Hixter

Politicians love to enact laws 'for the children.' Was that really necessary?

Not at all. The NRA and pro-gun people hold a very simple stance: stop demonizing and criminalizing those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Anyone who is legally allowed to possess a gun should be allowed to do so if he or she wishes to do so. It is already happening in states across the country. If I were to move back to California I would be committing a felony if I brought some of my firearms across the state line because of a couple pieces of plastic that are attached to them. My only recourse would be to get rid of them; I would be disarmed. It would do nothing whatso

Is pimping a felony? If so, no I'm not.

I don't believe for a second that the most ardent anti-gun campaigners don't want to disarm anyone, but I wish they'd just be honest about it. It's like when Obama had his sudden, embarrassment-driven 'evolution' on same-sex marriage -- everyone knew he was for it, but he hemmed, hawed, lied and obfuscated his true beliefs in order to be elected. To me, that's a character flaw and not something I want to see in any of my elected officials. It's really not that difficult to tell the truth. And what about the statistical drop in gun murders in the United States even as Americans arm themselve

Likewise! I'll send you my # via PM so that we can try to work something out via text message Saturday. Now I'm wondering what the beer selection will be. It's Denver, so I'm assuming it'll be good.

So when you say "we aren't coming to take away your precious guns" you really mean, "yes, we are coming to take your precious guns." At least you're being honest, unlike the politicians who swear they aren't going to take anyone's guns, despite the fact that we all know that's exactly what they'd like to do. For our own safety, of course. So how exactly does it make us any safer if the criminals - who already commit the majority of gun crimes -- remain armed while trustworthy and law-abiding citizens are disarmed? It would make Waco and Ruby Ridge look tiny in comparison. I know an

No. The exact wording on the ATF form is: "Are you an unlawful use of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?"

Convicted felons, people under indictment for a felony, people deemed mentally ill, people charged with domestic violence, people with restraining orders and people who use illegal drugs (even marijuana) are all legally forbidden to purchase firearms. If they do so (or attempt to do so) they are breaking the law.

That works for me. I'd rather the government do nothing if the 'something' is something like turning me into a felon for owning a piece of plastic with a spring inside. They can't. That's just the point: those people can't legally buy a weapon.

That was not my intent and I am not a liar. To be honest, I've never heard anyone try to claim that the two cartridges are similar. But the fact remains that both are lethal (the Australian athlete in Oklahoma was killed by a .22 pistol) and that it's ridiculous to call a .22 an "assault rifle" if someone puts an adjustable stock on it. Good question. There are already laws against doing so, so how will additional laws stop it from happening? Making something illegal-er doesn't prevent crime. You're forgetting one crucial fact: they made handguns illegal and severely restricted ownership

If you, too, think that nothing has changed, then you need to pay more attention to the news. Absolutely untrue. It's called realism. I've never said that and I don't believe that. Our world is more peaceful than it has even been in the past. Crime rates in the United States continue to drop even as gun ownership rises.

The number of firearm murders in the U.S. was 8583 in 2011; the UK's figure is usually around the 100 mark. I think the source you quoted may have included suicides, but those don't belong in this discussion. Also, the United States has 5 times as many people as the UK, not twice as many. That said, it's pointless to compare two countries. Some countries and cultures just have more murders than others. Japan has an extremely low murder rate, but it doesn't have anything to do with the availability of guns -- it's a cultural thing. There are 300 million privately owned firearms in the Unit

Most .22 rifles are semi-auto and not bolt action. The Ruger 10/22 has been America's most popular .22 rifle for the last 50 years and it is semi-auto. I was discussing the firing mechanism, not the ballistic properties of the cartridges they use. But if you want to go there, pretty much every caliber above .22LR used in hunting rifles is more powerful and deadly than the .223/5.56 used in an AR15 or M16. Grandpa's deer rifle is more deadly than an assault rifle and fires armor-piercing bullets!

As I've said many times before, I've never watched Fox News. I couldn't pick Alex Jones out of a lineup, but I will admit to wearing out an 8-track tape of Double Live Gonzo in the seventies. By definition, actual assault rifles are selective fire: safe, semi-auto and auto. The civilian AR15 is not capable of automatic fire and is really no different than grandpa's .22: one shot per trigger pull. Let's not forget that it is the anti-gun faction which has changed the description. Now all you have to do is attach a folding stock, plastic grip or a bayonet mount onto grandpa's hunting rifle an

It's sad that politicians have used this tragedy to try to advance their gun control agenda. The shooter was already barred from owning and purchasing firearms and he broke a multitude of laws by simply bringing his weapon into DC. Worst of all, people like Senator Feinstein have been whining about so-called "assault weapons" while the DC shooter was only armed with a shotgun -- as suggested and endorsed by Vice President Biden.

Walt's reflection has a bullet hole in his cranium. Fore(head)shadowing?

Are you in the Denver area? I'm flying out for this weekend's show and was wondering about the conditions -- do you think it'll be a mud pit? My friends and I are camping and I'm hoping that things will dry out, but maybe I'm being overly optimistic.

Which stance was that? There have been so many over the last few months. No, I do no support an "unbelievably small" strike against Syria. It would be too little, too late.

Save the drunkenness for GBV I'm going to the Denver show this weekend. It feels petty of me to worry about a little mud when thousands of people are homeless due to the flooding, but it has me a little nervous about camping. Hopefully the area dries out this week.

I was clearly referring to the 1990s.

Simply put, anything that strengthens or emboldens your enemies is a bad thing. Like it or not, that's the way things go on the international stage. As for the strikes the administration were planning, I would have expected "unbelievably small" and "just enough so that we aren't mocked" to mean that they would have been quick, relatively bloodless and comparatively cheap.

Cher's vocal effects: http://top40.about.com/od/top10lists/tp/top10autotune.htm

I guess so. You'd think people would be tired of it by now.

I'm pretty sure that Auto-Tune, when used correctly, is difficult or impossible to discern. It's typically used to make corrections to minor instances of off-pitch vocals and instruments, but the modern artists are stretching it to its limits and purposely creating those horrible effects because they're "in."