, and the laws not enforced or the punishment is insignificant. The solution to the problems you mention is not making it easier to purchase a gun in NJ, but to make it harder for criminals and straw buyers to buy guns in large amounts in other states, and then sell them here. This means closing the gun show loophole, which is how many of these guns are purchased, and prosecuting the irresponsible one percent of gun store owners that are the source of at least 50% of the guns traced to crimes in the US, and the likely source of 70-80%+ of the guns used in crimes in our area.

I have many friends who are gun owners, and some have guns that will be banned under these proposals. While we don't agree on the need to own or ban certain types of guns, we easily agree that the rules and requirements for gun ownership should be more uniform among the states, that background checks for all transactions is not unreasonable, and that irresponsible dealers and other gun sellers should be put out of business.

Goodness, Mr. Balls, you certainly are all worked up today. One might even suggest that you're verging on hysteria. One certainly hopes that you are not armed while in this volatile state. But, hey, thanks for what you think is an education on gun control.

It seems appropriate that permission to purchase a gun of any sort should be "burdesomely [sic] difficult."

Not every cowboy or cowgirl needs to play sheriff. This will not help bring crime down or protect our children. Quite the opposite.

It can take well over a year to get a Firearms Purchase Card in NJ, pretty tough process already.

The government doesn't make ANYTHING easy.. and they can't get ANYTHING right. Still too easy for "bad" guys to get guns and too hard for law abiding citizens to get them.

But, I am surprised, Cletus. With a name like that, you'd think he would be all for loosening gun laws. But, just because you don't like guns doesn't mean that other people shouldn't be legally allowed to have them. "Our rights only go as so far as to not infringe on other people's rights." Sounds like nobody is infringing in your right, but you want to infringe on other people's rights.

Took us 6 wks, start to finish. Not easy but hardly "burdensome." You have to supply 2 references, whom the police do call and check with. Took an hour to be fingerprinted--that includes drive time and waiting. Lots of paperwork, 2 trips to local police dept., the cost is not prohibitive, especially if you're planning to buy a $500 plus hand gun. We thought the steps from applying to receiving the permit were reasonable, effective, not a lot of red tape, but very thorough. They do ask if you've ever been convicted and also a mental health history--and they do check your background, that's the time involvement. Never expected it to be quick & easy; actually was glad of the thoroughness of the police before issuing the permit.

Thx Maplenogoodnomore...We already heave the toughtest laws in the land in NJ.

A friend of ours just got his ID card using my spouse as a reference. Really easy, took about a month.

I don't remember it being that easy thirty-plus years ago when I got mine.

these people don't let facts get in the way...this entire debate is driven by frenzied emotion not facts and reason. But luckily we live in a republic not a pure democracy. And our system was designed that way specifically to protect individual rights from the tyranny of the majority and mob rule. So they can tell all the lies they want, and throw out all the polls they want. Doesn't matter if 99% of New Jerseyans want an assault weapons ban. The right to own one is a pd individual right. So until they alter the constitution via the legal method, than they can't do anything. The law is on our side. And history and statistics will always be on our side.

firedup, where do you think NJ gangs get their guns? The vast majority come from other eastern states with loose gun laws, unregulated gun sales, and little enforcement. That's why we're talking about background checks for ALL purchases, and prosecuting the 1% of gun sellers that account for more than 50% of the guns used in crimes.

That's the common sense I'm looking for.

Lots has been said about gangs with guns, including how legal loopholes are how they get guns in the first place. So tougher gun control in other states would help end the illegal guns in our state.

I have to admit how the rattling of the cage on this issue is bringing the unstable people to the surface. Let's just take guns away from the people like Ted Nugent who is making threats via online videos. Let's keep shaking the cage and as the nuts fall out gather them and their arsenals.

It has always been a know fact, if you want something to get screwed up real good, ask the government to get involved

"The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says 'State' instead of 'Country' (the Framers knew the difference-see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states, which was necessary to get Virginia's vote. Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were totally clear on that...and we all should be too."
http://truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery

Dear Austin 315.
This is not false information. You just don"t like the facts. Get YOUR facts straight. Clearly you not educated at to the meaning of the 2nd amendment nor to the scholarly interpretation by even the most conservative Judge Antony Scalia.
Scalia( do you know who he is ?) said that although the 2nd Amendment affords citizens the right to bear arms , " that the court may issue gun control rulings in the future due to "precedent" indicating that within the context of the 18th century the Framers of the Constitution allowed for local restrictions on guns and bans on certain types of weapons" He also added that preserving the right to bear arms does not exclude banning extreme and unnecessary weapons,
Do you not think MILITARY ASSAULT WEAPONS ARE EXTREME? .
Additionally, the dissenting opinions in the Heller case( do you know that one ? )supports that the 2nd amendment originally referred to guns only for a well regulated militia and the need for that today is void, That was the interpretation of four other Supreme Court Judges , so this is not set in stone.
Do YOU know the facts? YOU ARE the one MISLEADING THE PUBLIC AND DISTORTING HISTORY AND FACTS.
You need to publicly correct yourself before spewing untrue statements.
Obviously you can not back up your statamenmets with facts as I have so rely on untruths.
Do your reasearch sir before you "shoot from the hip". I did MY RESEARCH and it is CORRECT .

"Cletus" is a prime example of sheeple. Had "Cletus" bothered to read the subject citation of that article, "Cletus" would know that it is based purely on opinion and there is zero evidence of a slavery connection in the passing of the Second Amendment. It was, in fact proposed, in part by two Northern States, "Cletus". But you wouldn't know that, because you don't want to.

Karen,

Can you please explain to me what ou mean by Military Assault Weapon? And please try not to use specific firearms make or models or use the the words "style" or "type". I am trying to understand the specific characteristics that qualify as "military" or "assault".

Thanks,

Brad

Easy Brad....look up the Assault Weapon Ban of 1994. One definition is there.

Well said Austin !

We the people now have 23 new executive orders...please tell me the ones that would have prevented the Sandy Hook tragety.....seems to me goverment should stay in the main tent....some 1500 guns missing from fast & furious....over 300 dead from these guns...some children.....if they can't keep track of theirs why should they impose on others? We should take theirs away...by the way 300 is > 26!

Very clean direct comment..bravo! thank you.

Larry, no one is claiming that any of this will "prevent" another Sandy Hook, and we're not just talking about massacres but the daily violence caused by illegal guns.

And I don't understand your point about Fast and Furious. That operation may have led to more deaths than Sandy Hook. Okay, so? A botched ATF program in Mexico means we shouldn't do anything about gun violence in the USA? What's your point?

It's funny that you seem to care about the deaths caused in Mexico by the Fast and Furious guns, but choose to ignore the 30,000+ American killed by guns every year.

"The common man needs to protect himself and his family and the USA."

One common man is in hiding/on trial after "protecting" his neighborhood and shooting an unarmed kid. He'll either be in jail or hiding for the rest of his life as a result in his "protecting" people. And if he does walk the streets as a free man one day the law he used to justify his action gives every one of us the right to shoot him on sight "standing our ground" in the face of a known danger.

So good luck with that.

My point is there are 1500 Military type wepons from the US goverment unaccounted for......Since when was it a botched op in Mexico? It all went down in the USA. If people would make as much noise about Fast & FUrious as sandy hook welll.......You would think the american people would be outraged that 1500 of the guns that they want to ban are out there.....gee maybe with the new laws they want to ram down our throat.....the people with these guns will turn them in

Don't forget that you can only apply for 2 handgun permits at one time and you can only buy one handgun in a 30 day period.

Also, the permits are only good for 90 days and they are usually back-dated 2 weeks from the time that you actually pick them up from the police station.

For Pete Mock above

Pete you said," Daily violence caused by illegal guns". Correct, well then why take legal guns away from legal law abiding citizens who were never in any trouble with the law? This is what this bill is to do, take guns from law abiding citizens who go to target practice or go hunting and fishing. What has illegal guns got to do with law abiding people? The bill is wrong!!! If you take the guns away from the law abiding people, then the only ones who will have guns are the criminals, and when they break in to your home {because they now know you don't have any guns} then who protects your family when they say I going to kill you kids right in front of you.
Do you tell them to wait and let you call the Police first and wait for them to get here before you shoot? Remember the Police can't be everywhere at once, so who is on the front line NOW!!!!

A friend of ours just got his ID card. It took about a month and was easy.

A few years ago another friend couldn't figure out what was slowing down his card and found out that one of the friends he had used as a reference hadn't "gotten around" to returning the police questionaire.

Mine is over thirty years old and I don't remember any problem.

Yes it does but the people's right refers to an individual right.

Define "assault rifle." Wanna bet that it becomes a sliding definition after each "ban?"

Also, your tone, use of caps and name calling are insulting, undermining what you perceive to be your argument. If this is to be about name calling and who's font is biggest, I think you're really just looking to type and vent, no to start or engage is a serious conversation.

I am not a gun owner. I must say what is the definition of assault rifle? All guns can assault someone, you can get a knife, club, fists, or what ever to assault someone.

Why not concentrate on illegal guns from gangs or criminals Seems everyone is picking on easy target , law abiding people who follow the rules in applying for permits, and gun ownership

firedup, please dig a little deeper. Some states import guns, other states export. NJ is a net importer. The guns in the hands of gangs here come from other states with loose gun laws, unregulated gun sales, and little enforcement. Guns get imported here in large quantities from states like Virginia. If we want fewer guns in the hands of criminals and gangs then we need to talk about background checks for ALL purchases and prosecuting the few dealers who illegally sell the guns used in crimes.

A majority of gun owners agree that if you can't pass a background check you shouldn't own a gun. That seems like a great place to start.

Please Karen...you are demonizing the law abiding for the people who break the laws don't care what you impose....and clearly the constitution does not say anything about any type.....you defend your house the way you want I'll defend mine my way......nothing will stop anyone that wants to mass murder.....NOTHING

great blog Karen!!!

What constitutes a "dangerous" weapon? Arn't all wepons by definition dangerous?
I also find it hilarious that people want to ban "high capacity" magazines. Look at it this way.
Step 1 people get shot by person 1 with 30 round mag
Step 2 ban mags over 10 rounds
Step 3 person 2 buys 3, 10 round mags
Step 4 person 2 practices changing mags
Step 5 person 2 kills people and fires just as many bullets

Well that was effective wasn't it?

