Tired of asking

[madamesilverspurs]

[ladyVet]

1. Thousands at least, maybe hundreds of thousands. nt

[Buzz Clik]

2. Nothing will persuade them. Ever.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. You and I know the answer, Mme.

And it's not pretty.

[Photographer]

4. Not a question of deaths for these people. Just who's has the largest checkbook.

[monmouth4]

5. Bet if someone said most of the poor souls killed were repubs who will no longer be able to

vote, guns would be taken tomorrow. Just sayin'..

[world wide wally]

6. My guess would be everyone

[Shandris]

7. How many more times must you be answered that it is mutually exclusive to...

...claim to value human life, then remove the ability of that human life to protect itself.

But keep trying, I'm sure the nagging is making more people turn to our side. I mean, gun sales are at an all-time low!

[gregcrawford]

9. Specious reasoning...

... is the kindest thing to be said about that post. And for the record, I am a gun owner. No one is going to take anyone's guns, so let's remove that from the discussion right now. And it is not a matter of removing someone's ability to defend themselves, it is removing the ability of filth like Dear, or any of the worthless skidmarks that preceded him, to TAKE a life.

Think about it.

[Shandris]

13. No, we won't remove that from the discussion.

If people are calling for confiscation -- and there are PLENTY who do -- then yes, the 'taking of guns' is a legitimate concern. It also removes the ability of a person to DEFEND themselves against someone who has created, built, obtained, or otherwise spontaneously generated a firearm of their own.

Now, if you can take care of those points, the conversation can progress. Until then, it's a stalemate. Now, if you want to demonstrate more of my 'specious reasoning', go right ahead. Otherwise, why not work on getting a workable answer that FORCIBLY, IRREVOCABLY prevents full disarmament OF ANY KIND, spelled out in clear, unambiguous words. If you can't say you're for that (and I suspect you can say you would indeed be for that, being a gun owner), then I question your commitment to a solution instead of a control fetish. I'm completely sympathetic to removing the ones like Dear, but not at the cost of leaving everyone unable to defend themselves outside of nice, wealthy areas with fast police response times.

By the way, in case you're unaware, I am NOT a gun owner, do not desire to be, nor do I find it an enjoyable pastime or recreation. I am a person who understands the way the world works, and although I am at peace with it myself, I can not stand by and allow one group of people to attempt to unilaterally disarm another, less defended, group of people. That is tyranny and totalitarianism no matter what rubric of compassion it is trumpeted with.

[gregcrawford]

15. I am suspicious of your motives...

... and I will decline to respond to any subsequent comments on your part.

[Shandris]

16. "I want to make sure poor people aren't victimized by those around them."

"WHAT?!? RAWR, I DON'T TRUST YOUR MOTIVES!!"

LOL. Okay, I suppose. I'm sorry it was such a shock that someone might care about the people they live with and around. Have a nice life.

Edit: Whats more humorous than the reaction I got is that I had actually lightened my stance a good bit last night, only to find this waiting for me. I love how life works sometimes.

[renate]

8. it really is hard to imagine that the leadership of the NRA doesn't *like* these mass shootings

I mean, Wayne LaPierre and the others at the top of the NRA could do something to stop them if they wanted to. But they don't.

I don't think most NRA members think mass shootings are fine and dandy, but it genuinely does seem as though the leadership does.

[Wounded Bear]

11. Mass killings are just free advertising to those cretins...

[jwirr]

10. K&R

[jtuck004]

12. First you have to grok the very real fear that people feel...

Black Friday breaks background check record for firearms

The FBI processed a record breaking number of background checks this Black Friday. 59News is taking a look into how the gun buying process stands now and why we're seeing an increase of gun purchases.

Ronnie Woods, who works at Flat Top Arms in Beckley, makes a living at selling guns. By law, every time he sells a gun he's required to issue a background check before completing the sale. On Black Friday more than 185,000 background checks were made in just 24 hours. According to the Associated Press that's two per second. Ronnie Wood tells us that they're seeing an influx of first time buyers, "Especially in the past eight years and the common thread being I want to buy it while I'm able to buy it."

The previous record for the most background checks in a single day was December 21st, 2012, about a week after a shooting at Sandy Hook, a Connecticut Elementary School. 20 children and six adults were shot to death.
...

http://www.wvnstv.com/story/30653633/black-friday-breaks-background-check-record-for-firearms

Since reagan came into office, maybe before, we have been teaching people that if you can't do it yourself it isn't worth doing. So instead of having dinner with your neighbors and banding together in an industrial union or cooperative to _really_ make one's life more secure, they go get a gun. Then they are reinforced by 1 person in every 300 homicides actually using the damn gun for defense. But that's the one they remember. lol.

We are all irons.

[Dustlawyer]

14. Need new guys!