The responsible use of assault weapons is......?

Brian my husband and son hunt deer with their .223 and have for years. is that responsible enough for you ?

The AR frame is used heavily in many responsible forms of shooting.

What constitutes an "assault weapon". A rifle, pistol or shotgun? A baseball bat or a 2 by four? A large rock? A (or several) Molotov cocktail thrown in a crowded theater?

Liberals think a 2x4 with a nail on the end is an assault rifle.

@J.B. Schmidt -- You obviously have no idea how difficult it is to get help for a family member with a mental illness if they don't want it. Holmes' mother no doubt worried to death, tried, and it took this for authorities to step in. So don't hold her accountable.

As for children at the theater that night, PG-13 is a joke. It was intended to mean PG content with material that would frighten younger children. Now all it means is PG where you can say the F-word. I'll make the judgement about what material my child can see, thank you very much, and that included some PG and PG-13 movies back in the day.

@Randy
So the government MUST step in and control the guns owned by law abiding citizens; however, you give the big middle finger if the government attempts to tell which movies are appropriate for your children. So in Randy's perfectly, you become the oligarch deciding which items the government gets to control.

If he is a danger and she let the authorities know this and it became known that he was purchasing ammo by the crate, don't you think they would have intervened? Recently the FAA let 106 government agencies use drones to watch the American people, yet they couldn't find out he was purchasing ammo. Don't play me for a fool.

@J.B. Schmidt...It's funny how you set yourself up as the moral police and yet are immoral or amoral yourself. Your logic is all over the place and you want to defend every right position whether it makes any sense or not.

@J.B. -- would you like to copy/paste my quote where I said the government MUST step in and control guns? I'll be waiting right here. For a very long time.

I don't think the government can or should attempt to control guns. I have said it would be worth talking about finding a way to limit how many rounds a person can fire off without pausing to reload. Shame on me.

As for the rest, you sure have a lot of blame to hand out, don't you? I don't have to play you for a fool.

@Lyle
Exactly my point. When some one attempts to actual question good/bad behavior we become the moral police. Who am I say that taking a 6yr old to pg13 movie at 12am is wrong? Demanding parents take some responsibility for their children is draconian. We live in a society where no singular individual is responsible for the their success and hence no singular individual is responsible for his failures. Therefore the government in its infinite wisdom must regulate the material possessions.

Pointing out the 6yr old is not me praising certain government intervention over another; however, points out the hypocrisy in this argument. It is you libs unwilling to question the parent at the same time you question the ability of every lawful gun owner to have the freedom to purchase what he wishes.

I would say change first, at a personal level. Change also at the family level. Change in the houses of worship that supposedly profess one thing but actively do next to nothing to address violence in this society. Change in education and also change in government legislation. Without the former, the later will do little I agree. As to ending a war, that is an often argued justification for using the A bomb... Do you feel we were justified to burn this many civilians to death, to irradiate this many people causing their slow and painful deaths? I think you were arguing earlier about trained military people using guns to defend themselves...the presumption being that only bad guys will die when the pros whip out their weapons. Tell me about the tens of thousands of Iraqi and afghan citizens who have died... the collateral damage as we prefer to spin it. You want everyone to be able to pack in public places...so we aren't even talking trained killers here. Your proposed world is an ugly world.

@Randy
Blame? Yep, I blame lip wrist progressives wishing to disarm America in their creation of a utopia.

What has happened with the 21st century man? Why are all of these liberal males so easily wanting to be victims and not protect others? This is an issue that is bigger than this crazed Joker person, why aren't liberal males, well real men?

@JB - I have to agree about the appropriateness of bringing young children to see this movie. I've not seen it, but I have seen the previous outings in this series and there is no way I'd take a kid younger than 8 or 10 to see it. And especially not to a midnight showing.

About the parents of the suspect, though - how is it their fault in any way that their grown son committed this horrible crime? As a fully adult man, his parents have absolutely no control over whether or not he gets and takes medication and/or treatment of any kind. Had she called the police and said, hey, I think my son is capable of maniacal homicide, they would have said while they could understand her concern, unless he harmed himself or others, there was little they could do.

@jessica...You're one hell of a man, oops woman. Laser pointer, really? What kind of heat are you packin' little lady? Tell me all about your war stories and how many people you have defended from evil perpetrators. Talk to any cop and they'll tell you how much different range shooting is from actual armed confrontation where they have to discharge their weapon. They have trained and trained to develop muscle memory, but still understand that when the adrenaline is flowing they still miss.

