HuffPost: How Many Guns Do We Need?

How many guns do you need?

Robert J. Benz, a contributor for “The Huffington Post,” is talking to “concerned citizens” about the “outrageous levels of gun violence” in the U.S.

In his latest post, Benz asked a person named “Gabi” the following question, “In 2008, the year Obama won the presidency, there were 12.7 million background checks. In his last full year as president, 2016, there were 27.5 million. How many guns do we need? And, what is this really about?”

Gabi, who is clearly a lackey for a gun control organization, responded, in part, by saying, “Robert, thank you for focusing on this profoundly vexing American issue…To answer your question, I think the increase in gun sales is really about greed disguised in the Second Amendment arguments that all guns and the right to buy guns will be taken away…”

Robert summed it up as, “Ok, so, profits at the expense of lives. This is a familiar theme.”

It’s hard for me to unpack all the idiocy in this exchange, but I’ll try. Let me start with the notion that fear buying was unfounded during the Obama years. This is a common refrain amongst anti-gunners. No one wants to take your guns!

Really? Who the heck are they kidding? Anytime you have lawmakers like Chuck Schumer or Dianne Feinstein shouting from the rooftops that we need to “dry up the supply” of widely popular and commonly owned firearms, you have to take the threat seriously. Not to mention the words that were coming out of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

“The president and I agree with you,” wrote Joe Biden, Obama’s #2, in response to a 2016 White House Petition asking for a ban on black rifles. “Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines should be banned from civilian ownership.”

How is that statement not a direct assault on my right to purchase an AR-15? I don’t think “double barrel” Joe could’ve been any more direct.

The boom in gun sales wasn’t a product of greedy gun manufacturers pushing products on hapless consumers or fiery rhetoric from the National Rifle Association, rather it was from legislation being pushed at both the state and federal level that sought to greatly restrict 2A rights. One needs to look no further than Feinstein’s 2013 “Assault Weapons” ban or the SAFE Act in New York, for examples.

The threat was real when Barry was at the helm. So demand for firearms skyrocketed. And what the public was saying to gun-grabbers was, in essence, “I’ll stop buying guns when you stop trying to take em.”

But these chuckleheads at Huffpo don’t get that. They don’t see a reason why anyone would need a gun, so they have real trouble understanding why so many people were rushing out to buy them when our elected officials were fighting tooth and nail to enact another gun ban. For them, personal safety is the job of government, not the individual. Buy a gun, for what? Why? The government will keep me safe.

As for that point about “profits at the expense of lives,” that’s nonsense. There are more guns in America than at any time in our nation’s history and gun crime is down — not up. The notion that selling more guns to responsible citizens increases gun violence is patently false. My guns have never walked out of the safe and shot someone, have yours?

Lastly, on the question of how many guns do we need? The answer is simple. As many as we want.

Gun ownership is an enshrined in our Constitution. We have the freedom to purchase as many firearms as we deem fit. Whether that’s two or two hundred, the choice is yours, not Feinstein’s, Schumer’s, Obama’s, or the chuckleheads’ at HuffPost.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 78 comments… add one }
  • timothyf7 May 11, 2019, 8:35 pm

    How many guns do we need?

    Hard question! The answer would be “How many guns would it take to stop a tyrannical, media-assisted, Government take-over?” If Huff and Puff could give me that answer, I could answer theirs!

  • Mike Watkins September 18, 2017, 10:45 pm

    How about we start talking about common sense protest control? or common sense free speech control?
    I’m definitely in favor of that, provided we on the right get to set the rules for the left’s protest and free speech. Fair is fair–they definitely think they have the right to set the rules for our gun use.

    And that brings to mind the idea that persons with no interest in shooting sports think they have the right to tell us what constitutes correct “sporting use” of firearms. As in, certain firearms are banned from importation because they have “no sporting use.”

    Haha! So do I, who know absolutely nothing about tennis and have no interest in tennis, get to be the one who sets rules for tennis?

    Liberalism is without a doubt a mental illness.

  • Greg September 17, 2017, 11:16 am

    This comment has been shared before which I believe makes a whole lot of sense, why do politicians body guards carry firearms and representative Feinstein needs to carry a conceal handgun herself?
    How many guns does she need? The very people who want to either take away or limit our rights of 2A.
    Take the weapons away from osamabama’s secret service people protecting him, there’s one too many I say.

  • Glenn61 September 17, 2017, 5:34 am

    For the filthy Socialist with Communist leanings at the Huffington Post….It really doesn’t matter if a law-abiding individual owns 10, 20, 40 or 50 guns.
    Or if he or she just has a 38 snubby for personal protection ,, they want the government to take them all away.
    If the Leftist authoritarians had their way, we would need a special license to own a pellet gun and the machete in the tool shed would need a serial number. Swords would be banned along with anything tactical, just like in jolly old England, where the Muslims are taking over the country now.

  • Steve Harmon September 16, 2017, 6:40 pm

    NEED???? So far, in my 64 years, thank God I haven’t “NEED”ed any. each of My 15 guns was legally purchased because I wanted each and every one for reasons only known by me. None has ever killed anyone, must be defective, right libs?

  • Pete Dee September 16, 2017, 12:24 pm

    How many guns do we need?
    As long as our government controls our military, as long as our government continues to take guns from LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, and allowing criminals to build their arsenals of “undocumented” guns, we need all we can get our hands on and then some.
    If huffpoo wasn’t such a bunch of ignorant puzzies they’d be able to figure that out.

  • Andrew N. September 15, 2017, 11:41 pm

    I saw a shirt the other day that addressed this issue. It read something like: “There are over 300 million legally guns and over 50 billion rounds of ammunition legally owned by Americans. If this was really a problem, you would definitely know about it.” So true. If we all came out shooting, there isn’t enough space online or in newspapers to describe the carnage.

  • Andrew N. September 15, 2017, 11:34 pm


  • Bob Rovak September 15, 2017, 9:51 pm

    I have been buying guns for close to 50 years now. It is a passion, a hobby. I work on them, i reload, i shoot. In all these years i have never shot anybody,or comitted a crime with them. There are still good people out there. Figure it out!

  • Art September 15, 2017, 9:44 pm

    At least 3 more.

  • Retrocon September 15, 2017, 8:50 pm

    I have a pat reply to these liberals that always works.

    Me: Do you believe that healthcare is a right?
    Lib: Yes, I do, everyone has a right to healthcare!
    Me: it’s not listed in the constitution, but I can buy into it being a right based on the ninth amendment
    Lib: thank you, and I thought you were a heartless conservative!
    Me: I’m not heartless. Tell me, does have a “right” to healthcare mean that the government should provide it if you cannot afford it? Or even if you can, like with “single payer.”
    Lib: yes, yes, absolutely! If you have a right to it, you must get it, even if you cannot afford it! Exactly.
    Me: So, healthcare is not called out in the constitution, but firearms are! I would appreciate my free, government provided firearms now, please.

  • DaveW September 15, 2017, 5:19 pm

    I totally agree with the comment “as many as I want (or can afford)”. One point I never see covered is that guns are tools which serve different uses:
    1. target –
    2. hunting – big game, fowl, varmints, etc
    3. competition – long range, speed, cowboy, etc
    4. self defense – home, away (concealed, open)
    5. job related

    • DaveW September 15, 2017, 5:22 pm

      6. collecting – western, militaria, pistols, rifles, etc

    • Frank September 15, 2017, 6:21 pm

      Or just as many as I like. I want to put a shout out to all minority veterans, law enforcement and gun toting liberals (and others) who are targeted in this forum. We all share the desire to own guns. I fully respect all legal contributors to our society. I am the first born to immigrants, but my parents applied for citizenry and did it legit. None of my relatives ran across a desert or swam to get here. I support legal immigration. Rock on and support freedom! It’s in jeopardy these days.

