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

For Rell

January 17, 2013

Last week, an Op Ed contributor wrote that the majority of guns in the United States have never killed anyone. He said that only "criminals, gangs and 'challenged' people'" can be held responsible....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(114)

mikekerstetter

Jan-17-13 3:23 AM

Maria Giordano-"Would you give up your gun if it meant saving a kid in your town? If not, then you are at least part of the gun problem in this country."

My guns aren't the problem. They sit in the gun cabinet where they have for 35 years and have never caused a problem. I don't know what you don't understand about legal gun ownership and their owners who never have and never will have any intent on harming another person with them. Punishing innocent people is not the answer.

15 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-17-13 3:32 AM

Evil does not exist within a gun. It exists in the hearts and minds of those who pull the trigger for evil purposes.

14 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Premier

Jan-17-13 5:59 AM

With all due respect for your loss Maria I know that giving up my guns won't save an innocent life but it could take one if my family or I were comfronted by the same kind of person who took your friend from you.

10 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jan-17-13 6:05 AM

Maria,

We sympathize with you for the loss of your friend. We pray that God give you peace, comfort and love through this difficult time.

We hope that responsible individual is appropriately punished, whether murder, self-defense or whatever the courts decide. This will set an example so that others may refrain from criminal deeds. A just society needs to enforce these natural laws of morality.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 6:07 AM

I'm just being honest here. I think its human nature to care less when it doesn't directly effect you. I think if a individuals brother, sister, son, daughter, wife, etc are in direct harm, then those individuals begin advocating hypocricy. I'm not advocating for why guns should be banned or anything like that because I in fact am not in favor of banning peoples' right to own guns. But I'll also, with pride, admit that deep down within my heart there is a very cold place. I take care of my own. And if my own comes in harms way, I don't care if it's a criminal or an every day street walker, that won't stop me from pulling the trigger before they do.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 6:07 AM

I'm just being honest here. I think its human nature to care less when it doesn't directly effect you. I think if a individuals brother, sister, son, daughter, wife, etc are in direct harm, then those individuals begin advocating hypocricy. I'm not advocating for why guns should be banned or anything like that because I in fact am not in favor of banning peoples' right to own guns. But I'll also, with pride, admit that deep down within my heart there is a very cold place. I take care of my own. And if my own comes in harms way, I don't care if it's a criminal or an every day street walker, that won't stop me from pulling the trigger before they do.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-17-13 6:23 AM

The owner of the guns most likely never had and never would have any intent on harming another person with them. That intent did not stop her death by those guns and the deaths of too many others, mostly children.

There is NO reason why a civilian should own an assault weapon and/or high volume clips. None. And to wave the Constitution as a banner for rights to own such is an extreme act of selfishness. Period.

Hey, ya know what? How about a couple of grande launchers for your collections out there? How bout some service to air missiles? Sound ridiculous? As ridiculous as those weapons and ammo being considered in this new federal legislation.

8 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-17-13 6:24 AM

that's "grenade" and "surface"...

Not enough coffee yet this morning.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Premier

Jan-17-13 6:31 AM

I hear ya Side, I blew coffee threw my nose reading the last part. Now I have to refill.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-17-13 6:37 AM

Well Premiere, if nothing else, I am always good for a laugh...

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rick424

Jan-17-13 7:14 AM

I bet if that 82 year old woman in today's news story would have had a gun, that would have fixed that purse snatcher. Better yet, if she had an assault weapon that would have really taken care of him. I am so glad to see Obama stand up to that whiny out of control organization called the NRA. How about that Rush Limbaugh, maybe someone could use their assult weapon on him. Sorry, that comment he made yesterday really ticked me off.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 7:23 AM

Sideliner, I completely agree with you. First of all, when it comes to the NRA, the organization is nothing about an excuse developing disease. Yes I just said that. With all due respect to gun owners, the NRA doesn't really give a*****about people getting killed by guns, they have no interest in cooperating to find solutions, if it were up to them, people WOULD own tanks, missles, rocket launchers,*****they'd probably even have some F16's in their back yard. The NRA is about creating more gun ownership, creating more guns, and creating laws to loosen regulation on guns. They are not about protection/safety of citizenship nor have they ever been. While one part of their purpose, protecting the 2nd Amendment, is honorable, another part, making excuses and refusing to work together with government to find solutions, is not. I'm sure I'll get a bunch of disagrees, but at the end of the day, ownership of assault rifles..there is no valid reason and I've really stopped caring about

7 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 7:24 AM

about what the people who support them, have to say.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Jan-17-13 7:37 AM

