KHD- I'm pretty sure they do understand this. Rahm Emanuel, mayor of Chicago,is the one twisting democrats arms to support this. Ask yourself why the mayor of the ground zero battlezone is the very person recruited by Obama to be the strong arm.

Not only Rahm Emanuel, but also Mayor Steve Scaffidi and OC, police chief of Oak Creek, also dems support. Now, ask why locally our politicians support efforts contrary to public opinion and tell me what we can do to over ride their representation and participation in National events?

Very well said Brian. If Pelosi was still around, that would have made 4 stooges. We have become a country of emotional reactionary dolts ran by rapacious Constitutional gutters going after it like a filet knife to a trout. I hope they cut themselves in the process.

I'm with yah on this one Brian. Taking a loaded or automatic gun out of the hands of even one person is immoral, unconstitutional and it makes Thomas Jefferson's ghost weep. Like all conservatives I only believe in passing laws that criminals will obey. By senselessly passing gun laws they will not obey you just put people in jail instead of finding laws they will abide by. It's like drunk driving or murder laws. By passing them you do nothing to protect the public. In fact, if we had more drunk drivers it would make the roads safer because everyone would be more attentive.

Keith Worst- Automatic? What are you talking about?

Brian I'm just agreeing with you that Obama's sick dream for america is a country where any person can't get their hands on any gun they please. Can you imagine such a horrid country? It would be so scary to walk around and think that the criminally insane, those with domestic abuse histories or and other form of criminal pasts wouldn't be allowed full and total access to guns and bullets that can rip right through a bullet proof vest. It would be such a sad time.

Kieth Worst- Answer the question? What automatic weapons are you talking about? Do you even know what you're talking about? And why don't we enforce the laws on the books that already ban the criminally insane, domestic abusers and felons. You can have all the laws you want, but unless someone enforces them, the y are totally useless.

You are the perfect example of the uninformed and uneducated when it comes to firearms.

Brian, as Wayne LaPierre has told us, we need to have absolutely no restrictions on guns. Automatic, semi-automatic or anything in between. And enforcing "laws" against guns? Really? And harm the 2nd Amendment? Enforcing any laws against guns is highly unconstitutional as any one who understands the constitution knows. I'm with you. Let everyone have guns without any restrictions and use them as they please. Only liberals are foolish enough to pass laws that criminals will not obey. Strong conservative know you only pass laws criminals will follow otherwise it's foolish and impedes the rest of us.

JB is right. After all our guns would take out the United state's army's tanks and predator drones. By putting our poorly educated gun owners who for whatever reason are salivating at the idea of shooting American soldiers, I think they will be a stable defense against the army when they come for you. After all, these citizen patriots I'm sure are far more skilled in combat than our army. Right? In fact if we put these patriots in Iraq or Afghanistan, maybe we would have won those wars.

GearHead-

In Stooges lingo it would be nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!

Your right! I'll submit to a nose-twist for that embarassment.

Gearhead is right. Doing anything to keep the guns out of any one single person's hands is immoral. Look at the patriot in Alabama with his underground shelter. He just exercised his 2nd Amendment rights. Can you believe Obama wants to take guns away from a guy like that? It's enough to make any republican's blood boil. Don't tread on our rights Barry!

An I' with Craig! By having all our neighbors with their host of criminal and domestic abuse histories going to Cabelas's and loading up on guns before Barry sends troops door to door to confiscate then just because he thinks they're "unfit" to carry a gun and use it how they please. He's going down as tyrannical as Lincoln when he started taking guns and history has shown how little respect Lincoln gets. Most of us modern conservatives see that he was the original socialist for trying to take away the guns of the southerners.

Born Free is right. There is absolutely, positively no difference than living in America than being a subject of an English colony. Granted I'm not sure who Born Free is advocating who he wants to blast with this post, but still, I think his rock solid logic and solid grasp that if you take a gun out of the hands of even one person it would make Gandhi sad. After all, Gandhi never knew what gun victimization was. RighT?

This is called recycling. I sell my Saturday night special to the highest bidder (a gangbanger because he has big money), and I trade up to a tactical weapon.

Seriously? Blame the responsible people for that?
Turn that horse around.

@Brian Dey (continued)....Of course, I know, that with 300 million firearms in private ownership that limiting firearms now will prove to be insignificant. It is better if we would concentrate on home security for firearms, including trigger locks and electronic activation before the firearm could be fired. I would like to see that even if someone gains access to a firearm that they wouldn't be able to fire it.

From a point of principle, magazines with capacities greater than 10 rounds is ridiculous. There is no rational reason for high capacity magazines except for war or law enforcement. Speaking of which, what are people planning to do with all the assault style weapons anyway? Are you and others preparing for war or what? If you are, who are you going to war against?

