| | Advanced Search

 

Ric Santurri: Solomon – Do As I Say, Not As I Do—As the Democratic primary for Mayor of Providence…

Gary Sasse: Are Gubernational Candidates Being Realistic and Focused?—As Rhode Island enters the homestretch of the…

Chef Walter’s Flavors + Knowledge: Blueberry Crisp—Blueberry crisp is a popular comfort-dessert, relatively simple…

Brewed Awakenings in Warwick To Open in September—Brewed Awakenings' fifth and largest coffee house will…

Tufts Health Plan and Radio Disney Brought Magic of Healthy Living to Pawtucket—Tufts Health Plan and Radio Disney AM 1260…

RI Groups Urge Police to Support Public’s Right to Record Police Activity—Nine local organizations have asked police departments across…

Fun, Fun, Fun - Beach Boys Play Newport—A spirited crowd filled the Newport Yachting Center…

Organize + Energize: 10 Ways to Make Your Mornings Easier—How many of you rush around in the…

Dear John: Does He Have a Secret Life?—She found lipstick in his car...

3rd Annual Jeffrey Osborne Celebrity Classic Raises More Than $500,000—The third annual Jeffrey Osborne Celebrity Classic raised…

 
 

Timothy Jones: RI Should Focus on Fixing Economy, Not Banning Guns

Saturday, March 22, 2014

 

Putting people back to work and giving them hope for a decent future would do infinitely more good than banning guns, believes Timothy Jones.

The first thing you have to understand about Rhode Island’s gun laws, is that they are not lenient. The Brady Campaign ranked Rhode Island as having the 8th strictest laws in the country in 2011, the most recent ranking available. It’s doubtful we’ve since fallen from the top 10. Rhode Islanders are subjected to background checks before buying firearms, waiting periods, draconian rules regarding how and where firearms can be transported, and a labyrinthine concealed carry permitting system. With that in mind, any additional infringements on the freedom of Rhode Islanders to own firearms must be questioned.

Gun-Related Legislation

This past Tuesday the Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee held hearings on a number of gun related bills. The most contentious proposals were bans of so-called “assault weapons,” magazine capacity limitations, and a bill that would create a slush fund for anti-gun groups in the state.

In response to these bills, hundreds of pro-freedom Rhode Islanders assembled at the State House to argue against their passage. A few dozen anti-gun activists, many of them from out of state, showed up to argue in favor.

Representative Joseph Almeida sponsored the bulk of the most egregious bills. One, titled the Safe Firearms Act was mostly a copy of Connecticut’s recently enacted gun ban with a few slight edits making it even harsher. A similar bill was introduced last year by Rep. Almeida, but rather than recognizing his defeat in 2013 as a call for moderation, he doubled-down in 2014 with an even stricter ban. Those aren’t the actions of a man seeking compromise. Almeida’s sponsorship was confusing at first, but upon reflection it seems more likely he submitted the bills as a favor. During his testimony on the bills, Rep. Almeida seemed as though he hadn’t even read the proposals. Given Rep. Almeida’s unfamiliarity with the bills and the verbatim language used in parts of the Connecticut bans, it’s likely these bills were model legislation pushed by out of state interests.

In complete contrast to Almeida’s fumbling responses were the testimonies of the hundreds of freedom loving Rhode Islanders who showed up to defend their rights. Hard working men and women took the day off or rushed to the State House after work to join together in opposition to the unconstitutional bills being heard. Contrary to the anti-gun crowd’s description of these patriots as racists and fear mongers, the people testifying in support of freedom were men and women of all walks of life who love their families and want to protect them. I was proud to stand with them and enjoyed getting to know many of them while we waited to testify.

Unfair Attacks

It was sad to see the anti-gun ringleaders focusing their speeches and testimonies on attacking the character of these gun owners as though they were baby-killing racists from Planet X. The good men and women who showed up to the State House on Tuesday to argue in favor of keeping their freedom didn’t deserve such hateful rhetoric, but impugning the character of ones’ opponent is a tactic typical of the side arguing without the support of the facts.

Another modus operandi of the anti-gun activists is introducing radical bills based on out of state model legislation with no consultation of Rhode Island’s firearms owners and then calling for compromise after it’s too late. Leaders of the anti-gun crowd warned the NRA at their Tuesday press conference that the gun rights group should make a compromise now or face consequences. But their actions speak of an entirely different agenda. Instead of actually reaching out a hand in good faith, they would prefer to use a faux call for compromise as a cudgel in the media. This tactic played out in even starker terms last year when the governor, the State Police, and legislative leaders wrote a number of bills in the proverbial “smoke filled room,” and then unveiled them hastily and without input at a press conference. Similar calls for supporters of the second amendment to compromise were made then. But no one from the pro-second amendment community was invited to discuss solutions before having them shoved down our throats. Just like this year.

A Radical Agenda

When I drive up to the State House to fight this type of radical agenda, the greatest concern I bring with me is that here in the Ocean State we have so much more important work to do and could implement even more effective ways of decreasing crime. Studies show that violent crime is linked to weak economies. It is no secret that Rhode Island’s economy is one of the weakest in the nation. Putting people back to work and giving them hope for a decent future would do infinitely more good than banning guns.

At www.rigunblog.com, we work hard on defeating this type of bad legislation. We also invite Rhode Islanders to come out to the many public shooting events around the state. Come see what shooting is all about and meet the great people that participate in shooting sports. These folks aren’t the demons the anti-gun crowd makes them out to be. We’re parents and doctors, engineers and electricians and quite plainly, Rhode Islanders just like you. We’re all neighbors here in this, the smallest of states, and we all want to live in safe communities. But there are better solutions to achieving that goal than banning firearms, creating slush funds for professional advocates, or diminishing freedom. Please join us in advocating for better solutions.

 

Timothy Jones is Editor in Chief of RIGunBlog.com, and Associate Editor of Richard C. Young’s Intelligence Report. You can follow him on Twitter at: @timothyojones

 

Related Slideshow: The Influence of Gun Money in New England States

New Data from The Sunlight Foundation shows state-by-state breakdowns for donations to groups on both sides of the gun debate. The money went toward candidates, political parties, and political action committees (PACs), but doesn't include donations to independent or so-called “super PACs”.

 

See how much money went to candidates in each of the New England States in the slides below.

Prev Next

Rhode Island

State Candidates

Control $: 0

Rights $: 229650

Federal Candidates

Control $: 19557

Rights $: 5612

Prev Next

Massachusetts

State Candidates

Control $: 2850

Rights $: 20538

Federal Candidates

Control $: 54058

Rights $: 104579

Prev Next

Maine

State Candidates

Control $: 8325

Rights $: 51700

Federal Candidates

Control $: 27318

Rights $: 142505

Prev Next

Connecticut

State Candidates

Control $: 4076

Rights $: 56200

Federal Candidates

Control $: 43666

Rights $: 121596

Prev Next

Vermont

State Candidates

Control $: 0

Rights $: 40330

Federal Candidates

Control $: 4500

Rights $: 7550

Prev Next

New Hampshire

State Candidates

Control $: 1500

Rights $: 22475

Federal Candidates

Control $: 34337

Rights $: 293560

 
 

Related Articles

 

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Comments:

Talk about a radical agenda! I don't think the recent legislation is meant to address economic concerns. It is meant to prevent and reduce gun violence. So, your argument that we should be focused on money(Economy) instead of on Rhode Islanders suffering from gun violence is not an argument at all.
We are going to stop you!

Comment #1 by Randy White on 2014 03 22

The father of a six-year-old Newtown massacre victim was heckled and shouted down by dozens of gun-nut audience members during a hearing held by the Gun Violence Prevention Working Group. Neil Heslin pleaded in his emotional testimony for lawmakers to improve mental health options and ban assault weapons like the one Adam Lanza used to murder his son Jesse, 19 other first graders and six adults. "I still can't see why any civilian, anybody in this room in fact, needs weapons of that sort. You're not going to use them for hunting, even for home protection," Heslin said

Comment #2 by Sammy Arizona on 2014 03 22

This national anti gun campaign is a fraud started by the progressives,it's a tactic used much in the same way that fascist regimes all over the world have implemented as a means of disarming and controlling populations. Don't be fooled by the all the dog whistle,buzz word,catch phrase distractions of homophob,racist,war on women,our children,social injustice,inequality,hate speech,the rich,big corporations,green energy,minimum wage, etc etc.. I suggest you do your own investigation and homework before you jump the gun (no pun intended) into these high profile mass shootings,you may discover truly enlightening and disturbing facts. There are enough gun laws on the books to choke a horse..why are they not enforced to curb gun violence? why? because it doesn't fit the left's anti 2nd amendment agenda.

Comment #3 by LENNY BRUCE on 2014 03 22

Right JOJO! Doesn't take long for the crazy to come out of your gun nutters, does it?
Talking about disturbing. What you wrote about the horrible mass shootings was totally disturbing! Why not just reveal that you are a "False Flag" nutter?

