|
Date: May 27th, 2009
Name: B
Subject: No
Comment: It is a statistical fact that when guns are taken away from the populous (law abiding), gun crime increase drastically. England and Washington D.C. had this problem when they implemented their anti-gun policies.
If you want to reduce gun crimes you only need to increase gun crime punishments. Then we get to keep our guns, lives, and constitutional rights. Use some sense people.
|
Date: May 26th, 2009
Name: John Garasimowicz
Subject: gun control
Comment: I'm sorry, but I don't live in fear as you. I am legally registered to carry a pistol here in VA. Ironically, in central VA where I live I don't need to carry and seldom do, unless I'm called to an urban area and have to leave late at night. It is comforting to know if some gang banger tries to make me, or my family, his next trophy, I have the tool and the right to meet the threat on equal terms. I'm a 50 year old HS teacher, not some fatalist nutjob as you tend to portay us.
|
Date: May 25th, 2009
Name: andrew harrison
Subject: communist traitor
Comment: Screw you! and all the other traitors to the constitution with your line of thinking!
|
Date: May 25th, 2009
Name: CommenSense
Subject: Liberal Journalists are Anti-American
Comment: The person that wrote this article is an idiot. First of all, yes, there are 300 million guns in the U.S.. That makes the U.S. population the most well-armed army on the planet. Second, guns PREVENT more violent crimes every year than we could even imagine to calculate. And lastly... if you tried to prevent the sale, or take away guns to/from law-biding citizens, the criminals will still have their guns (let's face it, criminals don't follow laws anyway), and criminals will find it easier
|
Date: May 2nd, 2009
Name: Gavin M
Subject: guns and australia
Comment: People use guns because they're there. Amendment or not, if you own a gun your likey to use it. In Australia guns have been gone for years and its good. Now if you need to defend yourself you use your brain and your fists. Read the Art of War.
A true warrior can be victorious without having to draw his sword.
|
Date: April 30th, 2009
Name: Ted N.
Subject: Gun Violence; America Needs A Surge Like Iraq
Comment: This well-meaning editorial and the resulting, mostly oppositional comments provide a picture-perfect illustration of the problem with gun control vs. gun rights arguments. So much passion, so much vitriol! Everyone has statistics to prove their point. Unfortunately, the back-and-forth never seems to help the situation we should all care about - too many innocent people are being killed and maimed because of violence. Violence is the issue, not guns. If we can put our different opinions about
|
Date: April 30th, 2009
Name: Thorn
Subject: Outlaw Gun Control
Comment: This article is dangerous! It's dangerous in the sense that it instigates the passing of unconstitutional and compleately ineffective gun laws that only disarm law abiding citizens and fascillitate more muggings, rapes and murder. The Waco and Ruby Ridge Massacres by federal goons probably would never took place if it wasn't for hysterical articles like this. Instead of another gun law we need to outlaw any call to infringe on the rights protected by constitution. If it's illegal to call for
|
Date: April 28th, 2009
Name: Lthrnck
Subject: Anti-gun article
Comment: You know I always wonder why you never hear this from the mouths of Anti-Gun People like yourself...
There is no legal obligation for any law enforcement agency to protect the individual or their family.
Why is it you never hear from the Anti-Gun people like yourself...
Police response times are after you can get to the phone to call it in... does not include the time trying to get though on 911... that is of course if your even able to call 911.
|
Date: April 27th, 2009
Name: Chuck
Subject: Do you have a problem with acting out?
Comment: If all of us --whether here in the U.S. or in Iraq-- acted out every time we felt like killing someone and had a to do so.....we'd be well on our way to assured anihilation.
If you're making dinner, and your husband or wife says something which makes you angry are you driven to grab a knife and start stabbing them? What if you're at a resturant, and you overhear the obnoxious remarks of a nearby patron? If you're driving down the road, and someone cuts you off?
Editor's Note: With a gun often it's one shot; then it's too late to be sorry
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Jeronimo
Subject: Journalists Stop Misleading
Comment: These articles are criminal. You are a silly little propagandist puppet. Who will protect you should you be at the end of a criminals barrel. You'll be dead you Nazi! You don't believe in peace through superior firepower. The Supreme Court said police are under no obligation to provide protection to individuals. What bad journalism. Research shows thats state with tighter gun control laws suffer from higher rates of violent crime. Also look at many recently publicized acts of violence....
Editor's Note: Your virulent attacks give me the impression that if you were in front of me with a gun, you would probably shoot me.
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Jerry Jones
Subject: Speaking Truth To Empower.
Comment: Your article should have been titled, Speaking Lies to Enslave.
Your complete lack of historical knowledge, combined with willful ingnorance is breathtaking. Gun control is RACIST!