If we need to concentrate on anything, then it needs to be more extensive background checks for all sales, commercial and private. We need better coordination between agencies making the information to gain easier access. Also, it is time to register all firearms so that sales can be tracked.

@Craig....Leave it to you to sell that piece to the highest bidder even though they are a criminal. It seems you don't have the intellectual horsepower to understand what's at stake here.

It is called sarcasm Lyle. As an intellectually elitist person, surely you understand the concept.
The point was: why would I risk my life selling a $50 hunk of iron?
The point was: Illegal gun sales will always remain illegal and under the radar, unless of course it is the US government selling them.
The point was: Law abiding people should not be punished with more red tape when the red tape will not fix the problem.
Please tell me what law will prevent a criminal from illegally owning or illegally obtaining a gun?
Are bangers going to submit to a background check?
You are on a runaway horse there Lyle.

What is amazing is that you charged my comment at a full gallop, showing your bias even more.
I sure hope the cavalry isn't coming with their muskets and swords next.

@Craig....I guess the only answer is to force all legal gun owners to title and registered all legal firearms and any that aren't registered should be seized and destroyed. I wrote a blog before about it and I suggest you go into my past blogs and reread,

Okay let's pretend for the sake of discussion I can afford the costs to register and title all of my guns. What do I get for my money?
Criminals will still buy guns illegally, so I wind up getting the shaft.
The guns that are kept in the gun safe for twenty years requires registration, but a car that is parked in a garage does not?
It will be a feel good law, not doing anything to fix this complex issue.

Lyle is scared of black guns as well. What a joke these academics preach to us. A pistol grip does not make a weapon ready for war Lyle.

Magazine sizes for us that obey the laws is unlimited. When at the range the more the better. And it takes about 5 seconds to change. If the government has 20 round mags I want 30 round mags. They already have the advantage of select fire without intrusive approvals.

Those that want to do harm will not follow any silly law you can think up. This is about control of the law obeying, and the 2nd admendment is in place to prevent this type of control.

Go hide in your gun free zones, and when the shooting starts call, if you can, call the guys in blue with guns.

Good morning Lyle: Just on clarify on your remarks, once a firearm is not in the possession of the rightful owner, it is now considered illegal. Once a firearm is sold to the black market, it is considered illegal.

In the case of Sandy Hook for example, the son stole the firearms from his mother. Those firearms are no longer legally purchased if they are in his possession, therefore rendering them illegal.

But lets jump to another trend. Just this week, an AR-15, tactical shotgun and ammunition were stole from a police cruiser in Orlando, FL. http://www.wesh.com/Guns-Stolen-From-Police-Cruiser/-/11788876/13120674/-/9s940yz/-/index.html. In Kansas City, MO, two AR-15's and a tactical shotgun were stole from police vehicles. www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/130269.html

In Los Angeles, a cache of tactical and assault weapons were stole from a LAPD Swat storage facility. Or you have cases like the NJ State Troopers. http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/2_nj_state_troopers_reassigned.html. Or this theft in a North Carolina police training facility. http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/8616502/.

If bad guys want guns, they will find ways to get them. In all tese cases, none of the firearms would have been on a national registry according to what has been presented so far.

Now lets look at Chicago the most dangerous city in America with the stiffest gun laws of all & home of some gun grabbing dumb fk politicians who wrote those laws and are currently trying to disarm the rest of us.

Perhaps the U.S. should pull out of Chicago?
Body count: In the last six months 292 killed (murdered) in Chicago.

221 killed in Iraq AND Chicago has one of the strictest gun laws in the entire US.

President: Barack Hussein Obama
Senator: Dick Durbin
House Representative: Jesse Jackson Jr.
Governor: Pat Quinn
House leader: Mike Madigan
Atty. Gen.: Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike)
Mayor: Rahm Emanuel
The leadership in Illinois – all Democrats.

Thank you for the combat zone in Chicago .
Of course, they’re all blaming each other.
Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!

Chicago school system rated one of the worst in the country. Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!

State pension fund $78 Billion in debt, worst in country. Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!

Cook County ( Chicago ) sales tax 10.25% highest in country. Can’t blame Republicans; there aren’t any!

This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois. And he is going to ‘fix’ Washington politics for us???

@Brian Dey....Good morning to you sir. I am not disputing your definition of legal or illegal firearms. It is clear that the incident at Sandy Hook was done with illegally possessed firearms. My real question, that I have posed is why do people living in relative safety, need to stockpile so many weapons. I am desperately trying to understand the psychological and sociological motivation behind such behavior.

