Do you have something on your mind and want to write your own online editorial?
Click here to get started!


Date posted - December 21, 2012

After the terrible shooting in CT the politicians cry “Gun Control.” I would never own an assault weapon nor can I see the need to make such weapons BUT it is a basic right of every citizen to be able to arm themselves. To allow the police and military to have these weapons and not allow citizens to is called a police state. The communist, socialist, and dictator countries probably all have this law. That is how they keep everyone under their control. Is it easier/cheaper to make a law rather then to provide mental health care for those that get their hands on these weapons? Who can guess what a person is thinking or how they are going to act? We keep allowing people with OWI’s to buy cars yet they are a lethal weapon in someone’s hands. I don’t have the answers but I don’t want anymore governmental control over another right.



From: Concerned

Print Friendly

76 Responses to “Concerned”

  1. lynn says:

    Here Here!!

  2. Tom M says:

    Instead of trying to pass yet another FeelGood law that protects NO ONE, let’s demand action and funding for better access to meaningful community based mental health services. Let’s demand and FUND an adequate number of trained Law Enforcement Officers in our schools to help guard our children. And please, let’s not allow anyone to further limit the rights of law abiding, productive citizens.


  3. EDH says:

    To a normal person, an AR-15 is really no different than a high end sports car. Are they necessary? No. Do you NEED to have one? No. Are they a lot of fun for recreational use and sport? Absolutely. Are they both very attractive to the enthusiast? Both are. Can both be deadly and dangerous when used by a lunatic?? Again true for both.

    I just don’t see where putting a ban on the quote “Assault rifles” will do a dang thing. Most hand guns are just as affective.

  4. Lee Ann says:

    I suppose a revolver with a speed loader or an automatic pistol with several clips would be fast enough, an assault rifle with a high capacity magazine kills fast, and can kill lots of people fast. If the shooter of Gabby Giffords had a regular capacity magazine, he would have been able to injure or kill 10 people, before people could jump him and take control. In CT, it was just a matter of minutes before the shooter killed 26 people. Imagine what he could have done in a half an hour?

    I am a gun owner most of my life. And i do not believe the government wants to limit rifles, shotguns or pistols. I can’t see the need for a semi automatic rifle with a high capacity clip and armor piercing bullets. We do need to use a whole bunch of money in this country to ensure the mentally ill get care, and the worst get sane enough and they won’t have access to weapons. And 75% of NRA members would like to see universal background checks for all weapons. So to have universal background checks, heavy REGULATION of assault type weapons, and a lot of federal and state money to ensure the mentally ill receive the care they need to keep everybody safer.

  5. virgil says:

    can anyoe tell me what is the difference between a assault rifle and a automatic rifle say a 223? i’m thinking as soon as they get a law to ban assault rifle then soon thereafter will be a ban on my auto 223 that we use to varmit hunt. oh lets see the only difference that I see is the style and what it is called. It is the same manufacture and caliber just different name Look out what is next

  6. Chicken Strips says:

    I don’t own a gun. I don’t need one. I’m not afraid where I live.

    If the government keeps growing and hastily passing laws based on emotion and fear-mongering, I can see 1930s Europe happening all over again. I sure wouldn’t mind having peace of mind in my house should such events occur. I suppose this is why the resurgence in sales is taking place.

  7. Doug says:

    If you want to comfort yourself thinking “heavy REGULATION” and another Federal Assault Weapons Ban is going to end all evil, you best look up the timeline of the 10 year ban signed into law by President Clinton on September 13, 1994, and the Columbine incident on April 20, 1999.

    Why not question why we are indoctrinated with the idea that we need to mainsteam every short-circuited individual into society, maintaining their right to dignity and normality, which in this case has ostensibly precluded the right to life, these children and their teacher no longer have.

    Why not question why video game makers produce pile of games that reward gamers in their scores for killing people…even defenseless people.

    This short-circuited individual wearing a bulletproof vest, chose a gun-free zone to murder innocent women and children. And when the police arrived, he took his own life. Too big of a coward to even attempt conflict with someone of equal capability. Reports state he fired 50 – 100 rounds, which would have required multiple magazine changes with an AR. He could have changed clips just as easily with the handguns he carried. There was no one to stop him. But the spotlight is on the AR as the problem.

    News reports are stating the response time was 20 minutes, with one of the teachers saying 25 minutes in an interview. If true, that’s way too long.

    We have fire alarms and fire drills in school, we have tornado alarms and tornado drills in school, some schools have lockdown drills for school shootings, but no schools have gunfire alarms. We need to consider installing gunshot detectors in schools, that automatically trigger an alarm/lockdown event, and notify police of where the gunfire was taking place in the school so they could respond faster and be more prepared upon arrival.

    Maybe if Adam Lanza encountered an alarm when he fired the first shot, he would have reconsidered.

  8. Possum Belly says:

    I don’t believe Timothy McVeigh had a weapon?

    • Lee Ann says:

      We don’t live in a perfect world. There will always be some kinds of crimes committed. He used some kind of fertilizer in a UHaul truck.

      Crime will always be with us. but I am all for regulating semi automatic rifles, getting rid of high capacity magazines, and putting more money into mental health programs to find these people before they do their crazy things. Sure, I realize that guns don’t kill people, that people kill people. but I am all for making it a little bit tougher for these crazies to get their weapons. I have no objections to rifles, shotguns or even revolvers or automatic pistols. But I am in favor of making it a little bit harder for everyone to get something highly regulated or getting any of those magazines at all.

      Every year, baby furniture factories recall the older ones, because the bars are too far apart, or a baby’s finger gets caught, or a baby swing falls down once out of ten million times. We can’t avoid every danger. Heck, we drive every day. That’s probably the worst of it. but let’s make it a bit harder for the crazies to get these weapons. With 75% of NRA members wanting a universal background check for every weapon, I agree with them. Let’s make background checks good and reliable. Having mental health clinics to inform the feds about people that should not be buying weapons. Maybe we can prevent a few slaughters anyway.

      • Chicken Strips says:

        It’s not fair to discriminate against people because they have some diagnosis, i.e. Depression, Seasonal Affective Disorder, etc. 80% of shootings are done by men; should we block men from getting guns?! No.

    • Chicken Strips says:

      sure he did.

  9. willy Pedro says:

    and what do you classify a weapon? rock filled sock. baseball bat.hammer. FERTILIZER. guns dont kill ! people do. I do agree with le anne about checking people out more BUT I still agree with the 2nd amendent

  10. jay miller says:

    they do run backgroung checks on every gun sold purchas permits abd concealed permits also have fbi backgroung checks run

    • Lee Ann says:

      Another problem we haven’t considered here is the fact that a certain % of guns are stolen in burglaries, etc. before used in any kind of crime, or sold to criminals. People think their weapons are safe in a gun safe, which can be carried out of your house by burglars. People’s revolvers are stolen out of glove boxes all the time.

      I know one guy whose handgun had been stolen in a burglary, and the cops went to give it back to him, and he found out it had been involved in a driveby shooting in which a young kid was killed. He told the cops to take it and melt it, he didn’t want any gun that had killed a person.

      There may be solid, honest, stable gun owners that own a 223 bushmaster, and their house is burglarized, and that’s how their weapons get into the criminal element. Sold for cheap to anyone wanting one. That is why they used the guns they had in Columbine. They outgunned the cops at first. They had banned them but people still had them, just unable to buy any more. If we are going to ban them, we’d have to melt them down. quit selling their bullets, regulate who has one, make it difficult to buy ammo, Even tho people kill people, not guns killing people. we need to make it difficult for people to kill people with one of these guns.

  11. Doug says:

    You should take some time to educate yourself on the affects of a weapons ban.

    The previous law banned possession of illegally imported or manufactured firearms, but did not ban possession or sale of pre-existing ‘assault weapons’ or previously factory standard magazines that were legally redefined as large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

    Another ban isn’t going to take anything out of the hands of the public. The “crazies” will illegally obtain firearms from legal owners like Adam Lanza did. His Mom legally owned those guns. He killed her and stole them.

  12. ThankfulForObama says:

    Here is my take:

    Gun control is absolutely necessary in this country. I ask that you hear me out before jumping to conclusions.

    First, let’s talk about guns themselves. A gun’s primary objective is to kill or destroy. There is no way around it. I understand that guns protect, but ultimately, guns are used to cause serious damage. Whether you use guns to hunt or to add security to your home, you are possessing a very, very serious weapon. A classic argument is “well cars kill people, should we take away cars?” No, cars aren’t built to kill. Guns are.

    With that being said, the United States is the most privately-protected country in this world. This means our citizens own more private weapons than any other nation. Statistics show us that it’s more common for the average gun owner to own more than one weapon.

    Now, here is my opinion: Is it really necessary to own multiple weapons, let alone an assault weapon? I understand there will always be an argument for hunters. I’ll get to that later. But for now, what is the point of owning so many? I’ll tell you: there is no point.

    I understand we have the Second Amendment, but the Second Amendment was written for people to have the right to protect themselves from GOVERNMENT, not their neighbors. I quote, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bears arms, shall not be infringed.” We have a regulated militia – it’s called the National Guard. Let us not forget this same constitution was written by people who believed in slavery and limiting the right to vote. So I ask, please, don’t use the Second Amendment as an arguing point – it’s no longer relevent in our society.

    For the record, I do think mental health is just as important, and I do believe it needs to be taken more seriously, however I am choosing to focus more on the gun issue. I think they should both be looked at 50/50 in our government’s eyes.

    I now ask you to consider something – where have most of the recent shootings taken place? For the most part, they have been in smaller communities rather than large cities (although I do recognize violence happens there too). Why? Because smaller communities do not protect against violence like bigger cities do. Schools in the Bronx borough of New York City have security guards, metal detectors, and cameras. You never hear of a massive shooting in a large school in a big city for this reason. However, arming teachers with guns or putting police officers in schools is NOT the answer for smaller communities, like the NRA unfortunately suggests.

    The fact is this – violence will happen anywhere. It could happen at a school, a grocery store, a library, a gas station… you get my point. Should we put a police officer in every establishment? No. We should not.

    Here is my suggestion: ban all assault weapons. In order to receive your permit, you should have to take a psych evaluation in addition to more training. I think it’s fair to allow ONE handgun per household, and limit the amount of ammunition you can buy. I think gun shows need to be regulated better as well. For hunters, I understand it’s a sport you enjoy. And you should be able to keep hunting! However, I would like to see a way to buy a hunting rifle more regulated. But, again, there is no reason for the average citizen to own an assault weapon – I think it’s more of an ego thing.