  • Dreadog September 15, 2017, 3:45 pm

    How many guns do I need ? As many Prada, Chanel, Gucci, Lubitan , Coach, Fendi, Etc as Gabi needs

  • BUMMERS September 15, 2017, 3:03 pm

    I am a gun-toting, avid 2nd. Ammendmant fan…. & a liberal leaning Independant. I moved from CA to OR in large part due to their rediculous gun regs (& yeah, there’s that no sales tax thing). I’m also astounded at some of the ignorance I read here. Have none of you bothered checkiong your ‘facts’?! So please stop the auto-bashing of everyone on the left side of the scale. The pendulum has swung our (gun nuts) way, but the hysteria I’m reading here needs to be balanced w/ reason. Question:over almost the last century, which POTUS has signed into law the most gun friendly legislation? Surprise-it’s O’Bama. Here’s an actual quote from “Nothing in Obama’s announced plan seeks to take away anyone’s gun. Nor would the plan prevent a law-abiding citizen from purchasing one.
    “I believe in the Second Amendment,” Obama said. “It’s there written on the paper. It guarantees a right to bear arms. No matter how many times people try to twist my words around — I taught constitutional law, I know a little about this. I get it.”
    The NRA has let us all down (except the gun sellers, of course) by insisting that even common sense legislation be fought tooth & nail. Almost everyone agrees on not letting the insane or criminal buy guns at a gun show, so why can they still? If we stop fighting regs like that, it makes us the more reasonable side & we get the centrists on our team.

    • Oaf September 15, 2017, 6:13 pm

      Keep on drinking that Liberal Kool Aid, Bummy old boy. Nah, Obama and the other Democrats never wanted to ban and/or take away our guns, it’s all just a plot from that nasty NRA in cahoots with the gun manufacturers to get us to buy more guns. And while I have your attention, I have some fine beachfront property in Arizona I’d love to sell you….. real cheap too!

      And it’s spelled ridiculous.

      • Danny Boy September 16, 2017, 12:03 pm

        it’s “FOOLAID”, Smells like grape soda, makes ya stupid.

    • Jerry Herndon September 15, 2017, 7:08 pm

      So Obama SIGNED a bunch of “gun friendly legislation”. Please tickle our memory and tell us all about it. The way I remember Obama was his call for gun control right after the Sandy Hook shooting and again after the Travon Martin shooting. Even Biden got in on the act with his “all you need is a sjotgun” BS. So maybe you need to check your “facts” before trying to sell that “common sense” legislation. The Supreme Court did more to restore gun owner rights during Obama’s reign – Obama did nothing for us except try to abridge our rights even more.

    • George Daley September 15, 2017, 7:18 pm

      I will simply say this: I love guns, and the feeling of freedom they give me. Obama may have passed some obsequious gun laws, but I’m sure our Supreme Court played a ‘small’ part? As far as the NRA’s need to fight ‘all’ exceptions to our 2nd Amendment, I say, “Go, NRA – don’t let any part of the ‘anti’s’ in the door of our house of Constitutional Rights.” Once you allow their little penis through the door, their big assholes will follow – and we know what that will bring with it? 2nd Amendment rocks!

    • Bill September 16, 2017, 10:57 am

      Sorry bummer, you are as big a fool as the rest of them and you will believe the same crap they will. Hell, he was still using the fake gunshow loophole. Ive never attended a gunshow and found a seller who would allow a purchase without a background check, have you? That alone should tell you who he is talking to and what he is up to.
      He uses words like common sense measures. Well who gets to devide what common sense is? Also, he is using lies to illustrate what common sense would be? Come on! Also he doesnt say that he doesnt want totake ceryain types of firearms off the table. Lie. Joe has him convinced all anyone needs is a double barrel shotyy, and , you dont even have to shoot the criminal with it. All you need to do is fire into the air and all the criminals will run away, promise.
      He says he doesnt want to take anyones guns. Lie. By effectively creating conditions that render that gun useless, he has taken it away from you. Sure, we could have cap and ball or a single shot shotguns and crap like that, see, he didnt take our guns, just some of them but I guess that would be great with you?
      Youre blind man, and a fool yo boot. You dont deserve to have a gun.

    • Pete Dee September 16, 2017, 12:32 pm

      Bum, ob did the same thing to guns that he did to taxes.
      He promised “your income taxes won’t go up one thin dime,” then he proceeded to increase corporate and business taxes thru the roof. The cost of everything went up. His tax increase was an indirect tax, not a direct tax on income, but a tax on EVERYTHING we spend our income on.
      He did the same with guns. Enacted legislation that banned this and that type of ammo, banned importation of guns from this and that country, raised licensing fees for FFL licenses, enacted more and costlier rules and regulations on gun dealers and FFL licensed businesses, made ammo harder to get and more costly, and dozens of other blockages and barricades to shooting sports, hunting, etc.
      ALL of that was passed on to gun owners!
      A back door increase in costs to the guy at the bottom IS in fact a tax increase!

    • Steve Harmon September 16, 2017, 6:50 pm

      I LOVE it when “gun grabbers” say, “common sense gun control”. Please tell me how ANY “common sense gun control” will not infringe on the 2A. Tell me where, in the 2A, it says anyone should lose their right to own a gun. Yes, even a convicted murderer.

  • Russ H. September 15, 2017, 2:55 pm

    HuffPo? Even the left snickers at their \”news.\” HuffPo is about as far left as you can get. Maybe it\’s Rolling Stone. As for this article, they clearly were seeking nothing more than anti-gun affirmations, not a realistic view of gun ownership. Nothing but silly propaganda.

  • BRASS September 15, 2017, 1:38 pm

    In order to answer that question, the questioner needs to have a minimum level of both armed & personal defense training in addition to a well developed self defense plan.
    At my stage of life, a fully developed plan requires a minimum of one firearm per room in the house plus those needed for concealed carry and other specific tasks.
    One can’t have too many guns, too much ammo or too much training; only too little money and not enough time.

  • J. S. deRagman September 15, 2017, 1:09 pm

    As many as the Chairperson of my House Ways and Means Committee will tolerate me buying…she’s been the Chair for 47 years and she and I are too old to change.

  • RetiredExtremelyDangerous September 15, 2017, 12:15 pm

    “How Many Guns Do We/I Need? As many as I want and can afford!
    My weapons, assure me, that the tyrants that wish to take my weapons from me will pay a price that will be more costly to them than it is to me! Should I fall, in my endeavor while protecting my family, my friends or myself. Like the teeth of Sharks, there will always be another to back me up and take my place to defend the lives, the property, the freedoms and the Nation that I love and cherish so dearly. God Bless My Family! God Bless the 2nd Amendment! God Bless All Of America!

  • Dave Henn September 15, 2017, 12:02 pm

    As Hillary would say, What difference does it make? If I own 1 gun or 500 guns, I can only shoot one at a time.

    I buy different guns for different needs.. you don’t go squirrel hunting with a 300 WinMag and you can’t hit a 1000 yard target in a competition with a 22LR.
    In Ohio you can only use a straight cartridge for deer hunting so a Henry 44 Mag is appropriate
    That same 44 mag cartridge can be used in a pistol when I go to Alaska to protect against bear attacks
    For varmint hunting in Arizona, a 5.56 is good but not for wild boar hunting in Texas.
    In any case, I am not carrying 10 rifles and pistols, you take the right tool for the job.

    • Ed Decker September 15, 2017, 1:49 pm

      How many guns or hired killers have been hired by the Clinton’s, who have killed more than fifty in this count. Just think Bill and Hillary did not have to have their own weapons.

  • Jimmy Joe Meeker September 15, 2017, 11:44 am

    “Democrats” (i.e. Communists) don’t believe we need ANY firearms. In fact, all our “needs” should be met by our benevolent overlords (i.e. Government). I’d like to ask them, however, how many man buns, television sets, or Starbucks coffees they “need.” This is supposed to be the land of the free. What part of freedom don’t they understand?

    • deanbob September 15, 2017, 12:16 pm

      With ZERO impunity intended towards law enforcement, until the government can prove it can prevent any and all violence and harm to me and my family, I will safely own what allows me to defend and protect my family as proscribed by the second amendment.

  • HZ September 15, 2017, 10:28 am

    It is no secret that most people who own a gun own several. This seems to really bother anti-gun folks. I suppose, in theory, if someone has 15 guns in his safe, he could arm a posse, a gang, or perhaps a terrorist cell. However, if this is a problem we are seeing, neither side seems to have mentioned it, let alone provided any evidence. Which brings me to my point: no matter how many guns I have in my safe, the trunk of my car, or stuffed into a backpack, I still only have two hands. Therefore, I can only shoot two guns at a time, at most. Similarly, even in the worst mass shootings, it is rare for a single box of ammo to be expended; at most the equivalent of a few boxes. So when the media report that someone had x-number of guns or a few hundreds or thousands of rounds of ammo we should think “so what.” It is not the number of guns or cartridges that matter, it is the number of criminal and psychopaths.

  • Norm Fishler September 15, 2017, 9:58 am

    How many guns do I Need? Not nearly as many as I want! Guns are NOT condoms & one size does not fit all. Figure out what you’ll be using your accumulation of firearms for & choose your collection thoughtfully, according to your budget. Your S&W 686 .357 cost $700.00? You should spend near that much again on ammunition, leather and speed loaders. I know I will. You should have a MINIMUM of 1000 rounds of ammunition laid away PER FIREARM, although thankfully, that does not have to be all at once. 5000 rounds is much better. A top notch safe is mandatory! Many of the safes I’ve been seeing lately are naught but a filing cabinet with a combination lock that I could get into with a hammer & flat bar or a cutting wheel in MINUTES. The internet is full of videos on how to select a decent safe, so spend a few hours viewing them & make an informed buy. The HuffPo & its lackeys are unfortunately not going away anytime soon so plan your strategy carefully and move accordingly.

  • Rick September 15, 2017, 9:57 am

    I buy so many because it’s been a hobby of mine. I grew up with firearms, I love the engineering. Other than working a lot and my family I collect firearms. I have around 70. Somewhere around that number and my eyes are already set on some others. I have a lot of rare Glocks , Daniel defense, Lwrc, The Beast from WMD, shockwave, AK’s , saiga, veprs , PS90, IWI Tavor x95 which I’m taking a class with IWI and can’t wait, Steyr aug 3, and a bunch more. I love collecting them. I have my book that all are in and who gets what when I leave this world. I household are firearms people . I enjoy doing upgrades also. It’s what I enjoy. I have nothing at all against golf. I’ve played for charity events. I’m terrible. Firearms I am not. My reason for so many. I’m 42 and I figure in about 20 yrs it’s hard to say how many I will have. I was given my first shotgun when I was 7. My grandfather gave me a 20guage to go hunting with. I still have it. My great great grandfather had a 1896 octagon barrel whinchester and I have it. My dads 22 stub nose. Looks like a Old starter pistol but he has had that since I was born. I have thought about what I want to do later in my life since my job is so physically demanding and I’ve enrolled in Guns smithing. I definite, Cerakote, and stipple. I’m currently working on a spike tactical build that my wife and I are building together with top quality parts and it will look great. It’s the jacks lower. I don’t mix the jacks lower and a diff upper like some but I want this to look awesome . We love target shooting, I’m getting involved with competition shooting in my state and it’s what I love and enjoy. Not a criminal or I wouldn’t own them and wouldn’t have been taken in at the school. Huge NRA life member and newly given the chairman spot for my county with the NRA. If I was able to do this for a living it would be that dream job. I own a masonry company and it gets to be to much after all these years of doing it.

  • Robert Floyd September 15, 2017, 9:54 am

    I need some help. I can not find the word “need” in the Constitution anywhere.

  • Ronnie September 15, 2017, 9:47 am

    What is the difference if a person has 1 gun or 50 guns, They can only shoot 2 at a time.

  • Alan September 15, 2017, 9:24 am

    Gotta love “profits at the expense of lives” comment, when one SHOULD be using the saying “VOTES at the expense of lives”.
    And DEMOCRATIC VOTES at that!!!
    It’s ALL tied up with the DNC, and their insistence on a ‘revolving door’ Justice system.
    Career criminals have been given a pass for DECADES by this Country’s Left Wing Justice system, and all in the name of their Lefty brethren’s crybaby attitude that criminals are “less fortunate” because of our greed, racism or whatever crap they come up with.
    Hell, the Detroit Police stated in an article that they KNOW who is going to commit the next felony in a given area of that city because they track these career criminals and their habits, and they know who they are by their past criminal record and through detective work. Another city just recently released similar info.
    Yet the criminals get released again, and again!
    Now, it’s hard to get peoples emotions to lock onto certain people for what they do, but it’s ‘oh so easy’ to hate an inanimate object, because that object doesn’t have family with a mother crying on TV about what a good boy he was.
    To displace blame from a perpetrator of violence to an inanimate object is the greatest of Intellectual misdeeds one can do, but the emotional, low intellect, hand out for the goodies types will NEVER see that.

    • C. G. A. September 15, 2017, 11:35 am

      Almost all of this gun violence in those cities/states would not be happening if the government there would enforce the federal gun laws related to using a gun during the commission of a crime. It has been proven to work in the past when they were enforced. Like it has been said numerous times, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Outlaws don’t respect laws, hence the term outlaw. But the anti-gun nuts don’t care about that. All they want to do is take away everyone’s guns so they can have all the power. No guns = no resistance.

      • Frank September 15, 2017, 5:56 pm

        It almost like that now in cities like Chicago and D.C.. Criminals have plenty of guns and the citizenry is under-armed.

  • BigC September 15, 2017, 9:01 am

    HILARIOUS!!! These anti-gun a-holes crying about saving lives, then applaud the sanctioned murders of more than 300,000 humans yearly by THEIR favorite past-time….. ABORTION!!!

  • Michael Keim September 15, 2017, 8:59 am

    As many as I want. It’s none of their business. It’s my right.

    • American September 15, 2017, 9:32 am

      You beat me to it. As many as I want.

  • Subber 64 September 15, 2017, 8:08 am

    How many cars do we need?? Jay Leno has over 280 cars worth many millions of dollars.
    (talk about greed over lives…)
    There are over 30,000 fatal car accidents in the US every year. How many cars do we need !!
    * LOL this argument is just as frivolous and idiotic as the “How many guns do we need”!
    Neither cars nor guns kill people…PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE! Hello Chicago……………………….!

  • Dr Motown September 15, 2017, 8:04 am

    Wrong question to ask. It’s not a collective “we” question, but an individual question. Some may want no gun, others may want 14. It all depends on the wants, needs, interests, etc of the individual. No different than the amount/type of tools, recreational equipment, etc that one person may own versus another

  • Al September 15, 2017, 8:01 am

    How many reporters do we need. I think we should have a law that require background checks on any and all reporters and news agencies. If they have been determined to be untruth tellers, then they lose their license and are jailed for 10 years. They should also have to go through background checks every 3-5 years.

    Let’s see if they support that! Get rid of both the first and second amendments. Don’t need them according to our politicians or the press.

    • Shavri September 19, 2017, 1:24 am

      Oh, and they should have to explain to the Chief of Police WHY they need a license to use their 1st Amendment. After all, they should have a very good reason before they are trusted with the power of speech.

  • Lon September 15, 2017, 7:45 am

    So, how much longer is the idiot left going to continue to blame guns for the violence in this country and not admit that (what most of us already know) the real problem is the culture of violence in our inner cities? They are losing the argument, even in those inner cities, yet they still sniffle and whimper about “evil” guns..

    • William September 15, 2017, 10:00 am

      You’re mostly right. However, we can also be realistic about how the violence is carried out. I don’t necessarily like background checks either, and no, having background checks and tax stamps won’t stop criminals. But my point is, wouldn’t you say it is factually harder to kill someone without a firearm? I’m not saying it still can’t happen, or that it will stop happening without the ease of access to firearms. But isn’t reasonable to say it’s harder to kill three people with a knife, than to kill three people with a semi-automatic rifle chambered in an intermediate cartridge?

      • Shavri September 19, 2017, 1:33 am

        No, if you look at actual statistics it appears that it is exceptionally easy to kill someone with your fists. After all that is the primary “weapon” used in the highest percentage of murders… But if I wanted to kill a lot of people. then a semi auto is definitely inferior to a small explosive such as say the ones used by the Boston Marathon bombers.

  • Altoid September 15, 2017, 6:19 am

    Last I heard there were over 320 million firearms in private hands in the US.
    This is shameful!
    There should be at least two to three times that number.

    • Joseph Kiesznoski September 15, 2017, 7:28 am

      No, That’s Great, It shows we believe in freedom and Liberty.

      • Brett Lutz September 15, 2017, 8:15 am

        Read his comment again.

    • C. G. A. September 15, 2017, 11:40 am

      That’s not enough.

  • Onthe Wall September 15, 2017, 4:57 am

    The answer to ‘How many guns do we need’ IS ‘AS MANY AS WE CAN POSSIBLY GET’.