I understand hunting needs, recreational sport shooting, even "plinking", antique firearm collecting and personal home protection; but, it still evades me why so many are creating personal armories. I know of one individual who claims to have a quarter of a million rounds of .223 stockpiled. Why?

There has to be something going on to motivate people to invest time, energy and wealth into such. I am not trying to slam anyone, I just want to understand.

Why do some people obtain .223 ammunition and fire arms? The same reason why some folks have fire extinguishers in their home when 911 can easily get the fire department. Why do some folks learn CPR when 911 can get an ambulance? Why do some folks buy flood insurance ? Its not too hard to understand, if you want to.

@Lyle
I disagree with Jack that these ammunition hoarders are expecting WWIII or a tyrannical Obama government. While there are some fringes (see Doomsday Preppers) I believe the majority of gun/ammunition hoarders fall into the same category of any other hoarder of material possessions. We live in a wealthy society, free from any really oppression that we are able to turn to material collection.

You might argue then why do they put up such a fight, but if you watch TLC hoarding shows those people will fight the city in order to keep their trash, let alone weapons. We have moved so far from a society that is depending on its needs that we have become a society depending on its wants. This starts with overspending in government and filters down to huge credit card debts among the poor. It is the same principal with guns. They just use the 2nd amendment to justify their hoarding.

Lyle- I think it would be safe to say that the buying binge we have seen since Sandy Hook is because of the threat, real or imaginative, of the almost immediate announcement of an assault weapons ban. With almost everything associated with the AR-15, sales have gone off the charts. Same with ammo stockpiling, purchase of large capacity clips, etc...

There was also a stockpiling in 2008 when Obama was elected because of statements he had made prior to his election regarding gun control or firearm bands. Then there are those who, and I know personally one of these people, who believed in the Mayan calendar.

Personally, I have shot an AR-15 and found it to be an excellent firearm for personal protection and enjoy target shooting with it. I don't currently own one, but am contemplatng purchasing one because of the proposed ban. It is really not much different from a Remington 750 .223, which is a great hunting rifle. The difference is not in the power or function as both shoot the same caliber rounds in exactly the same fashion, but because of the weight, its performancein close range, and being able to accomodate a pistol grip which gives you better accuracy, or a retractable stock, which comes in handy because of the varying weather conditions, or the ease of changing out scopes.

@Jack....Your example doesn't quite make the grade of explanation for the phenomena. We only have as many fire extinguishers as to address the risk. Knowing CPR doesn't really relate. The question remains, why so much redundanc concerning AR-15s and .223 ammunition.

The question is answered, it is simply a matter of degree. You don't like the answer, and I understand that, you simply do not like menacing looking fire arms. Its all a matter of what makes you feel less anxious. Why do some people purchase umbrella insurance policies of millions of dollars when others do not? You might feel that a $10 million umbrella is adequate, where what makes me feel better is much higher. I happen to own 4 AR 15s, I have owned them for many years, since the early 1990s and for many reasons. I like hunt wild boar and they are ideal for this, plus they are excellent home defense weapons.

@J.B. Schmidt....Prepping and hoarding might explain a fraction of it, but I don't think that is the who story. Hoarding is a diagnosable psychiatric disorder and is symptomatic of deeper disorders requiring extensive intervention.

So, I am to understand that you think that hoarding guns and ammunition is a sign of decadence and social decline? Assuming for the moment that you are correct, does that mean those doing it are engaging in evil? Another question, is it symtomatic of decline or is it contributor to decline?

@Brian Dey....This hoarding of AR-15s and ammunition has been going on longer than Obama has been in office. I don't think Obama's potential actions have created the mindset that has resulted in such stockpiles.

I don't use my semi automatic rifle to assault people, so please call it a self defense rifle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKlmZQVcXHU

@Lyle
What is evil? Society has chosen to accept many things that have/could be considered bad.

In the last 50 years the one cultural change our country has seen that transcends all social issues is the loss of restraint. The belief that 'want' and 'need' can be perceived as equal. We are a wealthy country and with wealth comes the ability to purchase more then you need. That is not always bad. However, for decades it has slowly morphed into the beast we are just coming to terms with. What was one of the factors behind the housing crash? The idea that personal 'want' for property size should not impact personal debt. What has created the possible student loan bubble? The idea that personal 'want' for a profession should outweigh 1) the job prospects and 2) the impact of the debt. What is driving the national debt? The idea that the 'wants' of some citizens are permissible over the countries ability to provide.

So as personal restraint has been eliminated, with a large group of people living off 'wants' and the governments leaders pointing the path to decadence; then yes it is leading to social decline.

