no guns

We Need Gun Control Now

Dear gun control advocates,

I agree with you. We need gun control, now. Not just because I personally do not enjoy playing with guns, but because I know restriction of such dangerous weapons is desperately needed in some cases.

People are being murdered in cold blood. Everyone who isn’t a stupid, ignorant lout, by now should know the danger and tragedy that has occurred on American soil due to a minority of rogues who are somehow allowed to acquire dangerous firearms and weapons to kill innocent people – sometimes children. Damn those redneck American gun-lovers and their miserable guns!

Why the hell does anyone need an assault rifle? What on earth could it possibly be used for but to kill people?

Certainly, mental health is a problem, but it cannot be argued that guns play no role. Let us scream it together – we must take action now! We must work to restrict, control, and even ban guns! But – if we are to control, restrict, or ban guns, we must be logical about it. There’s no sense in punishing people who aren’t dangerous, or violating peoples’ freedoms needlessly, so let us advocate stringent firearm regulations where it is most needed.

We need to restrict, control, and even ban the police from firearm and indeed, all weapons ownership. They have too many guns, too many weapons, and are more likely to commit murder than the average person (average person meaning bums and gangs included). Also note that if excessive force fatalities are counted as murders (which they should be), police actually are three times more likely to be murderers than the average American. They are also more likely than the average person to commit assault and sexual assault. (See figure 10 of this report). While they are supposed to be the heroic enforcers of just law and the courageous pillars of society, the reality is that if I am walking down a dark alley, I’m safer running into any average Joe (bums and gang members included) than running into a brother in blue, because the cop is more likely to be a violent thug, rapist, and murderer.

Police are particularly dangerous compared to private individuals because private individuals who murder people with guns actually are viewed as the heinous murderers they are. Efforts are made to apprehend, try, and imprison them. On the other hand, when police murder people, all they have to say is, “I feared for my life” in order to literally get away with murder. Besides the fact that the law treats police officers as a higher order of human being, it seems unfair, unnecessary, and dangerous for them to be armed with so many weapons.

What the hell do they need a tank for?

What the hell do they need drones for?

Oh, wait. That’s not what you were thinking of when you screamed for “gun control,” was it? No, it never is. Any discussion of restriction on firearms inevitably always means restriction of the private nobody of society who statistically isn’t likely to hurt or kill anyone with the gun. For some reason, it never refers to restriction of the violent, psychotic, cowardly police who patrol American streets constantly armed to the teeth, with tasers, clubs, rifles, and sometimes tanks and drones to back them up. Well why the fuck not?

Was it private nobodies, or armed enforcers of the state who killed 6 million Jews? Was it private nobodies or armed enforcers of the state who killed 3-4 million Cambodians? Was it private nobodies or armed enforcers of the state who gutted Chinese civilians and stabbed fetuses out of pregnant women’s wombs? And if you’re wailing about Godwin’s Law right about now, I urge you to Google the meaning of that term. It doesn’t mean what you think it means. If you think it means that as soon as you self-righteously utter “Godwin’s Law” that you have won the argument, and the other person has lost, you are fucking wrong. But to get back to the matter at hand – when has a private serial killer, even of the greatest magnitude, ever managed to come close to the murder and abuse rivaling the level of government? Guns or swords, whatever the weapon, have always been more dangerous in the hands of police and military than in the hands of Joe Shmoe.

If anyone seriously wants to talk about gun control, in any form, they need to first take a good hard look at what that entails, and who, in society needs to be subject to such controls.

Guns don’t just magically disappear, and laws do not make guns magically disappear. Some words written down on a piece of paper are not an equal match to a paper shredder or knife, much less firearms. Any form of gun control necessarily requires use of violence, with guns. If people don’t want to voluntarily register their guns, a police officer must force them to do so at the barrel of a gun. If people don’t voluntarily want to turn in their assault rifles, a police officer must force them to do so at the barrel of a gun. The use of a gun by a police officer may not be the first step – it may first start with a warning, a fine, or some type of detention, but if people seriously resist whatever form of gun control it is the government seeks to impose, police ultimately must enforce it – at the barrel of a gun.

