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

Guns are part of unperfect world

March 14, 2013

In response to the commentary “Gun law brings ‘radical’ thoughts” (Feb. 20), the writer makes some points that are his opinion and his right under the First Amendment....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(24)

stangv8

Mar-15-13 10:26 PM

What’s disgusting is the hypocrisy of the left. Gabby Gifford’s and her husband, Mark Kelly, have been crusading all over the country to get semi automatic firearms banned. Recently, Mark Kelly was observed purchasing an AR-15 from a gun shop as he was in there buying a semiautomatic handgun. When his AR-15 purchase went public, he then said he bought it to keep it from getting on the streets and planed to turn it into law enforcement. Anybody with any grey matter between their ears knows that’s Bovine Scatology; if it had not gone public, it would be in his house right now. There’s also a picture of Gifford’s at a range shooting an AR-15 herself. Nothing but another case of what’s good for me is bad for you.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Mar-15-13 9:43 PM

Sen Feinstein is disturbing at best and disgusting at worst. How much money has she and her family made with the inside information she is privy to? A typical "Do as I say, not as I do" POS politician that doesn't give a rip about Americans freedoms. Only how nuch control she can exert.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Mar-15-13 8:40 PM

Judeye why are you afraid of the so called assault weapons. That is the real question. Those weapons have killed about one percent of the murder victims in this country but you are jumping up and down because everyone won't sign onto your opinion wanting those banned. Banning them will not do anything to make you safer but in your spoon fed little political world murders will magically stop because these weapons are now illegal. Really? I have a bridge for sale and some ocean front property in Florida...we really need to talk. I could use the money...

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Mar-15-13 1:07 PM

"While the government has not "confiscated" any of our property as of yet,"

Ripley, the key word in that phrase is "yet".

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Mar-15-13 1:01 PM

I wonder why the Herkimer shootings aren't making the front page. Could it *possibly* be that it wasn't one of those dastardly "assault rifles" that the shooter used, so the media can't beat the issue to death and put half the public in a knee-jerk tizzy? Where's Joe Biden for a quote now?

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Mar-15-13 12:45 PM

"avoids the real issue by changing the discussion instead of actually addressing it. Typical."

Christopher, you just summed up the SAFE Act in so many words.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Mar-15-13 9:14 AM

Some postings are to complicated for the libs judeye and christopher to understand. Bad news and ripley for instance. Christopher has trouble with any round over 6 . What was wroing with those comments. Too simple christopher ? You be spoecific christopher. we have 400 million guns and a few nut cases. You are making all those legal gun owners criminals. Fact christopher if you can understand it.Shooting high capacity guns gives a rush much like at tax increase or mandatory union membership does to a liberal. I have seen pix of 75 round AK 47 for sale out west. Chrsitopher, are they the harbinger of mass death, the end to a doomocrat. Let us know !

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

badnewsbear

Mar-15-13 8:11 AM

Really, oversimplistic? How so? We already have an excess of laws in place. All new laws focus on guns and not the people committing the crimes. We don't need more laws and we don't need to ban guns from law abiding citizens. What's your solution, genius.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Christopher

Mar-15-13 7:50 AM

Joew, it makes sense to REPUBLICANS. Please, be specific. Like most purely dogmatic statements, it's overly simplistic and filled with stereotyping and avoids the real issue by changing the discussion instead of actually addressing it. Typical.

0 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Mar-15-13 6:18 AM

BadNewsBear-your last post makes too much sense. Someone is bound to be against it.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

badnewsbear

Mar-14-13 11:58 PM

"What are you willing to do to attempt to reduce gun violence in our country?" Judeye, absolutely nothing, I am already a law-abiding citizen and have never committed a crime with my guns. If you want to reduce crime, get officials to strictly enforce the 9000+ gun laws already on the books, get Liberal judges to stop letting violent offenders out early to repeat and get rid of political correctness so that a person with mental illness can be addressed without someone whining about them being "stigmatized". And finally, stop focusing on guns and start focusing on people. People are responsible for killing, not the tool they use.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

badnewsbear

Mar-14-13 11:48 PM

For those in denial of what the ultimate goal is here: "Dec 20, 2012 - Cuomo said “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option.", "Feb 15, 2013 – Democrats in Minnesota are pushing a gun confiscation proposal that looks eerily similar to one recently proposed by Democrats in Missouri", "Feb 8, 2013 – Law abiding gun owners in California have to feel uneasy after Democrats rolled out a massive gun control package on Thursday, which includes strict ammunition regulations and even a bill that allows potential confiscation of the state’s 166,000 legally registered semi-automatic rifles.",

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Mar-14-13 10:39 PM

Confiscating means taking? So, when Gov Cuomo says he will confiscate guns if necessary; what he’s saying is actually meaningless because he hasn’t taken any yet. No need to worry about the words that come out of the governors or any other politicians mouth until they actually start to take your firearms. But then, it'll be too late.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

Mar-14-13 10:36 PM

Why did somebody disagree with my comment? It was two questions? If you disagree, please answer the questions.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

Mar-14-13 9:58 PM

Judeye - told you this before, but you had no comment. Look up the "ruger charger", this is a semiautomatic pistol version of what is the most popular semiautomatic rimfire rifle ever made, the ruger 10/22. It is considered an assault weapon under existing NYS law, before the SAFE act. Why?