Karen I hate to tell you, but your facts are the same to you, as the bible is to christians, christians believe that the bible is full of facts, it may or it may not, my religion and my faith will guide me to what I feel is so. You are in the same position with your scientific facts... science can publish anything they want, you really would have no clue, just your faith in someone or something, that it is correct, we all know numbers are manipulated to serve ones agenda, you can eliminate 1 piece of the puzzle to change the whole picture, but our eyes and common sense tell us that assault rifle bans will not stop or minimize the next event, banning guns will not stop the next shooting, humans will always find a way to propel something at what they perceive to be their enemy. We have old sayings because thought and experience tells us what the truth is, "save for a rainy day" "don't spend what you don't have" etc.obviously if we listened to those sayings the economy would not be as it is, and clearly the people on the left choose to ignore these sayings because they feel they are progressive, advanced, more superior, than those with conservative views, these sayings are not to be taken lightly as they are born from truthes, and "fight fire with fire" is an example of how you can deal with this issue, without hurting the security and freedoms of law abiding citizens, especially since the left wants to cut defense spending, America will only be saved by its people during war.

Michael, that was the most incoherent things I've ever read. Actually, there are such things as facts, and rational, educated people base their arguments on them.

It is there Cletus. Looks like you made a mistake, and then assumed something that wasn't true. NO!!!!!! Not you!

CLETUS...stop reading blogs from progressives, and read real some real history not made up by those who wish to change it.

You posted from truth-out..
"The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says 'State' instead of 'Country' (the Framers knew the difference-see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states,"

How many souther states did those bloggers mean??
There were only 13 stars on the flag for 13 states

(1st) Delaware December 7th, 1787
(2nd) Pennsylvania December 12th,1787
(3rd) New Jersey December18th, 1787
(4th) Georgia January 2nd, 1788
(5th) Connecticut January 9th, 1788
(6th) Massachusetts February 6th, 1788
(7th) Maryland April 28th, 1788
(8th) South Carolina May 23rd, 1788
(9th) New Hampshire June 21st, 1788
(10th) Virginia June 25th, 1788
(11th) New York July 25th, 1788
(12th) North Carolina November 21st, 1789
(13th) Rhode Island May 29th, 1790

I disagree with you that only gun fanatics are totally against gun control. Look at the NRA…. Anytime there is any discussion about a certain gun measure, all they do is talk about Hitler and police states and the government taking control, and they don’t even objectively discuss whether the measure will work or no.

Now let’s look at Newtown. You had a case where a mentally disturbed person was able to obtain his mother’s legally owned firearms, and to on a rampage. When the NRA finally came out with a statement, was it to stress how we must keep guns out of the hands of certain people? Was it to remind responsible gun owners how important it is to make sure their firearms are secured? No and no. They come out with the usual irresponsible statement that if we just armed everyone in society, all problems would be solved. This is why people have such a hard time taking the NRA seriously.

Of course he should not have. No one with mental illness should be allowed access to a gun. Nor should all forms of weaponry be available to everyone. No one other than the most gun-crazed zealots believes there are no limits to the 2nd Amendment any more than there are no limits to free speech, religion, etc... That is well established. Scalia even said: “[The Second Amendment] is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any way whatsoever and for whatever purpose." But these appeals from Obama's on down are not based on data, or reality, or pragmatism...they are based on emotion. That is no way to approach Constitutional matters that effect a nation of 320 million people (the majoprity of whom own firearms and use/keep them responsibly).

The fault of that boy obtaining access to firearms falls on his deceased mother - his first victim. It was her foolish hobby to share with her mentally ill son. It's a shame that those background checks don't extend to family members who live in the same house. One could also make a case about mental illness and the penchant for violent computer games in our society corrupting the minds of today's impressionable youth.

Guess how many government officials were prosecuted as a result of those murders ... that's right ... ZERO!

You have got to be joking psumba- Comparing Waco to Sandy Hook? Why not compare Auschwitz to Bay of Pigs while you are at it- Nobody is saying our Government is perfect- but the fact of the matter is that if it was your son or daughter in Newtown or Va.Tech or Aurora- you would feel very different. The time has come - Take a good hard look at gun deaths in other countries- it's obvious what has to be done. It just takes courageous folks like Ms. Egert and others to make our voices heard. And if you really hate our country- may I suggest Mali- I hear they love to take Americans Hostage this time of year.

canada

Mitch ... I love our country!

Liberty comes when the government is afraid of the citizens. With Tyranny, the citizens are afraid of their government. We have been given more and more reason to be afraid of our government!

If I had a relative who was a member of the religious group at Waco, I would be just as upset as if they had been at Sandy Hook. The shooter at Sandy Hook is dead and can't be prosecuted. The individuals responsible for the murders at Waco have never been brought to justice.

The problem isn't the gun, it is the shooter. Look at the country of Switzerland. They have the highest per-capita private ownership of assault weapons in the world ... and the lowest level of crime in Europe.

The Aurora shooter chose to not act at the movie theater that was closest to his house. Instead, he chose one that was farther away that had a strict "no guns" policy! Guess why???

Thank the ACLU for protecting individuals with mental illness ... and thus keeping them off the radar of law enforcement. Thank the video game industry for producing games that desensitize children and adults to violence. Thank the movie industry for doing the same. Thank our government for not cracking down on the gangs whose activities generate the bulk of the murders in our country. Most of all, thank our government for the "Fast and Furious" program that was engineered to put assault weapons directly into the hands of bad guys!

Over 300 Mexican citizens (men, women, & CHILDREN) are DEAD as a result of our government's "Fast & Furious" gun running operation. Are we not to grieve their murders and call for changes to ensure that this will never happen again???

The problem is that our government has acted in a criminal manner and they are not being held accountable. The Attorney General is claiming executive privilege WRT documents related to this affair. The problem is that no high official has claimed ANY knowledge of the crime. Executive privilege implies that the President or his closest advisers were involved in the matter. Here's an article that lays out the issue in more detail:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/17/Holder-begs-court-to-indefinitely-delay-group-s-lawsuit-fighting-for-release-of-Obama-s-executive-privilege-Fast-and-Furious-documents

I fear my Government ... and that worries me greatly!

You didn't answer my question.

I’ll answer your question hookerman. As far as I’m concerned he should have had full rights to gun ownership. Of course you’ll have to admit owning a gun is a far, far cry from using it to take the lives of 20 school children. No one has the right to do that! Yet you anti-gun folks, like to make people think, oh if you have a gun, you’ll go nuts and shoot everyone. Really? Then I guess I should steer away for police cars, or policemen!

I’ll tell you this too. I will not give up my “Assault Rifles,” and high capacity magazines until the government gives theirs up too, at least domestically. Remember Hookerman, you are living in a country that recently used it “armed police forces” to throw rightful and legal homeowners out of their homes, courtesy of a corrupt government banking system.

Why do you progressive/liberal always think the government is your friend? It isn’t.

“Yet you anti-gun folks, like to make people think, oh if you have a gun, you’ll go nuts and shoot everyone”

No, that’s not my point at all…. in fact, I know many very responsible gun owners who I don’t feel are going to go nuts at all. My point is that there are certain people in our society who should not own a gun. The gun faction states that responsible, law abiding people should have the right to own a firearm. I agree. But that means we need controls in place to make sure that irresponsible, criminal, people (and those with mental disorders) do not. You can’t make one side of the argument, without making the other…. and yet that is what the NRA tries to do.

@ Hookerman American Dad is right and did answer for you "All gun owners support gun control. They control the guns, the right to own the guns and the protection of that right."

THe far majority of gun owners are for responsible gun ownership.

The question I asked was; "do you believe that the guy who perpetrated the Newtown massacre should have been allowed access to firearms???"

It was a yes or no question. American Dad did not answer that question, he went off on a long soliloquy about nothing that had to do with what I asked.

Gangs dont use assault weapons????? Shocking. Tell that to the police forces that face them in the street every day.

WMD? Really? You just compared a semi-automatic pistol with a factory designed 15 round mag to a nuclear weapon. Please stop. The laughing hurts too much. If these wepons were that effective then why did the US bother dropping Fat Man and Little Boy on Japan, we could have just dropped a bunch of pistols instead.

Is this person who buys said guns in a PA Walmart not violating NJ gun laws the moment he crosses the Delaware River? So how do you prevent someone from buying guns legally in PA and then transporting them illegally into NJ? What specific law to you propose and please tell me how it would work, who would enforce and why you think it is the best solution to the problem you just stated? (And how mant NJ people have been killed by assault weapons purchased in PA. This is clearly a problem to you. So you must have data that raised your level of concern yes?)

@ Brad --- I make it simple ... a resaler that provides an assualt weapon to a NJ resident via drivers license is violating the law. The purchaser buying the weapon with a NJ drivers license is buying the law. The laws exist and are on the books. They must be enforced through police review of sales records or suspension of FFL dealers ability to sell. Legally you can not buy a gun at a PA wallmart with a NJ License unless you have a NJ Firearms ID Card or Pistol Purchasers permit. At that point you could just get the same a a NJ Walmart and save gas in the process.

3,000 babies were murdered in America by way of abortion on the same day 20 kids were killed in Newtown. (1) 3,000 abortions take place in the U.S. everyday. It would seem to me that Ms. Egert and her associates should focus on ending abortion if she wants to save lives of children.

(1) Jones RK et al., Abortion in the United States: incidence and access to services, 2005, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2008, 40(1):6–16

@Clyde Donovan, really, you want to open up that can of worms? Stay on topic. This is a discussion about guns, not about abortions.

"No armed guard at a school or a mall with a handgun will be any match for a 20 year old decked out with high powered assault weapons, bullets that fly at 10 rounds a second, an armed with bullet proof gear from head to toe."

They will if they are a good enough shot.
1st there is no such thing as bullet "proof" only bullet resistant.
2nd it only takes 1 well placed bullet to end a mass shooting.
3rd it is very difficult to get bullet resistant gear
4th the school should be secured against entry if they are inside it is too late
5th good survalance of the mall parking lot could spot a shooter before he/she enters and start the mitigation process
6th 1 armed guard is easy to out match but 2 armed guards is twice as hard and any number of armed citizens in the mall could also tip the balance
7th it is just as easy if not easier to plant an IED in either place and have the same body count
8th the problem is with the society, take guns away and these same people will use knives, or bombs, or cars, or anything else they can. Without the intent of the weilder ANY wepon will remain inert.

The only firearm that can shoot at a sustained 10 rounds per second is a fully automatic machine gun, not a civilian "assault weapon". The published rate of fire for a FULLY automatic M16 military sub-machine gun is 650-750 rounds per minute. Now let's recall our grade school mathematics. 650 divided by 60 seconds = What?. A gold star for you if you get the answer correct.

