Start A Petition

How Many Deaths Are Enough?

Society & Culture  (tags: americans, crime, death, culture, freedoms, murder, news, politics, rights, society, violence, usa )

- 3012 days ago -
On April 22, 2008, almost exactly one year after 32 students and faculty members were slain in the massacre at Virginia Tech, the dealer who had sold one of the weapons used by the gunman delivered a public lecture on the school's campus.


We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


ewoud k (68)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 1:27 pm
How Many Deaths Are Enough?
Published: January 17, 2011

On April 22, 2008, almost exactly one year after 32 students and faculty members were slain in the massacre at Virginia Tech, the dealer who had sold one of the weapons used by the gunman delivered a public lecture on the school’s campus. His point: that people at Virginia Tech should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus.

Eric Thompson, owner of the online firearms store that sold a .22-caliber semiautomatic handgun to the shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, did not think that his appearance at Virginia Tech was disrespectful or that his position was extreme. He felt so strongly that college students should be allowed to be armed while engaged in their campus activities that he offered discounts to any students who wanted to buy guns from him.

Thompson spun the discounts as altruistic. He told, “This offers students and people who might not have otherwise been able to afford a weapon to purchase one at a hefty discount and at a significant expense to myself.”

The sale to Cho was not Thompson’s only unfortunate link to a mass killer. His firm sold a pair of 9-millimeter Glock magazines and a holster to Steven Kazmierczak, a 27-year-old graduate student in DeKalb, Ill., who, on the afternoon of Feb. 14, 2008, went heavily armed into an auditorium-type lecture hall at Northern Illinois University. Kazmierczak walked onto the stage in front of a crowd of students and opened fire. He killed five people and wounded 18 others before killing himself.

We’ve allowed the extremists to carry the day when it comes to guns in the United States, and it’s the dead and the wounded and their families who have had to pay the awful price. The idea of having large numbers of college students packing heat in their classrooms and at their parties and sporting events, or at the local pub or frat house or gymnasium, or wherever, is too stupid for words.

Thompson did not get a warm welcome at Virginia Tech. A spokesman for the school, Larry Hincker, said the fact that he “would set foot on this campus” was “terribly offensive” and “incredibly insensitive to the families of the victims.”

Just last week, a sophomore at Florida State University, Ashley Cowie, was shot to death accidentally by a 20-year-old student who, according to authorities, was showing off his rifle to a group of friends in an off-campus apartment complex favored by fraternity members. A second student was shot in the wrist. This occurred as state legislators in Florida are considering a proposal to allow people with permits to carry concealed weapons on campuses. The National Rifle Association thinks that’s a dandy idea.

The slaughter of college students — or anyone else — has never served as a deterrent to the gun fetishists. They want guns on campuses, in bars and taverns and churches, in parks and in the workplace, in cars and in the home. Ammunition everywhere — the deadlier, the better. A couple of years ago, a state legislator in Arizona, Karen Johnson, argued that adults needed to be able to carry guns in all schools, from elementary on up. “I feel like our kindergartners are sitting there like sitting ducks,” she said.

Can we get a grip?

The contention of those who would like college kids and just about everybody else to be armed to the teeth is that the good guys can shoot back whenever the bad guys show up to do harm. An important study published in 2009 by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine estimated that people in possession of a gun at the time of an assault were 4.5 times more likely to be shot during the assault than someone in a comparable situation without a gun.

“On average,” the researchers said, “guns did not seem to protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses can and do occur, the findings of this study do not support the perception that such successes are likely.”

Approximately 100,000 shootings occur in the United States every year. The number of people killed by guns should be enough to make our knees go weak. Monday was a national holiday celebrating the life of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. While the gun crazies are telling us that ever more Americans need to be walking around armed, we should keep in mind that more than a million people have died from gun violence — in murders, accidents and suicides — since Dr. King was shot to death in 1968.

We need fewer homicides, fewer accidental deaths and fewer suicides. That means fewer guns. That means stricter licensing and registration, more vigorous background checks and a ban on assault weapons. Start with that. Don’t tell me it’s too hard to achieve. Just get started.

Tamila mendoza (177)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 1:31 pm
he's still trying to make more money in a disrespectful tasteless way.

ewoud k (68)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 1:36 pm
With less armes in circulation, there's less chance that a non-criminal -in other words: an average citizen who goes mad- fires at some-one, and there's less chance that a criminal "finfs" a firearm somewhere.

I know that criminals will always be able to obtain a weapon, but that's not an argument for having numorous firearms in circulation.

