This came across the email today:

Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, but after a shooting, the problem is the gun!

Afs, I admire your ability to keep shouting into the wind. You're a smart cookie, and I'm not sure how you go on in a country that doesn't truly accept your thoughts and mind. Keep chugging along, my friend.

Because there's not a section in walmart to buy bombs. Because there's no national bomb association that says bombs are a 2nd amendment right and everyone is entitled to their bombs. When someone makes a bomb, they have to go through a lot of trouble to make one. It's not just that everyone who has a dispute with their mom, in the heat of the moment pick up their gun and go slaughter people. Because it takes a cold calculating sociopath to make a bomb and kill people with it. That's why.

Sure there is...just look under pressure cookers in the cook section or head over to the plumbing section if you like.

AND you don't have to fill out paperwork, go to classes or wait a long time to get a license, or Oh, and you don't have to go thru backround checks and or a waiting period to buy.

The best part is you can go on the internet without leaving your home and learn all you need to MAKE it and special groups who will cheer you on and teach you where the good spots are to place them to hurt the most people.

And even better then that....you get the United States people to allow you (and your whole screw up family) to come to this country, give you money to live and go to school while you repay them by blowing the legs off of the very people who help you live here.

One thing is the same= "it takes a cold calculating sociopath to kill people" in these events no matter what they use.

The saving grace is that the other 10 milion plus owners of pressure cookers still get to keep them with out people trying to pass laws keeping them from having or using them.

In 2010, 13,186 people died in terrorist attacks worldwide; in that same year, in America alone, 31,672 people lost their lives in gun-related deaths, according to numbers complied by Tom Diaz – until recently, a senior analyst at the Violence Policy Center.

You could twist this all you want and insult me and my family in the process, but the hard truth is, there is no bomb section at the walmart, but there is a gun section. You have to make a bomb using many bits and pieces, not just a pressure cooker that might or might not be necessary in every version. And all the gun related murders doesn't happen in cold blood, many happen because someone loses his/her head and guns are so readily available.

This from Amanpour's blog:

More Americans killed in gun deaths than in terrorist attacks

When there's not a bomb section at the walmart, you see that the numbers radically drop. So why not make it harder for criminals to get guns? And why not hold people who have guns to the same level of responsibility that you expect of a car owner?

I was talking about the people who just bombed Boston, not You or your family. So no twist or insult, only to the scum that came here and did this.

and you haven't read anything others have said that had facts, you just keep talking about cars and you opinions, of hate aimmed towards other people guns.

It is the KIND of people...not the gun. The simple concept that you don't seem to get is millions of good People don't need to lost the use or rights of gun ownership because people like you think it is a quick and easy way to solve a hard problem.

It would be like saying. Do not let any more people into the U.S.A. so no other bombers can do harm here.


apples to apples- unless you want to add cars which kill more people then any gun event ever did each year. Of course terrorist attacks are events. Gun deaths numbers stated are all deaths - not just Mass Shootings.

Many of us have already adressed these facts on how many and % of people/guns out there.

people only like to use the car comparisions when it suites them, but as soon as you bring up the number of deaths caused by auto accidents, then they are two different things and shouldn't be compared! does anybody with a right mind really believe that the extremely stringent "tests" that are required to operate a car really make the roads much safer? as far as the number of deaths from guns, please keep in mind that suicides make up a huge % of that number. you also have to factor in all shootings involving law enforcement.

as for the bombing, it almost seems to me to be a means of defense that people have to tragic situations, almost a form of self protection in the face of terrible things to chalk it up to just a crazy person. with guns, many seem to take the opposite stance, and insist that a new law, restriction, whatever, would have prevented it. both situations are the result of the same condition, unpredictable craziness that is sadly a part of society that can't be wiped away with the stroke of a pen.

there are also many who seem to think that stating guns are dangerous is some sort of trump card to their argument. we get it, they are dangerous, but the mind is far more. yes, they can be an easy way to kill, but you can also look at it on the flip side. generally speaking, someone planning a bombing has to go into a much greater deal of planning, which might lead to something even worse. take the recent bombing for example: we really dodged a bullet with this one. i'm no expert on bombs, nor do i or any of us have all of the details, but this could have been 10x worse if the bomb might have gone off a few seconds/minutes sooner or later.

the point is, as this example shows, that no matter what feel good controls we try to place on guns or any other dangerous things, as far as nutjobs are concerned where there is a will there is a way. technology is at everyone's fingertips, and that combined with the adaptive nature of humans for both good and bad can and will lead to horrible acts no matter what.

also, to expand on those who seem to want gun owners to be held to a high standard, the overwhelming majority are and have been held to these standards.

