Do Millions of Americans Have an Unhealthy Obsession with Guns?

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

gunsAs the gun debate has heated up, there’s been no shortage of talking points from gun rights advocates as to just how much they cherish our Second Amendment.

Which is ironic because many of these people have no issues when other Amendments are infringed upon.  I don’t see many of these people throwing a fit, or threatening revolution, because we’re not allowed to yell “bomb” in an airport or “fire” in a movie theater.

But man, you try and bring up gun regulations and some people go nuts.

I just don’t get it.  I really don’t.

First let me say I am a gun owner—I own 2.  I also know how to shoot.  I don’t need more than 10 rounds in a magazine for self defense because I know how to use my guns properly.  I wouldn’t want to own a gun if I couldn’t hit a target with 10 rounds.  Because if someone can’t hit a target with 10 rounds, should they really be firing guns to begin with?  While people might want a pile of guns, they sure as hell don’t need them.

Now don’t get me wrong, I understand hunting, self defense and sport shooting.

What I don’t get are these people who feel that they need to own an arsenal of weapons with magazines carrying 20 or more rounds.  I just don’t understand what kind of fear and paranoia these people must be living in.

If millions of individuals really feel they need stockpiles of weapons to be safe, that’s depressing.  Aren’t we supposedly the “greatest nation on earth”—why the hell are so many of these people terrified of apparently everything?

Are their neighborhoods so unsafe they need a cabinet loaded full of guns to defend themselves?  Are they such poor shots they need 20-30 rounds to hit a target?  Are they so paranoid that the end of the world is near and the only way for them and their family to survive the apocalypse is with enough guns to arm a small platoon?  Are they really so delusional that they think guns are the objects which keeps our government in line?

I just don’t get it.  There are millions of people who seem to cherish guns as much as they do their friends and family.

They take pictures with them.  Name them.  Defend gun rights as if the guns themselves have rights.

If someone obsessed this much over anything else wouldn’t we think they were insane?  Why is it normal for someone to own 20 or more guns, yet if someone owned 20 or more cats they’re often seen as mentally unstable?  The “crazy cat lady” stereotype if you will.

Often people view their concealed handguns with as much importance for leaving the house as their car keys or wallet.

Seriously, do these people live in such fear that they must be armed just to leave the house?  That must be a miserable existence.

I do a lot of things in my day to day life, things where I take the proper precautions to be safe.  For example, I believe in driving defensively and being aware of my surroundings—but I don’t drive around in fear for my life.

It’s just baffling to me, these people who talk as if they’d die before they agreed to even the most sensible of gun regulations such as universal background checks.

For the people who claim mental illness is to blame for our gun violence, not the guns themselves—isn’t the worship of an inanimate object to the point of threatening revolution if someone tried to take 1 or 2 of the 40 you own a sign of mental illness?

Isn’t hoarding guns and bullets for fear of society, your neighbors, the government and the unknown a sign of mental illness?

Because let’s be honest, the Second Amendment has already been “infringed” upon.  We’re not allowed to own missiles, bombs or other extremely dangerous explosives which could be argued by some that they are “arms” as well.  Besides, the Second Amendment doesn’t state we have the right to bear any arms to begin with.

It’s just disturbing to me that so many people live with such fear.  To believe the world is so terrible that if you don’t have guns there’s nothing that can stop all this terror from destroying you and your family.

Honestly, as a responsible gun owner and an advocate for our Second Amendment, I feel sorry for these people.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.
Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Comments

Facebook comments

  • What an amazing article! Thanks for using your talents to so well articulate the feelings and reasoning of so much of us. I have been “talking”to people on my Facebook list about gun control since Newtown and the things that they have been saying are beyond mad! I agree with you 1000%.

    SOOO many people have told me: background checks are “inconvenient” and are not going to do anything for the criminals and sick, as they will not submit themselves to one”, “guns don’t kill people; people kill people” …. My short answer is:

    You own more than one of these powerful weapons (there we have the control issue), the crazy, criminal, sick mind (universal background checks) steal YOUR powerful guns, kill my children and 20 more. If you had 1 or 2 modest guns, they could still have stolen then, still shot my children, but probably would not kill 20 more for the obvious reasons: they run out of bullets faster, as their magazines are not high capacity, and it takes time to load guns, so … there you have it: some people had the time to run, therefore the number of victims would be fewer … hoping that instead of having to load, you would just pick up the next of 20 already loaded guns.

    C-R-A-Z-Y!

    • Joel Stevenson

      So your logic is that an event (Mass Shooting Murder) that as killed 543 people in 30 years is going to be more likely than the tens of thousands of rapes and assaults a year. Or Murders, inc. Gun Murders, almost all of which use less then 7 rounds if the victim is unarmed.

      When you get down to it, since the CCW revolution has happened crime is down 49%. Arbitrary numbers of capacity don’t matter. Communities matter. Who cares what we can own when those of us who are willing to VOLUNTEER to help aren’t allowed. Not to mention that rest of you are unwilling.

  • Without the second amendment the rest are useless. You will never force a nation into a police state when the populous is armed. Leaders like Hitler knew this, which is why they disarmed before conquering. The only way we can defend the rest of our rights is if we can arm ourselves appropriately.

    You also speak of treating concealed carry as “being fearful of my life.” This is so far from the truth. There are so many instances were women get raped and men get mugged because they are overpowered. Guns are the great equalizer. A gun is the only thing that can put an 18 year old girl on the same playing field as 3 grown men. Pull that gun out and they are not going to touch you.

    As for the massive stockpiling; it’s a hobby for most people and a “basic arsenal for others. Truely you could understand the desire to have a small handgun for concealed carry, a large handgun for open carry, a primary use rifle, a varmint rifle, a hunting rifle, a close range shotgun, and a long range rifle.

    You may ask to yourself “why, that’s stupid.” But that is the beauty of America. I don’t question people’s novel collections, obsession with horses, car collections, what have you.

    • There was reasonable gun control measures in place before Hitler took power. Once installed as leader he was able to write laws, basically rendering parliament useless. Hitler loosened control measures considerably after taking over the government. Jews were considered non-citizens and were not allowed to possess firearms, along with ‘undesirables’. The legal age to own a firearm was lowered from 20 to 18. Firearm permits were expanded from one year to three. Hitler disarmed no one, Jewish citizenry excepted (other tight restrictions on Jewish citizenry also took place, they were deeply persecuted and were a minority group easily abused).

