F430murci

Haha, all lawyers go through very stringent background checks including the execution of HIPPA forms for all psychological, counseling and drug or alcohol notes and records as well as FBI background check. I am totally fine if all gun owners had to go through same and guns were taken away from those that could not pass such a rigorous background check.

The background check to purchase a firearm is already comparable to the background check to practice law. If you purchase a firearm (which from your post it appears you have never done). They run a computerized background check on you for criminal felony convictions and whether or not you are subject to a restraining order. The federal form 4473 requires you to disclose any mental health issues you may have.

There is no requirement I am aware of to submit a HIPAA waiver for admission to practice. From an admissions perspective of a state bar, it would not be practical for them to obtain all the medical records of every single applicant to screen for mental illness.

I do think HIPAA is THE source of the problem in regards to firearms. When a person seeks psychiatric help for the mental health professional cannot disclose the mental problem. I think it should be disclosed to the ATF to red flag any purchase of firearms. However, the rights of the mentally ill to keep their mental illness secret, supercedes the right of the public to avoid having firearms fall into the hands of the mentally ill.

Nope not all. Whack felons can easily buy Bushmasters at gun shows from private sellers.

The federal registration for class IIi for all weapons is a great idea because it would close that loop hole but gun dealers do nit want it because they can sell their assault weapons to their buddies who are private that sell them to just anyone including Mexican cartel members at gun shows.

Research class III registration and you will see how it works. Puts people in jail for a long time if selling to wrong person.

The mental thing is huge according to NRA so why not do mental background checks on people wanting to purchase guns and make is part of federal registration criteria so those violating go to jail. NRA does not want because a huge portion if their members would not pass.

Here is CBS poll I cited so I will quote.

Favor Oppose Unsure

% % %

"A ban on the sale and possession of equipment known as high-capacity or extended ammunition clips, which allow some guns to shoot more than 10 bullets before they need to be reloaded"

"Preventing certain people, such as convicted felons or people with mental health problems, from owning guns"

"Requiring gun owners to register their guns with the local government"

Good for you! This is the link to the full Pew poll.

http://www.people-pr...-gun-control/1/

So are you saying 62% does not think that assault weapons should be banned, 62% does not think high capacity clips should be banned, something like 92% does not think some form of registration should be required.

You guys cite ambiguous questions that are inconsistent with very specific questions that actually show what people think.

BTW, here is the NRA poll numbers I posted before which shows vast majority of NRA members believes gun control measures are needed and that NRA rhetoric is nit necessarily consistent with mist of it's members. 1/4 of the NRA members are absolute nut cases at extreme ends of public views.

• 74 percent of NRA members and 87 percent of non-NRA gun owners support requiring criminal background checks of anyone purchasing a gun.

• 79 percent of NRA members and 80 percent of non-NRA gun owners support requiring gun retailers to perform background checks on all employees - a measure recently endorsed by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry.

• 75 percent of NRA members believe concealed carry permits should only be granted to applicants who have not committed any violent misdemeanors, including assault.

• 74 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants who have completed gun safety training.

• 68 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants who do not have prior arrests for domestic violence.

• 63 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants 21 years of age or older.

• The NRA rank and file also supports barring people on terror watch lists from buying guns (71 percent) and believe the law should require gun owners to alert police to lost and stolen guns (64 percent). The NRA's Washington office strongly opposes both measures.

Here us the

Haha, all lawyers go through very stringent background checks including the execution of HIPPA forms for all psychological, counseling and drug or alcohol notes and records as well as FBI background check. I am totally fine if all gun owners had to go through same and guns were taken away from those that could not pass such a rigorous background check.

The background check to purchase a firearm is already comparable to the background check to practice law. If you purchase a firearm (which from your post it appears you have never done). They run a computerized background check on you for criminal felony convictions and whether or not you are subject to a restraining order. The federal form 4473 requires you to disclose any mental health issues you may have.

