Hey @Big_Trouble, I'm not a huge gun advocate even though I like rifle shooting as a sport. However you fail to mention that the senior citizen (former Marine) who disarmed the assailant actually had a CCW permit and was packing that day. His training told him that he would be viewed as a second shooter if he produced his weapon. So he didn't. That's what the armed society is supposed to offer - the option to use, or not use, your weapon in self defense.

Actually the man who tackled the shooter was unarmed. Another ,younger, armed man nearly shot the wrong guy, until the crowd shouted that he was pointing the gun at the older gentleman who disarmed the shooter. If he didn't listen to the crowd, he would have compounded the tragedy and shot an innocent man who was the REAL hero.

And since gun laws will only affect legal transactions, how do you propose to keep criminals from buying guns on the black market as they always have, or remove the guns that they already possess? There's no paper trail to follow.

Big trouble,

The sad truth is that bad things happen to good people regardless of whether or not a gun is introduced to the mix. There are also a large number of mentally ill and broken people that share the same space we do. You are looking for answers and a quick fix to a problem that has been around for decades. Until we find a way to help those that can not or will not help themselves with their illness or warped idea's or views it will continue. In a nut shell; Welcome to the human race.

As to Gabby Giffords continued recovery, keep up the fight. You are truly an inspiration to us all.

Haha DonDon, what a tool!

The bad guys will always get the guns. The idea of allowing citizens to carry a gun is to somewhat improve the odds of the bad guys always winning. Even if I was carrying a gun, it would take a few minutes to ascertain what exactly was going on at such an event. Plus once a citizen takes out a gun they can become the target as well. It just isn't that simple.

Big Trouble: study after study has shown conclusively that states with less restrictive carry laws have reduced violent crimes. These are independent studies, not NRA statistics. If you want to advocate for stricter gun laws shouldn't you educate yourself about the facts instead of resorting to name-calling and goofy generalizations?

Big Trouble, you are right. You are Correct Right, not
Right Right. The Right Righters are big time Wrong.

Big Trouble, you are right. You are Correct Right, not
Right Right. The Right Righters are big time Wrong.

Off-topic

With all due respect: this visciousness was not prevented by the police either. Nonetheless, I wouldn't ban them either.

The problem was there just weren't enough people carrying guns. If everybody in that gathering had been carrying just think of the response; I can just picture 20, 30, no 40 people pulling their guns out and firing... would that have been a sight to warm the heart of the NRA.

Cradle to grave...before a baby leaves the hospital it gets a gun and you get buried with a few of the guns in the arsenal you purchased over your lifetime. God bless America!!

And if there had been only one or two at the most firing and hitting the target in a timely manner so as to save lives, would you have objected, Nebraska001? Your humorous scenario is unrealistic.

If hand gun ownership ever starts to become as popular as automobile ownership did around the turn of the 20th century, you can bet there will be mandatory training for owners in the proper and safe use of them. Check the Wikipedia article on "Gun Politics in Switzerland".

Here's the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_gun_laws

Such a ridiculous discussion. Talk about banning guns until you are blue in the face.

Its NOT going to happen. Period, end of discussion.

And here is the great epiphany - Guns are NOT going to go away.

AND - people are going to keep killing people too.

You cant stop it, no matter how much you talk about it.

Just accept it.

Big Trouble, why not question the congresswoman's security services?

Surely they should have protected her by using metal detectors on her patrons before they approach her.

So what happen here, why was she unprotected when they knew very well that a member of congress would have a risk of being attack especially in these times?

The issue is not in the guns, it is about understanding and being in touch with the volatile situation of our society's woes.

And one other thing Big Trouble, when you are a member of congress, you are government property.

I think some people were not doing their job.

I would be happy to be gun-free like England, but only if the cops can't carry them either. Armed cops and unarmed citizens is a scary combination.

Guns are banned in Mexico. That's working out really well, isn't it?

We can fight the "war on guns" just as we fight the "war on drugs" without success, with the same results, inpart: we will create a whole bunch of criminals almost overnight, normal hard working, tax paying criminals. A law enforcement dream: more criminals, more job security. (Just another take but true-look at the history of the controlled substance act.)

Back to the topic of the article-Gabby is doing well, hooray, hooray. It will be wonderful to know she made the launch.

I was going to post the same as flbikerchick. Lets see, guns are banned in Mexico. Ciudad Mexico, 2010: 3000 People or one out of ever 433 people in that city were killed by guns. Do you find any city in USA with that many people killed by guns?

flbikerchick, Bad example. You do know how the mexican drug gangs get weapons right?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/12/AR2010121202663.html

In Ohio, people can obtain a right to carry, but, most public places and businesses are gun-free zones. So the guns get left in cars, or at home.

Easy prey for criminals who ignore the gun free zone laws.

Chill: Arizona unarguably has one of the least if not the least restrictive gun laws in the U.S., and is ranked #4 in violent crime. Doesn't fit the restrictive gun laws = less violent crime theory.

If the noise is too much, Congresswoman Giffords is more than welcome at our home in St. Augustine where she can witness the launch in magnificent silence from our front porch. She is always welcome. We wish them both our very best.

It is great to hear that Gabrielle's recovery is going so well. It is also good to see them setting intermediate goals for her recovery, and attending the launch is a great one to shoot for. As someone who has gone through rehab for a major injury (could not really get around at all for 6-8 weeks and could not walk without assistance for 4 1/2 months) I can tell you that setting intermediate goals is extremely important to the recovery process. Without these intermediate goals it is very easy to get frustrated and lose the drive you need to recover completely. I hope that Gabrielle's recovery continues to proceed at a quick pace and that she eventually recovers fully from her injuries. I look forward to seeing her on TV at the launch.

Always about the hubby and his greatness. I imagine it puts more stress on her, after such a horrific injury and tragedy, to see her husband blast off into space not certain if he returns- one more thing to swallow.

Strange that the public is banned from hearing any news about her and that is all about Kelly. Doesn't want the public to hear too much. Never have I seen such a thing when a public official has been injured. A normal situation is to do at least occasional updates. But this is all about the great astronaut who wants the limelight now.

He is a disgrace. Most of the posts I read are not in favor of him doing this. He should not even burden her with his stuff.

Not about you Kelly.

The press decides who they want to cover. Not Kelly or Giffords. And the story is about her, try reading it before making an ass of your self.

Then don't read these stories. The rest of us look for good news, as is this story.

I read the artcle about him falling off a bike. Did you? They put that out as if he was hurt, But he wasn't, and they actually avoided saying that he was injured at all. (equivocational reporting) No ambulance was called. At worst he may have skuffed his knee. That, like this, is Enquirer stuff not "news" for MSNBC

That who complains is the same who clicked on to read and comment. It's like watching a TV program - you don't like it - don't watch. STFU

Hey Gil...change the channel...you have a choice.

Hey Gil....screw you. Go back to clipping letters out of The Enquirer to make your next ransom letter.

LOVE you guys

Sorry- I'm with Gil on this one. A big *yawn* for the whole Gifford saga. Oh yeah, let's don't forget about the 6 people who were killed- the media certainly did.

Also, love how the medical pros are working to figure out how much assistance she might need and how much noise she could handle. Hmmm probably cost a couple million or so to sort that out. Got a better idea- how about watch the liftoff on T.V. and save us the drama... and expense!

on tv!!! what a fanatastic idea. it would save a couple of buck's wouldn't it.

absolutelyright wrote:

Also, love how the medical pros are working to figure out how much assistance she might need and how much noise she could handle. Hmmm probably cost a couple million or so to sort that out. Got a better idea- how about watch the liftoff on T.V. and save us the drama... and expense!

It would be good if you actually knew what you were talking about. Four years ago my son suffered a traumatic brain injury. Two months later while he was in the rehab hospital, a local band came to entertain the patients in the courtyard for Cinco de Mayo. He didn't last two minutes due to his sensitivity to the noise. Six months later we tried to go see a movie and had to leave because it was also too loud. Thankfully, noises no longer bother him but it took time. The brain is an amazing thing but lets not forget it controls everything else that goes on with our bodies. Hypersensitivity to sound, light, and stimulation in general is a common side effect of a TBI that may or may not subside with time.

I don't know where you live, but here in Arizona NO ONE has forgotten about those killed in this terrible tragedy, where it happened, when it happened, or who was responsible.

So Please keep your insensitive and uninformed comments to yourself--this is a very difficult time for Gabby, her family and friends, as well as many here and across the country whom she served as a well-liked and respected representative.

'Gabby'? You know this woman well enough to call her 'Gabby'? (rolling eyes). I sympathize with your son's plight and with '"Gabby's'" too- but the whole point is a). we're sick of the endless barrage of media coverage about it and b). it's ridiculous the amount of money & resources that are going to be spent just so she can watch her husband liftoff from cape fricken canaveral. It's all about media aggrandizement and the resulting made-for-tv movies, books, articles etc. that the bloodsuckers aim to profit off of. Like gag me with a spoon already!

absolutelyright - We here in Tucson have not forgotten the other victims. And 'Gabby' is her nickname, everybody calls her that.

There's absolutely no one forcing you to read or comment on these stories. If there is, you should call the police

Nobody forces me to do anything. But in this case, with the constant barrage of stories about them it becomes unavoidable & irritating, especially when they imply the amount of dollars spent for her health care as opposed to the victims who received a used bandaid and got kicked out of treatment long before they should have.

Kevin, thanks for understanding the real point of the article.

Mentally ill people who do not seek treatment are the issue.

mentally ill people do not seek treatment because they don't know they have an illness to begin with. Or, their illness prevents them from having the structured mindset to seek out treatment. Often, it is up to loved ones or via some state sanctioned means that they do get the help they need. In the case of the fruitcake that shot all these people, nobody acknowledged his illness nor took steps to get him help... and now we have the results.

The incarcerated get full medical benefits.

To kill 6 people and injure 13 in 10 seconds you need a gun

Response to voxpopuleye:

It is all about what Kelly wants not about being there for HER while she recovers. She hasn't communicated a thing and that is what Kelly wants to keep the public in the dark about. That is why there are no updates. If I were her mother, I would be doing plenty of updates for the people who care about her.

He wants to be the superstar. Just check out the photo taken of him with his crew. He is slouched in the chair like the big "alpha male" as someone put it.

He should be focused on some goal she can do with him. Not watching him blast off on a risky mission. Just what this poor woman needs. Something more to worry about. It should not be about watching him do his thing.

This gets more disturbing and I am sick of hearing about what he wants.

Kim, the need for an assault rifle will never be justify, only by one group of people that it would.

You better hope that day never come, it may be the wrong people, a tyranny.

Ask the citizens of Mexico...

Forgive me lord but if I read guns dont kill people one more time.......That nutcase didnt beat the congresswoman with a baseball bat CWP! Oh oh, here comes the major league players union...Bats dont kill people, people kill people. Guns dont kill people is very old, very stale and very wrong. Come up with something else.

reply to khjstrong:

"husband needs to think about her needs and cut the "chin up military philosophy." this is not a time for that. maybe he could use some counseling if he is not already getting it."

Right on could not have said it better. He is delusional and wants his wife back in 100 % condition with her being herself. This injury may well turn her into a very different person with different wants and needs. Wake up Kelly!

Go to therapy, you need it!

Margie, you have no idea what whe wants. She is lucid enough to communicate with him. It might be her, urging him to go through with it. Please get some therapy yourself, maybe you can learn to stop judgeing people you know absolutely nothing about.

kjhstrong, the article states she will only go if she can handle it. It's a goal, not a certainty. I think it's a reasonable guess, she supports him on this.

Besides, outside of her doctors, no one has have any right to say what she or her husband, can or can't do.

Wow, Margie..judgmental much?

And so full of sunshine and positive vibes for this couple who are going through such a horrible time.

And you are also feel qualified to tell other people when they should seek therapy.

Just amazing.

khjstrong,

Well, if you are on the fence about her going to the launch they'll just have to consult with you closer to the time and see how you feel about it.

Why don't you give it some more thought, maybe sleep on it and then let them know