"...fascist regimes all over the world have implemented as a means of disarming and controlling populations. Don't be fooled by the all the dog whistle,buzz word,catch phrase distractions of homophob,racist,war on women,our children,social injustice,inequality,hate speech,the rich,big corporations,green energy,minimum wage, etc etc.. " ~ JOJO
"I suggest you do your own investigation and homework before you jump the gun (no pun intended) into these high profile mass shootings,you may discover truly enlightening and disturbing facts."~ JOJO

I certainly hope you don't own any weapons...

Comment #4 by Randy White on 2014 03 22

I would like to thank the gun-nuts at the NRA and the pro-war, draft-dodging, chicken-hawk coward Mr Wayne LaPierre for their recent "donation" of $63,000 to the Rhode Island Board of Elections. The largest "donation" in the states history ....LOL
Too the NRA members who actually paid the fine...Proof that "a fool is easily parted from his money"

Sammy in GUN CRAZY Arizona

Comment #5 by Sammy Arizona on 2014 03 22

Randy White - If you have an argument for banning firearms owned by good citizens, we would all like to hear it. Your name calling does nothing to advance your position.

Sammy Arizona - Look around you at the things you don't "need", I'm sure there are many possessions you don't "need", but enjoy. NRA members are citizens, it seems you want to take away their First Amendment rights as well as the Second.

As far as laws on the books mentioned by JOJO MONKEY. Let's spell a few out.

We have laws against:
Killing your mother, didn't work.
Stealing, Mr. Lanza stole the firearms, didn't work.
Bringing firearms onto school property, didn't work.
Breaking into a building, didn't work.
Damaging public property, didn't work.
Killing adults, didn't work.
Killing children, didn't work.

Why is it the people that don't like the shooting sports or firearms insist no one should? It seems again the people that claim tolerance, aren't.

Do you anti-Second Amendment commenters remember who the school administrators were calling while the attack was occurring?

The people with firearms.

Comment #6 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 23

Odd the leader of the NRA is a pro-war, draft-dodging, chicken-hawk coward Mr Wayne LaPierre who refused to fight for his country and then bragged about how he used his political connections to avoid the draft (like the admitted pedophile. and fellow draft-dodger Ted Nugent)

Again
I would like to thank the gun-nuts at the NRA and the coward Mr. Wayne LaPierre for their recent ""donation": of $63,000 to the Rhode Island Board of Elections. The largest "donation" in the RI's states history ....LOL
Too the NRA members who "actually" paid the FINE ...Proof that "a fool is easily parted from his money"

Sammy in GUN CRAZY Arizona

Comment #7 by Sammy Arizona on 2014 03 23

Wuggly,
Good citizens? No! You are irresponsible citizens that force our children to live in terror! You guys fantasize about all kinds of crazy stuff like the rant you posted above concerning your idiotic understanding of the law and law enforcement.

All the kids suffering from gun violence in this country because you won't accept restrictions on DEADLY WEAPONS makes you a monster. 3 year olds shooting themselves and shooting others happens frequently because our laws on DEADLY WEAPONS are so lax that you can just buy one on facebook with out any checks at all! And gun owners just leave them lying around ...
YOU are the problem! We will stop you!

Comment #8 by Randy White on 2014 03 23

Sammy Arizona - I'll take it you didn't find things you don't "need" and do want to take away the right of free speech of those that don't agree with you.

Randy White - Again you name call, make false accusations and fail to make an argument to take a citizens rights away and create new laws.

I'm all for educating children in firearms safety. The same way we have sex, drivers and drug education, right in the classroom. How about you? There were rifle teams in the high schools in the fifties, the kids would walk to school with rifles slung over their shoulder. The difference is resposiblity is not being taught. That it is always someone elses fault. Sandy Hook was the fault of Mr. Lanza and no one else's.

Comment #9 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 23

Teach kids gun safety???
Like what that police instructor that shot himself in the foot??? You can watch it on youtube!
That safety instructor in Massachusetts that allowed a little boy to shoot himself in the head with an oozy? You can google that news story!
That police Chief in NH that left his guns out for a kid that shot himself in the head?

Of course I don't want children to be exposed to guns and gun nutters like you! I call you killer because that is what you are to me.

If you want to enjoy firing weapons then keep them locked up at the range or buy a BB gun!

You an your kind out to be ashamed for keeping our children living in fear and terror of getting shot.

We WILL stop you!

Comment #10 by Randy White on 2014 03 23

Oh, and HTF do you teach a 3 YEAR OLD about gun safety??? How do you teach a 2 YEAR OLD about gun safety???

I call you names like idiotic and killer and monster because that is precisely what you are! My God, you people are just so totally self-centered and ignorant that I have a hard time understanding how it is you are even able to function in our society.

2 year olds and 3 year olds are now shooting themselves and others in our society and it is because monsters like you prevent sensible gun legislation! I am so ashamed to think there are people like you in this world...

Comment #11 by Randy White on 2014 03 23

Randy,

Interesting that you can only come up with a handful of examples of tragedies. Yes, they are tragedies. But the countless scores of tragedies that will certainly occur (I know my history quite well) if you and your anti-gun-shilling friends get your way, is absolutely beyond all comprehension.

Oh and how to teach a 3YO about gun safety? By following the NRA's very simple instructions. http://eddieeagle.nra.org/ THIS is common-sense gun safety and should be mandatory in every school -- public, private, or home -- across the country. It doesn't matter if all guns are banned, there are so many in this country that YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM IF YOU DO NOT TEACH YOUR CHILDREN THIS!

If you teach toddlers REAL gun safety (as promoted by the Eddie Eagle program) that will surely help to reduce the number of tragedies you so blithely spew in support of your wrongheaded ideals.

Wait, you NEED those tragedies in order to support your cause. And you will RIDICULE the actual gun safety links I posted! It's almost as if you WANT tragedies to occur to further your goals!

Amazing.

Comment #12 by Trost Osler on 2014 03 23

Handful??? I could post all day about 2, 3 and 4 year olds finding guns and shooting themselves and others in the United States!

3 year olds do not attend Elementary school! 2 year olds do not attend Elementary school. You have no idea what you are talking about.

You are just a monster and nothing I say to you is going to change that.

"Handful" of tragedies... what a monster you are. Shame on you!

Comment #13 by Randy White on 2014 03 23

The proliferation of guns in this country presents a real danger to the 75% or so of us who do NOT own guns and would like to NOT get killed or injured by one.

A lot of deaths and injuries from guns are caused, not by criminals but by accidental shootings by law abiding folks and their young children therefore I would like to see mandatory liability insurance for gun ownership. If I have to have liability insurance for a car or truck, why should anyone escape responsibility for any injury or death caused by their guns? Insurance guarantees that there will be money to pay for damages. I know that criminals would not get the insurance, but I am sure that most responsible gun owners would get insurance in case of an accidental shooting,

Comment #14 by Sammy Arizona on 2014 03 23

Sammy,

What are the numbers of deaths and injuries from criminals and the numbers from accidental shootings? Not sure what argument u you are making about liability insurance for legal gun owners. In your fist sentence you state that you would like to NOT get killed or injured by one. Do infer that if you can collect the insurance payout then getting shot is ok?

A little mistified by your argument.

Comment #15 by Michael Byrnes on 2014 03 24

Mr. White appears miss informed and lacking the courtesy to review both sides of an argument before entering comment. It would appear that Mr. White would stand with the group that believes our children should fair power tools and work ethics until they reach the age of 26 and are saddled with a hefty student loan to do the job our fathers learned from true OJT... starting from the bottom. Mr. White would prefer we not teach our children pride of country or history... instead remove these firearms from the history book and give the small arms control to the U.N. It would appear Mr White's tunnel vision has seen nothing good is personal protection and gun safety over the past 30 years but history would prove him wrong. We offer many resources to such narrowed viewed outsiders... for those who don't like to take the time to read... try Gun Talk Radio for a few weeks. Hear from private groups that truly wish to keep our children safe... Listen to the other side of the story when 'gun control law' is not well vetted by both sides. Any time you go in a room and close the door to the other side you come out with garbage law.

Comment #16 by gregory dunbar on 2014 03 24

Michael Byrnes
No I am not OK with getting shot, don't talk crazy ... LOL
But I do believe that there should be mandatory insurance for gun owners. In the New England states they have 2 or 3 gun deaths per 100,000 residents per year. Out here in the Wild West we have 21 deaths per 100,000 residents TEN times the NE States .And since the new "Stand Your Ground Law" aka "kill at will" law has passed the rate is increasing. So its a real problem here. To make matters worse they just pasted a law allowing loaded weapons in barrooms and nightclubs, its a perfect mix .. guns and booze. Since then we had a shoot-out at a bar in Tempe AZ where 14 people were shot, none of them died but half of them will spend the rest of their lives in nursing homes at tax payers expense
Sammy in gun crazy Arizona

Comment #17 by Sammy Arizona on 2014 03 24

Greg Dunbar wrote
"Mr. White appears miss informed and lacking the courtesy to review both sides of an argument before entering comment. It would appear that Mr. White would" ...(note the rest of the comment is just conjecture and lacking facts)

Greg
Actually your the one lacking courtesy by putting words in Randy Whites mouth that he or she did not communicate.