      With out the 2nd the rest are useless? I beg to differ on that. Firearms are not the great equalizer by any measure, that’s a myth people like to cling to, like the Hitler disarming everyone myth.

      • Alright, so my facts weren’t perfectly straight with Hitler. But the only group he was violently against was the Jews and other “undesirable.” But ask yourself this: would Hitler have been able to do what he did to the Jews if they were well armed?

      • Yes. The Jewish citizenry was a minority group, who most of the German population in the country despised. The military had tanks, war machines, airplanes. They may have died in an effort to defend themselves, as many did in the Warsaw Ghetto (with smuggled weapons and Molotov cocktails, but they would not have prevailed under any circumstance.

      • That is pure speculation. The vc in Vietnam were completely out matched technology wise but guess what they still killed 65,000 Americans and we eventually withdrew from the theater.

      • leonardo_fibonacci

        The problem was not that they had no guns, the problem was that they had no rights. The Bundestag took their rights away one by one slowly over time. By the time they took the guns away it was too late. One of my family ran to the woods and joined the underground. He had no problem getting a gun then.

      • “The Bundestag took their rights away one by one slowly over time. By the time they took the guns away it was too late.”
        Remember this quote of yours it’s always a piece at a time it can happen here so stop kidding yourself and stop acting like you know what’s best for someone else cause you don’t. Ooh we need to ban semi auto rifles today… Next year it’s hand guns you see the progression. The fact is that you gun grabbers don’t like gun so you think you have the right to take them from every one when you have no right at all.

    • JamesKelso

      “The only way we can defend the rest of our rights is if we can arm ourselves appropriately.” You never heard of the VOTE? Most people have one but many choose not to use it.

    • Petroc

      Hitler did not “force” his nation into a police state. They went there willingly. And as the other poster noted, he did not take everyone’s guns away, just the Jews’. As for your scenario of a gun being the “equalizer” for the 18 year old girl, there is nothing in what the article says that would prevent that from happening. No one (no one seriously engaged in the debate) is arguing for eliminating all weapons! The argument that all the other Amendments are useless without the 2nd is the kind of paranoia that should disqualify one from passing any kind of mental stability background check! The millions of Americans who don’t own guns still posses all the rights inherent in the Constitution, still get to wield their power through the vote. As the writer says, you people who live in such constant fear really do need to be pitied.

      • The ONLY reason we enjoy the freedoms we have today is because countless people have given their lives to fight for it. While there are still people with a lust for power we will have to continue to fight to keep this freedom. The founding fathers knew this, which is why the specifically said our right to “bear arms shall not be infringed.”

        Sit there and seriously ponder if for a second. Obama could sit there and with a stroke of a pen completely annihilate every right, even the right to vote. But what is keeping him from doing that? The ONLY thing is the populous believing that the system of checks and balances will work and has the ability to force their leaders to abide by it as well.

        Don’t take our comfort and freedom lightly. History has shown it can be gone before you knew what hit you.

      • BinFL

        I’m sorry, but I can’t seriously ponder the idea of Obama doing what you said he could with the stroke of a pen because it is a practical impossibility. He absolutely CAN NOT do such a thing with an executive order, if that’s what you’re referring to. The only way he could take away any constitutional right with the stroke of a pen would be if he were signing a bill that both the House and Senate had first passed and sent to his desk to sign. And like I said, that ain’t happenin’.

        As for the idea that the only thing keeping our lawmakers in check is the threat of being shot by their constituents, that is serious crazy talk, and you should see someone about your anger issues and/or paranoid delusions.

      • Dennis M

        So are you saying blood of the children at Sandy Hook was necessary for our freedoms? More people have died in this country since 1968 then all the soldiers in all the wars this country have fought.
        I can tell what can stop Obama.It called the Constitution under it he is cheif executive.The executive branch executes the law.He can issue executive orders only on laws that already exist.
        The
        2nd amendment contains the words “well regulated” in it. None the the rights in
        the Bill of Rights are absolute.The government can not take away a right but it
        can control where and when it can be exercised.We have freedom of speech but one
        can not yell fire in a theater, slander or falsely advertise. We have the right
        of free assembly but we can not block traffic and government can require parade
        permits or create protest zones at political conventions.There
        is freedom of the press but they cannot publish child pornography.There
        is freedom of religion but prayer in school and religious displays on public
        space is not allowed.We have rights against unreasonable search and seizure but
        courts can issue warrants and the police can frisk you for a weapon at
        anytime.

        “Like
        most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to
        keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever
        purpose”-Justice Anthony Scalia Heller vs. DC

        There
        is an old saying “The right to wave your fist in the air ends where my nose
        begins” With all the carnage in this country from guns, I think the 2nd
        amendment has passed the point where our nose begins

      • Wrong Alexander Hamilton said in the federalist papers this.
        The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.
        — The Federalist Papers, No. 29.
        Hamilton indicates a well-regulated militia is a state of preparedness obtained after rigorous and persistent training. Note the use of ‘disciplining’ which indicates discipline could be synonymous with well-trained.

      • Dianne Feinstein has more than once stated that if she could she would ban and confiscate all the guns. (I think maybe she was referring to semi-auto rifles and handguns). I think there are a lot of people who would like to severely curtail civilian ownership of guns, but it’s not politically feasible right now. But they are hoping it will be someday. And they have lots of money and power (Bloomberg alone has many billions).

      • Joel Stevenson

        Try 37 different groups that were denied citizenship Also, a Nazi party card was required for everything or you were a Communist sympathizer. It wasn’t just the Jews.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      The Hitler thing is wrong. He relaxed gun regulations, except for the Jews, of course.

    • Dennis M

      Guns are the great equalizer for women?
      Guns would do little to stop rape in this country.
      More than a third of rapes are before the age of 18.Three out of four rape/sexual assault victimizations
      Three out of four involved offenders with whom the victim had a prior relationship as a family member, intimate, or acquaintance.Only 7% of all rapes involved multiple offenders who were strangers to the victim.
      In 2010 statistics show
      For homicides in which the victim to offender relationship could be
      identified, 94 percent of female victims (1,571 out of 1,669) were
      murdered by a male they knew.