See a common theme here?

Gun laws cannot be enforced without guns. No one who has a gun will give  a shit if you tell them to turn in their guns, and that the government may come after them with a fork or taser if they don’t. It is the threat that police, such as a SWAT team, will kick down their doors – with guns, that will coerce them into turning in their guns, like they did during hurricane Katrina.

So then, it seems you don’t want a restriction on guns. That’s not what you meant at all. You just want firearms restricted to the elite classes of the enforcers of the law. You want to completely disarm the classes of people who traditionally, historically, and statistically have hurt and killed minimal numbers of people, while you want to fully arm the military and police – allegedly to protect us all from the grave danger of firearms.

You want to give all firearm power to the enforcers of the law, who were first in line to capture slaves and return them to their masters, who were first in line to round up innocent Japanese citizens and drag them off to internment camps, who were first in line to let their dogs and batons loose upon black people trying to gain equal rights, and who will always be first in line to execute whatever sick atrocity the government wants executed.

So don’t say you want to restrict or get rid of guns. You do want guns, and you only want the most organized and depraved groups of people in the country to have them. Say what you mean, and know that it is your impossible burden to explain how this makes the rest of us safe.

  • Pingback: We Need Gun Control Now - Unofficial Network()

  • Zapeee

    This is a great article and i agree wholeheartedly that the police have too many weapons. (they dont even carry guns in england). i think gun control should start with removing the automatic weapons from the police station and putting them back in the national guard armory (for when martial law is declared) where they belong.

    The thing that really bugs me about the latest wave of gun control hyseria is discussion of the Sandy Hook perp’s mental health. To be sure, anyone who did what he did has mental health issues.

    but in some cases it would take a singularly brilliant therapist to figure this out years before it happened. so are we going to require every gun owner get a psych evaluation? how often? annually? monthly/ weekly?

    it seems like this will destroy what is left of “doctor-patient” confidentiality. will the FBI be accessing our mental health records? they sure will, and our health insurance companies will be more than happy to share their database with them.

    what happens when someone gets their permit and they have a breakdown years later? yeah, i guess they need to get evaluated on a daily basis for any sign of frustration or unhappiness.

    hey, commonsense, how often do you and your brother officers get examined by a psychiatrist?

    and last but not least, how would stricter laws governing the purchase and ownership of guns prevent a thief from stealing and using someone else’s guns?

  • shawn

    Cops have to be armed, and last i heard so are UK officers. The issue is getting their use of force under control. Far too often a cop saying i feared for my life is accepted without any physical evidence. Net result, panic shoots and the cop walks. What happened to the concept of REASONABLE fear?

    I’m trying to remember details. There was a cop who deliberately used a lesser gun so that his dick extension didn’t get him into situations it can’t get him out of.

  • mobooz

    Fucking government is taking away all of our weapons and labeling us terrorists. The only way they’re going to get my aerosol anthrax away from me is by pulling it from my cold, dead hands.

  • KAZ

    The only thing gun laws do is take guns away from those who obey the law. Case in point the recent elementary school shooting, the killer did not own the weapons he took the guns from his parents home. Then he disobeys all gun laws by bringing them onto school property. Only then he began to kill innocent adults and children.

    The only people gun laws hurt are the people who get killed by those who choose to disobey the laws. Just like the war on drugs, most drugs are illegal, yet people still choose to use, sell, and grow/make them. The war on drugs is a never ending war that will never be won. A war on guns will be the same way. As long as guns are being made, there will be people who use them the wrong way no matter what laws are in effect.

    My final point is this what makes a gun dangerous is not the amount of bullets it can shoot but the amount of training a person has using that weapon. Case in point is the D.C. sniper, the two individuals involved were far more deadly and accurate with a regular hunting rifle with a scope, than a mentally ill man with an assault rifle. If just one of the adults tragically killed in the elementary school had a concealed weapon there would have been a lot less victims. A person who takes a bullet for someone else is considered a hero and very well should be. However, the hero should not have to die the criminal should. America needs to allow its hero’s to defend themselves and put a bullet in the head of the psycho’s that deserve it.

