As a precursor to the upcoming illegal immigration debate, Rosemary Jenks, Director of Government Relations for NumbersUSA testified before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law on the Shortfalls of the 1986 Immigration Reform Legislation.

Her testimony hit the nail on the head with all the horrors of the 1986 amnesty and how we must not repeat that mistake again in 2007.

She references a study by the Heritage Foundation that examined all households in the US that are headed by a high school drop‐out--about 17.5 million households total, of which about 26% are immigrant households (both legal and illegal). All spending and all revenue at the Federal, state and local levels and found that each of these households costs taxpayers a net average of about $22,500 each year. They have also found that each foreign‐born household costs $18,500 per year.

An estimated 5 million illegal alien households currently come with an annual net cost to the US taxpayer of $92.5 billion! If they are able to achieve US citizenship, the costs to taxpayers will increase by $20 billion as they use more "entitlements". If the current group of illegal aliens are granted amnesty and citizenship, this will legally allow them to bring millions more of their family members and encourage millions more to come.

So when your Senator or Congressman stands up and says we need to grant amnesty and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, know that comes with a net annual cost of $100 BILLION.

http://stoptheinvasion.blogspot.com

Gun control has never prevented one crime.Gun control fanactics are frightened cringing people who are afraid to stand up for themselves and for what is right.The VT shootings show what happens when only the deranged are armed.This man could not have killed that many people if faculty or students were armed.The VA legislature should feel ashamed and share part of the blame for not passing a bill that would let law abiding citizens protect themselves wherever they are.Only the unarmed are victimized.At least with my second amendm ent rights i have a shooting chance to protect myselve and others.Oh,by the way,Gun control freaks,you can move to England,Australia or some other such country that welcomes such BS.

rufus: Where did I say God was pro gun! (if you are addressing me) I wish there was no violence in the word but God granted man free will and sometimes we really mess up! But I am telling you that I will not stand by and let the Cho's of the world butcher my son or daughter! No law written by man about restricting my right of self-defense will cause me to sacrifice them if I can avoid it! And Kevin, you have to get in the real world. Just because a person has a gun gun doesn't mean he's going to shoot someone in a fight! I'll bet you right now there are people carrying you don't even have a clue about. In Arizona they do it in the open! Don't hear about blood baths do you? If there was the anti gunners with the help of their media friends would have it all over the place! You know at the very least the school police should be armed and not standing there in uniform! Uniforms would be the first target! It's the political correctness that doesn't allow campus police to be armed! Look what it gets you! They have to run away and call for help first. Ever hear much about a nut trying to shoot everybody at the police headquarters? There is a reason for that!

are you guys crazy? advocating more people carrying guns? Yes in this situation someone strapping might have saved 10-15 lives, assuming they didn't get shot first, and didn't hit any one IN A CROWDED class room in the crossfire. However, in world filled with petty fist fights, and minor stabbings, domestic vilolence more guns would have a profound effect, if people used guns instead of conventional violent means. You are looking at a solution to one incident with out the greater ramifications.

I'll leave others to comment on the absurdity that God was pro gun. I'm not touching that with a ten foot pole. You people have tried to use my religon for war and have succeded in many respects. Just know the church is not God. Follow the Christ. The church is not longer his. The church sold out his message for money and power, as history shows. God will not live in that house as with the jewish tradition. Hopefully, true christians can take our church back for the capitalism who are difiling it, one day

rufus, Jesus also said "if you have no sword then sell your cloak" I believe this was in referance to self-defense! For those who think arming some students is nuts I say start with the returning Iraq veterans who or now entering colleges and also give them a free ride on everything for doing some work for security work!I would say their training is quite good.

answer me this all you gun hating liberals,

why has there only ever been mass shootings at events and locations were guns are banned,

go to a gun show, there is litterally tens of thousands of guns, and most people attending the shows are carrying guns,

and guess what, theres never been a firearm related murder, at a gun show, or NRA convention,
and i will take it a step furthur, to all those families who are suffering through the tragedy of losing a loved one to a crazed whaco,
i have a licence to carry a concealed weapon, as do many people in this country, and if just one of us was on the campus of VT that faitful day, less families would be suffering today,

Those who oppose the 2nd ammendment are the biggest argument for it since they would impose their will on the majority in this matter, it is likely that they would impose thier will in all other matters involving constitutional freedoms and natural liberty.

Less gun Control.
thanks

The comments about "tying the hands of law enforcement" is very interesting, in light of the fact that law enforcement organizations are among the most supportive of gun control measures.

MikeB - Time to get a life. You rant, make all sorts of claims without references, and then say that you don't provide references because somebody disparaged one of the sources.

BooHoo!

If it's a good source it should be able stand on its own.

You're posts are beginning to become pathetic. You make a "Sky is falling" post as the massacre story is beginning to unravel and then criticize others who went off on other tangents.

Time to look in the mirror.

Still haven't seen a gun advocate here pose one solution to preventing things such as the Virginia Tech massacre; other than more guns.

With only a few exceptions, the gun advocate posts almost all seem to boil down to "It's all about Me, Me, Me!"

It makes so much sense, I dont' know why it hasn't been done already!

I see it clearly now. Thank you all so much for making me see the obvious!

To stop murder, all we have to do is pass a law banning citizens from owning guns.

So, to stop all these terrorists blowing things up all over the world, we just need to pass a law against it!

It is so obvious!

Brilliant!

The King of Zouk, the King of Zouk
a crabby, narrow-minded kook

Gary, go conculate yourself, whatever that means. If America is only as brilliant as its dimmest bulb, I am rapidly losing hope. And you expect me to be OK with arming someone who talks / writes like that?

IF ONE LOOKS AT THE RESULTS OF CRIME COMMITTED BY CWC PERMITS HOLDERS, THE ONLY CONCULATION THAT CAN BE REACHED IS THAT EVERONE IS SAFER WHERE PEOPLE ARE ARMED. THE CRIMES COMMITTED BY CWC ARE LESS THAT 1%. THIS IS LESS THAT COMMITTED BY LAW OFFERS.

You people are not exactly reassuring me. Are these the kinds of minds behind the trigger fingers? Scary.

"This is a bit late but still- have you people ever heard of MAD? the last time two parties where assured of distruction resulted in a 30 years of life on a knife edge- would you really like to walk down the street not knowing who could attack you at a moments notice- at least now if you see a gun you run away."

I already know that someone could attack me at a moments notice. I also know that if I am unarmed, there is a much greater chance that the would be murderer will continue to fire after the initial shot. If the moment his shot it fired, however, I and those around me draw our own weapons and return fire, there is a great deterrent to his attacking me in the first place.

I assume that if one would break the law to murder someone, they will likely break the law to get the weapon regardless of legality.

Gun Control can work, but only if the black market for firearms is shut down first. If the black market exists, then criminals still have access to weapons. this is undeniable. Because of this, the only substantial effect of Gun Control is to remove legally purchased and owned firearms.

Whereas the Supreme Court has ruled the police to not have the responsibility to protect individuals, only to enforce the law, without methods of protecting ourselves we are effectively naked until the police show up to arrest the criminal. We, as citizens, have a right and duty to protect ourselves and those around us. The police are not everywhere, and cannot save us in every scenario. It is up to us to rescue ourselves.

