Obama met by pro-gun protests at scene of latest school shooting in Oregon

[MaxYakov]

These protesters have made a serious miscalculation.

Doing what they have done shows a complete lack of compassion for the families of the victims. They are a disgusting, vile lot of knuckle-draggers. If I was president it would make me want to do the exact opposite and push full speed ahead for gun control.

Come on Obama...you are a lame duck president so make this a priority now while you have a chance.

Can you enlighten us as to exactly what you think "this" would be?

As far as I'm concerned, those victims on campus were betrayed from multiple sources. The next-to-last line of defense was the claim that the campus was a "gun-free" zone and, implicitly would remain that way under all circumstances. The college administration did not and probably could not have, from a practical standpoint, make good on that claim.

I have to agree with Dr. Carson that the final line of defense was the students and staff themselves, even at the cost of several being shot, by overpowering the shooter before he had gotten the upper hand. We already have a recent example of that type of action by the take down of the terrorist on the French train.

So we should turn everywhere into a gun shoot zone where anyone can carry a gun and start shooting when he thinks someone is a threat??? Are we advocating vigilante justice? When this happens elsewhere, TV forumers condem it but when it happens in the US, they think it is their Constitutional rights. I am not pro or against gun control. People have a right to defend and protect themselves. There is a lot of rubbish talks here without any supporting arguments either way other than the man made Constitution.

If it's going to be labeled a "gun-free" zone then had better damn well be enforced as such or it's criminal negligence. People died relying on that, although I doubt many of the victims pondered this as they attended the college. Zones such as public passenger aircraft can be made genuinely "gun-free" only at the extreme cost and inconvenience to all.

As far as opening fire by individuals on other individuals, there are laws concerning this and the concealed carry or even open carry people are aware of these or should be.

I don't see what this has to do with "vigilante justice". I could make a pretty good case that the Umpqua shooter dementedly believed he was delivering "justice". The term "vigilante deterrence" when it refers to law-abiding citizens strikes me as a more apt term whether they using threat of arms or only dialing 911.

Of course a "deterrence" situation could escalate into an immediate, extra-judicial "justice" situation. The individual(s) meting out this "justice" had better be correct or face judicial system justice themselves. Case in point, the Trayvon Martin shooting.

[MaxYakov]

It's funny but the majority of Americans support the same changes that seem quite reasonable to me, and don't involve gun confiscation.

Which tells you it isn't the voters that politicians are afraid of, or paid by, but the NRA.

Cowards and Thieves.

And such onerous reporting requirements/regulations can drive gun stores out of business as it did recently with the High Bridge Arms store - the last one in San Francisco, a bastion of left-wing looniness:

Citing onerous regulations, San Francisco’s last gun store is closing its doors - Washington Post - Oct 5, 2015

"Last month, general manager Steven Alcairo announced on Facebook that High Bridge Arms is closing its doors at the end of October. As the closure approaches, Alcairo is blaming the store’s many opponents and the city’s cumbersome laws.

“It’s just too much coming from all sides,” Alcairo told ABC affiliate KGO-TV.

Namely, he told the AP, a proposed ordinance that would force the store to record each sale and submit weekly reports detailing ammunition sales to police. Alcairo added that he has also grown tired of filling out “mountains of paperwork” for the San Francisco Police Department, the state Justice Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

What did the uber-loonie, Nancy Pelosi, have to say about this?

Her typical loonie statement, of course:

“Regulations didn’t shut them down,” Pelosi said. “They didn’t want to live within the regulations and so they decided to go elsewhere. So that was a private sector decision on their part.”

Ref: freebeacon.com - Oct 8, 2015

Are you also a Pelosi-level loonie yourself because that would take some serious effort or dementia?

PS: San Francisco is one of the 300+ sanctuary cities where a young woman, Kathryn Steinle - ABC7 News, was shot and killed by an illegal alien that should have been turned over to Immigration and Custom Enforcement but was instead released. The shooter claimed it was an accident.

What did Obama have to say about this shooting do you suppose? Hint: Nothing.

Edited October 11, 2015 by MaxYakov

[Publicus]

I wish that those on this forum would state their home country when speaking on topics like gun control.....it is clear that the comatose European progressives have been marginalized and brainwashed by decades of low education standards and have become victims of Social Engineering internationalist (Communist)

indoctrination....rendering them virtually impossible to think clearly.....if Americans give in to the gun-grabbers then America will surely go the way of an Islamicized Europe ...or, as Orianna Fallaci.characterized it, EURABIA.....your choice.