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Scott M
Subject: 2nd amendment
Comment: I think I am going to have to go with Bill, Mike, DJMoore and Peter. Aside from the racism, sexism and classism involved in your Utopian dreams you forget that the main point of the 14th amendment was to allow recently freed Blacks the right to keep and bear arms and the rest of the Bill of Rights. Why would you propose the same thing that the Klan did in the late 1800s? Why would you want to disarm the innocent 80 million who never commit a crime with their 270 some million firearms?
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Aaron
Subject: Gun control = thought control
Comment: I don't own a gun, but the more I hear about the debate, the more I side with the gun nuts. Looking at the disastrous historical consequences of disarmament, one cannot think that voluntary disarmament is a good idea (not without mountains of illogical fact fudging). If one were to suspend judgment and entertain both sides stoically, one would invariably conclude that disarmament is a bad idea. I guess the reason for not studying history is so that people can write articles such as yours....
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Bonnet
Subject: Handguns Can Prevent Violent Crimes
Comment: Anti-handgun argumentsAnti-handgun arguments focus on the danger to innocents. Because many innocent people, including children, are killed or injured by guns, it is the gun that is at fault and ought to be banished from existence.Anti-handgun arguments focus on the criminal deeds of gun toting felons to rob, maim, rape and kill innocents and it is the guns borne by those felons that are the cause of such criminal activity and if guns were legislated out of existence then these crimes would go away.Anti-handgun arguments focus on the suicides that occur every year caused by guns and those suicides are the direct fault of the gun and so if the guns went away then the suicide rate would fall dramatically and there would be no more handgun suicides.All the above arguments are invalid. If all guns were instantly gone, innocents would still be hurt and/or killed by autos, bats, bicycles, boats, chemicals, dark, drugs, glass, heights, knives, motorcycles, swords, tools, poisons, and yes, even water.Accidents, criminal activity and suicides are the reasons gun activists want to ban guns.Before there were any guns on earth, there were accidents crimes and suicides. Historical accounts abound. The Torah, Bible, Koran and Talmud recount such, as do myriads of other ancient documents.The anti-handguns argument degrades to become only guesses about what the results would be if all handguns disappeared.Guns are not going to go away. There are too many of them. Worldwide. If guns did go away, they would be swiftly created anew, and by the millions. Worldwide. By governments and in private factories. Stop trying to ban guns. It is a naive and fruitless endeavor.The argument that the Constitution applies only to Federal laws, and each State or locality can make any laws they wish regarding the right to keep and bear arms, is foolish. It takes away the rights of the people of this country and makes each State or locality a Country unto itself. We fought the Revolutionary and Civil Wars over such rights.Think about this: many violent crimes are or could be PREVENTED by handguns in the hands of good people. Ask those who have done so. Ask victims if they wished there had been a gun to protect them.
Editor's Note: On the whole society would be better off without the proliferation of weapons. If all of us --whether here in the U.S. or in Iraq-- acted out every time we felt like killing someone and had a handgun to do so.....we'd be well on our way to assured anihilation. If we don't act, we'll approach that path.
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Peter
Subject: Gimme a gun! Speaking Truth to Empower
Comment: A Black Man with a gun is....
Equal.
One hundred and sixty years ago, Black folk lived on plantations and were kept under the thumb of their so-called betters. Part of that was being disarmed.
Today, Black folk live in projects and inner-city neighborhoods and are kept under the thumb of their so-called betters. You're still disarmed.
Do you really think that you're better off now than you were then?
A Black man with a gun is Equal. Never forget that!
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Mike Vanderboegh
Subject: Stop spitting on the memory of the Deacons for Defense and Justice.
Comment: What sort of moron forgets the essential lessons of the history of his people within one generation? Answer: liberal American Jews and liberal African-Americans. Do you really think that the Holocaust would have been stopped by more disarmament on the part of European Jews? Do you really think that the Deacons for Defense and Justice could have faced off the Klan and the racist local and state law enforcement that they controlled with frigging tulips in their hands singing Kum-by-yah?
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: djmoore
Subject: Moral Surge
Comment: The surge in Iraq was, in effect, all about putting guns in the hands of the good guys, and letting them pursue the wicked and defend the helpless.
Why then are you calling for guns to be taken from the hands of the good guys, We The People, ordinary, decent, law abiding American citizens, while letting the wicked run rampant? Where and when have criminals ever obeyed the law, however draconian?
Why are you, and Bob Herbert, claiming that we are handing out high-powered weaponry?
Editor's Note: The problem is you can'ty look into somebody's eyes --despite what Bush says-- and determine whether it's a "good guy" or not
|
Date: April 26th, 2009
Name: Bill
Subject: gun control
Comment: I firmly believe that the people who propose gun control support and abet criminal activity. What better way to make the life of crime and assault easier and more comfortable than to make sure you will not encounter an armed citizen unwilling to be a weak victim. Gun control is good for criminal safety during the execution of a crime. You do not have to worry about the homeowner, the owner of the car you want to jack, or the mini-mart you want to rob if non of them can own a gun!
|
|