2nd Amendment and Congresswoman Giffords

The "gun control" crowd will beat their drum loudly over this shooting. You're right, people kill, not guns. If the instrument is to blame, then they should take a look at the number of traffic deaths each year.

Totally agree, what a horrendous event. But you are correct, the libs will make it a gun issue and not a tortured soul issue. This guy needed help a long time ago.

As the Gunny told me 45 years ago, "It is not the weapon but the heart of stone of the man with the weapon". Please feel free to comment.

I am not a gun owner, but I do believe in the second amendment. Did anyone see Geraldo Rivera's fox news show yesterday regarding the Arizona shooting? I know he is a liberal, but I think he took it too far when he held up a picture of the congresswoman's opponent last election dressed in military fatigues and holding a rifle in his lap. Now this man WAS in the military and the caption was "do I look like a RINO?" Geraldo blew this up insinuating that this tea party advocate contributed to this massacre. I am outraged and wonder if anyone else will comment on this. I was waiting for the left to come up with something to blame Republicans and the tea party.

I am so sorry for what happened to Gabby- she really cared about the people she represented. You are right, if gun control could just keep guns out of the hands of deranged people I'd be all for it. The truth is that all of the deranged people will find a way to get their hands on weapons. Upstanding citizens need to protect themselves.

I am in favor of citizens owning guns and I own one and in my younger days was an avid hunter of rabbits,squirrels, pheasants, racoons and foxes. But I am not sure that we hunters need automatics, and other fancy fire arms that can shoot large numbers of rounds before loading

I was terribly disappointed to read yesterday that the person in Tucson, AZ who did the murders had purchased the weapon legally. the mind of that sick person does not reflect the thinking of the majority of people with weapons permits. It is a huge responsibility to make the choice to carry a lethal weapon. Heightened police security isn't always possible due to budget issues. However, Had there been some sane people at that rally who were legally carrying weapons, the murderer surely would have been stopped before 17 innocent people were wounded or killed.

What happened to Congresswoman Giffords and the others is indeed a tragedy - one that will be taken advantage of by the liberals for their gun control platform. What they do not seem to get - which is something you pointed out - is that guns do not kill people, people kill people. I'd be interested to know just how Jared Loughner slipped through the cracks IF he was registered to own that gun and how he got it if he didn't.

I believe that I will always be amazed by the rationale that gun control is the blanket solution for controling crime and/or the criminal. History has shown us that the "bad" guys always gain access to weapons and they DO NOT care about laws or regulation thereof. Gun control only disarms the "good" guys (you know--the ones who pay taxes and are law abiding citizens)who are only trying to protect themselves and their families...

The gun lovers are really running away from this one, but facts speak for themselves. If they really cared for the safety of anyone besides themselves, they would at least support measures to keep guns out of the hands of the crazies. That we should rely for our safety on the 'honesty' of gun buyers is wrong. They need to step up and take responsibility for their support of the gun lobby. Add that to their encouragement of Rush Limbaugh and Fox news and we have all we need to know why this country is less safe than any European country outside Bosnia. But you are right on one thing. It isn't the guns, it's the people that make this country so dangerous. And, Tim, what on earth do you need three guns for? Are you afraid one might jam during your next shootout?

I totally agree on the 2nd amendment, guns dont kill people do.

I totally agree with you. The Liberals are always looking for an excuse to take our guns away from us. What happened yesterday is probably a tip of the iceberg of what is to come. People don't have a relationship with God. Amoral. They take many drugs that mess up your reasoning eventually. They become irrational, and full of hate! God help America.

Before you blame the Tea Party for this tragedy, understand that Jared Loughran was not a crazy conservative. Katie Parker, the assassin's friend, described him as "left wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy."

Also quite possibly relevant - his Mountain View High School was part of the "Smaller Learning Community" of schools, led by Mike Klonsky, a communist activist and friend of terrorist Bill Ayres.

I write from here in England where we have very tight gun controls. I think it safe to say that these laws are pretty well universally accepted as good, though they don't completely stop individuals from going on the rampage from time to time. This summer a local near me killed 12 people before taking his own life however this persons actions were the exception, not a recurring event. This does not seem to be the case in the U.S. Am I wrong? His guns were legal. If someone wants to do such things they are always going to find a way, no matter what controls are in place but the way we view it is the more difficult it is to get hold of firearms, the fewer the opportunities there are to commit such acts. Even our police do not want to be routinely armed.

