In the video below, Al Jazeera‘s English-language correspondent suggests US shootings at hospital, nightclub raise questions on gun laws. Yes, well, I’m not seeing anything new in the “gun debate” sparked by these shootings. And neither are they. Which raises the question, what’s up with the headline? Another question . . .

Have Americans become inured to “gun violence”? In the main, I’d have to say yes. Yes we have. I also have to say that it’s a good thing, not a bad thing.

Don’t get me wrong. There’s a lot we can, should and are doing to reduce firearms-related injuries and death; from suicide prevention to anti-gang initiatives, to repealing and not replacing gun control laws that make innocent Americans soft targets for killer criminals.

But our firearms freedom is an individual right. The injury and death toll is, dare I say it, an inevitable consequence of that right.

Tens of millions of Americans understand and approve of that trade-off. Many don’t, however, leading them to support either “restrictions on the other guy’s guns” or civilian civilian disarmament.

So the gun “debate” is, and hopefully always will be, an ideological stalemate. Which means that incidents of “gun violence” are largely ignored, or used as (at least equal) justification by the pro-gun side. What’s wrong with that?

63 Responses to CapArms Question of the Day: Have We Become Too Comfortable with ‘Gun Violence’?

  1. Comfortable? Nah, GSW’s still hurt plenty.

    Really though, I think eventually the US will come around to the smart way of dealing with this and get away from the “it’s racist to incarcerate bad guys” thing, which is a major issue. Perhaps we’ll also come to a sane conclusion on helping prevent but also accepting suicide.

    • There is a lot of truth to this if you look at places like Chicago. It’s amazing how many of these people make the news for violent crimes here while on parole, probation or have a long list of crimes under their belt they served (minimal) time for. I mean, they go on about the rights of the perp but what about the right of the community to have a break from these assholes?

      • Can’t lock them up. The ACLU will be along shortly to sue you for infringing on their civil rights.

        And if you do manage to lock them up, the ACLU will be right there to make sure that we have to spend boatloads of money on getting them top notch healthcare and other benefits. Hell, here in Arizona inmates are about to get PlayStation 4 game consoles.

      • Baltimore when I was living there, 93% of murder perps, and even more astounding 91% of murder victims had criminal histories. In Milwaukee, nearly 80% of murder victims had 12 or more arrests.
        http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-08-31-criminal-target_N.htm

        This is something NEVER noted in Bloomberg owned gun violence “research centers” like Johns Hopkins Medical ($300 million to JHUMC from Bloomberg), or Harvard Injury, or the former CDC “research.”

        CDC and researchers never discuss lung cancer risk without discussing smoking in every chart and in the first graph of every research paper. But the fact that criminal activity is inherently dangerous and the driving force in the vast bulk of US gun violence even more than smoking drives most lung cancer never makes into the gun control advocacy “research’ ” work

        Now that does not mean that the lives of criminals are worth less, any more than the lives of smokers are. But it does mean the self-precipitated nature of the harm to them is the major consideration.

        If you are selling crack and another crack seller, or a buyer shoots you; if you are a stolen car parts fence and a car thief kills you in a dispute; if you are in an urban gang and another gang shoots you; or another type of criminal who get’s killed either because you are directly committing a crime when doing so, or because you are proven to have bad judgement and bad and dangerous friends and associates, those behaviors matter.

        This is national gun violence awareness week or month or something. A local church has in front yard 200 t-shirts on frames with the names of gun murder victims from the past year. I wrote down the names of the first I saw and ran them through my background check program at work. Eleven had arrest records, nine of them had felonies. Of the two 18 year old, both had arrest records for violent crimes. Seven had weapons arrests. the one 16 year old had no adult arrest record, but was shot along with his brother in a gang related event. The one female on the list had an aggravated assault with weapon whihc had been pled down from atttempted murder (when I looked up trail on findlaw it showed knife, meaning she did not just have one, or threaten with one, but had stabbed someone badly).

        I suggest EVERYONE google “US incarceration Trends” and hit “image” to see some graphs, and compare them to gun homicide trend graphs. As incarceration in the US nationally increased, gun murder plummeted. When incarceration rates fell recently we saw a spike in murder in the cities that reduced incarceration (Baltimore etc). Why? Because scores of jurisdictional studies keep showing well north of 90% of shootings are criminal-on-criminal.

        BTW you may want to also look at Australia’s incarceration rate trend graphs as well. Their drop in murder is clearly from large increase in incarceration of the bad guys, not gun control

        • This right here. I live in Baltimore and I actually get pissed when I hear about a shooting where the “victim” survives. The vast majority of people killed in Baltimore are violent criminals being killed by other violent criminals. Wish I ran the trauma center, I would require a background check before starting surgery.

          Outside of that, the justice system is backwards. We have harsher mandatory minimum sentencing for drug offenders then we do for violent criminals. That needs to be reversed. Leave the hippies and their weed alone and spend your time/money locking up these violent repeat offenders for a change.

  2. I don’t know that we have become too comfortable with the violence, but people certainly choose their own optics when looking at different incidents.

    The OMG panic, the inflammatory headlines, over 1 man causing one fatality and a few wounded in New York City, versus the “ho him” response to over two dozen wounded or injured in a Little Rock music club shooting with ties to gang violence.

    And I dare say that if the hospital gunman had worn a “Make America Great Again” hat there would be mobs with pitchforks in the streets.

    • Black people killing other black people in Arkansas is never going to be a big deal, especially not to coastal elites and your typical urban progs. They’ll act like they care, because it’s way too easy to just put a filter on your Facebook photo.

  3. The injury and death toll aren’t a result of us allowing guns. It’s inner cities with high poverty and poor education coupled with a “snitches get stitches” attitude.

    A test for anyone who doesn’t believe me. Look at crime rates including violence and gun violence in any city, state, or country you’d like and compare it to any other place. I guarantee you that whichever of the two has higher crime has more poverty and worse education. 100% of the time, it works everytime.

    A note here: That’s not to say that being poor makes someone a criminal. But in any group of people with fewer options for supporting themselves, more will turn to crime

    • It seems you are judiciously trying to dance around the real issue by couching it in terms of poverty and poor education. But I don’t think poor people in West Virginia and Kentucky are having dozens of shootings every weekend, like in Chicago.

      If it’s a matter of education, what’s the solution then? We have poured literally trillions of dollars into these communities in an effort to improve educational performance. It’s accomplished nothing other than wasting dollars that might have been useful elsewhere.

      Personally I do not believe it is due to poverty and poor education. Rather I think the violence, the poverty, and the poor education are all due to another common factor.

      • I do not have the solution to poverty and education. I do not think there is a single fix, but rather probably a series of changes.

        Find me the town in Kentucky or West Virginia or anywhere with worse graduation rates and worse poverty than Chicago and we’ll compare murders per captia. Since I’m just “dancing around” the issue… Prove me wrong

        • Timothy, incarcerating and keeping incarcerated the bad guys, who are a minority of urban residents, and in fact a minority of poor urban residents, allows the rest of the residents to live decent lives and have a prayer of getting out.
          Rural criminals have longer sentences.

          Now you are right about low opportunity being one of the factors. But it is not the major factor, and is caused by of the plantation mentality of the US left, which pays more to do nothing than it does to be gainfully employed.

          I DO agree we ought to look and keep looking at what happens to our nation’s poor children, and I don’t mind keeping trying and paying for the kids.

          As far as violence victimization of our countries poor children, in St., Louis, which has a hihg rate of children being shot or shooting people, in virtually every case this is due to the mother cohabiting with a hardened criminal, drug dealer, or gang member who has an illegal firearm. Guns are not the issue there since kids also have massively elevated rate of being knifed or beaten to death in a home with a criminal domiciled.

          would you agree we ought to not worry about laws mandating gun safes, and instead ought to make it illegal for a kid to be living with a felon? Especially if that felon is not one of the legal parents?

        • There’s a difference in the cultures of KY, WV, and IL to the extent that KY and WV culture encourages hard work, family, and success. In IL what is glorified is gangsta rap and getting over on the man. Every year, someone who comes from each of those 3 areas earns his doctorate in *something*, and in WV or KY he returns home to cheering crowds, in IL he never again dares to return home, he might be killed.

    • Those folks are on Welfare and SSI and most are fat as hogs.
      They have free housing, are well fed and have phones, and they DON’T want jobs. The violence is just another form of entertainment, killing for sport .
      Most of the blame should be leveled at the parents.

  4. Well for one, Al Jazzera, a state run news org, by a state that supports Islamic terror, to include funding the so called Islamic State, is well known for its anti western pro extremist viewpoints. Secondly, crime of all types was trending downward, the until the obama policies of being softer on crime, and the hyperventilating left wing news media tried to start a race war, caught up with us in 2016, when for the first time since the 90s we saw a rise in violent crime.

  5. Post-Sandy Hook, the defeat of Obama’s anti-gun Congressional agenda shocked a lot of Dims, and some of us too. Of course, Barry wasn’t coming for our guns, or so we were told. But he did and he lost.

    Republicans and the NRA (not SAF, which sold out to Manchin-Toomey), along with a couple of Dems, killed every unconstitutional law that Obama proposed.

    Our gun rights survived Sandy Hook. They can probably survive anything, as long as we’re willing to fight for our rights and not give them away.

    • Not enough people acknowledge how SAF sold us out by supporting the “compromise” Manchin/Toomey bill.

      It’s because Gottlieb personally believes a universal background check is good thing. I saw a video of him saying just such a thing. Just another elitist gun control organization, just not as extreme as MDA. So I cancelled my membership with SAF and I turn down any fund raising calls I get from them because of thier betrayal.

      • Alan told me the reason he wanted to negotiate a grand compromise: he thought UBC’s were a done deal. Better to get something for the pro-gun side in exchange. Wrong answer. Which I’m sure he regrets. As well he should.

        • Perhaps Robert. But in the video I saw of Alan, he spoke approvingly of the idea of a UBC. He said something like , paraphrasing “How can you not like the idea of having some kind of back ground check of a person before they can buy a firearm?” or something to that effect. I should have book marked it. So I believe he went with the compromise because, in the end, he personally supports a UBC.

          In the end, there is no more compromise possible. And it is that attitude that has allowed the massive expanse of our gun rights, not some wishy washy , “ooh, let’s find a middle ground”.

        • Humm, sounds a lot like Ruger’s famous gun-control cave-in, to say nothing about Springfield and Rock RIver Arms more recent sell-out. And, of course, the ghost of Dick Metcalf still haunts the pages of Guns And Ammo . . .

        • Alan told me the reason he wanted to negotiate a grand compromise: he thought UBC’s were a done deal. Better to get something for the pro-gun side in exchange.

          Anyone who knows anything knows that acquisition by criminals is fungible. Sure states that instituted background checks saw a small drop in the tiny amount of gun crime that was with firearms legally acquired without background checks. But they also saw an exact corresponding increase in gun crime with guns acquired by straw purchase.

          The NRA has had the correct evidence based position on this. NRA gave supporting it a try decades ago, but now that the data is in that acquisition of guns used in crime just shifts to straw purchase and other means, UBC is an idiotic idea.

          And Gottlieb just will not address what everyone who follows the issue knows: without a national firearms registry UBC is beyond useless. Canada did not drop its background checks, but it dropped most of its registry. Except for Canada, which gutted its registry, there is not one single case where a country adopted a national registry and did not use it for confiscation.

          The gun control lobby does not want to talk about the actual stats andthe elephant in the room which is the most over- represented group per capita in straw purchase is minority females.

        • Exactly. I will be completely able to accept UBC (although not happy, it would cost $$ and accomplish nothing) just as soon as someone can convince me that no registry is included, no POSSIBILITY of a registry. I add that last because we have mechanism in place for our government to eavesdrop on every (not “any”, but “EVERY”!) phone call or email of every citizen, 100% of the time, and save that recording for 1000 years, which was allowed because we were promised there would be safeguards preventing its use against Americans. Given the events of the past 9 months, does anyone still trust that guarantee (I never did)? But other than the complete leveling destruction of that multi-billion facility in UT, we will never get rid of that, if the capability exists, it will be used against our citizens, if not by Dems, then by GOP. If we ever have a reliable comprehensive registry, it will disappear the day after the last firearm listed is melted down, not a minute before.

  6. Want to talk about “levels of gun violence?” Go back to the late 80’s and early 90’s in major metro areas. Look at what DC’s level of murders were back then. Look at LA, NYC, et al.

    Today’s level of crime and homicides using guns is much lower. The press loves to act as tho every shooting is a new calamity, a new civilizational low, a horrid new assault on the dignity of the human race.

    The truth is that most journalists have the attention span and memory capacity of a goldfish: every trip around the bowl is a new adventure for them.

    • Spot on. Well do I remember the days of the peanut farmer(Obomba 0.5) in the white house. I volunteered for Reagan(like the young fool that I was) just to get rid of him…

    • “The truth is that most journalists have the attention span and memory capacity of a goldfish: every trip around the bowl is a new adventure for them.”

      Oooooo, I am saving that one.

    • The reason the term “gun violence is used is because it a) includes suicide, but b) excludes it by other means.

      “Lethal violence” (suicide+homicide by all means) wont work for the gun control advocates because lots of advanced societies with few to no guns have higher levels of “lethal violence”. S. Korea add Japan have much higher levels, and a dozen developed democracies with few to no guns are +/- 10% of the USA.

      If they exclude suicide, they are presented with the problem that fatal gun accident rate has fallen about 60%, has fallen 70% for children since the early 1990’s — and gun homicide has fallen 60% as well. ALL against the predictions of the peer reviewed work by gun control lobby researchers 20 and 30 years ago.

      • I don’t disagree with anything you have written, but one thing to keep in mind is that one major reason that gunshot FATALITIES have dropped over the long term is that medical technology continues to advance. A person who gets to the emergency room with a gunshot wound today is far more likely to survive than if he had gotten there with the same gunshot wound in the 1970s. This artificially deflates the murder rate, since more people survive.
        A better argument against gun control, IMO, is that regardless of the crime rate each of us has an individual right to protect ourselves and our families against a lethal force attack. If lethal force in defense is required, we should have the best tools available to defend ourselves, regardless of whether the odds of actually facing such an attack are either high or low.

        • I am sorry but the claim that technology had any significant effect on gunshot survival from the 1990’s to today is not supported by the data.
          1) Looking at actual aggravated assault and attempted murder with a firearm vs homicide with a firearm from 1990 to today, they equally declined.
          2) Data by wound type and location, cranial, penetrating torso shows those both declined by the same amount as gun homicide. They do NOT have higher survival rates today compared to 25 years ago.

          What is going on is that minor injuries, including close to half of firearms injuries that involve no penetration, and near 1/3 that invovle no actual gunshot wound and are powder burns, slide bites and temporary hearing loss, (which are often temporary disability by the now huge number of professional LEO and other carriers) did not used to be counted in the 1960’s as gun injury, and now are counted

          You could argue that medical practices caused a drop in death:injury ratio from 1960-80’s; but the drop in homicide from the early 1990’s to today mirrors the overall drop in shootings, just look at aggravated assault rate/100,000 it falls from the same peak.

          I do agree that even if it were going up the Bill of Rights would still trump, but the fact remains the gun control “science” is junk science that ignores the fundamentals

  7. Gun Violence? Nope.

    We’ve become to comfortable and complacent with Muslim Violence.

    I could use the term “Muslim Extremist Violence” however based on the near 80% support for Sharia Law, I am rapidly recognize that that is a designation without a difference.

  8. Kind of parallels people killed by alcohol/drugs/cars.

    People are willing to “accept” those deaths, but not anyone shot by a gun ever. For some reason.

    • Yes, I was just thinking along those lines. Add to the list abortions, racism, obesity, sex crimes, etc. Rather than raising concern repetition tends to deaden it.

  9. We could reduce gun violence to minimal levels by obvious means, but that would be racism. See, e.g., NYC’s stop and frisk attempts.

    I wonder what the statistics would be if we simply left out inner-city and gang violence.

    So, maybe I’m a racist, but I expect gun violence from certain elements of society. And therefore, don’t much care about it.

    • Before stop and frisk ended, more black men were stopped and frisked than there were black men in New York city. “I don’t like the way you look, boy”, is not an official policy that anybody should get behind.

      • “Before stop and frisk ended, more black men were stopped and frisked than there were black men in New York city. “I don’t like the way you look, boy”, is not an official policy that anybody should get behind.”

        That is a debunked LIE. The data, including Obama DOJ, showed NY stop and frisk did NOT stop more black men proportionally compared to commission rates of violent crime and weapons crimes crimes.

        And do you even understand why many people were stopped several times? When you have a judiciary that does catch and release, and gives people probation for carrying a knife, or pleas down felony arrests to misdemeanors, you do end up stopping and frisking the same bad guys over and over!

        I don;t support stop and frisk, especially Michael Bloomberg massive increase and expansion if it, but the entire narrative that it was racist has been fully debunked.

        Commission ratees matter unless you are going to claim stop and frisk was sexist because 90% of the people stopped were men when 90% of weapons crime is committed by men!

        Black males 16-55 are not gentically more likely to commit crime, but the simple fact is that they do. That 6% of the population commits about 50% of US murder adn 55% o US shootings. In NY where minority males are not 6% but 4x the rate, ie near 25% of the population, they do in fact commit over 95% of weapons crime, shootings, stabbings and homicide.

        Again when you are looking at populations which get stopped, questioned, cars stopped, searched, charged, prosecuted, convicted, sentenced, imprisoned, executed or for that matter shot by cops, COMMISSION RATES oft that population MATTER. Black males are also in fact shot less by cops than white males per violent crime committed.

        If anything, it is white males who were unfairly treated/targeted by stop-and-frisk, since that is the one group more often stopped than their proportional actual weapons crime commission rate in NYC.

      • Fact is, stop and frisk WORKED! It was clearly unconstitutional, fool who thought it up should have been fired, but it worked. If it was not abused, it certainly would have been, eventually. But crime (esp. murder) went WAY down without “shall issue”, which I did not believe was possible in NYC. Credit where credit is due.

  10. Haven’t read the comments yet but there is so much fail in this statement in the article I had to point it out:
    ” The injury and death toll is, dare I say it, an inevitable consequence of that right.”
    NO, NO, NO. If that were true, then other countries without the right would not see criminal violence. Yet they do and most see much more including tyranny and even greater mob violence than we see. Facts, not feelings.

    the injury and death toll is an inevitable consequence of criminal activity and stupidity which happen where rights are less prevalent and also where rights are more prevalent, not the consequence of rights. There have been numerous studies proving that the consequence of more rights is actually slightly lower criminal activity in some categories but only a slight nudge less for stupidity which seems to happen no matter what.

  11. Why was my comment deleted? What did I say other than to disagree that crime is a result of freedom?

    • I cannot speak for your experiences, but I have said the same hundreds of times here and never been censored.

  12. “In the video below, Al Jazeera‘s English-language correspondent suggests US shootings at hospital, nightclub raise questions on gun laws.”

    Indeed. Why don’t those places have guns for the peaceful people who only #shootback?

    “Shootings” at hospitals and elsewhere, plus machete attacks, careening trucks, and bombs suggests the issues isn’t guns. Maybe we need some different laws.

    “Yes, well, I’m not seeing anything new in the “gun debate” sparked by these shootings. And neither are they. Which raises the question, what’s up with the headline? …”

    They’re calling it “new” to pretend there’s something new being said, that they haven’t already lost the case they have. The article is just part of amplifying a spasm — the words just need to be fuzzy enough that they’re hard to refute. The point is to repeat the feeling: “guns, bad.”

    “Have Americans become inured to “gun violence”? In the main, I’d have to say yes. Yes we have. I also have to say that it’s a good thing, not a bad thing.”

    Americans have become completely too accepting of bad guys doing bad things, sometimes with guns. It is unacceptable that a school gets shot up when there’s something we can do about it, that we know works — mass shootings stop when the first armed response starts. It is unacceptable that mass casualties to make a point — terrorism — keeps coming from “known wolves.” It is unacceptable that shooters in US cities are known gang affiliates, multiply convicted, often for violence.

    We are entirely too comfortable with being culled a few at a time without fixing the problem, the means to protect ourselves, or both.

    Because people are too comfortable with the base level of carnage; they’ll settle for some feel-good, ineffective posturing claiming “It’s the guns.”

  13. It has been said before that violence is violence. It doesn’t matter if it is a political or religious nut job with a gun, a fertilizer bomb, a delivery truck driven through a crowd, or a mixture of ammonia and chlorine. There are evil people out there intent on doing evil things and the only desensitization that has occurred is a morbid acceptance by the population that bad things happen (usually, and preferribly, to other people somewhere else) and there isn’t a thing that can be done about it.

    State media and politicians harp on this topic because they hate everything a free populace stands for. Even if someone set off a dirty bomb in the port of LA they would still scream for closing Imaginary “loopholes” and to expand government control over the people.

  14. If the question is “have we become too comfortable with violence?” the answer is yes, we have.

    Yes, the lefty pols and press want to bang the gun control drum with each terrible crime, and yes, our reaction is not to care. But behind all the showboating, there are victims, some innocent of the crime, some not. I hope we do care. I hope we do what we can to help both beforehand and afterward.

    Of course it’s easier to do this when the left isn’t trying to exploit the victims and shove tyrrany down our throats. I guess we have to be bigger.

  15. “Comfortable” with gun violence? Nope..coming from the “news” arm of a terrorist state. THAT’S funny shite. Does Al Jazeera moan about Moose-lim butchery(aka as genital mutilation) on women and girls? Corporal punishment? Murder and persecution of Christians and Jews? Didn’t think so…

  16. If the ONLY tool used in violence was a gun, it might be an interesting question. Since many thousands of things can be used to perpetrate violence, including bare hands, the question is meaningless. And the phrase “gun violence” is meaningless because guns are not “violent” at all, of course… just inert chunks of metal and plastic.

    It is far better and more accurate to ask if people are starting to see that guns are a superior self defense tool, to protect oneself and others from all those OTHER tools, as well as guns, in the hands of those who want to harm others.

    I also ask “gun control” believers if they think murder is “against the law.” When they say yes, I ask them why they think another “law” that prohibits them from having a gun would mean anything to a murderer. I get some strange looks at times… Far too many people simply have never even thought of that connection.

  17. The Doc who committed the hospital shooting was a psycho. Shooting, setting himself on fire, then suicide. Nothing can be done about that. As for the nightclub shooting, people have gotten too used to going sketchy places where criminals gather to hear talentless, dime-a-dozen idiots, many proudly flaunting criminal records, make Sub-Dr. Suess rhymes to rhythms. Caveat emptor.

  18. Actually this entire line or reason is completely bunk.

    The murder and violent crime rates are at a historically low levels. Full stop. In fact the only real upward trend in terms of violence came about when the government began to get into the business of regulating peoples lives in the 1920s. Even now we’re still riding the downward trend in terms of over all gun violence across the nation.

    No, the point here has nothing to do with us. It’s a media that has done it’s best to control the narratives and guide national focus into whatever talking point they want us to think about. Not to say there is nothing to be learned from this reporting. But far too often these incidents are framed for the the sole purpose of pushing a agenda.

  19. “Gun violence” is not about protecting people or stopping crime. There is no grassroots movement to stop “gun violence.” It’s just elites funding small special interest groups to influence politicians to disarm ordinary people. It’s a tale as old as time. In Europe, the powers that be tried to ban crossbows because a peasant could kill a knight with one. In medieval Japan only the Samurai caste could carry swords. Once the next type of weapon is invented the elites won’t give a fig about guns the same they don’t care about bows and arrows. The Shannon types will be paid by the elites for common sense laser gun control.

  20. Of course we’ve become comfortable with it. That’s why nobody reports on or cares about the tens of thousands of routine homicides out there, except maybe to refer to them in aggregate statistics. It’s only the special event slaughters that grab the headlines.

    People want to hear about the psycho Dory-lookalike who shoots up an elementary school, or the self-loathing closeted homosexual who shoots up a gay nightclub, or the husband/wife terror twins who shoot up a company Christmas party, or the psycho Joker wannabe who shoots up a movie theater. These events all have interesting stories behind them, so they get attention. Some people use them as base entertainment, while others use them for political advantage.

    Nobody really cares about even these events beyond their respective turns in the news cycle, though. So-called gun violence won’t really matter to anyone, more than as water cooler conversation or cheap political points, until it becomes seriously widespread and starts hitting home.

    • “tens of thousands of routine homicides”

      1) US homicide has been falling for 25 years, down about 65%. Gun homicide down slightly more.

      2) US homicide has moved inversely with incarceration rates. It fell and kept falling as rates increased, because north of 90% of murder is criminal on criminal, gang on gang, and they murder less often while in prison). About three years ago Obama reduced incarceration rates of both small drug offenders and former FELONY drug sellers by reducing sentences for people already in federal detention, and issuing guidance reducing charges for new drug sellers and other felons, and homicide rates reversed the 25 year trend in a few cities causing a spike.

  21. More and More people buying guns for self protection. More people getting carry permits. SD training at all time highs. Getting to comfortable with gun violence? I think not. Getting prepared to protect themselves and there families from it.

  22. Have we become too comfortable with the presence of Aljazeera? The people that keep the mini-d1<k swinging over there are the same aholes sworn to bring America down.

    Comfortable with gun violence? F FING U ! I sh_t on your premise and your question and my dog sh_ts upon your 'news' establishment.

    Go get your a_ _ – raped self some First Amendment rights back wherever satan hatched ya, before you bother talking anything about anything related to the 2nd Amendment.

  23. The vast majority of “gun violence victims” engaged in behaviors which earned themselves a bullet. It’s for the most part addition by subtraction.

    No f**KS given.

  24. It is absolutely correct that certain american leaders are very comfortable with high levels of violence in cities and certain neighborhoods. They have a “D” after their name.

  25. I don’t see “Gun” violence. I see violent people who use guns, along with other weapons, to kill or maim others.

    “Have Americans become inured to “gun violence”?” Possibly so, we have gotten used to gang on gang violence and are not generally concerned about it except when an innocent is injured or killed. We read about a suicide (the only ones that make the news are when a gun is used) and we may feel something for the survivors.

    In our area almost every shooting can be attributed to gang on gang violence or self inflicted.

    Do we care? Most do and everyone should.

  26. If we could concealed carry in all 50 states, imagine the drop in crime. If we were “allowed” to have our 2A rights recognized in all 50 states, which is nowhere near possible until a change up in the roster of the Supremes, imagine the chilling effect on the street. The word would be out, the people of this country are no longer putting up with being preyed upon by the lawless.

    Imagine if we could get the message across to gun control politicians with a Supremes ruling, that we, the American people are no longer going to put up with their violation of our 2A rights being restored; imagine the chilling effect on them!

  27. Comfortable? No. The left has jumped the shark on their propaganda on this topic. Let me explain.

    Every few days, the press announces a new conspiracy only to have the report discredited. Every report on the unlawful use of a firearm seems to follow that same pattern albeit a little more difficult to discovery. Eventually, people distrust the hype assuming it to be another half truth, and they stop wasting their time reading it. The more BS spewed on us from leftist journalists, the more people get it and tune them out.

  28. We make too much profit on “gun violence”.
    That is the problem.
    Just like the “war on drugs”- too many people make money to accept the fact that it is a bad idea.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *