Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Put Prospective Gun Owners Under The Microscope
Townhall.com ^ | December 19, 2012 | Rachel Marsden

Posted on 12/19/2012 4:23:40 AM PST by Kaslin

PARIS -- Anyone who can't withstand a rational debate on the subject of gun control -- particularly in light of last week's Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Connecticut -- should be automatically prohibited from ever owning a firearm. In fact, this should be the number-one requirement of gun ownership: Can someone applying for ownership of a deadly weapon withstand an hour-long debate against someone in favor of gun control without resorting to physical or verbal assault?

Is it too much to ask that every person wanting to possess a firearm be subject to a battery of tests -- everything from intelligence and emotional quotient exams to a psychological evaluation and background check? When America's Founding Fathers drew up the Second Amendment, they didn't do so with the mentally stunted, emotionally disturbed and deeply insecure in mind. Back in their time, life was relatively challenging unto itself, and they must have figured that anyone who could survive day-to-day existence could surely handle a firearm if need be.

A question that has repeatedly come up since the Sandy Hook shootings is why America has so much more gun violence than other Western nations. The best explanation is that the Constitution defines and underpins culture. In fact, nearly every element in any Western democracy can be traced back to its constitutional roots.

The Second Amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms, but in other countries -- Canada, for example -- the right to own a gun is not a given. The onus is on an individual to prove he's mature, competent and sane enough to own one. As a result, no one in Canada grows up thinking of guns as a natural appendage. Gun ownership is seen as a privilege one must earn. Is there really anything so backward about that? Or is it preferable to arm everyone and pray for the best?

Canadian law requires a license and a safety course in order to own, borrow or store any sort of firearm. Police conduct a criminal background check and a safety screening to ascertain whether an applicant has "threatened or attempted suicide, suffered from or been diagnosed or treated by a medical practitioner for: depression; alcohol, drug or substance abuse; behavioral problems; or emotional problems," or "been reported to the police or social services for violence, threatened or attempted violence, or other conflict in your home or elsewhere," or recently suffered a relationship breakdown, job loss or bankruptcy. If an ex-wife tells the cops that perhaps you are not sane, then too bad for you.

Such a regulatory process also means fewer guns floating around. But what if a criminal did happen to be packing heat? Would you wish that you had a weapon so you could have a movie-style shootout? No, you would swallow your pride and let him take what he wanted, then call the insurance company.

Believe me, I understand the acute frustration one feels when being robbed or otherwise victimized. I was mugged on the subway in Paris last year. We both could have had guns, but thankfully neither of us did in a country with tight gun control. (The perpetrator would have had the advantage of foresight anyway, while I would have fumbled around trying to find mine.)

So how can America go about fixing its gun laws? Well, it's complicated, because all the crazies are mixed in with the sane gun owners. Since there was no sanity litmus test at the outset, how about implementing mandatory license renewal complete with psychological evaluations and background checks? Anyone failing to comply with a basic psychological competency test should have his weapons revoked.

It would likely take at least a generation to better balance individual gun rights with everyone else's right to their own day-to-day freedom and safety, but the shift in cultural mind-set needs to start somewhere


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: banglist; canada; firearms; guncontrol; guns; insanity; safety; sandyhook; violence
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

1 posted on 12/19/2012 4:23:44 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"Such a regulatory process also means fewer guns floating around. But what if a criminal did happen to be packing heat? Would you wish that you had a weapon so you could have a movie-style shootout? No, you would swallow your pride and let him take what he wanted, then call the insurance company."

And what if the criminal wanted you? Just suck it up, I guess and if the criminal intended to kill you, just take one for the collective. Your fellow drones will be appreciative.

2 posted on 12/19/2012 4:27:59 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Furthermore, people should be able to debate why it is they should have freedom of speech, or free exercise of religion, the right to petition the government for grievances or a jury trial, or to receive just compensation for property taken for public use, for an hour without getting heated, before they will be granted those rights either. Plus the IQ and EQ tests. We can’t have just anyone exercising those rights. Ideas kill.


3 posted on 12/19/2012 4:30:55 AM PST by coloradan (The US has become a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

And what if the criminal pointing a gun at you decides to leave no witness? I suppose then that you won’t be filing a claim with your insurance, now will you?

The illogical fallacies throughout this “column” defy understanding.


4 posted on 12/19/2012 4:32:27 AM PST by OldPossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Wow! Townhall has a 30 IQ ape on its staff.


5 posted on 12/19/2012 4:34:21 AM PST by sergeantdave (The FBI has declared war on the Marine Corps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Good idea. Let them and their security turn their guns in first.


6 posted on 12/19/2012 4:35:04 AM PST by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coloradan

People should have to prove they are not idiots before they are granted the right to vote.


7 posted on 12/19/2012 4:35:46 AM PST by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

How about this?

We put prospective presidential candidates Under The Microscope?

Make sure they don’t have nefarious backgrounds, abandonment issues, past drug use, can prove they are who they say they are, etc.

Oh no, that would be racist I guess.....


8 posted on 12/19/2012 4:37:17 AM PST by machman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

Or write columns suggesting changes to public policy.


9 posted on 12/19/2012 4:37:40 AM PST by coloradan (The US has become a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

As if a law-breaker gives 2 $hits about following a process.


10 posted on 12/19/2012 4:38:37 AM PST by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Hard to call the insurance company if the crook takes your life.


11 posted on 12/19/2012 4:39:50 AM PST by PeteB570 ( Islam is the sea in which the Terrorist Shark swims. The deeper the sea the larger the shark.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coloradan

How about applying the same criteria to those wanting an abortion. Life and death matter also.


12 posted on 12/19/2012 4:40:25 AM PST by WILLIALAL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Can someone applying for ownership of a deadly weapon withstand an hour-long debate against someone in favor of gun control without resorting to physical or verbal assault?
...........................................................

Under this rule I would never own a weapon.

If I had to argue gun control with Chris Mathews, Rachel Maddow, or Bob Beckel,for an hour, I wouldn’t pass muster.I would probably come out a raving lunatic. Like them, only on the other side of the argument.


13 posted on 12/19/2012 4:40:47 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Canadian law requires a license and a safety course in order to own, borrow or store any sort of firearm. Police conduct a criminal background check and a safety screening to ascertain whether an applicant has "threatened or attempted suicide, suffered from or been diagnosed or treated by a medical practitioner for: depression; alcohol, drug or substance abuse; behavioral problems; or emotional problems," or "been reported to the police or social services for violence, threatened or attempted violence, or other conflict in your home or elsewhere," or recently suffered a relationship breakdown, job loss or bankruptcy. If an ex-wife tells the cops that perhaps you are not sane, then too bad for you.

This list of human failings would disqualify 99% of all people. A "relationship breakdown" ??? an ex-wife says you are crazy??? violence, threatened or attempted??? alcohol abuse, ever been drunk???

I'm glad that is Canada and this is the USA {at least for the present}.

14 posted on 12/19/2012 4:45:35 AM PST by USS Alaska (Nuke the terrorist savages, start today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Has everybody lost their mind? This rush to demonize and criminalize a significant segment of the population can lead to no good. If draconian legislation is passed and surely upheld by the SCROTUM (aka SCOTUS), our country will deserve the totalitarian government that follows.

“Our Country won’t go on forever, if we stay soft as we are now. There won’t be any AMERICA because some foreign soldier will invade us and take our women and breed a hardier race!” Chesty Puller


15 posted on 12/19/2012 4:49:26 AM PST by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Rachel has the impression that criminals negotiate.

Equally ignant is her belief that we have some sort of uniform 'culture' ~ so we can compare Europe, in general, to America, in general, but not all of Europe ~ just certain select countries ~ certainly no one from rural Russia or Siberia ~ why it's not even Europe even though a lot of those people out there running around in the wild do, definitely, look to be European.

I think the way to deal with Rachel and her crowd is simple ~ first, deny that culture has anything at all to do with gun use. Simply point out that white Americans have a lower murder rate than white Europeans, and black Americans have a lower murder rate than black Africans! And isn't that wonderful as well as remarable.

Can she, in fact, say that white Canadians have as low a murder rate as white Americans?

BTW, she's the one who named Canada as a place that differs from America when it comes to gun rights, but this is the chance to shift it to murder rates as the basis for any further discussion about guns ~ they have TWO white subgroups there ~ the French and the Others. The French Canadian murder rate is supposedly higher than the Other Canadian murder rate ~ at least popular belief is the Frenchies are violent to a degree you don't find among the Scots, English, Welsh, Ukrainians, etc.

It's possible that non-francophone white Canadians are as nonviolent as white Americans, but will somebody prove that before asserting it as a fact?

