In response to:

Angry Gun Control Debate Does Collateral Damage

John912 Wrote: Jan 30, 2013 5:07 PM
Michael has made the mistake of believing the phases "modest... common-sense changes", "assualt weapons" and "expanded background checks" mean what he thinks they mean. They don't to the Statist (e.g. Obama, Schumer, Feinstein). They don't definde "assault weapons", because these "AR type" rifles are functionally identical to all semi-auto sporting rifles. "Expanded background checks" to them really means EVERY change of hands between private citizens, even father to son, grandda to granddaughter gifting of a squirrel rifle or shortgun will require an FBI NIC background check on the person receiving! These are MAJOR infringements upon our citizens rights, not minor adjustments. An none will have any positive impact on the real problem.
Dr_Zinj Wrote: Jan 31, 2013 10:54 AM
What the gun checkers and registration advocates failed to learn was that Canada had exactly the sysem they want to impose here and it was a collosal waste of billions of dollars and didn't do a single thing to make the country safer from gun crimes. Canada wised up and recently abolished that registration scheme. And crime didn't rise.

The Great Gun Debate shows American political discourse at its irrational worst; with both left and right promoting panic and hysteria that distracts attention from the nation’s truly menacing problems. Instead of addressing crushing deficits, economic stagnation, political gridlock, and the erosion of middle-class security, politicians and pundits obsess over gun violence—one of the few challenges where the United States has made dramatic progress in recent years.

How can the president and his supporters work themselves into a self-righteous lather over minor regulatory adjustments that have been tried before with no measurable impact on the rate of firearms...