Six gun control groups worth your time and donations

Since we published this article in 2012, in response to the gunning down of 20 children and six adults at the Sandy Hook shooting, America has seen over 1,500 mass shootings, leaving more than 1,700 people dead and 6,089 wounded, according to a disturbing map published by Vox. In the wake of last week’s Las Vegas shooting, the White House is once again saying now is not the time to, “have those policy conversations” about gun control, and the Onion is once again rerunning their article, which came out following the 2014 Isla Vista killings, “‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens.” While our federal government would prefer not to attempt improving America’s blatantly obvious gun problem, that doesn’t mean you can’t: consider giving some money, time or attention to the following local and national gun control groups because, in the words of Kurt Vonnegut:

That there are such devices as firearms, as easy to operate as cigarette lighters and as cheap as toasters, capable at anybody’s whim of killing Father or Fats [Waller] or Abraham Lincoln or John Lennon or Martin Luther King, Jr., or a woman pushing a baby carriage, should be proof enough for anybody that, to quote the old science fiction writer Kilgore Trout, “being alive is a crock of shit.”

The Brady Campaign: Named after Ronald Reagan’s assistant who was shot and nearly killed by John Hinckley, this group scored a major victory in the 90s with the federal assault weapons ban. Help the cause by donating here.

New Yorkers Against Gun Violence: Formed by grieving mothers in the wake of a Prospect Park shooting in 1993, NYAGV has grown from a Brooklyn-based organization to one with branches in 27 counties around the state. Despite the fact that New York has strict gun laws already, we can’t take it for granted. NYAGV also lobbies at the federal level for gun control. You can donate to them here.

Everytown for Gun Safety: Formerly Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Everytown for Gun Safety is now a coalition made up of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and survivors of America’s many gun violence incidents. Together, they lobby for gun control legislation on a local and federal level, as well as provide a support network for gun violence survivors.

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence: Is this the most reasonably-named group in the history of American politics? Possibly, yes. The CSV is an umbrella organization of 48 national groups that seek to free the nation from gun violence through policy advocacy, research and strategic engagement. You can donate to them here.

Violence Policy Center: Even the NRA is a little afraid of these guys, branding them “the most effective, and most untruthful anti-gun rabble-rouser in Washington.” VPC has worked on campaigns from the Brady Bill to taking a stand against concealed carry permitting, filling Washington with reports on the dangers of unregulated gun ownership, challenging the NRA head-on and being a nuisance for anyone looking to make the Second Amendment into a license to carry any and every weapon under the sun. You can help them out with a donation here.

Americans for Responsible Solutions: Started by former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in the wake of her own brush with death after being shot, ARS is focused on “commonsense” solutions to America’s widespread gun violence issue. Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly call themselves Second Amendment supporters, but are also committed to lobbying for expanded background checks, stiffer gun trafficking penalties and funding studies and research on the causes of gun violence. Donate to help with that here.

Updated by Hannah Frishberg


  1. Carrie Cahill -Asher

    Is there a way to stop or diminish the NRA influence by publishing the names of all congressman and senators who accept NRA funding? I do not want to vote for them. Also, to make public all congressman and senators who vetoed the ban on assault weapons. How about putting a lot of light on who the NRA funds?

    • No, there isn’t. The NRA has been here since before you were born and will be here after you die. We had the right to keep and bear arms before you were thought of and we will have it after you have left.

    • Explain it to me…. So you have all these anti-gun organizations and you have to demonize the NRA… Millions flowing to these anti-gun organizations to deny Americans their right to own firearms and of course once again the LEFT needs someone to focus their hatred on…

  2. Bonnie Darnell

    Would like to see the names of all 31 pro gun senators who refused to be interviewed on Meet the Press today. Also need to have published the names of all congressmen /senators who accept NRA funding. It is time for us to deal with the gun problem in this country and stand up to the influence of the NRA.

    • It’s time we deal with the yo-yo’s in this country who want to restore the feudal right, referred to by wannabe tyrants as the Divine Right, of Kings to Govern. Newsflash to low-information liberals: The only reason you have the right to spout your nonsense without being slapped down for it is because we are armed and we will not tolerate being deprived of our right to free speech. And here you are trying to take away our right to keep and bear arms. Not very bright, are you?

    • Jason

      Gun control “doesn’t work”….. All the stats in every state show that where there is gun control, there is crime!!! That simple, fact

      • Jerry

        I don’t understand why people argue gun control does not work . Same logic , u may argue seat belt does not work for car accident. This is totally an exercise and none sense

        • frdmftr

          Fairly new to the debate, are you, Jerry? For your information, gun control does not work because it interferes with the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in defense of the lives and liberties, while doing absolutely nothing to restrict criminals from being armed. As an example of gun control “not working,” you might want to research what happened when British Massachusetts Governor General Thomas Gage sent Lt. Col. Francis Smith and Marine Major John Pitcairn and 700 British Regulars to Concord via Lexington to impose “gun control” on the colonists. If these modern enemy insurgents advocating firearm restrictions on this board ever reach the point of actually forcing the issue, they will be arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned under 18USC2383 for Armed Insurrection. That’s why “gun control doesn’t work.”

  3. Hold on. How would gun control change what happened? Connecticut has some of the strictest gun control laws in the control. All of those guns were registered to another person even! People don’t need guns to go on killing sprees. A great example would be the unibomber…

    • And Connecticut is prohibited from legislating or enforcing ANY gun control laws: The Tenth Amendment prohibits any Power to the States prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, and the U.S. Constitution prohibits any infringement on the right to keep and bear arms. Gun control is DONE and the people have the fundamental right to ignore it.

  4. Pete,
    Maybe a ban on at least assault weapons needs to be nationwide (federal) then and not just in a few states like CT to be effective? Lanza’s mother got her assault weapons from somewhere…maybe accross state lines?

    Adam Lanza was not capable of the resourcefulness of Ted Kaczynski (a former college professor. Do you think Adam could have broken into a school and Killed 27 people in 10 minutes without the easy availability of a semi-automatic weapon?

    Maybe individual citizens should be allowed to own nuclear materials…you never know when citizens are going to have to protect themselves from the government, right? :-)

    • What difference does it make what kind of gun he had? First off, it was not an machine gun. It was one shot fired for each pull of the trigger. Secondly, it is not as if he kept shooting until he was disarmed or killed. He had his fill then offed himself.

      I also don’t know how you can really assess how much more resourceful one person is to another. Especially when in today’s day and age with the internet it would be pretty easy for Lanza to just google how to make an improvised explosive devise. He was supposed to be a math and science wiz.

      Maybe we should focus more on treating mental illness rather than on how to remove all the sharp objects from everyone before they hurt themselves. Seriously, you never explained how gun control really would’ve changed the situation. No guns sold to women with children who might have mental illness?

      • Adam Lanza used a semiautomatic Bushmaster Bushmaster .223 calibre rifle M4 Type Carbine, using several magazines of 30 bullets each as his primary weapon. Lanza taped together two cartridge magazines to this Bushmaster so that he could easily flip between the two with speed. Remember, every victim was hit more than once! Lanza also used “frangible ammunition”, which fragments on impact, inflicting wounds that are usually beyond medical help.

        A simple, “attainable” goal here might be to simply reduce the probability of incidents like this by reducing the availability of militarily efficient tools of any type –not- to do something impossible like eliminating any example of violence anyone can site—like the uni-bomber example.

        In this example, Adam was a special child himself under constant monitoring. If Adam’s mother didn’t have the tools for him to take then could Adam have had access to them elsewhere? If there were any way that Adam’s mother could have been prevented from acquiring those tools in the first place then it might at least be possible that this incident could have been prevented and those children and teachers would still be with us today. Isn’t saving human worth the effort even if it only increases chances?

        The focus needs to be on reducing the easy availability of militarily efficient tools of any type NOT on eliminating the right to own a gun.

        Let people who have practical reasons for owning a gun (like self-defense, hunting…) have them. The point is–is there any practical reason for needing to own any type of tools that could kill 26 people in 5 minutes? Do we want to allow availability of any type of weapon to people who want them for any reason like various psychological reasons?

        Just where you draw the line about what is too militarily efficient will take some study and healthy adult debate from both sides before it can be set. It seems to me though that gun advocates will secure there rights to bear arms even more solidly if they will add their voices, resources and efforts to eliminate mass murder scenarios like Newtown.
        If nothing else, after Newtown, we owe it to potential future victims to give this whole question another hard look and try.

        • In my previous reply I forgot to mention something really stupid you said: “Lanza also used “frangible ammunition”, which fragments on impact, inflicting wounds that are usually beyond medical help.” FYI, ‘frangible ammunition’ does not inflict wounds that are beyond medical help; all frangible ammunition does is not penetrate walls. It is used by marshals on aircraft to prevent penetrating the pressure bottle of the passenger compartment and causing decompression at altitude.

      • I have no problem with focusing more on mental illness, so long as a test for mental illness is not a pre-requisite for obtaining a firearm. Government has no authority to compel interrogation under penalty of perjury as a precondition to issuing or denying permission to exercise a right, especially when government has no authority to issue or deny permission to exercise a right in the first place.

    • It isn’t effective in the way you want it to be effective in the State of Connecticut or any other State, and it would not be effective nationally. We’ve been down this road before with the Gun Control Act of 1968 and we are not going down this road again. Understand this: There is no federal authority for gun control law delegated to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution and State authority for gun control is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. Gun Control law is null and void for want of subject matter jurisdiction and read this carefully: We will not comply. We will exercise our right to keep and bear arms in spite of you, and we will continue stopping the Adam Lanza and Thomas Holmes of the world whenever and wherever they are encountered.

      Get used to disappointment.

  5. Guns are taken from responsible gun owners. Taken out of their homes. It is time for these firearms to be secured. Gun safes are the best way to secure firearms. Practically anyone with a clean record can purchase a firearm. Taking them home an putting them in a drawer is irresponsible yet many do just that. Anyone that purchases a firearm should be certified to own a firearm. That means training on the handling and securing of the firearm. There should be mandatory certification of this type before a firearm can be purchased much like the Hunter Safety Program that was implemented years ago and was very successful. Go to and leave your comments on this.

    • Would you like to seek government permission to enter a comment on this board? Would you like to lock up your pens and pencils in a safe where you cannot reach them when you want them? Would you like to lock up your only means of defense from violent home invasion in a safe where you will be killed before you can dial the combination? Would you like to be thrown in jail for so much as shoving a home invader up against a wall, as is the standard in England? You have the right to yammer on about your defection political ideology all you want to for one reason and one reason only: We are armed and we intend to defend the U.S. Constitution as amended against you and every other tyrant working to destroy it. Why you would want to destroy that protection of your right to yammer on is inconceivable, and will not prevail.

    • It seems to me gun control organizations should be designated domestic terrorist organizations for advocating the ability of thugs and maniacs and terrorists to work their vicious, murderous will on innocent people with impunity. They should also be regarded as traitorous for advocating the destruction of the U.S. Constitution.

  6. Bud Held

    Gun control groups need to unite under one national organization which could be called something like the National Gun Control Association. Such an organization could give unified direction, raise significant money and effectively counteract the negative attacks that the NRA propagates against congress members who vote for gun control. How about some like Gabby Gifford as honorary organizing chairperson?

    • Go for it, Bud. Put all your eggs in one basket and see what maybe five thousand members will get you. The only reason you are getting the meager results you are getting now is because a vanishingly few gun control members have more money than brains and think they can buy their way to tyranny. It is physically impossible for your anti-rights/anti-liberty/anti-constitution programs to win, because any law you manage to pass will be null and void from the moment of its inception and no one may be lawfully compelled to obey a mere color of law. And if your sycophants in Congress or State legislators force us to defend our rights, we will.

  7. Victor J. Cano

    What happened to Americans for Responsible Solutions. Why don’t all these groups join together and pool their resources? Strength in numbers

  8. dave j

    Dear Senators, Congress men and women, State Representatives, Judges, law enforcement personnel, Vice President and Mr. President of the United States,

    “We the people” ask that you hear our voice. As responsible, taxpaying, law abiding citizens like you, we the people of the US are asking that our collective voice be heard. We understand your responsibility is complex and you are under enormous pressure from the public. Understanding the root cause of violence in America and “gun Control” is a key element. The root cause of the problem is derived from violent movies, violent video games and the media sensationalizing violence. Video game violence is a major factor if not the principal root cause of the criminal murderous behavior we are subjected to in the last several decades. Parents allow their children to play many violent video games for thousands of hours, thus desensitizing their emotions, retarding their social growth and glorifying gun violence. By the time a person is 21 they probably have seen 21,000 murders on TV.

    An emotional reaction to a tragedy does not warrant implementing additional illogical firearms laws in addition to what we already have in place. More importantly, emotional reactions by law makers do not prevent crime but logical laws and an improvement in the justice system improves the safety of the people.

    We, the good and responsible citizens, should not have to pay the price because of the actions of terrorist and evil individuals. The guns do not kill people. The bad and evil people kill people.

    As firearm enthusiasts and many war veterans of the United States of America, we are concerned that our rights as legal and responsible firearm owners are being infringed upon. Additional laws and regulations will only have an effect on the good people complying with the law, not the criminals.

    We the people agree that any person with a violent criminal background, felon, illegal alien and any mentally ill person should not own or be able to acquire firearms or any weapon for that matter. Criminals should be incarcerated or in the case of the mentally ill, receive proper medical attention and treatment. We believe in a background check for all people before firearms are purchased.

    Unreasonable and illogical gun control does not equate to crime control. It’s that simple. Additional gun control will only have a negative consequence on the law a biding citizens and not the evil, felonious and deranged. The firearm laws in place now are extensive and comprehensive in nature. The criminals, murderous felons and evil individuals do not comply with the laws already in place. We the people do not want to be punished for the crimes others carryout.

    The complex issue of “gun control” is exploited by the media and the emotions created by the saturation of tragedies and violence in the news and movies. With clear facts and logically firearm regulations the laws are straightforward.

    I ask that you investigate all of the positive firearm information by contacting the NRA. And this time allow the NRA a fair amount of time. Please expend the time in understanding and implications of any additional firearm laws and the firearm laws we have in place right now. We as responsible people obey the law and shall be allowed to protect ourselves, children, families, friends and other responsible citizens at all times with a firearm. The statistics prove that the good and responsible people defend themselves with legal firearms thousands of times a day against evil criminals.

    Please do not “buy into” on the prejudiced, one way spin by the media regarding guns. An AR-15 is a sporting firearm, not an assault weapon. A gun is a firearm that has countless enjoyable and legal uses. The AR-15 “sportsman riffle” is used by thousands of predator hunters, deer hunters, wild boar hunting and big game hunters. Each weekend thousands of firearm target shooting professionals use the AR-15 target firearm in shooting competitions. A firearm, like the AR-15 sporting rifle, is not just for protection. We the people enjoy the responsible usage of firearms during target shooting, sportsmanship high–power rifle shoots, small bore pistol competitions, junior target shooting championships, International Defense Pistol Association IDPA firearm matches, and many other enjoyable legal activities with semiautomatic rifles, pistols with large capacity magazines. In one weekend at a sanctioned competition a single person utilizes about 500 rounds target shooting. The AR-15 is the most popular sporting rife in history. We have worked hard to afford such a fine firearm and we very much enjoy the safe, responsible, ethical use, equipment and accessories for it. It is not a scary looking “assault weapon”. Please help stop demonizing guns with the words “assault weapon”. It is evil people that assault not the firearm..

    A police officer, or any law enforcement person for that matter, cannot be there for us at all times, in all places, to protect us from all criminals. Criminals do not have any rules, timelines or laws that they must follow. There could be multiple attackers at any one time in anyplace, with multiple weapons. The only way that we, the honest and responsible people, have a chance to survive a deadly encounter created by a criminal is to have firearms, semiautomatic pistols, shotguns and rifles to protect ourselves. The thousands of responsible individuals protecting their families with legal firearms each day are forced to do so by the evil criminals. Those criminals should be incarcerated for the crimes they commit. Not the honest and responsible people.

    It is very true that the only thing that will stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun. Please adjudicate the many issues with violence in video games, the internet and the mentally ill that is part of the root cause of the problem with crime and violence in the USA, not the guns.
    We know gun laws are always written by people who hate guns. Ironically, they are the ones who know the least about guns.

    The media created the names such as “high capacity:, “assault weapons” and “military style”. The fact is that most all firearms developed through the military end up as the best firearms for the civilian communities. Those versions are not military weapons. The military weapons are fully automatic.

    There are hundreds of thousands of large capacity magazines common in almost all semiautomatic firearms. Is it okay to have 10 rounds magazines or 12 in them? What logic does into that decision to limit the 30 round magazines? The only people that will have limitations now will be the law abiding folks like you and I; not the criminals. When three gang members break into a woman’s home where she and her two children live alone, how will she defend herself and her family effectively? Whys should she now be limited to a 6 shooter revolver when the criminals will have illegal semiautomatic weapons, shotguns, pistols and lord knows what else? Without the ability to own a semiautomatic firearm with larger capacity magazines, she and her children are now the only one in this horrible situation at a disadvantage. Do you think the criminals now will be limited to 10 rounds and the world a safe place? No. Please look at the facts, here is a website for your complete examination;

    When a person breaks the law, kills and has their day in court; they are incarcerated. Why are so many let out of prisons for “good behavior”? There is no “good behavior” when they have killed our good people. Why is that a criminal convicted of murdering his grandmother with a hammer released from prison? Crime control not gun control. Do not apply punishment to the good, responsible people of the USA.
    People with firearms save thousands of lives.

    There are many solutions to reduce the senseless, evil violence. A system that Implements a standardized background check system that accesses mental illness files, state and federal files quickly would be a reasonable improvement. A standardized concealed carry permit at the federal level or something like a driver’s license is the solution. Not a state by state, town by town, person by person arbitrary ruling.

    The wave of Americans—mothers and fathers, daughters and sons, pastors, law enforcement, mental health professionals, are legal responsible gun owners that ought to be allowed their rights to all legal firearms. We have the right to protect ourselves and families at ALL times by carrying and owning firearms. Because we are the people and are responsible ethical persons, we have a responsibility to defend ourselves from all enemies foreign and domestic. It is our second amendment right to do so.

    We the people ask you and your counterparts to protect our constitutional second amendment rights, our right to carry firearms for personal protection as responsible persons, are rights to protect ourselves and our rights to have and enjoy all legal sporting, rifles, handguns and ammunition. And, we ask for a response to this letter.

    The right of the people to keep and bear arms is an extension of the natural right to self-defense and a hallmark of personal sovereignty, A natural right is an area of individual human behavior — like thought, speech, worship, travel, self-defense, privacy, ownership and use of property, consensual personal intimacy

    We the People

    • Ah. Another advocate for the violation of our right to due process in the absence of probable cause of wrongdoing. Newsflash dave j: The federal government has no lawful delegated authority to mandate an interrogation under penalty of perjury as a pre-condition to permitting or denying the exercise of a right. Indeed, the federal government has no lawful delegated authority to issue or deny permission to exercise a right.

      Keeping and bearing arms is a right, and is beyond the reach of government. Ya think that might be why you’re getting a concussion banging that empty head against that solid wall?

  9. george allen

    Like the founders of Coca Cola who changed from fountain syrup – BY the words “bottle it”, as the word control has negative implications as the law of land says citizens can bear arms; what we need is GUN MANAGEMENT”

  10. jmach

    There will never be progress on gun control until the absurd deviation of the 2nd amendment hatched by the NRA is revealed as the fraud that it is.
    USSC 1876 and 1939 clearly said as did the amendment in the first place that it is about militia .. well regulated (state) militia.

    Anything more than a hunting rifle, a defensive pistol .. even though it’s more likely to harm innocents than to actually protect .. should be locked up at a licensed range and never leave that place. Period.

    • Earth to jmach: Earth to jmach: It wasn’t the NRA that made that perfectly rational determination of the meaning of the Second Amendment. It was the founding fathers, as the Heller Court and several others have determined. And by the way: The federal government has no lawful authority to pass or enforce gun control legislation anyway with or without the Second Amendment: It is not delegated the authority. And the Ninth and Tenth Amendments prohibit government from taking any interest in any subject for which the subject matter jurisdiction is not delegated. Welcome to the real world; your fantasy world doesn’t cut it.

    • Tango

      Really jmach? What are the imaginary USSC you cite?

      US Codes are abbreviated USC. If you are referring to US Supreme Court cases, those are cited as XXX U.S. XXX. Judging by the years, you’re referring to Cruikshank (that would be 92 U.S. 542) and United States v. Miller (which would be cited 307 U.S. 174) – although neither of them assign a specific collective rights interpretation to the 2nd Amendment.

      See, that question gave rise to both District of Columbia v. Heller (554 U.S. 570) and McDonald v. Chicago (561 U.S. 742) cases, which pretty well solidly identified the 2nd as an individual, rather than a collective right – sorry if you have to put your jackboots back on the shelf.

      As far as statutes defining the militia you can find the latest version at, which reads:

      a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
      (b) The classes of the militia are—
      (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
      (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

      And since your lack of linguistic history is evident, perhaps you would be surprised to find that “regulated” in the 18th century didn’t mean “burdened with laws and regulations”, but “timely, quick and effective”. Consider Alexander Hamilton’s words in Federalist Paper No. 29, where he wrote:
      “To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss. ”

      Nary a peep about more laws, is there?

      Again, sorry to ruin your leftist fantasy.

      Well, not really.

  11. marcd

    What am I missing here?

    I’d really like to hear from the NRA on this but since I’m not a member and they don’t post an email address or reply to their automated email thing I figured I’d check with some gun control advocacy groups instead ..

    I don’t see how unless one decides to interpret things as per their own personal beliefs and ideologies how anyone can dispute what I have below. And if one can interpret this however they want then that inherently applies to everything else in the constitution as well.


    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Guns exist and there should be no debate whether they should be registered and tracked. However, it’s obvious that banning guns is impossible and would only leave them in the hand of criminals or the “unstable” who could care less about laws. That being said I’d like to understand how the constitution is interpreted as providing the right to own and bear arms to EVERYONE?

    Going by the 2nd amendment and the subsequent Acts noted below I do not see how the constitution protects gun rights for anyone but men and women age 18-45 who serve in the military, reserves, national guard (or law enforcement), along with men and women up to the age of 64 if they’ve served in the reserves, national guard or law enforcement in the past. No one else has the right to own and bear arms as per the Constitution and related Acts as my understanding.

    *1st Militia Act of 1792 granted the president the power to call state militias whenever the country might be invaded, or be in imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation or Indian tribe.

    *2nd Militia Act of 1792 conscripted every “free able-bodied white male citizen” between the ages of 18 (17 at one point) and 45 into a local militia company. Militia members were to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack.

    *Militia Act of 1862 – Allowed African-Americans to participate as war laborers and soldiers during the American Civil War.

    *Militia Act of 1903 – Formalized the militia establishing the National Guard and Army Reserves. Men up to the age of 45 could still potentially be called for militia draft duty or up to 64 if they had served in the Militia, National Guard or Reserves.

    *Conscription in the United States was discontinued in 1973 but still remains a last resort contingency option requiring all males 18-25 to be registered. (if you count this then ALL men 18-25 would also have gun rights protected under the constitution.)


    In short, today citizens are no longer part of a militia and never will be. Today we don’t have a militia, period! To be honest many people I’ve mention this to didn’t even know what a militia is. Today we have an organized Military and if anything could be considered a militia is our reserves and national guards; Army Reserve, Army National Guard, Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard, Navy Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Coast Guard Reserve coupled with the contingency draft (I personally would also include local and national law enforcement personnel).

    Where everyone has the right to own and bear a gun is beyond me and like most else seems to involve interpretation that benefit a predetermined desired condition of a set group’s ideals. I also understand the interpretations but realize that the same can be done with nearly every other article and amendment.

    I’m a 37 year old male who never server in the military (regrettably as I look back) or law enforcement. Although I’ve shot guns with some of my relatives when I was a teenager and do still find them mechanically and sometimes artistically interesting, under what’s stated in the constitution and later acts I have no rights to own or bear arms!


    • mikeh

      Thanks to you, marcd, for a very thoughtful analysis of the constitution. If guns were not so glorified by americans, perhaps we would find a more peaceful nation and a more peaceful world. We seem intent on over arming the entire world. Hopefully, a hugh number of people will keep this in mind every time they vote. We need to let our voices be heard since the senators seems to be a bit hard of hearing.

    • Hmm, so the 4th Ammendmant says “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

      Now where is there a right to Abortion in there?!

      Please parse the 2nd as broadly as you parse the 4th!!!

      • C’mon, Greg! You have a great point if you want to get off the subject, but let’s look at the same issue in the light of the subject at hand: Where does the Fourth Amendment say it authorizes government to compel an interrogation under penalty of perjury as a precondition to issuing or denying permission to exercise a right? In fact, where does the U.S. Constitution say, anywhere, that the federal government has the authority to issue or deny permission to exercise a right?

    • Sorry, Marc. You’re full of crap. Practically nothing you said above is factual, legal, or even good sense. YOU are a member of the militia whether you like it or not, and YOU have a duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the rights and responsibilities of your fellow citizens. If you aren’t willing to fulfill this duty you aren’t worth they air you breathe.

    • If you start with a defective premise, your argument will fail every time. If you are actually expecting an answer, and not just a knee-jerk response from the bobble-heads on this forum, have a look at It’s a free book of about 60 pages, and you can download it or read it online. The fact is the founding fathers recognized the right to keep and bear arms is not limited to active members of a militia, and the National Guard is not the militia the founding fathers were referring to, and every citizen in this country has a duty to defend both the nation and the Constitution that created it, and the principles of liberty that made the U.S.A. the first nation in the history of the planet to establish the rights of the citizens as a gift from God (or as a birthright if you don’t believe in God as much as He believe in you) as superior to the arbitrary whims of government. That’s why we have the rule of law in this country instead of the rule of man as in every other country — and instead of the rule of man as being rammed down our throat by the treasonous thug inhabiting our White House and his sycophants in the U.S. Senate.

    • Tango

      Marc –

      see my reply above., which reads:
      a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
      (b) The classes of the militia are—
      (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
      (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

      Your dismissal of the Unorganized Militia makes your ignorance obvious.

    • Marcd, you seem to be under the impression fundamental law is changed by political fantasies. Here’s a reality check: If you are a citizen of the State, you are militia. Even today, without formal militia, without anything but a federal-controlled standing army at both the federal level and the State level (aka “national guard”), if the State government perceived an emergency requiring more response than it had available with police and national guard troops, you could be called into service to the State and be prosecuted if you refuse to muster for duty. EVERYONE — every citizen — is a member of the militia. Every able-bodied male between the age of 18 and 45 COULD be required to muster for militia duty and/or training (and any other citizen, male or female, who wanted to, could volunteer and be accepted).
      Time to wake up to your responsibilities, Marcd. They exist whether it is likely you will be required to fulfill them or not.

  12. jmach

    my proposed amendment…doing away with II since it has been bastardized and no longer reflects its intent. Gun rights are no more
    special than are piano rights and no person .. none .. needs a multi-pop
    machine gun in the streets … period >>


    Section 1.
    The second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

    Section 2.
    The manufacture, importation, sale, distribution, possession or gift of any assault style or automatic or semi-automatic weapon intended to launch missiles, bullets, grenades or rockets is hereby restricted as defined in section 3.

    Section 3.
    All weapons of the types defined in section 2 shall be manufactured for and only for shipment to licensed gun ranges pursuant to an order from a licensed gun dealer on behalf of a duly licensed and background tested candidate for ownership


    to military posts, pursuant to an order from the United States government, Department of Defense.
    1. Civilian ownership and use of the weapons herein described is restricted to secure lockers at gun ranges licensed by and supervised by both state and federal agencies. Weapon shall be available to the owner for use with inanimate targets on the range property.

    2. Transport of the weapons of the type herein defined shall require disassembly and packaging by the range operator and shipment to and only to another licensed gun range.

    3. Military posts receiving the types of weapons herein defined shall be required to
    have a designated security officer who shall be responsible for the secure
    storage and handling of said assault style, automatic and semi-automatic weapons.

    Section 4.
    No individual rights or privileges regarding the ownership, storage and use of the types of weapons herein described shall ever be considered superior to the welfare, safety and well-being of the society as a whole.

    Section 5.
    Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


    The President’s & Legislatures oath of office;
    I will to the best of my ability, Preserve, Protect and Defend
    the Constitution of the United States, so help me God!

    Mr. President & Democratic Senators, you are violating your oath of office……..I believe you should be censored & penalized for your blatent
    attempt to gut the Constituion…. and (The Second Ammenment) for your oun purposes. Trying to create police state. When do you plan to remove our First Ammendment rights,
    to silent the majority of voters who don’t support your views.
    I believe in Freedom! You clearly believe in Censorship. These Democrats want to control the people period! They are dead against our Freedoms.
    SHAME ON YOU1 You lost my vote and I hope the next election!

    • Good job, Senior-Citizen-62! Be careful, though: With the exception of the so-called Tea party Republicans, the typical Republican is very nearly as culpable for the devolution of our federal government into the rogue occupation government currently running the country as the Marxist Mafia masquerading as Democrats.


    You Democrats just want a police state with the government dictating everything. Dictator Obama is writing( Executive Orders ) taking away our rights. He is exceeding his authority isn’t he? This country is a Democracy
    to create Freedom! Looks like we need to ban Utility knives’s, a man in Texas just stabbed 14 people. Now two Russians (Cheachnians) just bombed the Boston Marathon Runners (197 injured). Looks like these people didn’t need guns. Be careful what you wish for….it may be your Freedom…

    • Careful there, SC-62: Benjamin Franklin rightly called democracy “Two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for lunch.” Our founding fathers were very aware that every democracy in history were unstable and violent. As James Madison said in Federalist Number 10: “Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

      We do not have a Democracy. We have a Constitutional Republic with democratically-chosen representation.

      • And you expect anyone to take a pro-Marxist rag like Mother Jones seriously? Zero deaths by Muslims? Ever heard of the Twin Towers? Ever heard of the deaths referred to by SC-62 in the Marathon Bombings? Those “Chechnyans” were Muslim terrorists, Tim. Ever heard of the freaking Muslim maniac that just committed a beheading at the UPS plant in Oklahoma all in a fit of rage because no one would convert to Islam? Oh, and note that he was stopped by CEO with his personal firearm that the folks on this forum seem to think should be prohibited. Don’t you think it interesting that everyone on this forum advocating prohibiting the private right to keep and bear arms, including BROKELYN.COM itself, are basically saying that Adam Henry should have been given a pass to behead as many women as he wanted to?

  15. Elisabeth Shoup

    I’d like to see a Gun Control ad that scrolls down a page with the name and amount received from the NRA of each Senator who voted against stronger background checks on one side and pictures of the victims of the New Hampshire School Massacre on the other. We could hear each Senator proudly state their name and the State they represent, alternating with President Obama’s reading of the name of the murdered child or staff member along with their picture.

    • Typical liberal (read “totalitarian”) attitude: Destroy everyone’s right to privacy in the exercise of their rights in an effort to next destroy the rights. Sorry, Elizabeth Shoup: It won’t fly. (Check that; I’m not sorry, and if you had a brain in your head you wouldn’t be either.)

  16. Elisabeth Shoup

    OOps, Sorry – Scratch that! I meant Connecticut! I was thinking of the New Hampshire Senators who voted against the back ground checks without taking money from the NRA.

    Sorry – you know what I meant, right? Please feel free to edit!

    • Oh, you mean just like Adolph Hitler did, lining up with a bunch of children behind him to tug at everyone’s heartstrings to give him the power to dictate the life and death of everyone? Those who don’t understand history are doomed to repeat it, Elizabeth. Gun owners have no intention of allowing you to take us down that well-worn path to tyranny, oppression, murder, mayhem, and bloody torture.

        • Irrelevant. What Hitler did is a matter of record, along with the exact wording of his gun control legislation giving the Third Reich unlimited authority to confiscate firearms which, when translated into English, is a near-verbatim wording of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

          Why are you advocating a Nazi law that resulted in the death of six million Jews, Gypsies, Catholics, and anyone else those vicious thugs could make into a scapegoat? Do you want to sit on the balcony overlooking the gulag exercise yard, and engage in target practice with a scoped rifle using inmates as targets?

  17. Funny there’s never any call for more Gun Control when some thug cops murders a black child, something of a monthly occurence in New York City, the bluest of the blue states!

    Oh, that’s right, violence by the Government is Ok, its just violence by Citizens that’s a problem.
    How many blacks have been murdered by the police? How about Waco, Ruby Ridge, Phildelphia Move, etc.
    Ok “Sheepable’ do what Big Brother tells you to …

    • Well, actually, the reality is exactly the opposite: That Chicago thug infesting the U.S. attorney-general’s office has failed to investigate a single case of black-on-white crime the blacks call “The Knock-Out Game,” where some Adam Henry coward walks up behind a white man or woman and cold-cocks him from behind and then stomps him and his companion half to death (or completely), and rapes the woman, and sets both of them on fire. Yet let a white person defend himself with force of arms from attempted murder by a black high on Lean, as when Trayvon Martin bashed George Zimmerman’s head into the concrete four times before Zimmerman shot him, and AG Holder is right on top of it, forcing the Florida authorities to try Zimmerman in a kangaroo court when they KNEW it was legitimate self-defense. Let a Ferguson cop, after receiving a broken nose, defend himself with force of arms from a black thug that outweighed him by a hundred and twenty-five pounds, and AG Holder opens an investigation into the whole police department. This list is still not complete if I point out the Black Panthers of New Jersey intimidating the heck out of voters at the polling place with batons slung over their shoulder, all in direct violation of voting laws, and AG Holder gives them a pass because they are black. There are DOZENS of civil rights investigations in process against white folks defending themselves from black thugs, and not one in process against a black person committing violence against innocent and unarmed white folks, often including rape, mayhem, arson, murder, and torture.
      Yeah, police brutality has become a serious problem in our nation, Greg, but blacks are not the only victims by a long shot.

        • So, you think Adam Henries use a script every time they commit a physical assault? Sorry you suffered a knockout game, David. I haven’t; I’m armed, and I am in control of what goes on in my vicinity. Could I interest you in some self-defense training designed to deter thugs, maniacs, wackos, and covert operatives? Even maniacs have enough instinct for self-preservation to never, ever, commit a massacre where they know an armed citizen will stop them before the second shot rings out.

  18. tyler

    OK A you all are a bunch of retards B the constitution clearly states that there should be no gun control laws. Also more crimes are stopped because of guns then crimes that are caused because of guns.

  19. Tyler Stapleton

    Look you guys are so freaking stupid America without guns is nothing. there has been a law since 1791 that ratify our nation for the right to bear arms. I’m not saying that murders will never happen and everyone will be happy because that just isn’t possible. But there is a reason we have guns and that is to provide protection. there are 10,000 murders per year by guns and yes thats horrific but 162,000 lives use guns as self defense. What you northerners need to realize is that you aren’t the entire country, your a section and region that honestly is so damn cocky. Just because everything bad happens there and you guys over sell every single story Doesn’t mean it should effect the entire country. I feel bad for the families that lose lives over these but the last thing I will say is GUNS DON’T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL People and just because all the bad things happen in this region means your security sucks so as a southerner i will have my 12 gauge on my lap and you guys can live in the shit hole.

    • Hey, careful there, Tyler: The majority of Northerners agree with you; it is only a small vocal minority pretending to be grass roots, manipulated night and day by the controlled media, who are dumb enough to believe that all you have to do is pass a (color of) law and everything will be sweetness and light.
      That’s what they thought when they passed the idiotic Gun Control Act of 1968. But the violent crime rate went through the roof, and Congress — under threat of being thrown out of office and perhaps tarred and feathered — wisely let is sunset.
      Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and these clowns who want to ban all privately owned firearms want the rest of us to repeat the injuries they created all over again.
      Ain’t gonna happen again.

  20. Tango

    If the groups you mentioned provided real, verifiable facts that supported their positions I’d be a lot more willing to endorse their positions.

    Instead, they resort to tactics like including criminals killed by the police like rogue cop Christopher Dorner and Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev to inflate the numbers of “victims of gun violence”. They also employ studies that attempt to portray the lifestyle of a rural household with hunters or suburban family with grandpa’s gun from the war as equally dangerous as a crack house in a ghetto full of drugs, felons and stolen weapons based solely on the presence of a firearm rather than considering either lifestyle or criminality.

  21. Marty

    Guns aren’t the problem, people are.. How many people die each year due to texting while driving? How many people die per year because of driving under the influence? Why single out guns? Why not ban cars, smartphones and alcohol? I am sick and tired of an insignificant few (less than 1/10th of 1 percent) giving guns a bad rap. I am even more fed up with the media hype to control public thinking on the issue of gun ownership. Gun control should be directed and banning guns for use by individuals with emotional and mental issues. The vast majority of gun owners are responsible and understand the need to safely handle and carry. Similar to those who understand responsibility and safety while driving a car.

  22. Do you like the fact that in our country, you cannot be incarcerated for a crime without first facing your accuser, having the right to compel witnesses on your behalf, having the assistance of counsel, being secure from witnessing against yourself. These are very few among the many liberties the United State Constitution facilitates and the Bill of Rights protects. These rights are protected because many people of this nation believe they must be protected. History has shown, without fail, the only way to protect rights from government obliteration, to prevent tyranny and oppression of the people that existed for 25 centuries before the United States was founded, is by the people having access to, and if necessary using, force of arms. And here you are trying to destroy the one right that protects all our liberties. Not very bright, are you? Contrary to your allegation above, Kurt Vonnegut and Kilgore Trout are crocks of shit.

  23. Sailing_J

    Two years later, how’s this working out for you guys? Probably not too well since I’ve still got all my semi-automatic weapons AND am able still able to apply for a permit to buy a fully automatic machine gun should I so choose.
    Did you hear the one about the concealed carry permit holder who stopped a muslim convert after he hacked off his ex-coworker’s head in Moore, OK? Well, I did since I don’t only listen/watch/read NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC or FOX for my news.

    • NBC Nightly News covered it, making a special point to mention that the CEO who stopped the piece of Islamic crap with his own personal firearm, for which he had a permit (that he should not need), was a reserve deputy sheriff — as though that makes the slightest bit of difference.

  24. Jason

    Gun control “doesn’t work”….. It never has, and never will. States and cities that allow conceal & carry, have a far lower crime rate than cities and states with gun control…. All the stats show it, they have for years, fact!!!

  25. The organizations you list are subversives and are conducting an insurrection against the Constitution of the United States, which is the singular, exclusive, absolutely only authority of the United States government. Their agenda is to destroy not only our right to keep and bear arms, but also our Fourth Amendment right to be secure from unwarranted search and seizure in the absence of probable cause of criminal conduct (background checks), our Fifth Amendment right to be secure from deprivation of rights without due process (background checks), and our Tenth Amendment right to a federal government exercising only those powers delegated by the U.S. Constitution and to a State government exercising only those powers not prohibited to the States by the U.S. Constitution, all to the purpose of imposing an impermissible a priori restraint on our right to keep and bear arms over which no government at any level has any authority to issue or deny permission to exercise in any event. Continued interference in the rights of the people will eventually incite rebellion and when the dust settles the subversives conducting this insurrection against the U.S. Constitution are likely to be prosecuted under Title 18 USC Section 2383 “Rebellion and Insurrection,” which compels a ten-year incarceration in federal prison. Y’all might want to reconsider your priorities.

  26. What a load of bullshit. David Colon, you should be ashamed of yourself, promoting this absolute nonsensical pack of lies and misleading rhetoric.
    Didn’t your Mama teach you right from wrong?
    I’m disgusted.

  27. David welch

    The basis of the Connecticut court that allowed the bushmaster suit to conntinue is most disturbing.
    The media reported that the judge ruled that the criteria for the ruling was based on “reasonable citizen use”
    This reasoning could be transferred to other potentially lethal products such as automobiles.
    A car that can exceed 100mph can not claim it has a reasonable civilian use.

  28. Tracy Hostetler

    I would like to donate to an organization such as People with Morals against people without morals. In short NRA members against liberals. I do not have a single friend in this world that is a liberal and it really does not matter. These organizations are nothing more than a group of people that want everyone to be equal regardless of hard work and talent. And the only way that can happen is to take away our guns. If you are a liberal please listen, you will not ever in your life time take my guns. No piece of paper or you flapping your gums will change that. So move on and go smoke your pot or whatever your into. Out of all the battles you could choose to fight this is the most dangerous one.

  29. candace Kelley

    I want to volunteer for organizations that are fighting to put laws on to commonsense gun control. I am retired and do not have money to contribute but have time to volunteer. I want to spend my retirement volunteer time to help gun control issues. Please guide me to organizations. Thank you.

    • Can’t do it, Candace. There are no organizations advocating gun control advocating “common sense” gun control. “Common Sense” is one o9f those buzzwords the Marxist Insurgency uses to advance its Cultural Marxist ideals. There is no common sense in hanging up signs inviting criminal, wackos, and terrorists into a facility in which the inhabitants thereof have been made into helpless targets. There is no common sense in passing null and void color of law prohibiting citizens from exercising their right to defend themselves or to be prepared to defend themselves.

      Perhaps your notion of common sense is not very common and not really even good sense, do you think? I’ll be happy to help you figure that out if you would like to discuss it.

  30. Irwin Mainway

    Gun Nuts think they have a RIGHT to own high-powered weapons that can fire high velocity bullets just as fast as you can flick your finger. 100- round magazines (yes – 100 rounds in a drum mag) – only Terrorists and Mass Murderers have any use for them.

    The Colorado theatre shooter had 100 round mags but the gun jammed, just imagine if it hadn’t!

    WE have a RIGHT to not have to live with these ridiculous things everywhere. A toddler picked up a pistol and shot mom through the front seat, and the Gun Nuts see nothing amiss except the gun not secured.

    • frdmftr

      Hi, Irwin! Do you think your use of what you think is a pejorative has the slightest impact on the facts of the matter under discussion? I will call your use of the pejorative “Gun Nut” and raise you one “freaking libtard idiot.” Now that you have been tweaked for your ad hominem attack, let’s see if you have the intellectual capacity to address the issue on the table:

      Yes, Irwin, we do have a right to own high-powered weapons that can fire high-velocity bullets just as fast as you can flick your finger. The arms referenced by the Second Amendment include “all the arms typically carried by the well-equipped infantryman, including hand grenades but not including poison gas.” (Bouvier’s Law dictionary, 1914)

      That being said, did you know the .223REM round fired by the AR-15 civilian rifle and the M4 and M16 military full-auto “assault rifle” is so weak it is not approved in most States for deer hunting? Still, we do have the right to keep and bear 7.62×39, 7.62×51, .308WIN, .30-’06, and several magnum caliber rifles as well as a broad range of handguns in various calibers.

      We also have a right to magazines sufficient to take out the trash when the assailants come in groups: Ten, twenty, thirty, fifty, hundred rounds, As for me, I’d appreciate it if any assailant coming against me would use a 100-round magazine; it makes his weapon excessively heavy, makes it difficult for him to aim properly, and almost always jams.

      No, you do NOT have a right to not have to live with these precision-made symbols and protectors of liberty everywhere; this is a free country. If you object to these symbols and protectors of liberty, you are welcome to unass the AO and relocate to France, where savages murder hundreds of disarmed people in music concerts, or anywhere else in Europe where defending yourself even without arms of any kind will land you in jail (“gaol” in the occupied territories).

      A toddler picked up a pistol and shot mom through the front seat, and yes, the cause was the irresponsibility of not properly securing the weapon. OTOH, savages shot up a Christmas Party in San Bernadino and the cause was the irresponsibility of the victims in not being armed in defense of themselves and their community of friends and co-workers.

      “Morons,” you say. And how moronic is it to claim citizens should not have the right to defend themselves from savages and from tyranny in general? How moronic is it to advocate the abject destruction of the first nation in the history of the planet to place private, individual rights in a position superior to the arbitrary whims of self-important little kings, princes, political officers, thugs, and neighborhood warlords, and to advocate restoring it to the feudal Divine Right of Kings to Govern, and govern absolutely. Are you sure you are not the moron in this debate, Mr. Mainway?

  31. Eugene John Murret, Sr.

    33,000 deaths alone has not been enough to deter the NRA and its Republican supporters in Congress. The public messaging of the gun control advocacy groups and their Congressional supporters needs to repeatedly focus on the direct connection between the gun manufacturers who only interested in selling guns and making profits regardless of the violence to public safety, and the NRA, pointing out that the manufacturers contribute a substantial portion of the NRA budget funds and the NRA leadership then goes against the wishes of 90% of its members by funneling money to anti-gun control members of and candidates for Congress and lobbying members of Congress to oppose common sense gun control legislation. This message needs to be repeated by gun control advocacy groups in TV ads and public pronouncements until the public understands the money trail. Coupled with that exposure is the strategy to encourage members of the public to contact their members of Congress showing them how to make contact and to tell their Congressional representatives that they support gun control legislation and adding that if the representative opposes common sense legislation then the voter will vote against the representative in the next election. The advocacy groups should also tell their supporters in Congress to voice the same money connection and urge them to tell their constituents to threaten anti-gun control legislators with negative votes in the next election.

    • frdmftr

      33,000 deaths, over 20,000 of which are suicides, compared to 2.5 million crimes a year stopped by the lawful exercise of the right to keep and bear arms and rarely even having to fire the weapon.

      Just for information, Dude, your use of the bogus oxymoron “common sense gun control” defines you as an enemy agent opposing the rights of law-abiding Americans to defend themselves from both criminals and government thugs violating our Constitution (but I repeat myself). There is no such thing as “common sense gun control” unless you are referring to keeping the weapon in your secure possess and not pointing it at any stupid liberal dickhead you don’t intend to kill.

      As a happy firearm owner and activist, not for the NRA, but for the U.S. Constitution and all our natural rights over which you and your vicious Marxist ilk have nothing to say about already, I am just happy as a free man can be that firearm manufacturers are making tons of money every time one of you clowns opens your yap about gun control.

      You will not reach your prize of widespread victim disarmament by illegal color of law, Mr. Murret, because law-abiding citizens don’t have to obey null and void color of law. And if you take it to the next level and send armed men out to confiscate our arms, that will constitute and armed rebellion and insurrection against the sole exclusive authority of the federal government, which is the Constitution of the United States, and we will put your insurrection down with extreme prejudice under the terms of 18USC2383 and associated statutes and arrest, prosecute, convict, and imprison every one of your minions, and then we will come looking for the adam henries who sent them.

      I recommend you back off from your Marxist Mafia agenda, Mr. Murret, before you find yourself and your ignorami cohorts in a lot more trouble than you have a clue how to deal with.

    • That’s the kind of claptrap that always comes out of Australia. I lived there four years under a Labor (read “communist”) government and the only way a communist government can maintain its hold on a nation of unruly people is by lying through their teeth to them constantly. And if you publish information discrediting some claim or “study” or “research” or whatever published by government you will be prosecuted for slandering government. And just to be clear, America is the ONLY nation in the world in which speaking the truth about a topic the public has a right to know the truth about is an absolute bar to prosecution for slander. That’s why, when a Melbourne newspaper columnist asked Frank sinatra “why won’t you talk to us, Frank?” he replied, “Because you are all whores for the government.” And he spent seven days locked in his penthouse apartment without room service because the communist labor unions had blackballed him, until finally the RAAF flew him and his entourage out.

      Murders and rapes and other street crime has not increased much since the idiots in government banned the private ownership of firearms because handguns were already banned unless you kept the weapon in a gun club safe and the street crime rate wasn’t high to begin with. But armed home invasions and armed drug gangs have increased enormously, but the newspapers are prohibited from reporting it for fear of “inciting the public to revolt.”

  32. James

    Thanks for the article. I just donated to the Violence Policy Center partially based on this article. I’m in Texas and I feel a strong urgency stop this epidemic of senseless murder.

    • Well, you didn’t help stop the senseless murders by donating the VPC: If anything, the VPC is one of the primary causes of all the murders. They are about 15 klicks to the left of Karl Marx; they want all citizens disarmed and victims of both criminals and government thugs, and just about the only folks that are not on their list of “dangerous people” are the blacks who are killing each other in droves.

      For your information, nothing is going to stop ALL ‘the senseless murders,’ but denying victims the right to defend themselves doesn’t stop any. In fact, it facilitates more them. I take it you haven’t noticed that every mass shooting to date, save two, has occurred under a sign that said “No Guns Allowed.”