About the first part, surrrre. I'm sure you didn't enjoy throwing that, addressing "me" in that little angry rant.

And try to get this: Nobody is trying to take your guns away, not at least in this bill, that somehow was shot down even when it got 54 votes, not sure why the threshold has to be 60.

They are trying to enforce background checks. That was all that bill was trying to do. I'm not sure why it makes you so nervous to check your background. If it inconvenience you in any way, try and think about all those people who may not get killed when crooks would have a harder time getting guns. And if you're hurt that someone stepped on your civil liberties when you tried to buy a gun, worse usually happens when you try to get on a plane, but you submit to that, because you want to be safe. Not sure why when it comes to the guns, you throw caution into the wind.

30,000 gun death per year is not a few deaths. For 3000 people, you justify attacking two countries, one hardly with any ties to that crime. Yet, you don't think it is necessary to do something when 30,000 people die of gun violence each year.

And it's good that you brought up immigration. The process that you go through when you try to immigrate, is more than a simple background check. Why don't you accept the watered down level of background check for people who want to have their hands on guns? Because it still might not work in some cases, we should just sit back and let the death toll rise?

Your little rants just prove that you haven't read or understood any posts in this thread or the people making them.
You need to open your mind and go back and read older posts which will answer all your misguided rants. That is if you can read others answers that are not matching yours.
I now understand you know very little on this subject and just enjoy throwing out crap instead of understand the real problems here. Never a real answer for anything, just calls for this and that.
Your bring up the SAME things that have already been adress and answer here at least once maybe twice already. Then chessey remarks about our fears and stuff...

oh yeah, that first part..."your sure" yeah.. Your sure about nothing!
You must think everything was/is about you...you must have seen yourself in my statements about the Boston bombers some how. I wonder why? No... I am joking- I really don't care!

peace to you! It is a wonderful day outside and I am off to the range!

HI there Five- Hope all is well by you. I am off to the range since the weather is near perfect here.

I have a new 9m which I need to test out,take care

I started this thread, but I don't post in it much because it gets so heated. But I DID read something noteworthy this week. It was in a magazine in a doctor's office, but I'll try to link it if I can find it later on.

Anyway, here's the stat: Over 40 percent of murders in the United States are committed with a common kitchen knife. And in Great Britain, there are more than six murders committed with a knife each week.

I'm sorry, but stats like that DO get you thinking. Violent people are going to commit acts of violence with whatever they can get their hands on. Draconian gun laws aren't the answer. Now that said, I support background checks, and I still don't know why John Q. Public needs a military type arsenal, but the anti-gun people are living in a fantasy world. It's "Pollyanna" to think that taking guns away from honest and decent people will deter criminals in any way.

I'm sorry, but stats like that DO get you thinking. Violent people are going to commit acts of violence with whatever they can get their hands on.

this is a line of reasoning that most people tend to dismiss totally, or just willfully ignore. i'm of the opinion that the % of all out whackjobs in society is going to remain constant regardless of what types of restrictions are put on guns or any other dangerous things. like i have stated many times, humans are very adaptive, and its up to the individual if thats a good or bad trait. if i was so inclined, i could easily go to the gas station and spend less than $10. bingo, now i have the potential capability to cause a great deal of devestation very easily and efficiently!

I started this thread, but I don't post in it much because it gets so heated. But I DID read something noteworthy this week. It was in a magazine in a doctor's office, but I'll try to link it if I can find it later on.

Anyway, here's the stat: Over 40 percent of murders in the United States are committed with a common kitchen knife. And in Great Britain, there are more than six murders committed with a knife each week.

Do you wonder why really? I know your style by now, you make it about the person who debates rather than the issue at hand. You might have asked how we do it over here, as you did in the DOMA thread, but this time it doesn't suit you, so you word your argument with an added insult. If you didn't mean it toward me, why use, "you" and "your screwed up family?" Too transparent for me, I'm afraid.

As for the rest, I see no argument there. Still waiting on why you are so against a background check.

yada yada yada. you don't know me you don't understand what people post and you don't know crap on this subject.
I posted "I was talking about the people who just bombed Boston, not You or your family. So no twist or insult, only to the scum that came here and did this.
and you still couldn't take THAT for the truth.
You pissed and moan that I surely was talking about YOU- Damn how about that. Were you and you family here on the Govt. Dime? Then you ask again a question that was talked about in older posts... I give up you can't be real.

The car comparison is interesting. In Germany, as some of you might know, there's no speed limit on most of the "Autobahn" (highways). The ADAC prevents stricter laws.
What's the ADAC? Something like the NRA for cars.

I might not know you, but I know your cyber attitude well enough by now. It's been almost a decade that I'm here, reading your posts. You said "you could." meaning, not yet, but it can happen in the future. "Your screwed up family" though? That seems to be already screwed up. But enough about me, I in fact take any insult coming from you as a compliment.

Still have not seen a rational argument from you. You keep saying that you have answered why you are against a background check, but I fail to find your answer, except saying that anything that keeps you from your 2nd amendment right is unconstitutional, which is plain wrong. All rights can be regulated.

Oh, I see that you are a expert or think you are an expert now on cyber attitude also-

But you still can't or won't understand that I am talking about the Boston Bomber and their screwed up family that have been in the news!!!!
I asked "was your Family Here, Did you live off our Govt?" did we the people of the UNITED STATES pay to school you when you where a student here?

DID YOU BLOW PEOPLES LEGS OFF???

If not then how could this be you or your Family???

If this all fits you then that would be a different story all together.

The post was showing the difference between a bomber and a gun owner if you didn't understand that!

Have you read the whole thread? You would have read why people feel that backgrounds checks will not work for this problem.

BY the way I don't argue....I give real reasons and can give you a view point from a large group of gun owners who work with these guns, can you do you the same?

or are your opinions based on how you feel? Do you know how things work, say here in NEW YORK State for guns? Have you gone thru any of the process...
What it takes to have one? or are you just a look up on the internet and form your opinions from what you read?
BTW...You may think I have a tone, But I am really sitting here because I do know the truth on this subject even if there are others who disagree.
The only thing I have always asked is for people to read posts, and listen to what others say. Vs taking pot shots for the hell of it. I don't think you or others will change their opinions and I am not going to waste my time trying...I just hope to make sure that some people understand the other side.

So if I worded an argument like this, you would be okay, right? Because I'm clearly talking about the Sandy Hook shooter. Here we go:

Since you could be a mentally challenged person who can take mommy's guns and kill that screwed up woman and then go on mass murdering of little children, background checks are of no use, because it wouldn't have stopped you, Right?

My argument was based on numbers and reasoning that there could be no harm in background checks. But I see you are trying to make a straw-man argument, in which those reasoning were based on my feelings. You keep saying you wouldn't waste time with me, but then continue with this sorry way of arguing. Again, what is so harmful about background checks?

Whoa, before you go off in another direction. Do you now understand that I was NOT talking about you or your family. Do you ackowledge this?

Did you go back and read about what we have already said about Background checks or are you just demanding to be heard and want people to jump to your questions? I post say: May 1st 2:19 PM why not.. Why not check that post out and others peoples thoughts.

Why do you worry so much and make so many comments about how people post vs. what their posts points are?
Why not just make your point clear instead of attacking a persons post pattern. It is quite noticable that you have had some education with your terms about the way people post. Good for you, but it doesn't help your point and comes across as an attack.

Facts, it is facts what will make your point. And I say POINT not argument because that sounds

Now back to your last post. Your Sandy Hook shooter would not have been stopped by a Backgrond Check, How could he. He didn't have a License, he didn't own a gun. And as pointed out before he stole his weapons. Just the way most criminals get theirs.

Backgrounds checks are done on the individual person applying for a weapon or license. Should "hard core" mental person get a license or permit- NO

He stole his mother's weapons- a major mistake made on her part for not keeping them safely away. But as I have said before she paid with her life for making those mistakes.

And I will make this statement. I don't want new laws made on someone FEELINGS. OR "if it would save on person concept."

People have to stop trying to solve these problems by taking good peoples rights away as an easy answer to a tuff problem no matter what their feeling are. And the worst happens when the ones who whine the most don't have any skin in the game so they don't care to give others rights away. It is that simple.

The real laugh are those who think we have to "GIVE" reasons to own and have guns.