Ban homosexuality, that kills people too "eventually", taints our blood suplies with HIV, etc. Swallow that one libs. I know it doesn't really have anything to do with this discussion but figured I throw it out there anyways since we want to ban "everything" that can lead to death in society and culture.

Correction on the AJC story, I read the story and was wrong about his thinking the wife was at work. Sorry about the mistake. Read it yourself and it shows what a lot of folks have been saying.

Check the AJC this AM and you will find an example of an man shooting his wife by mistake, thinking she was at work and mistook her for a intruder. Will checking the story change any minds? NO.

This is a bit late but still- have you people ever heard of MAD? the last time two parties where assured of distruction resulted in a 30 years of life on a knife edge- would you really like to walk down the street not knowing who could attack you at a moments notice- at least now if you see a gun you run away.

Aaron, 33 people on campus killed. Answer, allowing students to carry concealed on campus. Think how many lives would have been saved if the first person cho had taken a shot at had been armed? Cho would have been dead, and 32 lives would have been saved

DaShamu, you can peacefully plead with a deranged individual to stop when he is putting bullets into you or hacking at you with a chain-saw. I'll shoot back where I am allowed by my concealed carry permit. Unfortunately, a carrying gun owner probably could have stopped the campus incident as happens over 10,000 times yearly in the United States if campus carry were legal. ....but the law didn't stop the deranged perpetrator did it?

Gun ban on campus results in 33 killed - Answer, more gun control.

Gun ban in Washington DC results in "murder capital" of the US - Answer, don't let people defend themselves.

Gun ban in UK results in continually increasing violent crime rates - Answer, let the violent crime rate continue to climb.

US states adopt concealed carry laws - result, violent crime decreases.

OK, grammar time:

"you're" = "you are"
"your" = "belongs to you"
"Republican's" = "belongs to a Republican"
"Republicans" = "more than one Republican"
"where" = "what location"
"were" = past tense (pl) of the verb "to be"
"we're" = "we are"

It's really not that hard.

I am a Southerner.
I am a registered independent.
I am a hunter.
I am a veteran.
I am a gun owner.

And I support reasonable gun restrictions. Why? Because I do not trust the average person with the ability to kill others. Don't get me wrong - I like the average person. hell, I AM an average person. And I am damn glad that I wasn't packing when my truck got rear-ended last week in the VFW parking lot.
I am glad my daughter didn't have a gun when her ex-husband parked on her lawn at 5 in the morning.
Guns are good for hunting, target shooting, police, and the army. But in a country where only 60-some percent of the population knows the name of the Vice President, or can find Vietnam on a map, or understand basic science or economics, ain't no way I trust the average joe to make life or death decisions on the spot. Guns just encourage easy - but irreversible - solutions to everyday problems.

I really do not mind that you don't want a gun, or that you are afraid of, or even detest guns. You absolutely have the right to feel that way and I will gladly support you.

None of the above constitutes the right for you to abrogate my right to possess a firearm, or my natural and unalienable right to defend my self, my family, and my property.

Comment: Rosie O is packing as well as her bodyguards. Hypo/what!! Please do not refer to people with which you disagree as Morons, Idiots, or Retards. Those terms are used to identify persons who have a genetic defect, Downs Syndrome, and they are doing the best they can with what they have. Refer to them as "Very Intelligent People" which means educated into drooling stupidity. I am sure some of these "Very Intelligent People" have papers on their walls that prove graduation from some pretty exclusive University's and colledge"s. The important section of the 2nd amendment isn't refering to the malitia but that part stating that the right of the PEOPLE to own fire arms shall not be abridged. I am pretty sure that our founding fathers could have substituted something other than the word PEOPLE. They really were not the bumkins some would have us believe you know. You must also remember that the "Brown Bess" military arm of the time was the assalt rifle of the time. Semi-Automatic means that the spent shell is ejected from the weapon and a new round is chambered and the weapon can be fired with the next pull of the trigger. Fully automatic weapons just need the trigger pulled and held, You too can own one of these weapons if you have the price and wish to surrender your life and privacy to the B.A.T. as long as you own one.
Gee! You could own a 50cal. Macinegun, the ammunition may be hard to come by however. Legally!
I believe if the person who, alledigly, prescribed anti-depressants to Cho had properly flagged him his purchases of firearms would have been turned down, I do know that my stepfather was flagged and the L.A.P.D. was at his home to make sure that there were no firearms in the home. They also told my Mother that he could not own any firearms. I did read that Scotland Yard did have to start arming its officers of late, and that some articles have been published on the availability of firearms in the criminal element.
I do believe that firearms are illegal in England for most people. But then again the criminal by his vocation is breaking the law. On a regular basis isn't he? We had an Israeli professor who tried to block the door and was killed, and two students who also tried to block the door one of whom was killed. Israel has a high instance of "private" ownership of firearms,like the Swiss, and I believe that both countries have compulsery military membership.
The Swiss get their training and take their arms home with their uniforms and gear so they can quickly mobilize. Notice that I said compuslery not volunteer.
Think, Read and Learn. Do not accept anything without cross referenceing it. Have a nice day!

Why is it that liberals scream were for pro-choice only when it comes to abortion? Why can't I exercise my choice when it comes to my protection. Why do liberals fight so hard to block access to the mental health records, even court records stating this guy to be mentally ill and a danger to himself and others? Then they say we need more gun laws or need to ban guns. If those documents were reported to the police like they should have, this madman wouldn't have been able to purchase the guns. Why do liberals object to the government listening in on phone conversations of suspected terrorists? They don't trust the government to use this power wisely? I find it strange they then want us to trust the government to protect, educate, tax, and control or regulate every facet of our lives. Liberals even want our government to control our medical services. But liberals don't trust our government with the treatment of terrorists? Liberals don't trust our government spying on suspected terrorists? Do you want to know why democracies fail at around 200 years duration? It's because liberals want government to do more and more in their lives and provide more and better benefits until the treasury goes broke! Finally with more people taking out than people putting in, chaos. Liberals beleive in creating class warfare, tax the rich and give to the poor until the rich flee or go broke taking jobs with them. Liberals always blame something or someone else for failures. They keep us from finding out about this madman and then blame the gun. As for gun crime being less in countries that outlaw guns, DUH! Crime might not be less but at least it wasn't the evil gun.

MikeB: The answers we are getting appear to be the CYA at all levels as you stated, and the lawsuits that are sure to be coming soon. I can think of at least three cases where the suits can/will be filed against. The school seems to be more at fault than the others and would be the target for they have the most money.

WEDNESDAY, April 18 (HealthDay News) -- The 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court ruling Wednesday that a ban on so-called partial birth abortions is constitutional doesn't outlaw the procedure entirely.

An example of the new law not applying is when a late-term abortion may be necessary to save the mother if her life is endangered.

However, medical statistics suggest that the court's ruling might not have much impact on the number of abortions done every year in the United States.

The controversial procedure is usually performed after 12 weeks of pregnancy, and it accounted for only less than 1 percent of all U.S. abortions in 2000, according to a survey from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit group focused on reproductive health.

According to the U.S. government's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 857,475 abortions were performed in the United States in 2003.

Women usually choose to have a late-term abortion for medical reasons, such as a diagnosis of a serious fetal abnormality late in the pregnancy, according to doctors who perform the procedure.

Reaction to the Supreme Court ruling was predictable.

A new full-page national advertising campaign from a prominent advocacy organization points a sharp finger at the Bush administration in efforts to end the ongoing genocide in Sudan's Darfur region.