There are perfectly good analyses that show that violence, murder, and gun misuse in the United States tend to follow lines of ethnicity, not culture, and that in every critical case Americans of whatever ethnicity are less violent, murder at a lower rate, and misuse guns less often than their foreign counterparts!

So, all those other guys got a gun problem ~ not us.

16 posted on 12/19/2012 4:51:10 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I would point out that the “right” to vote has been expanded to every nut job except felons (whom the left would indeed include). This expansion was not as the founders envisioned it nor is it enumerated as a right, “endowed by our creator”. The writer fails to understand that the 2nd amendment is not number 2 to protect us from muggers or to facilitate hunting or target shooting but to preserve liberty from tyrants. Limiting it based on some character assessment opens the door wide to tyrants! Would this writer argue to limit voting to those who pass her judgment?
17 posted on 12/19/2012 4:51:21 AM PST by outofsalt ("If History teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I have a better idea. . .let’s make the criminals debate for an hour before they can kill anybody. The issue, my friend, is whether or not our rights our endowed to us by God OR by the state.


18 posted on 12/19/2012 4:53:17 AM PST by McBuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

Another TownHall writer has outed themself, like Deb Saunders yesterday, so TH ought to make more web space available for others that understand freedom.


19 posted on 12/19/2012 4:57:49 AM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: machman

How about this....gun ownership is a RIGHT under the constitution. Voting is not a constitutional right. Yet we want to apply standards to secure what is rightful under the constitution while we cannot apply standards for voting which is not.

I think one should have to pass a basic civics, economic and literacy test before voting. Of course that has been outlawed. I don’t believe one should have to pass any “test” besides not being a felon, to have a firearm. Apparently that will become the norm now.


20 posted on 12/19/2012 4:57:55 AM PST by Mouton (108th MI Group.....68-71)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Yesterday I heard Rich Wyatt of “American Guns” say that there is NO follow up if a felon or any other non qualified person tries to buy a firearm and is refused due to the background check!!!!!!!!!!!!

My answer to that was/is; SAY WHAT??????????????

Jared Loughner, if he was released today could walk into a gun store and try to buy a gun and when he is refused due to the background check, he DOES NOT get a visit by the authorities.???????


21 posted on 12/19/2012 4:59:36 AM PST by Tupelo (Hunkered down & loading up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WILLIALAL
Worse yet is that abortions actually KILL people in the 10’s of millions every year, and not just 30 a year in some school in a LIBERAL state.
22 posted on 12/19/2012 5:01:23 AM PST by JSteff (It was ALL about SCOTUSt. We are DOOMED for several generations. . Who cares? The Dems care!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It’s amazing how incredibly stupid this column is.

I think it speaks volumes that in every one of these shootings, you see paramilitaries walking around the scene with AR’s. They’re not firing them, because the deed is already done. Since AR-15’s are good at stopping murders, and the paramilitary’s AR’s always show up too late, maybe more people should own them. I wonder why none of these murderers invade the places these dusty AR’s are stored.

Anyway, the problem isn’t too many guns, it’s not even too few guns. The problem is a culture that’s rotten. From the top of the head, even to the foot, there is no soundness in it, but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores. Decreasing or increasing guns won’t bind the sores up or mollify them.


23 posted on 12/19/2012 5:03:23 AM PST by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
No need to argue anything. It is a constitutional right. Just say that every sentence to them.
24 posted on 12/19/2012 5:04:02 AM PST by JSteff (It was ALL about SCOTUSt. We are DOOMED for several generations. . Who cares? The Dems care!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska

Went to Canada last month for the first time. Lovely people but very much a foreign country. Even their currency looks like Slobbovian pezoozas.

So...this Canuckistani thinks it’s time to reeducate the masses, just like Janet Reno crowing that “America’s long love affair with the gun is over!”

That was after Waco, IIRC. Once again, the New Fascism is on the march, feeding as usual on the blood of slain innocents.


25 posted on 12/19/2012 5:05:41 AM PST by elcid1970 ("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

And how exactly does this apply to the likes of Adam Lanza?

Answer: It doesn`t. He stole the weapons from his dead mother.


26 posted on 12/19/2012 5:07:41 AM PST by ScottinVA (I've never been more disgusted with American voters.I am)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I believe that I would fail the “Gun Inquisition” within about....let’s see.......in about 3 minutes before I beat the crap out of the Marxist Socialist interviewer.

Then I would ask “I failed the test didn’t I?”

It would not have mattered at all for the test is designed to make a person with “backbone” rail against the extremely liberal and stupid questions they would ask you.


27 posted on 12/19/2012 5:09:03 AM PST by DH (Once the tainted finger of government touches anything the rot begins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Can someone applying for ownership of a deadly weapon withstand an hour-long debate against someone in favor of gun control without resorting to physical or verbal assault?

To a leftist, "verbal assault" means stating a point of view contrary to their own.

I would suspect that the "someone in favor of gun control" would be much more likely to resort to physical assault within an hour, and I'm certain that before the hour is out they will have resorted to proclaiming the prospective gun owner as "racist". (That's just how leftists roll).

28 posted on 12/19/2012 5:09:23 AM PST by Washi (Socialism is Slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I don’t think it is racist to tell the truth. So here goes.

Alabama is 26% black, 2% hispanic, and 72% white.

We also have poor record as far as crime, health, obesity, education, income and other assorted statistics goes which sometimes causes our northern liberal friends to point fingers at us and laugh, calling us rednecks, hillbillies, dumb hicks, red staters etc, etc.

However, if you remove the 26% black from the statistics, we’d have crime rate of North Dakota, education level somewhere in the middle, we’d be much more healthy, less obese, and our medium income would be close if not at the national average.

This is true for the other Southern states with large black poulations.

Now, you can argue that this is a legacy left over from slavery, but it is still true. The idea that Americans are a violent people, and Southerners especially so, is simply untrue. It breaks down very much on a racial basis as to who’s culture is causing these statistics to be higher than Norway or Belgium or other countires that consider themselves to be more civilized.


29 posted on 12/19/2012 5:24:22 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
As a result, no one in Canada grows up thinking of guns as a natural appendage. Gun ownership is seen as a privilege one must earn.

As a US citizen working in Canada for the past 3-years and having worked with Canadians for the past 25-years, I can tell you everyone I talk with hates their restrictive gun laws and are jealous of my ability to own firearms.

Whenever one of my Canadian friends stops by my place in the Northwest, the first thing they want to do is go to the range.
So just because their restrictive gun laws are enforced doesn't mean they are appreciated or respected.

30 posted on 12/19/2012 5:24:46 AM PST by Cuttnhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“Paris —”

France?

I stopped reading right there.


31 posted on 12/19/2012 5:28:19 AM PST by moovova
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coloradan

I COMPLETELY AGREE. Post of the day!


32 posted on 12/19/2012 5:28:46 AM PST by dinodino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The French have strict gun control? What about the horrific shooting of little girls at a school in Paris by Islamists??? Boy, do they have short memories.


33 posted on 12/19/2012 5:29:58 AM PST by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Can someone applying for ownership of a deadly weapon withstand an hour-long debate against someone in favor of gun control without resorting to physical or verbal assault?

Can someone in favor of gun control withstand an hour-long debate against someone that is pro-second amendment without resorting to physical or verbal assault?


34 posted on 12/19/2012 5:31:04 AM PST by Kent1957
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"Anyone who can't withstand a rational debate on the subject of gun control -- particularly in light of last week's Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Connecticut -- should be automatically prohibited from ever owning a firearm."

How Communist of her!


35 posted on 12/19/2012 5:31:54 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
This thread has just added to the FreeRepublic "bang list" (firearms interest list) by adding the keyword "banglist".

Any time a firearms-related thread is created on FreeRepublic, please be sure to add the "banglist" keyword to it so that interested FReepers don't miss it. Just a suggestion.

Let Freedom Ring,

Gun Facts v6!

Click the pic to go to the Gun Facts v6 download page!

36 posted on 12/19/2012 5:32:20 AM PST by Joe Brower (The "American People" are no longer capable of self-governance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
This thread has just added to the FreeRepublic "bang list" (firearms interest list) by adding the keyword "banglist".

Any time a firearms-related thread is created on FreeRepublic, please be sure to add the "banglist" keyword to it so that interested FReepers don't miss it. Just a suggestion.

Let Freedom Ring,

Gun Facts v6!

Click the pic to go to the Gun Facts v6 download page!

37 posted on 12/19/2012 5:32:42 AM PST by Joe Brower (The "American People" are no longer capable of self-governance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Ah, to be the fly in the ointment, the pig at the party or the nails on the chalkboard, the shooter wasn't a gun owner. He was denied the chance to buy a gun at the local gun store.

Is there anything that is more a waste of time than "journalists" writing about guns? They're completely ignorant and don't care to know the truth.

38 posted on 12/19/2012 5:36:41 AM PST by Jabba the Nutt (.Are they stupid, malicious or evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“The Second Amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms, but in other countries — Canada, for example — the right to own a gun is not a given. The onus is on an individual to prove he’s mature, competent and sane enough to own one. As a result, no one in Canada grows up thinking of guns as a natural appendage. Gun ownership is seen as a privilege one must earn. Is there really anything so backward about that? Or is it preferable to arm everyone and pray for the best? “

A lecture in basic human rights from a cheese-eating surrender monkey whose “revolution” wiped God and religion from public life and recognized tha all rights come from the state, lecturing a people who believe their rights as human beings are sacred as derived from God Himself and not from any acts by a guillotine crazed government of luddite iconoclasts.

Ahhh. I feel MUCH better!


39 posted on 12/19/2012 5:38:50 AM PST by ZULU (See video: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-first-siege-of-vienna.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"A question that has repeatedly come up since the Sandy Hook shootings is why America has so much more gun violence than other Western nations."

Good question, Rachel, why don't you answer it?

Who does the killing in America? Are killers randomly spread through the society or are their concentrations in certain population groups. Basically, if you compare the White population in America with the White populations in other weathly countries, the murder rates are comparable.

Don't let PC blinders prevent you from answering your own question. You didn't answer it in your article. Do you have the courage to face the truth, Rachel?

40 posted on 12/19/2012 5:41:53 AM PST by Jabba the Nutt (.Are they stupid, malicious or evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

Did you read the article?


41 posted on 12/19/2012 5:47:51 AM PST by Kaslin ( One Big Ass Mistake America (Make that Two))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: moovova

Don’t be ridiculous


42 posted on 12/19/2012 5:52:19 AM PST by Kaslin ( One Big Ass Mistake America (Make that Two))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The Second Amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms, but in other countries -- Canada, for example -- the right to own a gun is not a given.

I'll try to remember all that, if I ever move to Canada.

43 posted on 12/19/2012 5:55:07 AM PST by Graybeard58 ("Civil rights” leader and MSNB-Hee Haw host Al Sharpton - Larry Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The Second Amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms

Stopped reading right there.

44 posted on 12/19/2012 5:57:02 AM PST by NY.SS-Bar9 (Mitt has dogs for pets - Obama had them for lunch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt
I would point out that the “right” to vote has been expanded to every nut job except felons (whom the left would indeed include).

Hate to break it to you but felons already can vote, in all 50 states. Most states have the restriction that they must have served their time and/or parole or probation. Some few are a little more restrictive but all allow it.

Maine and Vermont even allow incarcerated felons to vote.

45 posted on 12/19/2012 6:07:22 AM PST by Graybeard58 ("Civil rights” leader and MSNB-Hee Haw host Al Sharpton - Larry Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mouton
I don’t believe one should have to pass any “test” besides not being a felon, to have a firearm

What other God given right would you deny felons who have paid their debt to society?

46 posted on 12/19/2012 6:12:31 AM PST by Graybeard58 ("Civil rights” leader and MSNB-Hee Haw host Al Sharpton - Larry Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

confiscation by regulation.

Its the Automatic Media way.


47 posted on 12/19/2012 6:30:43 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey

It is the Automatic Media.

They only live in bloomberg’s NYC.


48 posted on 12/19/2012 6:33:22 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

” Don’t be ridiculous”

Sorry...couldn’t help but make the “Paris” comment. The only good thing newsworthy to come out of France lately was Gerard Depardieu.

Thanks for the threads/articles you post.

(I did read the article...and it was as I expected...someone else trying to “surrender” my right to defend myself.)


49 posted on 12/19/2012 6:34:44 AM PST by moovova
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
A question that has repeatedly come up since the Sandy Hook shootings is why America has so much more gun violence than other Western nations.

What kind of drivel is this, Rachel?

We have lots of people that die in automobile accidents every year.

You could have just as easily written:

A question that has repeatedly come up since the accident on I-95 is why America has so much more car violence than other Western nations.

Maybe we should outlaw gasoline. Or tires. Yeah, that's the ticket.

50 posted on 12/19/2012 6:36:58 AM PST by sauropod (I will not comply)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson