What do you mean your display name says it all? I don't get it.

"... a legacy of Switzerland's policy of arming its men to defend its neutrality."

I thought that's how they made cheese.

You changed your name. It used to say river. That's why I didn't get it.

What do you mean your display name says it all? I don't get it.

It says he's an idiot. Why else would he patronize a website he regards as "A GOD DAMNED JOKE".

See what happens when the Swiss come to USA for vacation? Looks like we rubbed off on this guy... "Literally" heh heh

#1.1, dman nailed it.

Funny how people like you that hate MSNBC so much patronize the vine. Heh heh...

Well, that's one way to get youreself banned for life. Good job dude...

The Swiss government maintains a very tight grip on AMMUNITION. There are very strict laws as to the amount and location of ammunition the Swiss may possess for the guns kept in their homes. These laws prohibit the open sale of ammunition tied to target shooting or arms training. A reason why crimes such as this are very rare. Having said that, it is obvious that any law can be subverted or simply ignored by various citizens hell bent on murder. A very sad case seen here.

Where's the LIBOR connection?

If you want a gun you will get one .. there is no control for those that want to do harm with a gun.

bob-1008224

Only ours has liberal gun laws

Gun ownership is widespread in Switzerland and voters rejected a proposal in February 2011 to tighten the country's liberal fire arms laws.

Did you even read the article?

http://genevalunch.com/

More complete information from an English language Swiss site...

Sounds like a welfare recipient

Looks like the facts in this case pretty much shoot down most of the gun haters arguments of late.

There will always be a "nut" in every crowd. Do we stop living and give up our rights and freedom because of this?? I think not.

He used at least two firearms -- an old Swiss army carbine and a rifle capable of firing lead shot -- even though his weapons had been seized and destroyed in 2005, and he was not currently listed as having any guns.

OK.

Can any of you gun banning advocate bobbleheads tell me how ANY gun law would have prevented this from happening?

I would like to go on record disagreeing with the first reply's use of the word 'anymore'.

Our media is such crap! Here they pick on the 1 shooting in Switzerland, because everyone uses Switzerland as an example of how everyone has a gun and no one gets killed! So this ISOLATED incident is just that...isolated! But notice he has medical issues...again the shooter is on meds! The alcohol added to it, but 3 people were killed out of 8 MILLION! I'd say that their lack of gun control is highly effective. But like anything nothing is perfect.

According to BBC,

"Guns are deeply rooted within Swiss culture - but the gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept"

That speaks volume...not the one isolated incident! Our media, which has its head up this administrations ass has an agenda...gun control! 7,999,997 were not killed in Switzerland, as a result of having guns!

Mqira, if you don't want to hear any news about anything happening in this country or any other country that involves crime, just choose not to tune in. Alternately, you can stick with Fox where they pick and choose the news they want to either embellish or ignore altogether, in accordance with their policy of lying because they can, according to American media law. I would also encourage you to calm down. The shooting in Switzerland isn't about you, or America or your 2nd Amendment rights. It's about 3 people who died and 2 others who were injured by a drunken, gun shooting murdering head case in Switzerland . Speaking of head cases, calm the frankfurter down. You're losing it, man!

Mass shootings are rare in Switzerland, although gun possession is widespread -- some estimates run to at least one for every three of its 8 million inhabitants.

And those are only the ones they know about.

Also to those who say go to biased Fox news, what station isd more biased against guns than MSNBC?

Hey, antis, get a clue.

AG99, all he had to do is say "I used 10 rounds last month hunting" and he gets ten more rounds. One year and he has 120 rounds. That is more than has been used in any mass shooting in U.S. So you really think ammo being readily available is a problem?

The article had to make a point of him having an "assault" rifle. Well, yeah, what do you think the Swiss carbine was? It was a true military "Assault Rifle" NOT an "Assault Style" weapon like the semi-autos available here that you are trying so hard to take away from us. This was just another stab at "Assault Style" weapons by liberal biased MSNBC. The only difference between a Ruger mini 14 ranch and the Ruger mini 14 Assault is the stock. Ranch is wood and assault is polymer. They both use the exact same ammo and mechanically are identical. But when I put a polymer stock on my ranch, you now want to ban it as an assault weapon which it is not. This only makes it an assault STYLED weapon. Does a spoiler make my car a race car? NO, it only changes the looks. It does not go any faster.

The truth is out there if you will just look.

Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the US- 500+ people were murdered there in 2012. Instead of more gun laws- how about enforcing the ones we ALREADY HAVE!!!! Gun Control is not about the guns it's about the CONTROL,

@AG99

BlueLake is right. Switzerland controls the guns by controlling the ammo: "Swiss men serving in the citizen militia that makes up the bulk of the Swiss army keep their rifles at home, but not the ammunition, which is kept in armories."

This man obviously got some ammo from somewhere, but the lack of widespread ammo makes crimes like this rare in Switzerland. But since we can buy ammo at walmart, crimes like this are common here.

Wrong. As your quote indicates, this is ONLY for military personnel who have their issued full-auto rifle at home. Once they leave the military they are allowed to keep their rifles after they have been converted to semi-auto only. Ammunition is openly available and only requires that purchases be logged by the seller.

I'd much rather see Obama call for a Presidential Commission on the affects of psychotropic drugs on patients with mental illness than this gun witch hunt BS.

All one needs to do is read or watch the news to know we're reacting to this rhetoric by purchasing more guns than we'd have imagined. In Colorado they reported that a normal 2 hour background check is taking 9 days because of the back log. Thank goodness the AR I want doesn't even require a check.

The Obama media's pushing hand gun purchases through the ceiling; doing the exact opposite of what I think they wanted; or is it? Obama's knee jerk reaction to the so called public out cry will arm more Americans than ever before. It has forced me to plan to purchase the AR I've always wanted, but could not afford. And the demand that he's created has made it even more expensive. I'm still not detoured; just mad because of the added expense.

So with all due respect Mr. President, up yours!

As far as anyone here can tell, gun laws are enforced, to the degree possible. When you have a nation with enough guns in circulation for every man, woman and child, the police have a problem with which to deal that is bigger than they will ever be, in #s that is. Also, since Bush allowed the assault weapons ban to expire without even considering the impact it would have on this already gun saturated nation, the problem got exponentially worse. We're all aware of the gun show and Internet loopholes, and we're all aware that many folks who would, otherwise, be denied gun rights legally resort to acquiring guns illegally. We also know that rapid assault weapons and high capacity magazines and unlimited quantities of ammunition are the choice weapons of mass murderers. To ignore these aggravating factors is not only irresponsible, it is unacceptable. So, at the very minimum, it is being proposed that we go back to the days, weeks, months after Reagan was shot and reinstate the Brady Bill to ban assault weapons and unlimited stores of ammunition used for said assault weapons. While you may enjoy owning these weapons, it is clear that they are dangerous in the hands of the many and, especially, those who would use them for mass slaughter of innocents. Would you mind if we simply employ logic, common sense, experience and history to tackle this problem? Would it be too much to ask that you and other responsible gun owners who know that it would be a rare day indeed for you to ever require the services of an assault weapon, to support our society's efforts to get those guns off the streets and, at the very minimum, make it harder to mass murderers using assault weapons to kill innocent men, women and, God help us, children? Would re-instating the Brady Bill really represent a hardship for you whatsoever? Would closing the gun show and Internet loopholes REALLY be a bother to you and all other law abiding and responsible gun owners? Those are rhetorical questions, by the way, so no need to answer. It would be a shame if you outted yourself to be a selfish, self-absorbed and self-centered ME, ME, ME person. None of the best humans are those things.

Mgira,three people killed out of 8 million,I think you had better go back and read the article again,better yet get someone to read it to you.

Hey PJ.... you are WRONG! A guy in China killed 33 people with a knife recently. Bad people will do bad things.

askandreceive -

The statistical evidence showed that the "assault weapons" ban did not reduce criminal use of firearms.

Sometimes it seems so simple.

Mike-680333, you are wrong. There were 22 children stabbed in China and ALL of them survived. I always find it helpful to actually read the news instead of relying on hearsay or someone else's biased account of events.

Among the G12 nations, the Swiss are second only to us in gun homicides. Probably because they are heavily armed. Nevertheless, our gun homicide rate is close to 3 times theirs. Probably because they do have significant controls on ammo. For them, a mass homicide is three people; for us in double digits.

abortion clinics kill more people than guns - ban drive thru abortion clinics

Point is... bad people will do bad things. If you want to talk numbers..only 3% of all gun crimes are committed with "assualt Rifles ". You want to punish the millions of law abiding citizens for the crimes of a few? Until Barry and his band of misfits finish their assault on the constitution.... we have the 2nd amendment. Most states gun shows run background checks. If they don't, then they should. I have no problem with that. These internet sales you speak of... they go through an FFL licence holder. No average joe can directly purchase a firearm without going through an FFL holder. Banning guns is going to reduce crime about as much as banning drug use. Take the time to get the statistics and you will see that states with concealed carry have actually reduced their crime rates. I'm not going to argue with someone who is against legal firearm ownership. It's pointless. Until Barry's "transformation" happens.... we have the 2nd amendment FTW.

Ever been to a gun show? Some of them have thousands of patrons and the amount of weapons and ammo on hand is pretty substantial. NOT ONE PERSON has ever been shot at a gun show. Legal gun owners are not the problem. Gun bans are a hot button issue of the left. Always has been and always will be.

asknreceive1-1054310,

Put your tin foil hat back on buddy. I dont know why libs always have to bring up Fox news, then pretend its any worse than this garbage or your pick of ABC, CNN, etc. Under the assault weapon ban, we still had it used in Columbine. It did nothing, and there was no impact either before or after the ban. You see, the supporters of our rights use facts and statistics. Scared ignorant libs such as yourself only use fear and ignorance. Look up stats on the impact of gun control, then you can talk when you done come off as a scared little uninformed lib.

@Mike, I asked - what would've happened in this case if the drunk guy had a knife instead of gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vuPfOhF5Nw

MIke-680333- "NOT ONE PERSON has ever been shot at a gun show. Legal gun owners are not the problem."

Mike, stop making things up!

Pedestrian-in-SF

So much for all that "in Switzerland EVERYONE is armed and nobody gets shot!" business.

It's also so much for all that "gun control will make society safer" business. This shooter was not supposed to have guns because of his mental illness (we have the same rules here) and his guns had been seized. BUT..he got them somehow! Clearly this demonstates that taking guns away doesn't make anyone safer.

"After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military." W. Burroughs

Askandreceive--so long a statement with so many misstatements. The vast majority of guns used for illegal activities are also obtained illegally, and the vast majority of those are handguns. Assault-style weapons are rarely used by professional criminals or gang bangers in the commission of their crimes, at least on this side of the border. The only thing made "exponentially worse" (your statement) is the total number of citizens legally possessing these weapons and using them responsibly for home defense, pleasure shooting and hunting. You conveniently overlook the fact that the vast majority of mass shooting incidents in which assault weapons were used were committed by mentally unstable individuals, yet there is no call for an increase in providing care and monitoring of the mentally ill in our society--much easier to simply ignore the problem and try to ban them from obtaining guns, a virtual impossibility. The simple fact is that the criminal element and mentally ill will always find a way to obtain the weapons they need/want. None of the laws currently on the books or under the Brady Bill would have prevented what happened in Newtown, Virginia Tech, Aurora or Phoenix. To PROPERLY re-phrase your statement, "While you may enjoy owning these weapons, it is clear that they are dangerous in the hands of the VERY, VERY FEW (emphasis mine)". The current push for "assault-style" weapons ban in the wake of Newtown is simply knee-jerk, feel-good posturing by politicians pushing a simple-minded solution to a very complex problem. Regardless of your personal bias, assault-style weapons are useful for home defense, ARE often employed for hunting everything from varmints to small game to deer/elk, and the term itself is highly misleading. Read Half Cherokee's comments above--scores of weapons recognized as legitimate hunting weapons which have been available for decades if not generations are clip fed and the distinction between them and "assault" weapons is often nothing more than cosmetic. I personally have no problem closing the loopholes at gun shows and internet purchases, requiring more comprehensive background checks and limiting clip size, although the last item is ridiculous nonsense--limiting clips to 20 rounds or even less barely makes a dent in the rate of fire for the accomplished shooter practiced in changing clips. Particularly galling is the stance of many "celebrities" who are calling for the same knee-jerk response while making obscene incomes glorifying the same senseless violence you ascribe to the use of assault weapons. Furthermore, the culture of violence propagated by H'wood is hypocrisy personified when they then pretend to be "against violence". You want solutions? I suggest you campaign for more and better treatment of mental illness in this country, a ban on ultra-violent video games and movies, responsible debate on the depiction of violence in our society in general as well as the measures we BOTH agree to mentioned above. I would also suggest that you remember that the worst mass murder in our history was an act of domestic terrorism--the Oklahoma City bombing--and Timothy McVeigh didn't need a gun at all. Also keep in mind that gun violence is almost universally less in states with liberal gun laws and concealed carry laws than in states with the most restrictive laws--witness the deplorable murder "record" just set in Chicago, a city with extremely restrictive gun possession laws. Incidents like Newtown, while horrific, are extremely rare--basing national legislation on incidents like these is not only misdirected, it will have no effect on the level of gun-related crime or gun violence in this country, it will simply further impede the rights of law-abiding, responsible gun-owners.

@ asknrecieve, it's your socialistic opinion and your entitled to it; however, if you're an American citizen, a concept the First Amendment of the US Constitution has afforded you; incidentally, a document forged by some of the very best human beings. I, yes I, would prefer that you not infer what is best for all since all includes me, me, me. I love America because it allows me to be me and a we if I so choose; liberty. Ben Franklin said,"Those willing to give up liberty for security deserve neither;" by the way, one of our very best humans! The Second Amendment is a liberty I'm not willing to give up or even compromise with any restrictive law such as the Brady Bill. Me being armed keeps people like you self, my enemies, and my government respectfully cautious of me. A stability that is responsible and acceptable to me! Get over your ranting and demanding self!

More recent examples of people being shot at gun shows:

http://thecontributor.com/2-injured-unintentional-shooting-gun-show

http://www.supertalk.fm/Shooting-at-Gun-Show-Leaves-Two-Injured/14515154

It's also so much for all that "gun control will make society safer" business. This shooter was not supposed to have guns because of his mental illness (we have the same rules here) and his guns had been seized. BUT..he got them somehow! Clearly this demonstates that taking guns away doesn't make anyone safer.

The thing is, most anti-gun people wouldn't suggest that stricter gun controls will stop ALL incidents, or ALL criminals getting hold of guns. Just that it will make it harder.

Besides, in a country full of people who own guns, where were those gun owners to stop him before the police got there? Isn't that what we are told will happen if everyone is armed, that someone will stop him and that if you wait for the police that will be too long? How did that work out here?

Asknreceive -

Google "China knife attacks." There have beeen multiple fatalities. From the "Daily Beast" (12/15/2010):"

The spate of stabbings began in March of that year [2010], when a man in Fujian province went on a slashing spree outside a primary school, killing 8 and injuring 5. The attacker was a jobless doctor who reportedly was venting frustration after a failed romantic relationship. Over the next two months, four similar incidents took place in southern and inland China, leaving more than eight primary and kindergarten students dead and 57 injured. The timing of the four incidents suggested the possibility of a “copycat” phenomena, in which criminals mimic sensational incidents after learning of them from media. The stabbing spree alarmed government authorities, who enhanced security at schools; a Chinese regulation now also requires people to register with their national identity cards when purchasing large knives.

Knife Control!

asknreceive1-1054310

, it is being proposed that we go back to the days, weeks, months after Reagan was shot and reinstate the Brady Bill to ban assault weapons and unlimited stores of ammunition used for said assault weapons.

Ok, first let's get one thing straight, there NEVER was a BAN on "assault weapons" or high capacity magazines. Only the import and manufacture of NEW weapons was banned. Those weapons and high cap magazines that were already in the hands of the public were never outlawed. Also there was NEVER a limit on stores of ammunition and there never will be because anyone with half a brain realizes such a ban would be utterly impossible to enforce.

The Brady Bill was NOTHING other than drivel used to provide the sheeple with a false sense of security. Or did you forget that the Columbine shooting took place during the previous "ban"??

There IT IS: Another NutJob with a gun; IT IS Around The Globe and his original guns were destroyed in 2005 when he was under Psychiatric Treatment. AND There are Gun Maufacturers Around the Planet Just Eager to sell their Wares; TO ANYBODY Sane or Not Sane. And Yes, there are over 300,000,000 guns in The US; and YES the population is greater than of Swiss AND YES Therefore We, America, Have Many, Many, Many, Many More NutJobs running ON THE LOOSE As A Result Of Corporate Greed: BigPharma buying legislation to close down Mental Hospitals Across America So they can peddle their Worthless pills for the Mentally Compromised. AND NO American Universal HealthCare System like The SANE Countries HAVE. This Fact Is An AMERICAN DISGRACE Just so the insurance companies can $CREW US with INSANE Policy Rates, With Many TurnDown "Treatment Denials", which So many people cannot afford, and No Expanded Psychiatric "Examine and Retain" Teams, Like with This NutCase who got around it and got guns Anyway. Yes Guns Kill, And as a Gun Owner, They are to be handled with Respect and SAFETY so they won't kill.

The Answer???? With The Proliferation of Guns Here in America, So Too there Must Be A Proliferation of An American Universal healthcare System ESP ReOpening Our Mental Hospitals Across America And A VERY WIDE Proliferation of Psyciatric Care for So Many Mentally Ill AND DANGEROUS Americans to help Identify And Prevent these tragedies from occuring. What are The Statisitics of "Gun Outlawed" Countries?????

PJ-1795048 Comment collapsed by the community

Wonder how many people a drunken man can kill with a knife in this situation. I bet not more than 1."

Actually knife attacks are common, the last two that come to mind were at schools. One in Japan where a man killed 8 children and wounded 20.

The only thing that could have saved them was an onsite policemen or armed teachers.

rob80, you are a joke..

EVERY EXAMPLE of a shooting at a gun show YOU posted was AN ACCIDENT

OR in words you may understand, NOT INTENTIONAL

SAME FOR YOU MIDDLE1, ACCIDENT, NOT INTENTIONAL

I've been saying since September 11, 2001 that we need to outlaw aircraft larger that those designed to carry 10 people or less and less than 4 gallons of fuel. We should also outlaw terrorists. Oh, and tobacco, and alcohol, and cars, and lawn dart (oh, we did outlaw that one but I know people who own lawn darts illegally). We should also outlaw Heart Disease, Cancer, and Diabetes. Then only the criminals would die. Maybe outlaw Big Macs, Whoppers, and definitely Fries! I also believe that if we outlaw cocaine, heroin, and marijuana people would not use those drugs.

Oh, wait. Never mind. I guess laws only apply to law-abiding citizens. I guess it would be just as stupid as trying to outlaw guns or ammunition.

The gunman was a local resident who had been in psychiatric care

There is a common thread, and it isn't necessarily the guns.

looks like lilyhammer. Giovanni hendrickson is up to his old tricks I meen, johnny the fixer. lol. (only some people will get it). the rest of you, never mind lol

AG99, all he had to do is say "I used 10 rounds last month hunting" and he gets ten more rounds. One year and he has 120 rounds. That is more than has been used in any mass shooting in U.S. So you really think ammo being readily available is a problem?

I don't think that was the case in this instance. It is a very possible scenario, but not here. The article stated that the man was 33 years old. That means that any weapon that he had been issued by the Swiss government would have been an StG 90, which is chambered for 5.56mm NATO, and came into use in 1983 (the SIG SG 540, redesignated in 1990). That would have been well over a decade before this man came of age to be conscripted into the Angehöriger der Armee. However, only about 2/3 of the young adult males in Switzerland are cleared as fit for military service in the first place, and the roughly 1/3 who fail the screening get to fill slots in alternative public service programs. We do not know if this man was ever issued a rifle in the first place. If he was, apparently he either was not given the option of purchasing it when he left (article stated that he was unemployed) or that it was confiscated in 2005 when he received psychiatric treatment at approximately age 26. The article states that he used 'an old Swiss Army carbine', which I would take to be either a K11 or K31 karabiner (although it could conceivably be a K1893 or a K1905). Either one would fire the 7.5x55mm Swiss service cartridge. The Swiss government does still maintain a stock of 7.5mm and will issue it, but it goes to reservists who were issued their service rifle prior to the adoption of the StG 90. Anyone who was would now be older than age 40. It's very unlikely he got his ammunition from the Swiss government!

The article had to make a point of him having an "assault" rifle. Well, yeah, what do you think the Swiss carbine was? It was a true military "Assault Rifle" NOT an "Assault Style" weapon like the semi-autos available here that you are trying so hard to take away from us.

Barrel ranging from 21-25 inches in length, 6 round detachable box magazine, straight pull bolt as used in all Schmidt-Rubin type Swiss service weapons. There was no carbine version of the StG. 57 or StG 90 rifles, which were short rifles with barrel lengths of 23" and 20", respectively. Stocks on Schmidt-Rubin type rifles and carbines were made of walnut.

The other firearm the article stated the man used was only described as a rifle capable of firing 'lead shot', which doesn't really say much at all but I would infer to mean was such an antique that it was only for use with cast lead balls or bullets and was quite possibly so old that it was not intended for or safe to use with smokeless propellants.

I would gather that he 'borrowed' or just outright stole these firearms from someone, possibly quite elderly, to whom these had been in the family for generations.

Restrictions on ammunition are actually fairly recent in Switzerland, only occurring in the past five to ten years. The main reason they were implemented was a staggering suicide rate among young Swiss men who were killing themselves with head shots with their issued service rifles.

From the Swiss news link that some one provided:

Police said at a Thursday morning press conference in the village that the man used an old and long-abandoned army weapon called a "mousqueton", and a hunting rifle, but it is unclear how he obtained them. Earlier media reports that he used an assault rifle are wrong, police have confirmed. They are continuing to investigate if he used any other arms.

And an English translation of what a mousqueton is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K31

And a licensed firearm owner can possess any quantity of ammunition:
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/switzerland

the TiGor

It's very unlikely he got his ammunition from the Swiss government!

Agreed, after all he can just go and buy as much as he'd want from anyplace that sells it. Contrary to the popular belief here, there are no restrictions preventing someone from purchasing ammo in Switzerland. There are some limits regarding type and caliber but any military caliber ammo is readily purchased with the only requirement being the seller make a record of the purchase.

The other firearm the article stated the man used was only described as a rifle capable of firing 'lead shot'

And I'd wager this description is every bit as accurate as the description of an "old Swiss army carbine". Whomever wrote this article obviously knows very little about firearms so speculating on what they mean by an "old" rifle is pointless.

Restrictions on ammunition are actually fairly recent in Switzerland, only occurring in the past five to ten years. The main reason they were implemented was a staggering suicide rate among young Swiss men who were killing themselves with head shots with their issued service rifles

These restrictions apply ONLY to military issued ammo for military issued rifles.

Why use a knife btw when I can buy a more effective sword or machete at many stores? Why do some gang members carry machetes around with them? Ever see what a knife with a longer and heavier blade does? I wonder why there are limits on the size of the blade I can carry around with me in public? Why can I not carry a switchblade (the assault rifle of knives) in most states without a permit?

I almost have to laugh that this made the news here...someone has an axe to grind against guns. I like how you morons tried to hide that fact that he USED A F***ING SHOTGUN and instead called it a rifle that shots lead shot... Ever see what a shotgun with buckshot or a 1oz slug does to a human body? Why are shotguns not part of the "crusade" against guns? Would that make the population easier to control and for you to stay in power? Make it easier to bully them around since they cannot defend themselves?

Maybe if we did not put profit above everything else gun makers would not be so eager to sell their products. But, as long as profits are king WTF do you expect? Want to end gang problems or reduce them? How about giving them economic opportunities and equality? When they see people making 1000 times more then others WTF do you think is going to happen? Do you think they are going to be your happy little slaves working all their lives for 1/1000 of what your greedy a$$es decide to reward yourselves with? NO. What limits or controls the ratio between rich and poor again? TAXES. Don't want your husband to lose his mind and shot you or stab you? STOP CHEATING OH HIM and f***ing with his heart/mind.

If you really want to save lives then you are barking up the wrong tree. I propose we ban all SUVs. I wonder how many humans died due to car accidents that we could easily prevent by just driving a little slower reducing the total energy involved? If we drove slower, we would use less gas, and create less pollution too. Since there would be less energy vehicles could be made lighter and would not require 10 airbags each costing $500. If vehicles were lighter they would have less energy and be easier to accelerate saving even more gas.

If vehicles were more aerodynamic and had inline seating instead of side by side seating vehicles could almost double their fuel economy, but we are stuck on this idea that a woman wants to ride next to their partner instead of behind them. How much gas do we waste on this stupid a$$ ideal? We could even pack more cars on the same size roads by reducing the size of some lanes and redrawing the lines. But, that would be to simple and easy. It would also mess with that magic word "profits" and is why none of the current manufactures want to try it since they would rather sell you a house on wheels. I just need something to get me from point A to B and back again that keeps me out of the weather. A short motorcycle with a roof, windows, heat, A/C, and a couple extra tires, NOTHING ELSE. Take that extra 1000 to 2000 pounds of worthless crap and shove it up your a$$es.

Talk about piss poor engineering, but of course that is what the moronic public wants because the majority do not know chit about physics, and do not realize that every extra pound is a PENALTY and not a benefit. Every extra inch of surface area is a PENALTY and creates more air resistance. Therefore, big and tall vehicles like SUVs that are big and tall for no real reason are WASTES. They cost gas, they cause more pollution, they wear out our roads faster, they cost us lives since other vehicles get hit by those big and heavy vehicles and need to deal with extra energy so they have to be made heavier which wastes more gas and causes more pollution. Only stupid people think that bigger is always better. Why do most people fear organisims that are so small that they cannot even see them again?

Police said at a Thursday morning press conference in the village that the man used an old and long-abandoned army weapon called a "mousqueton", and a hunting rifle, but it is unclear how he obtained them.

A 'mousqueton' is another term for a carbine, but why they'd use a French word to describe it instead of the Germanic karabiner is beyond me, especially if it was a Swiss karabiner, which it presumably would have been as they were widely issued from the 1930's through the 50's.

And a licensed firearm owner can possess any quantity of ammunition:

I believe the thing to keep in mind is that a licensed firearm owner is generally going to be a civilian, owning firearms in a private capacity. While this may well include former martial arms, soldiers and reservists with an issue rifle do not own their rifle; it's government property until they return it or purchase it at the end of their service. It is the government ammunition that is no longer issued for the soldier or reservist to keep at home, which is pretty much going to be 5.56mm NATO at this point.

My guess would be that most licensed firearms owners aren't spring chickens anymore and their days as soldiers or reservists are likely in the past. Firearms tend to be an expensive luxury, and most people who own any substantial number of them have been around enough years to have made some money in life. A young buck may have a gun, or several, but the serious collectors are virtually all over the age of 40. I suspect the license that the Swiss government issues, which does not apply to many basic types of firearms that a hunter or a farmer would tend to use, deters a lot of 'casual' firearm ownership and that those who have the license are fairly serious about their avocation.

the TiGor

A 'mousqueton' is another term for a carbine, but why they'd use a French word to describe it instead of the Germanic karabiner is beyond me, especially if it was a Swiss karabiner, which it presumably would have been as they were widely issued from the 1930's through the 50's.

It wasn't a description but rather the name of the rifle- http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousqueton_1931

As I stated in my post above, all of my questions were rhetorical. I am not surprised that many of you felt compelled to not only respond, but to call me names and make assumptions about my political leanings. Indeed, I'm not surprised that 100% of the replies contained the same NRA-scripted explanations, excuses and talking points we've been forced to hear ad nauseum. It is apparent that those who are vehemently pro-gun to the point of being incapable of even considering the views of others, are always going to be pro-gun, and no matter the violence and mayhem guns cause in our society, will continue to cling to their perverted views of the 2nd Amendment while closing their eyes and ears to drown out the cries of an entire nation and her dying men, women and children. Doesn't sound like freedom to me. It sounds more like the cries of people who suffer from paranoia, fear, disenfranchised and, likely, mental illness. Loving an inanimate object to that degree, as well as the need to hoard said inanimate object, is considered to be a mental illness that just begs treatment. To that I say: Mental health evaluations, multi-tiered at that, for all current and would be gun owners. Everyone has the potential to break with reality, and gun owners, you just never know when all of those negative emotions and psychotic thoughts will drive you barking mad. Indeed, let's make that annual mental health evaluations, for all who want to be, you know, "responsible" gun owners.

Tired -

Pretty good post, but I question one part:

"How about giving them economic opportunities and equality? When they see people making 1000 times more then others WTF do you think is going to happen? Do you think they are going to be your happy little slaves . . ."

A friend worked in Chattanooga years ago as an occupational therapist. He was dealing with a young man who had some legal "difficulties." The kid looked at him and said "Who you talkin' to? I can make more on the streetcorner on Saturday night than you make in 6 months."

It is never simple.

asknreceive -

"Everyone has the potential to break with reality, and gun owners, you just never know when all of those negative emotions and psychotic thoughts will drive you barking mad. Indeed, let's make that annual mental health evaluations, for all who want to be, you know, "responsible" gun owners."

You may feel you have a tenuous grasp on your emotions, psyche, self-control, and feel all otherrs have the same issue. If you would use that as a basis to create public policy, then you would have to have the same mental health evaluation concern for drivers, pilots, capenters (they use skillsaws and might flip), doctors (all those scalpals), radiation techs (eek!), etc.

Most of us feel confident we are sane adults, and, yes, can be classified as responsible adults and even gun owners.

@asknreceive1-1054310

It is apparent that those who are vehemently pro-gun to the point of being incapable of even considering the views of others

Do you understand what a hypocrite is? Because I sure don't see much "considering the views of others" coming from YOU.

Backcountry, I've listened to, accepted and adhered to all of your talking points for the full 52 years I've been on this earth. That makes me a more than reasonable person, and I've never spoken out on this issue before now. However, the problem with gun violence in America has gotten worse, not better, and none of those NRA talking points are cutting it anymore. Don't tell me about hypocrisy. Have a talk about that concept with the man in your mirror, Mr. You Planet. You'll find that it is your paradigms that are stuck in reverse, not mine.

As for you, mpa, you go off on a tangent about professions that, for the most part, already have evaluations, even mental evaluations, as a part of their employment contracts. Heck, these folks are more often than not subjected to random drug tests. Indeed, I like your idea. Let's add regular and random drug testing to the gun owner's application and continued ownership requirements. Again, I am reminded why it is nearly impossible to have any dialogue with someone who cannot think outside their narrow paradigms. I don't own guns, so no worries about me buying one and using it on myself or anyone else. I'll never own a gun. I don't want that hazard in my home or in my life. As for you and your ilk, however, mental health evals and drug tests must be mandatory because you own and, in some cases, collect killing machines. You claim its all because you have the right to do so under the 2nd Amendment, but we know it's not all about that for the many. It's about the mindset of gun owners and, in many cases and for the most part, there can be no doubt that the reasons for fixation on guns is not a healthy one. You would, likely, condemn a hoarder of any other "thing" as being sick in the head. There are even television programs developed to that ism. Take your own advice and question your motives. Are they really about the right to own a gun, or is it all about your mindset, fantasies, fears and phobias? You may have a Super Hero Complex where you fantasize about being the one who shoots the bad guy dead so that you would be revered and deemed a savior. That's not only unlikely, it's downright juvenile in its very nature, not to mention that it almost never, ever, ever happens. Be honest with yourself, you just might learn something you need to know now rather than later.

asknreceive1-1054310

However, the problem with gun violence in America has gotten worse, not better,

WRONG! Gun violence is HALF what it was just 20 years ago and the trend is continuing downwards. But please don't let any actual facts influence your opinions in any way. How crazy would that be?

Don't tell me about hypocrisy. Have a talk about that concept with the man in your mirror, Mr. You Planet.

Ahhh, so you DON'T know what hypocrisy is because I have said NOTHING to make me one. YOU are the one bitching about others behaving exactly the same way you do.

Backcountry164:

I can see by looking at the Wikipedia link you provided that it is the French language page for the Karabiner 1931. The majority of the Swiss population, living in the plateau and the Middle Land, speak German and would call the weapon a karabiner. However, Swiss geography isn't something I've thought much about in many a year and I am not familiar with the village of Daillon or the canton of Vallais. Now that I've gone back to double check the article and see just where in Switzerland this happened, I would gather from the names, which sound very French, that the location was along the lightly populated west or southwest border of Switzerland where most people do, in fact, speak French instead of German. In that case, I imagine that people there would call it a Mosqueton instead of a karabiner, regardless of its official designation.

If you ever get the chance to see or handle a K31, they're really something. They're often described as 'a Swiss watch on steroids', and that's no joke. They're sometimes a bit rough looking in the stock and the receiver steel had a very high nickel content which didn't retain bluing so well, but mechanically, they're real gems. I don't know what firing one with issue GP 11 service ammunition is like, but I'm guessing that doing very much in one sitting will leave a guy with a very sore shoulder. I personally own a 1917 vintage Gewehr 11 rifle, which is a predecessor to the K31 and also fires the 7.5x55mm cartridge. It was sent back through the arsenal in 1926 for some unknown reason which could have been refinishing, refurbishment, or repair, and may have been reissued some time after that. It is stamped 'P' for 'Privat', indicating that it was sold to the soldier at the end of his enlistment. Unfortunately, I was unable to locate any paper hiding beneath the buttplate that indicated who that soldier may have been. The G11 has a free floating 31" barrel and I regularly achieve sub minute of angle groups when I get it out. It's a standard .30 caliber bore, and I've always reformed .284 Winchester brass into 7.5 Swiss. A very pleasant rifle to fire, though admittedly I always load my cartridges a tad on the light side. I'm not sure how I'd feel about having to use a G11 or a K31 as a combat rifle...from elevated, concealed positions (i.e: forested mountainsides) it would probably not put one at a disadvantage over other contemporary designs such as the Mauser 98, the Lee-Enfield, the Lebel Mle. 1886 or Berthier Mle. 1890, or the Mosin-Nagant. I'd prefer my US Rifle, M1903 over all of them, but that's just me as a biased American speaking. The straight pull bolt takes a bit of getting used to, but the G11 has proven to be an excellent target rifle that I've won a lot of informal matches with through the years, and a K31 is probably almost every bit as good in that respect.

From Tired-2176559, we get,

I like how you morons tried to hide that fact that he USED A F***ING SHOTGUN and instead called it a rifle that shots lead shot...

Now, hang on a minute there, buddy. We don't know for sure just what he used. We don't see them very often in the US, but there very definitely used to be rifles that were extremely large bore and were, in fact, measured by gauge, exactly as a shotgun always has been. They were to Europe what the big buffalo rifles were to America, but were generally hauled down to Africa in pursuit of elephants and dangerous game. Most were double rifles, side by side, used large brass cartridges filled with black powder, and typically fired a lead ball, which was once commonly known as shot. I believe they were available in different bore sizes up to No. 4. So, yes, he could have had an old (1880's era) hunting rifle that fits that description. If he did, however, I would be very curious to know where he got it from as those antiques are worth a very substantial amount of money, which it seems unlikely he would have to spend on something like that. If that's what he had and he stole it from somebody, it would probably qualify as grand theft if it were done where I live since such a rifle would probably be worth over $10,000. Maybe they're not as valuable in Switzerland as they're likely more common there; there are very few in the US.

Middle1

The typical spewing forth BS when trying to convince people that guns are safe is illustrated by your ignorant remark stating "Not one person has ever been killed at a gun show"

Here you go, Mr. I KNOW ALL ABOUT GUNS

This is from ABC News, but you will find the search for "boy killed at gun show". This event was touted as a safe, legal day of fun...

With his father and a firearms instructor standing nearby, an 8-year-old Connecticut boy shot himself in the head with a submachine gun yesterday, killing himself in an accident some say should never have happened.

Christopher Bizilj was testing a 9 mm Micro Uzi at the Westfield Sportsman's Club in Westfield, Mass., as part of the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo, when he shot himself Sunday.

"The firearm instructor prepped the weapon for him, and once it was ready he handed it to the child," Westfield Police Lt. Hipolito Nunez told ABCNews.com today.

Christopher then pulled the trigger, and the gun's recoil pulled the barrel upward, causing a round to hit him on the right side of his head, according Nunez. He was pronounced dead a short time later at Baystate Medical Center in nearby Springfield.

Massachusetts law allows a child to fire a gun with parental consent, so long as there's an active permit for the gun and a licensed firearm instructor is supervising. It is unclear whether the gun had a permit or whether the instructor was licensed, but Nunez said Christopher's father was nearby.

Christopher's family, including his father, Dr. Charles Bizilj, who is the director of emergency medicine at Johnson Memorial Hospital in Stafford Springs, Conn., could not be reached for comment.

ABC
Eight-year-old Christopher Bizilj accidentally shot and killed himself Sunday with an Uzi submachine gun while his fathe and a firearm instructor stood nearby.

But according to Ted Oven, a gun retailer and president of the Massachusetts Association of Firearms Dealers, Christopher should have never been allowed to handle a submachine gun on his own.

Oven has shot similar weapons and said the recoil is tough to control even for an adult.

"It requires all my strength," said Oven, who added that he did not have much experience with the Micro Uzi. "For an 8-year-old, it was inappropriate."

The Micro Uzi, he said, is a tough gun to get a permit for and retails for several thousand dollars. He was not at the expo when Christopher was shot but said that because the gun is fully automatic, it likely shot off several rounds in a couple of seconds when the boy pulled the trigger.

Information found on Uzitalk.com, an Internet forum dedicated to the Israeli-made submachine guns, described the Micro Uzi as coming on the market in 1986 and having the capability to fire 25 rounds in less than 30 seconds. The guns, manufactured by Israeli Military Industries Ltd., are generally designed for military and police use.

'No Permits or Licenses Required'

Messages left with COP Firearms & Training, the co-sponsor of the gun expo, and the president of the Westfield Sportsman's Club, were not immediately returned.

The flier for the expo advertised that it was "all legal and fun -- no permits or licenses required."

Targets listed on the flier included pumpkins, vehicles and "other fun stuff we can't print here!"

The Boston Field Division of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is investigating the accident along with the Westfield Police, Massachusetts State Police and the Hampden County District Attorney's Office.

James McNally, spokesman for the ATF's Boston division declined to comment until more information was available, but said "it's been awful."

Susan Gates, general counsel for the Washington, D.C.-based Children's Defense Fund, said the shooting in Westfield was a tragic reminder that there is not enough being done in the U.S. to keep guns out of children's hands.

"It just continues to illustrate why children should not have access to any type of gun,"Gates stated.

From Around the Web

• A look into the haunting, green-eyed gaze that captivated the world (SnagFilms)
• Cassidy Goodson is being tried as an adult despite being a 14-Year-Old (TakePart)
• 12 Funniest Dog and Cat Photos (Reader's Digest)
• 1933 double eagle trial: At long last, a conclusion (Coin World)
• Bob Stoops: Johnny Manziel best quarterback I've faced (SI.com)

[What's This?]

Related Topics: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Smoking

on Twitter, become a fan on Facebook

Share on emailEmail
Print

Share on facebook
Share on google_plusone

More Sharing ServicesShare

Comment & Contribute
Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.

View All Comments (317)

lillibird2
4:54 PM EST
Dec 23, 2012

I'm so sick of these pro-gun people..everytime something happens they say "it's so tragic" "it's just a tragic accident" and they want to just move on and leave things as they are. I say TAX the hell out of all guns and ammo to pay for professional guards at schools, ban semi auto weapons a large ammo clips, track the amount of ammo people can buy so there is no stockpiling, get tough regulations for gun shows..we need to do more than just banning assault weapons.

454CSB
9:28 PM EDT
Aug 15, 2011

Wow i hope he shoots better than he spell. Sucks about the kid. If you think any charge he gets is gonna be worse than the Pain of knowing your decision as a father is the reason your burying your son you are wrong.

xxJohnQxx
3:15 PM EDT
Aug 12, 2011

Getterbug08, If you want your opinion to be taken seriously, try using less caps, spell check and some appropriate grammar.This is tragic, I feel for everyone involved.

View All Comments (317)

Watch Mornings on ABC

Watch the Full Episode
GMA 01/05:Passenger Restrained in Seat...

Robin Roberts Recommends

• 2012 Year in Review: 'GMA' Looks Back
• 'GMA's' Top 10 Recipes of 2012
• Follow Robin's Journey

ABC News on Facebook

Jersey you're an idiot. Look at my comment again and you will see that I was quoting Mike and then provided a youtube video that proved his comment wrong. I did not make that statement.

So next time you want to go on a rant try reading the comment first and using just a little brain power. All you have done is make yourself look like a giant douche.

Well, the alcohol ban was tried and didn't work very well. The rest of your points are salient, though.

Windancersong, it is not in their culture to stab one another in the back like we do here in the U.S.

This is a prime example of the places our nations people came from, towns that are tight knit, religious, wholesome and good. People who care deeply for one another and do kind things for no reason. Many small towns in the U.S. still carry on today in this ancient tradition of decency.

Take heavily into consideration this man was in a drunken rage, here in the U.S. one would only need to claim mental instability.

As you can clearly see this can and does happen anywhere. Was he the victim of callous indignation, or just an angry drunken fool?

Now who or what is to blame? Is it the inanimate object of defense, sport and hunting? Is it the fellow man who failed to see this ones plight in hopes he would just sleep it off? Or is it simply a combination of the two?

This one went after the targets of his perceived anger and probably not innocent bystanders. Big difference.

Regardless that this could have been prevented or not it is still a tragedy, the victims will be mourned, the man will be punished and the rest of society will use the band-aid of "Gods Will."

Somewhere else tomorrow, it will happen again and this is why we must look closer at ourselves.

Responsible post Wind... (and I agree with Jwight01) The gun was the problem as a car is in a DUI..

Olias,

Windancersong "always" writes responsible posts that make sense. Not once have I ever seen a post from Windy that was arrogant. Not once...

You wrote one single sentence that was arrogant and has nothing to do with the story.

Relax and have a nice day...

CD

Interesting watching the gun folks tell us that guns had nothing to do with a shooting. Every country has cars and alcohol. NO western country allows our level of gun ownership, not even Switzerland (we have about twice their gun ownership rate.) And none has our level of slaughter.

We have about the same death rate in America as we were losing soldiers at the height of the Vietnam war. But to the gun folks that's OK. More dead bodies means more freedom

Or something

Bob, until a gun can get up off the table, or out of the drawer and aim and shoot you then NO the gun has nothing to do w/the shooting. It take purposeful aim and deliberate action to fire a gun, and THAT takes a PERSON. And that person ALONE is responsible for the shooting.

A woman the other day ran over teenager in a parking lot who was blocking a parking space she wanted. Was the car to blame? Of course not. It was the driver who was completely at fault.

Why are guns any different? Why do so many blame the nasty murdering gun rather than the person who pulled the trigger?

Bob,

What's your point?! Heh heh...

Bob.........most of the gun deaths are stupid gangbangers killing each other like in @!$%#cago. What's the problem??

Bob
You wrote that...We have about the same death rate in America as we were losing soldiers at the height of the Vietnam war. But to the gun folks that's OK. More dead bodies means more freedom

That's quite a blanket statement not to mention untruthful and meant to scare and confuse the real problem.Death rate from guns only?Cars accidents,cancer ect...It just says death rate.

Do tell...where in the world is Waldo and the crazy stats that would give you death rates comparable to Vietnam.
And do these stats give criminal on criminal,legally owned and used by someone who stole them,A league owner that snaped,mass killings(which are Extreamly Rare thank God) ?

It IS possible to think that people being able to carry around assault rifles, etc, is wrong and to still blame the person using the gun for killing someone you know.

Rob,

Its only possible if you are ignorant to the affects of gun control throughout the world, which apparently you are.

No it's not. That's just a total fallacy. I can blame the shooter, think they are a complete @!$%# who will get what they deserve, and still think people owning assault rifles is ridiculous. Just because you can't comprehend that point of view doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

People can have myriad different points of views that aren't easily placed into the boxes you want to construct for them. I personally think you WANT me to think that. It makes it easier for you to try and argue against someone who thinks that way. You want someone that thinks differently than you to have a point of view that you can abhor (as in blaming the gun, not the shooter) because then you can feel good about them being a little monster who's totally wrong. That way you can argue with them with a clear conscience because you're a good person and they're not. That's what you want, isn't it?

Well, sorry, you don't get to tell ME what I think.

When are we finally going to stop trying to control objects like alcohol and guns and drugs and realize twisted minds cannot and will not be controlled. Violence will never be eradicated from society, now or in the future.

Most liberals want and support a twisted mindset, they want and are okay with aborting the helpless unborn and claim my body my right! Then on the flip side after heinous crimes have been committed want to coddle and educate killers and pedophiles and people who commit crimes against humanity.This belief that they are the righteous protectors of all humanity is total crap. Get tough on crime and stop trying to take guns from law abiding citizens. Gun crimes, sex crimes, and crimes of extreme violence, societies should put these people down no second chances, real laws, no do-overs. This notion that an innocent man might be killed on death row is total liberal propaganda. More innocent kids are aborted daily then criminals will unjustly be given the death penalty. Do not worry about the guns, shut up step up and pass laws to squash real violence. If we use the liberal think tank model that the death penalty numbs us and makes us no better than the criminal? What does killing the innocent like stepping on a bug make us as a society? Take off the blinders guns can kill people, but a person pulls the trigger. More doctors end life in the world every day than all the gun crime in a month combined. Like I stated earlier, controlling are minds not objects is the key component. Violence will always be part of all societies but taking things from the innocent to punish the criminal is a liberal agenda who's time is done. I am a realist not a conservative, the issue is complex. I am not a gun owner, but have been, but removing guns from those who haven't committed crimes will reduce and deter what. Fifteen years to life for murder or gun crimes is not a deterrent. Funny thing about the majority of liberals they believe they can control human nature when they cannot even control their own thought process and be consistent. It is fine to kill that child with a scalpel, but one day later if he or she is born and someone shots him or her it is and outrage. I realize this rant it somewhat off topic but we cannot control all circumstances in life but must become better at punishing the criminal no matter what their issues are, before or after the act.

Rob,

You can have that opinion, just like I can have the opinion that the first amendment is wrong. Its about as legit as yours.

guns don't kill people, bullets do. the constitution says you have the right to bare arms. it says nothing about bullets. There where no bullets back then, just powder and ball. or is that ball and powder.

Rob80 -

Good for you! I keep saying the same thing to the "libturds" and "repukes" on this vine all the time. People who only think in black-and-white don't really think.

(But I still want to carry one of my "non-assault" rifles around!)

Rob80-4249854

I can blame the shooter, think they are a complete @!$%# who will get what they deserve, and still think people owning assault rifles is ridiculous

Sure you can. It's people trying to pass laws that force their personal opinions on others that is the problem. Because you personally think it is ridiculous would you force that opinion on me?

@ Bob.... err... Mexico?.....

Interesting watching the gun folks tell us that guns had nothing to do with a shooting. Every country has cars and alcohol. NO western country allows our level of gun ownership, not even Switzerland (we have about twice their gun ownership rate.) And none has our level of slaughter.

Over the past five years, 50,000 people have been killed in drug-war related violence in Mexico. And most of the guns that fuel this violence are smuggled over the U.S. border. A recent congressional report noted that at least 70% of the weapons seized in Mexico in 2009 and 2010 and submitted for tracing came from the United States.

http://forusa.org/blogs/john-lindsay-poland/help-stop-gun-violence-mexico/9826

Gee... I guess its our fault to... I thought I could blame Mexico with the tighter Gun laws than the US... So.. the People of Mexico aren't allowed to have Guns.. so the Drug dealing/smuggling LAW BREAKERS are the one.. oh wait.... I'll just blame Obama.. instead of those who obtain and use the guns illegally.. He "helped" a lot in Mexico to curb the violence.. didn't he?

Someone once said that the NRA wants Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to be a convenience store instead of a govt agency.

And that someone was a liar and an idiot.

Who said that Bob? YOU?

NRA= Not Really American.

Liquid, doom is the byproduct of actions and has no existence if evil isn't created by man.

If Marilyn Manson is busy there's always Alice Cooper or Rob Zombie.

:) ........:0 xXx "sorry" ;(

Man, I'm still angry at Dungeons and Dragons and Ozzy!

Generals gathered in their masses
Just like witches at black masses
Evil minds that plot destruction
Sorcerers of death's construction

In the fields the bodies burning
As the war machine keeps turning
Death and hatred to mankind
Poisoning their brainwashed minds
Oh lord yeah!

Politicians hide themselves away
They only started the war
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor

Time will tell on their power minds
Making war just for fun
Treating people just like pawns in chess
Wait 'til their judgement day comes
Yeah!

Now in darkness world stops turning
Ashes where the bodies burning
No more war pigs have the power
Hand of God has struck the hour

Day of judgement, God is calling
On their knees the war pig's crawling
Begging mercy for their sins
Satan laughing spreads his wings
Oh lord yeah!

The right wing thinks everyone in the US needs a body guard to protect them from people exercising their constitutional right to carry guns. It's insane

bob-1008224

You don't even make any sense.

Bob, if welfare would have been banned this whacko would have starved out a long time ago, we want welfare banned stupid

bob-1008224

The right wing thinks everyone in the US needs a body guard to protect them from people exercising their constitutional right to carry guns.

Are you talking about those RWNJ tea-tards like Rosie O'Donnell and Nancy Pelosi?

No, I think he was talking about "The Larry Craig scandal" Where this fine upstanding republican senator was arrested for doing the wild thing with another guy in a train station. But I could be wrong lol

George -

Thanks for adding absolutely nothing to the discussion . . .

Hey Joey,

I just thought I'd drop by and help you out a little.

Piers Morgan is on another network (CNN) so I am pretty sure he wont ready your post.

And he has his own blog you where you can comment piersmorgan[dot]blogs[dot]cnn[dot]com

So maybe you might get an answer to your question if you actually post it in the right place.

Anyway, just trying to be helpful since you seemed you really seem interested in what he has to say on this issue.

Hey Joey,

I just thought I'd drop by and help you out a little.

Piers Morgan is on another network (CNN) so I am pretty sure he wont ready your post.

And he has his own blog you where you can comment piersmorgan[dot]blogs[dot]cnn[dot]com

So maybe you might get an answer to your question if you actually post it in the right place.

Anyway, just trying to be helpful since you seemed you really seem interested in what he has to say on this issue.

Hey Aussie...sarcasm...get it? Just trying to be helpful since you aren't.

It might cut down on accidental shootings if the guns are stored out of sight and inaccessible to children. I do not own a gun, but I might want to one day, because I recently took up target shooting and enjoy it a lot. But, as long as I can rent a wide variety of handguns, and don't currently have a pronounced preference for one over the other, I do not really have to or want to buy one right away, if ever. Keeping a firearm in the house is an awesome responsibility that a lot of gun owners do not realize or accept, and the repeated instances of children shooting playmates or themselves, or the Adam Lanzas of the world going bonkers and killing as many innocents as they can, are good illustrations of what happens when gun owners are not responsible.

Mymomdidnotraiseafool
You wrote that "A lot" of gun owner do not realize or accept the Awsome responsibility of storing their guns...
Exactly how do you come up with "Alot" ? How often do you hear about children killing their playmates or whomever?
It's tragic,but the new hype on guns is Propaganda to scare people so the gov can get enough people begging for the Gov to protect them,please don't fall into this trap.

For all we know Lanza may have threatened his Mother with a knife if she didn't open her safe,or any number of things that we will never know,My Parents Had a shotgun in their closet,and my brother and I never touched their guns because they educated us on gun safety and respect for the gun as well as human life.
We have more babies murdered by their mothers every year by the millions and yet that is perfectly acceptable,and I would go as far as to say Alot of those that have no problem with the American Genoside going on through Abortion are the same that are anti-gun,and yet will not think of Capitol punishment for killers in prison.

For all we know Lanza may have threatened his Mother with a knife if she didn't open her safe,or any number of things that we will never know,

Don't we know that she was found in her bed, shot in her sleep?

Statistics have been posted on here that show the number of accidental shootings, suicides, homicides, etc. I don't remember the numbers, but do remember it seeming like 'a lot'.

The number of times we hear about kids getting a hold of their parents gun and shooting other people by accident (or if not shooting someone, just taking it into school, etc, also seems like 'a lot' to me. This is not something that you can exactly quantify, but it's often enough that you could quite conceivably say there are likely millions of gun owners who don't keep their guns secure.

Ster -

After you have read a few of Mymomma's posts, you recognize that his moniker is an outright fallacy . . .

Mpa
Lol I thought the same :)

Guns are readily available. Ammo is not.

bob-1008224

He killed three & wounded two. He didn't have an ammo problem.

So what drug do you think he was taking, or stopped taking, or should have been taking, or he stole from someone, or he bought on the street? According to the article, the implication was that he was drunk, and not under the influence of any prescription drug. I pay attention, and I do not see anything that you seem to.

Hoplophiliacs (Gun nuts) keep telling us nothing can be done about guns. We just have to sit back and enjoy the slaughter. Wrong. Other countries ban guns. Even Switzerland has a lower rate of gun related homicide than we do. It's time to REPEAL THE SECOND AMENDMENT

You and what army are going to do that? I don't think you would want to see the results of that, ludicrous as it might be. Remember the Volstead Act? How did that work out for the US?

bob1008224

"Mass shootings are RARE in Switzerland, although gun possession is widespread.." emphasis mine.

Tiny Switzerland was left alone by Hitler because of their well armed society.

mymom forgets we got rid of slavery. It took 100 years. Nothing is impossible. Other countries have strictly regulated guns. The evidence is clear. Too bad mymom and other hoplophiliacs ignore it

I love luther's comment. He left Switzerland alone because it was armed. The 20,000,000 man Russian army not so much.

Uh huh

So Bob, when are you going to repeal the Second Amendment? Anytime soon? Your just some loud mouth Leftard trying to stir up $hit. All mouth & no ass.

No bob doesn't plan on repealing the 2nd amendment. That's too much trouble. He just wants it sidestepped. Any right he doesn't want to exercise isn't a right he cares to be protected. Much like far too many Americans today. No wonder Americans today are wussies.

Bob-wrong... slavery took only about 5 years to get rid of and cost about 600,000 lives, as memory serves.

Also, there is a reason most military are conservatives or libertarians. Good luck in winning the civil war you will start by trying gun confiscation.

Im not against guns, I just think that most Americans are too stupid to own them. Don't ban the guns, ban stupid people who want to own them.

Chubette, the Yamamoto "quote" is totally false, yet constantly repeated by the gun community. Google "misquoting Yamamoto" at Factcheck d-o-t org for the facts.

Interesting point...since MJ is illegal, that means I can't get it easily, right?

We should have a race. I leave my house to purchase some illegal weed. You leave your house to purchase a legal firearm. Who do you think gets back home first?

You might have something there if there is a way to brew or ferment that stuff and come up with a good beer or scotch out of it.

:p

Buying the firearm goes a lot quicker if you take the gun show route.

No bob-1008224, you and your fellow socialist progressive friends are scourge on civilized society. DO YOU realize things began going bad when YOU found the time to complain about every facet of life and freedom while the rest of us WORKED......A$$HOLE.

Bobby, Bobby, Bobby! Your simplistic and unworkable idea is representative of what a two year old ring-tailed lemur might come up with. Adults who are capable of critical thinking can come up with much more reasoned and cogent arguments, so if you ever grow up, you may give it another try.

Oh please trots out the insults instead of the facts. No surprise from the hoplophiliacs

mymom kinda forgets the solution already exists, and has been tried in other countries. Gun controls and gun bans. We have the highest gun related murder rate in the western world. But don't tell the gun nuts. They'll wet their pants.

Bob, it's been tried in this country too. It's called ban on illegal drugs, and before that, Prohibiition.

They both worked real well. I can see a gun ban working just as well.

Yeah right.,

So what's your saying is they had lot's of mass shootings there prior to 2007 but the sudden restrictions on ammo sales stopped them from happening again? Hum..

Forgive bob - he is hoplophobic, and there is no cure.

'bob' - highest murder rate in developed world might have something to do with the fact that the US has the most slums and the most criminal ghetto-type people in the developed world. Some places in LA are as bad as the favelas in Brazil.

Maybe if bloods & crypts (and similar groups) weren't shooting each other or bystanders for wearing the wrong colors the gun death rate might be lower.

nice try, but colossal fail.

stop believing the bs from fox and the ultra right wing. your gun is not a toy, your gun is not a fetish, your gun is not your lover, it's a weapon.

have a nice day.

Yes, a gun is a weapon. How brilliant of you to point out this little known fact.

tommy forgets that Switzerland has, since October of 2007, banned private possession of ammo. Oh well...never let the facts stand in the way of a good rant

And Bob forgets that they didn't have much problem with gun violence before 2007 either.... LOL.

Military ammo is no longer issued to individuals to be stored at home as of 2007, but you may still buy and use commercial ammo as before.

Limit on Quantity, Type of Ammunition
A licensed firearm owner in Switzerland is permitted to possess any quantity of ammunition

Switzerland. 1997. 'General Provisions – Subject-Matter, Scope and Definitions.' Federal Law on Arms, Arms Accessories and Ammunitions of 20 June 1997 (Status as on 12 December 2008); Chapter 1 (Section 1). Geneva: Federal Assembly of the Swiss Confederation / Translation for the Small Arms Survey, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies. 20 June.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/switzerland

Imprison and burn progressives >shakes his middle finger at liberals<

I'm all for banning crazy people.

Hey tommy. Europe is far more diverse than the US. France has 10%' ethnic minorities', your dog whistle term for the 'darkies'. NO western European country has our level of gun slaughter.

bob-1008224

You keep talking about hoplophiliacs. Your definition is wrong. Your the one with the fear of guns brutha.

hoplophobia (uncountable)

1. (pejorative, rare) The fear of guns.  [quotations ▼]

Lol nice catch Kevin :) Bob is just posting word vomit clearly.

"Philia" means "love of" and "phobia" means "fear of." For instance, a "bibliophile" is someone who loves books. "Bibliophobe," apparently, is an appropriate name for many posters here.

IQ tests are nonsense. They simply gauge general knowledge levels for individuals or groups. They also weed out the learning disabled. But as for gauging intelligence, not happening. Thats why peoples IQ tend to go up with age, as they learn. The more well read people are, the higher they tend to score aswell.

I see, testosterone levels are inversely correlated to intelligence (something I always suspected)... hmmm. The answer is clear! Arm all of the women, and make gun ownership illegal for men!

P.S. Ask P.O.W.'s in the Vietnam War or in Japanese camps in WWII how peaceful the purportedly low levels of testosterone of their captors made their internment. Ask any few survivors of the "Rape of Nanking."

That doesn't negate thomasward's point, elspeth. There may be a correlation there, although I don't vouch for it . . .

So, Tommy-boy, did you get your robes and hood dry cleaned lately? Given all the verbal diarrhea that you just spewed out, it must have been such a waste of money, and I think the cleaner is getting tired of accepting your feces-stained garments.

You are a racist piece of @!$%#.

Timothy McVeigh, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, Adam Lanza, James Holmes, Ted Bundy, Seung-hui Cho, Jiverly Wong, Jared Lee Loughner, Gary Ridgeway, John Wayne Gacy, Albert DeSalvo, Jeffrey Dahmer, David Berkowitz, Joe Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Pol Pot. Those were sure some bad bad black guys.

yeah, OK, elspeth - he is a certifiable idiot . . .

How about the Rwandan genocide? About a million people murdered, mostly by machetes & clubs. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty or have a lot of murderous people in your group to kill that many people with such up front and personal weapons.

That was horrible, for sure. There are bad black people, there are bad white people, there are bad people and murderous sociopaths, unfortunately, in every group. Incidently, how cold-blooded does one need to be to hire people to design "showers" to lead children, elderly, women and other complete innocents into, after first stripping them naked and standing them in the cold? And there were a shocking number of men who went along with, and carried out those brutal plans. How bloodthirsty does one need to be to plan an assault on an island full of young, innocent teens, whose only escape from the slaughter was to swim for it? Too bad for all of us that we could both cite examples like that from every ethnic group on Earth. My point is, there is no ethnicity that is more or less likely to be violent, given the right (or wrong) circumstances. In general, brutality begets brutality, on a large or small scale.

What are all of the liberals douche bags going to say that in a nation in complete registry a known menace with psychiatric problems was still able to illegally obtain a weapon.

Maybe instead of banning guns we should just ban welfare leeches.

I'd say the "NRA nuts" are going to keep using the Swiss as an example, since their homicide rate is still low- much lower than Australia, which is often touted by those who oppose guns.

John
Umm yes we can still look at Switzerland as an example of how law abiding gun owners act and most homes have at least one gun,they have been trained and know gun safety,All this shows is even Switzerland has messed up in the head people,and news flash ! Most of us already know there are bad people that do bad things All over the world.
I think every anti-gun person should go to a gun safety class, A constitution class as well as A history lesson on what has happened when gun ownership is illegal,And how their Governments kill them,Real story,True Facts.An unarmed society is totally at the will and whims of their Government.Again that would go back to bad people that do bad things.

Uhhh .. ? Who said the NRA said Switzerland was an example for gun owners.

Many a commenter around here. And lots of NRA spokespersons often reference Switzerland as somewhere there's very little gun violence, claiming its because of all the guns in everyone's hands.

So much for all those guns in everyones hands, preventing a shooting rampage. In fact, it was the police that stopped this guy.

Freedom - Right...let's take one incident and use that as proof that gun ownership doesn't prevent crime because the cops got to him first. Great logic on your part.

Just pointing out that everyone having guns isnt an answer to preventing crazed gunman. Key word "preventing"..

Because thats the NRA line. Lets arm everyone, that will prevent these crimes. Unless of course you dont mean prevention, you just mean killing the guy after, or during. In my book thats a little too late, I prefer prevention. Then no one dies. You guys may want to arm teachers, so they can shoot the gunman after he starts shooting kids, I prefer to prevent the crazed gunman from having a gun at all.

Better than it is here.

They have much stricter rules, and far fewer incidences because of it. But having guns in the public's hands, means there will be shootings. How many shootings, is based on how scrutinizing you are on who gets a gun, and who doesn't.

Everyone having guns, doesnt prevent shootings.

They are also a socialist country,We are not ! We don't punish criminals the way they do either,so what's your point?
Everyone owning guns keeps them safe.One criminal is not going to make them rush to ban guns either,they have more common since apparently than the left does here.

Switzerland is not a socialist country, lol.. Its where most of the rich live. Ever heard of Swiss Bank accounts? The rich dont bank in socialist countries.

And everyone owning guns didnt keep these victims safe, did it. Their strict gun control laws, yes Switzerland has very strict gun control laws, do however, heavily reduce how often these kinds of shootings occur. That is fact. They have gun ownership almost as high as the US, yet no where near the shootings, because they also have strict gun control.

Gun control is not "gun banning", its controlling who can have a weapon. They go out of their way to criminals and crazies from getting guns, and the results show.

Freedom

The Social Democratic Party "has governed Switzerland as part of a grand coalition since 1959," according to Encyclopedia Britannica.

From the Boston Globe,they have a multi layered system and The People vote on everything, they have polititions also,but they don't get in the way as ours do.
They have strict gun laws as do we,they also have people that are mentally ill and snap just like here,but they are a very culture based and tight knit as a Country,we are as devided as can be,maybe that accounts for all the rage and violence here BTW their privacy with their banks is why the rich bank ans people with them.