    Oh, and for those who give the argument that “if you ban guns, criminals will still find a way to get them.” Isn’t this with every law? If you want an illegal drug, you can still get it. If you want to break the law, you still can. Is that an excuse to not at least try?

    Those children’s lives are more precious than your right to bear arms.

    • Doug says:

      Teachers in Texas are allowed to carry. How many shootings have occurred in Texas? How many accidental shootings by teachers, have happened in Texas?

      Lets assume we follow through with your idea to ban all assault weapons. You are going to have to define assault for me, because I have a 22 caliber semi-automatic rifle. It’s fun for target shooting. The kids love to plink targets with it at a range. Is that an assault rifle?

      And how are you going to attain “1 handgun per household”? Door to door search & seizure? In 2004, the US had an average of 1 firearm per adult, and I think most are not giving up any guns willingly. Can you see any complications with this?

      Your namesake is directly responsible for the most private sales of guns in history. Accelerated sales started 4 years ago, but exploded after the election. Gun & ammo shelves are empty at stores across America. I’m sure the gun & ammunition manufacturers are just as thankful as you.

      • ThankfulForObama says:

        This is why I am
        not in political office. I don’t have all the answers, but I was just offering my own personal suggestions.

        First (this goes to everyone), don’t blame our President for all this. He has done so much for this country. You may disagree, but if you take a step back from your own party, you’ll see he’s done a lot of good for people.

        So from my understanding, you believe on the whole “more guns, less crime” idea? I’m basing this off your suggestion from Texas teachers. Just so you know, Texas actually bans guns in school unless you have written authorization. From what I know, it’s only a small school in Texas that has this – it’s not every school in the state.

        I can see why you make this argument, but doesn’t it sadden you? Don’t you think it’s sad we have come to a point as a country where some of us feel better if EVERYONE carried a gun literally EVERYWHERE? That we don’t trust anyone so adding more tools to kill into our society is the answer? I just can’t see “more guns” as the answer.

        As far as the “one handgun” idea, I’m not sure how it would be implemented. I guess I was more driving the point that I think we should be allowed to defend ourselves but only in a way that isn’t in excess like those who carry hundreds of bullets in their house and multiple weapons.

        Also, I’m just curious, why are you teaching your kids how to operate a gun? I’m not “coming down on you” for your parenting, but after the shooting and reading how Adam Lanza’s mother brought him to shooting ranges, did you consider maybe not allowing your children shoot? I understand you may see it as fun, but is it the safest thing?

        • Doug says:

          “Other Texas schools allow teachers to carry weapons, but he would not reveal their locations, saying they are afraid of negative publicity.”

          My kids have been taught to be aware, and not to stick their head in the sand and hope someone is going to always be there to protect them. I would rather my kids learn how to safely handle a gun and protect themselves under supervision, than watch and learn on YouTube.

          Yes it is sad things have gotten to this point. But when there is no LEADERSHIP in this country, what would you expect?

          Please enthrall everyone with all of the things your namesake has done for this country. There is another poster on here, that hasn’t followed through on that request.

        • Tim says:

          First: Training and taking responsibility for our children, starts at home. Instead far too many parents let their children in the hands of others to teach them responsibility for their actions, (not all) It is time we as parents take the role as parents. sure some need daycare, that is not what I am talking about. It is those who give up their responsibility be a parent. So many examples…violent video games being just a start. So, when I teach my children how to safely operate a car, so they don’t kill someone or themselves, I take that responsibility, no different than teaching them that a hot burner on the stove will hurt. Or that being a bully is wrong. So to teaching my child how to safely use a weapon, is my responsibility.
          Now why don’t you check out what the state of Utah has had for school shooting and why. they allow students and faculty, that have permits, to actually carry Concealed. NOT ONE school incident has taken place in the state of Utah history!!
          Why do we have jails and a justice system? It is to deter crime. If we knew that running a stop sign whould get us nothing, nobody would stop. Yet millions do it each year. Make it a stiffer penalty and things change. We need something to deter these crazy irresponsibile idiots from doing what we all know is wrong.

        • Tim says:

          Educate your children as much as you can. You send your kids to drivers training, why? It is the responsibility of every parent to educate their children on so many things. Adam Lanza’s mother tried to educate him. What she did wrong (among other things) was not take resposible action for securing her weapons. I don’t think Adam Lanza would have made it thru a background check to get his own permit. If you have obtained your CCW permit you would know they DO check your background. Adam Lanza’s mother forgot to take control of her weapons. She knew he had problems. I understand she was about to have him evaluated or something like that. Every gun owner knows he/she needs to secure his/her weapon, even if it is concealed on their person. If you allow a 90 year old to have a gun in his/her nightstand but yet he/she can’t hear without his/her hearing aids, or see without his/her glasses, it is now different than allowing your six year old access to your guns. Every gun owner needs to be accountable for his/her guns!!
          As far as your disagreement with the 2nd amendment, stating that ” it’s no longer relevent in our society.” Where will you stop? What part of the constitution is next that you and your “president” want to throw out, just because you and he think ” it’s no longer relevent in our society.”???
          You say ” He has done so much for this country. You may disagree, but if you take a step back from your own party, you’ll see he’s done a lot of good for people.” WOW…do that, tell me what he has done. ( I can tell you many htings he has done, that are not good for USA) Now you insinuate that you and he want to to throw out parts of our consitution you and he don’t think are relevant??? I suggest as I have before you go buy yourself a copy of the constitution and read it several times. This is YOUR country also. These are the principles we were founded on. I don’t care which party is in office, how dare you as a TRUE AMERICAN tell people to throw out a part of what you were founded on just because you don’t think it was/is relevant. The 2nd amendment still is and should be in effect. How do you know that this president or the next, if he is crossed, will not just come and get you. (this has happened already) ie..write something negative for several days against the administration, see if your account gets blocked. You may be surprised.
          As far as your saying guns are only allowed in a small school in Texas, it is inaccurate: “AUSTIN, Texas—Texas could be the second state, following Utah, to allow students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on university campuses. The bill, currently in the legislature, is likely to pass as more than half the members of the Texas House have signed on as co-authors.”

  13. Possum Belly says:

    I keep reading about prayer rugs and korans being found in the desert border crossing areas. And I read of the concerns and fears that politicians have about who is entering our country illegally. I seriously believe that a day or an extended period is coming too soon when there will be a day when terrorists mount attacks simultaneously in thousands of American cities and towns. Attacks with not only guns but explosives and chemical and biological weapons. Then the weapons we are trying to remove from citizens will be all that we have and there will be a required Marshall Law. I am not a follower of Glen Beck. I get my news off of the main stream press. I think that day is any day now, not far off.

    • Lee Ann says:

      Prayer rugs and Korans found in the desert? Hm, must not be a really radical Muslim, if they are leaving those” important to them” articles. One would think they would put them somewhere safe, not just leave them in the desert. The Muslims are usually much more religious and willing to die for their religion. I wouldn’t think they would leave these in the desert. Just a thought.

      • Doug says:

        Ever considered you are in perpetual denial thinking that if you don’t believe something is true, you can post that belief here over and over, and it will become truth?

        I’m not going to pretend I know how radical someone is to cross the desert and leave possessions behind. Or what items terrorists are going to dump, before trying to blend into our population.

        Here’s a story you can choose to not believe… I’m pretty sure, it’s not the only story out there, if you take the time to look.

  14. Lee Ann says:

    I shot my first shotgun when I was 8 years old. It was my brother’s 410. I shot my first 30.06 when I was 12. I think it is necessary that everybody, especially in small towns and in the country know how to protect themselves. When i took my hunter’s safety class, and shot their .22s, the DNR person giving us the class, took me aside and asked me where I learned to shoot. When I told him “my dad and my brother”, he was amazed to see a girl shoot that well. I used to plink empty shot gun shells with a 22 all the time. I didn’t know you shouldn’t shoot water, so we used to throw the empty shells in the stream and shoot them when they go by. LOL.

    I really do not believe that this administration has any desire to take rifles, shot guns or revolvers away from the citizens. Assault rifles? I hope so. My semi automatic 22 holds what? 8 shells?

    On the good side, if the Republicans believe we should have either a cop or an armed guard in every school, it will really help get the government payroll up. instead of getting cuts to education and fire and police, it will get an increase.

    • Doug says:

      Well there we have it, it’s the Republican’s fault. I never saw that one coming. I completely missed that in this weeks news. Help me out.

      • Chicken Strips says:

        Uhhh…she didn’t blame the Republicans for anything. She said, “If the Republicans believe…”. You really did miss something. Don’t be so blind.

        • Doug says:

          Yes she did. She blamed them for future “cuts to education and fire and police” and “get the government payroll up”, when it was never Republicans that suggested “we should have either a cop or an armed guard in every school”.

          • Chicken Strips says:

            She was referring to the leader of the NRA, who is presumably Republican. Is it really that hard for you to read between the lines?

            What a silly idea…arming public-school teachers. Just what Johnny & Janie need to see, a pistol on the teacher’s hip.

          • Lee Ann says:

            Since Lapierre discussed the arming of teachers or bringing in paid armed guards, all of the Republicans have agreed with him. All except a few that are leaving next week anyway.

            Everybody seems to be forgetting about the fact that 75% of the NRA members want universal background checks. I think that would be a good first step.

        • Lee Ann says:

          Its just that the Republicans believe in a smaller government and more private business instead of growing the government. If we have to hire a whole bunch of armed police type officers, make sure they know how to shoot well, we will be growing government. big government, you know.

  15. Jcs says:

    Well I hope someone has a Merry Christmas. Unto us a Savior is born. His name is Jesus.

  16. ALisha says:

    Here is what I think Bout this whole Teachers being able to carry in the classroom thing…….I think there should at least be amed gaurds at the schools at all times and not allow the teachers to have weapons in the classrooms cuse God forbib wht would happen if the tearcher had turned their back for a second nd a child had gotten ahold of the weaponand it had accidently midfired or somethign to that effect? I thared guards is think having armed guards pressent at entrances and extits and hallways is that way to keep the children and staff safe for the present time. I also think schools eed to practice lockdown drills more often so that they know what is going to happen f something like that is to ever happen and I pry that none of the schools around here have to go into lockdowns agian.

