In response to:

Who Is Winning the Gun War?

OneForFreedom Wrote: Apr 12, 2013 5:25 PM
Looks to me more like consistency in treatment. Why should a non-violent felon (examples below include drug possession many years ago, etc). be forbidden from owning a gun? And if forbidden from owning a gun, should they not also lose their other rights? Why only the right to self defense? It seems pretty obvious that no one wants a convicted murderer to on a gun (or breathe, for that matter). But someone convicted of smoking something that was legal, then wasn't, and now depending on where you live, is again - why should they be prevented from owning a gun?
Attacks from abroad -- Pearl Harbor, 9/11 -- have united us.

Yet domestic atrocities lately seem only to deepen our divisions.

The bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City was seized upon to savage government critics like Rush Limbaugh.

After the murder of six innocents, including a 9-year-old girl, and the wounding of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and a dozen others in Tucson, Ariz., by a certifiable lunatic, Sarah Palin was charged with moral complicity.

The slaughter of 20 first-graders at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., put the National Rifle Association in the media cross hairs. With the massacres...