How do you know what, he or she "believes" ??? LOL

Comment #18 by Sammy Arizona on 2014 03 24

Sammy,

There are roughly 32,000 gun deaths per year in the United States. Of those, over 60% are suicides. About 3% are accidental deaths (less than 1,000). About 34% of deaths (just over 11,000 in both 2010 and 2011) make up the remainder of gun deaths. Of the 11,000 homicides almost 9,000 are gang related.

Not sure how wild west Arizona stats breaks down by suicide and gang related.

Comment #19 by Michael Byrnes on 2014 03 24

Randy White offers a fine example of the Progressive style of debate. Emotional, irrational, name-calling and fact-deficient. Every freedom-loving person should learn (but not use) the style.

Comment #20 by Art West on 2014 03 24

Mike, thanks for those stats! Only America has such shocking statistics like these among advanced countries. 960 gun accident deaths and 19,200 suicides annually is truly astonishing! Any kids get shot in Japan last year??? Nope! How many school massacres or even guns brought to school in Australia last year? ZERO!

Not to mention that the Journal of Pediatrics study finds that about 3,000 American children die each year and 7,000 suffer gun shot wounds.

If you nutters find it irrational for me to characterize you as monsters for your position in light of all the kids being shot to death and crippled and injured then you are not only monsters but you are willfully ignorant and a real danger to our nation and our children.
America is sick of your tired and idiotic arguments about guns. We can see that 2 YEAR OLDS are shooting others in this country. It is time to call you out for the monsters that you are. You WILL be stopped!

Comment #21 by Randy White on 2014 03 24

I think Sammy is n the right path with his suggestion that guns be insured. Seems like a compromise to me. You gun-nutters are not being responsible at all with your guns and that is very plain to see.
I'll add another suggestion to Sammy's.

"The U.S. General Accounting Office has estimated that
31% of unintentional deaths caused by firearms might be prevented by the addition of two
devices: a child-proof safety lock (8%) and a loading indicator (23%).x

o The best way to avoid unintentional shootings, particularly those involving children,
is to not keep a gun in the home."

A rational person would consider this but the typical response from gun-nutters is "No that won't be acceptable because ________________(enter crazy excuse about UN Small Arms Treaty or FreeDumb or NAZIs)"

Canada is very similar gun culture to the USA etc. yet far, far fewer gun deaths and violence. We could just adopt their gun laws and call it a day but you monsters prevent that from happening with your irrational arguments about Freedom and fantasies of home invasion etc.(it is pitiful).

What is likely to happen in Rhode Island is that more money will pour in from gun restriction groups to buy the politicians votes and then we will have some of the tightest restriction in the USA. When you nutters talk about the UN and Freedom and say stuff like "a handful of tragedies" people see how very disturbed, ignorant and dangerous you really are and that is when the money will start pouring in to buy the very politicians that are in the NRAs pocket now.

BTW, did you hear about this local incident???
"NORTH ATTLEBOROUGH, Massachusetts — Police say a Rhode Island woman intentionally shot herself to death at a Massachusetts gun range over the weekend."
We can't even trust you nuts at the range, how can we trust you anywhere???

Comment #22 by Randy White on 2014 03 24

Randy,

Art is right. You call for compromise and then go off your rocker in a way to insure no compromise would ever be possible. Either you don't understand compromise or you do not want compromise. May you should also look into swimming pool deaths, auto deaths and then hospital "accidental" deaths.

You make one good point
"The U.S. General Accounting Office has estimated that
31% of unintentional deaths caused by firearms might be prevented by the addition of two
devices: a child-proof safety lock (8%) and a loading indicator (23%).x

Comment #23 by Michael Byrnes on 2014 03 24

Great so we agree then? You will support insurance for guns and also trigger locks and loading indicators?

Swimming pools are not at issue here nut-job. I have been through his with so many of you guys it isn't funny! What is next the good ole hammer argument? Baseball bat argument?

You know why I use inflammatory and emotional rhetoric? Because it is effective in targeting YOU as the problem and it makes you guys start in with the crazy talk about False Flag and Swimming Pools and the Definition of what an Assault Weapon is etc.

I am just highlighting and exposing you guys for the nutters that you really are. For the uncaring monsters that keep our children living in fear and terror!

We will stop you!

Comment #24 by Randy White on 2014 03 24

Randy White - Crazy talk? Swimming, falls and bicycle accidents account for far more deaths than firearms, yet you base your argument on "the children".

I was taught gun safety at a young age, probably 5 or 6 as I look at the photos. I had a rifle and ammo in my closet when I was 7 or 8. I knew the responsibility of it. Responsibility can be taught at a very young age. There are kids in Honduras (and I'm sure other countries that, but I saw them in Honduras) that carry machetes, and think of the not as weapons but tools.

As far as compromise goes, you have nothing to offer. You want to restrict or confiscate me, my property or my rights. What do you give?

Did you see ProJo on Sunday? If those women had a firearm instead of a restraining order, maybe they would still be alive. When seconds count, police are minutes away.

Comment #25 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 24

Randy--why are you trying to control my life? If I want to have a gun in my home--and can act responsibly--why does my liberty concern you? It's my risk, no? It's my family and my choice--pro choice!

BTW, it's funny when a person that argues emotionally--and IMHO, irrationally, calls people that disagree with him "nutters." It also demonstrates incredible immaturity. Please up your game.

Comment #26 by Jimmy LaRouche on 2014 03 24

Some buzzwords need clarification.

Ban: This word is thrown around as if all gun legislation is aimed at "banning" all guns and all gun ownership. Of course this isn't true. Gun legislation is aimed at creating a well-regulated system of gun buying, selling, and ownership. A blanket ban on all guns and on all owners would be unconstitutional. Reasonable regulations are not unconstitutional.

Freedom: This word has been used by the gun lobby to mean that unfettered, unlimited, and unregulated gun ownership is the only definition of freedom. Other freedoms are so basic, the founding fathers felt no need to enumerate them in the Constitution. Among them are the right to breathe the air. The right to life, liberty, and happiness. The right to go to school without being shot in the face. The right to a government without interference from massively funded special interest groups.

Did you know that the gun lobby is preventing confirmation of a new surgeon general because the nominee once referred to gun violence as a public health issue? Did you know that the gun lobby de-funded research at the Center for Disease control about firearms injuries?

If the NRA and gun rights advocates were truly concerned about gun safety and gun violence, they would use their power, money, and influence to take the lead on these issues instead of fighting against every gun control bill that comes down the pike. Why don't they fight for good regulation instead of fighting against every regulation? Why can't there be some room for compromise? Why can't they acknowledge that people who want reasonable firearms regulation are not Nazis, but people who simply want to be safer?

Comment #27 by John Onamas on 2014 03 24

Wuggly, YES, CRAZY TALK! We are talking about guns and gun deaths and gun violence NOT swimming pools and all that other crazy stuff you guys try to distract with.

You had a rifle with ammo in your closet when you were 7 or 8, and that is after you were taught about gun safety??? News Flash for you nut-job!: storing a rifle in a closet with ammo is NOT safe! Your idea of safety is giving 7 and 8 years olds rifles and ammo that they can store in their closet? You are even crazier than I first thought. Doesn't take long for you killers to come out with the crazy talk though, does it?

Compromise? I already laid it out there with Insurance, Trigger locks and loading indicators! What say you? Agreed and call it a day?

Comment #28 by Randy White on 2014 03 24

Jimmy,
I am trying to protect people from irrational nuts like you. Your concept of "Liberty" frightens me. Too many kids are dying because of irresponsible nutters like you and I am here to stop you.

At least I have emotions, Jimmy! All those kids dying because you won't accept some simple restrictions to ensure their safety. That makes you a monster to me and most other rational human beings.

So, will you agree to mandatory insurance on guns, trigger locks and loading indicators? Then we can call it a day. What say you?

Comment #29 by Randy White on 2014 03 24

Sure you are Randy. You don't know me, but I'm automatically a nut because I disagree with you. Maturity that is not. Rational that is not. It's your way or the highway. Arrogant in your ignorance, you'd make victims of all of us in your pursuit of the perfect. Good luck with that.

Comment #30 by Jimmy LaRouche on 2014 03 24

Jim, you are a nut because of your position on guns. You are not only a but in my book but a monster! I am ashamed of you and I view you as extremely dangerous.

We will stop you!

Comment #31 by Randy White on 2014 03 24

John Onamas - The rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Randy White - I think you're projecting your own insecurities on gun owners. Maybe you don't trust yourself or family with firearms.

Violence is not perpetrated by in animate objects. Punish the people that harm others. As I stated before we have laws against murdering, injuring and robbing others.

You're trying to blame victims of crime on what a criminal does with stolen goods. With that mentality does the insurance company have to pay you any thing if your TV or computer is robbed? In your opinion the item wasn't secure enough.

Again with that "compromise" you're not offering anything.

Comment #32 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 24

Wuggles, no I wouldn't trust my own family with firearms because firearms are not safe. Firearms are deadly weapons.
Loved ones shoot other loved ones all the time in the USA. You guys are so ridiculous in your arguments about all this that you portrait yourselves as the victims! If I don't trust my own family with firearms then I certainly don't trust some guy that says he learned gun safety at age 5 and 6 and then at age 7 and 8 he was allowed the have a rifle with ammo in his closet!
We got 4 year olds shooting 2 year olds and you think yourself the victim?

This will not continue. We will stop you!

Comment #33 by Randy White on 2014 03 24

Wuggly, I'm really glad that you chose to respond to the substance of my post, rather than focus on a minor wording issue. Oh, wait...

Comment #34 by John Onamas on 2014 03 24

Randy White - Thank you for confirming my suspicions.
Yes, family members kill family members and chances are a victim of murder knows the murderer, no matter what the vehicle of demise. The vast majority of people are good and don't kill or harm others.

John Onamas - Sorry, I just don't want a misunderstanding that being "happy" is a right.

OK, Lets start with your comment on banning. Just look at history there is a progression every time, from registration to confiscation. It has happened in New York City, Detroit, Chicago, D.C. and many other cities around the country. It has also happened in many other countries, registration, taxation (politicians will tax anything they can count), banning, confiscation. The insurance you mention is registration, it would be the only way the State could keep track.

The rights you mention Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, from The Declaration of Independence, the right to not be shot in the face, I agree. This is why we have a Justice System so when someone violates someone else's rights, the person causing harm can be punished by society.
We don't punish people for what they might do.

Yes, the NRA lobbies Congress, just like all the anti-gun owners groups, Planned Parenthood, Auto Industry, Energy Corporations, Unions and all the other special interest groups lobbying for their special interest. Even against conformation of particular persons for certain positions.
"Good" in "good regulation" is subjective at best to whatever side you happen to be on. I consider regulation an infringement. "The Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

Comment #35 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 25

Randy,

Given your the character of your arguments in this matter I am not sure anyone should trust you or your family with firearms or any type of implement that could be used as a weapon. Firearms are a problem not because an inanimate object is deadly but because the operator of that inanimate object uses it in an improper manner.

Comment #36 by Michael Byrnes on 2014 03 25

A gun is NOT an inanimate object, genius! It is an explosive and deadly weapon! Guns should always be treated as dangerous and loaded! Do hammer just hammer stuff on their own? Do they just go off when you touch or drop them? DO they go off with an extreme temperature change? NO. NO. NO. And NO! you people are just about as smart as a 7 or 8 year old in my book! My God! Did you go to school in Rhode Island??? Guns are always going off in this country! People are constantly dropping them and just touching them and... THEY GO OFF! They go off because that are explosive weapons with many components! The components are made so that the gun is ready to fire INSTANTLY making them extremely dangerous, nut-jobs!
You guys are just wacko! If your argument held any wieght then 2 year olds would be kill others with hammers and knives etc. at the same frequency as with guns. And hammers would just GO OFF...

What kind of wacko believes it is safe for a 7 - 8 year old to store a rifle with ammo in his closet??? --- A GUN WACKO!(AKA Wuggly)

The reason that we aren't able to change the laws isn't because you guys have a strong argument! It is because you guys spend money on guns like it is some wacko obsession allowing gun companies to put money up for buying as many politicians as possible.

But now you are going to see money coming from the other side and when you do we will be vicious and unforgiving for the horrors that you have forced our children to live with! All the lock-down drills! All of the News Stories about School Shootings! All of the stories about BABIES being shot to death!

You WILL be stopped!

Comment #37 by Randy White on 2014 03 25

Wuggly, give me an example of "confiscation" having occurred. The specter of black-suited federal agents entering your house to seize your guns is just more agenda-driven hysteria. For one thing, this would be prohibited by the Fourth Amendment, which like almost all of the Bill of Rights, includes a structure of laws and policies to define the boundaries of this right.

The criminal justice system goes into action after a crime is committed. Any enlightened society understands that it public policy and regulation should be proactive and prevent crimes from occurring.

The NRA is the most powerful political lobby in the country. It insinuates itself into any aspect of our lives that might tangentially touch upon guns in any way. It does this not to protect people, but to protect an abstract principle. It disgusts me as an American.

The Second Amendment also contains the words "well regulated." Let's remember that too.

Comment #38 by John Onamas on 2014 03 25

Putting Gun Death Statistics in Perspective
Gangs Remain Key Unaddressed Problem in Gun Debate
By Dustin Hawkins

There are roughly 32,000 gun deaths per year in the United States. Of those, around 60% are suicides. About 3% are accidental deaths (less than 1,000). About 34% of deaths (just over 11,000 in both 2010 and 2011) make up the remainder of gun deaths. Sometimes the 32,000 and 11,000 figures are used interchangeably by gun control advocates. Clearly, the 32,000 figure is a far more dramatic number and is often used for impact. These numbers are also regularly compared to other countries' gun statistics. But are they true? Here, we will examine some of the most common gun control arguments used and put those figures into perspective.
Gang Violence Driving Force of Gun Violence
To hear gun control advocates speak, one would be led to believe that gun violence is a widespread problem whereby the mere existence of a gun is as much a problem as the person who intends to wield it. But the reality is that gun homicides are overwhelmingly tied to gang violence. In fact, a staggering 80% of gun homicides are gang-related. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), gang homicides accounted for roughly 8,900 of 11,100 gun murders in both 2010 and 2011. That means that there were just 2,200 non gang-related firearm murders in both years in a country of over 300 million people and 250 million guns.
Cities such as Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Cleveland, and New Orleans all have very high per-capita murder rates. Individual police estimates usually find at least 65% and often more than 80% of all murders in those cities are gang-related. Solve the problem of gang violence, and a huge chunk of the gun homicide and violence problem is solved. And what national gun control measures would slow the gang violence problem, when local gun control laws have failed in cities like Chicago? If politicians were really worried about gun deaths, wouldn't they be specifically targeting where a majority of the problems exist?
2,200 Gun Homicides Per Year Beyond Gangs
The 2,200 figure is perhaps the most relevant of all gun statistics in the gun control debate given that the gun control laws are specifically targeted to this segment. If the government were interested in stopping gangs - and as a result also stopping the major contributor of gun violence - the gun laws would be more targeted. Yet most gun control legislation would do little-to-nothing to slow the growing gang problem. Most of the gun laws are aimed at a segment of the population that is mostly law-abiding and outside of the gang culture and would likely do little to stop any of the violence.
The United States is one of the most gun-friendly countries in the world. Roughly half of American households have a gun. There are almost as many guns in America as people. It's common sense to know that, yes, the United States will probably have more gun murders than a country with almost no guns and no households with guns. I'd would also assume that Florida will have more drowning deaths than, say, Michigan. But unlike swimming pools, guns can also be used for self-defense reasons. The reality remains that in a country of 315 million people (and almost as many guns) very few of the guns are ever used in any crime. If arguments that the mere existence of guns made people more violent, more likely to murder, and more likely to commit crime, than the gun problem in America would be much worse.
Suicide Rates
Suicide is often a secondary reason gun control advocates use for wanting to "control" guns. It is true that roughly half of suicides in America are done by use of a firearm. Gun control advocates argue that suicides are often a momentary impulse and the availability of a gun makes people more likely to act on those impulses. Japan is probably the opposite of the United States in regards to a gun culture. With few guns and gun-related deaths, Japan is one of the most heavily cited countries by gun-control advocates. But while the cultural differences between Japan and the USA (and resulting gun violence comparisons) make a gun control argument hard to realistically swallow, one thing stands out: the suicide rate in Japan is more than twice the United States' suicide rate. The US suicide rate is about the same as Great Britain, Canada, Denmark, Switzerland, and Iceland and well below France and Greenland. In reality, suicide rates seem to have little to do with the availability or accessibility of guns. It just so happens that in the US guns are the suicide weapon of choice, while in Japan it might be jumping in front of a train or poisoning. The method of "jumping" is so common in Japan that the families of train-jumpers are often charged a fine for clean-up.
Mass Shootings Remain a Rarity
The reason that horrible tragedies like the Newton, Connecticut and Aurora, Colorado shootings are so gut-wrenching and shocking is rooted in a reality that such incidents are extremely rare. Unfortunately, politicians often aim to stir up emotional reactions and exploit these tragedies for political gain. With the incredible number of statistics that get thrown around and abused, it's important to sometimes step back and actually look at what the numbers say. Are the gun laws being proposed anything more than window dressing and "feel-good" legislation that will have little actual impact? Should more efforts actually be used in a results-oriented way, targeting the actual concentrated areas where gun crime occurs? Politics is often a processed-based and not results-oriented exercise, where "doing something" is often rewarded more than actually ever accomplishing anything.

Comment #39 by LENNY BRUCE on 2014 03 25

John,

You make a number of points that many in this discussion might not agree with but you make them in a mature and measured manner.

About the NRA you say that It does this not to protect people, but to protect an abstract principle. It disgusts me as an American.

What abstract principle are you referring to?