Furthermore, all semi-automatic magazine fed civilian firearms shoot at approximately the same rate, so that armed guard at school can return fire with his semi-automatic handgun at the SAME rate as the 20 year old decked out with a high powered "assault weapon".

Regardless of how many magazines galore one possesses, you can only use one at a time. Of course, if one possesses "magazine clips" galore we have nothing to worry about, because there is no such thing as a "magazine clip".

Ignorance is bliss right up until it affects others, then it is neither blissful nor even amusing. Rationalizing your stance against "assault weapons" based fictitious information should be an embarrassment for you.

Then you may have all the muskets you'd like. There's no reason to own high capacity magazines with the assault rifle to match.

this arguement that we need guns to defend against our military is the dumbest one ever.
ill give and play this stupid hypothetical game. IF our government wanted to kill us they would send drones, posion our drinking water, or bomb certain areas. if every civilian owned 100 military assault weapons we still wouldnt have a chance.
with your logic everyone should own a bazooka in case or government attacks us.
you people realize out of all the intelligent westernized countries we have the worse gun laws and the most gun violence, you dont see the correlation.

The "Germany" bit is false.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/67-harcourt.pdf

Karen. You just proved my point. Thank you.

Karen. You are trying to be rational? Seems to me you emotions are getting the better of you. Look Adam was deranged, Out of his mind, Crazy. What else could he have used, you ask? Oh I don’t know, why don’t you goggle Oklahoma City Bombing? 911 (no guns there) Or Happy Land Social Club.

Guns do not kill people any more than my keyboard mispells words.
You fix spelling problems with education, and you stop mass murders (or all murders) with education.

Banning assault weapons to stop mass murder has as much chance as saving the Titanic by bailing it out with a Dixie-Cup! It is a waste of time and money that could be used to really prevent these types of tragedies!

BillBalls: you might want to rethink that spell check analogy!

".Understand that if this person did not have access to these types of weapons -- he could NOT have shot the door down ,or shoot 100 rounds of ammunition into babies and staff in minutes."

First he climbed in a window, he didn't shoot down a door.
I don't know about anyone else but if I can squeeze a trigger at a rate of once every 2 seconds I could fire about 100 round in 3 min and 20 sec. Assuming a 100 round mag.

If I had 10 mags with 10 rounds and assume I can change a mag in 10 sec, I would be able to fire those same 100 rounds in 5 min. How fast is the police response where you live? Don't forget to factor that the police can't be dispatched until the caller has stated where they are and what is happening.

I am an EMT I have seen death and destruction in many forms and I know how emergency respone works. I also know that sometimes we must face the fact that we are savage animals struggling to get past our primal instincts, and some of us fail. It is sad, and tragic, and we should learn from it. But we should learn how to prevent the events leading up to the tragity. If it gets to the point that we have to shoot someone to stop them, then it is already too late. However, the problem is not the means of the killing aka guns and knives but the motive for it.

Actually it was not to committ treason, and if you actually study the debates on it, it can be argued they were for the slave patrol militias to round up runaway slaves.

No one is saying you cannot use a gun at home for defense. You should stop trying to confuse the two.

With all do respect Karen we have one mouth for talking, but two ears for listening for a reason. I already answered this (see above) ...Nor should all forms of weaponry be available to everyone. No one other than the most gun-crazed zealots believes there are no limits to the 2nd Amendment any more than there are no limits to free speech, religion, etc... That is well established. Scalia even said: “[The Second Amendment] is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any way whatsoever and for whatever purpose."

Ahhh Karen. If you really think there aren’t homes in America with higher fire power than assault weapons, like RPG, and “missiles,” you are living in La-La land! Besides you don’t need fire power like that to be a mass murderer. Heck a gallon can of gas will do!

BTW, Karen. If you actually know of or have a gun with unlimited capacity, you might want to patent that and then sell it to the government armed forces.

As far as tougher laws. As it stand now in Jersey, you can find yourself in jail for 7 years for the crime of still having your childhood Red Rider BB stored away in your attic, even if it is broken and won’t shoot! What is your recommendation – Execution?

Rocket Launchers???? I would think they are harmless devices unless of course you have......Rockets.
"And all this science, I don't understand, it's just my job five days a week, A Rocketman, A Rocketman".

I won't answer your question on Rocket Launchers because they are illegal to own. I will bring to note the Adam left the assault rifle in the car and entered the school with two handguns and extra magazines. There was no assault weapon used in the Newtown tragedy! Lack of real facts makes your organization appear whimsicle.

@Fair and Balanced - You may want to check your sources.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/27/setting-the-record-straight-adam-lanza-did-use-the-bushmaster-ar-15/

Straw man argument. If you can find me ONE person who wants a rocket launcher, I'll entertain this diversion.

I am sorry, one law abiding person who wants a rocket launcher. Sure there are plenty of criminals who want one and laws don't stop them. That law against murder sure stopped Adam Lanza and thousands of other criminals on a daily basis.

IF you believe ANYTHING the "mainstream media" blathers about...apparently Lanza DID leave the AR-15 in the car... http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495

to Sir ... Adam DID walk into the school with ONLY read it again ONLY!!!!!!! two handguns and extra clips!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stewie is right ... the truth is stranger than fiction because no one bothers to get it!!! The only assault rifle he had was left in the car!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The network news programs were asked to leave this little fact out of the headlines to further the upcoming assualt weapons ban. Which by the way already exists in NJ as well as a ban of clips in excess of 15 rounds.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/27/setting-the-record-straight-adam-lanza-did-use-the-bushmaster-ar-15/

I'll bet you a million dollars neither of those rocket launchers was bought legally at a rocket launcher dealership. Thanks for making our point. Criminals get what they want to get. What a straw man point on your part.

So you think TSA screening in a controlled corridor like an airport terminal where people can be searched one-by-one by several agents is akin to, or no more difficult than, removing 300 million guns from a population of 320 million scattered over a nation that covers half a continent to the artic circle to the Pacific Rim? That is your analogy?

You are right about airport security, wrong about guns. The push against gun rights is EXACTLY like airport security. It's a political smoke screen that only makes us feel safer, not actually safer.
The post-Newtown hysteria is exactly what happened post-9/11. And look where that got us. Thousands of U.S. troops dead in Iraq, a way too long war in Afghanistan, and a de facto elimination of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments by Bush AND Obama. Don't let fear and panic take away more of our rights.

Dave-
You must be off your meds

Pat you are so correct. Its very much like everyone who states the Newtown tragedy was the result of Assault weapons. Any moron who can read and takes the time to do so can see the assault weapon was left in the car and the piece of sh!t used two pistols. It also reminds us that the sensational article involving rocket launchers recovered in cali would have uncovered the fact they were military relics rendered useless and posing no more danger to the public if hey were used as a club to hit someone. Idiots everywhere being taken advantage of by politicians and the NRA.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/27/setting-the-record-straight-adam-lanza-did-use-the-bushmaster-ar-15/

Fair and balanced gets his facts right about as often as the actual Fox News. Lanza used the assault rifle to kill those children.

Should we also make auto manufacturers responsible for auto deaths? Alcohol manufacturers for drunk driver deaths, pharmaceutical companies for overdoses? Where do we stop? When do we start taking personal responsibility?

Stop Drunk Dreivers - pass federal law making manufacturers and sellers of alcoholic beverages, and automobiles strictly liable in tort actions for the 45,000 annual deaths and 400,000 wounded that their products cause.

BTW Mr. Crownover, More then half the gun deaths you stated were committed at the will of the gun owner. Yes it is called suicide!

Dropped a 100W guitar amp on my big toe the other day. Hurt like a mother. Should I sue Marshall?

Which ones? Be specific.

No Karen, At least I’m not saying to do nothing. I’m saying to use our time and money wisely to stop this type of violence. Why does it happen? What is wrong with these people who do it, and oh BTW Karen you demand answers about your missile question, but you won’t or at least haven’t answered my question about a gallon of gas!

Do you see my point? No guns were used in Oklahoma, 911, or Happy Land Social Club, but thousands of innocent people died at the hands of other deranged humans.

You are so right, one thing you learn in the service is never give up your weapon to anyone, because it may save your life and your buddies someday. Still believe it today. We took an oath then which still stand true today, to protect this country against a threats foreign and domestic.

Karen, I agree. Baseless comparison. Enforce the existing laws. Background checks and mental health checks. NJ law is in line with federal proposed ( except for 5 rounds) Make that the standard. No need for assault weapons.

@ Dave: It won't.

The average, law-abiding person owns "defense weapons". Please get your terms straight.

The problem with the NRA is that they are a lobby for the gun makers, not gun rights. They are hypocrites in that they want to ban video games and further place illegal regulations on the media, violating the 1st Amendment. What we need is a lobbying group that protects the ENTIRE Constitution. All of the Articles, the Bill of Rights Amendment 1 right up through 10, and all the subsequent Amendments.

I have. Re-read the Ratification Debates just two nights ago. What don't you not pretend only people on your side are smart. I'm willing to be that I've forgotten more about the Bill of Rights than you've ever known.

No thankfully. BTW Steward, does their opinion or vote carry more weight because that are government “officials?”

I wasn't aware civil liberties came with an expiration date.

Brad: Excellent call. Also wasn't aware the Bill of Rights contained an asterisk.

Dave you are so wrong again, the NRA is standing and fighting legal battles for their members, and yes I stand with the NRA, bet ya didn't see that coming did you? haha

Good luck with that revolution. It isn't musket against musket and maybe cannon against cannon. That is the kind of macho stupid talk that does no good at all. No one is talking about a right to bear any arms but the level of "arms" and a national record of who legally owns them. Someone who actively threatens rebellion shouldn't have any weapons and be on a watch list.

“ Someone who actively threatens rebellion shouldn't have any weapons and be on a watch list.”

Better yet Dan, let’s just shoot them, and then dump their dead bodies in a shallow mass grave. Better yet, after we kill them we’ll loot their estates, and reduce the national defect with the wealth we steal from them.

BTW Dan, would that include both the Tea Party and the OWSers!

Americans are decent people and if we could bring Newtown's dead back to life by giving up all civilian guns - we would do so! There is much that can be done short of that to prevent the next Newtown. Properly distributing the cost of gun violence through tort liability, to gun makers and sellers who control the risk of loss would result in safer weapons and purchasers. We already do much the same thing with dram shop and asbestos laws and cigarette taxes. That's a modest step allowing people to make and buy guns at prices that reflect all of society's costs.

Jersey Shore. Is that the show on PBS that Allistaire Cooke used to host?