    • Lee Ann says:

      There are many experts in colleges that have been interviewed and they say that having armed guards wouldn’t help. There were two armed guards in Columbine. they shot at the killers, and the killers shot back, and the armed guards knew that they were out armed, that they had no chance against the equipment the killers had. It would be difficult for someone with a S&W revolver on his hip to have a shootout with somebody that clearly doesn’t care if he lives or dies and has armor piercing ammo in an semi automatic assault rifle. And the bad guy has Kevlar on and has a 6 year old hostage. Now I am no expert on things like this, and I have no idea how they all decided who the experts were, lol. but they clearly say that having much better equipment, covered themselves in kevlar vests, etc. and just plain don’t care if they live or die, making them very reckless and dangerous, is pure folly to try to stop them. Maybe we need to start thinking about how we can prevent it in the first place.

  17. Hank Reardon says:

    Molon Labe.

    I carry everywhere and I do feel safe(with the exception of schools, where I will not carry as I do not want to go directly to jail). You have probably ran into me in a store or resturant and had no clue I was armed as you went about your daily task. There are more of us than you know, and when seconds count but the police are minutes away hopefully there is an armed citizen with a CCW nearby.

    School shootings have been on the decline for 20 years, but the way the media push the agenda and continually push the coverage while tugging on the heart strings to further their goal it’s no wonder people have the impression it is such an epidemic. I bet if the local media had wall to wall coverage of the three children who died in the Sioux Falls home fire last week, complete with coverage of unopened christmas presents, updates each hour about how they wanted to be teachers or fireman but now will never have the chance, how they loved to hold stuffed teddy bears while playing with kittens and then have live coverage of the funerals, the same ones clamoring for more gun control laws to add to the over 20,000 already on the books would be screaming for match control.

    It’s the same with each tragedy that they do not want go to waste. Damn the statistics and pull on those heartstrings. In the last ten years there have been an average of 29 children yearly killed in School Bus pedestrian accidents, and last year 5 were killed as passengers. That is more in 10 years than have been killed in mass school shootings.

    “Unequaled Safety Record” is the headline

    Any child that loses his or her life is tragic, but it seems the media and polititions make some more tragic than others to further certain goals.

    • Lee Ann says:

      I used to be married to a cop. They all are obligated to wear a weapon in public, in case they see a crime committed, they automatically become “on duty” then. Going to a party, we all knew that every man and a few of the women were carrying. Its just part of life.

      I have no objections to anyone carrying a weapon, if they are sane and not a criminal.

      I agree that if someone made a big deal out of a tragedy with just a couple of children, it would become just as big of a new story. We see and hear too much. Its on Tv, its on the internet, its on the radio, the newspapers, people talk about it. The only place I can escape it all is on HGTV, because I’m still trying to figure out what color to paint my bathroom (after painting it four times. lol).

      • Chicken Strips says:

        You’ve helped me create a New Year’s resolution: LESS NEWS!!!!!!!!
        I’m so tired of it and I -will- make a change!
        HGTV, whatever it takes!

    • Tim says:

      Fantastic Article!!!

  18. GunsAreNecessary says:

    Only reason why these people go to schools and kill tons of people is because they darn well know no one will have a gun to fight back! Teachers should have their concealed weapons permit!! N

    • Chicken Strips says:

      Wrong. So a teacher carries a gun; this dude had a gun capable of shotting many rounds in a few seconds. He’d outgun the nearest teacher and still accomplish his sick goal.

      Try to find ANY teacher who wants to carry a loaded gun in her classroom!

      Cowards hide behind guns. This man was a coward.


      • Tim says:

        Hundreds in Utah and Texas both!!!

        • Chicken Strips says:

          Texas is a breed of its own. They protect themselves for their OWN safety!

          • Tim says:

            Since you leave statements like this “Texas is a breed of its own. They protect themselves for their OWN safety!” Let me ask you this, if you were in a restaraunt, movie theater, or mall, and a gun man opened fire, and the guy laying on the ground behind the bench was from Texas, Utah, Iowa, or any other place and he/she had their CCW and was carring his/her hand gun on their hip, when that mad man comes up to you and points his pistol at your head and snears at you, would you want that “breed of their own,” that “protect themselves for thier OWN safety” to shoot him and save you and your loved ones life?

      • Lee Ann says:

        That shooter in CT with the weaponry he had could have killed everybody in the building in a half an hour, if he hurried. Also, someone like this guy is going to commit suicide anyway, so he doesn’t have anything to lose, I would imagine he would stand toe to toe with a teacher and fight it out, or take a hostage. He doesn’t care. Where most of us care deeply about the kids, and our own skin. A coward with big weapons, lots of ammo and just doesn’t care what happens to himself, is extra dangerous.

        • 2A Defender says:

          Actually, Lee Ann, most mass shooters only commit suicide when they are confronted by someone else with a weapon. In Newtown, it was when the shooter heard the police in the building. The reason? These people are cowards. Why else do you think they choose gun-free zones as locations to unleash their carnage? It’s because they’re target-rich environments. After all, when was the last time you heard of an incident like this happening at an NRA convention or a shooting range?