Comment #40 by Michael Byrnes on 2014 03 26

Michael, the "right" to bear arms is an abstract principle. And so is every other right embodied in the Constitution. They are abstract until given structure and enforcement by law and policy. For example, the right to free speech does not include slander and libel. The right to assemble peacefully often requires a permit. There is no right that is absolute and unlimited in a nation of laws and not men. Oliver Wendall Holmes said it best: "Your Liberty To Swing Your Fist Ends Just Where My Nose Begins." The gun lobby seems oblivious and/or uncaring about where other peoples' noses begin.

Comment #41 by John Onamas on 2014 03 26

John Onamas - Confiscation does not necessarily mean raids. What do you think Connecticut is trying to do now? They have banned certain firearms and requested they be turned in. What do you think happens when they don't? November 18, 2013 NYPD sent letters to citizens that had registered their firearms. The NYPD listed that persons firearms and why they needed to be turned in or removed from NY City.

My mistake for not specifying, I was quoting the Rhode Island Constitution, Article 1, Section 22, "The Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" That's the whole thing. When the Second Amendment mentions "well regulated" it was referring not to the People, but to the Militia, being well disciplined and practiced with arms. The People are the Militia, the Militia is not the people. The Bill of Rights restricts the Government not the People. The Rights are inalienable and can't be taken away.

In your response to Michael Byrnes, Yes, a permit is often needed if assembling in large numbers on Government property, except when your an "Occupy" group. It may also be required in halls and other gathering places for safety of patrons (think Station Nightclub). An anti-gun or pro-gun owning group can hold a meeting in the hall with a permit for a maximum of 300, with 300 people.

As far as slander and libel, we don't gag everyone that can talk because they might commit slander or libel. See my first post for laws broken by Mr. Lanza.

You refer to an Oliver Wendell Holmes quote. If Bob hits you, do you go after, blame, or punish Bill?

And like Michael I appreciate you discussing an emotional topic in a "mature and measured manner.

Small point, in 1968, the U.S. Supreme Court declared convicted felons can't be forced to register their guns, or prosecuted for failure to register their guns to do so would violate their Fifth Amendment (Haynes vs. U.S.).

Comment #42 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 26

I am sure you appreciate people talking nice to you killer. I am not one of those though because I know people like you do not respond to logic or evidence!
The only way to get through to monsters like you is to expose your ignorance.

Weren't you the one that highlighted gun safety by stating you had learned about gun safety at age 5-6 and by age 7-8 you had a rifle and ammo in your closet???
Do you think rational people are going to read what you wrote and not view you as a ignorant monster keeping our children in fear and terror?

You are a MONSTER and people know it...

Comment #43 by Randy White on 2014 03 26

Randy White - Yes, that's me. The kid who grew up with a gun in his closet and knowing what personal responsibility meant. Carried a jackknife in my pocket too, even in school. Never once thought of using a weapon against my fellow classmates.

As far as your kids living in "fear and terror" that is breed by ignorance. You project and teach your fears and terror onto your kids. What you teach you kids and what they learn is up to you. When do you plan to start teaching safety to children?

I taught my kids to swim so they wouldn't be afraid of the water when we were at the beach. Taught them to sail so they could control the boat and it would not control them and they wouldn't be afraid. Showed them how to ride bicycles, use a bow, and about basic tools. My kids didn't get the plastic hammer and saw, I got them small real tools they could build with and not be afraid. And I showed them the proper handling of firearms so they wouldn't be afraid. Even taught them how to drive. Confidence and responsibility that's what I taught my kids.

Knowledge is the antithesis of ignorance, ignorance of some thing sometimes results in fear of that thing.

I'm sure the rational people reading my posts and your posts will also come to conclusions. What those conclusions are is of course up to them.

Comment #44 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 27

Randy White

Seek help fast

Comment #45 by Michael Byrnes on 2014 03 27

gunfacts.info is a good source... compare to anything from a progressive... then redirect to proper logic.

Comment #46 by gregory dunbar on 2014 03 30

Hi Wuggly, despite what Mr. White claims, it is you who is responding in calm and reasonable tones. The debate here is very clear.

It is clear that Mr. White is simply a paid propagandist, come to portray gun owners as dangerous lunatics. Like Judas, he is probably not paid very much to sell the gift of freedom, and along with it his dignity and honor. History does not remember his ilk kindly.

Remember the Dred Scott case. It does not matter what the law is, nor what SCOTUS rules. Human rights remain above the law. The law can be wrong, and SCOTUS may rule unethically. That does not make it right. Ethics, morality, and justice are all above the law.

The basic right of self defense is not abstract, nor is it granted by the Constitution. It is merely protected by the Constitution. SCOTUS may eventually rule against it, but that is merely a temporary setback in recognition. The right remains, as does your duty to practice it or lose it for all your children's grandchildren.

Gun control is about disarming slaves. Felony restrictions on ownership are simply an instrument of disarming blacks. The drug war -- the source of a vast majority of the crime rate that Mr. White so blithely spews -- is a fist of oppression against American blacks.

Make no mistake. Gun control is the antithesis social justice. It is about unequality, about enforcing the basic tenets of slavery in an age where we profess to understand basic rights for all people of all colors, genders, and beliefs.

Gun control is about slavery.

Gun rights are about freedom, for *EVERYONE*. This is something Mr. White is paid to campaign against. He is against blacks, against minorities, against women, against every precept of justice for the weak and equality for all. Guns are about ensuring that every voice -- not matter how small -- has recognition and a place.

Firearms are about freedom. They always have been, and always will be. No further discussion is necessary or ever will be, except to teach new generations.

Comment #47 by Trost Osler on 2014 03 30

Insurance must be the answer... if the progressive can get money by way of taxes or some seemingly legal action then they will close the debate. Look around our state... the moneys supporting the recreational areas most enjoy are coming from the sportsman. The sportsman goes out each year and works for the government to ensure the wildlife are kept in check across the state.

Allow our children to learn about the tools of our trade and someday they will be the sportsman, policeman, lawyer, judge, etc. protecting our state interest... which includes the interest of the people who just like to visit the recreational areas and don't understand the processes behind keeping things in good order.

Yes, a child is not too young to taught to respect for tools of trade... power tools, computer, guns, or law.

Respect of others brings us to debate over facts... on other hand when one side disrespects the other is when they try to play the political game for years by twisting fact...

When a group of progressives are payed to bring the canned argument of the progressive to our state we must stand up and point out that these angles have all been tried in other states and we are not willing to support the RI candidates that platform includes such tales.

Comment #48 by gregory dunbar on 2014 03 30

Twisting fact???
Toddlers shooting toddlers is a twist of fact???

Tools of trade???
Children should not have access or fire guns at all! ZERO! Guns are DEADLY WEAPONS and children should have ZERO access to them. Children should be taught that guns are deadly and they should treat them as DEADLY and as loaded in all cases.

You nut-jobs treat guns as if they are safe and we should allow kids to fire them! That Wuggles dude even sees nothing wrong with a 7 year old having a rifle with ammo in the bedroom closet!

You guys are wacko! You think I am paid to fight with you idiots??? I like making fools of nutters like you! That is my payment!

How could any person in their right mind respect monsters like you? It isn't possible!

Comment #49 by Randy White on 2014 03 30

Trost,
Guns are NOT about Freedom. Guns are about KILLING. Stop being wacko and extremest. There are plenty of solutions to gun violence in the USA like adopting strategies to reduce gun violence in Australia, UK, Canada...

You guys don't help your cause by making wacko statements about Felons getting weapons or slavery etc. You sound 100% nuts when you say stuff like that.

So, what is happening currently is that the gun lobby and gun interests(manufacturers) are facing increasing push back from smart and thoughtful Americans about gun violence because toddlers are shooting toddlers! The gun interests have bought plenty of political influence over the years but that is now changing to gun restriction groups buying more politicians. In addition to the gun restriction money you have people like me that will fight with you idiots until we stop you!
We will stop you!

Comment #50 by Randy White on 2014 03 30

Let's take a look at why I call you guys wacko! Here is an extremely wacko statement:

"Gun control is about disarming slaves. Felony restrictions on ownership are simply an instrument of disarming blacks."

Allowing felons access to deadly weapons??? You can't get anymore wacked than that! Oh wait, allowing a 7 year old could be a tad bit more wacked than the good ole "felons should have guns" argument. It is hard to know where to even start with you nutters...

Comment #51 by Randy White on 2014 03 30

Mr. White,

It is hard to start because you are utterly disconnected from reality.

First, Australia is likely to lose their gun ban within the next few years. Second, Canada recently repealed their long gun registry, Third, the UK is reconsidering their ban on weapons due to surging gun violence and overall violence which is in stark contrast to America's falling crime rate. So you'll have to come up with better examples than that.

You know, every one of those mass-murderers shooting up schools in America is a left-wing anti-gun nutjob. You have a lot of nerve to call us "nuts" when your own ideological brethren feature such charming specimens of malice and destruction.

It would be nice if Senator Yee were the exception, but he is not. A Brady Campaign hero, selling shoulder-fired missiles and machine guns to terrorists? *yawn* wake me up when something surprising happens.

