What 'they're' saying, for our information:

[elleng]

Our View: Gun control, terrorism and solutions

The identities of the suspects and the motive for their shooting at the Inland Regional Center hadn't been determined Wednesday before politicians, activists and some in the liberal media already were yammering for more gun control laws.

We heard it from Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley. We heard it from California Sen. Dianne Feinstein. We heard it from the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. In short, just about every liberal lawmaker or leader in the country took time out to accuse Republicans of not doing enough to restrict Americans' Constitutional right to bear arms before they even knew if this was a random act of violence or a calculated act of terrorism.

The liberal media also jumped on board. Leading the way was the New York Daily News, whose front page Thursday featured the headline: God isn't fixing this. The paper went on to say GOP presidential candidates continue to pray but offer no solutions on gun control. The Daily News even called the candidates "cowards."

Wow.

Talk about inappropriate, inaccurate and insensitive. . .

he last thing Americans need to do at this point is cede their ability to arm themselves for the sake of liberal elitists who themselves are very well protected, many by armed bodyguards, or who have the means to ensure they won't be victimized.

Hillary Clinton et al, you want gun control so badly? Why not start it off by giving up your armed guards? Think you will like that?
We don't think that's too likely.

We're not sure what the answer is to gun violence in this country, especially when it comes to mentally deranged individuals bent on carrying it out. But even if everyone in the country surrendered their guns, it wouldn't end the problem. Because criminals seem to always find a way to get the weapons they need.

What we really need in America is for everyone to seriously discuss gun violence and how to address it. Exactly what steps could be taken to prevent mass shootings? The same tired rhetoric of "we need tougher gun control laws" does not count as a discussion or a solution.

For now, we feel much more secure knowing that if terrorism does become more prevalent in America that millions of law-abiding citizens are armed and able to protect themselves. Sooner or later those guns will come in handy. You can believe that.

http://www.desertdispatch.com/article/20151203/OPINION/151209964

[Egnever]

1. Not sure why this nonsense is posted here.

But since it is this argument really just makes me want to slap someone.

But even if everyone in the country surrendered their guns, it wouldn't end the problem. Because criminals seem to always find a way to get the weapons they need

Over and over again this dumb shit is repeated as if scarcity wouldn't reduce the number of incidents. No it likely wouldn't eliminate all of them but the idea it would have no effect on the number of incidents is so ridiculous I am not sure how people can repeat it without realizing how stupid it makes them look.

Here's a similar argument for the same morons. Why build a boarder fence it wont end the problem immigrants will always find away to get in.

Same dumb shit argument but I am sure they would shit cookies if you told them that.

[elleng]

2. As I said, 'What 'they're' saying, for our information.'

[Egnever]

3. If we wanted to hear what they are saying I am pretty sure we wouldn't be here.

Just saying.

Plenty of places on the series of tubes to hear what the idiot squad is spewing.

[DJ13]

4. Thank you elleng, I appreciate your post

[elleng]

5. Thanks, DJ13.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. What you are having is two countries discussing the same event

and as far as I can tell, we could be discussing to very different events with two very different facts.

And to a lesser extent you are seeing that here at play as well.