To the person who ask Tim "what on earth do you need three guns for"? I am 78 yrs old and have at least five guns and three long guns but have never pointed any at a living person. Do you not have something you like to collect? Roy

The word is called "Obfuscate". This is what the media is doing and started doing seconds after this tragedy first appeared in the news. They were first saying the gunman (jared Loughner) was ex-military, then they were saying he was a "right winger".... and next they started throwing blame at good people like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. All to try and obfuscate that yet another wack job, radical lib had gotten hold of a gun and gone off the deep end. For those of you that got the real news, the guy who flew his airplane into the IRS building here in Austin (LIB) and the guy who tried to take hostages at the Discovery Channel building (LIB). There seems to be a trend here. If it's still up take a look at the videos Jared put on Youtube, it's a real insight into just how twisted this guy is. And the scary thing is, when I was a lib, I knew quite a few guys like this. It's all about "emotion"..... and "victimhood", and how they sometimes put the two together, without ever considering their own personal responsibility.... This is usually the path which leads to this kind of violent behavior. Conservatives, like probably many here, are always painted as the cause but Liberalism is a suicidal belief system which brings about such twisted points of view. Liberals, who have no grasp of what "personal responsibility" is, will start yapping about gun control next. This only follows suit since they don't understand this, are always the victims and want to have a scapegoat, in this case, guns. For liberals with a strong belief in gun control, they should start by policing themselves, since more often then not, it's their cool-aid drinking, blind believers that are the one committing most of the atrocities like the insane lib, Jared Loughner. Would be great if we could have tighter gun control laws for liberals and looser for conservatives. Would make the world safer yet such an idea is hardly feasible. I'm going to go send a few bucks to the NRA now.

The number of guns one chooses to own is not related to need. Many of us have several guns for various hunting or shooting sports functions. No different than a fisherman that owns a dozen fishing rod and reel combo's for the multiple species they choose to fish for. Many have several cars and trucks that they may not need but choose to own. Gun ownership is not about need it is about the right to own them wether it be for use or collection just as one collect paintings. Does Al Gore have a need for a huge mansion that comsumes large amounts of fossil fuel energy and spews green house gasses? No, but he has a right to if he chooses.

What happened yesterday is horrible. Now the media spin seems to be starting to blame Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, and divisive politics! The only one to blame is the one that pulled the trigger. That punk planned it, took his gun to the event, and shot innocent people. He is responsible for his own actions- no one else.

Michael Lehner, Just wanted to let you know that it was mentioned that there was a sane person who had a gun at that event but there were so many people and so much chaos he would have risked killing an innocent bystander rather than the lunatic :-(

I am 56 and became disabled a couple of years ago and since I am no longer strong enough to protect myself, or anyone else for that matter, I have seriously been considering purchasing a gun, taking classes and carrying it with me.

My heart is heavy and am saying prayers for all the victims, their family and friends. I also pray full and speedy recovery for Gabby! All of the deaths are sad but, to me, the saddest is the wonderful little nine year old girl, born on 9/11, who was there because she wanted very much to attend the event :-(

I believe that all competent American citizens and public servants, not just law enforcement, should carry, either openly or concealed, a handgun of their choice to protect themselves and their loved ones from situations such as this. I would think that we would have a much more polite society if we all had the same level of self defense among ourselves.

@ Scotti: "And, Tim, what on earth do you need three guns for?" Scotti, how many cars do you own? No one needs more than 1, as they kill people.

As far as having a gun in the home with children, it is 'roughly 100 times more likely' a fatal accident will occur where there is a swimming pool at the home, than if there is a fire arm.
http://www.smartparentshealthykids.com/blog/?p=11
I would like to have a gun at home, but my wife is unfortunately too freaked about it.

I am very sorry for what had happened in my favorite state, but what is in question, why nobody blew this dirtbag away I always carry in az.it has some great conceal or not conceal laws.guess I hang with to many that believe in the rite to protect oneself and others. and a 92cent bullet is cheaper then a prison sentence.