These are faces of modern American gun ownership. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f8VmJRuBFY and of course http://olegvolk.net/gallery/technology/arms/ar15-m16/chloe_AR15carbine_EOTech_9649web.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1

Are we nuts? Sure. If that's "nuts," I wear it proudly along with the vast majority of country-men and women.

History will remember us and forget you. Because we believe in freedom and justice for all. Unlike you.

Comment #52 by Trost Osler on 2014 03 31

NO! my examples are of countries with lower gun violence rates due to the laws they have enacted, killer. You can't speculate that some countries might repeal parts of gun laws(that is just stupid).

Freedom and Justice??? No, I don't think so, nutter. Toddlers shooting toddlers is what history will remember about you monsters!

And, HTF are gun nuttters and killers my ideological bretheren??? You are a lot more wacko than I expected!
We will stop you, killer!

Comment #53 by Randy White on 2014 03 31

Mr. White,

It may seem stupid for countries to repeal restrictive gun laws, but our own states have been doing this for a few years now. It is now legal to carry a concealed firearm in ALL 50 STATES.

You call me a killer as if it is a bad thing. And it is true, because if I were criminally attacked with lethal force, I would unhesitatingly act in self defense to protect my life. So I acknowledge the label happily and publicly.

You are welcome to do otherwise. By all means, give the man your wallet. And if he shoots you anyway, then where will all your impassioned arguments be? Oops.

Dorner: Left-wing Obama fanatic, viciously anti-gun.

Loughner: Left-wing liberal, turned anarchist (an ultra-left ideology)

Lanza: registered Democrat

Holmes: registered Democrat, Obama campaign worker

Harris/Klebold: both grew up in openly liberal homes

You: vicious, groundless, emotional, left-wing rhetoric. "We will stop you"? Please.

The good thing about being on the right side of history is that we have already won. Your shrilling accusations are hollow against the inexorable march of human freedom. In Connecticut and New York, the police themselves are refusing to enforce gun laws they perceive as excessive.

So how, exactly, will you "stop us" when not even the police will help you even IF you get more gun laws passed?

Comment #54 by Trost Osler on 2014 03 31

I don't care if it is Dems or Libs or Repubs that are doing the killing, killer! I don't trust any one with a gun, but especially not you nut-jobs!

Answer me this genius, what political affiliation was the 3 year old that shot his baby sister in North Carolina??? An the 2 year old that shot himself in the head last month???

We will stop you! We are not going away and we are gaining strength daily. Thanks to your nut-job talk about Freedom etc. we have painted you as extremist killers that would shoot up a school with out hesitation! That is what truly scares me about you idiots. You are going to snap and shoot kids or allow kids to access your guns, killer. You are the problem and we mean to correct you! And, we WILL stop you!

Comment #55 by Randy White on 2014 03 31

Mr. White,

You don't trust anyone with a gun? Not even police? Not even Obama's bodyguards? You have an interesting point of view. Stupid and blind, but interesting if only because of its internal inconsistency.

Of course I allow kids access to guns: supervised access, at a gun range, for mature kids. After all, I shot a machine gun at 8 years old. It was a wonderful experience, and one I love to pass to others. The feeling of being entrusted with that much expenditure of power is truly life-changing, and a beneficial experience for anyone mature enough to experience it.

I am not worried about you going away. I enjoy watching a modern-day Judas sacrifice his humanity on the altar of stupidity. Lawmakers know their careers are on the line if they listen to you, and the tide hasn't been in your favor for some years now.

I'm not sure how you can link basic human equality with willingness to shoot up a school. Can you be a little more specific? I'm unclear on the connection.

Again, how exactly will we be "corrected" when the police aren't interested in enforcing new gun laws?

Comment #56 by Trost Osler on 2014 03 31

Wow! You are even nuttier than I thought!
I wonder if you aren't actually an anti-gun person coming here to make gun-nutters look even nuttier?
If so, you should tone it down a bit because nobody is that nuts!

Nutter or not. We WILL stop the gun crazies!

Comment #57 by Randy White on 2014 03 31

And I wonder if you aren't actually a pro-gun person coming in here to satirize anti-gunners.

Do you remember Piers Morgan's response when he shot a heavy machine gun for the first time? He asked the price, then asked if he could buy it.

Shooting a firearm is like being infected with a virus. But instead of making you sick, you learn about human rights, freedom, equality, justice, honor, and respect. So all we need to do is bring more and more people to the gun range, let them experience what is like to be entrusted with lethal force, and let them feel the tremendous power at their finger tips.

It changed Piers Morgan. It'll change you some day, too.

I am quite curious how you think we will be "stopped" when the police are refusing to enforce new gun laws?

Comment #58 by Trost Osler on 2014 03 31

Trost Osler - Thank you. I had no doubt.

Comment #59 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 31

Right, and 2 year olds get to find guns and shoot themselves. That doesn't sounds like Rights and Freedom etc. to me.
It sounds like stupidity and sickness!

I am an active duty Army veteran, moron! I have fired plenty of weapons and spent plenty of time at ranges, killer!

Piers Morgan is pro-gun control you nitwit! Guns are plenty of fun and exciting and give one an extreme sense of power and freedom but so does heroine and booze! It needs to be restricted and handled with discipline something BTW an 8 year old hasn't got at all!

I will stop you with the LAW, moron! WTF do you think this legislation is for???

We will stop you!

Comment #60 by Randy White on 2014 03 31

Mr. White,

Those 2-years-olds are hurt because people like you keep the NRA's Eddie Eagle program out of schools where their parents should learn it. You call me killer, but only one of us is directly participating in an action that causes children to die.

You will stop me with the LAW? What will you do when the police refuse to enforce it? (As they are already refusing in NY and CT.)

Comment #61 by Trost Osler on 2014 03 31

Randy White - As a Vet you swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, and defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic. Perhaps you forgot.

You use heroin and booze as examples of what must be controlled. How did prohibition work out? We have a case of underage drinking at the Governor's house. That's only the time that made it to the news. How is the drug war going now? Any heroin overdoses recently?

Laws will only work when people obey them. Good people will only obey them if the law is just.

Stop gun owners with the law? You want to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, yet you are willing to make criminals out of good people. As Trost Osler said, the police are not as willing as you believe to enforce these laws, many of their friends and family (people they trust) are firearms owners.

Comment #62 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 03 31

Trost Osler -- Randy White's comments are no match for your intelligent comments.

Comment #63 by Art West on 2014 04 02

Thank you, Wuggly and Art. I did not want the tone of this discussion to be of the peculiar sort of hoplophobic mental illness displayed by that fellow. After all, the NSA watches everything, and I think it is important that everyone understand where the calm, intelligent, sane people stand.

Comment #64 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 02

"Hoplophobic"??? Wow!

I was stationed here nutters: http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-fort-hood-shooting-20140402,0,799195.story#axzz2xmOvV3DT

Seems you killers are just everywhere...

Comment #65 by Randy White on 2014 04 03

Mr. White,

I am sorry you were so close to tragedy. Yet I am more sorry that you missed the reason for so much death: Ft. Hood was (and remains) a gun-free zone. Had those soldiers been armed, the spree would have ended as they do anywhere else people carry guns; namely, with the immediate death of the murderous attacker.

We are everywhere. I carry my (legally owned!) firearms wherever I (legally) can. If a spree shooter begins his rampage in my theater, I intend to protect as much innocent life as possible by quickly stopping the murderous attacker, as your comrades-in-arms were unable to do at Ft. Hood. If that makes me a killer in your eyes, I bear the label with pride.

How do you plan to "stop" us when even the police won't enforce new gun laws? We've already won!

Comment #66 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 03

Did ya ever stop to think,that there are most likely many lefty's sitting at home,on their computers, posing as right wing extremist gun nuts and posting outrageous,insane,fake commentary in order to bolster their anti gun agenda and sway opinion...well,there are many liberal
jagoffs who do not work,sit home all day and blog made up crap in order to further demonize people with opposing views...I'm sure some are even paid by big left wing progressive donors and underground political organizations. Liberals can't win in the arena of logic,so they resort to underhanded,sneaky tactics to push back.Don't buy into it...It's a big liberal stroke job.

Comment #67 by LENNY BRUCE on 2014 04 03

Jojo, I am quite sure that Mr. White is simply a paid shill, receiving money from one of Bloomberg's several astro-turf organizations. No real human being holds honest attitudes like his. The reason for his extremism (as he describes early on) is to anger pro-gun people and sway the rest of the public against them. I am absolutely certain he is paid to do this, probably not very much because he is not doing a good job.

The reason for my continuing dialog is to explore the boundaries of his masters' playbook so I may track the changes as compared to similar playbooks in the past (and, inevitably, the future). Also so that any members of the public that may read this in the future can be swayed against Mr. White's message. His message of hate is easy to see when contrasted against a message of love and compassion.

Comment #68 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 03

OK, killer...

Comment #69 by Randy White on 2014 04 03

Mr. White,

Are you perchance the fat, balding Randy White who purchased that assault weapon on TV and lied about not getting a background check from the dealer at the gun show?

Comment #70 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 03

JOJO MONKEY and Trost Osler - Randy White claims to be a Vet and to have served at FT. Hood, the Army base that happens to hit the news this week.
A Vet that doesn't respect the Constitution, but swore to uphold and defend it.
Wouldn't trust his friends or family with weapons, so he must have been a nervous wreck during his time in the Army.
Spent time at ranges with all different weapons, must have been against his will because he doesn't trust anyone with weapons and thinks the weapons on their own are dangerous.
Is familiar with all these firearms yet, doesn't know the proper spelling of Uzi one of the most recognized firearms on the planet.
Has no real arguments he can articulate and is reduced to name calling as he desperately tries to show good citizens and responsible gun owners in a bad light.

In short, I concur with your recent summations of Randy White.

Comment #71 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 04 03

I love how you wackos try to tell people how they think and what they have experienced. It really shows your level of intelligence.

You people have no shame and no honor. Just a bunch of killers in wait!

We WILL stop you!

Comment #72 by Randy White on 2014 04 03

Mr. White,

How will you stop us when the police themselves are refusing to obey or enforce new gun laws? (Specifically, the new laws in CO, NY, and CT.)

Comment #73 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 03

Trost Osler - Notice how Randy White continues to name call and doesn't answer to the inferences I made from his comments. He is only here to incite, not debate. He has no answers, that's why we will win.

Comment #74 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 04 03

I will stop you with the Law, genius. We got seatbelt laws, registration laws, insurance laws etc. for cars. We can do the same for your deadly weapons, killer. It isn't rocket science.

Why would I answer inferences made about me? I know that I am a Vet. I know that I have fired plenty a weapon in the military. You guys just nuts with your immature debate strategies. Trying to define your opponent without evidence is totally stupid.

I am basing my argument on what you have written yet you base your argument on what you imagine that I am etc. Totally childish.

Incite? What like you guys going out and shooting things up like the Ft Hood shooter??? No, that would be what I am seeking to avoid, nut-jobs!

Comment #75 by Randy White on 2014 04 03

Mr. White,

How will the "Law" stop me, when the police themselves are disobeying and refusing to enforce new gun laws? This is not suppostional: this is what is happening right now in CO, NY, and CT.

Say the most perfect world is achieved and all guns are banned. What if the police refuse to enforce it? How will we be stopped if the police do not enforce your "Law"?

Comment #76 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 03

That is totally stupid. Just as your nut-job fantasy of the cops coming to take your guns is stupid. That isn't how it will be done, killer. The police disobey commands is your nut-job fantasy but that doesn't make it reality. You idiots are just so basic in all of your thinking! The police coming into people's homes and taking guns is not any part of reality -- it is a nut-job fantasy!

Go ahead and provide a link to where it says police themselves are disobeying and refusing to enforce new gun laws! I dare you! Let's see what kind of nut-job news sources are used to manipulate a mind as weak as yours is...


Look at Australia for the answer etc.

Comment #77 by Randy White on 2014 04 03

Let's see now:

Russia Today: http://rt.com/usa/sheriffs-refuse-enforce-gun-laws-329/ (Thanks Comrade Vladimir!) Whose side are you killers on anyway???

American Freedom Fighters: http://www.americasfreedomfighters.com/2014/03/10/breaking-connecticut-police-refuse-to-enforce-new-gun-control-laws/ (Total wackos!)

You are a joke! I know your news sources(really they are propaganda sources)! People aren't going to take you seriously when they find out you are so easily manipulated by Russian Media Propaganda. Traitor!

Comment #78 by Randy White on 2014 04 03

Let's see now:

Russia Today: http://rt.com/usa/sheriffs-refuse-enforce-gun-laws-329/ (Thanks Comrade Vladimir!) Whose side are you killers on anyway???

American Freedom Fighters: http://www.americasfreedomfighters.com/2014/03/10/breaking-connecticut-police-refuse-to-enforce-new-gun-control-laws/ (Total wackos!)

You are a joke! I know your news sources(really they are propaganda sources)! People aren't going to take you seriously when they find out you are so easily manipulated by Russian Media Propaganda. Traitor!

Comment #79 by Randy White on 2014 04 03

Mr. White,

You pick two articles from inflammatory sources, out of hundreds and hundreds on the topic, in both mainstream and fringe media on all sides of the political spectrum. Congratulations on again showing your foolishness. If this were a civil debate, I would take a few minutes to dig up my sources. As it is, there is absolutely nothing I can say that would actually change your mind since you are paid to do this.

Grant me the respect of a civil debate, and I'll grant you the respect of sources. But the burden is on you to behave in a civil fashion.

I am not concerned with police coming to take my guns. The "Law" is clear in Connecticut, as is police inaction to enforce it. Laws may be passed, but it just means there will be a sort of grey area while we appeal it up to the Supreme Court and win.

So the question remains: how will the "Law" stop me when the police themselves refuse to enforce it?

Oh, and Australia's estimated non-compliance rate was (and remains) somewhere around 85 percent as I recall. Also, they have a serious and growing illegal gun problem. So if that's your example, you should do a little reading and find a better one.

Comment #80 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 04

All of the articles about that issue are invalid nut-job sources. Go ahead and post one or two of your own, nut-job! The police will do their job or they will be fired, fined, prosecuted etc. You will comply with the LAW! You are not above the LAW!

Behave in a civil fashion with a killer like you? No way nutter!

Non-compliance rate in Australia??? Answer me this, killer: How many toddlers suffered gun shot wounds in Australia last year??? How many mass shootings were there in Australia last year??? How many Australian children shot themselves in the head last year??? Go ahead and add the UK, Japan, Germany etc.. And, then you compare that to the USA! Where are you sources about "non-compliance"??? Russia Today??? Other nutter news sources??? I know what your sources are already. Your sources are not valid at all and non-compliance is a smoke screen for the real issue of gun violence. You can't just use made up nut-job stuff and expect smart and thoughtful people to believe it.

People like you are sick with sick ideas about what is right and wrong for America and America's children. You are the weak minded and fearful idiots that are being manipulated by gun interests.

But I am here to stop you! We WILL stop you!

Comment #81 by Randy White on 2014 04 04

Mr. White,

The best part about all this is that we actually are making the law, now. We are voting out anti-gun legislators, and voting in pro-gun legislators.

So that "Law" you promise that will strip me of my civil rights? Yeah, none of it is going to pass, not even with all the out-of-state money you promised would fund it. Why? Because any legislator dumb enough to sign it will find himself (or herself) looking for a job.

We may be sick killers, but we dominate the legislatures now. Obama can't even appoint a surgeon-general if we decide against it. We may have the wrong ideas about everything, but this is a democracy and we vote. Unlike anti-gunners, who vote for a variety of things, we vote for just one: Guns.

We love guns. And we have already won. If you don't like it, you should emigrate, because now even the Hispanic and Latino populations are beginning to adopt our fervor for equality and justice.

Oh, and ever since we forced Chicago to allow us "killers" to carry our guns wherever we want in the city, the murder rate has dropped to the lowest rate since 1958.

Comment #82 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 05

Possessing a gun is not a civil right, killer. Redefining terms like that just shows your lack of understanding and education. I am sure you have plenty of Russia Today articles though as sources of your civil rights though, right?

Last I checked Rhode Island legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic, as in over 80% Democratic! I don't think they will be worried about losing their jobs. They would be worried about losing contributions from the NRA but now they can get that same money from Mayors and Mom's and people like me.

Your political analysis nationally is also totally incorrect. You nutters control only the House and not the Senate. You have plenty of money to threaten politicians with but now that has changed with the growth of the gun-control movement.

A lie can only live for so long and your lies are just about totally used up, killer.

We WILL stop you in Rhode Island!

Comment #83 by Randy White on 2014 04 05

Randy White - You talk of toddlers shot by toddlers, accidental shootings. What will you go after next? Stairs, bicycles, swimming pools? I know you answered before that those aren't acts of violence, no they're accidents. There is no malice when a toddler accidentally shoots a toddler, it's an accident. Sorry, can't stop accidents.

As far as mass shootings, again you still haven't answered how to stop the bad citizens from getting firearms. Criminals do crime. Murder is illegal, so there is already a law. What makes you think another law will do anything? The most stringent anti-firearms areas have the highest violent crime rate.

Comment #84 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 04 05

Why don't toddlers shoot toddlers in other countries??? Answer me that professor!
It is your fault, killer! Only a killer would see a toddler shooting another toddler as an accident! We are not gonna let you get away with this anymore!

Has there been a mass shooting in Australia since they enacted stricter laws??? No, there hasn't. We already know which policies work and which don't. The only thing we need to do is to stop idiots like you!

Comment #85 by Randy White on 2014 04 05

Randy White - You still fail to answer the question what will you ban next "for the safety of children"? Your question "Why don't toddlers shoot toddlers in other countries???" is obvious and baited, of course no access to firearms. With that logic we can stop all car accidents by banning cars. Maybe you would like to ban gravity to keep people from falling.

You brought up Australia, an average of 27 children a year are murdered by their parents each year. Would you like to ban parents now?

So when children fall down stairs or off bicycles, have been killed by other means if someone wants to hurt them? Is that what you ban next? Do we ban minivans so mothers can't drive them into the ocean or a lake with their kids in them?

An 11 year old was beaten with a cricket bat last month in Australia, are you going to blame the bat? To save the children are we going to register or ban cricket bats? Of course not, cause it's an inanimate object.

As far as seeing a toddler shooting a toddler as an accident, do you actually think the toddler acted with malice?

Comment #86 by Wuggly Ump on 2014 04 06

Who said anything about "banning" all guns???

Yet they don't ban all cars in Canada, Australia, UK etc.
Only AMERICAN TODDLERS are shooting themselves and each other, genius!
Toddlers in other countries don't access firearms, nut-job!

An 11 year old was beaten last month in Australia??? Is that all you can come up with??? I cite all of these toddlers and you cite 1 single kid "beaten" with a bat?

You are totally nuts.

Comment #87 by Randy White on 2014 04 06

Mr. White,

Why do you single out firearms for your ire? Even if you were to succeed (never going to happen), the results would be so statistically insignificant as to be unnoticeable.

Meanwhile the number of people overall who would die from violence would skyrocket. Are their lives somehow worth less?

Comment #88 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 06

This is a discussion about firearms, genius. Statistically unnoticeable???

10,000 Children suffer gun shot wounds in America every year because monsters like you won't accept simple gun restrictions!

I mean, are you really so dense as to believe that passing stricter gun laws like they did in Australia won't significantly reduce gun violence? Because the stats in Australia are incredible! "...the law change had led to a 65 percent decline in the rate of firearm suicides. Firearm homicides fell by 59 percent in Australia."

You can make up what ever BS that you want about "rising crime" etc. in Australia but all that BS coming from you gun-nutters has been debunked. We are talking about GUN VIOLENCE not stupid crap about hammers or swimming pools or other crime stats about violence unrelated to gun violence!

1000s of kids getting shot every year in the USA because you can't accept some simple restrictions! I am ashamed to call you American!

Comment #89 by Randy White on 2014 04 06

Mr. White,

Why focus on GUN VIOLENCE? Why not violence in general, since there is so much more VIOLENCE in America than there is GUN violence?

If guns cause violence, how come our rate of violence is at a 40-year low despite near-universal legalization of concealed carry laws in the last few years? (AND the expiration of the Assault Weapon Ban allowing people to buy near-military-grade deadly, precise, reliable rifles at bargain basement prices, AND the huge surge of new gun ownership that has brought the rate of gun ownership in the US to HISTORIC HIGHS?)

If guns cause violence, how come Chicago had their lowest murder rate since 1958 this past quarter, after being forced in court to allow people to pack heat?

Comment #90 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 06

Question to the NRA--Lemmings
Who is going to pay for all those armed guards in schools you are SCREAMING for (about 40 billion dollars) in an absurdly transparent ploy to keep your precious assault rifles?

What say we put an extra tax on all firearm and ammunition sales to pay the salaries and all expenses related to idiot measures made necessary by the NRA's refusal to allow reasonable weapon restrictions? Toss in yearly 'license taxes' on all guns owned by individuals not required for their employment.
How about that? We can't have any new, UNFUNDED spending now can we?

Or we could just send the bill directly the Draft-Dodging ChickenHawk cowardly LIAR Wayne LaPiere at the NRA

Comment #91 by Sammy Arizona on 2014 04 06

"If guns cause violence"??? Guns are designed to kill!

Why focus on GUN VIOLENCE??? BECAUSE TODDLERS ARE SHOOTING TODDLERS! You go ahead and find me one GD example of a toddler hammering another toddler to death, you nut-job! Go ahead!

Chicago??? That is because of Commissioner McCarthy and Rahm Emmanuel's smart strategies to reduce gun violence(just as McCarthy did in NYC).

"But Chicago Police Superintendant Garry McCarthy says the opposite is what’s reducing crime: police have recovered 1,300 illegal guns during the first three months of 2014." So McCarthy (the TOP COP) says it is the opposite of what you and you gun-nutters say!
"Mr. McCarthy also attributed the drop in violence to better police training and community programs to keep kids off the street. Both the city’s top cop and its mayor, former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, have said they oppose the concealed carry laws."

How come toddlers don't shoot toddlers in other countries??? Do you really think that Toddlers shooting Toddlers is a reduction in gun violence? It is, in fact, a tragedy so sickening words can't describe it!

Why has Toddler on Toddler gun violence increased then from the 1950s???
Why have school shootings and shooting massacres increased since the 1950s???

You nutters are constantly comparing America to America when you ought to be looking to other civilized countries

Finally, nut-job, we are discussing GUN VIOLENCE not the general trend of violence or crime! GUN VIOLENCE is what we wish to stop! Toddlers and babies shooting each other and mass shootings is what we wish to stop!

Comment #92 by Randy White on 2014 04 06

Here is evidence of McCarthy's strategy in Newark under Cory Booker:
"He put up good numbers in Newark. “During [Cory] Booker’s term, homicides have declined 28 percent, shootings are down 46 percent, and crime overall is down 21 percent. March [2010] was Newark’s first month without a murder since 1966. Booker has emulated the approach pioneered by New York City in the 1990s, bringing over a New York City police veteran, Garry McCarthy, to run the police department, and instituting New York’s CompStat computer system for tracking crime and holding precinct commanders accountable.”

Wasn't no GD concealed carry victory in Newark when McCarthy was there! It is totally outrageous that you gun-crazies are taking credit for McCarthy's work(because he is totally against CC).

You guys just make up all kinds of nonsense! I mean, can you not see that when Toddlers are Shooting themselves and other Toddlers that we need to call for more gun control?
So, how about mandatory triggers locks? What say you? Will you do at least that for the kids???

Comment #93 by Randy White on 2014 04 06

Breaking News from the Media Offices of Mr Randy "We WILL stop you" White:

2 year old Finds Gun and kills his sister...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/06/2-year-old-child-kills-sister-with-gun/7392237/

When will you monsters have enough of this! YOU are the problem with Gun Violence! I am so, so ashamed of YOU!

Comment #94 by Randy White on 2014 04 07

Sammy: Those armed guards are already in schools, and are already stopping mass shootings. They are called 'School Resource Officers" and are widespread throughout the US. No extra taxes or bills needed. You should stay more in touch with reality if you want to have an effective argument.

Mr. White, why didn't their policies have effect before this quarter? Why couldn't they have done these things before being forced to let citizens carry deadly weapons?

I am still confused. Why are you so concerned about toddlers shooting toddlers? Most of these are preventable if you allow the NRA to teach Eddie Eagle safety to children (and parents). Problem solved, without all the drama.

Comment #95 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 07

McCarthy's policies did have effect before this quarter you liar! McCarthy had the same policy and success in Newark! That is why he is in Chicago now. Taking credit for his successes and attributing it to more guns is stupid! The only ones saying it was a change in the CC law is nutters like you and NRA news sources! The man that has reduced the crime rate is saying exactly how he accomplished it and the same way he did in Newark.

"Why are you so concerned about toddlers shooting toddlers?" What kind of monster says stuff like this?

Let the NRA teach kids about guns??? I think the NRA is the problem here just as much as sickos like you.

You guys just live in your own separate reality with you guns and your fantasies and your lies.

We are not taking it anymore! We WILL stop you!

Comment #96 by Randy White on 2014 04 07

Mr. White,

Have you even looked at the Eddie Eagle material? It is considerably less violent that many "children's" cartoons, and certainly less so than the evening news. Do you actually care about children?

It does not depict the NRA in any way, it does not portray gun usage, and it never shows anyone handling a gun either safely or unsafely. It is agnostic, both politically and practically. And it prevents accidental gun deaths in children.

Why would you be opposed to that?

Comment #97 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 07

What's been bothering me most since Fort Hood 2 (sickens me just to write that) is that there are so many guns in circulation, and they are so easy to obtain, that "gun free" zones are no longer aberrations and may in fact be more dangerous than other places--and that the gun crowd thinks this is a GOOD thing. Their dream is for everyone to NEED a gun for protection, whether they want to or not. All of us must now be forced to live in a quasi-militarized society because a minority of Americans just can't live without their arsenals of guns and won't accept the slightest safe guards. For these people, it's no longer rule by the Constitution; it's rule by the Second Amendment. You might have the right to own guns, but the rest of us have the right NOT to own guns, and not to be forced to live in this violent America that you've conjured, an America where guns in schools is considered a safety measure. I'm angered and saddened by it.

Comment #98 by John Onamas on 2014 04 07

Tru Dat John. It is a vicious cycle that we may never get out of.

If you are a Rhode Islander please like my page in support of tougher gun laws.

https://www.facebook.com/stopNRAinRhodeIsland?ref=br_tf

Comment #99 by Randy White on 2014 04 08

It is so good to know about this page. Very, very good. I'll be visiting regularly. As a Rhode Islander, I appreciate knowing who to support. Thank you.

Comment #100 by Trost Osler on 2014 04 08




Write your comment...

You must be logged in to post comments.