I find it comical that your husband and son hunt with .223s. Probably use 100 round mags since they need to put a lot of rounds down range. Any animal that they kill probably looks like Swiss cheese. You're a funny lady, not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but still funny.

@Brian
War sucks. I hate it. It is not avoidable. Must historians believe that we would have lost millions of people (taking American and Japanese into account) had we not dropped the bomb, but instead invaded the island.

Jessica, I think the 'real men' in a situation like that would be shielding their wives, children or grandchildren with their own bodies and maybe trying to get to an exit rather than mistaking themselves for Clint Eastwood and adding to the hail of bullets.

Second only to "end of the day" and "sounds like a plan", "law abiding citizen" is one of the lamest phrases in American parlance. What didn't make a Holmes a law abiding citizen prior to the second he pulled the trigger?

Wonderful. I hope you're a good shot, because if you miss and hit me, I will be suing you for everything you're worth.

No reason to worry, i have a laser point for my sight, it never misses. Which begs the question, why do you chose to be a victim?

Jessica,why do so many people who agree with you seem tomrelish the thought of confrontations. You sound like you are talking about a TV show....me and my kind cowering under tables while wonder woman saves the day. You don't know me nor what I would do in such a situation and unless you have been in combat...you honestly don't know what you would do. I hope you don't cap the other folks with your savvy shooting. It is not as simple to kill someone as you imagine. They don't stand still too long, for one thing.

Some one gets the drop on you Jessica and you're dead, despite your childish bravura. Reagan was surrounded by well-armed, well-trained people and he still got shot.

The problem is we have to cater to immature people like you who have a false sense of security, while threatening the security of the rest of us which fits in nicely with the sociopathic mindset of the right.

Did you ever think (doubt it) that if multiple people were carrying in that theater, you know, what you wish for, that they might think the other gun packers are with the shooter?

You people are real idiots.

You're half right, Denise...

;-)

Agreed. These respondents fantasize about being heroes. They hope for confrontations. Jessica have you ever even been in a serious fight....an assault? Why are you bucking for a showdown?

@Bren -

Hoffa was waiting for the humanizing personal experience story concerning a close friend or family member!

BTW - Still waiting for all those citations that you owe Hoffa, or admissions ;-)

Mr. Hoffa, my narrative style includes exemplar experiences. If you don't care for it, you'd better stick with AWD as his messaging is uber-direct. ; )

I enjoy reading your posts because you always drop some new employment experience in. Sometimes you are an attorney, a restaurant owner, etc. Which one is correct? No need to answer as it doesn't really matter. Just an interesting note. ; )

Brian, Dad used to go hunting each season--with a camera. He'd bring back stories about the "weekend warriors" shooting up the sides of barns, etc. One year a farmer painted "COW" on his cows and one still ended up getting shot. He's always encouraged us to stay in town during deer hunting season. ; )

There's definitely a range of skill sets out there. The early stats post-concealed carry reflected that current gun owners were expanding ownership rather than sales to first-time gun owners. I find that a concern.

Your father, quite likely, saw some of the most horrific scenes of the logical extension of violence. The human wave, a tactic where large numbers of soldiers run headlong into superior fire power, hoping to overwhelm by sheer force of numbers.... Not being killed fast enough...if he witnessed this, I can well imagine his reservations about guns... Not to mention seeing the bodies stacked like cordwood as the earth was too frozen to bury them. My heart goes out to all the well meaning young people who accept the idea that war is vital to anyone's security or that being a patriot requires becoming trained to kill the enemy du jour. Someone mentioned Japan. Isn't it amazing and absurd that we are friends with all the axis powers from WW2. Was it killing them that achieved this and vice versa? And the great red threat... Did we stop that by sacrificing 60000 young Americans in Vietnam...a country that had no strategic value to us? What about the other proxie wars we run or ran with the Soviets? What purpose was served... How were we protected? We back madmen...we arm them...then later..we take them out as we prefer to spin the old term...assassinate.

@Bren "jessica is willing to risk people's lives, including her own family's, over a little cash and easily-cancelled credit cards" Nice strawman argument .. so you can see the robbers/killers motivation .. how do you do that? i would like to know

Brian, I grew up with guns, they are a part of my family culture. And yes, i could certainly shoot a mad man charging at defenseless women and children, and cowards like you. Good day sir.

Brian, we'll hope that in the ensuing panic of the jessica v. "mad man" firefight that no one falls into jessica or in the line of fire.

I shudder to imagine the casualty count if a non-military civilian warrior like jessica (or two) had opened reciprocal fire in that Aurora movie theatre. The murderer was wearing body armour, I understand, but none of the moviegoers were.

Bren .. Body armor which would stop what type of round? was his legs in body armor? Seems he was dressing the type of a police state swat team member .. Hmmm maybe the police state was his motivation?

How does this not penetrate thick skulls? Holmes was totally outfitted in bulletproof gear. If he had been shot at, Holmes would have wielded around and sprayed in that direction and probably killed the hero and those around him (or her in your case).

Tell you what Jessica. How about we find ways for someone like Holmes not to have the weapons in the first place, because regardless, people would have gotten killed immediately, not that you would care.

Keith Schmitz, you certainly are a moron. Body armor? He had on one kevlar vest, this is not Hollywood, you aged old failed senior citizen. A shot with any firearm to a kevlar vest will knock him down, hell my .45ACP will penetrate it. Glad to see wimps like you and the rest of wilted flower children want to be victims. Me? I will continue to conceal carry and protect your wimpy ass.

Holmes’ outfit blew these jokers away. He wore a ballistic helmet, a ballistic vest, ballistic leggings, a throat protector, a groin protector, and tactical gloves. He was so well equipped that if anyone in that theater had tried what the National Rifle Association recommends—drawing a firearm to stop the carnage—that person would have been dead meat. Holmes didn’t just kill a dozen people. He killed the NRA’s answer to gun violence.

"Limp wristed" "wilted flower children" "wimp" . . .

Does anyone get the feeling our old friend alfred has put on drag?

Protect me, 'jessica'? No, my biggest fear is that you'll miss and hit me or, even worse, one of my loved ones who might otherwise have had a chance to make it out the door.

@Steve...more absurdity. Don't you have a business to run?

I found a teacher and a firefighter to run it for me, it's a nice life being rich but not building anything. Plenty of smarter harder working people out there to do it for me.

@Steve -

Just so long as you remember that you didn't build that business!

Steve didn't build those roads by himself, you mean. Let's keep it real, now!

; )

Hoffa you are taking his words out of context like very other right wing radical tea bagger on the internet. I didn't build the ROADS, someone else did. And having a road in front of my business automatically allows it to succeed beyond my wildest dreams. Just look, i'm rich, posting on the internet and my business is taking order after order, all you need is a road.

Please ignore the tone of Obama's speech, the condescending tone against a business owner, the mocking tone. This has allowed you tea bagger types to take it out of context. If you are as successful as me Hoffa you will send a thank you note to Obama for building that road, and to the teacher that showed you how to paint with canvas, and has since not showed up to balance your books in the summer.

See, Bren gets it. I didn't build the road! The guys that did got paid, and the road building business did as well, but they didn't build the road either! So you see a road building construction company doesn't even build the roads.

BUT.. all you need is a road provided to you at no charge by the government built by workers who got paid by a construction company who didn't really build the road either. The road construction company is successful because they didn't build a road in front of their shop and I am successful because they didn't build one in front of my shop either but we all had teachers.

►In conclusion: What came first, the business or the road? ◄

Steve, other than entirely missing Pres. Obama's point and indulging yourself in what you may fondly believe to be sarcasm, I can surmise that unless your business was built as part of a new industrial park or build-out, the road came first.

Bren - you might be the only smug person in the USA who thinks they understood what Obama meant. What, exactly was his point?

@upset father...Do some research and you'll see how low an incidence of homicide by firearms is. Most of the homicides in the UK occurs from stabbings. Always have been since they banned private ownership of handguns.

BTW, don't want to move, I have too much fun reading comments like yours. Cheapest fun around. :-P.

If it was clearly posted the armed robber would have had his way. The CC citizen would have left their weapon in the car.

@Lyle
I am not against charging a person with manslaughter if they take the life of a non-perp.

Only the American Rifleman swim suit issue is what I would consider porn.

I think that charging the shooter would be correct. "Are you guilty" is a question that would have to be settled in a court. Should we charge a police officer that shoots an innocent? Using a gun comes with many responsibilities. The record of CC shows that "the wild west" theory holds no water.

Only limp wristed eunuchs like you and Carlson miss, not us seasoned gun owners, Rube.

A personal injury lawyer would absolutely love to have the hit patron or his family as a client, on a contingency basis. Of course, the trespassing shooter did not commit an intentional act, but the gross negligence in the act of trespassing would reap a fortune for the victim and his lawyer. A child as a victim would be really scandalous. There would be criminal charges, but the real justice would be in the civil court.

UF.....Why should we ban any weapons? Why not slow hand grenades, even rpg,s? A knife can kill someone but it can't do what happened in CO. Why don't we let folks have killer drones? We ban things that are extremely dangerous and that are made for killing people with great dispatch. I think switchblade knives may still be banned... Not sure.

@Brian .. I guess cars should be on your list .. you could run down quite a few people at a concert or outdoor event .. You like the tyrants Hitler and Stalin love gun control, it isn't about saving lives but controlling the people

@upset father...Sorry, I don't read American Rifleman, even the swimsuit issue that J.B. never misses.

@Lyle -

You always were more of a Soldier of Fortune kind of guy ;-)

You missed it then, Lyle. The cover of this year's issue featured a really nice double barrel pump action model on it. And the rifle wasn't too shabby either.

There goes Brian on the projection train. Wild circular logic. I have read what she wrote and not sure where you see a threat. But then again, the liberal mantra - do as I say, not as I do.

"And yes, i could certainly shoot a mad man charging at defenseless women and children, and cowards like you."
I think it should be more like this:
mad man charging at defenseless women, children and cowards like you.

Hmmmm and hear i thought it was a right .. why do you look up what a "right" means

How about this same strategy for voting

Anyone can purchase or own a car, with none of the requirements you listed. Nothing in the law can stop even a 5 year old from purchasing a car.
If your list did have merit, would you require the same for additional guns?
Do you understand the difference between a right and a privilage?
Answer these, then I'll flame you.

Sweet, more insurance only the bad guys have guns.

Please google the term "right"

Mr. Blade

Did you not see I acknowledged what you said and agreed with you? Please read what I said.

You do not have a right in the constitution to drive, it is a privilege.

Your right Rees, the government should and could protect us from everything and anyone that might harm us, Just give up all our RIGHTS and blamo we will be safe as little babies in the womb ... woooo hoooooo

There are two kinds of people in this world. The first kind will come up with reasons to take your rights away. Then there are the others who always will defend your rights even if they offend some people.

Agreed.

Yup on banning the prescription drugs. Not sure on what the illegal stuff and alcohol are doing to people, but probably adding to the problem. Everything in moderation I say.

Fear is what I hear most acutely.

Brian - that would be mettle. Not just words. Unless they live in metal houses. Kind of like glass houses.

It is quite apparent that Mr Carlson chooses to be a victim in a mass shooting event. You are either going to bring down the evil doer or cower like a child in the fetal position and hope nothing happens. Mr. Carlson chooses the cowards way out, I prefer to continue to carry my .44 magnum pistol and save innocent lives.

I don't think that's his name. There's the obsession with limp wrists, and now with the 'victim' thing he sounds a lot like jessica.

JB... Maniacs are not afraid of being killed. Mass murders are suicidal to begin with. Criminals assume they will get away with their crimes. Unlike yourself, moat of the pro gun posters on this blog SPEAK as if they LIKE the thought of having to use their weapons to protect or as vigilantes. No one on this thread has spoken about
protecting their homes and property. The discussion and fantasy is taking down the
bad guy in a public place. Paul Ruble... As with Jessica.... Assuming that people who
work for peace are cowards is a mistake. Have you confronted anyone who was physically threatening your life?

JB, Colorado has a death penalty and Holmes surrendered, so this was no deterrent. The point is if someone is nuts the idea that other people may be armed will not stop him.

Did the fact that Reagan was surrounded by a well-armed, well-trained Secret Service detail stop him?

The point is that there are crazy people, and the best thing is we should not respond in kind. Pushing the notion that every one being armed is security is just that.

"Brian, I grew up with guns, they are a part of my family culture. And yes, i could certainly shoot a mad man charging at defenseless women and children, and cowards like you. Good day sir." Jessica

Brian U dont reed So gude.

I don't think it's even the military industrial complex. There were civil wars going on in Europe during WWII. What these people did to each other, whether they were on the Allies side, Nazis side or the Communists side, were unthinkable. It is hard to imagine humans can do this to each other, to family, to friends, to neighbors, all because they want the power and revenge. But then it isn't just humans, look what animals do to each other.

There are many ways to oppose evil. the perpetrators of torture murder in Latin America, many of them trained and supported by the US (SOA Grads), are being brout to justice one by one, tried and sentenced. Christ was most certainly a pacifist. He undercut evil by looking at the long range consequences and teaching real peace. You have bought in to a very prevalent ideology and you are part of a huge camp.
Does it bring you happiness? Will your children die in wars? Is there any hope for improvement or are we all simply killers? I prefer to hope for higher consciousness, to believe that people can be educated and that there can be vast improvements in human understanding and cooperation. I believe in compassion over anger. This is not evil nor is it refusing to deal with evil. Evil is rooted in ignorance, greed and a lust for power. The problem with battling evil...your phrase...is that all too often you become what you fight..... You fire bomb Dresden to frighten the Russians, all the while trying to paint it as a necessary act. Or you enslave the Palestinians....turning their lands, which were stolen, into the worlds largest prison. There are countless examples.

AWD, in a perfect sense, you are right as, o be a perect pacifist, you would need to overcome all anger directed toward people. I do believe there are people who have evolved a long way towards this perfect state... However, if you say that the ideology does not not exist or that great acts or pacifism have not happened, you simply are wrong. Are your ideas or values wrong be at use you do not live by them perfectly? Pacifists are people trying to live an increasingly peaceful life, and trying to help others do the same.

Hence the title of my post.... Guns are tools however and they have a special purpose. They don't work well for massagers, for digging holes, nor for unscrewing lightbulbs. They make expensive paper weights. Their proliferation and the effects of the global arms industry on the quality of life around this planet is evident and does not produce peace and security. The solution guns offer is at best short term.

People are not the problem either. Ignorance, greed and a desire for power are the roots of this evil. Guns and gun culture are symptomatic of the greater malaise. This thread provides a perfect cross section of thinking on the issue... From the macho bullshit and taunts about about cowardice, the homophobic crap, the appeals to the incontestability of amendments that were written by people hundreds of years ago for very different issues, the expressed passion for weapons.... To more reasoned expressions of a decision to own weapons to protect property from burglars, etc....
The gun advocates have not offered any ideas for improvement....just more of the same. The world is full of killing so, let's buy more guns and we will be able to do the same.

That would be an awesome analogy if it was original and you hadn't just copied it from the photograph that's been passed around to every corner of the web for the past 6 months...

The pic was actually about spoons

http://tinyurl.com/dyoqrw6

And of course your Comic-Con perspective helps.

These comments about you can use cars, gas, a lovely matched set of steak knives are really dumbassed. All these things serve a useful, every day purpose.

This gets down to the politics. No matter how irrational your argument, for you it gets down to you will not have a Democrat tell you what to do, because it attacks your manhood, or something.

It is your choice to be a wimp Keith, accept it, embrace it, and let others protect you.

I don't think you need an arsenal to be the person you describe, nor does everyone that has an arsenal think along those lines. There is evidence that the vast majority of legal gun owners are extremely responsible. I think Jessica does react with more emotion than fact, and this is not good for the pro-gun argument, but the anti-gun group seems to avoid the facts just as well. If the "take away cars" argument should go, I think the "hitting someone else's toddler" needs to go also.

"If the "take away cars" argument should go, I think the "hitting someone else's toddler" needs to go also."

Oh really? Just as there are some people who think they are Clint Eastwood and really shouldn't be shooting their guns in public, there are people who think they are Mario Andretti and shouldn't even be driving. In both cases, someone else's toddler can be hit.

The idea is not to penalize all the responsible gun owners and drivers. It's to discourage the attitude that equates guns and fast cars with a portion of the male anatomy. And maybe, just maybe, discuss how we can limit a lunatic's ability to spray a crowded public place with a plethora of bullets in a very short time.

Just pointing out that it is an emotional based argument, rather than a factual based one. Can you provide details of a toddler getting in the way of defensive gun fire? It's the blind pregnant nun argument.

And of course 'every man who doesn't carry is a limp-wristed victim' is the acme of rationalism?

Did I say that? I stated that those comments are more emotion than fact. I do not consider emotional arguments rational. I also do not think that extreme awfulizing is rational either.

That's some of the hope and change. I guess you can also get rid of the Preemptive Nobel Peace Prize as a tool in your quest for peace.

@Jessica
Easy answer. They feel their superior intellect can produce a utopian peace. That evil and hatred are purely manifestations of ignorance that their wisdom has been able to overcome. Hence, if they controlled the ignorant masses (ie socialism) then the world will become a better place.

There's 'armed' and then there's 'armed', jessica. Blazing away like a moron and possibly hitting someone else's toddler is not a reasoned response to a crisis. Your call for every 'man' to be armed is what i disagree with. I would honestly not mind being in the presence of someone who knew what s/he is doing, but that's rare.

Why do people like you confuse masculinity with the ability to put projectiles into living bodies? That's the sort of glorification that puts such ideas into the heads of lunatics like Homes.

jessica - You are sounding a lot like trademark Steve in comment drag. I find your comments hil!arious, if very disingenuous. Your statements that a real man is only one that is well armed with guns sounds like you are really one of those many dweeby guys at the firing range. If a woman cannot worship you, make one up, a comic book character like jessica.

@jessica...In an ordered civil society I don't think it is unreasonable to be able to go about one's life without having to carry a weapon. It appears that you don't think that we are living in a civil society. It is not healthy to always be in a state of readiness to fight something that has an extremely low probability of occurring. Successful living requires a certain amount of trust in the probability of events. There is no way to stop incidences like that which occurred Aurora, given the easy access that any citizen has to a plethora of firearms and other destructive devices.

From the reading of this thread, I think that what people are objecting to you about is that you don't have the psychology and personality that should be able to own and carry firearms. Police, who are paid professionals, carry weapons and are carefully screened to eliminate people like yourself. They are carefully trained in the assessment of a situation and when to deploy lethal force. I know many cops and the worst situation is when they have to use their weapon and is clearly a means of last resort. From your writing, deploying your weapon would be your first choice. This is the problem when you have amateurs carrying lethal force.

If you are so enamored with firearms, why don't you become a police officer or join the military. At least under the conditions you would be trained in the proper use of such and society would be much safer than having a vigilantly like you on the loose.

@Dirk Gutzmiller....LMAO. C'mon Dirk you just made my day. I can now see some wimpy guy dressed as Jessica Rabbit at Comic-Con. He/she is dressed in the camo evening gown with ammo slings across his/her less than ample chest. He/she has two huge sidearms strapped to his/her hips and is standing with an AR-15 at the ready.

He/she makes the statement: "I can't help that I look like this, I was just made this way!" I'm still laughing.

@jessica
How is it that a real man needs a weapon to defend anything? I was raised to believe (and still do) that those who need weapons to make their point are the cowards. It is a real coward who needs a DEADLY weapon to fight their battles, instead of taking their lumps and learning a lesson or two. Instead, those who carry a weapon have a sense of invincibility which can only lead to more trouble. I'd rather take a bullet to defend my family, than to carry around a gun because I am afraid.

Jessica....there are a lot of us with a bit of foresight....we ARE trying to protect women and children ...and men...from annihilation and have been doing so for years. The nuclear disarmament going on in the world is happening because men (and women) who prefer to work towards peace, stand up in the face of great opposition and take action. Fearful people buy and stockpile weapons... isnt that what you have said. You fear being shot in a public place...hence you have weapons. Protection is not only in the heat of the moment...but even there there are options to killing people. Real protection always must consider long term consequences...your world and thinking is pure Hatfields and McCoys.... IRA and the Brits..etc.

Just came across this article online:
http://gma.yahoo.com/women-survived-theater-shooting-grieve-hero-boyfriends-215438672--abc-news-topstories.html
Isn't funny how the "cowards" without guns that night made the ultimate sacrifice to save the lives of the people they were with. Those guys that took a bullet to save their loved ones are the real men.

Sounds like someone is channeling Vasquez from the movie Aliens -- "Hey, Vasquez, ever been mistaken for a man?" "No -- have you?"

jessica - There are stolen valor considerations, both legal and ethical, to claiming military background if you were real and did not serve. No one likes people doing that, no matter what their political persuasion. A defense that you are a fictional character would get you off the hook, however.

Please do not post a mustachioed photo of yourself in a catsuit and weapons strapped all over your hairy chest.

Dirk, The Supreme Court ruled June 28 that the Stolen Valor Act of 2006 was unconstitutional, saying it violated the free speech rights of those making false claims about winning the Medal of Honor and other combat citations. The Republicans are in process of passing a revised law.
So Greg-a-Fact rates your comment a half-false.

@jessica...LMAO; You just keep cracking me up. Let's see, how much actual combat experience do you have, and not just in theater? How many times have you fired your weapon in anger. MOS? I guess that would be dependent on if mine is bigger than yours. I was authorized to carry and deploy thermonuclear weapons, is that big enough for you? There's a Taoist proverb: "Those who say do not know; those who know do not say."

I didn't stay in the active military for nearly 10 years so that I would have to come home and carry weapons .for protection.

BTW, I am a trained clinician and if you would have come before me while I was practicing in the Navy, you'd never get close to a firearm again.

Not sure if "omnipotent" is quite the word you want to use to describe Mr. Ruble. That would be more of a description of you, they way you talk of being able to hit a moving target in a crowded, chaotic room.
Mr. Ruble is probably being more speculative, gathering assumptions about your psychological make up from the context of your writings.
Either way it seems like you may have an unfounded high regard for your abilities; as a marksman and a writer.

Jessica I think you have an incredibly limited notion of what defense is and can be. BTW, you must be really opposed to religions like Christianity... a religion that was held dear, if misunderstood in some enormous aspects, by "the founding fathers," so many of you think you pay homage to. Christ was such an incredible wimp wasnt he? No courage. Should have blasted the Romans (if he was the Son of God) with lightening strikes or something, and if he was just a man... why not carry a sword? Why all this talk about peace, forgiveness and compassion?

How exactly do you connect violence on TV and in Movies to a concealed weapon law?
How many shootings have happened in Milwaukee alone these past months? Has the number been changed by the concealed carry law?

Johnny Really Sharp Blade(man)..... wow...lets see. WTF does that have to do with ANYTHING on this thread? Are you a slave Johnny? Has someone taken away your big shiny gun? This NRA paranoid crap is fed to you to support a billion dollar industry...you are a sucker for I am sad to say. Do you think the people who run the NRA are afraid of a repressive govt takeover? They are in bed with our government for gods sake Johnny. They lobby the hell out of our Congressmen....they are best buds my man! The international armament industry is BIG BUSINESS...its not about freedoms...its about MONEY!

@Brian
Lets apply your rational intellect to speed limits. What is their purpose, to protect life? Since a new study finds that traffic deaths are up 13.5% this year over last, are they really doing their job. What makes this speed limit imposed on us the safe one? Considering it is 65 on the expressway and we are allowed to drive about ten over that prior to handing out traffic violations, how effective is that law? Couldn't the same safety on the roads by attained through better instruction during drivers Ed?

The same is true with guns. Please provide the ratio of deaths between the number of 100 round mag owned vs. number of people killed by a gun having a 100 round mag. A rational person would see that this random act of violence was not stoppable by legislation. Two of the largest massacres committed by an individual with a gun were down in countries with the most restrictive gun control laws (Australia and Norway).

You are attempting to pull conclusions from the incident that are not rational. In a world were evil exists, the only peace gained by disarmament is absolute control by the wicked. Not unlike the assumed safety a speed limit provides, gun control only restricts the trained, lawful citizen. Controlling the lawful in an attempt to create peace thorough government imposed equality, sounds like a socialist agenda to me.

Lastly, no one would use an IED for deer, that dumb. They are used for fishing.

@Jim...As much as people would want to believe, the most common firearm on the western frontier was not a six shooter or lever action repeating rifle, it was the good old muzzle loaded shotgun. Another trivia point is that most communities did not allow the carrying of firearms within the city limits. It is well known that alcohol and firearms didn't mix well. This was the cause of the infamous shootout at the OK Corral.

The idea of the firearms myth have been actively promoted by the firearms manufacturers and the NRA is nothing but a shill for that same group.

Firearms are tools designed for specific purposes. They haven't been designed to compensate for peoples' personal inadequacies; they are marketed as such.

I have to agree with Jim here. Jessica actually said her laser sight never misses! Put your laser on a man running towards you blasting away with his assault weapon....you might hit him...oh does he have tactical armor on? Give me a break.