It was a shameful act this this 22 year old did yesterday. My Prayers are with Gabby and her family for a full recovery. As he purchased this gun legally, it boggles my mind as to how. This brings me to State Laws, these differ from State to State. Maybe we need Federal Laws on a single form for each State that are the same and can not be changed by the States. Maybe in the State he purchased this weapon did not have the same information on it as Tim's questionaire did. I personally do not owe any firearms. I have thought about it for some time and just haven't got a round tuit yet. I also haven't hunted in 40 years. Was not my thing to do. I do however hope that no one tries to change our 2nd Amendment rights. Back ground checks must be the norm to purchase a firearm. It is the only way true law abiding citizens can protect themselves. Criminals will always be able to purchase illegal firearms, changing the constitution will not change this, but, back ground checks will prevent mentally ill people from purchasing firearms and causing death's like yesterday I believe.

I totally agree with your comments Tim, and the vast majority who have commented here. I live in the socialist utopia of Canada where, a number of years back the liberals established a billion dollar gun registry. It was only suppose to cost a couple of million. It is utterly stupid because the killers, the gangs and punks will always be 'packing' and the law abiding have no way to defend themselves. I read a funny story the other day. a guy was pulled over by a trooper for a minor traffic violation. he had his license, insurance, certificate that he can carry a concealed weapon etc. The trooper asked if he was carrying? The driver was so he said he had a gun in his coat pocket and a Derringer strapped to his leg. another one under the seat, and while I'm at it he said, I have an assault rifle and shot gun in the trunk. The trooper asked the man what he was afraid of?
NOT A DAMN THING was his reply.
No decent person wishes harm on another. But I'm just waiting to see how the lefties twist this tragedy into more nanny state policy. Listening to one sherriff give his comments, he felt that when tv and radio personalities daily attack the government it feeds people like this. What does that mean? Censor free speech? We shouldn't demonize politicians, even if they are acting like demons?

Tim, I enjoy the Fire Pit and opinions immensely. Typically I am not the type to respond but wanted to offer a somewhat contrarian position on gun control. However, I do not want anyone to mistake me for a liberal. I am a conservative independent, vote in every election, haven't voted for a Democrat in 20 years, do not believe in deficits, go to church every week, am against abortion, believe in smaller government, believe the tax code is screwed up, hate Obamacare, believe hunting is a great sport, believe the progressives are taking us from a Land of Opportunity to a Land of Entitlement, am OK with torturing terrorists, against illegal immigration, strongly support the military, and fly my flag every holiday.

I believe in the Constitution. It clearly states the people should have a right to own and bear arms because a well-regulated militia is necessary for a Free State. It does not say that people have a right to own and bear arms because unregulated vigilantes are necessary for a Free State. Some control and regulation of guns and munitions is constitutional and envisioned by our Founders. I am not sure they envisioned individual ownership of automatic weapons and firearms available on the market today. Would more control have prevented what happened in Arizona? Not sure but the control we currently have is not keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, drug runners, and kooks. Need a better solution.

The "well regulated militia" mentioned in the second amendment refers to the fine men and women in our armed forces. Because they (the government) has a militia (the armed forces), we (the people) MUST have the right to arms. You'd think our elected would be able to diagram a simple sentence.

We all are devastated by the shooting in Arizona. If someone in that crowd had had a gun, the killer would have been stopped before so many innocent people were hurt. Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens are a good thing.

It awful beyond words that Congresswoman Giffords and those around her were attacked by a mentally unstable man with a gun. However, the gun didn't attack them, the man did. Even if guns were outlawed a crazy or evil person will obtain one if they want. That's just part of the world. Our second amendment rights actually make this country safer than most European countries. Just check the statistics. As far as the comment by Mr. Thomas asking Tim why he needs three guns, why not? My husband is a competitive rifle shooter, I am just beginning to shoot competitive pistol, and we have several different types of firearms. "Shooting sports" (yes, that's it's name) is a hobby of many people. Golfers have lots of golf clubs, runners have numerous pairs of running shoes, equestrians have lots of tack and horse equipment, so shooters have more than one gun. People have different hobbies. My mom collects rooster figurines, some people collect baseball cards. There are people who collect guns as well, who admire the craftsmanship of different styles and makers of guns. Owning a gun doesn't mean you're expecting a shootout. So Tim, you can have as many firearms as you want. Just be well trained to handle them safely. Before I get too far off topic let's move back. Let's not mix up the issue of a mentally unstable man with the U.S. citizen's right of gun ownership. The issue is the deepening division of the country between the liberals and conservatives that is heated up by the media. Add to that the general lack of courtesy between people and the intolerance of anyone with different opinions and we end up with a lack of civil discourse that escalate to violence by those who are unstable. There isn't a quick fix to the problem of today's world being so media conscious. People need to think for themselves, investigate the facts, and take part in the political process by volunteering and voting. And, as a footnote; I personally work on being aware of what's happening around me. My following statement might light a firestorm but...It's possible that had a person who was lawfully carrying a concealed weapon at that meeting taken action once Jared Loughner pulled the trigger the first time many lives and injuries could have been spared. Loughner used a semi-automatic. You have to pull the trigger each shot with a semi-automatic. It's not an automatic where you squeeze down and it shoots until you release the pressure on the trigger.