There is no requirement I am aware of to submit a HIPAA waiver for admission to practice. From an admissions perspective of a state bar, it would not be practical for them to obtain all the medical records of every single applicant to screen for mental illness.

I do think HIPAA is THE source of the problem in regards to firearms. When a person seeks psychiatric help for the mental health professional cannot disclose the mental problem. I think it should be disclosed to the ATF to red flag any purchase of firearms. However, the rights of the mentally ill to keep their mental illness secret, supercedes the right of the public to avoid having firearms fall into the hands of the mentally ill.

They can and have to disclose if HIPPA form completed and to practice law you have to agree to produce all records related to mental treatment and diagnosis. Seems like those buying assault weapons with 30 shot clips should be at least required to have same mental check as those practicing law when at least lawyers have shown enough stability to make it through 7 years of college whereas guy can buy Bushmaster with a 6th grade education without a background check at a gun show from a private seller.

Haha, like the second word of each sentence spelled as "ban" of questions I quoted from polls. Twilight zone or just English as second language.

"Forty-nine percent of those polled said it’s more important to control gun ownership, compared to 42 percent who say it’s more important to protect Americans’ rights to own guns, according to a Pew Research Center Poll."

Controlling gun ownership is definitely not banning all guns. And yet 42% of Americans are against it. It's simple as that. Try to spin it or read it in a different way all you want. It won't make any difference. Almost half of America, days after a school massacre are still against gun control and that's that.

62 percent say ban certain stuff and even higher percentage say control with federal regulation through registration. Those are means to control gun sales and ownership with strong majority in favor. I even cited polls from NRA members showing strong majority favoring several measures to control and regulate ownership. Not huge logical leaps to understand and it is unfortunate if you cannot see and comprehend the dynamics and perceptions of questions and rationale behind more focused questions.

I don't know which poll you're reading but those numbers don't appear on the Pew poll when it's obvious I've been talking about the Pew poll all along. Don't try to lie or mislead then pretend you're smarter when you're obviously full of crap. I sent you the link to the Pew poll while it looks like you're pulling numbers out of your ass.

Here is CBS poll I cited so I will quote.

    Favor Oppose Unsure    

    % % %    

"A background check on anyone attempting to purchase a gun in order to determine whether the prospective buyer has been convicted of a felony"

12/17-18/12

95 5 -    

8/7-8/12

96 4 -    

"A ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of semi-automatic assault guns, such as the AK-47"

12/17-18/12

62 37 1    

8/7-8/12

57 42 1    

"A ban on the sale and possession of equipment known as high-capacity or extended ammunition clips, which allow some guns to shoot more than 10 bullets before they need to be reloaded"

12/17-18/12

62 37 1    

8/7-8/12

60 40 1    

"Preventing certain people, such as convicted felons or people with mental health problems, from owning guns"

12/17-18/12

92 8 1    

8/7-8/12

91 8 1    

"Limiting the number of guns an individual can own"

12/17-18/12

48 52 -    

8/7-8/12

45 54 1    

"Requiring gun owners to register their guns with the local government"

12/17-18/12

78 22 -    

8/7-8/12

76 23 1    

Haha, like the second word of each sentence spelled as "ban" of questions I quoted from polls. Twilight zone or just English as second language.

"Forty-nine percent of those polled said it’s more important to control gun ownership, compared to 42 percent who say it’s more important to protect Americans’ rights to own guns, according to a Pew Research Center Poll."

Controlling gun ownership is definitely not banning all guns. And yet 42% of Americans are against it. It's simple as that. Try to spin it or read it in a different way all you want. It won't make any difference. Almost half of America, days after a school massacre are still against gun control and that's that.

62 percent say ban certain stuff and even higher percentage say control with federal regulation through registration. Those are means to control gun sales and ownership with strong majority in favor. I even cited polls from NRA members showing strong majority favoring several measures to control and regulate ownership. Not huge logical leaps to understand and it is unfortunate if you cannot see and comprehend the dynamics and perceptions of questions and rationale behind more focused questions.