After reading your probably well-thought over post, suddenly that wall around the USA starts to make a lot of sense. Not so much to keep people out, as to keep people like you in.

God forbid the 'communist' countries in Europe with the very low gun-related deaths will have to listen to opinions like yours. Please keep that over there.

The vast majority of the voter population of the USA are politically center-middle so we entirely appreciate your points and we know them well. USA is high profile globally so every warthead gets greatly magnified, to include the views expressed by its rejects abroad.

We long ago established and continue to maintain a cultural wall of separation of crackpots vs the majority. President Obama represents the vast majority of Americans when he speaks of the great number of issues to include guns.

The loonies who showed up to the president's motorcade in Roseberg carrying their guns are indeed tearaways.

" President Obama represents the vast majority of Americans when he speaks of the great number of issues to include guns." Oh my god, you far left tin hat wing nuts are even further off the wall then I thought. "represents the vast majority".... don't you ever look at pole results....most people have finally seen through Obama.s lies now and he's crashing badly accept for the far left that's still hypnotized by his " charismatic demeanor ". I suppose you can find some white house propaganda site that spins or just lies about pole results to argue with my point. He's even a better liar than than that coke head Billy Clinton was and way better than alcoholic Bush was.

Prez Obama is the first twice elected POTUS since the war hero Dwight Eisenhower to win more than 51% of the popular vote in each of the two elections (1952; 1956). Those on the far right who cannot admit or concede that Prez Obama does indeed represent or reflect the clear majority of the American electorate prove that they are political marginals and sorehead losers. Two of their mainstream and best party guys lost, McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.

The D party has won the majority of the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 elections of the President. Only after the right recognizes and acknowledges the facts of reality can anyone begin to take 'em seriously or begin to listen to what the marginals have to say. The facts and realities are offered here to the right as positive suggestions and a constructive criticism.

After all, how many rightwingers we know of voted for either of the Republican party mainstream (Rino) candidates in 2008 or in 2012. Not many at all if the rightwingers did in fact vote in either election. Rightwingers have been clear that in 2016 they want a R party nominee/candidate they can vote for, i.e., Trump or Carson but only however if their first choice Genghis Khan is not on the ballot.

[Seastallion]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

So, what you are saying is that you bought and carried a gun for years THAT YOU NEVER NEEDED.

[smotherb]

Ummm you might want to dig deeper.....Some of the victims and their families are against gun control as is many of the people in that town. They can see the reality of it. Gun control laws is not the answer. They don't want to be left with out any self defense. Most if not all the the attackers in these events have had histories of mental problems. Therein lies the answer.

I think you are on the right track. There must be something wrong with anyone who believes killing a bunch of innocent people will further their cause. Of course, there may be some other excuses.

I suggest the gun-control lobbyists (and other gun-control advocates, Government and Non-Government) take it to the Gun Owner lobbyists, especially the NRA— the National Rifle Association, the powerful civilian nonprofit gun-rights advocate organization—to work in conjunction with them in a Gun Responsibility Group to have legislature proposed to the state and federal congresses which would help end this indiscriminate gun violence.

To get NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ support, give them considerable control of the Gun Responsibility Group and allow them to take credit for reducing these shootings. To further garner NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ support, give them the sponsorship of the additional training required to get a Responsible Gun Owners License—Gun Safety Test, Gun Shooting Test, Criminal Background Check, Mental Appropriateness Test, and any additional testing deemed necessary by the Gun Responsibility Group. There should be plenty of revenue generators therein.

The congressional passing of a law which is sponsored by the traditional anti-gun law groups should be little problem—especially since the Gun-Control law advocates will gain more gun control under the Responsible Gun Owners law.

Certainly, it would be easy to enforce the Responsible Gun Owners law for new gun owner applicants to earn a Responsible Gun Owners license, but current gun owners will balk at having to take the Responsible Gun Owners License test. That, of course, may leave a large number of Mentally Inappropriate current gun owners—and any other causal categories deemed potentially responsible. Consequently, current gun owners need to be motivated to earn the Responsible Gun Owners License.

Give the current gun owners who pass the Gun Responsibility test an honorary title, a recognition pin or medallion, special status in the NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ groups, special rates on all NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ groups’ functions (including the Responsible Gun Owners License test), give them priority treatment in all gun competitions, discounts in all hunting licenses, increase their game taking limits in all hunting jurisdictions, give them discounts on gun purchases, ammunition and gun-related products—it should be rather easy to get sponsorship through gun-related businesses, especially to support a popular Responsible Gun law.

Then, you have to deal with various states wanting to amend the Responsible Gun Owners law and the fact that a person not licensed under the Responsible Gun Owners law will get their hands on a gun. Of course, you have to deal with the registering of all guns owned by all Responsible Gun Owner licensees and non licensees. Each gun would have its nomenclature, ballistic finger-print, and serial number recorded. Those issues would be quite difficult to address.

Now, how many indiscriminate shootings will be stopped?

Sure, it would be a lot easier just to have a big brother law which mandates, “Say no to guns” and have all personal guns taken away.

Not so, you would probably get shot. It is a constitutional right of all Americans to keep and bear arms. Certainly, an amendment to the US Constitution is possible—basically, a new amendment must be made to change the old (second) amendment; that requires 2/3 of congress to pass the law, then 3/4 of the states to ratify it.

Numerous political factions have tried, but the vast majority of Americans want the right; even though many would like to have tighter gun control. If you are so against Americans having guns, get a constitutional amendment passed.

Edited October 11, 2015 by smotherb

[smotherb]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

So, what you are saying is that you bought and carried a gun for years THAT YOU NEVER NEEDED.

That was his right, and having a gun, but never using it, is probably the way it should be. However, if he needed a gun and didn't have one . . .

[Boon Mee]

Prez Obama is the first twice elected POTUS since the war hero Dwight Eisenhower to win more than 51% of the popular vote in each of the two elections (1952; 1956). Those on the far right who cannot admit or concede that Prez Obama does indeed represent or reflect the clear majority of the American electorate prove that they are political marginals and sorehead losers. Two of their mainstream and best party guys lost, McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.

The D party has won the majority of the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 elections of the President. Only after the right recognizes and acknowledges the facts of reality can anyone begin to take 'em seriously or begin to listen to what the marginals have to say. The facts and realities are offered here to the right as positive suggestions and a constructive criticism.

After all, how many rightwingers we know of voted for either of the Republican party mainstream (Rino) candidates in 2008 or in 2012. Not many at all if the rightwingers did in fact vote in either election. Rightwingers have been clear that in 2016 they want a R party nominee/candidate they can vote for, i.e., Trump or Carson but only however if their first choice Genghis Khan is not on the ballot.

Big negitivo on that.

Only reason Obama was elected 2X is due to the unholy numbers of LIV's who believed his lies.

You can keep your doctor. You'll save $2,500.00 USD per year on insurance and on and on.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Boon Mee

[CWMcMurray]

Ummm you might want to dig deeper.....Some of the victims and their families are against gun control as is many of the people in that town. They can see the reality of it. Gun control laws is not the answer. They don't want to be left with out any self defense. Most if not all the the attackers in these events have had histories of mental problems. Therein lies the answer.

If that is the case then those families that are still against gun control have no sympathy from me!!

Wow... So now who's being a low life knuckle dragger..

So only families in support of gun control are worthy of sympathy?

No other ideas or opinions allowed?

Edited October 12, 2015 by CWMcMurray

[casualbiker]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

So you were trained in the correct use of a weapon and when and how to use it. Correct?

[Credo]

I have a full appreciation for the 2nd amendment and I understand the desire and need for many Americans to own a gun, but at the same time, it seems that some sense has to be brought to bear on the unfettered availability of guns to nearly everyone.

A close Thai friend recently moved to AZ and I talk to him several times a week. One of the neighbors, a 40ish guy, who lives with his mother due to a very bad motorcycle accident that caused some brain damage. He has suffered emotional difficulties, including being subject to anger issues quite easily. He tried to get a driver's license, but was required to go through a battery of tests, including a battery of psychological tests. He failed and was allowed a driver's license. He went down to buy a gun and was given a permit!

This isn't someone who should be carrying a gun, but apparently no problem in getting one.

Something needs to be tightened up in getting a gun.

[casualbiker]

It's funny but the majority of Americans support the same changes that seem quite reasonable to me, and don't involve gun confiscation.

Which tells you it isn't the voters that politicians are afraid of, or paid by, but the NRA.

Cowards and Thieves.

And such onerous reporting requirements/regulations can drive gun stores out of business as it did recently with the High Bridge Arms store - the last one in San Francisco, a bastion of left-wing looniness:

Citing onerous regulations, San Francisco’s last gun store is closing its doors - Washington Post - Oct 5, 2015

"Last month, general manager Steven Alcairo announced on Facebook that High Bridge Arms is closing its doors at the end of October. As the closure approaches, Alcairo is blaming the store’s many opponents and the city’s cumbersome laws.

“It’s just too much coming from all sides,” Alcairo told ABC affiliate KGO-TV.

Namely, he told the AP, a proposed ordinance that would force the store to record each sale and submit weekly reports detailing ammunition sales to police. Alcairo added that he has also grown tired of filling out “mountains of paperwork” for the San Francisco Police Department, the state Justice Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

What did the uber-loonie, Nancy Pelosi, have to say about this?

Her typical loonie statement, of course:

“Regulations didn’t shut them down,” Pelosi said. “They didn’t want to live within the regulations and so they decided to go elsewhere. So that was a private sector decision on their part.”

Ref: freebeacon.com - Oct 8, 2015

Are you also a Pelosi-level loonie yourself because that would take some serious effort or dementia?

PS: San Francisco is one of the 300+ sanctuary cities where a young woman, Kathryn Steinle - ABC7 News, was shot and killed by an illegal alien that should have been turned over to Immigration and Custom Enforcement but was instead released. The shooter claimed it was an accident.

What did Obama have to say about this shooting do you suppose? Hint: Nothing.

Wouldn't you ACTUALLY want a gun store to do the following " he told the AP, a proposed ordinance that would force the store to record each sale and submit weekly reports detailing ammunition sales to police"

I certainly would. Even as the 2nd amendment allowed guns as a right it didn't say that it couldn't have checks beforehand.

Interesting reading here, especially the early Supreme Court rulings.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

By the way I'm British and don't believe I need a gun to otherthrow the government of the UK.

[Publicus]

Prez Obama is the first twice elected POTUS since the war hero Dwight Eisenhower to win more than 51% of the popular vote in each of the two elections (1952; 1956). Those on the far right who cannot admit or concede that Prez Obama does indeed represent or reflect the clear majority of the American electorate prove that they are political marginals and sorehead losers. Two of their mainstream and best party guys lost, McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.

The D party has won the majority of the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 elections of the President. Only after the right recognizes and acknowledges the facts of reality can anyone begin to take 'em seriously or begin to listen to what the marginals have to say. The facts and realities are offered here to the right as positive suggestions and a constructive criticism.

After all, how many rightwingers we know of voted for either of the Republican party mainstream (Rino) candidates in 2008 or in 2012. Not many at all if the rightwingers did in fact vote in either election. Rightwingers have been clear that in 2016 they want a R party nominee/candidate they can vote for, i.e., Trump or Carson but only however if their first choice Genghis Khan is not on the ballot.

Big negitivo on that.

Only reason Obama was elected 2X is due to the unholy numbers of LIV's who believed his lies.

You can keep your doctor. You'll save $2,500.00 USD per year on insurance and on and on.

Right wing loser denial persists which is predictable.

He won.

Twice.

Until the right recognizes the facts no one will listen to you.

[OMGImInPattaya]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

Almost any American understands the US gun culture, thanks.

The vast majority of us want better and expanded controls due to the proliferation of massacres committed by certain people and which are ignored or arbitrarily dismissed by the gun extremists. Guns have always been abused in the US but in recent times the abuse has become endemic and frantic.

The first settlers from the early 17th century arrived with guns and had to use them to hunt food. Conflicts with the natives meant the settlers for better and for worse had to use the guns. Settlement of the continent required guns, quite literally.

Those who are in the present certain they need guns to protect themselves against our government are the people Americans need the most protection against. The people who showed up to the president's motorcade in Roseberg bearing their firearms are free to do that, however, they demonstrate a serious mental and emotional challenge to themselves and to the society to have to deal with effectively.

I owned a handgun in the US and was immediately comfortable with it due to my military experience of eight years. I bought it for self-defense. My sense of things at the time was good because soon afterward I had to show it once, and that was it, once. Nothing wrong with that. Still, I did not carry nor did I want to try to carry. I can understand carry but only in exceptional specified circumstances, not as a general practice.

Being extreme about guns and gun ownership is harmful in the extreme. Extreme begets extreme as we see with the NRA.

Moderation plse thx.

Too bad, we've got the Second Amendment ☺

[Boon Mee]

Big negitivo on that.

Only reason Obama was elected 2X is due to the unholy numbers of LIV's who believed his lies.

You can keep your doctor. You'll save $2,500.00 USD per year on insurance and on and on.

Right wing loser denial persists which is predictable.

He won.

Twice.

Until the right recognizes the facts no one will listen to you.

What facts?

That the Obama years will go down as a bigger failure than Jimmy Carter's abysmal performance?

His one 'accomplishment' if you want to call it that is he's effectively ended Pax Americana. Putin has put a fork in Obama. He's done.

[55Jay]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

So, what you are saying is that you bought and carried a gun for years THAT YOU NEVER NEEDED.

What's it to you?

[chuckd]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

So, what you are saying is that you bought and carried a gun for years THAT YOU NEVER NEEDED.

What's it to you?

It's far better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it.

Basic common sense.

[Thaidream]

Even during the times of the 'Old West' when America was starting to establish towns and laws- open carry of guns in many places was forbidden. When you came to town , you checked your guns. In those days, weapons were used to protect you on the trail and used to obtain your food. Today, we have an over armed population spurred on by the gun lobby which is nothing more than an extension of America's capitalism. Of course, the gun lobby wants you to purchase more and more guns so they can get rich off Americans fear. Then, you have politicians who could care less about you, whether you live or die, they just want to stay in power forever. I would never own a gun, not needed, and of no value. I am not fooled by the hype of the gun lobby or the politicians.

A greater issue is the status of mental health in America. Since the days of Ronald Reagon who as Governor of California, released untold people who were mentally ill from hospitals, and cut the funding, it has never been the same. Insurance companies refuse to provide full mental health coverage; successive local, State and Federal governments have cut funding for treatment, research and facilities to house mentally ill patients. They are left on their own devices, often to wander the streets. When confronted by the police, who are ill trained and prone to shoot first- they are either killed or incarcerated. Remember- this is a country that bills itself as the greatest in the World, If this is what great is, I hate to see what the worst is.

[MZurf]

Yes...take the guns.......turn America into a gelded group of Socialist pacifists (Europeans), who bend over for Islam and its representative in the White House...

Please don't hold back now, let it all out!

[Boon Mee]

It's far better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it.

Basic common sense.

Indeed.

Common sense seems to be in short supply regarding firearms which are nothing but another tool in the toolbox.

[Seastallion]

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

So, what you are saying is that you bought and carried a gun for years THAT YOU NEVER NEEDED.

What's it to you?

It's far better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it.

Basic common sense.

Basic common sense is if you don't need something, why carry it around, especially if it is a deadly weapon.

I don't carry a fire extinguisher around with me everywhere....I guess you would because "it's better to have one and not need it than to need it and not have one". It must be terribly inconvenient for you.

The woman shot by her child in Walmart (I say "the", but there's probably a few)...did she ever need her gun? The kid shot by his brother (I say "the" but there's probably plenty), did the parent ever need his/her gun?

How many thousands of accidental gun deaths have occurred from weapons that were never needed?

Bearing arms just because you have the right to, is not sensible at all. In light of the thousands that die, it's actually pretty dumb.

[Publicus]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

Almost any American understands the US gun culture, thanks.

The vast majority of us want better and expanded controls due to the proliferation of massacres committed by certain people and which are ignored or arbitrarily dismissed by the gun extremists. Guns have always been abused in the US but in recent times the abuse has become endemic and frantic.

The first settlers from the early 17th century arrived with guns and had to use them to hunt food. Conflicts with the natives meant the settlers for better and for worse had to use the guns. Settlement of the continent required guns, quite literally.

Those who are in the present certain they need guns to protect themselves against our government are the people Americans need the most protection against. The people who showed up to the president's motorcade in Roseberg bearing their firearms are free to do that, however, they demonstrate a serious mental and emotional challenge to themselves and to the society to have to deal with effectively.

I owned a handgun in the US and was immediately comfortable with it due to my military experience of eight years. I bought it for self-defense. My sense of things at the time was good because soon afterward I had to show it once, and that was it, once. Nothing wrong with that. Still, I did not carry nor did I want to try to carry. I can understand carry but only in exceptional specified circumstances, not as a general practice.

Being extreme about guns and gun ownership is harmful in the extreme. Extreme begets extreme as we see with the NRA.

Moderation plse thx.

Too bad, we've got the Second Amendment ☺

In a sense it is too bad there is the Second Amendment.

That is because during the post-war era the far right extremists have step by step hijacked it from the original intent of the founders to the point that in the present time it's become virtually unAmerican in their minds to take the socially responsible position of advocating action against the regular and frequent massacres of citizens, slaughters in the schools especially.

The answer of the right sector that more guns are needed is not a sensible answer. People who advocate this have no sense of anything, yet these are the people who have four or five guns, a garage full of ammunition and newspaper clippings in their drawer of Mark David Chapman.

Reality is that the gun lobby led by the NRA have taken personal possession of the Second Amendment. The rest of us who are the vast majority of the society want it back. The Second Amendment belongs to everyone, not only or exclusively to the gun lobby led by the extremist and absolutist NRA.

[Publicus]

Welcome to Roseberg, OR. Surrounded by farmland, a small city in rural Oregon, where they still maintain conservative values, and the average citizen owns guns and supports the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.

Indeed, most people have no idea just how conservative, apart from pot growing and smoking, are the folks in southern Oregon. Portland and Eugene are really just islands, one big and one small, in a sea of conservatism. Back in the late 1960s we all knew that on the road south to the Bay area one did not linger south of Eugene if one had long hair. Too bad for the suffocating conservatism as otherwise southern Oregon would be a paradise with the great weather, great landscape, and fantastic outdoor opportunities. Roseburg would make a great retirement location being close to the ocean, close to the mountains, and not all that far away from Portland. But you do have to be able to tolerate a polite but very, very conservative mindset from the majority of the neighbors.

I'm trying to reconcile the imagery of a place where a dude fears to linger because of his hair, and a place where everyone is polite.

Just curious, not being argumentative.

1950s, 1960s, maybe even early 1970s. It was very rural and very conservative. And in the 60s, some of the hippie types headed out those directions to establish communal paradise, much to the dismay of the locals. Lol. My brother-in-law and sister were just that: long-haired, pot-smoking, hippie-types who bought a farm near coastal Oregon, and lived by commercial fishing and subsistence farming. Living their ideals. It's interesting that they were considered to be liberal to the extreme, but my brother-in-law was also an extremely independent, self-reliant guy. Quite the paradox when you consider that those are considered to be conservative traits by many. There actually was not a whole lot of difference between him and the farmers around him other than he had shoulder length hair and smoked pot and didn't own a firearm. Other than that, they probably had more similarities than differences. Lol

Remember when Oregon used to elect only Republicans to the US Senate in Washington. Pretty moderate and reasonable guyz like Mark Hatfield, Bob Packwood and the irascible but prescient Wayne Morse among others.

For some years recently the two US senators from Oregon have been Democrats. Oregon has voted Democrat for president in every election since 1988, meaning in part the state stands in a complete rejection of the Bush family mafia that had taken control of the national Republican party for an unhealthy while there. Indeed, since 1988 when Oregon voters chose the Democrat and Massachusetts Gov Mike Dukakis who lost to daddy Bush the state has never looked back.

Which leaves Roseberg and the many other rural gun-filled zones isolated both in the state and nationally. The suburban and exurban people in Oregon who own guns and who are probably pretty reasonable and balanced people in their own use of firearms defeat themselves when they support the NRA absolute takeover of the Second Amendment for its own closed purposes.

Just as the time came for an Obamacare program and marriage equality, the time will come when the society as a whole will retake the Second Amendment back from the wackobird extremists.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

It is useless.

Even when the facts, numbers, stats, are thrown and slapped on pro guns faces, they still use the same old "guns don't kill people.." and stuff like this.

Sorry for the apparent minority of American who want regulations, you will just have to wait until they shoot at each others or kill themselvs, or kill during a road rage, or while their toddlers play with guns....

[connda]

Ummm you might want to dig deeper.....Some of the victims and their families are against gun control as is many of the people in that town. They can see the reality of it. Gun control laws is not the answer. They don't want to be left with out any self defense. Most if not all the the attackers in these events have had histories of mental problems. Therein lies the answer.

I think you are on the right track. There must be something wrong with anyone who believes killing a bunch of innocent people will further their cause. Of course, there may be some other excuses.

I suggest the gun-control lobbyists (and other gun-control advocates, Government and Non-Government) take it to the Gun Owner lobbyists, especially the NRA— the National Rifle Association, the powerful civilian nonprofit gun-rights advocate organization—to work in conjunction with them in a Gun Responsibility Group to have legislature proposed to the state and federal congresses which would help end this indiscriminate gun violence.

To get NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ support, give them considerable control of the Gun Responsibility Group and allow them to take credit for reducing these shootings. To further garner NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ support, give them the sponsorship of the additional training required to get a Responsible Gun Owners License—Gun Safety Test, Gun Shooting Test, Criminal Background Check, Mental Appropriateness Test, and any additional testing deemed necessary by the Gun Responsibility Group. There should be plenty of revenue generators therein.

The congressional passing of a law which is sponsored by the traditional anti-gun law groups should be little problem—especially since the Gun-Control law advocates will gain more gun control under the Responsible Gun Owners law.

Certainly, it would be easy to enforce the Responsible Gun Owners law for new gun owner applicants to earn a Responsible Gun Owners license, but current gun owners will balk at having to take the Responsible Gun Owners License test. That, of course, may leave a large number of Mentally Inappropriate current gun owners—and any other causal categories deemed potentially responsible. Consequently, current gun owners need to be motivated to earn the Responsible Gun Owners License.

Give the current gun owners who pass the Gun Responsibility test an honorary title, a recognition pin or medallion, special status in the NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ groups, special rates on all NRA and other Gun-Owner advocates’ groups’ functions (including the Responsible Gun Owners License test), give them priority treatment in all gun competitions, discounts in all hunting licenses, increase their game taking limits in all hunting jurisdictions, give them discounts on gun purchases, ammunition and gun-related products—it should be rather easy to get sponsorship through gun-related businesses, especially to support a popular Responsible Gun law.

Then, you have to deal with various states wanting to amend the Responsible Gun Owners law and the fact that a person not licensed under the Responsible Gun Owners law will get their hands on a gun. Of course, you have to deal with the registering of all guns owned by all Responsible Gun Owner licensees and non licensees. Each gun would have its nomenclature, ballistic finger-print, and serial number recorded. Those issues would be quite difficult to address.

Now, how many indiscriminate shootings will be stopped?

Sure, it would be a lot easier just to have a big brother law which mandates, “Say no to guns” and have all personal guns taken away.

Not so, you would probably get shot. It is a constitutional right of all Americans to keep and bear arms. Certainly, an amendment to the US Constitution is possible—basically, a new amendment must be made to change the old (second) amendment; that requires 2/3 of congress to pass the law, then 3/4 of the states to ratify it.

Numerous political factions have tried, but the vast majority of Americans want the right; even though many would like to have tighter gun control. If you are so against Americans having guns, get a constitutional amendment passed.

I'm in agreement with you. It's too easy for someone who has no firearm training to purchase a firearm. I personally think there should be minimum training requirement to purchase a firearm, to use it for hunting, to use it for home self-defense, to use it for target and competition shooting, and to carry concealed. Each one of these instances should require a higher level of training respectively. For example, to purchase a handgun an individual should be required to attend a basic firearm course that covers, at a minimum: safety, use, technique, and state laws. For example: https://firearmsacademy.com/classes/handgun. Also, because the gun will probably be stored in a home, the buyer should also be required to attend a home defense course. NRA offers these classes as do many private organizations.

As a gun owner and an individual who carried concealed in the US, I absolutely agree that gun training should be a prerequisite to purchase and own a firearm, and the firearm instructors should be trained to screen for individuals who display 'abnormal behavior' during the courses. There are people I've met who shouldn't be anywhere near a firearm. I completely support our Second Amendment right to bear arms in the United States, but there is a heavy responsibly that goes along with that right. Imho, no normal, sane average citizen should be barred from owning firearms in the United States of America. But! Firearm training should be mandatory. And trust me, that's not me being liberal; that me being conservative.

[connda]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

So, what you are saying is that you bought and carried a gun for years THAT YOU NEVER NEEDED.

And I thank God that I never needed to take a human life, even during my time in the military. But under the right circumstances, I was quite prepared to do so.

Edited October 12, 2015 by connda

[Seastallion]

I carried a hand gun for 28+ years, 12 of those years as law enforcement investigator, 8 years as a private investigator, 5 years selling jewelry, the rest of the time I had a "carry permit".

In 28+ years I pulled the hand gun 2 times, pointed it once

.

1) when 3 people started to enter a store in the middle of summer in long coats, in the middle of the double doors they turned around. Police were called, their car stopped about 10 minutes later by 5 cruisers with weapons drawn. In the car the police found 3 sawed off shot guns, 5 handguns. === the folks had criminal records.

2) was caught in the middle of a store robery. The local police chief ( who I knew ) had his weapon pointed at the armed robber, the robber's weapon at the chief. I asked the chief where I should "shoot the robber" if he didn't follow police commands. I was behind the robber. When the robber heard me, he decided to put the weapon down and assume the position. === identified as a ex-con

Civilians who carry hand weapons are total nuts.....right!!!!!!

Criminals do not follow the rules / laws. The "gun free zone" around schools is a disaster...killing fields for the criminal, life or death unknown for the people in the "gun free zones"

I started carrying around 1978 after being a witness in an assault with a deadly weapon case where the accused was convicted. After receiving death threats against myself and family, I obtained a concealed carry permit. I carried concealed as a private citizen until I moved to Thailand.

I never once had to draw my gun for any reason, well, accept at the shooting range.

Citizen who legally carry are not 'Cowboys' nor are they 'gun-nut crazies'. The people I knew who legally carried a firearm were some of the most down to earth, stable, and sane people I've met. The people I was worried about? Those not carrying legally and criminals. They are out there. And they are dangerous. And they prey on the weakest in society: like unprotected schools that are 'gun-free zones' - that's an armed psychopath's wet dream come true. Some states have now enacted legislation specifically legalizing the carrying of guns on campus. If you understand US gun culture, you understand why.

You either understand US gun culture or you don't. It's that simple.

So, what you are saying is that you bought and carried a gun for years THAT YOU NEVER NEEDED.

And I thank God that I never needed to take a human life, even during my time in the military. But under the right circumstances, I was quite prepared to do so.

Thank God for that and good on you.

If you really think about it, what you have said is an argument for disarmament.

You never needed a gun, you thank God for never having needed a gun. That you could use a gun if needed is neither here nor there. I too could use a weapon if needed. The fact remains that you carried one, never needed it, but the gun's very existence added to the probability of an innocent death.

I ask you, as I did chuck, do you carry a fire extinguisher everywhere?

[55Jay]

If there was a chance of being attacked with a flame thrower, it might be sensible to carry a fire extinguisher.

Not doing so could be considered "pretty dumb".

[Boon Mee]

Just as the time came for an Obamacare program and marriage equality, the time will come when the society as a whole will retake the Second Amendment back from the wackobird extremists.

Well, thank God and the NRA we won't see that take place in our lifetimes...

[Publicus]

Just as the time came for an Obamacare program and marriage equality, the time will come when the society as a whole will retake the Second Amendment back from the wackobird extremists.

Well, thank God and the NRA we won't see that take place in our lifetimes...

Some crackpot with a gun enabled by the NRA may cause your prediction to become a sudden and deadly reality for you, I, or for someone you or I know --or do not know.

If the hand of God might be involved in that then so be it, or so I'd suppose. I'd also suppose you'd accept that.

I and others do not accept it. Not any of it.

The laws will change as will the culture of guns, god, gays, grits, gravy. The change is well in process presently and it is accelerating. Expect that after the next election the logjam will begin to be broken loose so the new waters can flow.

[Publicus]

If there was a chance of being attacked with a flame thrower, it might be sensible to carry a fire extinguisher.

Not doing so could be considered "pretty dumb".

Some Americans conceal carry a gun, visibly carry a fire extinguisher while lugging a TOW anti-tank platform on their back cause one can never be too safe with all the crackpots out there showing up with guns.