While the government has not "confiscated" any of our property as of yet, NYS has essentially done so, by forcing us to rid ourselves of any existing >10 round magazines, magazines that were legally purchased. Maybe they didn't come take them, but isn't the result the same?

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Mar-14-13 9:49 PM

Oh, wait, I owe her an apology. It was an AK-47, complete with drum magazine. Always one to carelessly go for full-effect, she is.

www . google . com/search?q=feinstein+holding+ak+47&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari#biv=i%7C0%3Bd%7CM7O5gefojxnjwM%3A

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Mar-14-13 9:14 PM

Did anybody else see the photo of Feinstein holding an AR-15 with her finger on the trigger while it was pointed straight at people in the crowd around her? If ANYBODY should have a weapon taken away from them, it's HER. Someone with that little common sense and awareness is the absolute last person that should regulate ANYTHING related to weapons, period. She, like Andrew Cuomo is nothing but a shallow, limelight-seeking grandstander with nothing but personal gain in mind. Legislation submitted by both people are prime examples of "Look at me! Look at me!" legislation, with zero interest in the public's well-being.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Mar-14-13 8:29 PM

The point of the article is people are against it GETTING to the confiscation point. There is no reason to do any tinkering with the 2nd amendment, except to liberals. Once relatives are at the door, it's a little late to say you would rather not have company. Can you understand that analogy?

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProudToBeUnAmerican

Mar-14-13 4:23 PM

Confiscating means taking. When they start taking guns away from you, then you can say they've been confiscating guns. Simple logic to most but a puzzling mystery to the Tea Party minority.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Mar-14-13 10:09 AM

Judeye, see Isaiah 3:12, women sure rule over us along with kids. Its for the children ! The last time women prohibited something , it was alcohol. It led to a huge increase in violence. The learned gals did not understand testosterone then or now. Listen to pelosi, she confirms it.The activist women are in a relationship with their man, the govt and will try to tell law abiding men what to do . Doomed to failure. can you understand that judeye? i doubt it. Take a look at all the activist women in history. with rare exception they tried legislation, not science , invention or business. Judeye, you are walking proof as to why men rule the business and science world. You want to take that way with income limits. Now johhny be fair, mommy is speaking. Hey gals, guess what ? we are adult males. we dont need mommies, our govt now telling us what to do . Judeye, you have not posted anything about the influence on history, well, other than their sex appeal. enlighten us.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Mar-14-13 9:49 AM

Judeye, do you honestly think a criminal will follow the law or banning any gun ? What to do ? do what they have done in other areas of the country. resource officers in schools have stopped many gun attacks.This was on PBS many times now. You cannot atop them all, pure and simple. judeye, your mommy skills will not work with adult males mostly , who snap. You do not understand human nature at all. suprising since you claim to be a grandmother. usually age makes one wise to human nature. it did not seem to do that with you. You are trying to make one dependent on the nanny govt, the big time mommy for women who could not feel satisfied in business or govt. testosterone will sink estrogen everytime judye. law or no law. Judeye, men dont want to be mommied by the likes of you.Mommy judye, can I have a trans fat cookie or a large soft drink ?

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Mar-14-13 9:08 AM

What weapons would you ban or do you think all weapons should be permitted for civilian use?

Should we bring back the machine gun?

What are you willing to do to attempt to reduce gun violence in our country?

By the way, not all handguns have been banned under the SAFE law.

3 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Mar-14-13 8:02 AM

The libs talk of mental health requirements for guns . If that were imposed for running for office, no liberal could be judged mentally sane. All the doom talk that comes from their lips. I heard on TV talk of confiscation of guns in NY by an elected official.they also want citizens to throw out their over limit magazines. yep, the criminals will do just that . mentally unbalanced again from our elected officials. The libs have hijacked govt, turning it into an insane governing body, full of regulations, but no common sense.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Mar-14-13 6:49 AM

James-thanks for your service. Great article. One more thing,Sen Feinstein out of CA wants as part of her anti gun bill to ban veteran ownership of firearms if they have PTSD! If that ain't a crock.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 24 of 24 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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

 

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