      Sixteen times as many females were murdered by a male they knew
      (1,571 victims) than were killed by male strangers (98 victims).

      For victims who knew their offenders, 65 percent (1,017) of female
      homicide victims were wives or intimate acquaintances of their killers.11

      There were 313 women shot and killed by either their husband or
      intimate acquaintance during the course of an argument.

      Nationwide, for homicides in which the weapon could be determined
      (1,622), more female homicides were committed with firearms (52
      percent) than with any other weapon. Knives and other cutting
      instruments accounted for 20 percent of all female murders, bodily force 12 percent, and murder by blunt object seven percent. Of the homicides committed with firearms, 70 percent were committed with handguns.
      Presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation increases the risk of homicide for women by 500 percent.

    • jordan12345

      why not get a taser or something?

  • josh craig

    the second amendment is to protect us from our government, not ourselves as much. without guns and other weapons, which should also be allowed, we cannot keep the rest of our freedoms. The author of this has obviously never read “The Prince”. educate yourself on how to totally control a state, and you’ll realize how much we do need our guns with 20+ rounds.

    • HAHAHAHAHA please favor us with your interpretation of ~”The Prince”.

    • BigTBone

      You’re already controlled by the very irrational fear the author describes. What could ‘government control’ do to me that corporations haven’t already?

      You people really make no sense.

      • Corporations also have access to their own private armed police forces, or in the case of Chase and the NYPD, they buy preferential treatment with multi-million dollar donations. They would not be disarmed. We would be. A nation without guns is one where corporations, police, and the military have an exclusive monopoly on power and lethal force. None of these groups are or ever have been friends of progressives.

      • BigTBone

        They are not friends of progressives, but most of us would rather solve issues through peaceful means. If the left embraced violence as the answer, OWS would have been scary as hell. Let the right cling to their perceived “2nd amendment solutions”

        Ballots instead of bullets.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        When was the last time someone who wasn’t a psycho was disarmed by government? Why are you people so afraid of your own government? Because it does things you don’t agree with or like? Too bad. It’s called living in a democracy.

    • Steve

      Hey Josh, how many rounds do you think you’ll need to defend against a 500 lb. bomb dropped from the sky above you? Are you marksman enough to take out a fighter/bomber? Think you’ll see that drone the bad old tyrannical govt sends after you? Got anything that will stop a tank? You see, Josh, your argument is totally without merit. That’s because it’s not 1776 and muskets anymore. If you are REALLY so afraid of our government, take your gun and place the barrel in your mouth and squeeze the trigger. It’s already over!

      Seriously, no one cares about disarming the population. What we care about is a little more control over the situation. What exactly is it about background checks that scares you so much? Do you think the govt is gonna do blanket denials? Because if that’s the case, bunky……..we have laws for a reason. Take for example, liquor license laws: they are designed to weed out undesirables. People with things in their backgrounds that send red flags, like felonies. If you have a clean record and you get turned down, you can challenge the government and they have to show a compelling LEGAL reason or grant you the license. Now granted, maybe you know that your paranoia is kind of extreme and possibly a symptom of the onset of mental illness. Is that what’s worrying you, bunky? It’s ok. Some people shouldn’t have guns. You might be one of them. Ask your psychiatrist if guns are right for you.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      You funny. The second amendment was to protect us from foreign countries, AKA the British.

  • orville dean

    because the nra have made people paranoid with there lies an bull shit an some people are just plain idiots

    • Because defending the Constitution is not a worthy cause..

      • The Supreme Court of The United States was given power by the Constitution to interpret it and rule what is or isn’t constitutional. The SCOTUS ruled that there are justifiable limits that can be put on private firearm ownership.

  • I completely disagree! 10 rounds is not enough for self defense! Being in the USMC I have learned that shooting at a target is one thing, but shooting at a target that is also shooting back at you is another. Hell just go on youtube and look up police officers under a fire fight, they blow through a 15 round mag in seconds!

    The day something tragic happens to you where you actually need to defend yourself is the day when you can criticize people for feeling the need to arm themselves.

    • Tknight

      That’s a shock and awe tactic used by the police to get a criminal to feel overwhelmed and want to give up in fear of losing their life.

      • Seems like a solid tactic, then, for civilians defending their homes to have access to use.

      • Dizcuzted

        Actually, it’s a stupid tactic liable to cause damage to people and property around your home.

      • No, it’s a standard tactic to use when confronting a threat. You keep shooting as quickly as you can until the threat is neutralized. When you are under stress and have someone (probably under the influence of hard drugs) shooting at you, you can’t expect to shoot as accurately as you would at the range. People who say you should be able to take down a target with 10 shots obviously haven’t ever been in that situation before and are speaking from theory rather than experience.

      • Not to mention 90% of the Country’s Sheriffs feel that the magazine limiting laws are complete bogus.

      • Dennis M

        Combat and law enforcement instructors will tell that the shooters most vulnerable
        period is when he is changing magazines. That brief moment where he is forced to
        stop shooting to remove one magazine and insert another often provides the
        opportunity to stop him. One example of this is the Tucson shooting where Gabby
        Giffords was among 20 people shot. When the shooter stopped to change magazines,
        Patricia Maisch, an unarmed 61 year old woman, was able to grab the fresh
        magazine while others held the shooter down. This ended the shooting and saved
        lives. Simply stated: The more magazine changes required the better chance of
        stopping the shooter.

      • guest

        And the more legal gun owners with carry permits, the more chance a criminal will not start shooting in the first place. Dennis M, you need to move to Chicago…your story will change in a hurry.

      • Dennis M

        Criminals never give much thought to consequences of their actions before hand.They see what they and take it when they want The flaw with the good guy with gun solution is that
        it only comes into play after a bad guy with gun has drawn and fired his(Reagan
        was surrounded by good guys with guns when he was shot).The first one to draw a
        weapon is always at advantage. The effective solutions are those that keep a gun out of the hands of a bad guy before he acts out.
        Many cite the city of Chicago as having some of the strongest gun laws in the country with a continually high rate of gun crime. Those same critics casually ignore the transformation of New York City from one of the most gun violent cities in the country to one of the safest, having thelowest number of homicides ever recorded in 2012. The vast discrepancy between the two cities simply demonstrates that gun laws, like all laws, are only effective to the extent that they are enforced. Chicago’s judicial system has been woefully negligent in catching, prosecuting and sentencing criminals for gun offenses. New York, conversely, has implemented some of the most rigorous police practices and sentencing guidelines for gun violations in the country as both its crime statistics and streets reflect. What both Chicago and New York unfortunately share is the blight of illegal guns funneled in from cities and states with weaker gun regulations. The vast majority of guns used in crimes on the streets of New York and Chicago originate in cities and states with little to no gun laws. Gun rights advocates are correct in criticizing the effectiveness of selective state and municipal gun measures, but only to the extent that it shows the need for comprehensive federal legislation.

