The AP reports that the men who detonated explosives to kill innocents at the Boston Marathons and later engaged in a shoot-out with police (after shooting an MIT security guard execution-style) didn't have gun permits, according to Massachusetts state police.
But wait a minute. I thought a rigorous system for regulating gun permits was supposed to prevent gun violence (that's what Massachusetts state officials insisted upon passing the nation's toughest gun laws back in 1998).
It's almost as if the Tsarnaev brothers -- terrorists, murderers, carjackers -- had no respect for the (gun) laws . . .
x6xxx234 why don't you go take a look at some coutrys that have strong gun control- Canada, Japan, Germany etc- then tell me strong gun control doesn't work- ignorant rednecks like you are too stooooopid to know that these countrys even exist
I already addressed this once before in that if you remove gun murders committed by Blacks and Latinos, US per capita murder rates would drop drastically according to FBI data. How many Blacks and Latinos are there in Japan where 98.5% of the population is ethnic Japanese? Far far less than 1%. How about Canada? Also both less than 1%.How about Germany where 92% of the population is ethnic German? again less than 1%.
What you need to do to compare apples to apples is to look at murder rates for predominately White communities. If you do you will see that homogeneous White communities have per capita murder rates similar to homogeneous countries like Canada Germany and Japan.
What an ignorant, pacifist fool you are....certainly a victim in waiting. Anyone that is not willing to defend themselves, deserves what they get. Are you really stupid enough to believe our government is going to protect you 24 / 7 ????? I mean, it only took 1000 " heroes " of 10 different law entities five days to find a kid they identified on the first day. I have no problem with the law and how they handled the capture of the Boston , but had this lunatic tried to take an armed Bostonian hostage, that Friday night band standing episode would most likely not have been necessary . As a matter of fact, I find it interesting that he didn't take a hostage......maybe he was thinking he just might roll up on the wrong dude and get his head blow off. On the other hand, if no citizens were allow to have arms, he would certainly been free to enter any establishment, take hostages, and probably result in more deaths than occurred on race day.
To be completely honest I don't know if I could shoot some one, but if confronted in the middle of the night with some doped up punk looking for drug money or some nut job looking to make a political statement, I certainly reserve the right to defend myself .
The countryside is flooded, inundated, with guns of all types. Anyone can get one, or more than one. A nine year old can get a gun. If he doesn't take the one from his Dad's dresser he can get one from his friend's brother. Manufacturers don't care what their product does, they just want to sell more to generate more revenue. They are the first to mouth the platitudes that guns don't kill, people do, or to parrot the 2nd amendment. They are exactly like the cigarette manufacturers, defending their product despite piles of evidence proving the destruction to society and national health. It will take the same lawsuits and coordinated efforts to clean up this mess that had to be done regarding cigarettes. It's true, in a roundabout way that guns don't kill, people do, but, six year olds seldom kill anyone any other way but with a gun. My question is: Why are people despising these bomber brothers more than they despise the school shooter? And using the Islam angle for the excuse to despise them more? Is three dead with a relationship to a twisted form of Islam worse than twelve dead due to a twisted psyche?