I got a bridge to sell you!

Wow, so guidable if you believe this nonsense.

The problem with polls is that 9 out of 10 believe the question related to a complete ban on all weapons so NRA and people like you use this misinformation. The majority when asked if they think assault weapons should be banned was 62 per CBS news poll on 12-18-2012. 62 percent also said high capacity clips should be banned on same date. 78 percent required registration of all guns.

I'm reading the Pew poll which says CONTROL not ban.

Really, I see a BAN in these sentences and not a control.

"A ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of semi-automatic assault guns, such as the AK-47"

12/17-18/12

62 37 1

8/7-8/12

57 42 1

"A ban on the sale and possession of equipment known as high-capacity or extended ammunition clips, which allow some guns to shoot more than 10 bullets before they need to be reloaded"

12/17-18/12

62 37 1

8/7-8/12

60 40 1

http://www.people-pr.../12-20-12-2.png

Where is the 'ban'?

Haha, like the second word of each sentence spelled as "ban" of questions I quoted from polls. Twilight zone or just English as second language.

You need to read my post again. Especially note "The NRA wants to prevent the possession and use of firearms by criminals and mentally unfit persons. But the NRA insists that it be done without infringing upon the Second Amendment rights of mentally fit, law-abiding citizens." That is an important distinction!

Let's define mentally ill or term mentally fit. I think a good argument that a majority of those Knob Creek NRA machine gun totung guys are mentally ill and that any who really believes they need assault weapons and machine guns in US are mentally ill, unless paranoid and delusional thinking is no longer within ambit of mental illness. Most card carrying NRA survivalists types with walk-in gun safes and small arsenals are not poster children for defining the term mentally fit or mentally stable.

This will be a tough term for Courts to define and I am all for it provided NRA polices it's member and forces it's unstable members to cancel membership and turn their weapons in. Otherwise, just more empty rhetoric from money hungry small penile compensating NRA folks. On that note, Merry Christmas everyone, happy holidays, and give an extra big hug to those close and your children if applicable. Let's strive to make the world a better place for our children and be grateful for what we have and who we have in our lives.

When you use terms like " Knob Creek " and "money hungry small penile compensating", you sound more like you are desc ribing the money-grubbing civil-tort lawyers!

Your comment of "mentally ill, unless paranoid and delusional thinking is no longer within ambit of mental illness" fits civil-tort lawyers far more accurately than NRA members!

The United States will be a far better place when the American Bar Association "forces it's unstable members to cancel membership and turn their" licenses to play lawyer.

Post 89 says it all. Haha, all lawyers go through very stringent background checks including the execution of HIPPA forms for all psychological, counseling and drug or alcohol notes and records as well as FBI background check. I am totally fine if all gun owners had to go through same and guns were taken away from those that could not pass such a rigorous background check.

A lot the anti gun people seem to think that banning guns would be some kind of panacea to gun crime.

Are you really so naive?

Guns will always be available on the black market no matter how many restrictions you place on them.

Nope, only a start and part if a multi faceted approach that will take several years to implement and effectuate. The alternative is to end up like Mexico where people walk around carrying assault rifles and there are so many murders that only 10 percent are actually investigated and solved.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is defending the rights of U.S. citizens, specifically the rights enumerated in the Second Amendment of our Bill of Rights. I will not surrender my rights because of the actions of a mentally deranged criminal. For decades now the liberals have proceeded with their efforts to "mainstream" mentally ill persons and, in some cases, prevent the mandatory medication such persons when medical professionals have prescribed such medication as necessary. This, and multiple other liberal policies, have much more to do with these tragic incidents than gun ownership.

Your countries gun laws are 3rd world at best, the only policy that allows these tragedies are your backward laws on gun control. UK is a country where you are more likely to be violently assaulted yet over 3000 times less likely to get shot. Switzerland, a very low crime county with no gun controls, and guess what, 100 times more likely to get shot than the UK. Look at the countries with US style gun laws and you will see there is a direct correlation between controls and shootings.