      • leonardo_fibonacci

        I know people who have lived in Chicago their whole lives and have never seen or heard a gun being fired. If you live in South Chicago yes but in Skokie – not so much? Same is true in any major American city. Are you talking about East LA or Belair. Manhattan or the S. Bronx. South Phoenix or Scottsdale.

      • BAB

        Where did you get that idea?

      • leonardo_fibonacci

        Yes I thought about this when we watched the video of the Police letting loose on the boat where the marathon bomber was hiding. From the sound it seemed like an insane amount of bullets being pumped into a target at most 25 feet square. And yet the kid walked out of the boat? Don’t these guys have any training? Its like they literally couldn’t hit a target the size of a barn door. Whats up with that?

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      And how often do you expect to be in a firefight with someone in your neighborhood?

      • First of all that doesn’t matter, you can never predict what could happen, but prepare for the worst. And if someone or several criminals are burglarizing your home armed with firearms, you can expect a firefight especially if your first shot doesn’t take them down.

      • Dennis M

        Why does justification always weapons involve preposterous hypothetical scenarios?
        A study of shootings in three demographically disparate communities around the country revealed only 13 instances of justified self-defense out of 622 home shootings, suggesting a gun in the home is 22 times more likely to kill a friend or loved one instead of an intruder. Similar studies found homicides were twice as likely to take place in homes with guns versus those without. As a nation, in the aggregate we kill far more innocent people than we save with firearms.

      • John Borowic

        preposterous hypothetical scenarios? Some say Sandy hook was unimaginable.

      • BAB

        Yeah, and they’re wrong.

      • Gunluvr

        Then you stay on your side of the street with your beliefs and we’ll stay on ours. We don’t care about studies and stats, we care about what we know and believe is right.

      • Jesse

        Why do I even need to justify my right to own a firearm? You don’t have to give a reason as to why you need free speech every time you use it.

      • BAB

        Paranoia really sucks.

      • Frostiken

        In 27 years, I’ve never had my kitchen catch fire, but I still keep a fire extinguisher and smoke alarms.

      • Ventsislav Atanasov

        Bad comparison. You play with fire every day in your kitchen and having a fire extinguisher is wise. But how often your neighbor comes to set your home on fire?

    • Dennis M

      A contagious shooting is a sociological phenomenon observed in military and police personnel in the United States, in which one person firing on a target can induce others to begin shooting. Often the subsequent shooters will not know why they are firing.On August 24, 2012, outside the Empire State Building Following a shooting Nine bystanders were wounded by stray bullets fired by the police.

    • leonardo_fibonacci

      First like everyone else here I want to thank you for service. But Michael this isn’t Kabul. You are far more likely to be hit by lightning than to be involved in a firefight on the streets of Chicago. I know many people who live in Chicago all their lives and have never seen or heard a gun being shot.

      Your training has served you well and I hope it continues to for as long as you in the service. But when you come home for sake of everyone who loves you – please let go. And if you can’t please ask for help, there is no shame, its harder to man up and ask for help than it is to hide.

      • Meditor

        Now, you mean. Tomorrow, you can’t pretend to know.

    • BAB

      You know, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry when I read that sort of statement. (1) homes in which there are guns are more likely to have have occupants who are wounded or killed with a gun within the home – hence they actually don’t have “protection”. (2) The vast majority of gun deaths are suicides, not homicides. 2/5 of individuals who are at risk of suicide have access to a gun. Guns cause 1/2 of suicides. Do the math. (3) It’s a myth that guns are successful in protecting you.

      Besides, what kind of neighborhood do you live in that you need a gun to defend yourself? MOVE.

      • Gunluvr

        It’s a Bill of Rights not needs.

  • Nick

    You said. “Someone that can’t hit a target with 10 rounds shouldn’t be firing a gun to begin with”. Then What about the police officers that riddle 2 innocent ladies truck with over 100 rounds because they thought they were the ex-lapd police officer Chris dorner? Hitting them multiple times. It’s not that these people are paranoid for no reason. We live in a police state where you’re going to eventually (probably soon) going to have to defend yourself against the police/military and what have you. You have to be real ignorant to think that tyranny can’t happen in today’s world. I don’t believe in god but, god help you when they come knocking on your door

    • JamesKelso

      How about voting out those that want steal your rights?

      • If they’ve got the guns and they don’t want to leave office, voting ceases to be effective, and your ability to do something about it ceases to exist.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        The only ones I know who don’t want to leave office are Republicans. That’s why they want to rig elections. When was the last time a defeated politician didn’t leave?

    • calm dog

      Nick –

      I’ve gotta say, Man – go ahead and stockpile all those guns and ammo if it makes you feel any better, but if the government ever DOES come knocking, they’ll be bringing tanks, drones, bombers, missiles, and a million men. Sleep tight.

      • Then it’s our failure as responsible citizens that we have allowed the government to amass that level of power, and allowed it the ability to use that power against us. You realize what you’re saying, the government can do whatever it wants to do to us as citizens, and there’s nothing we can do about it. That makes us slaves, or prisoners. Liberal or conservative (or left-wing anarchist like myself) we should all oppose that. It’s blatantly totalitarian.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Uh, what level of power are you talking about?

      • calm dog

        John, Pretty much ANY government has massive power. It’s their job to protect their citizens from outside attack. You can’t be proposing that the U.S. government not have more military capability than Joe Main Street. Our power to keep the government in check has little to do with military might. Just take a look at Syria to see how armed resistance is working out for them. Hopefully, there is enough power here in the ballot box. If not, we’ll never have enough bullets.

      • Gunluvr

        I presume the same drones, tanks, cannons and soldiers that it tried to use to impose “democracy” on Afghanistan, Iraq & Vietnam with; Right? Didn’t really work out without the people’s support, huh. Killed a lot of them though but didn’t change anything in a big way.

    • Steve

      Nick….stupid……..why do you insist on comparing apples and oranges? If you can’t stop a single intruder in your home with 10 rounds, what makes you think you can do it with 100? You see, if you read your own post, you clearly talk about police OFFICERS, plural. Wake up and stop being stupid.

  • Go Bucks

    I see a lot of people being paranoid about our government taking us over. I think they forget that, the same military that the government would have to use, is made up of our friends and family as soldiers. Do you really think your friend or family member is going to come and round us all up for a complete take over of our rights??????

    • No, but the government could request the UN and foreign governments to intervene if there was ever a societal breakdown/collapse/civil war situation following an attempt to confiscate guns in america

      • No one is trying to confiscate firearms. That was never an issue, it was never brought up.

      • Dennis M

        Put on a tin foil hat and you will be safe from the UN and their black helicopters

    • Did you know that during WWII most German soldiers were completely ignorant of the Holocaust? When you go to boot camp you are beat into submission. They train you to follow orders without question.

      I’m praying that these friends and neighbors in the military will be able to discern where the line is drawn, but I have my concerns.

      • leonardo_fibonacci

        Too young to remember Mei Lai?

      • BAB

        No one in Germany was ignorant of the Holocaust. There were so many concentration camps

        throughout the country, large and small, that everyone knew about it.

      • Stephanie Bova

        There were certainly NO German soldiers who were ignorant of the Holocaust. German soldiers made the Holocaust possible! (Hence as you correctly mentioned, the brainwashing!) Who did you think was organizing, enforcing, running, and making the logistics of concentration camps possible… Hitler running around all by himself? No, it was the SS and SA, and all the members of the Nazi German Armed Forces. Not every German *citizen* was aware of the extent of the concentration camps, but those in the military most certainly were (killing 6 million people takes a lot of man-power, since they weren’t using bombs). Thinking that the American Military would turn on its own country makes absolutely no sense, can you find any example in history of that ever happening, not just in America but in any country? Making a comparison to Nazi Germany is ridiculous since the Nazi’s didn’t attack their own people (Germans) they attacked the Jews which they obviously didn’t consider their own people. And since America is *fundamentally* comprised of all different races and nationalities of people, and therefore so is the military, this comparison is idiotic.

      • Meditor

        Have you ever heard of the Civil War? People in the military turn on civilians all the time. Why would we be different?

  • I love this article. I mean, really, without a doubt, LOVE this article. I am a gun owner as well and I told the man when I bought it, “I want bolt action rifle and no large clips. If I can’t kill an animal or the unlikely home invader with 10 shots, I don’t need a gun and probably killed an innocent person with my horrid aim.” I don’t walk around in fear because I don’t have a CC handgun, I don’t NEED that crutch. Its like a drug and the drug is power.

    • If you’re trying to kill a home invader with a bolt action rifle you’re gonna have a bad time. You’re also a danger to your family members and neighbors. That high caliber high power hunting round will overpenetrate even if you do hit with the one shot you get off before the burglar takes the rifle away from you, and it’ll go right through your walls and your neighbor’s walls. And possible through your family members or your neighbors. You’d be better off with a baseball bat.

    • What bolt action rifle has 10 shots? And for home defense??? You should’ve got a revolver.

      • It fits 9 to be exact. I will NEVER own a pistol. They are too easy for a child to get to, even with trigger locks. My gun is not meant to be for home defense, its for hunting, I’m not ignorant but what burglar in their right mind, desperate, high or , would dare to take the chance that I wouldn’t blow their kneecaps off? I know how to keep my family safe with murder and without FEAR of the government.

  • I feel sorry for them also. Yeah, all of them are paranoid, or just think they are real life guys from Red Dawn.

  • It’s not about the “background checks” it what the liberals
    tried to hide in the legislation. Our forefathers
    carried the same weapons our soldiers did.
    I have absolutely no problem at all with law-abiding citizens arming
    themselves and carrying any type weapon they desire. It criminals who need to be dealt with and we
    could do so if our judges and prosecutors would prosecute laws currently on the
    books.

    • Steve

      What exactly was ‘hidden’ in the legislation? Please quote it exactly as the draft of the law is readily available for me to check your claim. Moving on, exactly which laws on the books now are not enforced? I hear that from the gun nuts all the time and don’t get it BECAUSE the gun nutters are terrified of the government passing laws regarding guns! They DON’T want background checks done. They DON’T want to have to register their guns. They DON’T want any restrictions at all on who they can sell their guns to. Their argument is that guns are a holy right that CANNOT be regulated in any way because if they are, the government will disarm us all and send us all to a UN labor camp! Our guns are all that stand between us and UN domination! Aliens from outer space in league with the White House! The hordes of vicious criminals!! Puh-leeze grow a brain!

      • Joel Stevenson

        Try the fact that the “universal Background Checks” would be no more effective than now. Why? Because NICS database is a joke. Half the police incidents are unreported and the system is underfunded for upkeep/upgrade. If you want to “fix” it, All gun owners thank you! We agreed to it, they said it would fix the problem, and it hasn’t. They lied about all our laws that would “protect” us. That’s why we no longer trust them.

        The law would do nothing. Laws aren’t the answer. We have agreed to several sweeping reforms. They didn’t work. So let’s try something else.

  • KRoad

    I completely agree that there should be regulations on magazine size and background checks for sure. The legislation put forward still allowed over 1,200 types of guns – I can’t imagine why you would need more than that to choose from. Having said that, I got into a debate with a friend of mine over the Second Amendment and the rights that entitles us to. Basically the argument boiled down to him saying he doesn’t want 1,200 guns or a billion bullets, he just want the right to be able to have that if he chose to. I am NOT saying I agree with that but I see his point. Would background checks have stopped Newtown? No. Would magazine size limits stopped Newtown? No. But it would have helped. There may be fewer children to mourn and that is a step in the right direction. The other issue is that mental illness has a LOT to do with these situations and that should also be a priority along with the magazine size and background checks. No system will be perfect and mass shootings cannot be eliminated but we can take steps to minimize occurrence and the sheer number of casualties.