More than 600 New Jersey officials, teachers and parents to discuss school security are expected to gather in Ewing today to discuss ways to boost security in the wake of the Newtown tragedy.
(Looks like you and cohorts have lost control of the issue to me Linda)

The New Jersey School Boards Association organized the event, the largest special program it has run outside its annual conventions.

Stewart, tell me, what is "THE issue" YOU are referring to. You and your "cohorts" are all over the map on this one. Is the "issue" guns themselves? Or is it Crime? Violence? (yes violence exists without guns and guns arent the actual cause of it, people are) School security? Which argument and scare tactice are you and your "cohorts" on today. That is the problem - you don't understand what the REAL ISSUES are.

Linda, when someone is shooting and then stops to reload, you have a few seconds to act and take them by surprise, but the common person in that situation will sit there scare anyway and not move to defend themselves, I don't care if the person only shot two rounds, they don't know enough to move on them.

Ok, if the first amendment is still absolute, then explain how the FCC can regulate our television and radio and airways. If the 4th amendment is still absolute, then how come we're searched at airports? How come the NSA can screen our phone calls and email messages?

You are absolutely correct? Technically, the government should be able to ban all of us here from saying any of this. We are on the internet. The founders could have never imagined the internet. Hookerman: None of what you just described is in any way shape or form legal. But let me take a risk and make an assumption. You voted for Obama. Well, Mr. Barack Walker Obama quadrupled warrantless wiretaps and signed a bill saying he can have any American arrested without charge, trial, or a lawyer at his discretion. What say you to that? If you didn't vote for Obama than my apologies and good for you. Hopefully you didn't vote for Romney either.

It doesn't matter who I voted for... the enemy is not Obama nor Bush, nor the republicans, nor the democrats... the enemy is us. Last year, a TSA official even admitted that our 4th amendment rights were being violated by their searches, and more than 80 % of the people still supported the TSA's method. The government will take whatever liberty we will allow, and right now, we are allowing quite a bit. I don't think it matters at all who you vote into office.

gun control is your index finger...no more no less

You've got to be kidding me? You sit there and generalize about who owns guns and WE are the bigots. You and people like you live in a the narrow minded world you accuse those of disagreeing with you of living in. Are you dumb or just that blinded by ideology?

No people don't need tanks, missles and nukes to defeat a tyranical didcator's army. The Taliban is defeating American forces with AK-47s, donkey carts and donkeys.

Clarify for me Clyde. We need these weapons to protect ourselves against a tyranical dictatorship. We have a tyranicaly dictatorship in power right now. How exactly are those weapons protecting us??

I see, Clyde, what you're advocating is an American Taliban. Prepare for a little pushback on that.

Clyde, why do you blame all of these "problems" on women. It seems to me you have an issue with women. I believe both the issues you bring up involve women, particularly the latter.

My Second Amendment right protects your First Amendment right to spew forth uninformed inanities. The youth of this Country should spend more time cultivating their own food than downloading porn and making dumb comments like this.

Is This Necessary: Don't insult the youth of this country. I am 27 years old and couldn't be a stronger support of the Second Amendment, and indeed the entire Constitution as a whole.
Also, it does not seem as though any of the NJ Residents for Action group could be considered youth. I would not be surprised if I was the youngest or one of the youngest people on this discussion board.
Seems those most opposed to the Second Amendment are middle aged women and aging liberal hippie d-----

How many of those deaths in the U.S. were by the barrel of a legal gun? About 4%.

Well you don't need any of that mechanical aptitude, incliation and discipline if the peace of weapondry you are shooting can fire 45 to 6 rounds per minute

They namecall because they have a profound misunderstanding of the Second Amendment and its historical importance in our Constitutional republic. They learn everything they know about it from misinformed, unvetted posters on gawker.com. It's quite sad, really.

For the (at least) thousandth time, no one is suggesting a gun ban. No one.

Have you ever been to Far Rockaway? Hint. it's worse than Newark.

Banning them will not help. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning than killed by an assault rife.

Second, any of us could make a huge bomb with the stuff under our kitchen sinks and a quick trip to Home Depot. So yes, he could have found other ways to kill all those people and more. Look at Tim McVeigh.

Hello Mr. Smith:

I am actually, a female, but that is of no moment.

I'm thinking that Lanza could have used .22's and accomplished his goal. Lanza could have used a bomb and accomplished his goal. Lanza could have used a plane and accomplished his goal. My point is that if you are a deranged sort (a la Tim McVeigh or 9/11 hijackers) once you have a goal in mind, it will be carried out. Period.

Banning assault weapons is not going to stop a mass murderer; it will simply make the murderer more creative. Creative in terms of thinking of a new murderous method or creative in terms of figuring out how to get that assault weapon from the street. I think what needs to happen is that we need to have a real honest dialogue about mental health issues. I think that there's so much shame with mental illness that often times, issues go undiagnosed and untreated. I have no idea about the kind of treatment that Lanza received or did not receive, but.......if mama was just allowing him to fester in the basement while he hatched a plan....that's a problem!!!

Signed it yesterday, thanks, Charles.

Sorry, i know you wish you could shut up everyone who disagrees with you, but this is a free country and you can't. Worse yet for you, we are going to win. because we have the rule of law on our side. Plus the majority of the House of Representatives and a few Senate Democrats doesn't hurt.

That's cool Michael Bloomberg tried to pretend he was Conservative too. Being a Conservative is about more than hating high taxes.

You're willingness to trade liberty for the veil of security is truly terrifying.

About the island thing, trust me feeling's mutual. And to me, all of you are just as much a fanatic as you consider us.

Giving up rights in the face of fear, especially when it's not even going to make you safer, is lunacy to me.

Karen,
I am so glad that this group has elected you President! You are so effective at convincing people of the efficacy of your position. Your patience and kindness of expression has really earned my vote. Bravo! NOT!!!

Additionally, for those of you claiming you love the Constitution then railing against the Second Amendment and pretending it doesn't mean what it does mean, that's like a racist justifying their behavior by saying they have a lot of black friends. You don't love the Constitution, at least not all of it. And if you do, I certainly hope you don't support Barack Walker Obama. The man who quadrupled warrantless wiretaps and also gave himself the power to imprison any American at any time without trial, charge, or access to a lawyer.
Finally, you guys can sign all the petitions you want. Yell and peddle insults and all that until you're all blue in the face. It's a free country. But you won't win. And on that day when the Assault Weapons Ban fails to even make it out of Committee in the House, I'd going to drink a nice tall glass of champagne and toast to all of you. And what must be so awful for you, is if you know our current Congressional composition, you know I'm right. Man what a bitter pill that must be to swallow.

Wow, that's a boatload of assumptions, there, Al. You're awfully fond of this little racist analogy of yours, I'll leave you to think about what that says about you while I go back to being, let's see, a racist, small/narrow-minded troll. Yowza.

It's not an assumption, it's based off of your comments here. Your small minded insults you've leveled at people who think differently than you. Hating someone, assuming something about them, insulting them, because they think differently than you, they have a different lifestyle, they have different values, that's all a form of bigotry. Just like racism is a form of bigotry.
You incorrectly assume that everyone who owns a gun and values gun rights is a redneck and unintelligent. You are not only incorrect, but this narrow minded belief does by definition make you a bigot.

Yes I know that, which is why I immediately clarified my remarks to mean one law abiding citizen. I seriously doubt that those rocket launchers were bought legally and registered. Same goes for 96% of guns used in crimes in this country.
Bottom line is you don't get to tell me what my individual rights are. If I own a gun, it in no way hurts you. I am not saying get rid of background checks. I totally agree with background checks. That's sensible. But trying to ban something due to the off chance someone may misuse it is not logical or right. And yes, it is the off chance. Almost every single legal gun owner in this country never uses their gun, including assault rifles, to harm another. Again, you don't get to decide what my rights are. That's why we have a republic instead of a pure democracy, and why we have a Constitution, it's to protect from the tyranny of the majority and mob rule.
I don't understand why anyone needs a Ferrari that goes 200 mph but I don't presume to tell any Ferrari owner that they are stupid or evil, or ignorant.
It's the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs.

Cute. It trots out that old, untrue Nixon era chestnut: "we are the silent majority", and the usual alarmist, pity-pandering, "we're losing our rights" balderdash. Boo freakin' hoo.

Not saying you shouldn't voice your opinions. Free speech is ALWAYS a good thing. i disagree with what you say but I'd always defend your right to say it, and I hope that's mutual, though with some of you I doubt it.

Just curious your thoughts about the fact that the end game of this almost certainly will not go even close to your way.

Does this apply to you as well, Karen? If so, you should review some of your insulting and name-calling comments above...

Well 21st century concerned citizen. It is called the "bill of rights", "not the bill of what YOU think is right", It is not the "Bill of what you think someone else needs" either. It is the "Bill of Rights". And the bill of rights guarantees that the right to self defense shall NOT be infringed. That means the ability to defend ourselves against a crooked cop that has an assault rifle. I am a former federal agent, and I guarantee you that there are plenty of crooked cops out there. The world is not what you fantasize it is. I am sorry about that.

As John said, that's not for you to decide. The justification is that the government is no better or higher than the people. I think seeing all our government has done, trusting them to rule over a disarmed public is very dangerous and naive.
For instance, going back to an example i gave earlier. It would have been great if all of those Japanese Americans in the 40's had all had guns, and had shot at the government agents who took them from their homes and forced them into concentration camps.
Government is a necessary evil. But it is never to be trusted, and always to be kept on a very short leash. The Second Amendment is just another check on government, just like the separation of powers.

To 21st concerned citizen
Very well said.

Did you sign our petition?

Please, I ask again, how do you define - what is your definition - please - of an "assault weapon". Those words are thrown around by a majority who are not educated about guns. It sounds scary so it must be scary. Anything you use to cause harm to someone else is an "assault weapon". An AR-15 has COSMETIC features including a pistol grip to help with stability when shooting it; it can have a collapsibile stock to fit different sized bodies.. These features do not enhance their lethality. These guns were chosen and targeted because they look scary. Just because some people do not like guns or are scared by them, especially because of their looks, doesn't mean they should dictate to law abiding gun owners who enjoy using these guns for sport. Other people should not push their agenda and perpetuate a myth that guns are only used for bad things and killing. Once again, another point that people are not acknowledging regarding Newtown, that psycho killer used two handguns NOT the rifle that is currently being demonized. That rifle was retrieved from his vehicle by law enforcement. Also, 10 mag or 15 mag capacity, it doesn't matter against unarmed people.

Can I own a "defense weapon" or is that not acceptable either?

"Assault weapon" is a marketing term that was coined by the gun control folks. It's a term that's used to describe guns that look scary but are no different than any other gun that's legally available.

"Assault" is something that you do. If I hit you with a bat, then I have assaulted you with a bat. I did not use an "assault bat" to hit you.

Wow. Any point you've tried to make, Karen is far overshadowed by your ranting, name calling and "shouting" in all caps.

Calling for a civilized discussion only carries weight when the request itself is from someone acting in kind.

MikeyD: Why don't you send some of your criticism to commenters here on the other side of the argument? Talk about rude, boorish and bullying.
It does bring up a good point: its about time that the majority of this country that wants these weapons removed for the streets stop cowing to selfish desires of the minority that want to own a gun for no other reason than they are compensating for something. How's that for bullying?
Face it: the fact that guns are available at all means that they are going to get in the hands of someone that would use them for no good, and every time an attempt is made to fix that, we have hear the cries of the NRA and their ilk and all the while they present no real solution. Real solution: Ban all weapons longer than a persons reach. will it prevent psychos for perpetrating violence? No, but mass murders will be a thing of the past. And the whole bombing thing is a non-starter, many more shootings than bombings for many, many reasons, not the least of which is ease of access. But that's obviously not going to happen. Until a real workable solutions is put forward, here's one: Prepare to give up any gun that's not a revolver or hunting rifle that is not permanently kept on a firing range. Otherwise, prepare to go to jail. That's the stand we need to take.

I read that it was actually a revolver that was used.

I also read that it was the prozac that actually caused him to lose reality and kill those children. I don't think they were babies or infants but the were 6 year olds and up. i don't think it mattered what gun was available to him, he would have use whatever. He could have used gas can's or acid.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7f9_1358505777

Maybe you should be flagged too!

The media puts their own slant on everything on both sides; it depends on your view and what reports you want to believe. So you believe the reports that state one thing and someone else may want to believe the reports that state another. The media no longer reports news, they make the news what they want. They delete/add what they want and add their personal bias. Or you could have someone like you who "flags" my comments because they aren't what you want to believe because you feel what is reported by these news media outlets as entirely factual. I suppose you also believe everything the govt puts out there. Also, where was the reporting about the bombing of the Arizona SS office? Politicians make knee jerk reactions and put so much bs out there and play on the public fears . It is all about power and getting re-elected. We live in a society where there is NO personal responsibility and the govt is FEEDING that. Make more laws for law abiding citizens, take away guns, but the govt won't enforce the current laws. That psycho set out to kill and no matter what he was going to do it. Blame HIM and his mother if she was irresponsible enough to allow him access to her guns. Do not blame the gun. You zoned in on something that even YOU do not know all the facts of but state you do. You say I have lost credibility? You won't admit to not being educated about your own agenda and pushing misinformation about "scary" guns aka the "assault weapon"

YOUR BLOG? THIS IS PATCH!

(Did you like my all caps shouting, Karen? Recognize it from anywhere?)

More civility from the political Left.

Is your question; why would Obama float bans on assault rifles and across-the-board background checks, when he knows they have no chance of passing congress? That's easy... if another nut-case picks up an assault rifle a year or two from now and goes on a rampage, Obama can claim that he did everything he could have to prevent it from happening. Then, some will claim that the blood is on the hands of the republicans in congress who defeated the bill.

Please, please explain to me how I was threatening. Oh boy I'd LOVE to hear this one. Sorry if you took my question as threatening, but I can't understand for the life of mean how you've construed anything I've said as threatening. Also I'd love to hear how what I just said was demeaning.

Also love to hear how I was intimidating anyone. I'm literally doing all the same things you are, yet, because I don't share your opinion, somehow I am threatening an intimidating. Please stop trying to shut down debate simply because you either can't or won't answer a legitimate question.

At the risk of being accused of any number of things again, I am sorry the truth hurts. Like I said before, which I guess what a bit condescending, yet no more so than your side has been, it must be a bitter pill to swallow knowing the AWB has no chance of passing.

Trust me, I've been there in politics. I knew my preferred candidate had no chance of getting the GOP nomination. Then I knew there was no chance Obama wouldn't be re-elected. Sometimes in politics and government, outcomes are tough to call. Things can go either way. It is the honest to God truth that this is not one of those times. This bill just will not pass the House. It won't. That's just reality. Nothing intimidating about that. It's not like I am Congressman who will vote on it. I have nothing to do with it's passing or not. Just calling it like I see it.

At the risk of being "flagged," Karen, you are a whack-job.

I am armed and ready to defend against your capitals!

Someone's having a meltdown, eh? Stop the presses -- things are not to the gentile Monsieur Balls's liking.

Thank you, cc, for putting this in perspective. Really, folks, if you are a gun control advocate AND pro-choice, you have serious intellectual and moral problems.

Lots of contradictions in this nutty world, Monk. Why I've heard of "pro-lifers" who are just rabid fans of the death penalty. Go figure.

Yes, there are many contradictions in life. Comparing the occasional execution of a heinous criminal (usually a murderer of innocents) to the daily abortion of thousands of human fetuses (usually just unwanted children) makes my head spin. (I'm indifferent about the death penalty, by the way.) And I certainly do not understand how requiring law-abiding people to abide by additional laws will prevent criminals and madmen from doing harm.

You and a few others on this page are awfully quick to jump to conclusions, pal, not a real good sign in an armed person. You don't know what I read, and you surely do not know that I read "blogs from progressives". One thing that I DO know, however, from your post below, is that you're fond of using bogus quotes from historical figures as disparate as George Washington and Himmler. In other words, you're attributing your egregious errors to me. Now, as for your question above, do I really have to school in the difference between southern and northern states 1787-90, especially since there were a mere 13? Let's try to act just a *little* sane.

First, hateful speech doesn't kill people. Second, while Adam Lanza is primarily responsible, a person in his mental state should not have had access to firearms, and I think it is the responsibility of our society to control who obtains guns. If the NRA mantra is that responsible, law-abiding people have the right to own guns, then the flip side should be that irresponsible criminals should not. You can't have one side of the coin without the other.

you make too much sense, so the come backs are going to be something like this, "your racists", "your a bully", "you threatened me"
These people are products of the school school system that have been programming kids to be subjects at best and dependents at most. i was raised and educated at an overseas american school, and I think like you. Most people have not learned what it is to be an american, or what a privilige it is to be an american, This has all changed, We let the constitution slowly but surely be erased and no one knows it even has. The patriot act, then the healthcare act, then the NDAA act, now they are going to slow boil the 2nd amendment. The free internet is also going to be nonexistent. Seems we are paving the way for our children's children to go the way of the German Jews. None of these poorly educated people will ever realize it until they are being herded into a gas chamber.

The "German" part is false.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/67-harcourt.pdf

Ringwood Mom. Salon?? I do not get my information from Salon, Slate and the other propaganda outlets. : (

Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State.
Heinrich Himmler, quote

Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.
George Washington

Firedup49, that's a false quote from George Washington, but I'm sure you discount any source that isn't Soldier of Fortune magazine.
http://stason.org/TULARC/society/pro-guns/99-APPENDIX-VI-Pious-Frauds-Or-If-It-Sounds-Too-Good-T.html#.UPtujKETLfI

Firedup49, false Himmler quote.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Heinrich_Himmler

As the Monticello website states, there is no evidence that Jefferson ever made the quote that is attributed to him above;

http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/those-who-hammer-their-guns-plowsquotation

The 2nd quote is a paraphrase of a Ben Franklin quote;

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/1381.html

Father accidentally shoots teen son in face in hunting accident in Cumberland County

Five Injured In Accidental Gun Show Shootings On ‘Gun Appreciation Day’
I guess there must not have been any 'progressives' there that day huh Chris? Otherwise there would have been more control then?

That's a really funny spin on abortion. I think most people view it conservatives trying to control a woman's reproductive rights by making abortion illegal (even though conservatives claim that they are for small government).

@Chris: There is more to this then just control. Events like this tend to prove the Liberal/ Progressive - whatever floats your boat,- ways of thinking are wrong and don't work. They fear events like this may return America to some of the old, Judeo-Christian traditions, and we all know that God, and His silly Ten commandments is such a pain in the behind.

The only solution to events like this are M.O.R.O.A.L.S, and those MORALS can only be learned when passed down from parent to child. Parents, also, have a duty to seek help if their child cannot or will not accept MORALS! Leaving your child to play violent video games in his or her darken bedroom, because his or her parents are sleeping off the night before IS NOT RESPONSIBLE PARENT-SHIP. Engage your children. Eat together! Talk to each other! Go to Church (OMG) or a baseball game, ice skating, bowling, bike riding, walking, or even target shooting, whatever just do it with your children.

Any fool can understand one human will not take the life of another, if that human has been taught that each and every life is precious, we are all brothers and sisters of God, and we have no right, no right what so ever to take another life!

If you really believed in the Ten Commandments, you wouldn't be spending your Sabatth passing judgement on others.

Woman from Warren purposefully gets behind wheel and drives drunk and kills man

Father Accidentally Runs Over his Two Sons

http://www.godvine.com/Dad-Accidentally-Runs-Over-his-Two-Sons-Miraculous-Outcome-432.html

DIYer cuts Finger off with Saw:

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni21463034/

Keansburg woman stabbed - A Keansburg woman was pushing a child in a stroller as she shopped in the Middletown Bed Bath & Beyond when she was stabbed 12 times, according to authorities. A sharp knife is among the weapons

http://middletown-nj.patch.com/articles/middletown-man-charged-with-attempted-murder-in-stabbing-at-bed-bath-beyond

I'm not sure it will do any good to make rational, intelligent posts when half the country, it seems, does not have the intellectual or moral foundation to appreciate them. This gun control effort is like putting a bandaid on a finger when the leg is broken. Totally misplaced.

People, we have a serious education problem in this society when individuals are taught that their role in life is to look to the government for direction and be dependent upon that government.

You're right, we do need national laws. Since we do have an Amendment that protects gun rights in the Constitution, gun rights shouldn't fall under the 10th Amendment, for those of you unaware, that's the state's rights amendment.

But those national laws should be much closer to what they have in say, TX and AZ than NY or NJ. The gun show loophole, while it should be closed if it existed, only accounts for about 15% of sales are conducted without a background check. And guess what, every single on of those sales is illegal. There is no gun show loophole because there already is a federal law requiring any sales to be accompanied by a criminal background check.

And I honestly don't know anyone who is against background checks. Samuel Adams himself said that the Second Amendment is only meant to protect the rights of peaceable (law abiding) citizens. So a background check is totally appropriate. But once you go through a background check and it is determined that you are not a criminal, you have the right to own any gun you want, and guess what, that hurts no one.

The reality is that this isn't about guns, it's about people. You don't have a problem with guns because you're fine with the government having them. It's about the people. You don't like the people who like guns. Because in your narrow minds, they are all rednecks. But again, that's because you live in a small, narrow minded world.

Dan - “A Criminal Outlet Store?” Well NO Dan, they break into law abiding citizens homes when we are away at work busting our a$$es and being forced to contribute to their social welfare programs, and then they steal them! Come on Dan, do you really think they pile into cars and cross state lines to buy guns legally? Do you even know what the requirements in the neighboring states are? Oh and thanks to people like you and your buddies over at The Journal News, now the criminals have a road map of when to go to find their guns!

Everyone knows you aren’t sharpest tool in the shed Dan, but that post says you’ve been left out in the rain and rusted from dull to blunt!

Ed, At first read, you would think that Dan was being sarcastic, but then it is apparent that he really believes what he is typing out. It would be entertaining if it were not so frightening, knowing that there are millions of Dans out there.

John, – I am a strong believer in our Constitution, but I’m seriously thinking we should change it in accordance with Article Five to include some form of I.Q. testing to be allowed to vote. I mean "Criminal Outlet Store. Really????

I’ve often wondered why these anti-2nd amendment folks don’t go about using Article Five, to delete our right to bear arms? Actually that’s a rhetorical question!

Did you know in Sweden males between the ages of 18 to 31 (I think) where REQUIRED to own guns? Maybe Dan should look at Sweden’s crime rate.

ed, I know what you mean about giving people the power to vote. It should be something like this, you need a w-2 to vote, or if you don't have that you can have a military retirement card, no former military man is going to vote his country down the drain. or anyone getting public assistance should lose their right to vote until they are off public assistance. The wagon riders just keep voting more and more passengers, and we are tired of pulling harder and harder and getting less food.
I am under the belief that we are in for a huge resetting of this economy, and I don't think these wagon riders are going to take it kindly. you better have an escape plan and a gun, Morristown is not the place to be when SHTF. I actually have a trailer with 6- 15 gallons of fuel barrels. If the dollar collapses and it will eventually, it will happen fast, i have enough fuel to get me to texas with out stopping at a gas station. You may think I am crazy but I call it prepared. There are too many welfare zombies per acre for my liking in the Northeast. I suggest you at least think about what I am saying. Remember what people used to think was impossible...."realestate prices will never fall" "GM go bankrupt!, Your crazy!" "National Healthcare!, Never happen!" "US dollar will always be the world's reserve currency" or will it?

Dan, everytime you people PANIC about something, you want to make a stricter law about it. The demoncraps PANIC at the drop of a hat today, if someone just sneezes at you.

That's right, philmcc, they just don't know how smart us gun-toters is!

You guys on the Left are just soooooo progressive and tolerant. We should all learn from you.
What a joke, how about you all hop down off your high horse?

Alex, Cletus and Dan Grant are members of the Communist party. They think without government we would have nothing. Dan is a former Montville politician. both are dependents on the government now. So they would not like what you have to say. To them you need to shut up and give them their entitled hand out.

John, Montville? Didn’t Montville just have one of the largest property tax reductions in the history of the state? Oh that’s right, Dan is a **Former** local official!

James, you are correct. just google school attacks. You will see it is actually a world wide problem that has been timeless or not a new phenomena. china, russia, japan, africa have all had mulitple school massacres with and without guns. the weapons they used were axes, meat cleavers, knives, bombs, acid, bats, HOME MADE FLAME THOWERS, for christ sake. many of these without guns still caused mulitple deaths in the double digits. The only common denominator I found was that they were men were all adult and crazy. Maybe they were wronged some how and wanted to get some sort of revenge. i will never understand it, hopefully not, but the gun control reaction makes no sense. Armed guards makes more sense, armed teachers is not as good but acceptable, but no protection is not an option. If you go to any federal building across the country you will find the employees and buildings guarded by armed guards. Now why are people up in arms about putting armed guards at schools?. No pun intended. It is like having a flat tire on your car and deciding to change your oil. Gun control and school massacres are not related.

So Spot On James

Remember Happy Land Social Club?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire

Arson set fires kill on average 300 people a year, right here in the United States. Where is the outcry? Will Karen petition the government to ban automatic lighters with unlimited fuel? Maybe we should all be put through background checks, and be finger printed to buy a gas can? Of course if they make it hard for us to buy gas cans to run our mowers, and other small engines, I guess we can always go to the Criminal Outlet, and buy them there! .

New Gun control laws do nothing to stop the individual who is intent on killing strangers on a whim. What could go a long way to stopping guns from getting into the wrong hands would be making Gun Show and private sales without background checks illegal. If an individual wants to sell a weapon to another individual the buyer and seller MUST go to the local Police, Sheriff, or State Police station to have a proper background check done and the cost of the back ground check will be paid by the buyer. Anyone who has a family member that has or is currently under psychological care should NOT be permitted to have any weapons, no matter how many bullets it can hold or how quickly it can fire those bullets. That law alone would go a long way to stopping these types of crimes.

The next and most difficult step would be to go back and review everyone who has weapons and check if any family member has been or currently is under psychological care. If they find a family member who is, then taking the weapons away is the only reasonable action. Bold step, yes, but without it there will still be guns, and people who will use them like we have seen all too much of already, out there for the next newtown school incident.

"New Gun control laws do nothing to stop the individual who is intent on killing strangers on a whim. What could go a long way to stopping guns from getting into the wrong hands would be making Gun Show and private sales without background checks illegal."

Aren't these two statements contradictory??? Mandating background checks for all guns sold through gun shows and private sales WOULD be a new gun control law!

So you don't consider the Bady Bill to be a gun control law??? I think the NRA would strongly disagree with you on that.

I don't really care what the NRA thinks. Facts are Facts. You tell me how effective the Brady Bill has been. I think it has been a waste of time and paper. Just writing a law doesn't stop the activity. If it did we would not need Safes in Banks or locks on doors.

You're making no sense at all. First, you state the we need a law mandating background checks for all guns purchased privately and through gun shows, then you state that the Brady Bill (which requires background checks for firearms purchases), is wasted legislation. Are you for background checks, or aren't you???

Hookerman, Does the Brady Bill require background checks for ALL firearms purchases? No it does not! If it mandated registration and background checks for ALL sales that would include sales between private parties and at gun shows. So as I said the Brady Bill (which requires background checks for only some firearms purchases), is wasted legislation. I don't know how much clearer I can explain that.

...which would fly in the face of the First Amendment.

suppose you use your true and correct legal name in order to be taken more seriously when posting obnoxious comments instead of coming off like an antagonistic anon troll?

Stewart, since neither you nor BillBalls seems to be familiar with our Constitution, let me quote the passage of the first amendment that would be violated by BillBalls's suggestion; " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion....". I'll assume you and Bill were not familiar with these words, unless you are" first amendment haters".

Stewart Resmer, some of us have had unpleasant consequences from using real, rather than screen names. You may have heard that occasional internet interactions result in stalking and frightening personal attacks from people of dubious mental stability.

All too Funny – You guys, Cletus, Hookerman, Steward, Don’t like my little suggestion that the government makes us read a few paragraphs of the bible. You all jump up and down and scream The 1st amendment, the 1st amendment, it violates the 1st amendment, and then you turn around and continue to beat on my right to the 2nd amendment!

HYPOCRITES, all of you!

You all probably believe the Constitution says there is a wall of separation between the government and religion, too!

No, Thomas Jefferson created that term in reference to the first amendment; "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

Well, BB, you didn't merely suggest people read "a few paragraphs of the Bible", you said that "All American citizens will be required to read the “Sermon on the Mount.”(Matthew 5-6) Then attest they will live their life by those teachings." The "requirement" there would doubtlessly rankle most Christians, not to mention atheists and those of any other faith.

Here is the Truth Hookerman –

http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

Do you get it? You see the Danbury Baptists wrote Jefferson ASKING him if they could establish a church. They did that because back in the "good" old country they ran away from you HAD to ask the government to do something like, oh I don’t know ---- Start a Church! Carry a gun! Well in fact, do anything outside of the "approved" way of living!

The Jefferson letter you just read is Jefferson answer to them, and frankly Jefferson was a little pi$$$es off at them, because he thought all us newly minted Americans, understood the greatness and depth of our personal Freedoms, which he helped to establish!

Do you understand your freedoms Hookerman? I think not!

Bill -- Excellent exchange. You set those fools up and they went for it hook, line & sinker. Good Job, and oh by the way, I don't think I'd bet against you in a game of chess! My hat is off to you!

Your ‘truth’ Edward is no different from what I said. You have not uncovered any additional insight into the matter. And Jefferson was PO’d at the Danbury Baptists??? How exactly would you know that? Did Jefferson tell you that himself?

tell it to the people of newtown

Stew, while I do not believe certain guns belong in the hands of the average citizen, you are doing what you have accused the right of doing with Benghazi, politicizing a terrible event. Stricter gun laws do not deter crime. Chicago, which has the strictest gun control laws in the country, has the highest murder rate by gun in the country. And I doubt that all those gangbangers are getting their guns at gun shows. We need to look at the situations and the people involved, not just the weapons used.

Steward – Why don’t you tell the people of Newtown, the principal, the janitor, or anyone else in that school wasn’t allowed to carry guns, because progressive/liberals like you are scared to death of them and somehow think calling 911 solves all problems.

tell it to the people of newtown I said...go on up there, jump out at the first memorial you find at the side of the road, wear your sidearm, sling an assault rifle over your shoulder, open your bi-pod if you like, load up your hundred round mag too.
We will all read about you on the evening news with your true and correct name at long last, and your bail

How do we start a petition for "Conceal carry"

John, I can be done with the stroke of the Governor’s pen. All he need do is declare NJ as a “Must” issue State, instead of the “Can” issue it currently is! See, here in Jersey you can apply for a carry permit, you can pass the background checks, and satisfy every requirement, but, because this is a can issue state, it is then up to the State to decide, and they almost always decide NO! Go across the river to Pa. which is a MUST issue State, and if you check-out, the State MUST then give you the permit!

Currently 37 States are Must Issue, but Jersey isn’t one of them!

PS. You can bet the friends of friends get carry permits here in Jersey.

Prentiss Gray, you don't really get the point. People only arm themselves when they feel the need, and put their guns away when the situation does not require them. After reading you comment it makes me think that us gun owners want to walk around the grocery store with a rifle strapped to our shoulder. Please.
As for doing something? You not supposed to do something just to make you feel better. You do something so you benefit from that action. Stricter gun control laws will not prevent another massacre. It wont. So why even do it? Nonsense. You feel good with all these records being kept and redtape, but in the end will not save lives. Arming good guys will save lives after a massacre starts.
Example, Bernie Madoff. Sec gave the green light that all was ok. People felt good and relaxed their standards. What happened? Well turned out to be a ponzi scheme all along, but thank god the feds were there to count how much money was stolen. Right? maybe if there was no SEC telling them everything was A'Okay, maybe they would have thought to themselves this is just too good to be true and they would have look into his operation further and opted not to give them their money. So my advice is we really need to quit making the government responsible for our everyday safety and make it our responsibility. The government can hardly do anything right. When it tries, it fails causing other collateral damage.

YOU GO GIRL!!!

if you censor video games and movies aren't you taking away peoples freedom to express themselves? cant the video game makers use the same argument as pro gun people, 100,0000 of kids play the game and are perfectly normal and dont become violent. so you are going to ban violent videos because one kid of of millions MIGHT have been influenced by a game or movie?
if you hold a mentally ill person in a home arent you breaking the 5th amendment by holding them against their will before a crime is committed?

I have not read anything you written turn out incorrect. I grew up all over the world and partly in the south. Adults in the south would always say to somebody to remind them about privacy "It none of our business" As much as they gossiped they would always remind themselves of the importance of privacy and the extreme embarrassment if caught being too nosy. That was a horrible thing to have happen is being caught red handed knowing something private about someone.

Why call our country The "United" States, right? Call it Ayn Rand Land. You have a sentimental adoration of the founders, yet, let's face it, you'd have been among the many colonists who would have supported the Crown,, and later, Jim Crow,, even later, Joe McCarthy. It is, in fact, someone's business if you own a gun: the business of the person you disable or kill.

There you go again, Cletus. You love the 1st, but you hate the 2nd, and now you seem ignorant of the 10th! But here is the good news – Article 5 of the Constitution allows you to change it, so do so! Make it what you want.

BTW, I do have a sentimental attachment to our founders and here is a little fact you should really think about. Yes this country has made some mistakes, so have some religions, but if you think you are persecuted here for whatever reasons (race, sex, sexual preference, age, handicapped …. whatever) you’d best sit back and thank your lucky star you were born here, because if those founders never risked their and their families lives to start this country of freedoms, we’d still be living under the rule of tyrants, and there is a good chance you’d be incarcerated, or even hung in public because you are “different.”

This is America Cletus, and every American is offered the same opportunity each and every day. Don’t like your life? Change it! Don’t like where you live? Change it! Don’t like you doctors! Change them! Don’t like you church? Change it! Do whatever makes you happy; just don’t ask me to help you on your way, unless of course you are willing and capable to return my help to me in equal parts.

Cletus, Don't worry, you will get what you want. The USSA. United Socialist States of America. Obama kept using your favorite word, "Collective" and "We". So we can quit our jobs, Obama will just raise the taxes on the rich and give "We" money to live, until there are no rich no more. you will be dead of old age before we run out of rich, so sit back and enjoy.

John, so you are saying Cletus’ change is we pull, he rides?

When I was young we had a kid in the neighborhood that won’t help us do anything. We’d build a fort, he wasn’t there. We make a sled riding trail on a hill, he wasn’t there. We’d build a bike racing track, he wasn’t there. However, if we used the fort, trail or track, he was always there to play! When we played ball, he always had to play 1st base or pitch, and bat first, or he’d sulk and go home.

As time went on, we all learned how to ignore him, and never included him in anything we did, and guess what he’d do? He’d run home and tell mommy how mean we were to him. Come dinner, all of us would be told by our parents that we needed to be nice to poor, little Cletus or we’d get punished!

I don’t know maybe Barack and Cletus grow up in the same disadvantaged neighborhood. You know, the one where you had to pull your own weight, (if capable) but they didn’t.

PS you and Alex give me renewed faith in America, assuming our dollar survives as the world standard, we might even make it through the next four years!

Ed. After listening half way thru Obama's inag speech, then turning it off, I decided I am selling my stocks and buying gold bullion. A lot of it. Basically an insane amount. I am changing my portfolio to 90% precious metals. I am very scared of what is coming, I am also getting very serious about my get out of the northeast plan and looking at other parts of the country or other countries. The Hitler analogy used to be kind of coy, but it is emerging as very familiar now. Comparing Hitlers speeches to Obama's speeches, quite the similarities, and the peoples reactions to him are religious in nature. The TV anchor said before Obama's speech..."This sacred moment". There are too many cletus zombies out there that are going to demand their entitlements when the government can no longer come thru, so either they are coming for them or the government is going to ignore the constitution and come for it. either way i am planing not to be around. This is a time period of do or die in my opinion. bulliondirect.com, apmex.com

John, I don't know if you're actually serious or just inflamed by this debate, but converting your investments to precious metals is just about the dumbest thing you can do right now. Whether you believe it or not the market is recovering and precious metal value will drop, and it could be a precipitous fall as it has been in the past. Remember it's not what individual investors feel the market will do that controls it, it's what most investors feel that controls the market. Most of the investment community now believes we are coming out of the woods, not that we're headed for disaster. Also note that gold was at a 30 year high in september but but then fell $150 in a scant month. The price soared up from about $450 to $1800 in just a few years, but that should be read as a bubble not a predictor of future earnings. I just say study this a little more.

Prentiss Gray. Gold is artificially low right now. The government and the fed are continuing to overspend the tax revenue and printing money like no tomorrow. The debt ceiling will be risen. The dollar is on the move towards nothingness. The only thread holding any value to the dollar is that the Arabs are agreeing to only sell oil for dollars in exchange for the rulers security that our military provides. Any Arab leader that sold oil for anything other than the US dollar was taken out of power quickly. They put a label on this naming it the "Arab Spring". This was not an uprising of the people but a an uprising of the the west to remove and install a government that would maintain the US petro dollar. We are maintaining the value of the dollar strictly by miilitary force. Opec has seen what happens when they decide to sell oil in other currencies or gold. They have all been taken out. How long can we force people to use our dollars? It can back fire at anytime. The more we print and devaule the dollar the more likely it will end. How long will the Arabs agree to take our devaluing dollars for their oil? I feel it won't be much longer. Now getting back to Obama connection. He is going to continue to put the tax payer in more and more debt causing the fed to create more and more money, devaluing the dollar more and more, pissing the Arabs off more and more. Short term fix is for Obama to go after "Extra profits" from those evil rich, lower stock values

John: Do what you like, but I think you're living in a nightmare scenario. Just make sure enough other investors agree with you or you'll be the one left holding the bag. Good luck.

John, excellent move. If Prentiss thinks gold is going to fall he really needs to take a good look at the long and continuing decline of the US fiat dollar! Is he kidding us?? Consider this:

In 1960 you could buy an ounce of gold for $36.00. Okay, now hold that ounce of gold in your left hand and put 36 dollar bills in your right hand. Everything is equal, right? Now fast forward to 2012, you are still holding that very same ounce of gold in your left hand, but now need almost 1,700 dollar bills in you right hand to be equal.

What changed? The gold? No it is still the very same ounce of gold. Obviously, what changed was the value of the dollar, and in fact the value of that dollar fell so far today you need 1,664 more of them to buy the very same thing you could in 1960 for just 36 of them.

John, the decline of dollar is NOT something most liberals or progressives choose to understand. In their minds a dollar is a dollar. Gold costs more because its price went up! They believe inflation is cause by upwards price movement, not the downward value of the dollar! (silly them)

Now consider you are a foreign country holding many US dollars in your vaults, watching them decline........ Do you want them anymore? Nope, you trade them in for gold, which many countries are or have

PS – Gold is important, but remember, when the SHTF (which it will) guns and ammunition will be worth a thousands times what gold is!

Oh, BillBalls, since you're trying to channel Ronnie Reagan, try also to remember the dementia!
And as for your lapdog john, he needs to know the difference between socialism and communism, poor dim bulb that he is!

How much did it cost?

Stewart, By chance do you own a gun? I'm just wondering.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2013/01/for_second_inauguration_obama.html

This shows why we need to preserve our gun rights, and even increase them.

And ironically, Alicia Keys performs at the Inaugural Ball. That is the Alicia Keys who wears a gold AK47 around her neck. Lady Gaga performed as well, who recently wore an outfit emblazoned with guns sticking out of her bra. I guess that's ok though.

Groupon Cancels All Gun-Related Promotions – The Consumerist

Good for Groupon, they are a private company and they can do what they want. Now I too have the right as a consumer not use their service any longer.

You see Steward; our system is a very simple system. It runs itself by simply producing a product there seems to be a demand for. (that means someone wants it) on the other side of the fence there are the buyers of that product who are willing to freely part with their hard earned dollars for that product or not! Simple right?

You may have remembered that as the Law of Supply and Demand, taught to you way back in high school, assuming you were paying attention and not daydreaming about how you were going to save the world from people who cling to their bibles and guns!

Sadly the POTUS clearly outlined last night that he does not believe in that system any longer and he wants to centralize all functions and have the government tell us what we can buy, what it should cost, and oh BTW the big secret he never lets out --- what you will do for a living, and how much you get paid! Anyone who doesn’t believe this, just needs to talk to a doctor, or thousand of other employed in the health field!

edward- i want to buy a pet bear to guard my house. i feel my family would be safer if a bear was outside to patrol my house. if a robber hoped over my fence my bear would attack him. i have studied about bears and consider myself a responsible bear owner. however i can not legally own a bear as a pet. Edward will you help me fight for my right to own what i want to own. just because some people may not be a responsible bear owner should i not have that freedom?
also edward by your reasoning you believe prostitution should be legal. there is clearly a demand for it since people do it illegaly. if a man/woman have no issue with selling their body why cant they? shouldnt they be free to do what they want with themselves? who gets to side the line of morality.
im also curious what you did to protest the Patriot Act when bush passed it. that was much more of a breach of the constitution than what obama plans to do by stronger background checks and limiting the avaliability of certain guns.

john i too side with libertarian views (wish people paid attention to Gary Johnson instead of Mitt Romeny who didnt even want to be presidents). im not anti gun and believe people shuold have the right to own guns, however tracking guns and monitering the illegal sale of guns could use a lot of improvement.
my issue are the people who complain about obama not following the constitution when they didnt say anything in the past. its like these people only think there are 2 ammendments.
when people only fall back on the constitution to protect things they care about such as guns i find it hypocritical (not referring to you). people cant pick and chose which parts of the constitution to follow, it is all or none.

How thrilled you must be. Maybe the media should cover it more. You know get Dr. Phil down there? Anything to shine more attention on it to wake up the other nuts who say "what a great way to get my name in the papers!"

I wonder if it was another "gun free zone"?

Actually, it is the fourth at a high school or college since Newtown.

In many cases, it is a matter of willful ignorance. The constitutional issue has been settled; reasonable restrictions on gun possession, like those on freedom of speech and assembly have repeatedly been upheld. The slippery slope argument also has been debunked. Unable to offer winning arguments against the proposed mandatory background checks and banning of assault weapons and high volume magazines, many who oppose any type of gun control now instead attack the ultimate strawman--the government is coming for your guns. This iteration of fear-mongering is resonating with with gun owners, but ultimately it will fail because the public will support steps to protect public safety that don't harm responsible gun owners.

Excellent statistics and very well articulated. Totally agree with your assessment. I for one do not want my guns taken away. But wholeheartedly agree we need tighter control. More people are going to die if nothing is done.

You seem to have pretty bad information there Gene. 32,000 are shot and killed in the US every year, with another 70,000 or so shot and injured. one child or teen is killed by a gun every three hours, eight every day, 55 every week in the United States. More preschoolers were shot and killed last year than police officers. Behind car accidents, guns is the leading killer of American children. Get your facts straight.

Rob, stop making sense using facts and data, it annoys those in denial and they get aggitated easily because of it, they have guns you know?

so guns, fast food, cigaretttes, perscription drugs that are highly addictive and alcohol can all be legal but drugs cant. all these things are bad for but who gets to draw the line and decide which ones are legal.
i cant smoke a joint on a saturday night while in my home but anyone over 21 can legally drink a bottle of vodka. you ever hear anyone getting into a fight after smoking a joint... nope, however there are thousands of assualts influenced by alcohol daily. a 35 year old man cant use marijuana to ease his back pain after a 50 hour work week but parents can feed their parents fast food 5 timees a week leading to the majority of american being obese. you want health care to go down, make fast food and soda illegal.
this is why libertarians are the only none hypocritical party. alcohol, fast food, drugs, and guns can all be very harmful, however many people use them responsibly. everything should be legal and let people chose to do what they want. if you are going to make one harmful thing illegal all of them should be otherwise its just peoples opinions on what THEY think should be legal and not.

And by attacking the validity of my statistics - which I say are valid - he avoids the main argument - because that would be more difficult than just making stuff up - or not contributing at all like you.

Rob's stats are legit, although it includes suicides. I'll add one more statistic to the discussion....over 1,200,000 abortions in the US in 2011. Makes the gun number appear to be just a rounding error.

2 guys walk in to a library in Texas, armed under the 2nd amendment and get into a gun fight, kinda shoots holes (pun intended) in the 'if some one had a firearm shootings would not happen' dont it?

while i dont agree with bloomberg i am a bit more understanding then you are. obesity is a serious problem in the US. it is not like he is making this law for no reason. everyone is aware of the harm soda can cause but parents still let their children drink massive amounts of it. i do question why a law is neccessary for soda but i also question why anyone would drink 32 oz of soda as a single serving.
i dont agree with the law but i understand why people could think it is neccassary.

id be more concerned about alcohol if i were you. thats the real gateway drug

I wholeheartedly agree withn you. Alcohol one of the most pernicious drugs. People get stupid and belligerent when drunk.

I dont like drinking and dont want to ban alcohol - but there were more drunk driving deaths than gun deaths last year too. Where's the cavalry on that one?

Agreed on both drugs and alcohol...and it's not just about deaths. People don't have to die for their lives to be destroyed by drugs and alcohol. Most parents are in denial about what their children are exposed to on a regular basis. I should know, I was in school not too long ago.

Gene, no one is trying to confiscate all the guns. That is a conspiracy theory being pushed by the gun lobby. You are reading the stats wrong, 32,000 a year die from guns, including homicides, accidental shootings, and suicides.

There do need to be better controls. I am glad you brought up alcohols and cars. Traffic fatalities have dropped over 50% since they started treating it as a public health concern. They improved the quality of vehicles, passed laws requiring seat belts, and have had extensive public services campaigns about the risks of driving drunk, texting while driving, buckling up, etc. No one banned all cars or booze, but it was a succcessful public health campaign that has saved lives. The NRA wrote and passed a law in Florida to make it illegal for doctors to talk to patients about securing their guns or the risks involved to children.

There are 12,000 homicides by firearms in the United States annually, over 75% of which are unlawfully owned firearms. If persons wish to commit suicide they do not need a gun to accomplish that.

There is obviously one HUGE difference which you're missing in your argument.... drug overdoses only kill the person who chooses to take the drugs.... guns kill other people who made no choice whatsoever concerning the cause of their death.

Not True Hookerman – How many drivers, driving buses, trucks, trains, taxi-cabs, limos, you name it have been drugged up, crashed and killed many? I guess you don't consider alcoho a drug, because we all know thousands of people dire a year at the hands of drunk drivers, and God only knows how many drunks die a year from their drinking.

Let's stay on topic here Bill. The analogy that was made dealt with drug overdoses, not intoxicated drivers.

But since you want to draw an analogy between cars and guns, then let's look at that. In order to drive a car, you must go through vigorous training, pass both a written and behind-the-wheel test, and go through a long probationary period. If you're guilty of any serious driving violation (such as driving while intoxicated), your driving privilege is revoked. All cars on the road need to follow certain manufacturing regulations to insure their safety.

So, if we had the same regulations and restrictions for gun use (based on your own analogy), then we'd probably go a long way to reducing gun violence. Agreed???

truthhurts, you are absolutely incorrect about suicide. States with lower gun ownership have much lower overall suicides rates, and conversely states with much higher rates of gun ownership have higher rates of suicide. There IS a major correclation between prevalence of guns and suicide. You should read this http://fortlee.patch.com/articles/op-ed-guns-suicide-domestic-violence-and-need-for-research

No Hookerman – the driver’s license training you just described, is very similar to the training I had to complete to be issued a Concealed Carry Permit in North Carolina. Of course my background was scrutinized , I sat through eight hours of classroom instructions, which taught me where I could and couldn’t carry my gun, along with very intense training on when I could “use” it, if need be, and yes I had to pass a test of all the subject matter. On top of that I had to put 6 shots down range and prove that I’m somewhat accurate with my aim, and I has to demonstrate my knowledge of the weapon, and how to be safe with it.

But here’s the problem with both car and gun licensing. Both are susceptible to criminal action. That is to say someone can steal my gun and harm someone, just as easily as someone can steal my car and harm someone.

When we read a story about a carjacker, or someone who stole a car and then gets in a deadly accident killing innocent people, do we call for better car laws? No! Why not?

You are kidding yourself if you think only licensed and insured people are driving cars, just the same as you seem to think only licensed people have guns.

That may be, but let's look at the recent mass shootings that have occurred. With the most recent Newtown shooting, the shooter Adam Lanza used his mother's guns, which were legally purchased. With the Aurora movie theatre shootings, shooter James Holmes used guns that he legally purchased. With the Tucson AZ shooting that seriously injured representative Gabrielle Gifford, shooter Jared Lee Loughner used a gun that he had legally purchased.

So we're not exactly seeing a pattern of people using stolen guns for these mass-shootings, are we???

STOP twisting the FACTS

Adam stole his mother’s guns, and then killed her! Just because she was his mother doesn’t mean they are his guns, anymore then it makes it right he killed her!

James Eagan Holmes and Jared Lee Loughner? Come on Hookerman, both of these guys were under psychiatric care for serious problems. What medications were they taking? What are the known side effects? What drug company produces them? Why were they not in a secure mental health facility?

There are plenty of medications out in the market place today that warn users it might make them suicidal. It doesn’t take too much of a leap to think if they can make you dark enough to kill oneself, they can also make you dark enough to commit mass murder. Why are people allowed to take these drugs, and then walk about in public? I, for one, don’t want someone coming down a two lane highway at my car on those drugs. What happens if they suddenly think – Oh what the hell and cut the wheel towards me?

So to your question. Yes I do see a pattern here, but you are the one missing it not me.

Look Hookerman, everyone here is trying to tell you banning guns WON’T stop mass murders, because that’s the FACT. It will just force the perpetrator to some other way of committing the act. If you seriously want to stop this, then open your mind, and help us all find the reason why it happens and how to stop it!

Homework for you – Google Happy Land Social Club

"James Eagan Holmes and Jared Lee Loughner? Come on Hookerman, both of these guys were under psychiatric care for serious problems."

YES! And they were both able to legally obtain guns that killed people. Doesn't that tell you that our current controls aren't working??? If in one part of the country (as you pointed out), you can get arrested for having a BB gun in your car, but in another, people with severe mental issue can easily obtain firearms, doesn't that tell you that we need some sensible federal regulations?

Yet, if I try to have an intelligent conversation on that subject, I'm told by the gun lobby that I'm leading my grandchildren into gas chambers. There's got to be a middle ground between a complete ban on guns (which I never suggested), and allowing people with mental disorders to walk into any gun show and obtain dangerous firearms.

12 states actually had more guns deaths than motor vehicle deaths this year. Cars are used every single day by a vast majority of Americans. They are much safer per use than guns. That argument holds no water.

Fast and Furious has NOTHING to do with the current gun control debate, and is an attempt to muddle the issue to take away from common sense gun control. In fact, Fast and Furious, and its predecessor that began under President George W. Bush, can be more laid at the feet of the gun lobby who have so weakened the ATF that they are forced to desperate measures to try to prevent trafficking. One of the executive actions the President signed last week was to urge Congress to stop the disgraceful block on the ATF from having a director. For the past six years republican members of the House of Representatives have prevented a vote to approve the President’s nominee for director of the ATF. This needs to happen, and more resources need to be appropriated to stop gun trafficking. This will directly impact us in New Jersey, where up to 80% of crime guns recovered are trafficked from out of state.

Keith – have you noticed that most doctors’ offices now have a sign that says you must show your insurance card and your photo ID? You can thank Obamacare for that. Kind of ironic isn’t it? Considering how the democrats swore up and down that at least 25% of the minorities in this nation don’t have and or can’t get photo IDs to vote with.

What will happen to them? How will they get medical care without a photo ID card?

Sorry fred, that is a myth and wrongly reading the data. Assault weapons, not just assault rifles, fall into all of the subcategories, like street sweeper shotguns, or tec-9 assault pistols. There are hundreds, if thousands of unknown firearms used in homicides, and thousands of assault rifles and weapons used in shootings every single day.