"The time for stalling has passed; the time for action has come," the ad reads in bold print, quoting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Sept. 27, 2006, remarks to the Africa Society of the National Summit on Africa. The ad from SaveDarfur.org notes that Rice's comments were seven months ago, and says: "It takes more than talk to stop a genocide."

The ad acknowledges that Sudan President Omar al-Bashir has broken promises, but then says Bush administration diplomacy "has not even slowed that genocide."

The ad calls for a ban on Sudanese oil imports, the implementation of a no-fly zone, full funding for the U.S. share of peacekeeping and humanitarian aid and assistance in the prosecution of the case before the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

Peace in the middle east :)

'the worst school rampage occurred when an anti-tax zealot blew up a school in Bath, Mich., in 1927, killing around 40 children and a handful of adults,'

yes well, that's what you folks are all about.. self interest. And you just love violence.

lylepink - The system broke at just about every level. This guy was before courts for an involuntary commital. He had been accused of stalking and threatening behavior. He had received counselling for some serious psychological problems. And he had been contacted by the police for harrasement. All of this came out after the kilings. I have to wonder why/how none of these agencies, the university, and the court, had not entered their data into the national database that was checked when he did purchase at least one of those handguns. Any any one of those agencies had done their job, this tragedy could have been averted.

The more that comes out about the shooter clearly shows a long list of things that were plainly ignored. "A danger to himself or others" among those being reported, goes back to 2005. I hope some of the legal folks would give an opinion about how long it will be before the lawsuits begin. I am not sure how he was able to get around "The danger to himself and others" that would have been made in a background check, and I am pretty sure that would have stopped him from buying the guns legally.

Hey if you really are rosie O. you are lucky to be able to buy your protection! What about the rest of us poor slobs? Just so you know that some of the first gun control laws were used by Southern democrats after the civil war because they didn't want the blacks armed! How many more must die before you get it? Now if you and your ilk would have reported this unstable nut to proper authorities in the first place he would have been not allowed his purchase! Instead you worry about his privacy and rights! Oh but I forgot, you are the ones who believe Bush had people fly the planes on 9-11! I think you are the one who "needs" to see the men in white coats! Hope your not packin'!

Joe Truth,
"Or do you think our country, with its horrible crime record involving guns, is a model for the rest of the world to follow?" Actually, I could care less about the stats of other countries really - they just don't matter. And yes, i do thing the US is a model for the rest of the world to follow. The founders put the right to bear arms at number 2 on the top ten list for a reason. Our country is really set upon the premise that with great power comes great responsibility. The rights and freedoms that our founding fathers gave us gives each of us potential to do great things. It's up to us to use them appropriately. Unfortunately with those rights we have, we also need to accept the abuses. Limiting the right may (or may not) limit the abuse, but America is defined by its rights and freedoms. When you change those or give them away to the government, you invariably change who we are and what we are about.

So what, are you saying that gun registration is good. Gun registration means gun confiscation. What happens when the public is unable to defend itself? The government takes them over. Look at history, Germany, Turkey, Uganda, same story. When you outlaw guns, only the outlaws have guns.

First off, i have to say it's hard for me actually being in agreement on an issue with MikeB. I'm sure we'll fix that on the next topic.

Anon,
"Why do you accept limitation on your First Ammendment rights (such as yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater) but you reaqct violently when anyone dares to similarly impose some common sense restrictions on the Second Ammendment."

OK, I'll bite. First off, its FALSELY yelling fire (if there is a fire, then it is OK and encouraged). Secondly, the decision under which this remark was made (Schenck) was overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio, which ruled that speech could only be banned when it was directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot). Personally, i still think that may be too much of a restriction. But you can only fight so many battles at once (so many amendments, so little time). Finally, what exactly is your definition of "common sense restrictions"? From this blog, it runs the gammut from allowing people to own nukes to banning everything but sticks. One man's firearm is another man's WND.

FYI: Reports of a shooting at The U of Mo.

CC's right. Guns will not make any difference in the '08 election. Well, at least this event won't. You never know when another nut-job will strike...
http://www.political-buzz.com/

Joe Truth: Your comments are well thought out and at least tries to address the problem. Cable news stations are reporting the tapes and other things sent to NBC apparently between the shootings.

I'm not disputing that fact MikeB. That doesn't mean, that my opinons or anyone else here are less. I know Democrats are scared or this issue and the repub.s are slaves to it, like abortion and gay marriage. The point is. It doesn't have to be. This is America. WE never let what has stopped us in the past effect our future. My goal in life is to get the people how speard hate and make a profit of my religon off the air. That is my goal. You can agree or not. You cannot say I'm missguided or crazy, because I can say the same things about the conservative movement.

RUFUS1133 -
You keep forgetting the 20 or so self identified liberals posting here, in defense of guns and gun ownership. You also, all too conveniently, forget the 25 percent or so of Democrats who enjoy shooting sports and oppose gun control laws. One thing you cannot ignore, however, is that this issue is political suicide for any candidate calling for gun control. We gun owners vote in a block. However we disagree on most policy, this issue pretty much makes or breaks who we will vote for. Any candidate ignoring that fact is inviting defeat at the polls. To be sure, a very few big city nut cases like Chuck Schumer can win and be opposed to gun ownership, but nation wide it will wreck most candidates and they all know it.

DaShamu - I couldn't agree with you more. But....you still seem to associate guns with violence. Now, I own a semi-automatic pistol. Most of the anti-gun crowd here claims that the only reason for the existance of these things is to kill people. But I really don't think I have it in me to harm someone else. I target shoot with mine. It has a ten shot clip, because that is what is required in competition shooting. I tune that gun, play with the sights, and put in countless hours coming up with the most accurate loads I possibly can. But it IS ALL ABOUT ACCURACY. It has nothing to do with violence. My shooting is about as violent as your bowling - but a lot more fun....louder, but safer, too. And no beer belly!

"Have we set the one-day record yet!

I'd like to know who sent out the word to flood this site today?"

rIGHT-WING FEAR FLOODED THIS SITE TODAY. Check this blog out on politico.com:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0407/Obama_on_Virginia_Tech_and_Violence.html#comments

The other blog here have one or two entries. One, had 647. Why is that? Someone must have came on and tried to spread truth. The conservative movement can't stand for that. Let's flood the site so the message is drowned out.

Mike: what exactly was hysterical about my request? you should have no trouble providing a simple link to a simple news story. if this event happened the local paper at least should have written about it -- otherwise how else did you hear about it?

you're the one who sounds hysterical my friend.

all i want is ONE link to ONE of these stories. come on, you talk the talk, now walk the walk.

Loudounian - I've already played that game with you and yoour fellow hysterics. What I got, when I cited something, was a remark disparaging it for one reason or other. I'll tell you what, YOU do a Google search. SImple enough to find the article. There are thousands of similar ones, occuring every day, all across the country. The FBI published stats every year that support the contention that legally armed citizens PREVENT CRIME.

And, while we're at it, Cho Seung-Hui, was illegally in possession of those guns he used to commit his crime. He had been committed to a mental hospital, had been seeing a counselor for psychological problems, had been warned about stalking woemn on two different occations. Where were the reports on this? If the local government, if even VT, had done their job, that inforamton would have gone into the National Crime Database and he wopuld have been prevented from purchasing or owning any gun, even any ammunition. Your blaming legal gun owners or guns for this is misplaced. Instead the blame resides with those very government institutions you have so studiously ignored. The "system" wont work if government employees, university administrators, and police, don't do THEIR jobs.

Have we set the one-day record yet!

I'd like to know who sent out the word to flood this site today?

It's sad to see how many people are dealing problems with violence.
Some religions encourage people to take revenge on others; some regimes use violence to control their people. While some media teach kids how to be violent; some adults show to kids how to solve problems with violence without noticing what influence they might give.
It happens not only between people and people, but also between nations. As one of the leading country in the world, the U.S. government should not show their leadership in a violent way. Bush's "War on Terror" is one of the great examples.
It is clear that the military solution is continuing to worsen the situation in Iraq, so now is time to reinforce a humanitarian aid to bring peace to the world.
Instead spending $522 billion on U.S. military budget and wasting our precious lives by sending more troops, we can use the money to save so many lives by providing food, water access and sanitation. According to The Borgen Project, it only costs $19 billion to eliminate global hunger.
I hope our next political leader will make a commitment to the U.N.'s Millennium Development Goals to stop the global poverty and make the world a better place.

I so sincerely wish that all of you gun folks posting here could have fulfilled your fantasies and been on the campus that day.

As you should know, FIVER, its hard to prove something didn't happen. There are no lists of what hasn't happened, and the basis for my statement that the core of the patriot act as been upheld is that so little of it has been overruled.

In late September, a federal district judge in New York, Victor Marrero, ruled that a key component of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional. The ruling made headlines, for it is the first to strike down any of the vast new surveillance powers the act authorized. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/10/15/ramasastry.patriot.act/index.html

This is a 2004 article which says its the first sucessful legal challenge to the Patriot Act. So from 2001-2004, there were NO sucessful challenges.

This part that was overruled is still being enforced. The 2nd Circuit court put the decision on hold, and Ginsburg was asked to intervene. In turning down that request, Ginsburg said she expected the appeals court to hear arguments in the government's appeal and rule "with appropriate care and dispatch." Arguments are Nov. 2.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/07/politics/main927811.shtml

Also:Federal prosecutors have maintained that secrecy about records demands is necessary to keep from alerting suspects and jeopardizing terrorism investigations.

In other words, a court had to tell the ACLU not to tip off the terrorist suspect under investigation.

FIVER, if this suspect BLOWS something up, will you again accuse law enforcement of doing nothing?

In that all of the patriot act is still being enforced pending court review, my statement stands as correct.

Also, note that no significant changes have been enacted by your newly blue Congress.

Right. It's all about me, huh. It's all about rufus1133. You can blame me all day if it makes you feel better. I can take that for you, I am a christian. I'll blame the people who lead the misguided sheep done this path, and then tried to use my religon as justification to line their pockets. With that being said I agree. Left The Christ out. That's what I have been saying to the religous right, the falwells the robertsons of the worls

My God, this is not the wild west. Why does everyone have to carry thier own gun to defend themselves against others? Arming the public is not going to resolve our sorry state. In regards to the first admendment, and defending ourselves against the government- how is owning a handgun going to protect you from the armies????

Rufus,

Instead of summarizing Christ's teaching trying reading the Bible it might open your eyes. Christ said he came to divide parent from child and said unless you forsake your family you have no part of me. Christ never said he came to teach tolerance for he condemned sin (i.e., Old Testament) and said he came to fulfill the law not to destroy it. Christ message is a radical message that neither liberals nor conservatives embrace.

I personally do not think Christ would have taken any side in the debate. His mission was to bring man to a relationship with God. I would say keep Jesus out of this debate.

"You didn't read about it on the national news becasue it was a crime prevented by someone exercising that Second Amendment right."

Funny how that's always the case with these alleged incidents. So why don't you provide a link?

Razorback,

I provided you with examples of the Patriot Act's unconstituiionality at: (Posted by: fiver | April 18, 2007 05:21 PM)

I then gave you one example of many case citations at: (Posted by: fiver | April 18, 2007 05:59 PM).

I've said nothing whatsoever regarding profiling but directed several specific questions and requests to you which you have ignored.

Do you really think you can get away with these tactics when there is a written record of our comments? It makes you look less than foolish. Have a nice day; I'm through with you.

hi, i'm such a lazy cretin i can't even take the time to make up a fake name to attach to my moronic posts.

I heard something very interesting on NPR this morning. Someone had identified the shooter as South Korean and someone else made a stuid racist comment. Thereafter, there was a parade of comments and emails from listeners that being Asian or South Korean was not the issue. This was simply one deranged person who committed a horrible crime. I believe that. I wonder why some of tjose ame liberals took leave of their senses, then, when it came time to simply point out that the use of firearms was also an isolated act, by one deranged individual, and is not typical of most gun owners.

And, in answer to the comment by the annon poster above, "yes" I do think we would be safer if all law abiding people were armed. The shooter at VT would have been shot very quickly if even one a few of the students had permits and were lawfully carying weapons. That is simply common sense. Here, in Oregon, just a few weeks ago, a deranged man attempted to murder several families and was shot and wounded by a trucker, with a permit to carry a handgun. You didn't read about it on the national news becasue it was a crime prevented by someone exercising that Second Amendment right. Now, I don't carry. I don't think I could kill someone, even to save my own life, but I've got to tell you, I feel safer with "gun nuts" around me than I do at any other time. Those VT students, most of them at least, would be alive today if some students were legally armed.

Please someone make fun of my spelling and grammar - it will take away from the obvious faults with my reasoning.

Dufus1133

What do you mean he ignored the ban? how could he? He must be the victim somehow.

Well, I'm going to call you on a couple of things. First your use of male genitilia as a form of insult is benieth contempt and you ought to be banned fom the Post forever. The only reason you wnt is becasue the Post gives left wing cretins and Naderites a free pass when they express their bigotry. Second, Christian's "turn the other cheek" when it is appropriate. At other times, the example is Christ, with a whip, driving the money changers from the temple steps."

Please don't use Jesus actions, and that specfic action, to justify the right-wing lunicy. Bush tried that he failed.

1. Jesus would have never been FOR guns. any form.
2. The money changers scene was because they allowed non-jewish money in the temple. THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT SOLD THIS COUNTRY OUT FOR HIGH STOCK PRICES AND OIL. They choose money over doing the Christian thing. So in that sense the religous right is actually the oppisit eof that lesson.
3. Most of the post on this site or from conservative. A high number are people not even talking about the subject at hand or how to fix it. They can't win that debate.

The only ways is to silence the real speak. Do me a favor and never try to say the right in this country is "of high moral character". They are making BILLIONS off of blood money.

Sorry for the rant. It is a sin to try and twist the teachings of a great man for your politcal process unless, of course you honor he specifically said so. In this case Jesus preached the opposite of everything you see hear. Let's go down the list and see how the right fares:

1.He preach Tolerance
2. Peace
3. Love
4. Shunning of money
5. living Fun full life

The opposite is true on each one of these things, in regards to the right in this country. So, Please don't do that.

I only said that if you read or watched anything outside of the LSM you would have surely found this story. It was considered a victory for the Bush admin - probably the reason you haven't ever heard of it. Try going to yahoo and typing 'patriot act court ruling'. you may actually learn something out of the usual propaganda. I would be willing to bet you never heard we are winning in Iraq either. Or that the economy is booming.

Re: (Cho's acts demonstrate this. If the ban had been effective, he would not have killed 32 others.) - Dan H.

There is no ban in Virginia, so how is this relevant?

VT DID ban possession of firearms on campus. Thus, their ban was ineffective and unenforceable, as are all gun bans.

anonymous commenter,

I've responded to each request for sources by providing sources, not by the "homework" excuse you quoted.

Further,are you saying this landmark was only reported on FOX? Not on any other network? Not in legal newspapers? Nowhere but FOX? And you won't even divulge the FOX reference?

But my problem is that I "watch those fake news shows."? Did you read your post before you clicked on publish?

Fiver

I understand why you dont want to site specifics about the constitutionality of the Patriot Act, along with a court decision.

All you have to do is convice a judge that you are right, and they will enter a restraining order prohibiting the government from violating your constitutional rights.

The goverment was afraid of being accuse of profiling, and therefore the FBI national office overruled the local agents request for a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui computer prior to 9/11.

No liberals said we have to put up with the violence of 9/11 because our Constitution protects people like Moussaoui, and its just part of the price we pay for freedom. Rather, liberals said the administration failed to protect Americans, ignoring the fact that the politically correct atmosphere in which profiling is used to call people racists contributed to the unwillingness of the government to aggressively go after a dark complected Islamic immigrant.

Likewise, liberals will point out that playrights have first amendment rights, that mentally ill persons should not be stigmatized, and that immigrants should not be given special attention from law enforcement.

Less concern about the rights of persons to write about violent fantasies, less concern about the rights of the mentally ill, and less concern about stigmatizing immigrants might have caused a more aggressive preventative approach to Cho.

There is obviously no guarantee that any of this would have prevented what happened, just as it is obvious that different gun laws would not have guaranteed a different outcome.

Politically correct advocacy for all of these supposedly oppressed groups gets in the way of prevention when a member of the groups favored by the left decide that they want to victimize the innocent.

I wasn't going to do your homework for you"
- translation - I just make this sh*t up.

MikeB - you are in good form today. this suits you much better then the protectionist rantings you usually post. there is hope for you yet.

If all citizens carried loaded handguns, would we all be safer?

Fiver - you are not aware because you don't watch fox, you watch those fake news shows. this was a highly public finding only a few weeks ago. Here is a taste of what libs do when confronted with requests for sources:

"I wasn't going to do your homework for you"

How many think VT would be safer if all students were allowed to carry concealed and loaded weapons? Safer? You cannot be serious.

JoeTruth | April 18, 2007 05:32 PM -
Well, I'm going to call you on a couple of things. First your use of male genitilia as a form of insult is benieth contempt and you ought to be banned fom the Post forever. The only reason you wnt is becasue the Post gives left wing cretins and Naderites a free pass when they express their bigotry. Second, Christian's "turn the other cheek" when it is appropriate. At other times, the example is Christ, with a whip, driving the money changers from the temple steps. I leave i for you to decide whether you are a potential convert or simply an evil, twitsted little gnoe that no amount of work can save. And, third, I am noramlly a liberal Democrat, pro-choice, pro-Gay rights, pro-National Health Care, a John Kerry voting, anti-Bush, anti-corporation, pro-union, Democrat. I also happen to be a fire eating proponent of *all* of the Bill Of Rights and am an avid hunter and target shooter and gun owner. I stand very solidly with the other gun owners here, liberal and conservative. What we all have in common is a deep seated belief in the Seond Amendment, a love of shooting sports, and mutual respect. We are also politcially active and WILL NOT vote for any candiate who advocates gun control laws and that includes that stupid Brady Bill.

"I can't make you people respect life"

but the supreme court did just that today, despite protest from all the Dems who can't get their story straight.

"The core of the patriot act has been upheld."

Razorback,

In the same post where you demand I give you a case citation, you make the above claim with no reference?

In answer to your request, the case of ACLU v. National Security Agency, Docket No. 06-2095 challenges NSA surveillance and is currently on appeal in Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. There are many others.

I am aware of no case in which "the core of the Patriot Act has been upheld." Please provide your source.

What you do to each other is not my concern. I can't make you people respect life. If you have hate, if you want to shoot people, I say you shoot like-minded people rather than my children

As a practical Liberal I am all for collecting up all the guns and sending them back to Mexico. you see I can find those guns no matter where you hide them. I will not be able to find any illegal aliens during this effort.

To CH:

Re - "the deterrant here would be the use of the weapon, not its presence"

Hmmmm..... and the deterrent value of using a weapon that was NOT there.....?

Your original postulate seemed to be that the fact that a gun was concealed removed it's value as a deterrent. This is not true, as a concealed weapon may kill a misbehaving wacko just as well as one openly carried.

I'll preach love tolerance, power to the people.
In case you miseed my message of peace and tolerance I'll repeat it:

I say send all conservatives to Austraila with their boy Rupert Murdock

Why don't you all move to Alaska and hunt and shoot each other all day.

We don't need these people in office. We need them in rehab :)

Tougher gun laws wont do jack.... this guy killed 30+ people then himself, you think he would have qualms about breaking into someones house to steal their registered firearms to use in his attack?

Is a criminal really going to be concerned about breaking laws to obtain a weapon he plans to use illegally anyway?
And to the whole... protect yourself from oppressive government argument... that might have been true back in the 1700's, however military weaponry has come a long way since then.. Before you even had a chance to protect yourself you would be labeled an enemy combatant and shipped off to Cuba.

Razorback,

Please stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that the government does nothing to protect the public. I did, however, point out that on September 11, at Columbine, and at Virginia Tech, the government and law enforcement did nothing to protect the public. If I'm incorrect, please point out what they did.

Also, as asked before, how were law enforcement's hands tied at Columbine and Virginia Tech? There were plenty of heavily armed officers present at both for significant periods of time during the attacks. No attempt was made to stop the attacks. How were their hands tied? By me? Again, if I'm wrong, please point out what they did.

In response to "it only takes one" post regarding "would I trust everyone to carry"?

The short answer is no, not everyone, but I would trust the large majority of those that want to carry.

This is very simular to driving cars. They can be made to be lethal weapons, are are used as such in some circumstances. Yet, the great majority of drivers learn the laws and rules of the road, get enough training to responsibly use their car in most circumstances, and use the car to improve their and other's lives. The greatest majority don't snap and go plowing through an open air market if a spouse cheats on them. So, I trust them to use their car responsibly,a nd will punish those that don't.

It really is a matter of "Who do you trust?" The libs tend to trust a big brother govenment, even though it has proved time and again to be inadequate to deal effectively in preventing gun violence. Conservatives tend to trust themselves and their fellow citizens to do the right thing, in the greatest majority of cases. The gun debate essentially boils down to this calculation.

I do recall Jesus said "turn the other cheek

so according to liberal views, we should ignore all attacks. Yes that does fit in with cut and run and rights for terrorists.

I recall something about an eye for an eye. but as a Lib I only use the bible when convenient. it has no redeeming value on its own.

how will you function. I know how. You move to where everythinks like you. You'll all sit around watching Fox drinking beers talking about how no one understands. That is your existence. HAte,intolerance, ignorance, fear.

Good luck with that life. I'll preach love tolerance, power to the people.

It's all good. You don't have to understand, blank poster attacking me on every post. When they are pulled you will get it. What will you do when you brain is off the air?

have learned from experience in dealing with less advanced primates - other Liberals

Solution II,
I believe the case your referring to is U.S. v. Miller decided in 1939. It did involve a sawed-off shotgun, but the statute in question made it a crime for a felon to transport one across state lines. This is not clear precedent for banning handguns.

Rush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/HannityRush/O'Reilly/Coulter/Hannity

someone over at daily Kos told me if I print this as a single word often enough, I could win arguments with those evil cons. how's it working?

they also told me I have no obligation to make sense otherwise. this appeals to me as a Democrat because I have never made sense.

This is beginning to sound like a bar-room brawl. Name calling has gone wild. I see testicular influences taking hold. Let's get our guns out and fight like a man! As for my sources of information, I said that I wasn't going to do your homework for you. I am just making you aware of what I have read. I have learned from experience in dealing with less advanced primates that the validity of any source providing unpalatable information is routinely,in fact always, attacked as "biased" etc. by the knee-jerk pro-gun advocates. Perhaps these people need a personal tragedy in their own home to come to their senses. This is not a football game. This life and death. Grab a beer and start shooting. This a manhood thing, right? The funny thing is that most gun advocates are also Christians. I do recall Jesus said "turn the other cheek." If there is one thing I can't suffer, it's hypocrites!

We can pass all sorts of laws that criminals will ignore and law-abiding citizens will follow. this will put the citizen at a disadvantage but we like new laws anyhow.

I think banning volcanoes makes more sense. do you know how many people suffer from volcano fear? do you remember pompeii? they are also ruining our environment. all we need is a movie. did you know that in Hawaii the fear of volcanoes is higher than in France? This proves it is a problem.

Nore would we want to ban volcano's because we would all be dead without an atomosphere. Don't get sidtracked joe. They love to bring up points that are of no relevance. Like, "people die of obesity, let's ban spoons." Stick to your guns. Don't worry about these crackpots agreing with you. It will never happen. They are just an Avatar of Rush/O'Reilly/Coulter/Hannity.

Due to time constraints, I can only tell you to check out the crime statistics before and after New York passed its ban. Same for DC.

Fiver says the government does nothing to protect the public, but lots to protect Bush and Cheney.

They blame law enforcement, then tie law enforcements hands.

They say the CIA should have figured it out, the FBI should have figured it out, the airport should have figured it out, then they try to deny them to tools to figure it out.

Just find a court case. NO MORE EXCUSES. The core of the patriot act has been upheld.

Joe Truth - the reaon you're appalled is that there is no factual basis for you gun control stance. The violent crime rate stas pubished by the various governments, the actual homicide figurs from the Department of Justice, everything flies in the face of your closely held beliefs. Oh, what to do when reality creeps in, challenging your whole reason for thnking one way.... Oh well, there's always drugs!

Chris, if you ever read your comments sections, you know that I'm a loyal reader. Please leave this stuff alone at least until the funerals are over. Whether it's a politician or a special interest group or, yes, a journalist, exploiting this tragedy so quickly for political purposes is cheap and it's beneath you. You may not have a side in the debate you refer to, but you definitely have a professional interest in immediately politicizing the deaths of these people.

Just stop. Just stop and wait until the dead are buried and then we can all get into this.

Supreme Court has upheld ban on certain categories of firearms (decision was Al Capone era, on sawed-off shotguns). Why not similar ban on semi-autos (which any dignified hunter doesn't need) and/or handguns?
Wholly absent among the Second Amendment defenders is ANY mention of the "well-regualted militia" clause. How many of these people are out doing PT on Saturday mornings? Company-level tactics? Maneuver warfare? I thought not.
As to the idea that a single armed student in a classroom would've "prevented" the whole thing: let's just hope that student was a better shot than the trained professional G-man who managed to shoot his fellow FBI special agent last week. And/or that he hadn't been hitting the Keystone Lights the night before...
As for "soft" targets: last year another deranged individual killed two local Virginia police officers at their precinct house using semi-automatic weapons (AK-47 derivative, I think).

Typical of the silly comments splattered in this blog site. "Ban volcanoes" the bloogger states. How stupid. If we could, we would!!!! Now, let's get back on track. We CAN pass gun control laws. We CAN'T pass anti-volcano laws. What nonsense!

We democrats will not surveille the enemy or collect intelligence. We are completely against intelligence as you all know. that might make the enemy FEEL bad. we prefer to wait until after the carnage and then send in inspector cluseau to track down the criminals and bring them to justice in the Hague where they can play the media for years and eventually get off. Its only fair.

cdw, your citation is from a university survey of crime in the four LARGEST cities in a sampling of countries. This hacked piece of garbage has been tossed around by the gun control crowd for so long that people actually started to look at it. The statistics are based on HEARSAY/surveys of households and not on published government crime reports. Furthermore, the methologogy has been repeadly questioned in academic circles......e,g, no one of any academic standing believes a thing about it. How on earth the authors of this doggeral expect to extrapolate the crime rate for the entire U.S. by looking at New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Miami is beyoind me...it is also a very very sick joke. WorldNetDaily uses police reports and official government reports of violent crime.

Rehab? That is the left's answer to everything. Everything can be cured with rehab. Isn't rehab a form of brainwashing? Isn't brainwashing a popular technique of Socialists? Oh my, it is all coming back now.

All this talk from gun-toters about the constitution. What about three seperate branches of government? Is that in the constiution somwhere?

You gots to understand peoples, its true because JOE KNOWS its true. Joe's preconcieved ideological biases are true just because JOE SAYS SO. Facts that stand in the way of what JOE KNOWS can be disregarded, because JOE knows the TRUTH.

Quit picking on Joe, we don't want JOE to go CHO.

JoeTruth -

Then cite your sources please.

I am so sure of my truth I needn't bother to provide my citation. I have also seen big foot and have pictures to prove it. go to my site, enter your creidt card and I'll show you.

Joe truth

Razorback,

The suits against the Patriot Act are still winding their way through the courts.

If you believe the surveillance authorized by the Patriot Act is the same that we have been using against organized crime, you simply don't know what you are talking about.

Surveillance on organized crime requires a warrant based on probable cause found by a neutral and impartial magistrate. The surveillance authorized by Patriot Act requires no suspicion whatsoever, no warrant,and no judge. Only a finding by authorized law enforcement (with no requirement of evidence) that the surveillance is needed for a terrorist investigation.

But again, what has you so afraid that you're willing to abandon your Constitutional protections? Do you think Al Qaeda is going to get you? In Arkansas? Remember, the last time Al Qaeda attacked in the U.S. the authorities did nothing to protect the public (but plenty to protect Bush and Cheney).

I am appalled by the cynical use of so-called data provided by nothing less than liars. The typical gun lover finds a phony data base, probably planted by a gun control maniac (on the edge of psychiatric illness), circulates it and uses it to refute the truth. Sorry, fellows, but that doesn't work with people like me. I have seen the statistics before from credible PRIMARY sources, and the US is BY FAR, the most homicidal nation in the First World per capita, regardless of means of homicide. And the miscreants who provided a phony data base should be able to reason that even if it were true that in other nations homicides are more common, just not by guns, then we still should set out to reduce homicides using guns-- they could reason that this would FURTHER reduce our "sterling" and wonderfully "low" homicide rate!!!!! Go do your homework yourself. I have seen official figures for homicides and they do not in the least resemble what has been provided here.

