Archived Story

Who needs guns that spray rounds?

Published 10:27am Monday, December 31, 2012

What will it take for the NRA and all gun-loving Americans to finally agree that the ordinary citizen does not need a semi-automatic rifle? These weapons are for killing people, they’re not for hunting.

How many more of our children have to die before we wake up and take these guns off the market? I don’t like guns and won’t pretend to for this discussion. Everytime someone talks about taking semiautomatic weapons off the market, people run to the gun stores to buy a gun. No one is talking about stopping gun sales; we just want the automatic weapons off the market and out of the hands of everyone but military or law enforcement.

When you think about the damage that was done to these children in Connecticut with an AR-15 as compared to a handgun, it ought to make you sick. The children and adults didn’t have a chance with someone spraying bullets at them. It’s time we start thinking about our children, our neighbors and our own safety before we start realizing we don’t need these semiautomatic or automatic weapons.

Let’s get rid of these particular weapons and stop pretending someone is trying to take away your rights to own a gun. No one is trying to take away your rights, we just want to make our lives a little safer by saying no to these type of weapons. What’s wrong with that?


Kathy Diaz

Albert Lea

  • Angry1

    Kathy saul alinsky would be proud…..but we have freedoms and even if I don’t agree on the content I support being able to exercise your rights but the constitution and the bill of rights is not an a la carte menu where you pick and choose what you care to observe and what you do not.

    The most particularly egregious either intentional or not

    “stop pretending someone is trying to take away your rights to own a gun. No one is trying to take away your rights, we just want to make our lives a little safer by saying no to these type of weapons.


    Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said only the federal government should have “high-capacity” gun magazines and that the “state ought to have a monopoly on legitimate violence.”

    The lawmaker told that he not only supports prohibiting the future sale of 10-round gun magazines, but he would like to confiscate high-capacity clips already legally possessed by American citizens.

    Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) characterized the slayings as “a very fortuitous event for those of us determined to disarm the general public. The fact that so many of the victims were young children should go a long way toward softening up the opposition of the right wing gun nuts who have blocked constructive measures against this much needed action.”

    It’s long past the time that we recognize that the ancient rationale for private gun ownership is no longer relevant,” the Representative said. “People don’t need to personally hunt for food. There are no Indians on the rampage in our towns. The skills our ancestors had with firearms have atrophied in our modern world.”

    “America would be a much safer place if only government personnel were allowed to carry guns,” McCarthy maintained. “As history has shown in other countries, concentrating the firepower in the hands of well trained police and military personnel is more conducive to securing a peaceful environment for everyone to enjoy.

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein stated in Feb. 5, 1995: “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ’em all in,’ I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.”

    Kathy…….Their words not mine!!!!!!!!!

    I guess these people have a utopian plan for us all never mind about inconvenient facts chicago has strict gun laws it passed 500 murders or the 1994 AWB was a failure.

    Never mind the people calling for banning and registration and registration ALWAYS leads to CONFISCATION history teaches us that, these are the very same people have government provided security with the very same rifles, pistols and shotguns they seek to take from the american people.

    Kathy…….Where were you when Operation Fast and Furious remember that when the government illegally ran guns and ammo the same kind they want to ban the death toll is higher but where is the outcry over this who holds the government accountable?

    It seems to me that there is an certain arrogance in washington they pass laws but are not subject to the law.

    Even Pravda YES PRAVDA get’s it here is an excerpt

    While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

    For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

    The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

    No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

    So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

    Stanislav Mishin

    The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. — Thomas Jefferson

    A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
    ~George Washington

  • nzeroesc

    Kathy I should hope that before you become so against a cause, you would take the time to truly understand what it is that you are against instead of blindly repeating terms you have heard in the media the past couple of weeks.

    You ask who needs guns that spray rounds, and mention both semi-automatic and automatic weapons in the same sentence.

    Nearly every gun sold, and manufactured in the last 100 years is of the semi-automatic type. They only fire one round each time you pull the trigger. This includes the AR-15 rifle that was used in Connecticut.

    “Assault” rifles that the media is vilifying incorrectly, or rather where you refer to automatic weapons, have been banned by the FOPA since 1986. No one can sell, transfer, or purchase any automatic weapon made since 1986.

    You do not have to like guns, or the thought of them, but please take the time to correctly understand the real issues at hand. Nearly any handgun on the market today can fire rounds just as fast as an AR-15, and the discussion to limit the capacity of ammunition in weapons has also been shown to have no significant impact to anyone other than the costs to those that enjoy the sport.

  • Angry1

    Dated 12/26/2012

    State Rep. Dan Muhlbauer, D-Manilla, says Iowa lawmakers should ban semi-automatic guns and “start taking them” from owners who refuse to surrender any illegal firearms through a buy-back program.

    In an interview, a fiery Muhlbauer, the chairman of the Iowa House Democratic Rural Caucus with a reputation for often voting with Republicans, said it is time to act with “radical changes” on gun laws and other issues to protect schoolchildren from shooting sprees like the one in Newtown, Conn.

    “We cannot have big guns out here as far as the big guns that are out here, the semi-automatics and all of them,” Muhlbauer said. “Those are not hunting weapons.

    He added, “We should ban those in Iowa.”

    Muhlbauer, who did not list the specific weapons he wants outlawed in the interview, said he would like to see the ban implemented in a retroactive fashion.

    “Even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them,” Muhlbauer said. “Because if they’re out there, they’re just going to get circulated around to the wrong people. Those guns should not be in the public’s hands. There are just too many guns.”

    If such a ban were implemented, Muhlbauer suggested a voluntary buy-back plan. But he would go further if needed.

    “If we find them on the street, there’s going to have to be some sort of penalty for them,” Muhlbauer said.

    Templeton Mayor Ken Behrens, a Republican, said Muhlbauer’s proposal smacks of an overreach that is out of touch with much of rural Iowa.

    “I would hate to see a law where it would be mandated that somebody start taking guns,” Behrens said. “I don’t think that would go over well.”

    Muhlbauer said the state also should eye more careful screening of who enters schools, government buildings and other facilities. He also suggested consideration of steel doors to prevent entry to classrooms by gunmen. Metal detectors or armed guards at schools may be legitimate options as well, he said.

    “We have not done enough in the past, and this is running away from us,” Muhlbauer said. “We can’t have this anymore.”

    Muhlbauer, a cattleman and farmer, owns three guns — a .410 shotgun, a .22 rifle and a .22 pistol.

    He does some pheasant hunting and skeet shooting with the guns.

    Muhlbauer said flatly that he’s not frightened politically by the National Rifle Association or the Iowa Gun Owners.

    “As you know, the last couple of years I’ve been fighting against them,” Muhlbauer said. “I have told them time and time again, ‘You guys are wanting the gun laws so loose that that pendulum is going to swing back and it’s going to bite you.’ And that’s just what we don’t want to see happen now. We want to put in stricter rules with common sense. I don’t want to have the gun laws slung back so far that we start taking guns away and start limiting them to where people cannot enjoy guns, those that want to have it. And that’s what I’m afraid, if we keep having these incidents happen, is what’s going to happen.”

    Muhlbauer said promoting tough gun laws and protecting children in schools are important enough to lose an election advocating.

    “We’re talking people’s lives,” Muhlbauer said. “You want to start losing children’s lives and adult lives over a gun issue because the NRA thinks we’re stepping on somebody’s toes?”

    He said the response to the school shootings has to amount to more than legislative tinkering.

    “With all these shootings going, we have to start making radical changes and radical choices from what we’ve done in the past,” Muhlbauer said.

    In coming months, Muhlbauer said, he will work to unite rural and urban legislators on efforts to prevent school shooting sprees and other violence.

    Mental health must be up to date and not full of loopholes, he said. Muhlbauer also identified violent video games as a concern.

    “We’ve got these video games out here for these little kids,” he said. “Maybe it’s time we start pulling them away. They’re playing some really nasty games on there that are shoot-’em-up. Evidently our culture is pointing toward this.”

    Muhlbauer said he doesn’t know how the Legislature would go about prohibiting children from playing video games he finds objectionable.

    “As parents, they’re going to have to start watching what their kids are doing more closely,” he said.

  • Gus

    Who…….Everyone that wants one…