Where are the "talking heads" on this

We have heard people like John Gibson & other right wing talk show hosts talk all week about how they felt if the students on the Virginia Tech campus were allowed to carry weapons to protect themselves there would be more of those students alive today.

I could flip that around & say if Matthew Winkler did not have a gun in the house he would be alive today & Mary Winkler would be free. Mary Winkler did say she did not intend to kill her husband, the gun went off unintentionally.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/19/winkler.trial/index.html

When are the right wing-nut jobs going to realize that there is more killings because of easy availability of guns. After all Cho, Seung-Hui got 2 guns legally. I lived in Britain when the ban on handguns were first announced. Many people were fearful that this was going to lead to rampant crime. But this has caused no significant increase in crime. Why aren't those right wing talk show hosts talking about that. The real fear is that they want their guns to take down a democratic party president if they do not like him/her.

When the ban on handguns was first announced. Many people were fearful that this was going to lead to rampant crime. But this has caused (no significant increase) in crime. That actually makes our point it caused (no significant increase in crime) (so therefore it must have actually increased the crime rate) rather than lowering it. So why take the handguns away from law abiding citizens when it appently had little affect and actually (increased) the crime rate?

It may be true that she did not intend to kill her husband, but she had to have had pulled the trigger -- true mechanical failures are incredibly rare.

Hit him square in the back with every pellet.

Bake

Mildly apropos-- last week I saw a bumper sticker that read, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will accidentally shoot their kids"

I got a chuckle out of it.