If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words.

The preamble portion of the second amendment sets forth just one example of what the operative portion of the amendment is concerned with. If you read it as 'a boat being necessary to fish' the right of the people to keep and own boats shall not be infringed'...does anyone seriously believe that would mean only fishermen could own boats and then only use them for the expressed purpose of fishing? I think not.
By the way I read that somewhere and it stuck, sorry I cant recall where though. My prayers also go out to Gabby and the others who were killed or injured by this madman.

It is no hard task to find a non-registered gun. If you have a little cash and be subtle about it, almost any patron of any bar can hook you up. I have found them at flea markets, grocery stores, civic clubs and many other "unlikley" places. Just don't tell everyone.

It is not the weapon, it is the one who pulls that weapons trigger.

Certainly a tragedy. In a Nation over 300 million plus, extremes can and do exist, and events such as this cannot be ruled out. Even the event at a Texas military base where weapons were quite available/accessible, an army psychiatrist, H. Hassan killed and wounded many, while it was known, he was in contact with a radical terrorist, and had been acting strangely, before the actual massacre that took place.....No mention by liberals of GUNS with that event....It is selective.

It appears we are teetering on the brink...of what you may ask? At what point does one say free speech and 2nd amendment rights go hand in hand in a free society based on our Constitution, Bill of Rights etc.
It is not only this 2nd amendment issue, for this is only a small part of a society ripe for increasing volatility. Could this be an excuse and exploitation, planned and used for more government intervention and control of a it's People?

When does one cross the line in displaying passionate positions appropriately?
Examples: someone standing at a public polling station in Para military clothing holding a club near an entrance, no civil rights violation there, according to Attorney general E. Holder. A Union Representative, R. Trumpka yelling to a crowd of supporters to incite discord and opposition to another person, group or entity. A Baptist radical Group, holding signs and wailing aloud in hatred and disrespect of another who has lost their life, for the very right for them to protest. One who legally may choose abortion over a potential Human Being being given their right to live,..Others who use the cloth of religion either in a pulpit or other venue, that spew division and hatred...The Rev. Al....The Rev Jackson, The 'Honorable' L. Farrakhan ...The banning of a Mark Twain Classic that mentions the word N-----, yet in Rap music it is acceptable.
'Trigger Words' themselves that bring out the best and worst with the mere mention for example: Bush, Palin, Obama, Rush, Cheney, Beck, Hannity etc
.
Never can I recall a more divisive period 'in my lifetime'...or will we heading towards 'internment' camps of our minds with fear?

In as much as Rep. Giffords has been a strong advocate for the 2nd Amendment I doubt the anti-gun lobby will have much traction trying to make this tragedy a campaign issue. My prayers are with the victims, their friends and families. The lunatic responsible will be dealt with, but now the Liberal Language Police smell blood. Far more dangerous to the public discourse is this self-righteous manufactured Leftist outrage designed to silence opposition. Watch this manifest itself as subtle innuendo inserted into every MSM story of this traedgy.

It is not the weapon, it is the one who pulls that weapons trigger....The greater weapon is the mind that pulls that trigger.

Certainly a tragedy.

In a Nation over 300 million plus, extremes can and do exist, and events such as this cannot be ruled out. Even the event at a Texas military base where weapons were quite available/accessible, an army psychiatrist, H. Hassan killed and wounded many, while it was known he was in contact with radical terrorist and was previously acting strangely by others, before the actual masscre that took place.....No mention by liberals of GUNS with that event....It is selective.