A gun is an inantimate <sp> object. Left untouched, it poses no harm to anyone.Everyone is blaming everything on guns. The problem is the people who touch them.Most people who touch them do so responsibly and bring no harm to anyone else (humans anyway).Those that choose to do harm ie. criminals, mentally ill are the problem , both of which either have no regard or understanding of the current laws. Most of these people don't go thru legal channels to get thier guns. You can pass laws and ban things till you are blue in the face, but these people will still get thier guns. Stronger enforcement and harder sentencing for the current laws/ crimes are neccesary. Unfortunately, when it comes to the mentally imbalanced, there is no way to predict things like Sandy Hook in advance. An armed guard in that school may have helped but not a sure thing.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

spike2

Jan-17-13 7:38 AM

Although i admire the 82 year old woman for resisting, she endangered herself. This man could have punched her, grabbed her neck, etc.. Again she was courageous but should have given up her purse. She did not have a gun and seems unlikely she would have succeeded in shooting him. he would, in all likelihood, have taken the gun from her, possibly shot her or in the alternative, taken the purse and the gun. He would most likely have used her gun in additional crimes or sold it to a criminal. Their is an absolute place for guns and self-protection but one should never falsely believe it is always the best choice.

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Josh84

Jan-17-13 7:45 AM

wwhickok Jan-17-13 7:23 AM***"when it comes to the NRA, the organization is nothing about an excuse developing disease. Yes I just said that."

yes, but what exactly did you say.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rick424

Jan-17-13 7:45 AM

No, the problem is there are too many guns in this country. It is so easy for the "bad" people to obtain them. If the 82 year old would have had one there would be one more criminal with one. (Great comment Spike). We need to get this situation under control. More guns is not the answer. Most polls agree, the people want change. The NRA just doesn't get it. They are bent on obtaining their goal regardless of what the masses think.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 7:56 AM

wwhickok Jan-17-13 7:23 AM***"when it comes to the NRA, the organization is nothing about an excuse developing disease. Yes I just said that."

"yes, but what exactly did you say."

It was supposed to say "but an, not about an".

I'm saying that the problem with the 'Gun Control Debate' is the NRA. Who's primary concern is about making gaining ground for their organization, not creating a sound, fundamental, and safe structure for Firearm Ownership.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Josh84

Jan-17-13 7:59 AM

Another day, another group of people who have no idea what an "assault weapon" is or how it is defined. With no intention of educating themselves on the issue they continue to proclaim their firm stance, and make idiotic analogies to counter the lack of knowledge they have on the subject.

At this point as soon as I see words like "clips" or "military grade" I just shake my head. If you have enough time to post your beliefs on a forum such as this you should have enough time to google, and educate yourself on the basics of firearms.

You might even realize that a full on, balls to the wall "assault weapons" ban, wouldn't have hindered any of these lunatics from carrying out their cruel, wicked acts.

3 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 8:00 AM

The thing is, not everyone is blaming guns, but at the same time, most 'gun supporters' are acting as though guns aren't at least part of the problem. Because that's ********. The #1 Problem is criminals and Mental Health. The #2 problem is that there are far too many guns in this country. The #3 problem is that any regulations you make now, are going to be ineffective because of the years that have passed where people have been able to acquire firearms without those regulations in place. There is not just one cause to the issues we're having now. There is multiple causes.

I'm all for gun ownership, outside of assault rifles. I am not all for the path that the NRA chooses to take in 'protecting gun ownership'.

Like I said, there isn't just one cause, there are multiple 'pieces of the puzzle' that are to blame.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Jan-17-13 8:10 AM

"Tell them that we are desperate for tighter gun control."

Yes. Let's tell them we want the kind of gum laws they have in Chicago or DC, because those laws have certainly proven to greatly reduce gun violence. Right?

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jan-17-13 8:16 AM

"Evil does not exist within a gun. It exists in the hearts and minds of those who pull the trigger for evil purposes." - mikekerstetter

*

You must really miss the "good ol' days" o' being able to burn epileptics & paranoid-schizophrenics, at the stake, for being "possessed".

Keep "evil" in fairy-tale books...designed to scare the crap outta children & the least-educated...where it belongs.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 8:18 AM

First of all Josh, thank you for calling us all stupid.

Now if you're finished, I know*****well what an assault rifle is.

But for arguements sake: AK-47, M16, SMGs, Bushmaster AR-15, FN P90, Uzi, Mac-10, FAMAS, FX-05 Xiuhcoatl, M-4, Vector, F2000, TAR-21, MP5k, FN P90, FAL, ACR, Glock, Sig Sauer...just to name a few.

Some of those are sub-machine guns, some in fact are already banned, some should be banned and the last two are examples of the most commonly used hand guns.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-17-13 8:19 AM

Oh but that's right Josh, I'm stupid and I don't know what I'm talking about.

Give me a break..if you're not going to think before you type, log off.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jan-17-13 8:21 AM

"I'm just being honest here. I think its human nature to care less when it doesn't directly effect you." - wwhickok

*

...And, we've conducted two Wars (more-currently), that are the best proof of that!

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 114 comments Show More 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