Hixter

Here's my solution for the umpteenth time: enforce current laws. They cover every possibility already, so why do we need more that only serve to infringe on the rights of the good guys while not affecting the bad guys in the slightest.

You're completely ignoring my comments about other weapons (knives, bare hands, etc.) and trying to boil it all down to statistics which only include injury by firearm. Only one thing matters: my safety. I don't care if the intruder is armed, unarmed, a raving murderer or the teenager down the street: I am going to protect my safety and a gun will be my method of protecting myself and stopping the threat to my safety. And since when do guns "backfire"?

I wholeheartedly agree. My firearms will sit safely tucked away unless I find myself in the unfortunate position of having to use them to defend my life. All I wish for is the chance to be able to defend myself legally and forcefully if the need arises.

They're locked up and nobody is hurt. P.S. I am licensed to carry a gun so I am seldom far from one.

Sorry, but I require an automobile to make it to my office, earn a living and buy my food. I have a burglar alarm and a barking dog, but I am not going to count on them when 2 guys kick down my doors. I won't be able to count on the police to save me either, so I can only hope that some buckshot to the chest will save me from death at the hands of criminals.

No, I'm saying that I've explained myself ad infinitum and you're just casting aspersions.

Think of how many lives would be lost if the United States were to repeal the Second Amendment and forcibly confiscate Americans' guns. It would be a bloodbath.

Why should we enact more laws if the previous laws are roundly ignored? Seems like a waste of time to me. Enforce the laws that are already on the books. Don't make criminals out of law-abiding citizens just because current laws are ignored by bad guys. Go after the bad guys instead. Absolutely. And I'm not willing to be disarmed so that it might happen to me. I follow the law and I don't hurt other people. I can not count on the police to protect me 24/7, so I must protect myself. Any attempt to diminish my ability to protect myself makes me less safe.

Some people (a small percentage of the population) have decided to ignore gun laws and they are the source of the problem. Enacting new laws that will only affect the law-abiding citizens is pointless and will not reduce gun crimes.

There are almost 300 million firearms in this country -- almost one per person -- so I can't see anything making them even marginally more difficult to acquire. Maybe a street gun would cost $25 to $50 more? Marijuana has been illegal for decades, but how difficult is it to acquire? Would another layer of laws make it more difficult to buy? I doubt it.

Please explain how people who already obtain, carry and use firearms illegally will suddenly find themselves compelled to follow the laws that they've been ignoring for decades.

I think existing gun laws cover pretty much everything. Additional laws added "to save our children" are poorly thought out and serve as little more than political posturing rather than actually making us safer. To sum it up: bad guys will always be bad guys and good guys will always be good guys.

I don't have a weapons cache, but I choose to own firearms to protect myself, my family and my neighbors against violent criminals. It doesn't matter to me in the slightest if you choose to remain unarmed, but don't infringe on my right to self-protection. I am certain that I'd rather face armed assailants with a firearm rather than my fists. As far as I'm concerned, that kind of condescending blather has no place on a friendly forum where people gather to discuss a band that they enjoy.

I agree, Dorner's a goner -- probably by his own hand. Good riddance.

Looks like Dorner has been spotted again in Big Bear. Carjacking and a shootout with a Fish & Game officer. Live audio from the scene says there's gunfire and 2 officers down. http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/live-video/

Likewise.

And they use explosive warheads, not inert chunks of lead. Not at all a handgun.

This is a rocket launcher:

It's not a handgun or rifle, for starters.

I support existing laws that make it illegal for mentally ill people, drug users and criminals to buy firearms, not adding more laws that impact the 99% of Americans who don't use their firearms to commit crimes while rolling off the backs of street criminals who ignore current laws and will do the same if new laws are enacted. Guns on the streets are obtained by 2 primary means: theft (already illegal) and personal sale. But we're not talking about gun show sales in most cases: the majority are purchased legally by straw buyers who pass background checks and then sell them to bad guys for a c

Because legislators are considering an "assault" rifle ban, not a handgun ban.

No, I'm just a citizen expressing my views -- with a little more politeness. And why the continuing assertions that I don't support any gun laws despite my repeated statements to the contrary? Suicides have no place in a discussion of gun violence, but when Japan was given as an example of a country with little gun crime I stated that the nations' societies were very different and pointed out that Japan's suicide rate is twice ours as an example of the very different morals and traditions held by the two populations. And then you went on to break it down into the degrees of likelihood th

It's quite clear that there are those who would take away all of our guns (see the above posts and cities like Chicago) and every time they chip away at magazine capacity and cosmetic items like pistol grips it erodes our Second Amendment rights just a little more. Things like New York's 7-round limit essentially outlaw every pistol other than a revolver. And it really bothers me that the government officials that are drafting the new laws have exempted themselves from having to follow said laws. As I've said, I submit to them all the time. But ask yourself whether you really believe that the

And they also have a suicide rate that's twice that of the United States. As I said, different countries and different cultures. Apples and oranges. Not likely. And trust me, I can get to my weapons in about 2 seconds while at home or in my vehicle. The resident has no possible way of knowing what the burglar's intentions are and the news is full of stories about people who were killed after surprising the crooks. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who breaks into my house has plans to harm me and I will do everything possible to stop them from doing so. Such action will probably be of the 12

Apples and oranges; you can't compare 2 countries with vastly different demographics, morals, traditions, etc., but I'll bet Japan's numbers would look just like ours if we shipped them a couple million gang bangers and street thugs. And let's not forget that little thing called the Second Amendment. Incorrect, unless you are a mind reader you have no way of knowing the intruder's intentions. I will always assume that someone who breaks into my home is armed and will injure and/or kill me if confronted rather than risk being identified and thrown in jail. I will do my best to kill the intru