I hope next time, and there will be a next time, that the massacre is at an NRA rally, at least then, support for your ridiculous amendment will diminish.

p.s since the tragedy well over 100 americans have been shot and murdered

This is in response to balo post above. I don't have inclination to wade back through to find original post to quote.

Wow, balo sounds like we are talking about taking away his woman. Truth is mentally ill probably don't know they are mentally so self regulation is not the best idea here. Have you taken an NMPI or had a full psych evaluation before getting your guns you are so determined no one will ever take from you? David Koresh was determined that no one would take his guns also.

. . . and the medication, liberals and mentally ill comments . . . Speechless on that one.

The Gun Lobby blames the deaths on "people, not guns", but they won't allow law changes to stop "people" getting guns.

Strange reasoning indeed, because only applied to guns. Every other business that makes a product that harms people can be taken to court, but not gunmakers.

You may be referring to the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" of 2005. This was a needed response to a series of frivolous and reckless lawsuits that were intended to drive gun manufacturers and dealers out of business by holding those manufacturers and dealers liable for the criminal acts of third parties who were totally beyond their control. Those lawsuits were a clear misuse of our legal system. Those frivolous lawsuits were the equivalent of suing General Motors or Ford because an individual committed a criminal act using an automobile produced by those companies.

The purpose of the act is to prevent firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for crimes committed with their products by third parties beyond their control. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible.

Yeah, we are and will be paying for Bush lunacy for next 50 to 100 years. Not sure how one man could cause so much trouble and economic problems in such a short period of time. Happens when everyone becomes near sighted and starts missing the forest for the trees.

Sadly, I argued an Amicus Curiae position for Gun companies on one if the sensitive issues and won back during this timeframe.

Still ways to get around and it is amazing how the manufacturer of such dangerous products that serve one purpose and one purpose only thinks it should be absolved from liability. There will be a tort drive against gun companies when time, setting, political atmosphere and court is right. Us mass tort guys are just focusing on banks right now.

Doesn't the second amendment state something like "while it may be necesary to raise a millitia then a citizen of the USA has to right to keep and bear arms". Would it be fair to say that in modern day America the millitia would be the National Guard in which case only members of that organization would be able to "keep and bear arms" under the constitution and Joe Public would have no rights to keep guns at all.

The Supreme Court of the U.S. has fairly recently ruled that the 2nd. Amendment means that individual Americans have the right to own and bear arms - guns... case closed... the militia argument has been tossed by SCOTUS

There have also been several detailed and scholarly researched reports that included the drafts, notes, and correspondence of the writers of our Bill of Rights as they were being constructed. Also examined were other writings and statements of the writers of our Bill of Rights. It is well settled that they intended those rights, including those in the First and Second Amendment to be individual rights.

Also, back when our Bill of Rights was constructed, the term "militia" did not mean "National Guard" type organizations that could be "federalized" by the stroke of a pen. The common usage was the entire body of adult male citizens. And, yes, those rights have now been extended to adult female citizens and also non-white citizens. The extension of rights to those citizens was the correct action.

This is primarily in reference to the above post about US Supreme Court ruling in 2008 Heller decision. People perhaps should read and understand polls and especially court decision before distorting same to advance their goals.

Heller was a pretty fact specific case and Scalia writing for 5 person majority provided a whole lot of room for banning a lot of different weapons ala 1939 Miller language. Contemplates perhaps only guns protected were those available at time of drafting and not these crazy ultra dangerous weapons available today. I am cool with letting these NRA guys gave black powder or cap and ball guns. Can hunt with them, but I guess these poor guys just cannot derive compensation factor or macho feel from a musket as they can from a Bushmaster.

I got a bridge to sell you!

Wow, so guidable if you believe this nonsense.

