Common sense (almost) always prevails in the end

Two years after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut’s governor said he doubts the state legislature has the “appetite” to take up many of the additional gun control recommendations included in a final report released Friday by a state commission.

ABC News 

Say it isn’t so. Draconian restrictions based on falsehoods and myths failed to whet the appetitive of the public-at-large?

Propagated lies about “assault weapons” and the natural right of self defense have failed to energize the public to support disarmament?



15 thoughts on “Common sense (almost) always prevails in the end

  1. Well, they already passed new law, they just didn't think they could push for more, politically, and money is part of the problem. One main proposal had nothing to do with gun control per se, but rather the mental health system in CT, and no state wants to deal with that right now either.

    Politically, the day has been won by the gun rights advocates for a generation now. No one is anywhere in the distant of vicinity of supporting “disarmament.”



  2. It's either naivete or perfidy on your part, if your trying to convince that gun control groups won't continue to push for civilian disarmament. It's their goal….they simply know that the only way they can achieve it, is to continue to rely on lies, and to chip away bit by bit.


  3. Bla bla bla… Sure, there is a militia regulation movement, but it just doesn't have the power of the gun advocates. It was almost even like 30-40 years ago, but for the foreseeable future, the gun nuts, the underground arms trade, the manufacturers, criminals, etc, have little to worry about.



  4. You should have stuck with blah, blah, blah….given the substance of the rest of your odd diatribe. “Militia regulation movement”? WTF?

    “It was almost even like….” Nonsensical.

    “Criminals have little to worry about?” Who knew committing a crime was legal now?

    You've underdone yourself.


  5. Militia regulation movement seemed like a proper term to me.

    It was almost “even” (as in equal in strength)…

    Thanks to people like you, criminals and the insane in this country have very easy access to guns.

    Pay attention.



  6. I think the real myth is that what has been shown to work in other countries with less gun violence can't work here… thanks to the evil NRA and the deluded gun nuts. No matter how many kids are killed the NRA just does not care. And the gun nuts continue to not see any connection between guns (which we are awash in) and gun violence.


  7. To think that guns are purely bad is surface thinking at it's most ridiculous. Yes, guns can help you do bad things but they can also help you do good things such as preventing crimes (hundreds of thousands of times a year the mere act of brandishing a gun wards off a crime). And if you don't believe in the deterrence of a firearm, please explain to me why that crazy killer in Colorado went to the ONLY movie theater in the area that was a gun free zone (passing on theaters that were closer and more populous).


  8. All you've accomplished has been to illustrate that you cannot proffer an argument without the use of stale pejoratives and tired projections. In other words, you have no intellectual argument whatsoever.

    You do have quite the intriguing NRA fetish. You may want to look into that.


  9. CI: It's like shooting fish in a barrel, isn't it? As if anyone can take a comment seriously that calls an organization that protects our human rights in the face of fascistic attacks “evil”.

    “In other words, you have no intellectual argument whatsoever.”

    But he will bomb your blog with spam, homoerotic come-ons, and death threats if you get tired of this and block his comments.


  10. Jersey: More like “anti Constitution movement”.

    The law books already have tons of laws regulating guns. The movement you support seeks to abolish our basic rights of ownership. “confiscate, confiscate, confiscate”.


  11. Eh…he's child's play.

    Bit the scripted, and reflexively visceral hatred toward the NRA is a case study in the psychology of projected paranoia. Their need to portray the member funded group as a shill for an industry illustrates their ignorance of the group and the fact that the liberal camp engages in exactly the same strategy they accuse the NRA of.

    It's actually quite facinating.


  12. And the NRA is a much more legitimate group, grass roots group, than the AFL-CIO, which the liberals so love.

    The AFL-CIO gets its money by bullying and stealing from workers (yes, an illegal taking in violation of US law against forced union dues.

    While every single [penny the NRA gets is from the choice of its entirely-voluntary members and contributors.


  13. I don't take seriously anyone who is obsessed with “homoerotic come-ons”, or thinks the gun industry shill/terrorist organization (the NRA) is “grass roots”. Such talk makes me laugh… And then cry. Sad that some are such dupes. And that them being dupes is contributing to the unnecessary death toll.

    As for Will's “argument” that more guns make us safer – it has been thoroughly debunked. Sane people realize that more guns result in more gun violence. The sane people (a majority of Americans) say laws need to be passed to curb the violence… But dmarks thinks a majority calling for our politicians to act (democracy) is “fascistic”.

    Democracy is fascism and blowing people away with your gun is a “basic human right”? This is why the rest of us refer to such people as gun nuts.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s