In countries where firearms are not as widely spread as in the US there are far less shoting incidents, and thus less dead and wounded.

The average citizen doesn't need a gun to protect himself.

Trish K (93)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 2:47 pm
But like big old cars, people want one just because It is our right to bear arms just incase

Carole Sarcinello (338)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 2:56 pm

And, when we consider "How Many Deaths Are Enough?," let's try to also think beyond borders. (After all, a loss of an innocent is equally wrong even beyond geographically drawn lines.)

ALL unnecessary loss of life is unacceptable!

Stop wars for profit!

Mac R (289)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 3:22 pm
It's insanity of the American mind.

resignd C (139)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 3:33 pm
Interesting subject. I have read that if people are armed they have stopped violence from being much worse. The time it takes for the police to respond to a call for help can take much too long and a death can result.
Actually if people have proper training in gun use and the laws and have had proper background checks it does not worry me if they are allow to carry. Maybe I would be safer.
And as Ewoud mentioned that criminals will always be able to get guns, as the saying goes "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns". I have read articles about how violent crime has not decreased as in U.K. the deaths from knives went up and they were talking about, perhaps a joke, registering knives.
I do not have a gun as I am afraid of them, because a family tragedy happened with one when I was young, and hopefully I will never need one. But I could change my mind. Some people say if things get really bad in the U.S. and there is a food shortage, etc., you might want to have a way to protect yourself from having your homes broken into and being robbed.
Once when I traveled to Amsterdam, I met a female Judge from Chicago who said she always travels alone. She said she was not as afraid there as she was in the U.S. about crime against her because she said in Europe, they usually just want your money, but in the States people want to hurt you, i.e. take your money and beat and possibly kill you. Why??

Ralph F (70)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 3:54 pm
In addition to the easy access of guns, there seems to be something about the American mindset -- violence first, then think afterwards. I think Michael Moore covered it well in, "Bowling for Columbine." I was unaware that many Canadians had access to guns but the percentage of gun deaths per population is much lower. Here in Japan, there are strict gun laws. Rifles are used by hunters, and handguns are rarely seen -- used only by mafia types on rare occasions -- and even then, it is usually gangster vs. gangster fighting, leaving the general population out of it. It seems that the average person here doesn't have the inclination to randomly target someone for attack. I'm not opposed to gun ownership back home (USA), but there definitely needs to be some sort of training, certification and general common sense courses included.

. (0)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 3:55 pm
Noted and Thanks. If we take the right of owning firearms away, only the criminals will have them.
I am for some gun controls like making it impossible to buy a firearm at these gun shows without the normal background check. And, any assault rifle with armor piercing bullets, I have a problem with. We jeopardize our police forces enough without allowing this type of firearm or bullet to be sold, basically to anyone.

Toni C (508)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 3:59 pm
Completely banning firearms will never work because too many people consider them a right. If you think there's drugs coming across the borders, don't you think they'd be just as willing to bring in illegal firearms? I think there should be stricter laws concerning firearms... thorough background checks, and I'm not just talking about felons but mental conditions, etc., and I believe licenses should have to be reviewed and renewed after a certain period of time, just as a driver's license. It also might be a good idea for them to take a course infirearms training and safety. Illegal firearms will always get into the hands of those who want to use them for ulterior purposes, so completely banning them from the general population is not going to solve the problem.

Susan S (187)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 4:01 pm
As a Canadian we seem to have a different perspective on gun control legislation. I remember talking to a Conservation Officer who explained the difficulty in registering all the guns in Canada because hunters and farmers have many guns that are not registered. Also, there is a broad spectrum of 'guns' from handguns to semi-automatic weapons to hunting rifles, and they all were created for different purposes. One of the problems with guns in general is that they get into the wrong hands, and that can mean organized crime or gangsters as well as people who are unbalanced. If people try to use a gun for personal protection then often they are not trained to use it properly and the tragedy can be that even if someone breaks into their home and they go to get their gun (for instance from their night table) the invader often uses it on them and it backfires. Also, having guns in the home around children is absolutely preposterous, and we have all heard of tragedies where children accidentally shoot each other when playing with guns (or even adult hunters). However, all that being said, one of the things that I will always remember and which shocked me (but which may not be factually accurate) is that the country of Switzerland was heavily armed and every third home owned a gun...that is one of the reasons that historians believe that Hitler did not invade the country (because he thought the fatalities of actually taking over would be too high due to resistance). So Switzerland stayed neutral during WWII and that was a blessing. So every debate has a number of sides and a number of angles to consider. Also, in response to Judith and her comments about guns and knives - both can be weapons. In some cultures there are a lot of stabbings from knives as they are the weapon of choice and in others there are more shootings. Does this mean that one form of violence is better or that it is just the preferred one that is readily available. It is the violence that is bred by guns which are symbols of violence which is the real enemy.

Carole Sarcinello (338)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 4:06 pm
Think again . . . (actual testimony before Congress by a victim):
Suzanna Gratia Hupp explains meaning of 2nd Amendment!

Henriette Matthijssen (154)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 5:10 pm
Guns do not kill! People who pulls the trigger are the killers. And I have never owned a gun in my life & never will! With my dogs in the home I am well protected! God is also with me as well as my Guardian Angel! One welcomes violence with violence! Only cowards needs guns! Thanks Ewoud.

Marilyn M (145)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 6:02 pm
Noted. Thank you, Ewoud.

Antonio M (134)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 6:10 pm
Here, in Europe we don't have free shop guns as you have in the USA. We let the Police and the Army make their job to protect us.

Phyllis P (232)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 6:33 pm
Yes, but gun control would ruin business for those lobbyists in Washington. It is a well oiled machine and they are not ready to give it up, like alot of other things. Right to bear arms is one thing, right to murder is a completely different story. Thanks for posting

Michele Hollow (185)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 6:42 pm
I have always been against the right to own a gun.

Angela Dubie (306)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 6:53 pm
Michele, that was quite a hollow statement,LOL, i just could not resist, just because you are against something dosen't make it wrong!
, I just knew that the Arizona tragety would result in this debate, the same as after Ronald Reagan's neighbor shot him! How predictable?
I have nagging questions, that i just can't seem to itch away, and that is:
If the political atmosphers was as violent as the media reports, with cross hairs and vandalism, and death threats, why were there no cops around? Why was no security hired? Why wern't the people themselves leary of it, and packing a piece? If it is legal to carry a gun to political rallies, where they even have gun shows, why was everyone unarmed? Arizone is pictured as a modern day western, where you have to check your guns at the local saloon!
I just feel that the American people are being played like a fiddle, to our media-tainments mass programming events! Live entainment at it's finest, cameras were there, but only the shooters gun, give me a break!

Aletta Kraan (146)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 7:15 pm
Noted , hate guns !!

Angela Dubie (306)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 7:17 pm
This is just another staged diverson!
We are looking over here where the poor government, just like in OKC, where they blew up their own children, just so they would be the victim to get us to look away from the Waco massicure, and now 4-19, is their anniversary, and Waco is no longer even mentioned!
We forgot about the mass bird and fish deaths, that are happening world, and heaven forbid that we dare focus our attention on WMD's and genocide, by out own government!
So now we are back on track at each others throats, playing the blame game, to weeken Americas resolve, when it comes to defending our own country! The government is just too busy conquering foreign nations for their resources, to protect our borders, and air travle and sky scrapers and the American people!
Lets, just blame "the lone shooter" no connection to the assassination of an NRA approved Senator!
There is no grassy knowl here, no motive other than the rantings of a lunitic!
Now we need to dis arm all of the crazy pot heads! While forgetting to mention that he was in treatment and on psycho drugs, crying about being mind controled!
Don't be fooled again! There is something afoul going on! Yes you could say that i'm a conspiracy theorist, is that not the standard P.C. responce, or that i am parinoid, a close second!
Well i am an American, that follows trends and petterns, so i am both, i have seen just too much not be!
The biggest conspiracy theory that i ever heard, was that 19 foreignors conquered America, with box cutters, I would have to believe Colleen Thomas to believe that one, whose kidding who!
If political tensions were so high in Arizona, would you take you little girl?

Jae A (316)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 7:44 pm
Hand guns with six rounds...fine...rifle with that or less.....fine...automatic military types of weapons.....NOT OK. Guns do kill people. Fill a staduim full of guns and bullets and not one person....without someone to fire the weapon it is useless so yes...guns do kill people and animals. No need for automatic weapons for hunting or self protection If you're up against someone that well armed then your butt is probably toast to begin with. No guns..not even for the crooks. Generic crook couldn't afford what one will cost on the black market if zero were for sale in the U.S. Time to stop the myth [$] about this gun run on our country.

Audrey W (61)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 7:58 pm
Guns and weapons shouldn't be in the hands of the irresponsible individuals: the mentally, emotionally and behaviorally unbalanced. There should be stricter laws on gun ownership. How many more innocent victims until some positive changes are made for the sake of civil safety!? If any individual is allowed to own a gun, then this person must be in full control of rational thinking and not be likely to over-react to others' whimsical words. They must be fully capable of self-control and capable of taking responsibility for their actions. These should be just the basic requirements, but even so, just because there is no proof that someone is mentally (or otherwise) unbalanced, isn't any kind of a proof that they are either.

Calle J (19)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 11:02 pm
GB meanwhile is become disarmed.

Has anyone considered the use of mind altering drugs for immobilizing?
Ritalin - for instance, a common prescribed medicine for Indigo Children, causes to lose control over his own mind.
Certain computer games doing the rest for getting ppl into brain dead mode.

"Can we get a grip?"
A weapon is as dangerous as it's owner.
Bottom line.

Angela Dubie (306)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 11:12 pm
I have recently seen reports that state that conservites, and liberals are mentally imbalanced, so if we go by those two studies, America will be disarmed by mandate, overriding the constitution yet again!

Angela Dubie (306)
Tuesday January 18, 2011, 11:16 pm
If America actually had a well regulated militia, i'd say a ok to gun control, but since we don't and that the government is no longer standing on our constitutional foundation, i'd have to say either form community militias, or prepare for the worse!

JustaHuman Here (53)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 1:27 am
A prohibition of guns does not solve the "problem". It just moves the letgal sale and posession ofg guns to the illegal market. Here in Germany carrying a gun is illegal except you have a lizense. But can't you get a gun even so? Of course you can! Of course the governments want that their people don't have guns.

Alet Coetzee (59)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 2:30 am
Noted, thank you.

Rajee Seetharam (138)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 2:33 am
I do not see any point of weapons in a world which is following Mahatma Gandhi's Ahimsa ( Non-violence ) and Martin Luther King Jr.....or are we following them at all???????????
Noted with thanks. Thank you Henriette...this gives me so much food for thought and talk.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 2:47 am
I don't like guns, I'm afraid of them
I have no problem with responsible, sane people having guns.
They need to totally over haul the gun laws in this country, our police force should never be out gunned.
We had a case here about 8 years ago, road rage, so he shot and killed the guy. What is wrong with temperament tests and mental evaluations? Just my opinion
Thank you ewoud & Judith for the forward

Thomas C (116)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 3:46 am
Ban guns and for that matter bows traps and all weapons of destruction period! There is no justification for firearms possession amongst the civilian population and the misuse of firearms by the police calls in to question the issuing of guns to some of the more trigger happy idiots in uniform worldwide without making them generally available to any who can pay for them! Even those small minority of shooters that confine their activities to closed range target shooting will be aware that a light load of propellant will put a.38 bullet through a piece of 2x2 at 25 metres. Enabling factory load and multiple round ability in the street begs the question why are there not more fatalities from such irresponsible gun laws! It can only be luck and the shooters ineptitude that protects the public!

ewoud k (68)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 4:00 am
From CNN International, jan 19 2011:
"Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- A 17-year-old boy arrested after a handgun in his backpack accidentally discharged and wounded two other high school students Tuesday was able to bring his automatic pistol on campus apparently because the Los Angeles school does only random metal detector checks, police said.

The chief of Los Angeles Unified Schools District police, Steve Zipperman, said the district's policy calls for random screening with metal detectors, to be determined by each school's principal.

"It is a possibility that the student who walked on with that backpack was not checked," Zipperman told reporters.

The arrested student, a senior whom authorities didn't identify, entered a health class Tuesday morning and set his backpack on a desk, Los Angeles Police Deputy Chief Patrick Gannon said.

When the backpack landed on the desk, the automatic handgun discharged, firing a single round that struck a girl in the temple and a boy in the neck, Zipperman said......."

Mind you, this wasn't a gunfight, ar a dispute that went out of hand, the automatic handgun discharged when the backpack landed on the table....

Any volunteers to explain to the parents whose kids were wounded that this boy really needed
to bring a gun to class?

This time no-one was killed, it seems, but in my eyes this was just a matter of luck: "The 15-year-old girl had head surgery early Tuesday afternoon at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Torrance, California, and was in critical condition, Hospital Chief Medical Officer Gail Anderson told reporters Tuesday.

The bullet struck the left side of her head, Anderson said, gesturing to his temple as he spoke. The bullet then also exited from the same area and didn't pass through her head, though it caused some fracturing to the girl's skull, Anderson said late Tuesday afternoon.

The girl suffered "a significant blood clot on the left side of her brain." Doctors removed a piece of her skull and haven't replaced it yet because the brain swells 48 hours after such an injury, Anderson said.

When the girl arrived at the hospital by ambulance, she was unconscious, said hospital Dr. Scott Bricker. "She already had signs of a significant brain injury" from the shock wave of the bullet striking her skull, Bricker said.

Said Anderson: "We're going to be looking for her to be moving her arms and legs" when she awakens."


Thomas C (116)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 4:29 am
Shooting for those that enjoy the skill involved is not relevant to the use of weapons for hunting or criminal activities. In the former no skill is required for modern target assisted weaponry, having found a target and in the latter the object of gun possession is intimidation of the victim to part with their cash or goods etc it is not even necessary to shoot! Target shooters who used to shoot in the UK gained their kudos not from being photographed with a dead animal they had just slaughtered with overwhelming odds but from the precision skill required to hit the spot whilst shooting one handed over the simple open sights of a handgun or intuitive shooting with an automatic pistol at skittles and other ianimate targets such as printed targets or scrap vehicles with score cards on them. Reloading against the clock with auto magazines or revolver speed loaders being the order of the day and equity being obtained by restricting the number of bullets used by each shooter. Strict safety rules being enforced by range officers who checked guns and ammunition in and out of the range and all clubs with bars for example had a strict no alcohol and guns policy those who wanted to drink after shooting having to hand their guns over or secure them in a gun safe before being served in the bar and the were not allowed back on the range after drinking! Ironically in the early part of the last century military personal were expected to purchase there own sidearms,(guns and ceremonial swords) and the only qulification for purchasing handguns or long guns was to be a "Gentleman" whatever that meant but one m assumes the criminal classes and mentally infirm were excluded the cost would exclude the working class leaving firearm ownership the preserve of the military and well off! How times have changed when one hears a hunter justififying his or her activity as putting food on the table in these hard times, using guns, eguipment and vehicles etc, the cost of which would cover the debts of a third world country!

Sharon Balloch (127)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 4:44 am
So when everyone knows that in each and every home there is no Guns will we all feel safer? Do we really believe that our Governments are worried about the violence, then why does it allow our youth to have video games where the targets are womena and babies, where killing over and over the basic idea of the game?

I do not have a gun, but I will not feel any safer if you do not either. If the evil folks of the world know that no home can protect itself, that only the criminals and police have guns will we be better off?

The answer is not taking away guns, its the people who are violent, many folks are killed by cars and yet we do not say it is the cars that kill, we lock up the driver.

Ok I admit it.. I do not trust my government and I sure as heck do not trust yours.. my government does not care that it makes 80 percent of us sick to death of the bashing in of baby seals heads, and they do not care if children play games of such violence it can only lead to violence.. they scare me more than that fellow breaking into my car to steal my purse..

I know this is not a popular stand.. And I would never own a gun. But I like that folks have to guess which house has guns and which house does not..

Michela M (3964)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 6:27 am
Noted, my friend!!!!!!!!! Ciao!! Michela

Geynell Eskite (68)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 8:38 am
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

"THE PEOPLE" means the American People as a whole. "A WELL REGULATED MILITIA" does not mean a start-up gang of paranoid, inbred gun obsessed yahoos with a grudge against the Government and a stockpile of automatic weapons. We HAVE our WELL REGULATED MILITIA: The Armed Services, National Guard, Coast Guard, and the various National and local law enforcement agencies.

The Second Amendment must be interpreted with an understanding of the Zeitgeist of the time in which it was written. I would not deny any citizen of sound mind the opportunity to own a weapon for protection from home invasion or wild animal attack. But I seriously doubt that British soldiers are going to march down our streets, burst into our homes and demand their Colonies back. I do not go to sleep at night worried that bands of Native American Warriors are going to sweep into town, burn down my village and demand their land back (although God knows, I wouldn't blame them if they did).

It is the perversion of this Amendment by the overly powerful NRA that has caused this chaos. As much as The NRA would like us to believe that we would all be a lot safer if every American carried a gun at all times, I have to disagree. They have infected their devotees with an apocalyptic fear and mistrust of their fellow Americans and of their own Government. The Gun lobby has a huge amount of profit riding on keeping this fear alive. They want us to buy, collect and carry lots and lots of guns to protect ourselves from the horrible threat of ......someone taking our guns.

This philosophy is not just ridiculous, it's potentially deadly. So relax, Rambo. We just want to reserve the opportunity for gun ownership for mentally stable, law abiding citizens, and limit the number and type of weapons owned. No private citizen needs an Uzi. They certainly don't need a warehouse full of them. We have our WELL REGULATED militia to prevent the overthrow of the United States Government. We do not want to have to protect it from YOU.

Angela Dubie (306)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 8:51 am
The national guard has been used in the drug war against the American people, in this unconstitutional war, so how do that make them OUR regulated militia?

Angela Dubie (306)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:12 am
Ewold, yes it is tragic when innocent peopleget shot, but we are overlooking why this young boy brought a weapon to school in the first place, or why they have metal detectors and police on premises?
Our schools have become war zones, gangs and bullies have dominion!
Legalized drugs would end the gangs, but we need to install equality, in order to rid the bulling!

Angela Dubie (306)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:15 am
If i offered free alcohol at a gun show, a war could very well break out, but if i offered free guns at a hemp rally, it would still be peaceful!!

Roxana C (171)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:21 am
In my country, Argentina, you are supposed to obtain an authorization to buy/own a gun and a different one to carry it with you, you have to register it and you also need to pass a psychological test. Of course, there are many people who illegally obtain guns, but we are not discussing illegal activities here.
Thanks, Ewoud, for sharing.

Parsifal S (99)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:27 am
Exactly Angela and Henriette. I am not a fan of weapons - NO WAY.
Does weapons kill?
Or was it the being at the trigger?
At this stage, exactly like in other countries, the USA average citizen is about getting disarmed. This is a worst case scenario for freedom and liberty.
Next step in New World Order will be martial law. And this could be impeded if government knows their citizen are still armed.
Do not fall for their tricks.
Stand for (the poor remains of a former great) USA.

Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:40 am

Angela Dubie (306)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:40 am
Right on Parsifal, a lot of money is being spent tyring to convince people that America will be a safer place if only the cops and the robbers are armed!
I am a convice for back child support, and my husband is one for planting marijuana publically, and we have lost our citizenship for prior acts of servitude, and even non-violent acts at that! The disarming of America is an alarming result of propaganda, lies, and an agenda to overthrow our Republic!
We have no ppolice to enforce constitutionality within our government or of their laws, but police the people to death!
Cars kill, but they blame it one people, people kill and they blame it on guns, hypocracy and double standards have replaced our constitution, fear and propaganda have become our dictators!

Marilyn L (107)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:59 am
IF ONLY. If only our American politicians would have the courage to stand up to the NRA and citizens who misinterpert the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution.

The only reason to have a semi-automatic or an automatic weapon is to kill people and as many in a short period of time as possible. For a solider, in battle, this is makes sense, for a citizen it is nonsense and these weapons have no place on our streets.

I'm sure you heard the fools that say they have these weapons so they can defend themselves against tyranny, also nonsense. This isn't 1776, this is 2011 and if we wanted to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government we would need to have citizens have missle launcher, tanks, etc. It a lame and stupid argument.

The Second Amendment should be revised for the todays situation. We no longer need, nor should we want a militia. The National Guard was develop for many reason but one was to rid ourselves of the need to have a militia, in other words, an armed citizenary.

I am ashamed that this country does not do more to protect it's citizens from fools who have this unhealthy need to be armed and dangerous.

Krasimira B (175)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 10:08 am
I don't want to give advises to my American friends. Just a statistics: In Bulgaria the most frequent homicides and deadly incidents happens in the families of policemen, army officers and bodyguards. I never heard about murder with gun, perpetrated by a minor Bulgarian child. Noted, thank you Ewoud for posting.

Krasimira B (175)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 10:09 am
You cannot currently send a star to ewoud because you have done so within the last week.

Jennifer T (101)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 10:14 am
Excellent article. The extremists/NRA lobby have been allowed to be in control of this issue for far too long - no amount of innocent blood is going to be enough for them. In the interest of public safety It's time for rational laws and enforcement. If that makes the gun nuts unhappy, too bad. Get a non-lethal hobby.

Carole Sarcinello (338)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 10:23 am

"Get a non-lethal hobby."

That was too funny not to laugh at. Thanks for injecting some levity, Jennifer!

Past Member (0)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 11:41 am
The most interesting quote is this one: An important study published in 2009 by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine estimated that people in possession of a gun at the time of an assault were 4.5 times more likely to be shot during the assault than someone in a comparable situation without a gun.
“On average,” the researchers said, “guns did not seem to protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses can and do occur, the findings of this study do not support the perception that such successes are likely.”

However you feel, that says to me I don't want a gun.

Fiona Ogilvie (562)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 12:08 pm
I am absolutely against gun control. I demand my second Amendment rights. I am a very good, well practiced shot. As the NRA teaches, "you will take a my gun, onlly from my cold dead hands".

Voula Angelakis (156)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 1:11 pm
No one has the right to kill anyone. There is no excuse for a taken life. Guns = Violence + Big money for the companies etc.

Susan D (116)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 2:25 pm
This guy Thompson is insensitive to say the least. He should really be in jail as an accessory to thise murders which were committed.

Susan D (116)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 2:32 pm
Judith -- You speak of violent crime on UK not decreasing-- as if UK had guns, then banned them, and saw no decrease. This is incorrect. Here, guns are not a "right" but a privilege. We have not suddenly banned them. So if you have a legitimate reason eg farmers and members of shooting clubs, you will be vetted and required to have a licence, which has to be renewed from time to time. When there is a murder, whether gun or knife or some other method, it makes the headlines, as it is not at all common here,whereas in the US it seems to be an everyday happening somewhere or other.
When you get a deranged person, such as recently in the case of Loughner, they can do a lot less damage without a gun.

Susan D (116)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 2:37 pm
How many of us do things we regret when we are angry? So many episodes of e.g. road rage would end in murder rather than an exchange of bad language, if everyone was carrying a gun.

Angela Dubie (306)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 3:07 pm
If Loughner was as mad as people are suggesting, and lets say that he could buy a gun legally, ha could hace made a bomb, or used a vehicle to run down all in his path!
The sheriff did not see him as a threat, and might even have signed gun ownership papers for him amyway!

Mary D (47)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 3:31 pm
Thanks Edwoud--good post and discussion.

. (0)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 5:30 pm
Sadly enough, the South has the weakest gun laws in America. The horrible incident should have had an effect on who can purchase a gun in Virginia, sadly it has not.

Marjolein soederhuizen (284)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 5:46 pm
Wellm, i think i rest my case, in the netherlands guns are not allowed and i think thats for the better, as killing in this country is like a shock still, offcourse the bandits have guns, illegal and kill eachother time to time, sometimes ven a shopholder gets a bullit, butr rarely, maybe we are a too small country with to much inhabitants, we never got used to guns and i think we never will.......................thank god..........................

Audrey W (61)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 9:58 pm
Parsifal, my guess is that NWO will have a list of all legal gun owners and all of their details. Gun owners may try to stop the NWO and the martial law through violent resistance, but NWO will not be asking who fired the first shot and for what reasons as all suspects can mysteriously disappear, the proof of them ever existing erased. Personally, I believe that the best thing is to sleep with a clear conscience (not with weapons) as this renders people as less likely suspects in the first place. My suggestion is (for everyone, myself included) - make peace with God, live morally to the best of our ability, and be aware of our own mortality, because sooner or later we all have to be held accountable for how we have lived. Those who believe that killing is an option are accepting that murder can be acceptable. I can understand if it's in self-defense, or in defense of the innocent, but something tells me that NWO will not be especially interested in those details. That's if the NWO becomes a reality.

Angela Dubie (306)
Wednesday January 19, 2011, 11:06 pm
The new world order must already be here because the old world order has vanished!

Natalie Away J (125)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 5:35 am
Noted, thanks Ewoud.

Constantin Leon (36)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 9:33 am
Between my will to post a comment of my own and my will to adopt a comment as if it was mine
I' ve choose the words of our friend who signs under the nickname @ewoud k. He says :
"With less armes in circulation, there's less chance that a non-criminal -in other words: an average citizen who goes mad- fires at some-one, and there's less chance that a criminal "finfs" a firearm somewhere.
I know that criminals will always be able to obtain a weapon, but that's not an argument for having numorous firearms in circulation.In countries where firearms are not as widely spread as in the US there are far less shoting incidents, and thus less dead and wounded.
The average citizen doesn't need a gun to protect himself. "

I totally adopt his words and I totally agree with them.
I do keep some military guns for I still am a captain in my national army but,
these guns are in my place only for case of need, that means in a case of war
and NOT in any case for anything that has to do with personal matters.
In that case I would be discriminated and condemned to live in jail for many years.

Peggy A (109)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 1:12 pm

Rita S (3)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 4:27 pm
Good arguments.

Constantin Leon (36)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 4:42 pm
May I know who is this person named "ERIC THOMPSON" that is accused by our friend @Joan Masseti?

Audrey W (61)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 5:02 pm
Every generation so far has been complaining how things are not as they used to be. As much as that be true, I don't consider it as sufficient evidence that New World Order is here and now.

Myriam G (32)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 7:15 pm
For as long as I can remember, I've always been glad to live in a country where there is a heavy control on firearms, where people can't carry concealed weapons, or purchase automatic guns just for fun. I feel a lot safer knowing that there are good gun control laws. I'm happy to know that my kids are growing up in a gun-free environment.
I wish every mother and father, everywhere, but especially in the US, knew that their children are safe from guns. One can't protect oneself from guns by carrying their own gun. One can't expect to walk down the path of Peace while carrying a gun. One should put down the gun, and walk on the path of Peace, towards understanding.

Angela Dubie (306)
Thursday January 20, 2011, 8:31 pm

Past Member (0)
Friday January 21, 2011, 4:03 am
Wow, some people really love their guns. Can´t understand. After all that happens. Wow!!! Sad, there are more important things , living beings to be in love with, than with a gun. My country has gun control, I am thankful for this. I feel safer like this. People who always lived with the need of having a gun, does not have a clue and does not want to give the chance to experience, how it is not to have a gun. Is much, much more peaceful. Sad.

Julie van Niekerk (230)
Saturday January 22, 2011, 12:01 pm
Killing became a human status symbol.

Angela Dubie (306)
Saturday January 22, 2011, 12:16 pm
The gladiator mentality has taken over America and replaced Christian values! We are marching to the beat of a different drummer, "we are the champions, no time for losers" "survival of thefittest" Competition has replaced 'liberty and justice for all' since the pledge of alegiance and school prayer was removed!
Justice has become entertainment, tried by the court of public opinion!
Violence has become the norm on t.v, movies. and vidio games and sports! The 4 horsemen of the apocalypse have taken peace from the earth, sitting thestage for the final battles of good vs evil, for evil is incarnate in our social system!

Isabel Robson (46)
Saturday January 22, 2011, 3:32 pm
~Thank you for sharing.
Love and Peace is the only answer
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" Ghandi

Laurel U (8)
Sunday January 23, 2011, 12:04 pm
I have to TOTALLY agree with Angela Dubie's statement that:'Competition has replaced "liberty and justice for all" since the Pledge of Alligence and School Prayer were removed'!!! Everything she has stated in each and every comment she has made throughout this conversation regarding guns has been "Bang On"-pardon the unintentional pun!

Angela Dubie (306)
Sunday January 23, 2011, 1:55 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Laurel because you have done so within the last week.

Rae Z (7)
Sunday January 23, 2011, 3:07 pm
As much as I love my 20-gauge, I still think it would be best not to have firearms at all. I would happily, but tearfully, hand over mine if they passed such a thing. I've heard that in Russia, they don't even allow cops to have guns as that is a military only priviledge. Perhaps we in the US would benefit from such a thing.

Parsifal S (99)
Saturday January 29, 2011, 12:43 pm
Angela Dubie:
"Tuesday January 18, 2011, 11:16 pm
If America actually had a well regulated militia, i'd say a ok to gun control, but since we don't and that the government is no longer standing on our constitutional foundation, i'd have to say either form community militias, or prepare for the worse!"
In my numble opinion the best thoughtful statement made here.
Disarming America is open the gates for their NWO agenda.
There are already lots of treads in serious discussion of disarmament of Americans.

Sure every killed person is (more than) sad. What counts here is on the large scale.

Angela Dubie (306)
Thursday February 10, 2011, 2:24 pm
Parsifal, yes you are correct, for it has become quite obvious that our government has become the terrorists, and that thay have been waging war against our constitutional freedoms for quite some time, yes we should have community arsonals, and well trained, and well armed citizens, but ground troops are not the only front, for we are being attacked by air, with H.A.A.R.P. and chem trails and germ and biological weapons, financally, fees, fines and inprisonment, by legalized adultry, and divorce, legal bigotry in employment, ect.! Are we not being burried in buerucratic red tape? We are being poisoned with flouride, aspertain, and food additives, air, and water pollution ect.!
In fact we are being watched and spied on, radiated by our t.v. sets, our computers, micro wave ovens and cell phones, vacceins are deadly, as well as bankers, politicians, and doctors!
Violence at this point will only bread more violence, we have a right to protect ourselves especially from our own government!
On the large scale we are beat, unless our own military takes their constitutional oarh to heart and seizes our imposter government and reinstates our constitution!
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in Society & Culture

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.