  • DW


    UK police are routinely NOT armed. They do have specific squads that are armed but they are only called when necessary.

    This is especially true in Great Britian where the majority of police officers are unarmed and most do not want to be armed.

    Many however do carry tazers.

  • Joker

    We should probably ban cars too while we are at it because they kill more people than guns!!! Stupid democrats

  • Georgia Sand

    @KAZ – couldn’t agree with you more.

  • Common Sense, enemy of Liiberty

    Cops shoot and kill 350-425 people per year. Doesn’t come close to the 12-14,000 killed every year by everyday citizens…

  • takaru

    there is a good movie out about gun control, where only the government and cops have guns- it called Shindlers List

  • Ghost

    Given the ratio of cops:citizens, cops kill more people than citizens.

  • tz

    Maybe you brought a gun to an RPG or a Mortar fight.

  • mg

    Excellant writing you got there!Hopefully we can all just go on and enjoy our way of life.The problem is that the government wants us to live their life.I dont think so.Let them pry them guns from our cold dead hands if they want them.At least we wouldnt be cowards!

  • Pingback: We Need Gun Control Now | Especially For The Thugs With Badges | The Tallahassee O()

  • joe

    You are all fools if you believe America needs gun control. Statistics prove that in 1993 6.6 people to every 100,000 were killed with guns, in 2011 studies show 3.3 people to every 100,000 were killed with guns. The country has gotten SAFER because of GUNS. Guns do not kill people, people kill people. Wake up people, if you take away civilian guns you can only expect mass GENOCIDE. Hitler took the guns from the Jews and committed GENOCIDE, Musoline took guns away, Stalin took guns away…every great dictator TOOK AWAY GUNS and all of them committed GENOCIDE. You take away guns in America and you will murder millions.

  • Hey

    Sad reality is, no matter how strict politicians make gun control laws, these laws will never stop determined murderers from stealing guns and then using them to kill.

  • Dkingslayer69

    I really hope they remove guns from policemen.. They kill to many people and always get away with it. I also hope that the military steps in and go out in the streets and go into every house in every town and city and take away the guns to those who don’t have the right papers for them. Cause at least that would be a good start to get guns of the streets.

    As for those that have papers they all have to take a few tests to make sure that they are not crazy in the head like mentally.

    also for those with papers keep in touch with them and check up on them random times monthly to make sure no one has sold the guns to anyone on the streets.

  • Nbcrew

    Great read here, we need to flip all these bullshit gun laws
    Onto the police because they are the problem!
    If it wern’t for all the restrictions we have on guns today
    Mabye someone (like a teacher with a consealed weapon) could have shot that kid before he killed Over 20 students.
    Same gos for the movie theater shit that happend a while back
    All it woulda took is one fucking guy with a gun.
    Its gunna come down to the police trying to take are guns and us
    Shooting back.

  • BluEyeDevil

    There are as of 2011, 683,396 full time state, city, university and college, metropolitan and non-metropolitan county, and other law enforcement officers in the United States. There are approx. 120,000 full time law enforcement personnel working for the federal government adding up to a total number of 800,000 law enforcement personnel in the U.S. Now there are ……..
    311,591,917 people in the U.S. subtract 800,000 of that number and you have 310,791,917 non law enforcement citizens in this country. Gonna do a little math for ya………
    Police kill approximately 375 people a year with a gun, by the way 72 officers where killed in the line of duty of those 63 were killed with firearms just for your info, which means that roughly 1 in 6400 cops will kill someone in the line of duty………
    Now, there are 14,022 murders in this country a year roughly 11,000 committed with a firearm that means 1 in 28,253 citizens will commit a murder with a firearm. Statistics prove that nearly 75% of murders committed by citizens with a firearm are gang related.
    1 in 6400 cops murder with guns
    1 in 28253 citizens murder with guns
    The funny thing is citizens have far more guns than the police do but you are more likely to be killed by a cop than you are a gang member. Numbers don’t lie.