    • Joseph Kiesznoski September 15, 2017, 7:29 am

      Correct, because you never know what you will need as any given time..

    • CharlieKing1 September 15, 2017, 9:08 am

      I think the answer should be the oft used one that the New Yorkers use- ‘NUNYA!’

  • Onthe Wall September 15, 2017, 4:54 am

    According to the New York City Police Department internet site between 87% & 94% of ALL VIOLENT CRIMES ARE COMMITTED BY blacks and or hispanics. If you really want to end gun violence simple GET RID OF THE BLACKS AND HISPANICS. Any asshole who can read even democrats should understand, I mean last mothers day in Chicago at a mothers day parade 19 people shot 6 killed by ‘GUNS’ in the hands of blacks. It’s funny I at 1 time had 38 hand guns on my pistol license and any time either of my sons wanted to see a gun I said sure, unlock the gun safe and show them anything they want to see or touch. NOT 1 OF THOSE GUNS EVER HURT ANYONE(Except my wallet when I bought some of them). You stupid bastards are going after the wrong thing.

    • Mig September 15, 2017, 8:15 am

      I’m half white/half Hispanic, can I stay? Maybe a better question is- who made you the guy who decides?

      I wonder if you ever served in the military to preserve the freedoms we hold so dear and speak about so often like I have. Maybe you thought that was below you as well.

    • Big Squid September 15, 2017, 9:10 am

      On the wall. I’m a black law abiding citizen. CCW holder, NRA member who served in the US Navy along side with many black and Hispanic Sailors, and Marines. We protected your right to free speech among other things. You’re welcome to say what you want to say but,
      I respectfully disagree with your comments.
      Furthermore, approximately 40 percent of my city’s police department are black or Hispanic. Further confirming my distaste for your view.

    • William September 15, 2017, 10:05 am

      You’re disingenuous to your own argument. You very pointedly decided to only use New York City as your reference point, completely disregarding the fact that there are more violent encounters between white men and police than any other race, as well as white men carrying out more domestic terror attacks and assault with firearms than any other race. I carry everywhere I go, I’m proficient (on paper) with 3 separate firearms, and I’m Hispanic/Irish.
      So not only am I brown, I can shoot better than you.

    • Deadmeat99 September 15, 2017, 10:11 am

      Notice how Onthe Wall makes and absurd point using ridiculous statistics and yet even people here can’t see through the ruse. This is the same mechanism that causes idiot leftists to believe the garbage published on the HuffPo.

    • Common Sense September 15, 2017, 10:27 am

      Good job. You are officially a bigot. I do agree that the statistics tend to point towards minorities often times, but the answer is not to “get rid” of those people. The correct action is to address why that is and see how we can change it. There are plenty of brave men and women of color who protected your rights, even the one that says you can say the first dumb thing that crosses your simple mind. I bet you’d have a hard time saving some ignorant shit like that to their face though.. Come on and do yourself and every other white person in the US a favor and just keep your ridiculous commentary to yourself as not to make me look like an ass with you. What we need to be addressing is why it is ok to promote entitlement and condone a lifestyle which propagates violence. White folks are no less able to operate guns or commit crimes than people of color. The real issue is that we (Americans) continue to let race divide us and continue to condone a pathetic lifestyle. Its all about how we raise our children and the standards we hold for ourselves and those around us.

      Also, thank you folks who have also commented for your service. I for one appreciate you and would be willing to bet my hard earned dollars that neither you, nor those in your household, are part of the real issue we have today.

  • Brandon Salyer September 15, 2017, 4:43 am

    “No one wants to take your guns.” Really? Never mind the rhetoric spewed from D.C. We have to look no further than California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, and a few I’m probably forgetting. The Democrats lost 2016 due to running gun grabbing globalist and deriding anyone who doesn’t lockstep with their Big Brother agenda.
    As for the article, it does have one wrong statement. The answer to “How many guns do we need?” Is as many as it takes to ensure that old eagle can still fly and that old bell can ring. It’s shameful when Joe Public has to worry about the idiots in the federal and state capitols as much as they do the muggers and rapist. Not that there’s much difference between the two groups.

    • John Jones, Ph.D. September 15, 2017, 6:30 am

      As Jefferson stated when he and Madison demanded that inclusion of the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights,…”We must be ever vigilant of that bad goverment…and should it ever raise it’s ugly head…The people must have the tools of disent”.

    • C. G. A. September 15, 2017, 11:56 am

      I wish they would split California down the middle, like along I-5, so the liberal, snowflake, coastal elitist, gun-hating, free speech as long as it conforms with my thinking, freaks could live in West California and the rest of us could live in California. Then they could secede from the USA and we would be better off without them. Then I could keep and use my guns and wouldn’t have to move to a more conservative state either.

  • Dr. Strangelove September 15, 2017, 4:37 am

    How many guns do you need? It depends, how big is your safe?

  • Shawn September 15, 2017, 4:06 am

    How much free speech do we need?
    We’ve been far too long without have to quarter government agents in our homes!
    Seriously, what was wrong with forced confessions?
    Do we really need to explicitly outlaw slavery? That was over 150 years ago!
    Why is it that he’d think those are ridiculous but not his?

    • Lon September 15, 2017, 7:39 am

      The left is working feverishly to limit free speech also.

      • Davron September 15, 2017, 11:21 am

        Most specifically free speech that isn’t approved by them.

  • Will Drider September 14, 2017, 11:48 pm

    “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” – Robert A. Heinlein
    The population of the U.S. grows daily. Every day thousands of people come of age to buy a firearm. For some a event has opened their eyes to the necessity of owning a firearm or several for various requirements. Still others gather them as collectors. In reality, people can have one or hunderds in line with “keep and bear Arms”. I am personally amazed that their has not been insurrections and revolt in places where politicians and judges deprive the Constitutional Rights of Citizens as originally written.
    We The People need every law abiding citizen to have and carry a firearm. No one protects you 24/7 but yourself, you may also shoulder that responsibility for other family members.
    Why do gun control laws only target and place restrictions on law abiding citizens?

  • John R Pyles 111 September 14, 2017, 7:38 pm

    how much more liberal news do we need?

    • William September 15, 2017, 10:11 am

      I’d consider myself Liberal, and I love firearms and am a huge proponent for them. Just like you dislike politicians for their ridiculous anti-firearms laws that usually only target law-abiding target shooters, there’s nothing more disingenuous than hearing it’s all the democrats fault. There are plenty of democrats who carry everyday like I do, I’m friends with them.
      How many more liberals do we need, then? More like me and my buddies, who are democrats AND gun lovers.

      • Davron September 15, 2017, 11:23 am

        He specifically said liberal news. It would be much better if we had more centrist news if we can’t actually have unbiased or objective news.

      • Shavri September 19, 2017, 1:39 am

        If you Democrat gun lovers don’t get control of YOUR party then they are going to take all YOUR guns just like the Democrats in NY, NJ, CA, MA… etc, etc, etc. So your voting speaks louder than your posts.

  • derakshan September 14, 2017, 4:33 pm

    Yes, the levels of gun violence are unacceptable, but what has that got do with law-abiding gun owners? NOTHING

    • The Captain September 15, 2017, 3:06 am

      As many as it takes to stem the tide of Leftist/Socialist/”Progressive” violence and corruption. (Wait just a moment, that’s limitless, isn’t it)? You Statists don’t seem to comprehend that “we the people” don’t intend on being subject to you, the effete, elitist snobs.
      Suck it up, buttercup.

    • Larry September 15, 2017, 7:20 am

      Gun violence is only prevalent in cities and states with the most restrictive Gun laws. In states with less restrictions and the majority of those state’s inhabitants carry, either open carry or concealed, Gun violence is almost non-existent. Chicago has an annual homicide rate of nearly 3500, with nearly a third of those homicides involve handguns but handguns are literally illegal in that town. But in a state like Utah, who averages about 30 homicides per year, with only 1 or 2 attributed to Gun violence, maybe you might get my point. More guns means less crime. Texas has less aggravated criminal activity then any other state in the Union. Missouri recently passed constitutional carry, which means a resident there no longer has to have a permit to carry concealed, and since that passed, has seen an almost 600% drop in aggravated crimes since! The level of ‘gun violence’ in this country is only contained within states where private gun ownership is basically illegal and only represents about 1/16th of the overall population.

    • Joseph Kiesznoski September 15, 2017, 7:30 am


Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend