Google+

We Recommend By ZergNet

142 comments

  • BigDannyH - January 12, 2013 4:48 a.m.

    From reading these messages, I kind of feel the NRA have already won. Nobody seems to be even entertaining the idea that perhaps your society would be a little healthier without everyone having access to guns. I'm not sure why a ban on guns is such a no-go area? It's such a no-go area that even these baby steps of banning automatic weapons seem to be DOA. Why do the "hunters" get so much protection too? "Most hunting rifles are semi-automatic, so banning them would ruin hunting". So fucking what! I'm sorry if your brutal, archaic hobby is made a little more difficult but we're trying to protect society! If they made a videogame controller that made it much easier to win at Fifa but, if a nutcase got hold of it, 10s of people could be murdered then, you know what, ban that bloody controller. I'll just have to get better at Fifa.
  • IronYoshi - January 12, 2013 7:11 a.m.

    I invite you to understand reality. You don't get why a ban on guns is a no-go? Read the Constitution. And before you come out with that "well regulated militia" line, try reading Heller vs. DC. Hint: the 2nd Amendment doesn't require that you be a member of a "militia," as we understand the term today, to own a weapon. You don't get why hunters get protection? Because the 2nd Amendment wasn't about hunting. It wasn't at the Republic's founding and it is not now.
  • Aardvarkk - January 12, 2013 7:42 a.m.

    That was passed when they still had muskets, so you are welcome to all the muskets you want.
  • opzero - January 13, 2013 11:27 a.m.

    The first amendment was made when they had shouting in town halls quail pens and parchment paper in mind before there was the internet , tv, radio , video games , movies , cable, mp3, ........
  • ParagonT - January 14, 2013 3:35 p.m.

    So was the formula E=MC2. Your point?
  • BigDannyH - January 14, 2013 4:17 p.m.

    The thing is, when scientific theories are proved incorrect, they change them.
  • ParagonT - January 14, 2013 8:03 p.m.

    But it isn't incorrect, it's just that the person doing the calculations and equating thinks that the formula is flawed instead of blaming themselves.
  • BigDannyH - January 15, 2013 2:48 p.m.

    It's actually part of a theory, right? I don't think it's proven, just widely believed.
  • ParagonT - January 15, 2013 2:59 p.m.

    Albeit I don't see many people jumping off buildings in light of the 'Theory' of Gravity. It's not just a theory as some may say, it's one of the best ways available to the scientific community to explain a phenomenon. It's really hard not to believe in it when there are almost no other explanations available or on par that the scientific community agree's with. But this is another discussion lol.
  • Meleedragon27 - January 11, 2013 9:18 p.m.

    I'm a bit baffled about your statement about how gun support is dying, Magrino: last I checked, more and more states have adopted gun-friendly laws (concealed carry in particular) over the past 20 years. Two major SCOTUS hearings (2008's Heller vs. District of Columbia & 2010's MacDonald vs. Chicago) have ruled in favor of gun rights advocates. Prior to Sandy Hook, a poll conducted by Gallup showed gun control in the minority with most people polled saying that gun laws should stay as they are or loosen them. The gun lobby has become so powerful that most politicians, again prior to Sandy Hook, dared not speak of gun control (especially not at a federal level for fear of losing their seats come next election). If anything, gun support is stronger than it has been in a long time. There's a reason the gun control lobby is using Sandy Hook as an opportunity to throw everything they've got at Obama; because they know this may be their only chance to pass gun legislation at a federal level for years to come. Even then, it's an uphill battle: Congress isn't going to make gun control a top priority anytime soon due to the country's unpleasant financial woes (and it lacks a sufficient number of people who would vote for such measures, anyway), and the gun lobby is going to throw everything they've got right back at the gun control groups. It's gonna be an unpleasant battle in the coming months, that's for damn sure.
  • IronYoshi - January 12, 2013 7:12 a.m.

    Blame the nefarious "gun lobby" all you want. The real force keeping politicians in check is Americans who own guns. Yes, you heard me. Ordinary Americans.
  • ZeeCaptain - January 12, 2013 1:53 p.m.

    IronYoshi surely you'r not suggesting that the gun toting american citizens are keeping politicians in line, it's doubtful they would work up the nerve to march on the government and even if they did they would not get very far.
  • IronYoshi - January 12, 2013 9:31 p.m.

    Idiot, it is the gun-toting American citizens who exercise their right to vote. Remember that? Suffrage?
  • IronYoshi - January 12, 2013 9:33 p.m.

    Oh and by the way, you have no idea what a regular gun owner would do if the government went totalitarian. You probably think guns are scary. Remember the most dominant part of the "gun culture" in the US is current and retired law enforcement/military. You know, the guys that you trust to use deadly force. Bet you didn't think of that, did you?
  • ZeeCaptain - January 13, 2013 7:55 a.m.

    You'r right I do thing guns are scary, but more so I think the people holding the guns are scarier, but seeing how most of the population that owns guns that would turn on the american government if it so did go totalitarian are in the south, and not to sat they are all the red neck culture but they are the types that are paranoid enough to own guns just for such an occasion as the government going such, worst case scenario is there's a second civil war but I just don't think that will happen. Now maybe you are such a person that owns a gun and cradle it as you wait for the government to turn on you or sell you to China, I mean there's one thing to defend your statement but then it's another to outright attack someone for disagreeing with you, and so far throughout this thread there are quite a few people disagreeing with you.
  • GR_TomMagrino - January 12, 2013 10:04 a.m.

