Credibility+brokaw=ZERO!
Brilliant!!
Because before he sets out to commit mass-murder, a killer will check to make sure he is obeying all appropriate gun laws!
Hunting has nothing to do with the second amendment. As long as this jerk can hunt, he’s cool.
Freedom or safety, which will he choose?
“But when a right becomes an acute threat to the general welfare it is time for re-evaluation.”
It’s called the Bill of Rights, Tom. Not the Bill of Needs.
But he may be half-right. Maybe it is time for revolution.
Tell me, Tommy, is your Leftist Stupidity an acute pain, or just a dull ache that you think will go away if you drink enough?
Definitely “hotair dot com”
How about these jerks wait to find out the truth about Las Vegas before making stupid comments? The entire incident smells.
No Tommy you are not pro gun. You are just another anti 2nd amendment moron.
“But when a right becomes an acute threat to the general welfare it is time for re-evaluation.”
Re-education is what Comrade Tommy Fudd really means.
Remember Sen. Bob Kerrey and his beautiful gun/ugly gun ad?
Ruger Red Label O/U versus AR-15. Keep one, ban the other.
tommy brokaw huh?
Well Tommy, the investigation so far on the Shooter has confirmed it was completely legal for him to purchase guns and to have passed a background check. So right there your entire thesis is blown up. No amount of gun laws could have stopped the LV shooting. What can stop such incidents is vigilance, vigilance, vigilance. For examples, hotels may now opt to scan all luggage coming and going just like airport security.
Since “military grade” is a made up marketing term, like “assault weapon”, this guy has no credibility.
The Second Amendment is not about the right to shoot; it is about the right to shoot back.
He does know the semi-auto pistol millions have is military grade....right??
Well “little” tommy, you’re certainly writing for an appropriately named web site, because you’re full of Hot Air (you’re also full of something very stinky)!
Even with the Las Vegas incident, "gun rights" are in no way "an acute threat to the general welfare". The news media is certainly blowing it up to appear that way, but it simply is not, as even a cursory examination of gun crime shows.
Which one of these background changes would have stopped this guy?
Because people intent on murdering people will obey these "limits."
Just stop with the Stupidity.
Kurt Schlichter said it best.
"I don’t agree with liberals often, because I’m not an idiot and because I love America, but when they once again say, “We must have a conversation about guns!” I still couldn’t agree more. And, since all we’ve heard is you leftists shrieking at us all week, I’ll start it off.You don’t ever get to disarm us. Not ever.
There. It sure feels good to engage in a constructive dialogue."
What limit on ammo? Is this a limit by how much space I have? If I buy 1000 rounds with each caliber I have, that’s 5000 rounds, if I buy that case of each while I still have a partial case, maybe that’s as much as 10,000 rounds does he think that’s acceptable? What if I buy a case of 3250? This is such a ridiculous statement to limit quantity of ammo
Maybe Mr. Brokaw ought to obtain a copy of a 1976 Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police position paper on firearms control that, among things, said “the registration, serialization, and licencing of firearms will not act as a deterrent to violence and will not necessarily identify the person perpetrating the crime” and that “cessation of firearms sales will not remove them from those who can do violence”. Seems most likely American law enforcement officials would share such views back then and certainly today.