Dick’s Sporting Goods pulls machine guns from shelves

Friends of mine were shopping at a Dick’s Sporting Goods store in Kenosha yesterday when they noticed employees removing guns from the shelves. Certain guns are coming down from the shelves in other Wisconsin locations, too. Staff at a Dick’s Sporting Goods Store in Madison confirmed they will no longer sell Mrs machine rifles, but will continue to sell rifles and ammo for hunting.

CNN.com reports:

Dick’s Sporting Goods, one of the largest sporting goods retailers in the world, says it has removed all guns from its store nearest to Newtown, Connecticut, and is suspending the sale of certain kinds of semi-automatic rifles from its chains nationwide.

The move was made out of respect for the victims and families of last week’s Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting “during this time of national mourning,” the store said in a statement Tuesday morning.

“We continue to extend our deepest sympathies to those affected by this terrible tragedy,” the statement said.

It’s unclear how long this suspension of machine gun sales will last.

The move comes after reports that investigators were trying to determine whether the gunman in the Newtown shooting, Adam Lanza, tried to buy a gun from a Dick’s Sporting Goods store in the city of Danbury, about 12 miles away.

“At this time, reports that the suspect visited one of our stores last week have not been confirmed by law enforcement,” the sporting goods store said in a statement. “Based on our records, we can confirm that no firearms were sold to the suspect identified in this case.”

Either way, it’s good to see that Dick’s is taking action. Actions speak louder than words.

125 comments to Dick’s Sporting Goods pulls machine guns from shelves

  • John Casper

    Thanks Lisa. This is a good step, hope others follow.

    Nothing worse for the Second Amendment, “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,” then when firearms fall into the hands of the mentally ill.

       6 likes

  • Michael BB

    I have never been a Dick’s Sporting Goods customer, but, as Thelma Ritter said in Miracle on 34th Street, ..”I never done much shoppin’ here (at Macy’s)but from now on, I’m gonna be a regular (Macy) customer..
    The retailer’s actions are wonderful and deserve as much positive reinforcement as the community can give them. Free market(partial)solutions to a social problem, who’d-a-thunk it! Of course they’re worried about liabilities, as well they should be. Lawyers can do some good as well, ya know…
    MBB

       4 likes

  • Rye N

    You shouldn’t post things like this without understanding what you’re saying. Dick’s doesn’t or has not ever sold “machine guns.” They simply cannot, as a machine gun is a fully automatic gun. These are not available unless you have a specific license from the government and buy something manufactured before they were banned.

    You are why there are many issues.

       17 likes

    • Lisa Mux

      Rye N,

      A Dick’s staffer provided me with the info. He said the stores will no longer be selling “mrs machine rifles.” I substituted the word “gun” for “rifle.”

      And to say that I am “why there are so many issues” is not helpful and just plain cruel.

         4 likes

    • John Casper

      Rye, let me introduce you to the Second Amendment: “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.”

      Allowing the mental ill access to automatic weapons and ammo is the single best way to injure the Second Amendment. When you come around to wanting to defend the Second Amendment, you will apologize to Lisa and thank her for the post.

         6 likes

      • Tom

        Learn the law you dolt. To make it easier for you, go ahead and read 18 U.S.C. § 921. The Second Amendment may provide the basis for US citizens to own automatic weapons, but when was the last time the federal government paid attention to the Constitution. The construction, sale, or transference of new select fire (i.e.) weapons has been banned since 1986. Just as Rye said, there are no “automatic weapons” at Dicks, and there never have been. Transferable Class 3 weapons (automatics), cost a minimum of $10,000; a price tag you will never see at Dicks.

        You people are so lost it’s sad – please go ahead and tell me, what assault rifle did Seung-Hui Cho use? Ah that’s right, he didn’t use one. What about Timothy McVeigh? Or Mutsuo Toi, who killed 29 people with an axe and a sword?

        Then again people like yourself can’t be expected to actually research any of this when you go about throwing the term “machine gun” around, as if military grade select fire weapons are available to the general public.

           13 likes

        • Lisa Mux

          Tom,

          We can disagree with one another and not call each other names or make it personal.

          I ask that everyone-on both sides- please take a deep breath before commenting on my post and refrain from name-calling and cruel comments. We’re better than that.

          Thank you.

             6 likes

        • John Casper

          Tom, “The Second Amendment may provide the basis for US citizens to own automatic weapons….”

          So now you’re not sure?

          Tom, please don’t let a “dolt” beat you on this. Does the Second Amendment provide the basis for US citizens to own automatic weapons, or not?

             1 likes

          • Tom

            I’m not sure how you construed that I was unsure of anything. How can I not be sure when I quote a federal statute (which clearly denotes that select fire weapons manufactured post-1986 are forbidden, and items manufactured pre-1986 require ATF approval) for you to read? Last time I checked, the Constitution provides the federal government with no legal basis to regulate the production or use of drugs, regulate aspects of private citizens lives, or spy on the populace, yet they do it anyways.

            So yes, since you can’t read, the Constitution DOES allow for the ownership of any and all arms; the federal government DOES NOT. If you did even the most basic research on how to procure a Class 3 weapon you’d already know this.

               7 likes

            • John Casper

              “I’m not sure how you construed that I was unsure of anything…..”

              You gave it away with the word “may.”

              IANAL, but even I know that “may,” is “permissive.” Folks who have passed the bar understand that means “optional.”

                 2 likes

              • Tom

                I’m a 3L at Duke, I used the word “may” because that’s exactly how the federal government views the subject. Don’t believe me, please go reread the original AWB.

                Legislators couldn’t care less about the Constitution as long as they please their constituents, and feed their pet projects.

                   3 likes

            • The Second Amendment allows for the citizenry to “keep and bear arms,” not to “keep and bear any and all arms.”

              If you think the Second Amendment should be interpreted as broadly as possible, then do you also believe convicted felons should be allowed to bear arms, since the Second Amendment isn’t specific on that issue? What about the mentally ill?

              If we take a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment, would you support allowing your fellow citizens to keep and bear Stinger missile systems and rocket-propelled grenade launchers?

                 4 likes

              • Tom

                “The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American … the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”

                The entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to provide the citizenry with the legal right to acquire the same arms possessed by the federal (standing) army; regardless of which Framer you research, every founding father held this belief. As for your argument that the 2nd Amendment applies to convicted felons, you might want to do your research. The right to bare arms extends only to enfranchised citizens of this nation, which felons are not; the same legal argument also applies to those found to be mentally ill. When a person is stripped of his or her rights, whether for medical or punitive reasons, they forfeit the privileges accorded to the general citizenry.

                   5 likes

                • Tom, there are a number of states in which individuals convicted of felonies can vote upon completion of their sentences (including Wisconsin) thanks to their civil rights being restored. If we apply the logic being used by some in this thread, those individuals should also have the right to bear arms.

                  Next time you lecture me on doing some research, make sure you’ve done yours first.

                     0 likes

        • Steve

          Tom, the confusion about machine guns is a totally secondary point to the larger issue. Sure, nobody in the US has gone on a killing spree with a “machine gun”, but they have done so with “assault rifles”. What I gather Dick’s has pulled are assault rifles like the AR-15, which have high capacity clips (30 rounds) and fire high velocity rounds. Fine, that’s not an M-60, but does that really matter to the core issue here?

          To your point about Seung-Hui Cho (who used a shotgun and a samurai sword), and Timothy McVeigh, who used a bomb; gun control doesn’t stop violence. But what gun control does do is limit the capabilities of the average person to amplify that violence. If all you have is a knife, you can stab somebody and with a good bit of training and a lot of effort, maybe you can stab and kill a few people. But a gun is easy. An assault rifle is even easier.

          Imagine for a moment what the Aurora and Newtown shootings look like if the only guns available are revolvers. The violence still happens but a lot less people are dead. There are myriad inputs that go into gun violence in this country, but the availability of the guns and, in particular very powerful high capacity guns, exacerbates the problem.

             2 likes

        • jon libke

          Thank you tom glad to see someone out there actually looks at more then one sad tragedy that has happened. WEAPONS DON’T KILL, PEOPLE DO! Get it right close minded people

             4 likes

          • Marga Krumins

            Actually, it’s both. Ask the victims of Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

               0 likes

            • Michael BB

              …well,well, what a pretty little thread this is! This is what gun control advocates are up against. 2nd Amendment under any and all “reasonable” circumstances, free and ready access to any weapon someone worthy deems worthy. Ammunition for all. Online sales, and outright theft are just the side effects of honouring our Constitutional rights. Background checks for all in-person sales, which constitute a small percentage of total gun sales, will have to suffice.
              Who among us feels like they are part of a citizen militia? This is SUCH a miserable canard. This is why Americans ought to expect to see the pillaging of schools, theaters, churches, stores, etc., continue unabated. It is our steadfast refusal to place any real and significant limits on gun ownership and access to ammo. IF we were to restrict ANY and EVERY eligible citizen to single-shot weapons, and limit holdings of ammo to places that sell hunting licences and target ranges, where the ammo will be consumed, that would ease my mind a bit. Barring that, we must resign ourselves to continued violence by persons sane and insane, angry or merely criminal, freedom fighters and vigilantes alike. If you want to defend your house against a criminal, use a baseball bat. If you want to defend the lives of innocents in public places, support meaningful gun control legislation, or realize that the people who do the killing with the guns here in America, are part of your idea of what the Constitution guarantees, and not mine. I believe that the Constitution, a copy of which I carry with me at all times, like a weapon, guarantees us the right to be secure, without guaranteeing ANYONE the right to access to guns, since we no longer use our citizens for militia, that task falling to the National Guard. Bye,bye, gunnies…and as for gun control advocates, don’t waste your breath or typing fingers trying to convince any gun owners that the good of all is a greater good than the good of a few. MBB, a non-gun owner who reads the Constitution…

                 0 likes

              • Tom

                So you claim to abide by the Constitution while stating “without guaranteeing ANYONE the right to access to guns.” Which directly violates the 2nd Amendment. Also, just in case you were wondering, the National Guard is NOT the militia – and unlike you, claims are backed by both historical and legal precedent. If you really want to contest the issue of the citizenry not being the militia, take it up with the Supreme Court (United States v Miller).

                As for what I protect my house with, that’s really none of your goddamn business. Neither you, nor the federal government, has any authority to tell me what devices or implements I may, or may not use to protect my life, or the life of my family. If you don’t believe in owning firearms that’s your prerogative, nobody is forcing you to take personal accountability for your safety (and just as a heads up, the police are not obligated to protect you [Warren v District of Columbia]).

                The Constitution provides for a range of liberties, if you don’t agree with them, move to a community that supports your views so you won’t have to worry about “gunnies”; feel free to set sail for elsewhere, England is calling.

                   5 likes

                • Michael BB

                  …see what I mean? The gun enthusiasts have ALL their ducks in a row, easier to shoot that way, I suppose. There is NO reasoning with them, morally, ethically, constitutionally, pragmatically, etc. They will do what they wanna do, and just because some person misuses their favorite toy, repeatedly, and lots of innocent people lose their lives, that is still not enough. Thus, we ought to consider victims of gun violence, legal, illegal, justified, unjustified, publicized, forgotten, as the cost of being civilized. Naturally, I was encouraged to move to England. I cannot, as the food is terrible.
                  Cars are not made to kill living things. Most accidents that are caused by the proximity of humans to danger are caused by secondary functions, not primary functions like the bullets from a gun. The A-bomb was specifically made to kill hundreds of thousands of people. People made it, people used it, people died from it. The object is thus now under the strictest controls of treaty, and nations who are pursuing its development are considered pariahs. Why aren’t gun owners considered pariahs?
                  The Constitution means what some Supreme Court says it means, as history shows us every 50 years or so, when ideas change, not always for the better.
                  So, again I say, expect more killings from crazies who can steal guns easily, there being so many of them about. I am not one of the gun owners, and never will be. I do not expect the police to protect me, the police are almost always there to investigate and solve, but not prevent, crime. I will not be killed with my own gun. I will not kill anyone for any crime. That is the task of a trained officer, or any State that has capital punishment, which is not a deterrent but simple revenge.
                  We will not be having any dialogue about guns, as you can see from these postings. The people who want semi and automatic weapons banned, and the people who want whatever gun is manufactured to be legal to own will NEVER see the same goals. The nastiness from gun owners is an indication of their tendencies to settle things with coercion and not accept pragmatic limits on so-called freedoms. I am unsubscribing to Blogging Blue, because it causes me to see Red more often than Blue. MBB

                     2 likes

                • Tom,

                  You\’re a third year law student at Duke?

                  Here\’s some interesting info from a real lawyer

                  http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/winkler-the-nra-used-to-support-gun-control-1.3865217

                     0 likes

            • jon libke

              Really stop and think now……. bomb built by man….bomb launched by man…. bomb dont choose who or what they destroy man does. There for it was mans choice and man who killed those unfortunate victims….take ownership for what one does you cant blame an object wow what a concept

                 2 likes

    • Michael BB

      OK< so let's get some more facts. Dick's has removed something from their shelves. Just what is it? Is it a semi-automatic weapon of some kind, as I suspect? Let's keep our "sights" on the Big Issue, which is that some retailer is taking action. Whomever made the initial posting, get us some more info, so we can start the gun control dialogue off with a BANG, that is, the sound of reasonable-ness winning, and NOT nit-picky gun vs. rifle vs who-knows-what from people who want guns, guns, and all guns everywhere. By the way, AMMO control is just as important as gun control, the Constitution does not say much about ammo, does it? or does it? MBB

         2 likes

      • Lisa Mux

        I’ll try to get more info for you. I posted this while the story was still breaking.

           1 likes

        • Lisa Mux

          Again, the information I received and the language I used came directly from a staff member at a Dick’s Sporting Goods store-I figured the person who sold the guns would know the name of the guns.

          Look, guys, we can argue all day about “fully automatic” vs “semi-automatic” but semantics will not bring back those dead children in Newtown. Only action will prevent something like this from happening again, which is the whole point of this post.

          By all means, keep discussing, but please remember to keep your comments clean and civil-thank you.

             3 likes

          • Evan

            Semi vs fully automatic is not semantics, its a major mechanical and legal distinction.

               2 likes

            • John Casper

              Evan, what do you mean by “major mechanical,” distinction?

                 0 likes

            • Steve

              Does the distinction matter to this debate in the slightest? The murders in Newtown were done with semi-automatic guns. That the murders were done using legal firearms is evidence that this legal distinction may not be all that relevant.

                 2 likes

              • Evan

                Without getting into long details, a semi-automatic rifle needs some heavy machine work and replacement of parts to be made select fire (full-auto).
                As for the legal distinction have a talk with the BATFE about the penalties for owning an unregistered machine gun. The machine gun registry created in 1934 and closed to new guns in the 80’s, lists all full auto’s in civilian hands. There is a transfer fee of $200 to buy one and with the closure of the list prices for legal ones start at $10,000.

                   1 likes

                • John Casper

                  Evan, in the post you responded to Lisa did not mention “rifle.” Please define what you mean by “semi-automatic,” as it pertains to weapons that have not been modified.

                  I didn’t ask about the legal distinction, but you seem awfully anxious to bring it up.

                     0 likes

                  • Evan

                    I didn’t use the word rifle, because it wasn’t a distinction that needed to be made. Semi-automatic means the same thing regardless of weather you are talking about a rifle, handgun, or shotgun. You have to release and re-pull the trigger for every shot. It’s not a machine gun where you can hold down the trigger and empty the magazine or run out a belt.. It requires you to make the choice to fire the next round. If you want to be taken seriously you need to use the correct term.

                       1 likes

                    • John Casper

                      Evan at 5:16 yesterday here’s what you wrote: “Without getting into long details, a semi-automatic rifle……”

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      This started because I pointed out semi vs full auto is not just semantics like Lisa claimed. You asked about the mechanical distinction. Steve asked if it mattered, I told him to check with the BATFE. I only used a rifle to talk about the modifications as an example. With the correct knowledge, access to the right parts or ability to manufactur them, you could theoretically make any semiautomatic weapon into full auto.

                         1 likes

                    • John Casper

                      Unless a lever is your idea of a “major” mechanical difference, your assertion about the mechanical difference was flat wrong. You wanted to make Lisa look bad.

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      Externally on an AR-15 style weapon, it is just a different lever, but the internal modifications needed go far beyond that.

                         1 likes

                    • John Casper

                      Let me introduce you to my little friend, the Browning Automatic Rifle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1918_Browning_Automatic_Rifle

                      It’s only been around since 1918.

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      And? They discontinued production of full auto BAR’s 50 yrs ago, they continue to make a semi-automatic variant. But federal law makes it so manufacturers design the receivers so that you can’t easily modify them to full auto.

                         1 likes

                    • John Casper

                      major: “notable or conspicuous in effect or scope”

                      You owe Lisa an apology.

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      No I don’t, I stand by my statement that the difference between semi-automatic and select fire is far beyond semantics in both a legal and mechanical sense. Just because what you can see externally on one model may be small doesn’t mean that the mechanical differences aren’t major and an attempt to convert to switch it over would be extremely difficult.
                      I can show you a 22lr copy of a rifle, that doesn’t mean parts are interchangeable.

                         2 likes

                    • John Casper

                      Sure you do.

                      Your 4:12 yesterday was wrong. “Semi vs fully automatic is not semantics, its a major mechanical and legal distinction.” You omitted what made it “major,” was that you were manually altering it. Give us a little more detail on that. Was the manufacturer’s warranty still good after you made your “major” mechanical conversion?

                      Based on what you’ve written so far, I’m guessing you were just as inaccurate and self-serving wrt the legal distinction.

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      What makes it major? There’s that it has to be done in a machine shop by a gunsmith who has the knowledge to do it right, any warranty given by the manufacturer would be instantly voided, and the who part about violating federal law unless the person doing it is a Class III manufacturer and the person receiving it is a Class III dealer. You can contact the BATFE if you want to know the exact penalties involved, but you can be sure it involves a hefty fine and several years in a federal pound me in the ass prison.

                         1 likes

      • Evan

        With your ‘ammo control’ idea how would you deal with reloaders? You can reuse casings, buy or make bullets, buy powde and primers, and make your own ammo.

           2 likes

        • John Casper

          We\’re not talking about shells for an old shotgun. As always, you conveniently left out what NOT using their ammo does to your warranty.

          Please, \”wow us,\” with your expertise. Lay out the specs for AR-15 ammo and the materials. Then tell us what it costs you to duplicate it and how long it would take you make 100 rounds. Then compare that to their retail price.

          \”Sporting goods retailers need to realize that ammunition is one of the largest profit generators. Aside from stocking up on a wide range of ammunition, retailers should carefully consider how they display such items to ensure maximize visibility. In addition, they should also be knowledgeable about the different features of each product to correctly handle inquiries\”

          http://news-business.vlex.com/vid/ammunition-boosting-loading-shelves-53558926

          SARCASM

          Gun manufacturers are just going to let you waltz in and soak up their profit center. They\’re not going to engineer the rounds to make it really hard/expensive to duplicate. \”PRAISE the Lord and pass the ammunition!\”

          /sarcasm

             0 likes

          • Evan

            And you say I don\’t know what I\’m talking about? There\’s thousands of people who reload their own ammunition to save money already, I\’m one of them. With an investment of $300-500 you can get all the equipment to reload. After that its just a matter of getting the components. Including cleaning the old brass, your looking at about three or so hours for 100 rounds. Reloading tables are freely available online and there are manuals out there with directions on what to do. This isn\’t something new, people have been loading their own ammo for a long time.

               1 likes

            • John Casper

              Evan, what are you waiting for?

              Give us a link to the reloading tables and the manuals for the AR-15. That will make it easier to \”Lay out the specs for AR-15 ammo and the materials. Then tell us what it costs you to duplicate it and how long it would take you make 100 rounds. Then compare that to their retail price.\”

                 0 likes

              • Evan

                Rcbs.com
                Hornady.com
                Lyman.com
                Midwayusa.com
                All have reloading equipment, Lyman puts out a manual with tables for almost every caliber. Specs will be different for the different powders and bullet weights. Costs will vary based on what powder you choose, bullet weight, amount of powder per round, brand of primer, ect.

                   1 likes

                • John Casper

                  I want YOUR pricing info on the 5.56×45mm. Use whatever spec you want. You\’re on the clock. I want to see how long it\’s going to take you to get to a price for 100 rounds.

                     0 likes

                  • Evan

                    If I wanted to start reloading .223, it would cost me $80 and about three hours for 100. I have most of the equipment already and can get spent brass free from some friends.

                       1 likes

                    • John Casper

                      These guys claim 32 cents a round on an order of 500. http://ammoseek.com/?gun=rifle&cal=113&grains=0&mfg=&keywords=&sortby=cpr

                      Price goes down to 29 cents a round on an order of a 1,000.

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      If you don\’t include the new set of dies, it a would be $14.99 for 100

                         1 likes

                    • John Casper

                      Evan, you don\’t think much of you\’re time. You\’re not even charging $5.00/hour for labor. When you or anyone else charge that little, folks start to worry about the quality. I\’m not saying the quality of your rounds would be bad, but it\’s something to consider. If I was in the market, I would not buy from you because you did not apologize to Lisa.

                      If I were you, I\’d consider the possibility that the folks at RCBS,… , who want to sell you that equipment, may not have your best interests at heart, unless it\’s just a hobby for you.

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      I already have the equipment, it\’s not a new cost. And that\’s what it would cost for me to reload for myself, I don\’t reload for others there\’s too much liability involved.

                         1 likes

                    • Evan

                      And you\’ve completely ignored my original question. If you support ammunition control, how would you handle reloaders?

                         1 likes

                    • John Casper

                      You completely ignored my request that you apologize to Lisa.

                         0 likes

                    • Evan

                      If I had been wrong I would have apologized.

                         1 likes

  • jon libke

    Dicks is banning the sales of semi auto rifles because of the CT school shooting they say. So why ban rifles based on what happened with pistols! How ignorant does that sound? And what sence does that make? Is someone wants to hurt someone they are do it by any means they can. Oklahoma bomber killed many people and didnt use a gun of any kind. People are stabbed daily but you can still buy knives at dicks. And also the weapons that have been used by these crazies to commit these tragedies have stole or wrongfully obtained, so illegal or not they found a way to get weapons they shouldnt have been able to get anyways. Fuck dicks and morons that support them, all my outdoor needs will be purchased anywhere but dicks sport goods for this uneducated decision they have made

       3 likes

    • From an article on the coroner’s report from the CT shooting published Sunday:

      Lanza blasted his way into the building and used a high-powered rifle to kill 20 children and six adults, including the principal who tried to stop him, authorities said

      http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20121216/NEWS02/712169876

      And another from Saturday:

      The gunman behind the Connecticut elementary school massacre stormed into the building and shot 20 children at least twice with a high-powered rifle, executing some at close range and killing adults who tried to stop the carnage, authorities said Saturday.

      http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/ci_22199373/connecticut-shooting-victims-shot-multiple-times-close-range?source=most_viewed

      “…all my outdoor needs will be purchased anywhere but dicks sport goods for this uneducated decision they have made”
      I thought boycotts were the refuge of the unwashed socialist masses?

         3 likes

      • jon libke

        Read what really happened not just what the media writes. CT shooter used a Glock pistol and a Sig Saurer pistol in his rampage and police FOUND and ar15 in the backseat of the shooter vehicle it was not used. And all of which he stole, he didnt own them himself. The problem isnt guns cause people are stabbed daily by PEOPLE, people are killed daily by cars driven by PEOPLE, Oklahoma bomber didnt use guns and killed thousands no gun used there either o and that was a person that chose to create and do those acts too. So should we take away everyones cars, knives, and fertalizer cause those kill more then guns do. And again look at all these tragedies there were commited with stolen weapons not legal gun owners. And to the reason criminals have guns is because cops have guns. The problem isnt the things we own and use the problem is unstable people. You people are being narrow minded and ignorant to place this on “assault weapons” and news flash a hunting rifle has the same capabilities as an “assault weapon”. I dont have a problem with dicks protecting themselves and restricting sales the problem is they blame it on a single occurance that a rifle wasnt even used in. They are being haste in thier decision, because like i said should take away cars. Shit while youre at it ban smoking its worse then all things i already listed but no one does that they just complain and complain and do nothing and nothing happens but a couple mass shootings happen, which is very sad, and everyone wants to attack semi auto rifles. Shame on you for being so closed minded

           2 likes

        • Marga Krumins

          Those were the early reports. The reports given out after the investigation was fully underway were that he used the AR-15 to put as many as 11 rounds into 1 child…. He used, I think it was the Sig-Sauer to kill himself. What was found in his vehicle was a shotgun.

             0 likes

    • “Dicks is banning the sales of semi auto rifles…” Dick’s is simply not offering them for sale. Banning would imply they have influence over other retailers…that would big BIG government’s responsibility!

         1 likes

      • jon libke

        Really youre being a anal dick now, ban means to stop or restrict or prevent so why nitpick my post? So here you go Dicks is suspending the sales of tactical “styled” rifles. O and these “assault” rifles are just as deadly as any other firearm out there or as any knife. An the media writes what sells stories and you bought into it, there wasnt “hundreds” of bullets fired but your are right that they were his mothers guns, THAT HE STOLE ! Again he wasnt legal to have those. So responsible owners shouldnt be able to own weapons and sporting goods cause of recent tragidies? So go sell your car now and ride a bike or walk or youre just a hipicrit cause kill more then guns do. Cause its the car and guns fault that all this people are dead not the people behind them right!

           2 likes

        • \”…your (sic) are right that they were his mothers guns, THAT HE STOLE ! Again he wasnt legal to have those.\”

          Yeah, maybe we could prosecute her for illegally permitting a minor to access her guns! Oh wait, never mind.

             0 likes

    • POSTED TODAY:

      http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gunman-behavior-shootings-indicates-planning-control-former-fbi-180620270.html

      Lanza brought three guns into the school, all owned by his mother. He killed his victims with a high-powered semi-automatic rifle, but he also carried two pistols, one of which he used to take his own life. Police say he sprayed hundreds of bullets inside the school and had considerably more left over to use.

         1 likes

      • jon libke

        And hey we both could be wrong about what was or wasnt used we werent there but dont attack a tool go after people its them that commited these tragidies a person did. We make the choice a firearm can not whats so hard to see and understand about that? Ive hit my finger hundreds of times with a hammer and never once was it the hammers fault it was my fault and my fault only to place blame elsewhere would be crazy.

           1 likes

    • Keith Schmitz

      Following Oklahoma City bombing, regulations were passed that required the verification for the reason of purchasing mass quantities of chemicals that caused the blast.

         1 likes

      • jon libke

        O so theres no way a person could stock pile or obtain illegally til they had enough to make whatever cause i dont see your point buddy

           3 likes

  • Dick’s isn’t the only one reacting by pulling guns from their offerings…Walmart has joined the trend…and private equity company Cerberus is selling off their gun company investments.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/businesses-react-newtown-tragedy-190318407.html

       1 likes

  • Marga Krumins

    I think all of us are deeply saddened by what happened at Sandy Hook and what has happened elsewhere, including in Brookfield. I think we all want to figure out what actions need to be taken in order to prevent such tragedies from happening again, while still allowing us to live the lives we’ve chosen and are assured under the Constitution. In order for us to find that “happy medium” we need to work to bridge gaps of understanding, share information and perspectives; figure out what we need to do. Name calling, disrespecting each other or each other’s perspectives in no way contributes to doing so.

    Now, I sort of stand in the middle of things. I’m not a gun owner. I’m not a hunter. I am ex-military and most of my family here are gun owners, some of them “assault weapon” owners. And, I have been known to, for example, do a little target shooting at the family farm with my family, namely with an AR-15, .22 Rifle, and a 20-gauge shotgun (once, ouch), cleaning it afterwards. And, I know Lisa.

    Lisa reported on something that happened at Dick’s, based on information she was given there. Lisa is not familiar with guns; it’s a world foreign to her. Like all of us, when we communicate about things we are not familiar with, she got the specifics wrong, from the perspective of someone who is familiar with guns.

    But, from another perspective, she got them very right. Those that are not familiar with guns see, for example, an AR-15 or hear about what is referred to as an “assault weapon” and think machine gun (and for all I know, a Mrs. Machine Rifle may be a “brand” name). It’s not on those who have no interest in weapons (but do have an interest in what, for example happens to our kids in school) to demonstrate knowledge about weapons. No more than it would for the average person to know the differences between a curb and snaffle if they’re not horse people.

    It’s on those of us who do know the differences to share our knowledge of those differences, just as we would knowledge about anything else. Doing so in a respectful, understanding way will go a lot farther than name-calling if we want to have a discussion that moves things forward in a helpful manner.

       5 likes

    • John Casper

      Thank you for your service.

      One change that Republicans will probably propose is a free-market approach. Require insurance for all non-hunting weapons. Credit rating and other historical factors will determine the premiums. It’s a sensible way to distribute risk and it will help weed out those who do not have the aptitude.

         3 likes

  • Believe it or not, I went to school to be a cop. I have a shotgun in the house and we are planning to buy a handgun as I once owned one in college. I was firearm certified and the lady and I enjoy shooting handguns for recreation once in a blue moon. We also live in an area, where it’s not a bad idea to have a gun around.

    With all that being said, I am a proud liberal. A liberal that understands that the assault weapons ban that expired under the Bush/Cheney administration needs to be reinstated. Period. People wonder why there have been so many shootings in the last decade, Uhhhhmmm…could part of it be that the assault ban expired?

    For the sake of these children and teachers that didn’t have a chance against an AR-15 Bushmaster Assault Rifle (that is basically a killing machine and in no way used for hunting deer or for self-defense), I’m asking those that disagree, to really think this through. Look at the data. Look at what second amendment actually says.

    I think if you take off the ideological glasses (or ideological gun scope), you’ll find that banning assault rifles is fairly reasonable. No one is looking to come to your house and take away all your guns.

    The point is, there is absolutely no reason for a citizen to own these type of rifles. In areas where there are stricter gun laws, there is a considerable drop in violent crimes. That’s the simple fact of the matter.

    Considering the uptick of these tragic incidents, I think it’s a very reasonable policy change, especially considering that the has precedent.

       4 likes

    • jon libke

      These weapons you call “assault rifle” is for hunting and sport as well. The handgun is the only one you cant hunt with. And you ever think of how tough the economy has been this past decade and how sparse jobs are the past decade instead of attacking a tool that requires a HUMAN to be operated. The firearms didnt choose to take these innocent lives a PERSON did. And as long as a firearm is made for military or lawenforcement there will be access to them. Come on look how many things are illegal or restricted like drugs but they are still there and still being used and sold even though there are illegal. And europe banned civilian gun ownership and gun crime rose. The point is is PEOPLE want something or to do something they will do it by an means they can its not just cause its legal or illegal to have or do

         4 likes

      • Jon – A Bushmaster AR-15 is most definitely an assault rifle. That is literally how it’s categorized. That’s why it was banned during the assault ban from 1994 to 2004. It’s also described as “a civilian version of the military M-16″. People learned to hunt without it for a good 10 years. Like I stated earlier, there is a precedent here. No one is taking any freedoms away.

           1 likes

        • jon libke

          Who cares what it is called, cars have killed far more then any assault rifle and no has stopped selling or producing cars. Shit theres alot out there that has killed more then any gun but they stay available for purchase and legal. The situations that have happened lately are messed up and sad but to call for a ban is bs.

             4 likes

          • Keith Schmitz

            How about if we start with your BS.

            Cars provide an economic benefit. Bet you the $8 billion dollar revenue of the gun industry, bet you the cost to society is far higher. We really can’t afford this sector.

               0 likes

            • jon libke

              Make excuses all you want ,cars have benefits. Hello they still kill cause of improper or misuse of a person. This isnt about what helps its about civilian danger. Ban alcohol it has no benefit and again kills more then firearms also

                 4 likes

      • Keith Schmitz

        I really give a shit if a gun is used for hunting or target shooting. If these weapons are used to kill large number of people, human beings trump your hobbies.

           0 likes

        • jon libke

          Knives hurt and kill large numbers of people better clean out your kitchen, and do you really think removing one weapon with reduce killings? If people want to kill they will even if they cant get a firearm. And back to cars and what you stated, human lives trump the benefit or gain of any automobile and again they have killed way more then firearms but production is slowing down is it?

             3 likes

      • Dan Close

        Do you seriously consider an AR15 or a Bushmaster to be classified as hunting rifles? I am a gun owner and a hunter for over 30 years. Anyone using a semi auto rifle for hunting does not belong in the woods. If you are a hunter, take a hunter safety course and some shooting classes and practice at the range. When you hunt, it should be a one shot kill. You do not shoot at running animals as there are too many variables you can not account fore. If you are using a semi auto for hunting, all you are doing is blasting away as many rounds as you can as fast as you can. All you end up doing is torturing the animal. Shots do not land where you think they should. More often than not, the animal is gut shot and hit in multiple locations ruining the majority of the meat. God forbid, you are on stand on the opposite side of the animal being shot at because there is a good chance you may get hit because the guy using the semi auto is too focussed on the animal running that he forgets to ensure their is nothing behind the animal. More often than not, you will miss with half your shots and who knows where those rounds will land. Now I know there are idiots who will use a bolt or lever action and still shoot running animals. They also need to learn to shoot better. I know this as I had someone shoot a tree I was sitting against about 1 foot above my head. They were shooting at a deer running past me and did not bother to look at what was around it. I was in a full orange hunting suit in snow covered woods. Stood out like a sore thumb. The point is, semi auto rifle just make it easier for lazy people to become more dangerous. If you want one for home defense, that is your choice. Just own up and call it what it is or is not. AR15 and Bushmasters are not hunting rifles. They are assault weapons meant to kill people.

           1 likes

        • jon libke

          Where did anyone say that just cause youre using an semi auto rifle youre gonna be showering bullets like you describe? You can fire just one bullet at a time you dont have to unload onto the animal lol. As a matter off fact no says you have to use high capacity mags. If hunting theres still ammo laws you have to abide by. And why cant anyone use it? Its a rifle right? Its design to shoot something from a distance right? And by the way its a modern rifle, improved or redesigned from other rifles for modern people. Youre older obviously and you like the guns you use and thats your choice no one cares. But because this is something that appeals more to todays younger and up and coming shooters doesnt mean its a death machine. Any firearm can be used to harm people shit anything can be used to harm someone. How many people you thing have been killed or hurt by a lever or bolt action rifle? Bet you more then any bushmaster ever made. But you still miss the true bottom line its not the firearms fault, its not manufacturers fault, its the operator, no if ands or buts about it. And yes if i had to defend myself id rather use a modern semi auto rifle over bolt or lever action

             4 likes

    • jon libke

      If cops have them why cant i? O let guess cause cops dont ever break the law right? Or cops never kill innocent people right? O wait theres no cops that are unstableness to make them commit of these crazy acts right? Come on people get it right we all have a choice in what we do a firearm of any nature or firing rate makes you do these things, these people chose to. Youre attacking a tool that has no mind or ability to operate its self it requires a person to operate. It doesnt matter if youre cop or civilian we all have choices to make the firearms has no control over an operator

         4 likes

      • Jon – Scaling back on assault weapons is only one way to fight this. I agree, there are many other approaches we need to take. As I focused silly video thing I do, changing how Americans see and deal with mental illness is another huge issue we need to deal with.

        But let’s face it, cops mostly have handguns or shotguns. No one is talking about taking those away.

           3 likes

    • Marga Krumins

      Personally, I don’t know that you need to ban the AR-15 itself. (And I’ve eaten venison shot with one by my then 90 year old father; my niece I think uses an AK style. They’re light caliber, but the people I know only take a shot they think they’ll make accurately.) Think about it, is it the stock, pistol grip, virtual lack of recoil, bayonet lug, or flash suppressor that is the danger? Is it that it is semi-automatic? So, are .22s and for all intents and purposes, most hunting rifles. Or, is it the large-capacity magazines, detachable or otherwise?

      Now, a ten-round magazine is maybe a happy medium? Allowing one to fire 3 3-round shot groups? Then, one could go the more expensive, bulky (and easy to detect)route, and buy multiple magazines, allowing one to shoot with frequent magazine changes — or the less expensive, but less convenient route of having one magazine that will be reloaded frequently. Either route would allow people to use the rifles for their legal purposes, yet slow down the rate of fire in potential mass shooting situations. Oh, and require a licensing process that includes a psychological evaluation in order to purchase any gun; that is, “you want to buy something that is designed to kill; demonstrate that it’s safe for the rest of us to put it in your hands.”

         0 likes

      • Ed Heinzelman

        Just because you can hunt with it doesn’t make it a hunting weapon…I can fish with a hand grenade (well if I could own one) but that doesn’t make it a rod and reel.

           1 likes

        • jon libke

          Ok youre going a bit out there now ed. Grenade fishing come on now be reasonable now. It may not be classified as a hunting rifle but is an alterative none the less. And you ever stop to think that maybe its design and style is whats appealing about these not just there reliability easy to maintain and accuracy. Thats why its sometimes called a modern rifle cause its more up to date. Non the less people are singling ar style weapons out. Like ive said theres much worse out there we could spend time on that harms more the any firearm.

             2 likes

          • Keith Schmitz

            Find another hobby Jon.

               1 likes

            • jon libke

              Stop driving and breathing keith it may ruin your life. Youre going to extremes bro. I agree we need stricter laws and more exstensive background checks but take away cause of what happened is a bit hipicritical cause there alot that does worse then firearms and for way longer time now.

                 3 likes

  • Casey1911

    Dick’s has never once, ever, in the history of the county, sold machine guns. Lefties show thier ignorance with every new utterance. Research the meanings of the words and terms you use before you write them.

       2 likes

    • Lisa Mux

      Casey, as I stated in the comments above-twice- I got my information by calling a Dick’s Sporting Goods store and speaking with staff. They (employees of Dick’s, the ones who actually sold the guns) provided me with the terminology.

      Okay, I am done repeating myself now.

      Muxy out.

         1 likes

  • Thanks for posting the article Lisa!

       1 likes

  • Carlos Mandingo

    Long story short: “People Kill People, Guns doesn’t Kill”. An AR-15 isn’t a machine gun nor an assault rifle. It’s simply an Tactical Semi-Auto Rifle. Believe me, if he would have used a shotgun it would have been worst.
    Dicks should be more creative about this situation, b/c its not the root-cause of the accident. Invest into guidance counselors in schools. Create a more detail background check. etc.

       4 likes

    • Carlos – An AR-15 is most definetely an assault rifle. That is what it is defined as. That is why it was banned for 10 years.

         2 likes

      • Also, as a person that grew going hunting, if you are a hunter and you need an AR-15, then you are not a very good hunter.

           2 likes

        • jon libke

          No where does it say you need to be a good hunter to hunt so whats the point here a gun is a gun big or small, old or modern ban one you would have to take away all and then you can be taken over by whoever wanted to take your defensless self

             1 likes

  • Retired Soldier

    First, I retired out of the army as a combat troop so I know the real assault weapons, the correct terminology and have seen what happened in countries we invaded and by force removed the civilians personal protection weapons.

    To have a conversation both sides have to know what the words being used really mean so:

    The correct definition of an assault Rifle – An assault rifle is a select-fire (either fully automatic or burst capable) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. It is not to be confused with assault weapons. Assault rifles are the standard service rifles in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

    Notice the select-fire part…. There was no assault rifle or weapon used at that school. There was a pull the trigger once to fire a bullet once rifle called the AR 15. This is the same one pull one bang as used by all rifles and shotguns in America for almost 100 years, the exceptions being pump shotguns and bolt action rifles. The rifle used in Connecticut does however look like the M16 the military used for over 20 years. It is not one.

    Just because the press is too dumb to know the difference does not mean we need to. If you want to ban Assault rifles for sale in Dick’s, congratulations, they have not been allowed to sell them since 1986.

    That being said, the 13 Sept 1994 “Federal Assault Weapons Ban” often discussed without any real knowledge of what it said or did in essence banned weapons that looked “Assaulty” An example from the ban:

    Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

    Folding or telescoping stock
    Pistol grip
    Bayonet mount
    Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
    Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally).

    Grenades were already illegal so the bottom part was an example of the feel good part. Everything listed except the accept detachable magazine was all about the look and since the “and” was used instead of the “or” it banned weapons purely on their looks.

    A rifle that functioned exactly like the one in Connecticut but did not look “assaulty” would not have been banned under the old 1986 ban.

       4 likes

    • First of all, thank you for your service. Here’s my question, and I ask with a huge amount of respect being a veteran. Are you saying that you feel AR-15s should not be banned? If so, why do you feel that way? What do you feel it can be used for? Do you really feel it’s an adequate hunting rifle?

      I’ve gone hunting and I enjoy shooting handguns for recreation and we have a gun in the house for self-defense…but it seems that this Bushmaster rifle was used in 4 of the most recent shootings and did a lot of damage. I’m just trying to wrap my head around, why exactly we need these types of guns around.

         1 likes

      • Retired Vet

        The reason a AR 15 was used was because its commonly available. Its the most popularly sold rifle in America. It can easily be modified by users to look how they want, with various attachments and yes it looks like a real assault rifle. Look how many reporters keep calling it an assault rifle…
        Ban it and another rifle will become the poster child just like the semiautomatic version of MAC 10’s were before they were banned.

        I have been in countries where we took the guns away.
        It was a diaster.
        Ask the reporters why American baseball bats are the number one export to England, in the winter..
        The violent will aways try to take from those less able to protect themselves. Applies to every nation on Earth I have been to, its not going to change. Ask yourself if your wife got backed into a corner by a gang of murdering men masquading as humans would you rather she have something that would make them back off or 911 on speeddial ?

           4 likes

  • Lisa Mux

    My dear readers,

    I have learned a lot from reading all of these comments, and it’s not just the difference between a semi-automatic and a machine gun (although, I can assure you, I now know the difference beyond a shadow of a doubt!).
    Please continue to keep in mind that I got the information and language that I used from an actual Dick’s employee who sold the guns, so I did my due diligence with this post. I doubt that employee reads Blogging Blue, but you never know…

    Also, just wanted to thank you all for continuing to keep the conversation civil. :)

    Lisa

       3 likes

  • Lisa Mux

    The most important thing I’ve learned from reading these 80+ comments is that some readers will attempt to destroy my credibility by seizing on a minor technical inaccuracy that is not relevant to the overall argument. Then they’ll change the subject.
    This is a really shady tactic.
    Next time I’m just going to ignore them.

       3 likes

  • Retired Soldier

    Everyone leave the Lady alone. I hope Lisa did not think my comments were directed toward her. If so, I apologize.

    The main steam TV networks or press which is the word I used in my comments, have staffs that know better since they have the budgets for fact checkers. They knew what they were doing, and still are…

    As I understand it the shooter tried to buy a gun and was denied, that\’s when he went and killed his mother and took her weapons. What has not been released is where he tried to buy a gun.

    Dicks Sporting Goods, as an American company can sell, or not sell, what ever they want that is legal to sell in this country.

    Americans have the right to shop where they want.

    I suspect Dick\’s will know how this choice works out for them at the end of the next business quarter.

    I for one, have written them off my Christmas shopping destinations. They gave me no problems returning the item I had brought for one of my son\’s, not a weapon or ammo, in case any one wonders. Dicks personnel were polite and professional.

    Freedom is not when you get what you want, it\’s when the guy you are disagreeing with wins because he has the same rights as you, and the laws your elected officeholders have enacted prevail, even if you do not like it at the time.

    In this country that\’s the Congress of the United States and the Constitution.

    How you view this loss is what separates adults from children.

    Be glad for both the Constitution and the Congress no matter how much they drive you up the wall, the alternatives are worse….

       5 likes

    • Lisa Mux

      Retired Soldier,

      Thank you for your concern, but you need not apologize. My comments were not directed toward you. I welcome healthy dialogue after my posts, especially if people are sincere.

      Unfortunately, a very small group of readers delights in combing through my blog posts and gleefully attacking me when they find any sort of “error.” I find that…sad.
      So I’m going to ignore those people in the hopes that they will find something better to do with their time.

      Again, my message was for a very small group of readers.

      And don’t worry about me. If I couldn’t take the heat, I wouldn’t blog left in Waukesha County. :)

      Carry on.

      And Happy Holidays, everyone!

         1 likes

  • nonquixote

    I hated to even join this discussion that has pushed every other discussion off the board, and by helping to advertise the gun retailer in question.

    Dick\’s pulled these guns in time to mark them up, put them back out when a new profit point is reached and make a financial killing resulting from manipulating the immediate supply of these guns. Capitalism working as it should, isn\’t that the goal? Any other sentiment about motivation of Dick\’s action is ludicrous.

       3 likes

  • Brian Engles

    Dicks does not sell \”machine guns\”. Machine guns are fully automatic. Dicks sells semi automatic replicas of the military\’s machine guns. Full Auto rifles are only sold through a Class III Federal Licsensed Firearms Dealer. If you are going to report sometging please have the courtesy to use facts not fiction. Thank you.

       1 likes

  • George/Keoki

    Lisa, you are not expected to be informed about guns especially if it’s not your sport/ hobby. The same can be said for anyone regardless if the subject is car mechanics or watch making. The lack of subject education is where the problem resides. To be even more clear for the people who know little about guns. All this attention about “Assault Rifles” sells great media air time and succeeds at elevating emotions, but as it’s been already explained by Poster “Retired Soldier” the AR-15 fires one round for one trigger pull. Keeping that in mind, the majority of hand guns operate the same, one round for one trigger pull. It becomes senseless to argue back and forth and target the AR-15. A common semi-automatic hand gun reloads the next round from the magazine just like the AR. Revolver pistols also fire one round for each trigger pull but the difference is the revolver uses a rotating cylinder to employ the next round. In all these examples, none are full-automatic nor Military Assault Weapons. Also there has been a lot of exploited opinion about magazine capacity. Most average semi-automatic hand guns have a magazine capacity between 7 & 13 rounds. However it really makes little difference, when a push of a button drops the empty magazine and the operator immediately slaps in a fresh one. The whole process takes less than 20 seconds and can be repeated over and over until you run of magazines. So you see all the debate about the big bad AR-15 “Assault Rifle” is arguing over common function pertaining to hand guns as well; one not being any worse than the other. Oh and the Revolver? “Speed Clips” are the modern way of rapid reloading. No more one at a time, you reload all at once, be it 5 or 6 rounds. The carnage that happened in CT would have been just as horrific if the mentally deranged killer had brought a single Glock with 15 loaded magazines in his coat pockets.
    So let us not get so caught up in all the hype about so called assault guns because it side rails where the public and lawmakers need to be. Everyone has to agree on one thing, there is something mentally wrong with a human being capable of murder and mass murder. We have to stop passing the blame on McDonald’s “burgers” as the cause why our child is obese. As parents we have to be accountable for the actions of our children, teens and young adults, especially when dysfunction is recognizable. It’s people killing people, regardless of the method they choose. Stop the hysteria for a moment about guns. A disturbed individual intent on killing large numbers of people has many options rather than using a gun to get the job done; a simple match and gasoline; how about common household chemicals you can read about on the internet to make a bomb. Methods like that bare less risk of personal injury, spare them of the gore and better chance of getting away. A demented person determined to cause mass killing certainly doesn’t need a gun.
    While we spin our wheels, waste tax payers money on laws which are not even band-aid fixes and can’t be enforced, we once again focus our attention on the instrument of the destruction rather than the early detection and treatment of mental illness. What do we do with people capable of harming and killing innocent people? It’s not a matter of how they are going to do it or what they may use. It a matter of identifying them and doing whatever it takes to keep them from abnormal behavior.
    By the way the highest number of school children killed in a school was in the early 1900’s and the device was a bomb. Fight your political battles where it applies, but this is a human behavior issue. Identify and control this and we’ll all be much safer.

       4 likes

    • Keith Schmitz

      You and your ilk attack Lisa for insulting your fetish and calling the semi autos at Dick\’s (did I write it right?) \”machine guns.\”

      Everyone however is subject to inaccuracies from time to time. In your case, referring to that incident of the attack on the school in Michigan in the 1920s as a \”bomb.\” In fact there were three explosions.

      It was dynamite — http://tinyurl.com/bwsvb99 — not a \”bomb.\” Should we call you stupid?

      The reason why I bring that up is not to make fun of you George, but to point out when did you last walk into a Walmart and buy 500 lbs of dynamite like that guy in Michigan did, or buy it on line?

      While we are on the subject, after Timothy McVeigh blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City using a truck full of chemicals, no one can buy that quantity of chemicals any more without scrutiny.

      The same should be true regarding large quantities of bullets as the guy who did the shooting in Aurora did this summer.

      And while we are on the subject of scrutiny regarding mental health, with the level of obsession by many of the gun lovers on this comments section, maybe some psychiatric intervention is in order.

      Call it what you want. These weapons deliver death and they have no place in civilized society. I hate when right wingers say this sort of thing all the time, but in this case if you think assault style weapons are appropriate, move to Zaire or Somalia and commune with the 14 year olds who wield these things.

      At any rate, get a grip.

         0 likes

  • George/Keoki

    Even had the mother done the right thing and secure her guns, I\’m sure he would have found another way. How about the driver\’s licence she helped him get? If he would have picked the right time I\’m sure he could have ran over as many with his car. Ever been a victom of road rage? Almost every day for me. We live in a socity where there are no telling what someone is going to do.

       3 likes

    • Keith Schmitz

      \” If he would have picked the right time I’m sure he could have ran over as many with his car.\”

      Read what you wrote. That\’s idiotic and disrespectful to the people who died. You should be ashamed of yourself.

         0 likes

  • George/Keoki

    Keith maybe you forgot by the time you finished reading the last sentence, but I wasn\’t attacking Lisa, I was being understanding. Comprehension may be a weak point for you. On the other hand you kind of made my day because there hasn’t been much to smile about in the week following this tragedy. I actually cracked a smile having read your response to my input. You obviously missed the entire point I was making, and as I attempted to point out the focus of your thinking went right to details about quantities of explosives and the difference between a bomb versus explosives. Who cares! He blew the place up! It’s not the bombs fault or should I have said the fault of explosives? You simply can’t see the forest through the trees can you Keith? How about wrapping your pea brain around this. What is wrong mentally with someone who has the capacity to do such a thing? If you can solve that you will help contribute to the remedy. Because the point you are missing is that it doesn’t matter what the hell he used to do the killing, it’s the person doing IT!
    Now if you have a personal issue with guns in general, that’s fine; you have the right in this country anyway, to your opinion and you can thank the Constitution for that. And no thank you, I will stay in this birth country of mine because I believe in upholding the Constitution of our Forefathers. Perhaps it is a choice you better consider.
    The reason you made me smile after reading your bla-bla crap, is that I’ve always wondered where my wife came up with the term stupid Liberal Democrats. Now I know. You see I have always voted Democrat and she is a conservative Republican. Needless to say we don’t always agree on political matters, but the Constitution and in particular the 2nd Amendment we do. By the way she has a concealed weapon permit and takes it to church assuring the best chances of providing our two adorable little girls a chance of surviving an attack from some nut case like the guy in CT. You see this isn’t the days of Leave It to Beaver any more Keith. People don’t leave their cars unlocked or the doors of their house unlocked. And bad guys don’t just break into your home when you’re away. No they do what has become way to common, something called Home Invasion. Yep, they want YOU home so they can manipulate you into helping them get what they want, than kill you and your family. Why are people arming themselves? Do I dare say more? If you are in denial buddy, I pity you the day you dash to your door bell expecting a girl scout selling cookies and it’s NOT!
    For the men and women who have given their lives, or families who have lost their children in war protecting our Constitution, you tell them you got a bitch with it. In the mean time I propose that you also hang a sign on your front door signifying your home is a Gun Free Zone!
    It’s partly because of granola liberal jack-asses like you that that school and most around the country are sitting ducks to some mentally insane person hell bent on destruction and killing with no regard as to the choice of weapon or device.
    Oh and by the way check out the latest happening today in Australia, where a raged man using his car to smash another into the guard rail repeatedly; and in the process managed to get out and bash in the guy’s windshield, fortunately the victim managed to get away before this mental case dragged him through it. Had that been you and you wife and children, it would have been a terrible site for them to watch you get your ass kicked and possibly killed in cold blood. As for the CT tragedy, we could only have wished that the principal would have got a shot off at the bastard and taken him out before getting to the children. Worry about the minds of social paths and what makes them tick. Ask what can we do to resolve the problem with mentally sick people and stop the B/S about one gun verses another; its horse shit, save it! This enraged mental bastard would have done as much killing with a standard .22 pistol w/25 round magazine, or even less. I\’m done with YOU!

       4 likes

    • Keith Schmitz

      Wow, get a grip George. Sorry you think I\’m stand between you and thing you love.

      I\’ll come back to your ignorant rant when I have more time.

         0 likes

    • Keith Schmitz

      No I get your point. First of all you are talking down to Lisa. And from what I have read, you have reason to do that.

      Second, what it boils down that like a lot of other gun fetishers, you\’ll come up with a lot of idiotic reasons why we have to let a tidal wave of guns flow out into our society.

      Someone from Germany pointed out why we have the second amendment, because the country was at that time surrounded by a variety of threats — the British, Indians, etc., and it made every sense to make sure that everyone is armed. Who do we now at our border? Canadians and on the other side Mexicans who, thanks to our idiotic gun and drug policies are armed to the teeth.

      The only threat we face is people like you advocate unlimited access to guns, and so every gang banger and person with a mental problem can get their hands on military style weapons. Thanks to you and other\’s likely who need a gun as an emotional crutch.

      But I doubt if the history part would have an effect on you. Because of your slavish support for the corporate oligarchy, if you were around in 1775 you\’d be happily calling yourself a tory.

      Fast forward to the 1790s, our founding fathers would be rounding up yahoos like you because you don\’t want to pay your taxes and want to threaten armed insurrection. That\’s they replaced the weak Articles of Confederation with the Constitution, which of course later the souther yahoos rebelled against.

      As for the 2nd amendment, Cheif Justice Berger referred to it \”as the greatest fraud ever perpetrated.\”

      You are being used pal. Best not to waste your time on a reply.

         0 likes

  • George,

    Thanks for bringing up Australia. They enacted strict gun laws there after a horrific 1996 massacre and haven\’t had a similar incident since.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html

    Stay witty George. It really suits you.

       0 likes

    • George/Keoki

      Well Steve the very first site I opened concerning Australia after the gun ban? \”between 2002 & 2003 85% of gun violance were from unregistered guns.\”
      I\’m not surprised, are you? Law abiding citizens are not the problem. Bad guys will forever have guns one way or the other.
      Also interresting it said that Australia prior to the gun ban had decades of low gun violence. So on one hand little has changed except now the bad guys with guns out number the good guys with no guns.
      Sure sounds like it worked to me. Lol

         3 likes

Blogging Blue’s “14 in ’14”

Goal Thermometer

Follow us on Twitter