The problem with polls is that 9 out of 10 believe the question related to a complete ban on all weapons so NRA and people like you use this misinformation. The majority when asked if they think assault weapons should be banned was 62 per CBS news poll on 12-18-2012. 62 percent also said high capacity clips should be banned on same date. 78 percent required registration of all guns.

I'm reading the Pew poll which says CONTROL not ban.

Really, I see a BAN in these sentences and not a control.

"A ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of semi-automatic assault guns, such as the AK-47"

12/17-18/12

62 37 1    

8/7-8/12

57 42 1    

"A ban on the sale and possession of equipment known as high-capacity or extended ammunition clips, which allow some guns to shoot more than 10 bullets before they need to be reloaded"

12/17-18/12

62 37 1    

8/7-8/12

60 40 1    

Steve wanted the Apple minimalist feel of his stores with this yacht. Feadship is a good yacht company and makes some gorgeous yachts. Unfortunately, this one is not and only Steve is to blame so estate needs to pay up suckers. They built exactly what he designed and wanted.

Love the comments about majority of Americans are not in favor of gun control when 74 of NRA members disagree with NRA's public platform and do believe we need gun reform.

• 74 percent of NRA members and 87 percent of non-NRA gun owners support requiring criminal background checks of anyone purchasing a gun.

• 79 percent of NRA members and 80 percent of non-NRA gun owners support requiring gun retailers to perform background checks on all employees - a measure recently endorsed by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry.

• 75 percent of NRA members believe concealed carry permits should only be granted to applicants who have not committed any violent misdemeanors, including assault.

• 74 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants who have completed gun safety training.

• 68 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants who do not have prior arrests for domestic violence.

• 63 percent of NRA members believe permits should only be granted to applicants 21 years of age or older.

• The NRA rank and file also supports barring people on terror watch lists from buying guns (71 percent) and believe the law should require gun owners to alert police to lost and stolen guns (64 percent). The NRA's Washington office strongly opposes both measures.

This article has good poll numbers even if you do nit buy into or believe the views:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=9786

This isn't rocket science. This is gun science. It is known if you can reduce the number of automatic weapons in civilian populations you reduce to rate of MASS murders. Again, nobody is talking about changing the 2nd amendment. Talking about perfectly legal, perfectly constitutional LIMITS.

In recent hisory, when has an automatic weapon been used in a mass murder in the U.S.?

Class III and federal registration are pretty step requirements. Class III are also dam_n expensive so most thugs using weapons to commit crimes are not going to be lugging along a 100 pound machine gun that cost $ 35,000.

These class III are few and far between so perhaps ban on post 1986 and very, very strict registration requirements works somewhat.

I think federal registration and class III type requirements are a great idea for all guns.

Truth is, semi mode am an assault rifle is better route for taking lots of people out. Full auto is only good for suppression fire and you squeeze and your pretty much done.

No, but dies that mean we don't try and that we do not exercise some rational intelligent though and measures to make this country safer.

Wasn't Columbine gun show purchasers so just more gun show loop hole crap where basically anyway, felon it not, can buy assault rifles at now. Good idea. No great ideas.

http://extras.denver...s/shot0427a.htm

Precisely! There will always be some loop hole which will allow a criminal to get a gun. Obama and congress, after this tragedy will probably pass some half assed gun control bill which won't work. And then we just have to wait for the next gun massacre.

Gun control has always made it more difficult from citizens to get guns while criminals and crazies don't really care because they don't follow the law anyway. I'm not one of those 2nd Amendment types but I firmly believe if criminals have access to 300 million guns out there illegally, then law abiding citizens should be to easily get a gun legally.

Uhm, how is that working out? Working out teally well isn't it. Nuff said.

NRA had it's chance to saturate market with weapons during last 8 years and it has done zero good so time for a change.

The loopholes can and will get closed and hopefully we will start to see vigorous prosecution of illegal sales of firearms which has largely gone unpublished.

Some cannot or refuse to see the forest for the trees. A crafty lawyer needs to angle back sone if the legal responsibility back on NRA and gun mfgs. File in a liberal jurisdiction, survive summary judgment and chance if a huge verdict is there. I say put money where mouth is.

I have posted in another thread that there have been a whole lot of potential gun massacres that was stopped by a citizen who used his legal gun to stop the would be mass murderer. So yes, having law abiding citizens with guns is working out pretty good. I have already said, if you can ban all 300 million guns then you don't need citizens with guns also. But since you can't then the citizens should be able to possess one to protect themselves.

Good luck with closing the loopholes. Criminals and crazies will always be able to find a gun to hurt somebody if they really want to. 300 million guns, good luck stopping them from getting one.

And stop blaming the NRA for everything. Immediately after the massacre, a poll that 42% of Americans were still against gun control. That's almost half of the population. I doubt everyone of them is a 2nd Amendment nut.

I got a bridge to sell you!

Wow, so guidable if you believe this nonsense.

The problem with polls is that 9 out of 10 believe the question related to a complete ban on all weapons so NRA and people like you use this misinformation. The majority when asked if they think assault weapons should be banned was 62 per CBS news poll on 12-18-2012. 62 percent also said high capacity clips should be banned on same date. 78 percent required registration of all guns.

Money grab he has been dead for over a YEAR.......................has nothing to do with Steve Jobs - he's not around to cancel the order or tell them to proceed - they decided in the wake to bill(k) accordingly.........

Please get facts straight before spouting off. I know Feadship guys well as my family is in the charter yacht business. These guys are straight up and followed Steve's wishes.

Saw this one at Feadship dock. Strange design and I think they will have trouble selling. Jobs wanted them to complete because it meant a lot to him on a personal level even though he knew he would pass before done. He didn't want to stop the commission because he though he would be conceding to death. The estate should pay for this one. Completely uncool. He wife and children attended christening. Pay the bill.

No, but dies that mean we don't try and that we do not exercise some rational intelligent though and measures to make this country safer.

Wasn't Columbine gun show purchasers so just more gun show loop hole crap where basically anyway, felon it not, can buy assault rifles at now. Good idea. No great ideas.

http://extras.denver...s/shot0427a.htm

Precisely! There will always be some loop hole which will allow a criminal to get a gun. Obama and congress, after this tragedy will probably pass some half assed gun control bill which won't work. And then we just have to wait for the next gun massacre.

Gun control has always made it more difficult from citizens to get guns while criminals and crazies don't really care because they don't follow the law anyway. I'm not one of those 2nd Amendment types but I firmly believe if criminals have access to 300 million guns out there illegally, then law abiding citizens should be to easily get a gun legally.

Uhm, how is that working out? Working out really well isn't it. Nuff said.

NRA had it's chance to saturate market with weapons during last 8 years and it has done zero good so time for a change.

The loopholes can and will get closed and hopefully we will start to see vigorous prosecution of illegal sales of firearms which has largely gone unprosecuted.

Some cannot or refuse to see the forest for the trees. A crafty lawyer needs to angle back sone if the legal responsibility back on NRA and gun mfgs. File in a liberal jurisdiction, survive summary judgment and chance if a huge verdict is there. I say put money where mouth is.

Of course, prudent thing would be security plus gun control. These whack jobs are trying hard to make things such a mess that there is no going back and they also fully understand a small but very vocal percentage of population can be manipulated with fear and bs rhetoric most intelligent forward thinking individuals can only shake their heads in amazement at ala Bush axis of evil et al speeches for many years.

Haha, these people probably think Amish mafia is unscripted and Bigfoot is an ancient alien. American greed and patriotic paranoia at it's finest.

"Small but vocal percentage" Really Now! Try 100 to 150 MILLION Gun owners - who own somewhere between 200 to 300 Million guns ... No - Not Small - but yes - very vocal ... At nearly 1/2 the total American population and over 1/2 of the American Adult population say - Guns will stay - no limits on the 2nd. Amendment...

I own shot gun and brother owns pistols due to job. Both of us believe gun control is needed and assault weapons should be off the street so equating number if gun owner to radical views espoused by the NRA is a naive view.

I think the 1994 assault weapon ban was a good law that unfortunately lapsed in 2004 during Bush's axis of evil rants.

And from 1994-2004, how many school attacks were there? Did the assault weapon ban prevent Columbine?

All these half measures, half gun control laws don't work

No, but does that mean we don't try and that we do not exercise some rational intelligent thought and impliment measures to make this country safer.

Wasn't Columbine just gun show purchases so just more gun show loop hole crap where basically anyway, felon it not, can buy assault rifles at now. Good idea. No great ideas.

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/shot0427a.htm

Another factor: Members of the U;S. House of Representatives and Senators (Senate) like to be re-elected to office. They know if they vote for some strict gun control bill that they run a strong chance of NOT being relected next time... The Members of the House have to run for re-election every two years. The House of Representatives has a majority of Republican ... Guess what is Not going to happen in the House...

Maybe it's time politicians' start placing safety of citizens above the politicians' own economic needs. With NRA, it's definitely a mentality of corporate greed over country need. Politicians have no excuse and people are starting to get it. We are really dealing with a very small but vocal percentage that fall into the radical whack category. Kind if like the whacked pro lifers that protest and kill abortion doctors. Small, but vocal group that probably gets 100% of their whacky members turning out at the polls. Unfortunately, rationale people with more moderate views tend to be less likely to vote so our policy gets dictated by the whackadoodles.

Another factor: Members of the U;S. House of Representatives and Senators (Senate) like to be re-elected to office. They know if they vote for some strict gun control bill that they run a strong chance of NOT being relected next time... The Members of the House have to run for re-election every two years. The House of Representatives has a majority of Republican ... Guess what is Not going to happen in the House...

Yes and that is why the PEOPLE must rise if they really want change and DEMAND change. Not with guns. Not with the NRA. With votes. Many people thought Obama was toast for a second term but the people decided differently. A hard road to control guns? Yes. Impossible? If so, what kind of democracy is that?

The U.S. is a Repbulic not a Democracy ... and besides if you are talking about a majority vote - then the gun advocates are in the majority - sounds democratic to me...

No, most people believe in some sort of gun control and a string majority believe in banning assault weapons and going back to pre2004 laws so maybe get ya facts a but straighter before during off silly misleading posts.

Of course, prudent thing would be security plus gun control. These whack jobs are trying hard to make things such a mess that there is no going back and they also fully understand a small but very vocal percentage of population can be manipulated with fear and bs rhetoric most intelligent forward thinking individuals can only shake their heads in amazement at ala Bush axis of evil et al speeches for many years.

Haha, these people probably think Amish mafia is unscripted and Bigfoot is an ancient alien. American greed and patriotic paranoia at it's finest.

"Small but vocal percentage" Really Now! Try 100 to 150 MILLION Gun owners - who own somewhere between 200 to 300 Million guns ... No - Not Small - but yes - very vocal ... At nearly 1/2 the total American population and over 1/2 of the American Adult population say - Guns will stay - no limits on the 2nd. Amendment...

I own shot gun and brother owns pistols due to job. Both of us believe gun control is needed and assault weapons should be off the street so equating number if gun owner to radical views espoused by the NRA is a naive view.

I think the 1994 assault weapon ban was a good law that unfortunately lapsed in 2004 during Bush's axis of evil rants.

Of course, prudent thing would be security plus gun control. These whack jobs are trying hard to make things such a mess that there is no going back and they also fully understand a small but very vocal percentage of population can be manipulated with fear and bs rhetoric most intelligent forward thinking individuals can only shake their heads in amazement at ala Bush axis of evil et al speeches for many years.

Haha, these people probably think Amish mafia is unscripted and Bigfoot is an ancient alien. American greed and patriotic paranoia at it's finest.