[Dick Bachert]

[P-Marlowe]

If the uniform of the day included a holstered .45 then this kind of mass killling would never occur on a military base.

[aruanan]

I have a boss who was talking about some report saying that people who had guns and were victims of a home invasion were more likely than not to be shot by the invaders with their own guns after having been disarmed. Yeah, I said. Better to give up those guns and be completely at the mercy of the home invaders.

I said all that statistic means is that homeowners need to have more training in planning for a home invasion and completely wiping out the invaders. After this happens a few highly publicized times, future, not-yet-dead, home invaders may start doing the "this could happen to you" imagination game and realize the potential cost of doing that kind of business is just too high for comfort.

[Mr. K]

mass murders by a nut with a gun can number in the 10s,20s, or even more people

But when someone ELSE has a gun, they are usually less than 4

We need to ARM MORE PEOPLE? instead of disarm... because if only one life is saved...

[VerySadAmerican]

There was absolutely NO evidence an AR-15 was used. Yet every media outlet reported that the shooter had one.

I wonder if Feinstein is going to call for security guards and cops only have single shot revolvers. If that had been the case the shooter couldn’t have killed but one person with the guard’s gun.

[jeffc]

Gun control is not what the gun-grabbers are after. The ultimate goal, little by little, is an outright gun ban.

[TauntedTiger]

Thank God we have the second amendment to protect us from fascist types like her. /s

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

I would love to get accustomed to hearing, “breaking news, a homeowner shot and killed a drug crazed home invader weilding a shotgun.”

[vette6387]

My E-mail to Dianne:

So here you are again, chattering about the “need for gun control” before the investigation into the DC Navy Yard is through it’s first day. But we do know some things at this juncture. None of the usual political language applies here. Alexis, who killed twelve people, did not buy a weapon “from a friend” or “over the Internet” or in the “parking lot of a gun show.” He did not have a “high capacity” magazine from which to “spray” bullets around. He did not buy a “military style assault weapon,” nor did he even use one. He did not use “special ammunition.” Instead, he bought a shotgun that almost nobody is openly suggesting should be banned or controlled. Policians like you who call for new laws in the wake of this shooting will thus need to be called to task with a simple and reliable question: “What exactly do you propose doing, and how specifically would it have changed what happened at the Navy Yard? You need to use some intellectual honesty instead of prattling on about something about which you know or understand very little. I understand you don’t like guns for anyone except yourself and the rest of “the important people,” the group with which you self-identify so I expect that you will be up on your “soapbox” about this tragedy because like “our president,” you never let a bad situation go to waste.