As for the specific hoarding of guns and ammunition. From a societal stand point it is no more dangerous then collecting shoes. My guess is that more people have been killed for their sneakers then in mass shootings in the US. Those hoarding weapons are not the ones committing the crimes.

Lyle:

How long has the stockpiling/hoarding been going on? Could it have been inspired by the Brady Bill or any of the number of attempts to ban certain weapons that have been proposed since then?

I tend to agree with Brian that people tend to hoard the things they fear will not be available at some point in the near future.

Lyle: Check this out- http://www.atf.gov/publications/firearms/050412-firearms-commerce-in-the-us-annual-statistical-update-2012.pdf.

the last time gun sales exceeded 5,000,000 per year was 1993 and 1994, just before the 1994 ban. Also of note, a sharp upswing began in 2008 and at leat in this chart from the ATF, continues to 2010. This seems to support that sales dramatically increase when gunowners feel threatened that the ywill lose their rights.

@J.B. Schmidt....Believe it or not I agree with you on inconspicuous consumption as being a source of many of the problems of our society. The period following post WW II began the era of mass media marketing, convincing people of the need for more and more stuff. What really kicked it off was the advent of easy general credit emerging in the mid 1960s. We saw the establishment of a symbiotic relationships between producers, consumers and financiers. It was the system that created unprecedented growth and led to the global economic system that we now live under. Who do we single out to hold responsible?

I disagree about the killing for shoes scenario, although it has happened, but not to the extent that you indicate.

I think, that stockpiling firearms and ammunition goes beyond just consumptive behavior; people are stockpiling based on a specific world view perception and fear. They are preparing for the worst case scenario, which may become self fulfilling, if left unabated. The control, flow and spin of information can be the trigger that would escalate from just planning to actuality. The more stockpiles, the higher the probability of becoming a reality of horror.

@Craig....What an immaterial question, you already know the answer. So why ask it?

Exactly Lyle !
You get the point, I am proud of you.
What good are new laws going to do when the old laws are not effective for the violators?

@J.B. Schmidt...We are not China and White European American Culture is only four centuries old, whereas China has existed for over five millennia. There is no way the two can be compared. Therefore, your first point is moot.

Concerning your second point; the UK has a problem in their impoverished areas just like we do. However, they don't have a firearm problem but a problem with edged weapons. Edged weapons are an up close and personal weapon, whereas firearms are a stand off weapon with a higher rate of overall lethality. Inherently, making firearms more dangerous and of greater risk to the public with the possibility of the innocent being caught by a stray bullet. What I find curious is that, by your own admission, that the suburban and rural areas have the lowest rates of violent crime, yet have the highest rate of private firearm ownership, out of all proportion to actual risk. I know there will be some who claim that there is an indirect correlation between high firearm ownership and lower violent crimes. However, that would be pretty easy to prove to be a false relationship. Most crimes are crimes of opportunity and there are fewer potential perpetrators in the suburban and urban areas. It would appear that the reaction by suburbanites reaction is out of proportion to the risk.

@Lyle
Odd, I made the same argument about us not being like the rest of the world for the health care debate and it fell on deaf ears and heavy criticism.

My point with China has nothing to do with it lengthy existence. If they have tighter gun laws and still have an illegal firearms black market, how will anything you have proposed prevent the current US black market from getting worse?

Based on the liberal argument, shouldn't the UK place heavier regulations on edged weapons? Only allow kitchens knives and make sure the owner has them registered with the state? The vast majority of shootings within the US are one or two at time, not unlike the problem with edge weapons in the UK. So again, you need to explain how yours or other liberal proposals will fix that.

As for risk, how do we know that lowered risk is not driven by protected property? The suburbanite is proactive in the defense of his community.

Saying the 2nd Amendment doesn’t apply to modern firearms is like saying the 1st Amendment does not apply to cellphones, radio, T.V., and the internet.

No logic with these folks like Lyle Rubble, just empty emotion.

Maybe China has it right, they find you guilty of a heinous crime and walk you out the back door of the courthouse...and put a cap in your head. They send the bill for the bullet to your family. No sterilization needed. Problem solved.

@Steve
The video was good. Its to bad liberals don't pay attention to logical black men.

just in case link doesn't work for all

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKlmZQVcXHU

@Rees
The problem is not the gun. It is the culture of the inner city. If you remove the inner city gun violence stats we are comparable with the rest of the world. Since nearly all of that violence is done with weapons purchased by bypassing the system, would they not do the same with bullets?

The solution lies in changing the culture of the inner city. Give them hope rather then handouts. Provide incentives for people to change theirs lives. We need the black leaders who are currently more concerned with their own political viability to demand more responsibility from the people in the inner city. We need black leaders to condemn the music that perpetuates the violence and poor treatment of women. If you don't change the culture, limiting the bullets will change nothing.

As for the random killings (ie Oak Creek or Sandy Hook), how can you stop the accumulation of ammo? Or better yet, what number of owned bullets equates to an acceptable level of death? Random killings are not stoppable and are the plague of every country through out history, bullets or no bullets.

"Do you believe this is a problem that needs an answer? Has gun violence reached the point where we need to solve it? Can we get beyond the conservative/liberal talking points and chat like we are Americans seeking answers? "

I could easily provide stats from the FBI and other places that correlate the majority of the problems to one group - but that isn't PC or even allowed to be discussed - especially here. The only two groups allowed to be discussed are government and citizens.

There is a special discrimination against white males who get to be blamed as the cause for everything. Note that in crime stats Hispanics are lumped together with Caucasians.

Hmph. Only white males hate and are racist homophobes who oppress women.

Take away white males, and civilized society disappears.

the new problem in California: Attack on family in Compton latest incident in wave of anti-black violence

A Latino gang is intimidating blacks into leaving the city that was once an African American enclave. It's part of a violent trend seen in other parts of the L.A. area.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0126-compton-20130126,0,977110.story?page=1

Rees- Good afternoon!

I will submit to you two things that can help and I don't believe are controversial.

1. Better prosecution of the nearly 9,000 federal firearm laws. In the Judicial Committee Hearings of the U.S. Senate held today, I was apalled by the lack of prosecuting even the simplest of laws; i.e. possession of a firearm while engad in a crime. I carries a five year mandatory sentence and only 480 prosecutions took place in the last year nationwide. Along with that, local prosecutors must do their part by charging and prosecuting state, local and federal laws.

2. Eliminating loopholes and make it mandatory in all sales of firearms the federal background checks and mandatory reporting of mental health officials. This may require HIPAA law changes. Also, mandatory reporting of all felony convictions and any other requirement under the NICS.

Another thing to consider would be that all data interfaces to one central reporting agency and that all reports be filed withing 24 hours of notice.

We all know that the NICS has been in effect since 1993 and all law abiding citizens have been operting under this requirement. Hobbyists, gun collectors and private sellers should not be exempt. This doesn't violate the 2nd Amendment in way, shape or form.

As far as gun bans and registries, those do violate the intent of the 2nd amendment as outlined in Washington D.C. v. Heller.

Sandy Hook was a conspiracy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrngdgUixYg&list=LL45dgt6U3R57bFw5UDUzSUQ

Wrong Eve, but if I missed it please correct me. I won't go so far as conspiracy but I do believe FBI cover-up as here in WI with the Sikh Temple. Bad reporting also a problem still there is lots of missing information. Did they get any info on Adam's computer? What about Moms and the other evidence removed from the home? Any prints? Where are the statements of the wounded adults who worked at the school? Did anyone actually see Adam Lanza pull the trigger? Who was the guy running in the woods? Why did he run? Was he the same guy seen laying on the ground and later sitting in the front seat of a squad? Did they ever locate the Driver of the van that had just left the schools parking lot? What about the two shadows a teacher reported seeing? IF you know the answers to the above by all means correct me. I am looking.

More...

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/01/obama-administration-repositioning-homeland-security-ammunition-containers/?wpmp_switcher=desktop

Excellent Point GearHead. Periodically I'm seeing reports of government agencies buying huge amounts of ammunition, Fema, RFP's for ready to eat meals, coffins, major city response drills including helicopters flying above. And, always a lack of critical information on rationale.

Sorry $andSense. Lyle is not an intellectual. Lyle is a product of his socialization and education. At times he accepts and argues from an inaccurate learned knowledge base. Enlightenment results from challenge. I'm sure he means well, he argues politically correct it's just his accepted facts are at times false when put to the test and he has not tested and proven his accepted fact base. Lyles ideology is dangerous in that it blocks advancement of the whole. Kinda like the accepted belief that the world was flat. Unchallenged, America wouldn't have been discovered possibly until the advent of the airplane.

Vocal, the airplane wouldn't have been discovered, because the smart smug people "knew" that if man was meant to fly, he would have been given wings. This, coming from a culture headed by kings, where beheadings were commonplace. His ideology is more dangerous than you let on, because he thinks he's on the leading edge of social advancement. It constantly amazes how unfounded his conclusions usually are.

Truly a shame that his grandmother was just some wealthy bank executive, that could not measure up, in his mind (or his book) to his father ... the low-life philanderer. Enough said.