  • Janice Feldstein

    I’m an old woman. The elderly are the most preyed upon because we are the most vulnerable. I sleep well at night because I have a gun by my nightstand and I’m not afraid to use it. Most gun laws deprive the law abiding citizens of their guns, in one way or another. Even though honest people would never hurt anyone.

    Where gun laws are the most severe is where guns are abused the most. This is because the laws already on the books aren’t enforced. So more gun laws will not make people safer— the laws already on the books must be enforced first. And if need be add to them. as long as the laws don’t infringe on our right to defend ourselves. Guns are called equalizers because that’s what they are.

    Guns are only a tool it’s the people who misuse this tool that must be controlled not the tool. Our founders knew what they were doing when they installed this Amendment in the Constitution. Self defense is a primary weapon of freedom, we should never forget this when we rail against this right.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      Some of those people who must be controlled own a lot of guns.

    • leonardo_fibonacci

      Always the same tired old arguments isn’t it? And they never make any sense.

      1) An old woman is going to defend herself in the middle of the night against an intruder. Lady if you are lucky you won’t wake up while he’s there and if you do the best you can hope for is that he’ll think you are so funny he won’t use your own gun against you.

      2) We need to be able to defend ourselves against an as-yet-unidentified external foe with a military at least 33% bigger than China, the UK, France, Japan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Germany, India and Brazil combined. Of course if our Stealth fighters, Stealth Subs, Stealth tanks, drones and guns that shoot around corners couldn’t stop them I’m not sure what you all are planning to do with your little AK47.

      3) We need to be able to defend ourselves against a hypothetical “Police State” which does not now and never has existed in this country. If it did, surely this old lady wouldn’t have to keep a gun in her bedside table. With both the far left and far right constantly invoking the memory of Hitler and the Holocaust its really hard to see how the Neo Nazi Party could ever achieve any power beyond the History Channel.

      4) If we have to register our guns “They” will know who we are! News Flash!! If They don’t know who you are now – they can certainly find you quickly enough. When Kennedy was shot they were broadcasting a photo of Lee Harvey Oswald posing with a rifle and newspaper within hours. That was 50 years ago.

      Within 48 hours of the Marathon Bombing we had these guys Facebook Pages and their Uncle railing on national TV. We knew their school grades, their favorite foods, and their love lives.

      Facebook, Google, Walmart, Target, and a host of companies you never heard of with innocuous names buy and sell you every day and twice on Tuesday. Target once boasted they can tell a woman is pregnant before she knows.

      What exactly do you think you are going to get away?

      5) I need an ultra-large magazine because Zombies that the UN is training never come at you alone – they always travel in swarms. And a single 50 caliber exploding hollow point isn’t going to take them them down. You need to just pull the trigger and hold on tight.

      Take my word for it. A very good friend of mine is a writer for one of those Zombie shows and he has sworn to me on his mothers life that Zombies aren’t real. He made this whole thing up and sold the idea to FX Channel. Not only that there is no such thing as Vampires, Spiderman or Ironman. There is just my friend in a little cubicle on the Sony lot trying to make a living.

      6) 5) I need an AK47 for sport shooting. Seriously I can’t even address that one without banging my head on the table.

      • robert fantina

        And areas with the loosest gun control laws have the most gun deaths – intentional and accidental. Not the other way around as the ‘old lady’ (no disrespect intended) said.

      • Nattleby .

        Just keep banging your head on the table. Go on, harder…

  • If the author of this understood sport shooting, if he understood guns at all, he’d know “assault weapons” with “30 round magazines” are used almost exclusively in sport shooting, and the vast majority of murders are committed with handguns with capacities in the 10-15 round range or lower. Nobody holds up a liquor store on the south side of Chicago with an AR-15.

    This is somebody who has probably a Biden-approved shotgun and a revolver, and figures since that’s good enough for him, he’s got the right to dictate to other people how they choose to defend themselves. My home defense gun has an 8 round magazine. My wife’s has 15. I don’t tell her that she needs to go down to 10. It’s what she’s comfortable with, and what I have is what I’m comfortable with.

    I don’t know that an AR-15 would make any difference in standing up to government power. Probably not. I do know that AR-15s are not widely used in crime, and are used in a ridiculously small percentage of murders each year. They are also widely used in competitive and sport shooting. Moves to legislate an AR-15 or other “evil black rifles” are based in emotion and visceral dislike for the appearance of the gun.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      What sport uses an AR-15 with a 30 round mag?

      • There are a number of fairly new competitive shooting sports that use that class of firearm. They are mostly outgrowths of more traditional target shooting or “combat course” type competitions.

      • J-Way

        3-Gun (competitors use a shotgun, tactical rifle, and handgun)
        Action Rifle

        Tactical Carbine

      • Dennis M

        People race antique cars that doesn’t mean a Model T is a race car.
        Just as there are vehicles designed for different functions,sedans,sport cars, suv’s, minivans ,4×4’s and pickup trucks.There are guns designed for different purposes,self defense,bird hunting,big game hunting or target shooting. Each type of gun is designed with features that best suit the function it will used for.The AR15 was designed for the military to serve the mission of a soldier whose job it is to inflict the maximum lethal force to his enemy possible.The AR15 was made to be a light weight weapon so it would be easy to carry.Capable
        of a high rate of fire and has a detectable large capacity magazine so a soldier can place maximum firepower down range. It uses .223 ammo which is lightweight so a soldier can carry more of it. Although the .223 is a small bullet, the AR15 fires it at a high muzzle velocity of over 3000 fps so it impacts its target with a great amount of energy. The bullet is also designed to tumble and fragment causing maximum tissue damage. The AR15 was designed from the ground up for just one purpose and that purpose is to deliver the maximum lethal force
        possible to kill human beings.These features make it an ideal weapon of choice for a mass murderer.

  • Dsherms

    Sounds like Clifton is paranoid himself if he has to own two guns. Why any?

  • Chris E.

    I disagree. It’s not about feeling “need” for many people. There are a lot of people “out there” who just enjoy shooting several different types of guns and also collect for fun, just like people collect cars, old cameras or whatever. I think your “article” is skewed and stereotypes gun owners.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      Yeah, but there are a lot of crazies with an arsenal that think the gummint is coming to get them. Maybe that’s why they don’t want background checks; someone would figure out they are paranoid schizophrenics.

  • A great obsession! Just reading many of these posts makes me realize that those who want to amass big arsenals, besides being conspiracy theorist kooks, are addicts. Guns have become their drug of choice, or perhaps fetish is a better description. So many gun addicts still think they’re cowboys in the Wild West, and they have that ridiculous cowboy mentality.

    • Joel Stevenson

      Actually, very untrue Ma’am. Many people do enjoy Firearms. However, most people who do enjoy them amass them at the same rate you would amass clothes, shoes, jewelry, etc. If I carry a pistol for 5-7 years, I may replace it with a newer, better model rather than risk a failure at a critical moment. Also, 10 rounds is an Arbitrary number not based on any science or legitimate source. It is about the stacking of a magazine.

  • Dan Young

    Gotta agree that this is naive. I suggest some force-on-force training to illustrate how quickly 10 rounds go in a firefight. There is a reason police graduated from revolvers to 17-round Glocks. HOWEVER, I agree that most folks don’t need to stockpile guns. Own three, and learn how to use them perfectly, instinctively, under a wide variety of fast-motion scenarios, light conditions, and distances from contact grappling to the longest hallway in your house. Then maybe you can consider yourself someone who knows how to use them.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      And when exactly do you expect to be in a firefight???

    • Dan Young

      BTW – IMO folks fearing government takeovers are delusional on a number of counts. But the most basic is: no matter how many rounds you have, what chance do you have against ATF SWAT teams? Answer: absolutely zero. Who the heck do you think you’ll be up against – rank amateurs? With no-knock warrants, you’ll either be dead or in custody in 60 seconds, and you’ll never see it coming.

  • The author is obviously only in touch with his reality, not A REALITY. Reality is that no one can yell bomb in an airport or fire in a theater, not because its denying anyone freedom of speech but because it is dangerous. You feel you don’t need more than 10 rounds because you know how to shoot…how cute you ass while. How many of those paper targets “you know how to shoot at” have ever shot back at you? For the day that the bad guys bring the assault to you,then and only then will you see the 10 round issue differently. Oh and by the way we show more passion on the assault on the second amendment because of the efforts that this administration is putting forth. Which no other amendment is under you moron. And by the way the rest is about choice and freedom. Why do you drive the car you drive? Who gives a shit…because you chose it. Chances are if you could afford a,better one you would, wouldn’t you?

  • It seems like you are asking the wrong questions. Consider:

    – If someone owns one gun, why shouldn’t you let them own several? (Assuming they are appropriately secured).

    – How much of the obsession with owning guns is a reaction to people wanting to take them away? It is a fact of psychology that people often define themselves at least partially as the opposite of whatever they oppose, and gun control/gun ban activists are pretty militant and pretty pervasive.

    – Lots of people geek out on their collections of weird things. I know a guy who builds rockets (fairly big ones). No one condemns him as mentally ill for his hobby. And given the amount of glamour attached to wielding a gun in almost every corner of media, it would be extremely surprising if people weren’t attracted to them.

  • Posting twice because of a fault in the pagescript.

    – Gun control activists often state some variation of “Gun rights activists care more about their guns than they do their family/kids/human life, etc.”. This is really off base. If you are in a discussion about gun rights that is what you are going to talk about, not post pictures of your grandkids. Gun rights activists in general care about family and children no less (or more) than anyone else. We just have come to different conclusions about the best way of protecting them.

  • Erik Koehler

    Why does no one seem to realize that the 2nd amendment doesn’t give you the right to bear arms? That right exists independently of the constitution and the bill of rights. The 2nd amendment says the Gov’t cannot infringe upon the right to bear arms. The right to bear arms is untouchable and can never be taken away.

  • Here, here! It should be categorized as a mental illness in the new DSM-V coming out in May.

  • Dennis M

    Addictive behavior is any activity, substance, object, or behavior that becomes the major focus of a person’s life resulting in a physical, mental, and/or social withdrawal from their normal day to day obligations.
    There are different types of addiction and virtually any activity or substance has the potential to become addictive. Drugs, alcohol, and nicotine are examples of substance addictions, whereas behavior addiction (also known as process addictions) may include gambling, sexual activity, Internet, food related behaviors, shopping, work, or exercise.
    The reason so many gun owners over react and feel threatened over the idea of any sort of gun control is they are suffering an emotional withdrawal reaction
    A lot of gun owners(BUT NOT ALL) seem to caught out in some kind of gun addiction.
    They have as much obsession, justification,rationalization and minimization ,denial and fear about a harmful habit as Dr Phil would see at any of his interventions.
    Obsession:
    Some gun owners think no amount of guns or ammo can be too many,no gun is too powerful.They can cite chapter and verse of the make, models and calibers of any weapon- In AA they like to say “one is too many, a thousand not enough”

    Justification
    Gun owner: It’s for hunting,I like to target shoot, I’m defending my family,It’s my 2nd amendment right.It’s fun
    Drunk:I drink because my job is stressful,my wife doesn’t love me,It’s my right drinking isn’t illegal.It’s fun

    Rationalization and Minimization
    Gun Owner:An AR15 is just like any other gun,The AR15 is better than other guns,A true assault weapon is fully automatic mine only shoots as fast I can pull the trigger,30 rounds is not large capacity it’s the the standard issue, the .223 is not a powerful bullet why it is not ever allowed for hunting deer.It’s my hobby it’s the only pleasure I have.
    Drunk: I work everyday,have a home and support my family just like everyone else, I only drink at night,I only drink beer not the hard stuff,I only drank a six pack,It’s the only pleasure I have.

    Denial
    Gun owner:Knives and clubs kill more people than guns,The shooter at Sandy Hook didn’t use an AR15,legal gun owners never shoot anybody.The problem is people who don’t know how to handle a gun,I know how to safely handle my weapons there could never be a problem
    Drunk: I don’t have a drinking problem, I can drive, I only drank beer,Some people can’t handle their drinking I can, there will never be a problem.

    Fear:
    I need high capacity magazines because the bad guys coming into my home has one, the police can’t protect me,.223 is a lot faster than 911,Registration means the tyrannical government will know where my guns are.- All addictions are driven by self center fear and the need for escape.

    I’m sure saying all this will raise a lot of gun owner hackles so I’m going to say the following in capital letters:
    JUST AS THE MAJORITY OF DRINKERS ARE RESPONSIBLE AND CAUSE NO PROBLEMS THE SAME IS TRUE OF GUN OWNERS.
    I suspect the ones who will howling the loudest about this posting will be the ones in the deepest denial.

  • Big Pete

    OK, love the article, nice to hear from a responsible gun owner who is interested in openly discussing the topic. Full disclosure, I’m originally English, now Canadian, both, please note, long term democracies with histories of civil disobedience but not of major gun ownership. I mention civil disobedience for a very specific reason, citizens of any country have the ability to defend themselves against oppression and often have, without any firearms what so ever. If the situation ever gets bad enough we all have the ability to take a stand, no matter how big or small our arsenal is. We’ll all probably end up dead or arrested anyway, because, as someone pointed out the “Man” always has the best stuff (15 mag rifle vs tank anyone?) but at least we’ll have taken a stand.
    And I don’t mean to be critical, gun ownership is obviously an American thing which I guess a lot of us outsiders don’t get; fair enough, different strokes for different folks. What always surprises me is the way any mention of what seem to be some fairly reasonable controls (really no more than when you’re licensed to drive a car) end up causing so much fear and concern.
    Finally anyone who truly honestly thinks that the government of one of the most advanced, economically successful, media swamped countries on the planet would get away with “rounding us up and shipping us off”, especially after what happened during and since WWII, should seriously consider running for office, long term I think a far better means of protecting themselves in a democracy than having any amount of fire power.

  • Ban Spoons I’m Fat

    I’m so sick of people trying to tell me how many guns I SHOULD only be able to own! Why the f… does that matter to you? If someone went nutso and on a rampage, what would matter if he/she brought 50 guns to their rampage or 2 guns and 50 “ten round” magazines?… I swear all of the effin hypocrites out there need to understand that if you want to stop “gun violence” put your energy in punishing criminals, not spending a fortune trying to reform them just to justify jobs in a broken revolving door system and keep you nose out of my life. I don’t tell you how many d…. you can eat, don’t tell me how many guns I can own.

    You know that driving while under the influence is against the law, right? I wonder how long it will be before you can’t buy more than two drinks because “you might” drive drunk and kill someone.

    Every single person that lives in the good ol US of A should have to do a 5 to 10 year refresher on our constitution. It’s really insane how many people don’t want any one infringing on their rights, yet are first to infringe on some one else’s.

  • Text Second Amendment of the Constitution: Its obsolescence or application today, Second Decade of the Twenty, is, to say the least, debatable whole or in part:
    text

    There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with slight capitalization and punctuation differences, found in official documents related to the adoption of the Charter of rights.1 A version was passed by Congress, 2 while another is found in copies distributed to states3 and then ratified by them.
    As approved by Congress:
    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.
    Being well regulated militia necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    As ratified by the States:
    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.
    Being well regulated militia necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
    The handwritten original copy of the Bill of Rights, passed by the House and Senate, was prepared by the scribe William Lambert and resides in the National Archives

  • A man with a gun can control one hundred without.

    Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

    This year will mark a milestone in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration of. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient and the world will follow our lead into the future.

    Adolf Hitler, 1935

    Every good communist should know that political power grows in the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must control the weapons.

    Mao Tse Tung

    This is the LaPierre Moral…

    • The LaPierre Moral is based on flawed history and erroneous quotations that are easily disproven of course.

  • BAB

    Does anyone else wish that he’d answer the question posed in the title? If It’s only “millions” then they’re irrelevant. If it’s “tens of millions” then they’re relevant and we need to get busy with helping them get some therapy. Obsessions are not good things.

  • Bob

    I have yet to see how a book can be threatening, yet people get together to ban those all the time. I fail to see how banning any cup bigger than 16 ounces will stop people from consuming to much soda & becoming fat when there are free refills. Based on your logic, I fail to see why you need even a 10 round clip when you are a good enough shot that you only need 1 round. I fail to see how someone can claim the 2nd amendment doesn’t allow us to have a semi-automatic assault rifle because they didn’t back when it was drafted, even though the people had the same grade of rifles as the make shift military force we had. I fail to see how you can compare 1st Amendment & 2nd Amendment rights, when places like the media have gotten people killed for ratings, yet you want that right untouched. I fail to see how people blowing this out of proportion helps anyone & constantly griping that it is “the otherside” that is ruining this “reform”.

    Divide & conquer. Simple, easy idea that gets dismissed so readily. Do we need gun control reform? Yes. Do people need an assault rifle? They feel they do, so yes. Have either side acted like anything other than children? No. You are entitled to your views, but so are they. To be honest, I think we the people should be allowed to vote on what our individual State should be, because you do have a right to live with or without the guns of your choice. We should get to vote, all existing guns, only hunting rifles & max of 10 round guns or gun free. Then I would like the government to step in to assist the people by merely talking to companies that don’t allow transfers to open the doors to transfers for people to move to the State of their choice. Not everyone will be able to make these moves, so not everyone will be happy, but hey, that is life & when you try to make everyone happy, you fail everyone. Stop blaming each other & name calling. Start looking for real solutions & you might get somewhere. Or, keep acting like my kids when they aren’t getting their way & face the consequences. Channel your passion, temper it with wisdom & hone it with intelligence to reach a better tomorrow.

  • Iddqd

    “Greatest country in the world”. Yeah right… Just look at the unemployment rates, inflation and number of homeless. How can the greatest country have the poorest people.

    People used to quote china as a “poor people land” but now it seems like the USA and china have swooped places. Is this due to incompetence?

  • A Critic

    ” I just don’t understand what kind of fear and paranoia these people must be living in.”

    Did you know paper targets are responsible for 66% of unsolved homicides and 99% of unsolved child kidnappings? Ayuh – that’s why we gotta have high capacity magazines – one shot doesn’t kill a paper target. You gotta shoot it so full of holes it won’t stay up on the board any more.

  • Boyscout

    I agree with a lot of the article to some extent however, if it were to hit the fan I do not want to be one of the “have nots”!

  • Pingback: The Illogical Musings of a Gun Nut Who Wants More Guns Even After Admitting They Cause More Violence()

  • Pingback: Weaponry Fascination Normal or Unhealthy? | Weaponry Fanatic()