Would he have been able to kill as many people with explosives?

Would he have been able to kill as many people with a car?

Would he have been able to kill as many people with a bio weapon?

It doesn’t matter. The central problem is that the guy was psycho and wanted people dead.

Some counterpoints:

Since guns can’t talk, how are guns enablers? This like a person blaming the big mac for being fat! The food is just there- what did you choose to do with it? Did you eat 50 of them are throw them away. And if someone thinks the gun is talking to them, then we know for sure they are not all there.

There’s other mass murders- 9/11, oklahoma city, gas chambers, saddam hussein, etc What was the main method of execution then?

True a gun is a weapon desdigned for killing but so is the bow, the knife, heck you can can even use a fork if you’re in prison. Again, the materials are all there- what do you choose to do with them?

Stop manufacturing?? The technology is out there. Someone will manufacture it. If it’s not a law abiding industry then it will be the criminal. A drug lord made forbes list. Does anyone NOT think he could use that money to manufacture weapons?

And I’m still trying to figure out what liberals, gay people, SUVs and recycling have to do with guns? In fact it seems to me that you have a VERY NARROW view of people who own weapons and what type of people they are. Projection much? You do not have to won a weapon. You can argue afainst it. But I’m just tired of the same old weak, political and bigoted arguments..

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690314709013801.html

3/11/2009

Did you know that at one Connecticut college, simply advocating for extending the Right to Carry onto college campuses is enough to get students referred to the campus police?

It happened at Central Connecticut State University, after student John Wahlberg gave an assigned presentation on a “relevant issue in the media.” Mr. Wahlberg wanted to speak about school violence, and during his presentation he discussed Right-to-Carry on campus. According to the Recorder newspaper, after he “made the point that if students were permitted to conceal carry guns [sic] on campus, the violence could have been stopped earlier in many of these cases,” his professor lodged a complaint with the campus police.

Mr. Wahlberg received a “request” to come down to the campus police department, where officers proceeded to rattle off a list of firearms that he legally owns, and asked him where he kept the guns.

All because he dared mention Right-to-Carry.

If the facts in the newspaper are accurate, this is outrageous. Expressing an opinion about Right-to-Carry on campus shouldn’t lead to a police investigation. It should lead to a discussion and debate about the issue, but apparently that’s too much to ask from the academics who hyperventilate at the thought of the Bill of Rights being enforced on college campuses.

Er….no. That is inaccurate.

The NRA is a special interest group with the goal of protecting constitutional 2nd amendment rights.

My training was provided by the police. A former police chief provided my classroom training at a local community college course; a currently serving police officer provided my marksmanship and safety training.

Are we good so far?

The NRA promotes gun safety every day by providing training for hunters and gun owners.

Isn’t that a good thing?

The NRA [like its counterparty the ACLU] is actively engaged in protecting the Constitutional rights of gun-owners, while promoting safety, training, and proper use of guns for protection and hunting.

So, give the devil his due on that at least.

NewHampster, I apologize for making that assumption against you. Sorry. Your position about prayer in school, abortion and stem cell research is unknown to me.

This has been a spirited discussion. Which is a good thing in my mind because it’s an important issue for many of us.