      • Hank Rearden says:

        It would only take one well placed round to take out the shooter. A. Lanza was there to kill as many as possible to make the evening news, an armed teacher need only take out one, the shooter. It does not matter what kind of weapon the madman has, it still only takes one shot to neutralize the threat. As it was, Lanza killed himself when he heard the police sirens. I would wager if the coward would have seen a teacher with a 9mm aimed at him he would have done the same as when he heard the sirens and killed himself.

        Adam Lanza was a broken toy, and that is the direction we need to look if we really want to stop these events from happening. That and getting rid of the ineffective “Gun Free Zones”.

  19. Tim says:

    Let me preface my opinion here before I go on: It is a tradgedy when anyone is killed by a madman or people willing to sacrifice themselves to voice their opinions. In all cases of killing of innocent lives, men women, or children, it is horrible. In the last 35 years or so, we have seen so many senseless killing of our citizens in a multitude of ways. Whether it be in the use of planes, cars, explosives, guns, or what ever, all tradgic. My point in this post is not to take any of them lightly. Here however is just another way to look at some of this. You may choice to agree or disagree, I myself choice to reserve my judgement on it, (I just don’t know).
    There have been more and more of these tradgedies all the time. Do we REALLY know the whole story? Think about this, there are some very very powerful people that want gun control, or better yet, that actually want our guns taken away from every citizen in the country. Basically, throw out the 2nd amendment, it doesn’t apply any more they say. Why do they want to do? We hear so many versions of every incident, what do you beleive. Could there be some of these powerful gov’t officials who would stop at nothing to get their way, be behind some of thse incidents. I hope not, I really hope not. However I came across this article. Makes me think. Check it out. Could our powerfull leaders be so bent on their agenda that this could be true? Look at the Benghazi incident, so many lies. Look at the bombings of the twin towers, do we really know actually who all was involved? Now read this article, what role does our newsmedia play in the hands of our gov’t??
    I just question what role our media is playing into the hands of our current leadership. Look back on the past election and what was kept from the voting public.

    • Lee Ann says:

      I checked your link, and I am curious about the whole thing too. The coroner said that everyone was killed with a big rifle. Yet supposedly the only weapons they found on Lanza were automatic pistols.

      Another question. In Aurora when Holmes went into the movie theatre, there was a witness, a young man, who said that two men were in the theatre, and two men left, and one man came back and started shooting. I am seriously wondering if one of the two that left was Holmes, and the guy who came back shooting was the other one. Holmes doesn’t look alert enough to even stand there, much less be a deadly killer. What if the other guy walked out, handed the gun to Holmes and left? Holmes is too mentally ill to think of all that himself. He’s almost barely there.

      I’m not a conspiracist about anything. I believe that JFK was shot in dallas, elvis did die, not go and become a Priest, I am fairly believing of these weird things that happen. but both the Holmes/Aurora shooting has me curious, and this shooting in CT seems to have some weird things going on. but I’m not an expert on any of this, so we tend to go by what they tell us.

      • Tim says:

        Lee Ann…I just learned today that the families of all the victims in CT were not allowed to see their loved ones bodies. I am not 100% sure that is a fact yet, I can not confirm it, however if that is true, why was that?

        • Lee Ann says:

          Considering that one little boy was shot in the head 11 times, I can certainly understand why his parents were not allowed to see him One can just imagine what a six year old shot 11 times would look like. 6 years old—they’re so little.

  20. Hank Reardon says:

    I just found this today, and the writer spells out the problem with gun control in a very reasoned and thought out way.

    It’s a long read, but worth it.

    • Tim says:

      Everyone needs to read this article. Thanks for finding it Hank.

    • Doug says:

      In the spirit of Christmas, it was time for a break, however this problem is not going to fix itself.

      That was a great article Hank, and I would encourage everyone reading and posting here, to read and digest the FACTS presented by an expert, not a politician, before posting here again.

      I have just a few comments to add below, because I’m done arguing with people that really have nothing further to back up their version of prevention. They spout the same old talking points that have spilled out over the past 30 years. The facts (without twisting) do not support decreased casualties, and it will come down to sheer numbers for, or against, gun control that put this to rest. History always repeats itself, and if you can live with another Sandy Hook if all we do is ban assault rifles to prevent it, shame on you. With that, the following comments on this subject are my last. Good day to you all. I’m going gun shopping.

      It seems, that District of Columbia police say they are investigating an incident in which NBC News reporter David Gregory displayed what he described as a high-capacity ammunition magazine on “Meet the Press.” Gun laws in the nation’s capital generally restrict the possession of high-capacity magazines, regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. They can’t even keep a banned magazine off of the set of a national television show after the Metropolitan Police Department denied producers request to do so.

      Where did Adam Lanza get the body armor he was wearing? The state of Connecticut prohibits residents from buying or selling body armor through any fashion that is not involving direct face to face contact. Connecticut will allow officers, the military, or police departments to buy body armor over the internet but there are certain stipulations that must be met before the purchase will be deemed legal.

      Ron Paul had some interesting comments on Monday, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” he said. But Paul — who said he agrees that “more guns equals less crime” and “private gun ownership prevents many shootings” — nevertheless chided the NRA for its plan, describing it as a government solution that could infringe on liberty. 
      “Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, X-ray scanners and warrantless physical searches? We see this culture in our airports: witness the shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders. This is the world of government provided ‘security,’ a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse,” Paul said. 

      The gunmen in many of the mass shootings in recent years shared a trait that offers a critical clue to preventing future attacks. Each showed clear signs of psychotic behavior and, had they been treated, the disasters might have been avoided.

      One final note: Don’t believe the administration would ever lie to you…. HA!

      • Chicken Strips says:

        I don’t think anyone here is wanting to ban guns, or feels that the administration would ever not lie to us.
        Have fun buying your gun. I’m sure you’ll keep it under your bed like most people. How’s that going to help you when you’re in a large public setting and it’s absent from your presence should something take place?
        How’d Mrs. Lanza’s gun purchase end up treating her?
        “Buy more guns!” is a rather silly political statement.
        Takes all kinds!

  21. Tim says:

    OK, here it starts, Gov. Andrew Coumo is going to introduce a bill that wants to CONFISCATE our weapons, or a mandatory government buy back. There are many in this administration that want every gun in america taken away. Heck, our gov’t can’t even find 15 million illegal aliens, how in the world are they going to try to take every citizens gun away. Ask yourself, does the administration want to take every gun out of every citizens hand b/c of the tradgic circumstances that have taken place, or do they want to just disarm the american people? Is this their oportunity to exploit tradgedy for their agenda?
    I read this from an article by Former US Army medic, current biker, sometimes technical writer, future organ donor — living a conservative life in liberal Austin.
    “”The tyranny of leftists always seeps out, doesn’t it? Cuomo proved (but doesn’t understand why) the Second Amendment is not about hunting. The Founding Fathers weren’t worried about the colonists bagging a buck or a goose. They knew from sad experience that the natural tendency of government is to grow in size and scope where it eventually controls every aspect of the lives of ‘subjects’ in a country. The only protection citizens have against an oppressive, tyrannous government is to rise up and replace it. THAT is the reason we have the Second Amendment. Governor Cuomo’s statement is the reason we have the Second Amendment! Conservatives understand this. Liberals either are too stupid or corrupt to understand or admit.

    Cuomo wants to confiscate guns or require mandatory sale to the state? Just who is going to confiscate the weapons? And what if the citizens don’t sell their weapons to the state? What then, Governor? Are you going to imprison honest, patriotic, otherwise law-abiding citizens? By what right? By what authority? It isn’t found in the Constitution.

    What Governor Cuomo is considering could usher in a revolution. It would be interesting to know how many sworn law enforcement officers in New York would turn in their badges before going door to door trying to confiscate the weapons of their neighbors. Do they not anticipate that a good many of those New Yorkers are not going to willingly hand over their guns? What then, Governor? Do you call in the National Guard? Well, those citizens ARE the National Guard! And what if those citizens decide it’s time to pay a little visit to Albany? What then, Governor?””

    I also found this statistic most people will never be told…Average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by police…18.25. Average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by civilians…2.2. Nothing against the police, but there are many factors for that, one big one, who is there first!!

    • Lee Ann says:

      If Cuomo is saying New York State is to ban weapons, NY state has laws against any handguns for about 40 years There are people WITH handguns, I am sure, that ‘s where he is probably thinking to go. However, NY state will always allow a rifle and a shot gun with a slug for deer hunting. they are overrun with deer, everywhere. I used to own 64 acres in the Southern Tier of New York State, and had a herd of 50 deer on my property. they allowed two licenses for landowners, and everybody else got one license. And the people that are living hand to mouth in that area poach deer all year long. and still they are everywhere, getting hit in the road, eating the grapes from Welches, ruining gardens. so I am sure the state of NY will always allow hunting. but handguns have been illegal for years.

      • Tim says:

        Illegal handguns? Hasn’t seemed to stop their crime.

        • Lee Ann says:

          It has helped the crime % in New York City. There is far less crime in NYC than there used to be. Giuliani cut down on a lot of the homicides. Its far safer in NYC than it is in Chicago, Miami, San Francisco, etc. Upstate, where I used to live, nobody has a handgun, they all have shotguns and 22s. And nobody seems to miss having a handgun. Its just what they know. and they are major hunters upstate,

        • Chicken Strips says:

          Actually they (NY, NY) had a murder-free day very recently. In a city of 8+ million, that’s quite something believe it or not. New York’s crime has been DRASTICALLY cut the past 15-20 years. Try reading before you publish LIES.

          • Tim says:

            I would hate to copy and paste and ruin your day, so I will just tell you the stats I found, you say NY crime has DRASTICALLY went down in the last 15 – 20 years. It has all over the country. 57% of all murderes in NY were still from firearms. in 2010 on a per population basis of 100,000 there were 2.64 murders in NY. In 2011 that same figure was 4.12. and remember, 57% of those were from guns. So how can I translate that into saying NY’s strict handgun laws make them safer? I personally cannot.

          • Chicken Strips says:

            Tim, their violent crime has decreased 75% the past 15 years; that’s how I can translate for you, since apparently you need a little help here. Their murder rate has gone from the worst to something like that of Sioux Falls’.
            Anyway, no one was saying their laws make them safer. We were in defense of your lie, “Hasn’t seemed to stop their crime”, when in fact the crime is IMMENSELY lower. Considering the fact that NY is a melting pot of all cultures, the rate is astonishing.
            I’m PRO-GUN. I’m also anti-ignorance.

          • Tim says:

            I am not trying to “publish lies” I am sorry if the facts I relay here don’t meet your ideals. I am not going to attack you except only to say that I am not a lier as you have called me. You say that NY’s crime rate is about what SF SD is… here are some facts the way I have understood them: according to, the crime index for SF in 2010 per 100,000 was 252.5. And according to that same figure for NY in the same time frame was 581.7. Now the way I follow that, SF, SD is a much safer place to be.
            Yes NY’s crime rate has dropped, but why…(sorry for the for the ability to cut and paste, just is a product of the computor age I guess). Again according to “Crime in New York City was high in the 1980s during the Mayor Edward I. Koch years, as the crack epidemic hit New York City, and peaked in 1990, the first year of Mayor David Dinkins’ administration (1990–1994). During the administration of Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (1994–2002), there was a precipitous drop in crime in his first term, continuing at a slower rate in both his second term and under Mayor Michael Bloomberg (2002–present).
            Many commentators have suggested that the New York City Police Department’s adoption of CompStat, broken windows policing, and other strategies during the administration of Rudolph Giuliani were responsible for the drop in crime, some studies argued that the dramatic reduction in crime was strongly correlated with the increases in the number of police officers that started under Mayor Dinkins and continued through the Giuliani administration.” It did not say it was b/c of tighter gun control, at least not in what I could find here.

    • Chicken Strips says:

      Too many words.
      1) Copy and paste?
      2) Too much time on your hands?

      • Tim says:

        Some people just can’t do the research on their own. That takes time. When we just listen to mainstream media and use their ideas as gospel, we are not informed people. Do your own research. When someone does point out statistics and support for ones opinion, you use personal attacks?. Interesting.

        • Chicken Strips says:

          Right. Like you saying NY’s crime hasn’t gone down (haha!). We don’t need copied and pasted articles; surprisingly, they have an agenda to push as well! I didn’t make a personal attack. If I wanted to do that, I would have by now.

  22. Citizen says:

    I don’t know much about guns, but can someone tell me why us as citizens would need a automatic rifle (a gun that holds a magazine of 20 or more bullets and all those bullets unload by pulling the trigger once)! My 2 cents is that the only people that should have possession of that type of gun is the men and women protecting our country, not some person in our neighborhood. You don’t use that type of gun hunting and surely wouldn’t use it to protect your home from an intruder. So why would you own one? If its for fun then I think there are many more fun things to do out there in this world other than that! I am not againist owning a gun for hunting or protecting myself but there is no need for an automatic rifle that I described to be in the hands of any citizen! Just think if some crazy person wants to go on a shooting spree I hope he has a hand gun of a few bullets, not an automatic rifle of 20 or more. It would save many more lives!

    • 2A Defender says:

      Citizen, you are making the mistake that the anti-gunners are counting on the average person to make. “Automatic” guns….guns that fire multiple rounds with just one pull of the trigger have all but been eradicated from the hands of the general public by the National Firearms Act of 1934. Anyone possessing a fully-automatic weapon mut undergo a thorough BATFE background check and pay a $200 tax per year to possess that weapon. In addition, no new models have been available for civilian purchase since (I believe) 1968. The “automatic weapons” that those who want to restrict our 2nd amendment rights are referring to are, in fact, SEMI-automatic. That means that there is a trigge pull required for each shot that is fired.

      As for magazine capacity, larger magazines are often helpful for self-defense situations. Many people semi-automatic firearms for personal and family defense. The sad truth is that, unlike in movies and TV shows, attackers are seldom stopped from their misdeeds after being hit with just one round. Most often, loss of an amount of blood sufficient to stop their aggression is required. This can take some time. This may sound callous, but more holes = greater blood flow, speeding up the process of ending the threat from a bad guy. Also, on occasion, one may find one’s self facing multiple attackers.

      The other undeniable fact is that the effects of “adrenaline dump” during such an encounter may cause missed shots. Accuracy isn’t as easy in a real world situation as it is on a target range.

      Thank you, Citizen, for your comment, and for this opportunity to try and clear up some misinformation regarding guns and magazines.

      Have a nice day.

    • Doug says:

      Automatic weapons are heavily restricted under ATF rulings. Civilians can own automatic weapons, though only through strict Class III certification as well as regulated inspections from the ATF.

      Even the dreaded AR is just a semi-automatic rifle that only fires once per trigger pull. No different than a Ruger 10/22 22 caliber rifle with a 10 – 50 round magazine, just a bigger caliber.

      • Hank Rearden says:

        The caliber is the same, the bullet weight and construction, case size and powder charge are different, along with the .22 being a rimfire instead of a center fire.

        The ever dreaded AR-15 is really just a .22 on steroids. If they ever do get the AR banned the next on the list will be the scoped high powered .30 caliber “Sniper” hunting rifle.

    • Hank Rearden says:

      This man sums it up my sentiments exactly. He is a school teacher as well as a gun enthusiast. If you have a half hour please watch.

Leave a Reply

Sheldon Broadcasting Company, Inc. appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language.
2. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem (personal) attacks.
3. Threats are treated seriously and will be reported to law enforcement.
4. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Sheldon Broadcasting Company, Inc. or its advertisers agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the selected staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email

Back to:Concerned