Ban volcanoes, unless they are gay volcanoes, don't profile volcanoes, tax volcanoes, they are ruining the environment, subsidize volcanoes, because Hawaii is a very cool place. Gay marriage might be legal there.

John you are ignorant. Got proof?

That's right John. We don't need these people in office. We need them in rehab :)

We need them to work on their daddy issues.

Thousands of people were evacuated after a long-dormant volcano erupted late Tuesday and again early Wednesday, provoking avalanches and floods that swept away houses and bridges.

Ban volcanoes!

This comment by John...

"Gun ownership for most American men is a sign of frustrated and insecure masculinity."

...is a sign of his effeminate sensative transexual girly man nature.

I hope that the tough woman (or man) in his life has given him permission to play on the computer, otherwise a big time spanking is coming for JohnJohn.

Still the same basic question - how will you collect up all the existing guns?

Is this too hard to contemplate silly Libs? It is a very simple and straightforward query? Otherwise go back to worshipping fake science and false hope.

cdw - Check the cite I give above about the overall *violent* crime rate being higher in Australia. The researchers, from Holland and employed by the E.U. mind you, conclude that Australia;s rate oif violent crime went up AS A RESULT OF the strict gun control laws passed by their nut job PM. Here's another citation of violent crime stas that makes our Canadian and other gun control nuts cringe: http://www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/may/19/dantre.htm

There is apparently an INVERSE RELATIONSHIP between gun ownership and violent crime. Like it or not, those are the facts. All you can do is whine and spout emotional nonsense. You have no facts to support gun control. Even the homicide rate stats used by the Brady fools is cocked up. There were fewer than 18,000 homicides in the U.S. in 2005. Of those, about 5,200 were due to firearms of all types. 80% of those were a result of gang on gang violence, primarily in large inner cities. Your rate of being harmed or killed by a firearm in the U.S., unless you are a gang member, is 5.7 times LESS than your chances of being harmed in a knife attack in England.

As a woman, I have no "testicular connection" with my desire to own a gun. I have been around them all of my life. Seven kids grew up in a house with a gun. Most never saw it, I have seen it twice in my life. I believe in proper parental control and discipline, something severely lacking these days. My son collects swords and knives. They scare me more than any gun could. If Cho didn't use a gun, he could have found an internet website that would have shown him how to use a bomb using regulare household items. What would the argument be then?

Gun ownership for most American men is a sign of frustrated and insecure masculinity.

jwelch, ultimately evrything int his world is about probability. Death by firearms is far more likely in this country than in, say, European nations. This unquestioning support for the Constitution avoids the reality of history. The Constitution IS NOT in stone. We have had amendments that have allowed women to vote, for example. Our founding fathers allowed us a way out if things changed. We are now in the 21st century, and things have changed. It is time to amend our Constitution to reflect this, just as we finally allowed women the right to vote. Your statements about banning mental illness are not to the point. The reality is that these mentally ill people cannot all be tracked down in time, and so we must be on guard by passing appropriate laws. It seems gun advocates believe the guns have rights like people do. They seem to fight relentlessly against laws that protect our children, as if guns had Constitutional rights. Guns are probability modifiers. This is my point. They vastly increase the probability of death. I wonder why the rest of the democratic and civilized world, the ones with much lower homicide rates, disagree with you and people like you. Doesn't that put you on the defensive? Or do you think our country, with its horrible crime record involving guns, is a model for the rest of the world to follow? This liberal vs conservative nonsense reminds me of the mindless rooting for one's football team. This is not a silly game. This is about life and death, not liberals vs conservatives. Start thinking intelligently, please.

Matt Wright

The fifth amendment says if they take it, they have to provide "just compensation", but you know how those liberals like to tear up the constitution.

Is that a Remington semi-automatic shotgun? I will trade you my .357 magnum revolver for it.

Worldnet Daily is a rightwing hack paper. Below are some statistics from the same study they "reference". Besides Switzerland (discussed earlier), the US is an outlier in terms of gun ownership and crime.

Sorry the data is not very well formatted. Welcome to the real world, where data is king.

Source: International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS), 1989-2000
http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/NACJD/STUDY/03803.xml
hand all
gun% gun% A/T SA Rob Bur Homicide
England & Wales 0.5 4.7 5.3 3.4 1.9 9.4 0.7
Scotland 0.5 5.3 2.9 1.8 9.0 1.8
Northern Ireland 1.5 4.3 3.3 1.5 4.7 5.2
Netherlands 1.0 2.0 9.3 6.4 2.0 8.9 0.9
West Germany 6.5 9.2 9.3 7.9 3.0 4.7 1.2
Switzerland 14.0 32.6 3.9 5.5 2.2 4.0 1.2
Belgium 6.0 16.8 6.4 4.9 4.0 7.7 1.8
France 5.5 24.7 7.1 4.3 2.9 10.4 1.2
Spain 2.0 7.5 6.8 9.1 5.6 1.0
Norway 3.5 31.2 8.2 4.7 1.5 3.2 1.2
Finland 7.0 25.5 9.7 4.3 2.7 2.0 2.9
USA 29.0 48.9 12.7 10.4 5.5 13.7 8.8
Canada 4.0 30.8 8.8 10.0 2.6 10.2 2.1
Australia 2.0 20.1 11.6 13.5 2.3 16.6 2.0

Stop with the facts, its ruining liberalism.

Matt Wright:

Does this mean that now that I am 47 they can take my Remington?

Sorry, my NBC package link didn't work. See http://www.wnbc.com/news/12418237/detail.html?rss=ny&psp=news

An automatic weapon has no purpose but to kill humans. No purpose on this planet other than that, regardsless of what these souless hacks say. I say send all conservatives to Austraila with their boy Rupert Murdock. See how safe they feel when everybody has guns then.

Joe Truth,

Cho hardly seems to have done this on a whim. NBC just got a package from him today.

fiver

Just how many of those suits have been sucessful?

Do you object to using the same electronic means which have been used against mobsters and drug dealers to be used againt terrorists?

As Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) explained during the floor debate about the Act, "the FBI could get a wiretap to investigate the mafia, but they could not get one to investigate terrorists. To put it bluntly, that was crazy! What's good for the mob should be good for terrorists." (Cong. Rec., 10/25/01)

Now police officers, FBI agents, federal prosecutors and intelligence officials can protect our communities by "connecting the dots" to uncover terrorist plots before they are completed. As Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) said about the Patriot Act, "we simply cannot prevail in the battle against terrorism if the right hand of our government has no idea what the left hand is doing" (Press release, 10/26/01)

Which of this do you disagree with? Are Biden and Edwards right wing fanatics? Specifics fiver, enough of the false drive by rhetoric.

As for me, my views are entirely consistent. I agree with reasonable restrictions on the second amendment. I support the back ground checks, I support banning maching guns (and tanks and nuclear weapons for the idiots who must inject those into the discussion).

I also believe that the same techniques of surveillance that have been used on mafioso and drug dealers should be used on terrorists.

The Virginia Tech gunman sent photographs, videos and writings to NBC in New York before he died in the massacre that left 33 people dead

TO NBC - the heart of liberalism. Looking for a sympathetic audience.

Joe Truth, NOT TRUE. You gun control freaks keep inventing "facts". The homicide rate in European countries with strict gun control laws is about the same as the U.S. They just don't use guns. Also the rate of violent crime in those same countries is THREE TIMES higher than the U.S. and your chance of being a victum of a crime is 5.7 times greater in England and Wales and France and Australia than in the U.S. ANyone can go Google any number of studies on this by simply typing in "Violent crimes U.S. Brtain". I would, however, refer you to a WorldNetDaily article, which references and ongoing study from the Netherlands: http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/guncontrol_20010302.html

Every single contention you have made is merely emotional hysteria born of some misguided "belief" you have and your irrational fear of firearms. If this debate were about anything other than gun cotnrol, you would be urged to seek pyschological counselling.

the simple fact is that guns are out there. what will you libs lose elections to prove - that you can control criminals. you couldn't even stop the Cin C from doing interns.

Joe Truth,
I fear you have failed to grasp the issue sir...

weather you ban guns, or don't
unless you consider the mentality society is adopting, the desensitization of our youth, our inability to prevent people from possibly committing crimes because we are afraid to discriminate against them...

you will not be able to prevent crimes like these from happening again.

You haven't since the 60's or 70's, and we have forms of gun control, and what you have failed to see, is that doing so, has done nothing to prevent violence from happening.

Good luck on preventing mental illness and murder.

I'll be rooting for you.

What you are also failing to see, is that once you remove rights, one slowly after another creep away from you.

But since you are going to be able to prevent all bad things from happening in the future in your Utopia, I am certain that the government in your Utopia will never allow sanctioned murder, like Hitler's did.

You fail to see the trick that one incident, shocking, frightening and horrible, makes everyone debate the wrong issue.

Killing will continue to exist.
Doesn't matter how.

The greatest weapon of mass destruction sir, is the mind, followed by the inability to use it.

When will truth prevail? Imagine the killer at Virginia Tech trying to accomplish what he did with only a knife? Guns help, and they help because they can be used quickly (little time for the emotionally disturbed to clear his mind, perhaps), and are highly effective and easy to use by those with the inability to think up more elaborate schemes for killing people. I would rather take my chances with a knife than a gun. If I owned a gun, I would only be more likely to kill an innocent bystander or cause another person to want to kill me.

"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

The classes of the militia are--
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."

-United States Legal Code, Title 10, Sub A, Part I, Chapter 13, 311

I hope this shuts up the 'NG, police, and military are our militia' crowd.

If gun is used in any crime ----
by use ~ it means fired, shown, indicates
by any means that (he/she/them) have one
weather it can be seen or not...........
also NO PLEA Bargins in ANY case where a gun is 'used'.............

"The Dow Jones industrial average closed above 12,800 for the first time Wednesday,

Blame it on Bush"

I hope all that money you conservatives are making off of death makes you happy. How is that differant from blood money on the streets. Conservatives hate crime, right? You hate hustlers on the street right? You will have to answer for yousins one day. Maybe not today, but someday

Actually, Jacie, VT is case and point. Guns are banned on college campuses. A crazed person thinks hey this is like stealing candy from a baby..... let me update my post

In 2006, state supported college campuses banned concealed weapons on campus. As a result, 32 students, unable to defend themselves were chased down and exterminated due to a failure of local police to show up and do their duty

the worst school rampage occurred when an anti-tax zealot blew up a school in Bath, Mich., in 1927, killing around 40 children and a handful of adults, including himself.

Ban schools!

BTW, I make myself look stupiod so I can fit in with liberals.

jwelch, I am sorry that you fail to grasp the issues here. I agree that the killer was mental ill, to put it bluntly. But there are many like him out there, and for that reason alone we have to make an effort to avoid this kind of thing happening again. Europeans have a far lower rate of homicide because of strict gun control. Of course, you can argue it is just cultural and nothing else. And that would suit me fine. We need to alter our sick way of dealing with perceived and real threats. Just as this crazy kid was ill, so is American society as a whole. He reflects the violence that this country so adamantly promotes. Every time I read an article about some poor teenager killing himself with a firearm from his home, I will think of you.

Razorback,
Numerous lawsuits have filed against the Patriot Act (including several by the ACLU) for the evisceration of the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth, and Eighth Amendments. As I've mentioned earlier, you're on a board with several self-described liberals who believe that the Bill of Rights (Second Amendment included) must be protected. Yet your posts seem to reveal little or no respect for any Amendment other than the Second.

Questions: Who's being inconsistent? What has you so frightened that you're willing to hand over your rights to authorities who are either unable or unwilling to protect you?

The Dow Jones industrial average closed above 12,800 for the first time Wednesday,

Blame it on Bush

ooo. bY the way. I misspell words on purpose just to mess with you conservatives. I know you have short attension spans and love to attack. I'll give you the misspelled words. Have fun. Attack that if it helps your intelecual point :)

LYLEPINKO, are you the same LYLEPINKO that said I was mistaken about the application of the so called "assault weapons" ban? Are you the same LYLEPINKO that I had to correct?

Now LYLEPINKO says:

"A few days before this tragic event, we had a good discussion going until the nuts took over this cite. Any time a valid point is raised, for or agaist, the nut wackos are sure to be found in a matter of minutes."

Was your "good discussion" all of you liberals yacking off, reinforcing their ingnorant intollerant ideological biases without interruption from anyone who disagrees?

Oh for the good ole days when liberals were all about "diversity".

TO answer the post above...
the level of arrogance of the liberal anti gun people is just awful too.

In fact, the level of arrogance of this debate is abhorrent.

32 students are dead because of an anomaly that is a product of a disturbed society.

I would be appauled to read this if I were one of their parents.

Figure it out people. Society is changing and NOT in a better way. That being said, there is substance in MUDs posting that CHO is a small fraction of the population. It doesnt matter what color creed religion orientation political party ... HE WAS A MANIAC WITH MENTAL DISORDERS.

To take these children's massacre and make it about gun control and politics is RETARDED (no offense to those who's IQ actually falls in the range 75-100 who are suppossed to be Retarded).

IF CHO DID NOT HAVE A GUN, HE WOULD HAVE USED SOMETHING ELSE. We should be talking about WHY youth are so quick to violence now, and WHY people are afraid to report crimes, WHY crimes are not prosecuted ...like stalking, in which someone really can't be prosecuted until they have physically harmed another being...WHY people feared him and yet nothing was done.

Hey Gun Control debaters...which came first, the chicken or the egg? There is not right...

In a UTOPIA it would be nice that we do not have guns and everyone loves each other and nobody is violent. In REALITY that's not the case.

And...if keeping your right to speak freely, such as on this blog, meant you had to bear arms against a oppressive governtment, you would happily take them up.

If you wouldn't you have no right to complain. If you have no desire to protect your rights, then you have no right to fufil your desires...such as that to have an opinion.

That being said, most Gun collectors are not looking for high powered Automatic or Semi Automatic weapons. Most criminals are. And those criminals probably are going to register them.

STOP BEING STUPID and take in that the other side's opinion might have some merritt. BOTH SIDES.

Quit insulting the lost by using their deaths to pummel each other about a moot point. If Cho wanted to kill these people and couldn't buy the gun at a gun shop, he surely could have purchased one from a fellow student or some other ne'er do well in the area.

HIS MOTIVE IS THE ISSUE NOT HIS METHOD.

Jim House: The fallacy exposed by your post is your leap to the conclusion that because something happened after something else happened means that there was a cause and effect. But this is not true. America arguably has the most lax gun laws in the world. Yet our society