    According to Gallup, gun ownership as a percentage of population in the US has dropped by, on average, 2 percent each year since 2007. It's also disproportionately concentrated among older white men. You can find more demographic info here: http://bit.ly/TUpwBn
  • ventanger - January 13, 2013 9:02 a.m.

    But the population is rising, so the number is ultimately increasing... statistics.
  • GR_TomMagrino - January 13, 2013 11:17 a.m.

    US population growth has been essentially flat the past three years: http://huff.to/YpwkgF
  • ventanger - January 13, 2013 6:51 p.m.

    You're just pointing out that the rate of increase is the same. Still the population, and number of responsible, qualified gun-owners is increasing. Not sure why you're still trying to argue that. Ya know, I hope you talk about some of the responses to your article in the next RR.
  • Meleedragon27 - January 13, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    Maybe so, but those statistics are only saying the number of gun owners is decreasing. I suppose that would draw alarm for an organization who represents the gun industry (after all, less customers = less money, and less money = less industry). However, I would like to point out the ownership and support are two different things. You don't necessarily have to own a gun of any kind to support gun rights (take me, for example). Besides, I stand by my point that support is still strong if not stronger than it has been, as I pointed out by the SCOTUS rulings (very recent ones, in fact , from '08 and '10) and the number of states that have eased up on their gun laws (esp. concealed carry).
  • Asmodean - January 11, 2013 8:59 p.m.

    Listen I can appreciate the perspective of most Gun enthusiasts, heck I think guns are cool but I would never buy one or at the least keep one in my home. But the Coolness factor or security benefit some people feel for guns is not sufficient an excuse for not have reasonable and secure gun laws in the US that would limit what weapons are available to the public. Claiming gun registration and/or banding some types of weapons as an infringement on your liberty and second amendment rights are a straw man at best. 1. No one has or is likely to ban all firearms in the US, it's a ridiculous and rather paranoid to believe anyone is coming for all the guns. 2. The Government already restricts the sale of full-auto fire arms, and explosives which are tracked and require special training to own and you can't buy surface to air missiles, fighter jets or tanks (unless they are unarmed and woefully obsolete) 3. Most Gun enthusiast who hide behind the 2nd Amendment only bother to talking about 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" part and are silent on the militia part which would imply, at the least, gun owners are required to be part of a state run militia. On the Matter of Sandy Hook massacre and the NRA's attack on violent video games, there are 0 studies supporting the implication that games have any effect on real world violence. What is 100% correct is an ill young, in need of help, walked into a school and killed 27 people with a gun. I would never be so naive as to think new gun laws would halt gun crime in the US. But anyone who thinks we need guns in schools or that less gun control will lower gun crime is not just naive but insane. Is Gun control the only answer? hell no. But seeing that Mr. Lanza killed people with a gun and not say a 360/PS3 it might be good to start there and not with the straw man of Media (video game) violence. If he had walked into the School with a NES Zapper I might just be onside with the NRA.
  • archnite - January 12, 2013 5:35 a.m.

    I think this sums up my own opinions well.
  • ultimatepunchrod - January 12, 2013 12:09 p.m.

    There have been studies that have shown a link between video games and aggression (which includes physical and verbal displays of it), but there have been a lot more that haven't replicated the data or haven't shown the effect in novel situations. I'm not disagreeing with you, but saying there have been zero studies that support the link between games and aggression isn't entirely accurate. Once again, not disagreeing with you.
  • ventanger - January 14, 2013 9:05 a.m.

    There are many guards, if not police officers, in schools. You think it's insane for me to think that a cop should have a gun?
  • Asmodean - January 14, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    I think it's insane for anyone to think that having armed guards in schools or arming the staff would have stopped this shooting or any of the of the others that occurred before. Guns do not belong in schools, IMO they don't don't belong in people's homes or concealed on their person either. You want a gun without signing up for the army or police, then join a gun club and have your firearms secured there.
  • kyle94 - January 11, 2013 7:17 p.m.

    Ultimately, with issues like this, I do fall a bit on the side of 'more gun control'. However, that being said, the US is full of illegal guns, and criminals will get their hands on guns anyway. I think there should always be extensive background checks and guns should be kept out of the hands of the mentally ill. However, if we are to truly lower the rate of crime within the country (which are dropping anyway, so lower them faster I suppose), we should focus on several issues at once. Focusing entirely on guns is almost as useless as focusing entirely on video games. We're going to need to make it easier for the mentally ill to get access to treatment, and dealing with issues that cause crime in the first place, trying to lower poverty rates and ensure that people are getting a good education despite their backgrounds. However, tighter gun control and cracking down more on illegal guns might make a difference as well, especially in the short-term compared to the main issues.
  • Arobadope - January 11, 2013 4:36 p.m.

    www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/01/10/ CNNs-Morgan-Slams-Down-Constitution-Calls-It-Your-Little-Book That link basically sums up my response to this.

Showing 81-100 of 142 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.