  • BluEyeDevil

    Hey common sent,
    If you are going to fly off the handle with statistics make sure you are accurate and don’t skewed numbers to benefit your point of view. You are completely wrong in your analysis and use typical cop misinformation.

  • BluEyeDevil

    Just a personal observation,

    Why do you think you have the right to take my rights from me. I say NO to you. If you want gun control, denounce your rights and move to England.
    I am not your slave or serf, you have a right to your point of view, but have no right to tell what to do.

  • Zapeee


    where do those numbers come from?

  • Chris Mallory

    Disarm cops for a safer America.

  • BluEyeDevil

    He probably gets his info from the FBI crime statistics. It’s where I get mine and probably the most accurate resource for information on crime statistics you will find. Most what hes says as far as statistics is close to correct but he fails to give you comparisons, or the other side of the coin. He is a two sided coin when it comes to getting information from him and skewed to his point of view instead of the big picture.

  • Rick

    I know people who do not own guns and are pro gun control because they fear them. It’s as if the gun itself is evil and merely by having one it will cast a spell on the owner making them do horrific things they would have never done if they hadn’t touched it. Ipso facto, all gun owners are evil. This ridiculous concept is pure nonsense and can only have been put in their heads by main stream media.

    Gun owners are fed up with this child-like reasoning so let’s put it terms these misled people can understand. There are over 100 million lawful gun owners in this country with close to 280 million guns. The ratio is 89 guns for every 100 people. There were 8500 murders by guns in the US in 2011. Let’s assume that 3/4 of those murders were committed with a “legal” gun, and lets assume that of those 6100 “legal gun murderers” was responsible for one killing. 6100/100,000,000 = 0.000061 or 0.0061%.

    To put this in perspective, there are almost 200,000,000 licensed drivers in the US, and nearly 275,000,000 registered vehicles. There were 32,994 traffic related deaths last year. 32,994/200,000,000 = 0.000165 or 0.0165%.

    31% of those traffic related death were alcohol related or 10,228 deaths. Hence you are almost twice as likely to be killed by a drunk driving incident than by a lawful gun. Now, let’s assume that the government proposes that in order to “solve” this problem, no vehicle can be registered unless it is equipped with breathalyzer equipment to ensure it cannot be started until you “blow clean”. I forgot to mention that you only have a few months to install this equipment and you are responsible for the costs to do so. If not equipped, you vehicle is illegal. And you can lose your license and your car if pulled over. In addition, the price of all new and used vehicles will increase significantly. All dealers, mechanics, even Jiffy Lubes will have the responsibility of reporting you and your vehicle if it is brought in for service and does not have the necessary equipment.

    What would be your reaction? “I don’t drink and drive, why should I have to be penalized for the fact that a small percentage of people do?” The powers that be will tell you that you are being protected from that small fraction that do. But is that true? Will everyone agree to do this? Will everyone have the means to do it? And what about the fact that some people can be drunk and have a friend blow into the device. What about the ones who are impaired by illegal drugs or even prescription medication. How does the device and this new law prevent those incidents? The answer is they can’t. New laws and regulations will not protect you. They will only make more criminals. People who have never driven impaired, and who may never even gotten a parking ticket will be criminals merely because they don’t feel they should be penalized for the actions of a minuscule portion of the populace. What the law does do is create more revenue for the State. Which is the real goal all along.

    Now you know how lawful gun owners feel. A gun is no more evil than a car. It all depends on who is behind the wheel or the trigger. It’s not about need. You may argue “yeah but we need cars, we don’t need guns.” If this is your argument, you need a history lesson. The right to own a gun is in the Bill of Rights. In reality, the government has more of a right to curtail your vehicle than it does to curtail gun ownership. As you will find out, the government believes your “right” to own a car and travel unmolested is a privilege that can be taken away arbitrarily. I hope you now understand.

  • BluEyeDevil

    Let’s give you guys some other stats:
    Top causes of death in the United States not of natural causes
    1Heart Disease
    4Lung Disease
    9Kidney Disease
    10Blood Poisoning
    12Liver Disease
    Homicide doesn’t even make the list.
    Question is: Why do we spend so much time and resources on gun homicide? Not that it is not important but I can think of 15 things that our time and money can be spent trying to find answers for…….

  • Common Sense

    Without going into stats, I will agree with your numbers. But then again, its an unfair sample of the population.

    Since the unemployed, bakers, plumbers, day laborers, teachers and other such occupations, do not require contact with armed/unarmed people in potentially violent situations, the numbers are catchy, but rather inaccurate. You also didn’t separate out the number of those under 18 (23% of the total population) and the over 65 (13%) or about 115 million.

    Now, had you listed, say the approximately 50 million police contacts per year (911 calls, traffic stops, ‘stop and frisk’ etc) vs 375 killings per year, then your percentage might be better representation.

    When compared to deaths as a result of ‘medical errors/negligence’ per year, the police are holy saints compared to that field. 375 deaths vs anywhere from 20,000 to 190,000 depending on your source. And this was from just 37-45 million hospitalizations per year, about the same number of police contacts per year one could equate. In 2011, 98,000 people died in ‘preventable medical accidents’ – just behind auto accidents, or #5 on Devil’s list.

    So, based on that perception, and another example above, your more likely to be killed by either your doctor/medical care worker, or the drunk in the oncoming lane then the cop, sorry, the tyrant out oppressing you.

  • Common Sense

    Last I checked, the amount in local taxes paid for public safety pales in comparison to the cost of medical care/insurance.

  • Rick

    The purpose of my post was to give gun control proponents an analogy they could understand. If they get it and want to focus on a real problem, just take a look at the FDA website where they admit that over 100,000 Americans die every year due to adverse drug reactions from legally declared safe prescription medication. That does not include overdoses from pain medication. Why aren’t people marching on D.C, demanding the heads of the FDA and CEOs of the Pharmaceutical industry for putting out obviously deadly drugs that have killed over 1,000,000 American in the last decade alone?

  • Libertarianawesomeness

    I do not own a gun! However, I will give up my guns when the Government gives up theirs.


    WOW….some of the comments on here are just crazy!!! Let’s start with Zippee… we go with this fully auto assault weapon bullshit. And I’ll call it bullshit cause it is. How is removing 1 type of gun going to do anything. The overwhelming majority of police shootings involve a sidearm. 2nd. those that involve a fully auto weapon are mostly incidents where regardless of the weapon, bad guy would’ve been shot.

    2ndly.. the overwhelming majority of police shootings are justified. Takeing the few examples of the bad ones would be like stating that we need to lock up anyone wist Aspurgers desease because the kid at Sandy Hook had it.

    And I think it’s funny how a website that says the drug war failed……feels we need to ban something else…as if that’s going to work.

    If people truly want to reduce death.. make in manditory that every car has an interlock device.

  • takaru

    stats?: the greatest concentration of psychopaths by profession:
    Corporate CEO
    Media (TV/Radio)

  • shawn


    “If people truly want to reduce death.. make in manditory
    that every car has an interlock device.”

    Prohibitively expensive, something else to go wrong, probably easily defeated, ect. Like with guns, people may simply have to accept we live in a free society and need to accept the risks that go with that.

    As for cop guns, i don’t particularly have a problem with. AR15s. Though would not go along with fully automatic weapons. Cops work in a civilian environment and misses don’t stop. But i don’t think most police ARs are full fun auto anyway.
    As for most police shoots are justified, well a lot of people are shot ‘reaching for their wasteband’ only to find no weapon. There are a lot more gray shoots than cops want to admit to, and a lot of motivation to clear an officer of wrong doing.

  • Zapeee




    Actually i agree with you and i think outlawing gun types or larger magazines is absolutely pointless.

    but if you consider that we have the right to bear arms against the government should it become tyrannical, and that the police are becoming more and more militarized, exactly how do you think the constitution framers would correct this situation?

    and “starter interlock devices for all” is an idiotic plan and will only be good for the company that is lobbying for the law.


    Great rhetoric, I agree 100%. what do you think of the media overreporting and sensationalizingt emotional issues lke the sandy hook shooting?


    Good point. and as we all have seen lately, our health care system is all about insurance companies, profits, avoiding liablitly and jacking the bill with unnecessary tests, not care for the patient. seems just like the police, ostensibly out “helping the public” but in fact harming indivuduals by writing tickets for petty infractions, trumping up DUI charges, unnecessarily detaining and searching civilians, but not helping people in need, such as disabled motorists.

    Commonsense, in your duties as a “Peace officer” have you ever actually helped a motorist stranded in a remote area change a flat, jump start their car, or get some gas? really? just an average shmoe and not some hottie? really? have you ever really helped anyone?

  • monwatches

    I concur there is actually a storm coming. Liberals are playing with fire these days. Men and women fought and died to the legal rights we have and will do so to shield them. Like Toby Keith mentioned in his song…”this big dog will fight if you rattle his cage”, and in my eyes the big dog would be the American people. The winds of change can shift seriously quickly on Obama. He is an absolute baastaard.

  • Lurker

    Considering how the majority of Copblock people seem to be “pro-constitution”, you seem to be pretty against the 2nd amendment. Don’t like guns?

    Go to England, it must be safe becuase there are no guns, right? Oh wait, you’re roughly 2x as likely to be the victim of a violent crime. Stabbings are through the roof over there. The majority of people being killed by guns in the US are scumbag on scumbag. The Smith family driving to the store is unlikely to be shot.

    And of course cops shoot more people than the average person. They are called to the worst situations that people come across. They are put into dangerous, violent situations and sometimes it’s necessary to kill people. I highly doubt you’d agree that any police shootings are justified though, based on your other articles.

  • Austin

    this is stupid guns dont kill people, people kill people… We have the inaliable right to bare arms in america. It says plainly in the constitution that this right shall not be infrindged apon. We have this right to keep the government in check and if it become a tyranny, we maybe able to overthrow it. Gun control is all how it starts read your history. The Nazi’s did chairmen Mao did and then killed masses. What makes you all think that our corupt government is doing this for good, instead of evil?..

  • Navy Vet

    I have to completely disagree with this post. The right to keep and bear arms is the single most important right we have in my opinion. Most people have a point at which they believe they would would resist tyranny but if you relinquish your right to bear arms then it doesn’t matter WHAT your breaking point is, it won’t matter.

    Less then 3% of all the gun murders in the US happen with rifles of ANY kind, much less “Assault Rifles”. I am all for policies that WILL help keep guns out of the hands of criminals, such as closing background check loopholes. But the banning of 1 type of weapon or accessory will have no real impact on our gun violence.

    We should instead be focusing on that fact that many of the recent mass shooters have been on various psychoactive pharmaceuticals. We should be focusing on better mental health in this country, making sure that those with mental problems are not able to purchase weapons. This includes closing background check loopholes.

    As bad as gun violence may be Democide has been exponentially worse. MILLIONS of people have been killed by governments in the last century alone. This time won’t be different, history will repeat itself. You can’t march and armed population to a camp.

    In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

    Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    And even if you believe that this just won’t happen in American then you are naive. In just the last 11 years we have seen torture, extra-judicial killing of Americans, indefinite detention codified, a surveillance grid second to none, and wanton abuse of authority by US government personnel.

    But let’s say for the sake of argument that there is nothing to worry about in our lifetimes. Relinquishing our arms damns every successive generation of Americans to the consequences of our decision. Maybe in 100 years there will be a dictator in the US more brutal then Mao, Stalin, and Hitler put together. Our decision to disarm could sentence our great grandchildren to death.

    Of all the threats in the entire world a brutal government has shown time and time again to be the most dangerous. Anybody who is a serious student of history knows that disarming a population is the most effective way to control them. Gun control is less about guns and more about control.

  • Georgia Sand

    @Lurker and @Navy Vet. While I appreciate your thoughtful comments, and support of gun rights, it’s pretty clear you did not read the article.

  • Georgia Sand

    And same goes for Austin. I think the three of you only made it through the first quarter of the article. Maybe try reading the whole thing, then see what you think.

  • Georgia Sand

    @Lurker – another point you need to understand about reading carefully – the stats above are on police murder and excessive force, which by definition are NOT justified shootings. These numbers DO NOT INCLUDE the justified shootings. So your argument about them being put into awful situations doesn’t hold.

  • Austin

    I understand what your saying about the police, but I did read this in full. I just understand that this kind of action is how it all starts… I agree that police have no buissness owning drones, tanks, and other non needed idems. However, the “GOVERNMENT” wants to ban all “assult riffles” and later on all guns all together. My question is this how would stop “them” from taking something like this and turning it around on the people of this Republic? Cause that is what I’m pretty sure would happen

  • kevin

    i didnt get through the first two paragraphs to figure out you are right out of your mind.

  • pfftwhatev

    ” Case in point is the D.C. sniper, the two individuals involved were far more deadly and accurate with a regular hunting rifle with a scope, than a mentally ill man with an assault rifle”

    @KAZ The DC snipers used a Bushmaster AR-15. I mean, I agree with you otherwise, just wanted to point out that they weren’t using something most people would consider a “hunting” rifle.

  • The Marine

    This is madness. All of it!

    Where can I even begin? You have no idea what you are talking about! Ban the police from firearms?! Are you bats**t crazy?! From what I can tell, guns should be kept out of the hands of people like you!

    I have no idea where you grew up, but where I live, the police force is greatly trusted and respected. Your “statistic” on excessive force is faulty; even if an officer did rough some one up in an unacceptable manner, he can lose his badge just for stiking a person without due means, and even arrested and tried for pulling his gun inappropriately or threatening someone. The police are not above the law; they have to follow it like everyone else, it is merely their job to enforce it.

  • Socks

    Do you people hear yourself? Lets only let the government and the military have weapons so that if they want to take away something like your 1st amendement you cant fight back. The colonists brought their guns for hunting and protection and look what happened to them, they rose up against tyrants to become free. In the words of a famous Japanese commander, “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.”- Admiral Yamamoto

  • keepinitreal

    Propaganda like this is the reason Copblock will NEVER be taken seriously by anyone with more than two brain cells. Bunch of idiots will hopefully grow up someday and join a real movement capable or reasonable dialogue to stop the spread of police brutality…not simply making up silly statistics about cops all being “coward murdering rapists.” By the way I didn’t see a citation on your “figure 10.” How convenient and childish.

  • keepinitreal

    @Blueeyeddeveil…Hey idiot your analysis is flawed from the start. You are considering police line of duty killings exactly the same as criminal murders. The vast majority of police shootings are justified. Of course, I’m sure you probably don’t believe any police shooting was justified considering your presence here, but try to open your small mind just for a moment and maybe someday you will amount to something. There are many other variables you conveniently fail to mention as well, such as the high number of those killed by police who were engaged in criminal conduct. Your little anecdote about being more likely to be murdered in cold blood by a cop than a gang member while walking down the street minding your own business is one of the silliest things I ever read.

  • Thomas Anderson
  • Freedom

    Like Navy Vet had, gun control is a good IDEA but has proven around the world not to work. 99.9% of guns used in crimes are not legal which means that laws would not have stoped the crime from happening and in fact the criminal may even attempt to kill more people knowing nobody is armed. We, as a nation, need to stop talking gun control and start talking about how to get illigal guns off the street. Illigal guns do not include unregistered btw. And assault rifles kill less people every year than any other gun class. I think by doing research you’ll find that “redneck” states that have vertically no gun laws or concealed Carry restrictions have the lowest murder and crime rate because criminals simpldont know if they can pull things off. It’s not like every other person is carrying a gun but there is still a better chance there is. Criminals will always have guns unless we find a way to stop them, and gun control isn’t a solution which had been proven especially in Chicago, and what will stop a bad guy with a gun if we don’t have one? Police Persue criminals after they have harmed you, the point is to stop harm from happening all together. Just think about it