It appears we are teetering on the brink. At what point does one say free speech and 2nd amendment rights go hand in hand?...We are not robots, our minds guide our actions....in this case, the pulling of that trigger not the gun itself as mentioned. It is in this manor this I speak. The Second Amendment is clearly pointed out as a right in our Constitution.

Could this be an excuse, an exploitation and/or an attempt used for more government intervention and control of its People?

When does one cross the line in displaying passionate positions appropriately?
Examples: someone standing at a public polling station in Para military clothing holding a club near an entrance, no civil rights violation there, according to Attorney general E. Holder. A Union Representative R. Trumpka yelling to a crowd of supporters to incite discord and opposition to another person, group or entity. A Baptist ridicule group, holding signs and wailing aloud in hatred and disrespect of another who has lost their life, for the very right for them to protest. One who legally may choose abortion over a potential Human Being being given their right to live,..Others who use the cloth of religion either in a pulpit or other venue, that spew division and hatred...The Rev. Al....The Rev Jackson, The 'Honorable' L. Farrakhan ...The banning of a Mark Twain Classic that mentions the word N-----, yet in Rap music it is acceptable.
Trigger words themselves that bring out the best and worst with the mere mention for example: Bush, Palin, Obama, Rush, Cheney, Beck, Hannity etc
.
Never can I recall a more divisive period 'in my lifetime'...for are we heading towards 'internment' camps of our minds now with fear? ....When does the insanity stop with all the volitility and chaos we see, hear and read on a daily basis?

the shooter was not of the Tea Party or the right.....he was an individual that is deranged....the left and Liberals and Dems just want to use this tragic event to silence anyone who opposes their agenda.....prayers to all the victims of the Arizona shooting...

This is so sad, does anyone know why he shot her? Changing the gun law isn't going to correct issues like this.....will just make it worse....

tim, i'm one of those left leaning liberals, but let's not use this horrible tragedy caused by a loony, as a platform to promote gun buying or gun control. believe it or not, i support the 2nd amendment. you want 3 guns or 100 guns it's 'ok' by me. but your guns are for hunting and perhaps protection of your home from bad guys. our federal militia is well armed and capable of our national security. it's not your job to be on the front lines any more. besides at your age and weight you're no match for a well trained 20 year old invader. if you can not hit a deer with the 1st shot, good luck getting the 2nd one off. if you can not hit a home invader with 4,5,or 6 shots - time to go back to the range. maybe we don't need rapid firing weapons - but that's a discussion for a calmer time. the .45 liberator pistol was never widely distributed in europe and had no bearing on the outcome of ww2. you misrepresented this item - you're not going to ban yourself are you? jim

COMMENT BY Tim Carter:

Jim,

Nope, I'm not going away. I just conducted a trial here in my office. I'm innocent of your charges. Too bad so sad. :->

A million of the Liberators were made and distributed. I'd say that's a pretty wide distribution. As the Wikipedia entry states, they were developed more for a psychological effect on the occupying German forces than a killing effect.

The gun dealer I go to has one in his case. As he explains it the point was to have the German soldiers constantly on edge wondering if some farmer is going to shoot them in the back.

You're correct, we'll never know if the weapon had a zero effect. My statement was "partially responsible". You could take that to mean that a handful of Germans might have been killed with the guns and that helped in some sort of way.

We're spitting hairs. The point is guns in the hands of citizens can have an effect.

Hi Tim, I support the 2nd Amendment.

I know I shouldn't be sarcastic about this. Rather than ban guns under the reasoning that if we ban them they will not be a problem; why don't we just ban murder?

The murderer in Tucson who shot Giffords should be executed as quickly as the left would like to see our rights for arms removed. Certainly not too hard to have a quick fair trial on this one. But of course the left does not want any execution of murders even though the execution of babies is a right to them.

I think the right to bear arms should include automatic weapons but we can see there would be a big problem in the wrong hands. Well trained and certified citizens packing in public would be a good thing. The more powerful the gun the harder the certification and of course more frequent testing and reviewing a citizen's mental wellness. Those citizens with higher certifications should be required to pack in public for set times. I can't help but think if one knows he is going to die quickly that would be a big deterrent or at least put a stop to the killing.

Here's what I posted on the comments at the Washington Post, where they were calling for gun control:
There's little doubt the shooter was, and is, mentally deranged. As with Virginia Tech, the information about the shooter was available but not fed into the system that prevents mentally unstable people from buying guns. The problem here is not the gun, nor the availability of guns to a free people, but the failure of those who developed information about his instability to put that information where it could have prevented the sale of the gun.

Because he used a gun, regardless of type, the knee-jerk reaction is to ban guns. But let's think about a different weapon--what if he had driven a car or truck into the crowd, and killed 6 and injured the rest? Would we be calling for the ban of cars or trucks? Of course not! The facts show that in every case where gun control laws are placed, crimes committed by guns increase. The facts also show that in every case where gun control laws are removed, and citizens can reasonably obtain and carry guns, gun crimes decrease precipitously. These data don't come from the NRA, but from federal and state government statistics, which may not be perfect but can't be accused of trying to fudge the numbers to make guns look good. The numbers also show that responsible gun owners, which is almost a redundant statement according to the records, rarely are found to be involved in conflict with others or with law enforcement. Argue with this if you wish, but check the facts first.
Furthermore, this guy was not a conservative by any stretch of imagination. Go look at his Facebook page, if it is still up. It was last night--he is far to the left, well beyond anything espoused by most liberal politicians, as he espouses communism and worships Mein Kampf as his bible.

Tim, albeit tragic, I am suprised it hadn't happened by now. If you draw a circle, and include in that circle all morality that is accepted by society. Then just outside that circle, draw a small bubble touching the fringe,lets call it abortion. The liberal left, accept,condone, and embrace that fringe and push to include it within the circle....so the circle grows larger. Then draw another small bubble touching the outside of the circle, lets call it homersexual rights. Once again, the liberal left push to include it within the acceptability range, and the circle grows larger again. Finally, lets draw a bubble and call it, kicking God out of public conversation. You get the picture. Each time the left push to include a fringe element, the circle gets larger. Draw a smaller circle around the center of the large one. This represents a conservative view point. The gulf between the two circles gets larger as the liberals push outward on the range of acceptability, thus common ground has diminished betwee the two viewpoints. Now as I grew up, liberals were known to be openminded and tolerant. But today, that only applies toward the outside fringe of the circle, toward the inner circle, they have become vehemently militaristic and confrontational, as seen in this last congress where they had the numbers to dictate this countries direction. Again, I am not suprised this tragic incident happened at all. the gulf of common ground has grown almost beyond compromise. Hope my circle theory makes some sense. Jim

Tim, I've come across a recently passed awayt friend's gun collection his wife asked me to evaluate. I am going to record model and serial numbers for a spreadsheet. Do you know any resource I can submit that to in order to get appraisals? Thanks for any info you may have. Jim

COMMENT BY Tim Carter:

Jim,

This is pretty easy. You'll have to take each gun to at least two local gunsmiths to have them touch and feel them. They'll be able to appraise them easily. Gunsmiths and dealers purchase collections all the time. If you have the time, you'll get the best price selling them out piecemeal instead of selling the entire collection to one person. But I've been wrong before!

The Arizona shooting resulted in the death of 6 (so far) and wounding of 13, including the Jewish Ariz. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, is tragic. Jared Loughner, the 22 yr. old shooter, is unbalanced, and if I can rely on TV news, was apparently kicked out of college because of the schools concerns over his radical ideas and actions on campus, and was actively involved on-line with a radical web-site (anti-Jewish in philisophy).

I perceive the question we should be pondering is not gun control - they are illegal in Mexico but 30,000+ were killed with guns in the last 4 years by drug cartels, the toll is rising, and the violence is starting to spread over onto our side of the border. I believe Loughner would have found a way to obtain weapons even if they were outlawed, and could have used other methods. Are Guns a Weapon of Mass Distruction? Laughner's gun had a clip holding 32 rounds and he reportedly had 3 clips. He emptied the first clip, and when he attempted to load the second it was taken from him by a woman bystander. He then loaded the 3rd, but it failed to operate properly. It was then that he was subdued by two other bystanders (what took the bystanders so long to subdue him?).

The question I ponder is what can we, as a free society, do to control known radicals, and how can we stop or reverse their radicalization (ex: Ft. Hood).

I just wish that there were more people in the crowd that had exercised their right to bear arms. If they had, maybe a lot less people would of been injured or killed.

Criminals will always have access to deadly weapons, but just like anti-terrorism tactics used at the airports, it's the everyday Joe that has their rights infringed upon.

"Scorched Earth" laws only affect the law abiding citizen, not the criminal. If it did, they wouldn't be criminals!

John Lott wrote a book named "More Guns, Less Crime" which chronicles his research of gun use in America. He found that areas that ban guns have a drastic increae in crime after the gun ban takes effect. Areas that allow or even encourage gun possession by it's citizens show a decrease in crime. This research was done so well that the most virulent gun banners can't fault it. I highly recommend you read it if you have an interest in gun control or second ammendment rights. Four unarmed citizens dissarmed the "suspect" and tackled him after he had shot 20 rounds. If one or more citizens had had guns, how many shots do you suppose he would have fired before being shot, himself? And, better yet, if he knew those citizens might be armed, would he have tried it in the first place?

Wow, lots of "their coming for my guns" references posted here. I haven't heard or seen any outcry for this (other than right wingers claiming it's going to happen), maybe I'm not watching hard enough. These types of tragedies should not be boiled down to liberal vs conservative arguments. While I consider myself a centrist, I have to think that everyone knows there is no national policy or database in place that can effectively "regulate" as in "well regulated militia" who can buy, own and use guns, period. This is a huge problem and what we witness all too frequently is the occassional crazy that manages to buy a gun from a gun store and go do their damage. The Virginia Tech student, and this kid come to mind even though there were blatant signs of mental problems there. So what to do? Shouldn't it be the process of buying a gun be more stringent to weed out these mental defectives? It seems obvious to me that is where our weakness is. I could care less how many guns you own providing you went through the necessary hoops to get them. There should be some kind of pshycological questioning and research that comes into play here in addition to background checking, no? Should I be able to go to a gun show in Texas and walk away with an M-16 with little screening into who I am? And what limits should be put on the types of weaponry available to John and Jane Doe? It seems some think you should be able to just about anything, is that a good concept when we can't even keep handguns out of the hands of fruitcakes? Arm everyone as a solution? Really? I love my neighbor Pete but I've seen him after a few beers, and I wouldn't want him near a pointed stick let alone a handgun. Let me summarize to the extreme right crowd NOBODY IS COMING FOR YOUR GUNS. We simply need a better system for making gun ownership more responsible! And sorry, but shame on Palin and those who use gun/death references in talking about political opposition. This country is losing it's civility and it goes all the way to the top. The decline in civility is in full speed these days. Let's hope this incident will wake people to tone down the rhetoric.

It is frustrating to speak and not be heard. When people get desperate to be heard, they often resort to violence. How ironic that Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords risked her own personal safety by making herself available to listen to the desperate cries of the frusterated US citizens.

The injury to Ms Giffords is shocking and sad, the deaths of others around her worse still. But suppose the shooter had merely used a bow-and-arrow? or a poison dart gun? A baseball bat? An axe? A knife? A car? His bare hands? Anything can be turned into a weapon! Should everything therefore be banned to prevent murderous misuse? People kill people, not guns or other things. We need to work on the people. . .

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,was written in the beginning of our great country and I hope and pray that the liberals will not tear it apart as they are trying to do to the country. The sad thing is that the gun gets the blame not the sick people that commit the crime. In the end we will be held accountable for our actions.

in our area a home owner shot an intruder invading his bedroom. rightly so, i say. however he fired 9 times - hitting the invader 5 times, himself once, and missing 3 times. actually doing better than some recent police shotting. in these comment many want armed bystanders to pull their guns, begin firing, and try to hit in running man in a crowd. wow ! no thanks i don't want to be there.

I think that John Green, the father of Christina Taylor Green, said it best in an interview on the Today Show:

Well, there's always been something special about Christina and, you know, the way she came into the world, on 9/11 and the way she left the world yesterday is obviously one that everybody else will remember. We're going to remember her for the nine years that we had her, and she was a beautiful, vibrant, young girl. It shouldn't happen in this country or anywhere else, but, you know, it's a free society, we're going to be subject to people like this. So I prefer this to the alternative.

Also, keep Ben Franklin's words in mind:

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

I don't think the problem is lack of gun control, but our self-absorbed society. Everyone goes around wondering how their life can be made better and not how they can help to make the world around them a better place. It's obvious people who were around this deranged young man knew he was potentially dangerous, that's why he made them feel uneasy. Rather than trying to do something to get this man help before he reached critical mass, people just turned their backs on him. People were aware that Loughner felt angry about Giffords lack of a response to the question he posed at his High School when she visited and I'd dare say that at least some of those people also knew of his second attendance to one of Gifford's other gatherings. These people who knew of Loughner's background and his anger towards Giffords should have acted more responsibly and notified authorities...but I guess they had themselves to worry about. Of course, I'm not saying it is these people's fault that this happened--but as Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing..." and of course I'd include women in that statement too.

Has anyone thought of the fact that if one person at the rally had a carry permit and had brought his gun, the outcome of the killing may have been much less catastrophic?

2nd Amendment. The right "shall not be infringed."
“THOSE WHO HAMMER THEIR GUNS INTO PLOWS, WILL PLOW FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT” Thomas Jefferson
The President and I, long before, toke an Oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America

I will say what's been said countless time, "Guns don't kill people, People do!"
I learned the proper and safe use of firearms at an early age, about 9, and I learned that they are only good for killing.
The gun is an inert object until somebody uses it.

My grandfather had a collection of long guns - shotguns and rifles and each and every had a specific purpose. A deer rifle, a squirrel rifle a varmit shotgun and more, each to do the job.
He refused to even consider owning a pistol.
He never shot anything we didn't eat unless it was a varmit in the henhouse.
And all the neighbors fell the same way.
Guns are simple to use any idiot can operate one, they make a loud, satifying noise and produce immediate results.
Here's another quote, "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
Oh, I needs must say, I haven't read all the posts here, but I will.

The U.S.A.has more guns per capita than any nation on earth.The U.S.A. has more deaths by guns tha any nation on earth.
Your forefathers could no more envision automatic handguns with oversized clips than they could envision the internet.

Mark D.
I believe the USA has more cars per capita than any nation on earth. The USA probably has more deaths by automobiles than any nation on earth. Our forefathers could no more envision automobiles than they could envision the internet.

Your point is?

Sorry Mark, my comment should have been directed to roy.

The unfortunate incident in Arizona had little to do with a gun, gun laws, our Constitution, political or religious belief systems. It was a human condition. The young man is not sane. It wasn’t himself, or his family, it was a de-railed human gene. My heart and my prayers go out to the victims and their families, and to the attacker and his family. I count and appreciate my blessings daily. Legs that walk, eyes that see, and keeping all my marbles are some of my good fortunes that are at the top of my list.

Besides all this discussion on the gun subject can you believe the spin coming out of the drive by media, it's become ridiculous. They will stop at nothing to keep the agenda of the people in power a secret and try to convince us they know what best for us. It's become a joke.

Christina Green was a terrible speller. She is not dead because of a misspelled word.

I love guns, shooting, this country, many other countries, many of our politicians (from several different parties)....I am not sure that this shooting would have been prevented with more/less laws, if there was a different person speaking, if it happened in another country....

Just thought I'd throw some statistics at you on guns and the strange attitudes Americans seem to have with guns unlike most civilized societies in the world.
1. Guns make you safer. FACT - only 1.7% of all handgun murders were justifiable homicides, used in self defense. 2. Guns will protect you from strangers. FACT - strangers only kill 13% of murder victims. You are much more likley to use a gun on a friend or relative than against a criminal who is going to 'prey' on you. 3. Guns in the home make is a safer place. FACT - The murder rate is 2.7 times higher in homes with guns than those without them. The same study showed that people are 21 times more likely to be killed by someone they know than by a stranger breaking in or being held u p on the street. 4. Right-to-carry makes the world safer. FACT - An easy to pull weapon raises the risk of killing especially when anger or drunkenness are involved. Combine easy available firepower with intense emotion and you get lots of dead people. 5. We need guns to protect us from the government. FACT - Really? individuals beating the US military? Sorry, I'm not biting on the gist of this post at all.