An unarmed person is not a citizen. He is a subject. An armed person that freely submits to the laws of the land and abides by them is a citizen and capable of protecting himself.

Totalitarian states all agree that taking the weapons from law abiding citizens is a good idea.

Concealed caryy laws have ALWAYS reduced the murder and assault rate because the criminals are no longer operating in an environment where they are the only ones with weapons.

The shootings in Tucson, AZ are most tragic. The victims were innocent people, sadly a nine year old girl died.The anti gun crowd and anti gun politicians don't even express any remorse for the victims or the wounded, their only concern is to pass more gun control laws. There has been alot of new reports about Jared Loughner, apparently he had some type of problem long before he planned and carried out his attack on Representative Giffords. Yet the anti gun crowd ignores the fact that law abiding citizens carryiong concealed weapons are a deterrent to crime and incidents like this one. Crime has definitley gone down because of concealed carry laws. Criminal are criminal and they aren'ty supposed to possess any type of firearm, yet the anti gun groups nor the politicans ever make any reference to enforcing the existing gun laws, there are moree than enough of them to be enforced against those breaking the law. Liberals are against the lawful ownership of guns by the law abiding and new laws don't always solve the problem. Kepp in mind that the anti gun groups wnat to eradicate the Second Amendment out of the Bill of Rights, that is their goal. They are subversives for doing they are doing and should be investigated as should the elected officials that support the anti gun groups agenda and goals. What other Guaranteed right can be taken away.

Add this to the stupidity. In our town, a high school student with an empty shotgun shell in the back of his pickup can be kicked out of school and possibly prosecuted. In other words, the guys who might be able to do something helpful are having their hands tied. When I was in college, lots of us had "arsenals" in our dormitory rooms. A shooter would not be shooting for very long there at that college. Funny thing, no shootings have ever happened there. I think teachers ought to openly carry. Every kid old enough to own a gun ought to have the right to exercise his 2nd amendment right on campus. How many shooters would we have if half the class is openly packing iron? I'll also bet that if the teachers are packing iron, the disrespect they endure would diminish substantially.

I have this hanging in my office:

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"

Adolf Hitler

1935

Ann, You are the voice of reason and common sense in a wilderness of B.S. No wonder the libs hate you so much. Reason and common sense are entirely foreign concepts to them. Keep up the good work.

Ann,

Perhaps someone needs to point out to the president, an alleged constitutional scholar, that the reason for the 2nd ammendment is not for us to protect ourselves from nutjob shooters, but to protect ourselves from HIM. And his ilk. A couple of high-capacity magazines might come in handy in that context...

If they take away our Guns, who will protect us from the Government?

Predators with guns always seek out areas where the victims are unarmed. Otherwise you'd be seeing mass shootings at police stations, Nat. Guard buildings, and gun shows. Too bad people like Bill Orielly think it was OK to take the guns away from Grandmas after Katrina. Even the so called conservatives rarely state why we have a right to "Keep and Bear". It has nothing to do with hunting, target shooting, and only alittle to do with personal self defense. It, according to our founders, is to protect ourselves from a despotic govt. If they can limit or take away our ability to resist-our will to resist will fade away. We're very nearly hopeless already with what these DC criminals have done over the last century. Trying to take the guns in one fell swoop would trigger enough outrage for people to act in defense of our country. That's why a little limit here and a little law there is how they're eroding our liberty.

TERM LIMITS-REFERENDUM-RECALL-IMPEACH-PROSECUTE

I love you Ann. Always right on. I have a concealed carry permit and do carry everyday. I hope I never have to use my weapon to protect myself or others but will gladly do so if required. The lefties will never get it.

Gun Control is a tight grouping around the 10-ring or, as a Marine Sniper might say, one shot - one kill. Everything else is rubbish!

Carpal tunnel syndrome! Ann! You're a comic genius!

AZ has concealed carry, but the murderer made sure he targeted a Democrat ensuring a less chance of him being shot by anyone there and stopped. If he had targeted a Republican Congressman in AZ, he would not have gotten far and would have been stopped by the armed citizens there. He knew that Republicans shoot back and defend themselves.

Thank you Mrs. Coulter. Well said. We can also use the example of the tragic set of circumstances of Mrs. Suzanna Gratia Hupp who watched 23 people, including her parents, executed in a cafeteria in Killeen, TX in 1991 when she had to leave her firearm in her car because of the policies of the cafeteria.

Keep up your excellent work.

A good and logical argument, Ann. Logical. Now there's a word that liberals just don't understand. Emotional. Now there's a word that liberals love, understand, and bleat about, ad nauseum. They want to be the world's Mama. React. Oh, the liberals love to react, usually with emotional outbursts. Okay, my point is made.

For me, a Texan, the subject of gun control also raises the issue of state's rights. Why does Idiot Bloomberg of New York have anything to say about another state's right to have gun shows, pro-Second Amendment freedoms, and concealed carry? I remember when Texas passed the concealed carry law, the liberals predicted, as in many other states, that there would be "blood on the streets." Well, guess what, folks? It didn't happen. The same can be said for many other states.

When Texas passed their version of the Castle Doctrine, or the "no retreat" law, liberals screamed that it gave an excuse to kill indiscriminately. It didn't happen. Instead, we Texans, like most law-abiding citizens, helped lower the crime rate in Texas (just as you argued, Ann) by being responsible armed citizens. Who wants to break into a home knowing they might be met with deadly force?

Write, write, write your representatives often, folks, and demand that they protect our Second Amendment rights! If they don't respond, remember that on election day.

If the GOVERNMENT takes away our guns are the going to take away out knives as well? Sure will make eating hard, do we go back to cave man style.Seems like if they can not stop Killing one way they will try another.

Yes I have a permit to carry concealed in my home state and have a UTAH permit as well. I am also a 25 year retired US Army SGM. I served in Viet Nam twice, Europe and the far East as well.I have served my country and love my country as well. As stated Gun control is being able to put all of you rounds in the black at 50 yards..

Keep up the good work.

@Eb Snell regarding his post of the "Hitler quote":

Although I found it easy to believe that Hitler could have made such a statement, I did a search and found a couple references that show the statement to be false. Check out one of the sites at this URL:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1791/did-hitler-ban-gun-ownership

There were gun laws in Germany and Eastern Europe in the 1930s that helped Hitler and the Nazis conquer people, but the quote you cite is apparently fabricated. I believe, however, that we need to fight every effort to take our guns away. All evidence shows that, when you take guns away from law-abiding citizens, crime skyrockets because people cannot protect themselves from criminals with guns.

Ann, you are a brilliant lady. I have all your books, read your column every week and greatly admire your courage and eloquence. If I may though, please remember these are not Second Amendment rights, they are God-given rights which just happen to be the subject of the Second Amendment. The feds, as they did in the War Between the States, may be able to force certain behaviors on us at the point of a bayonet but they can never take away any of the rights bestowed by the Creator. I hold this truth to be self-evident.

G T, thank you for letting me know. That quote was given to me, and I took it as good. Obviously it did not occur to me to check it out. I also totally agree with you. Thank you!

Ann -

Let me point out something you touched on, but was perhaps missed by most:

- BHO talked about a hunter.

- You talked about a deranged predator.

Those two are different concepts, thus, rate different legislative approaches. Today you buried your best advice in the eighth paragraph, and then left it hanging there.

Since the best solution will come from proper problem identification, and since you very quickly and easily separated the concepts for everybody, I hope you follow up and continue down that path again soon. Thanks Ann.

The only logic we need is what you just said. If we had armed passengers on the flights that hit the World Trade center Towers, the outcome could have changed history.

BJ and Norge-

You beat me to it. The Second Amendment is not about hunting and target plinking; it's the last recourse the citizenry has for enforcing the rest of the Bill of Rights should a despotic government, even a well-meaning one, attempt to take those freedoms away.

BoFromTexas-

My son is on the student government at Texas A&M (Galveston campus.) He recently told me that they are drafting a resolution calling on the legislature to restore full gun rights to all law-abiding students on Texas campuses. One wonders how they were taken away in the first place, but at least this is a step in the right direction.

@Random63

I was thinking the same thing Random. In fact, there was an armed citizen in the vicinity. Joe Zamudio was carrying his sidearm and was in the nearby Walgreens when the shooting went down. He ran out and TOWARD the scene of the incident, but by then the sheep had already (uncharacteristicly) tackled the wolf (Loughner) when he attempted to reload. Had the sheepdog (Zamudio), or another like him, been among the flock, who knows how many might have been saved. We'll never know.

Read Lt. Col. Grossman's treatise "On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs" at killology.com I've been a sheepdog most of my life, having served in the military and as a law enforcement officer. I will not have a tyrannical government turn me into just another one of the sheep.

"There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men."

~ Edmund Burke

Let's not forget the Fort Hood shooter Hidal Hassan, who was able to reek his havoc because Bill Cinton thought it necessary to implememnt a law making it illegal for trained military men on a military base to carry their own weapons. Thanks Liberals!

Thanks, Ann. Clear and concise, and deadly accurate (pun intended). Unfortunately, the libs will never get your humor.

My wife, 21-year old son and I all carry with permits. It is a right of passage in our family, that when a child turns 21 I pay for their class, pay for the permit, and get them the handgun of their choosing. My 17-year old and 15-year old can't wait. We all have a deep and abiding respect for the power of a gun, and I've trained all my children in the proper use and care. I know with confidence that, if the situation every presents itself, my family could and would protect not only ourselves, but those around us.

Interesting note - the Subway near my office has a worker who carries his Sig in a holster on his right hip. Interesting that even in a downtown location no one has ever even attempted to rob the store while he was in it. The store owner says she feels much safer when he is working, and none of the customers has ever complained about it. They, too, feel safer.

Ahh, it's beautiful to live in Tennessee.

BJ and Norge-

You beat me to it. The Second Amendment is not about hunting and target plinking; it's the last recourse the citizenry has for enforcing the rest of the Bill of Rights should a despotic government, even a well-meaning one, attempt to take those freedoms away.

BoFromTexas-

My son is on the student government at Texas A&M (Galveston campus.) He recently told me that they are drafting a resolution calling on the legislature to restore full gun rights to all law-abiding students on Texas campuses. One wonders how they were taken away in the first place, but at least this is a step in the right direction.

Regarding the true intent of the 2nd amendment, advocates like Ann or like minded politicians are practically forbidden from mentioning it, because 'you know, that's crazy talk...'

You are so right, Ann! Do you pack iron, too?

The left wants pro-choice for abortions and conversely wants to limit, or take away, your choice to own a firearm.

Jim G,

While I get the analogy, I hardly think that unarmed citizens who possess the courage to charge a madman during his shooting spree deserve to be refered to as "sheep".

Ann is priceless. She cuts through all the liberal BS to turn on the harsh light of reality. You cannot be nice to liberals. You cannot liberals them get away with their elaborate lies and rationales for taking away your constitutional rights, your money, and your livelihood. Liberal government solutions all stink.

Hello America,

Liberalism is an ideology in which the method of bad behavior takes front seat to those that behave badly. The left demonize method while victimizing the errant person. The true culprit in the Tucson shooting in the mind of the left is the weapon, clip, bullets and of course their favorite whipping boys and girls on the right. Jared Loughner is their victimized poster boy.

What I saw in the mug shots taken post carnage was a demoniac quite smug in his evil deed. In my mind he is definitely a poster boy . . . for left minded thinking that is a befuddled as his own.

We will never know for sure that if Arizona had a concealed carry law fewer people would have died. This was a gathering of mostly liberals listening to their Democrat representative, and we know how liberal Democrats loathe EVIL guns.

I do know that the state of Arizona has an unlicensed open carrying law. My brother called the proper authorities regard their carrying laws before we traveled to the state to visit relatives and engage in our favorite past time rockhounding. You never know what kind of demented two legged creature you are going to run across in the wilderness.

I also know that had I been at this representatives meeting under Arizona's carrying law, he would have only got one shot off before immediately leaving this life to the next in which his EVIL would have been repaid in spades through eternity.

All states should allow concealed carry permits to its residents. Better to dispatch EVIL, than to let EVIL carry out its nefarious design. After all, it is the American way.

The Turban Torpedo

The liberals that support gun control should be asked in the countries where law abiding persons cannot possess firearms how is the crime rate.

The crime rate went up dramatically, Austrailia for one,officilas there couldn't explain why the crime rate was so high since guns were banned.Only the criminals weer able to get guns.England also has strict gun control laws what good does it do to curtail the law abiding citizens rights to defend themselves. There have been in the past U.S. Supreme Court case ruling that the police are not obligated to protect individual citizens. I am in no way saying or implying that police agencies/officer are not doing their jobs they are doing their jobs. Banning an object a particular type of gun or high capacity magazine that was used

is a knee jerk reaction to the problem. Jared Loughner bought the gun he used legally and same for the 30 round magazines. What he did was against the law killing people, he had this planned out.

The states where law abiding people have the right to carry a firearm, crime is lower and because laws in those states also protect a law abaiding person if they actually have to shoot a criminal or defend themselves. Banning inanimate objects doesn't do anything. Like Prhibition in the 1920's alcohol was illegal but was still able to be purchased illegally. The same trhing will happen with guns. Be wary of those in and out of political office that want to slowly eradicate any of our rights. The Second Amendment was put there for good reason by the Founding Fathers of this nation.

Watch them closely. They will try to go after Magazines, and ammunition through devious little amendments hidden in big important bills.

Thanks Ann for pointing out the truth about lower crime rates when Concealed Carry is permitted.

It is amazing how little our elected representatives know about firearms. Perhaps they could ask their bodyguards for a quick primer on handgun and rifle operations so they could be conversant. Better yet, why don't we start electing folks who own guns and carry themselves.

Christians need to recognize that their inalienable *commission* to bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, and their neighbors comes, not from the Second Amendment, but from Yahweh and His perfect laws and altogether righteous judgments (Psalm 19:7-9). See "Firearms: Scripturally Defended" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/firearm-right.php and "Amendment 2: Self-Defense: Constitutional or Biblical" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt12.php.

This God-given responsibility must be enforced by the biblical judgment for any irresponsible (unlawful) use of the same, which means, if convicted of murder (regardless his mental state), murderers such as Loughner, would be put to death.

Ann have you ever heard a liberal admit they were wrong.About anything!You can show them reams and reams of facts.And they'll look you right in the eye,and in an indignant manor say.Well! That's Only Your-Opinion!Then go in to a bunch of goofy excuses a thid grader would be ashamed to use.I'd really love to hear somebody ask our dear leader where the hunting clause is at in the second amendment the next time he tries to join the two together.After all he's a renoun constitutional scholar.So he should be able to point it out with ease to "we the stupid people" I've heard that a broken clock is right atleast twice a day.If you made the same comparison to liberals,you'd be insulting all the broken clocks in the world.Semper Paratus.

Go to the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership website. JPFO.org And check out the mass killings by governments during the 20th century and the anti-gun laws that made it possible. It includes the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc.

Ban the magazine and the deranged predator will carry more guns. Ban the guns and the deranged predator will use a knife or a bomb. Ban the knives and the deranged predator will use a car. A deranged predator with the intention of doing harm will not care if something is banned or not. What good would a 1,000 foot weapons-free perimeter around politicians do? Absolutely nothing! Those intent on doing harm will simply ignore that as well. It's just that simple. As has already been pointed out, a trained and legally armed citizenry is the best defense against a deranged predator.

Hey guys and girls. What gives the authorities the right to deny us packing iron WITHOUT carry permits? Read the words in the second amendment. We need to support open (or concealed) carry for all law abiding citizens. We need to perfect that right, and allow it to only be curtailed if we are found morally deficient, or mentally unstable. There even has to be strict criteria for that because the Democrats would lock all of us up otherwise. Vermont or Maine or one of those yankee states at least has this right. I, for one, am not even going to speak loudly around a guy who is packing iron. As the bumper sticker says, "An Armed Society is a Polite Society."

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

(think about it)

Kiki

Steve Corragio - I don't know where you are getting your statistics from re Australia. We have some of the tightest gun control legislation in the world i.e. You cannot even own a gun unless you are a farmer or a member of a gun club. The net result is that Melbourne which is roughly the size of Chicago has one tenth of the murders committed every year in Chicago. Many of those are stabbings, and as you can appreciate, it is truly difficult to go full-on postal with a knife. So we don't have anywhere near the incidence of mass killings that you do in the USA. Just another perspective guys...

Richie B.,

You cite chicago, bad choice, chicago has had some of the most restrictive gun laws in the United States. Therefore criminals, hoods and thugs are the ones that do most of the killing, with illegal firearms. Criminals have no respect for the law and will not abide by the law. In chicago ghettoville, even after the Supreme Court Struck down the firearms ban in the Mc Donald Vs. chicago case, the politicians(with scoundrel daily in the lead) started back door rules in a further attempt to keep firearms out of the hands of Law Abiding Citizens, Richie I don't mean to offend you, just trying to clarify chicago and Melbourne. Thanks, David Ross citizen that is proudly armed 24/7/365 with one under and 8 more to follow, with 8 more to follow that if necessary. NAGR and GOA member

The school official referenced by Ann, who went to his car to get his gun to stop the killing was in direct violation of federal law. His actions could have cost him 10 years in jail. While prosecutors were not foolish enough to pursue the hero under such circumstances, I cringe every time I drop my kids off at school knowing that any small mistake might cost me my liberty. Our current gun laws and prosecutorial discretion creates an uncertain line between hero and felon. Scary.

Something I wrote long ago: The three most common characteristics of a legally armed society are, Courtesy, Respect and Manners.

But, even in the old West, where murder was very rare, there were psychopaths, like "Billy the Kid." The fact that almost every man bore arms kept the crime rate low enough that news of almost every major crime spread everywhere within a very short time.

One thing Gun Grabbers use to drive Gun Crime statistics up is the policy of counting "Homicides." Homicide simply means that someone was killed or murdered, by whatever type of weapon. They insist on counting: Accidental Deaths, Police killed in the line of Duty (rightfully), Criminals killed by an armed Victim, Victims killed as a result of criminal activity, Criminals killed by Police responding to a Crime in progress, and, Serial or Mass Murderer loose in a Gun Free Zone...along with his victims.

At Virginia Tech, there were 33 Victims and a Mass Murderer who committed suicide. This was reported and entered into the books (and in News Reports) as 34 Homicides. Their justification? The Murderer committed Homicide on himself.

State or district with the highest crime rate...DC

State or district with the lowest crime rate...VT

State or district with the strictist gun law....DC

State or district with the highest per capita rate of gun ownership....VT

This will make no sense to a liberal.

Ann,

I can only add one thing to all that has been said:

Please do not use clips and magazines interchangeably. They are not the same. As a former Army small arms instructor it goes thru me like a knife. Clips feed magazines, magazines feed the weapon.

I believe the second ammendment is the only concealed carry law that one should need.

High capacity magazines kill people like Ann's wit causes the left's disconnect from reality.

“You won’t get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There’s only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up and if you don’t actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time... It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.”

—Ronald Reagan in 1983, after surviving the 1981 assassination attempt of the deranged John Hinckley.

I hope to carry my bagpipe onto the airplane. I may be thwarted, however, for in some jurisdictions the bagpipe is considered a weapon of war. I will be happy to loan it to the Air Marshal. I'll be sure to bring it to my next political rally.

We all know the reason behind the gun control push...its corrupt , lying, incompetent politicians afraid people will find them out and turn off their lights! Thing is...people already have found out and if it comes to it, guns aren't even needed....thousands of years ago a simple method of stoning the a.h.'s to death solved the problem.....it may have to come back to that? imho

Blairblaster3, Psalm 147:6-9 is the only concealed carry law one should need.

See "Firearms: Scripturally Defended" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/firearm-right.php and "Amendment 2: Self-Defense: Constitutional or Biblical" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt12.php.

Ms. Coulter,

I do not care if you post my name, email address, home address and phone number (I only gave out two (2) out of four (4)).

In history: violence leads to anarchy.

Anarchy leads to chaos.

Chaos leads to Martial Law.

Martial Law leads to a Monarchy or a Theoacracy - with one (1) excepton - THE GREAT AMERICAN EXPERIMENT.

I simply ask you one question:

I am 77 years old, served my country as a Marine during the Korean War (on the lines seven months)and worked hard all my life to educate my two children (I had only two because that is all I could afford while paying high taxes so "others" could enjoy the American life.

I lived in cities all over the country and saw with my own eyes that if you are weak you are the VICTIM.

So now I'm retired and live a modest life. I am armed for my protection and have a voice-activated tape recorder by my door. If/when they come for my guns there will be a gunfight. If I survive that will be great. If I don't, there will be an audio record of what happened. I would rather be dead than become a SUBJECT!

Norge,

Yes, but note that in this particular case I qualified their response as uncharacteristic.

Absolutely, when the opportunity presented itself, with a pause in the gunfire as Loughner stopped to reload, they rose up and took him down. I heartily applaud them for that courage. However, to get the full meaning of the "sheep" analogy you really need to read Grossman's piece - "On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs."

And keep in mind that term "sheep" used in the analogy is not used derrogatorily, it's just an acknowledgement of the fact that within our society there are folks whose psychological make-up is by nature predominately gentle and kind. The idea of taking part in any sort of violent act is abhorrent to them. That's NOT a bad thing. A civilized society is built around and encourages those qualities. The sheep are just not members of the "warrior class" and there's nothing wrong with that. The sheepdogs are members, but differ from the wolves in that they are protectors and can also exhibit great kindness and gentleness.

Where the situation does go bad is when the "sheep" decide society should be strictly ruled by their notions. They determine they are the only ones with the sensibilities to be in charge of the utopia they envision and are working toward. They live in a fatal state of denial to the existence of the wolves among them and the wolves at the gate. They feel they can reason with and/or rehabilitate the wolves. The sheepdogs scare them. They convince themselves of a need to do away with the sheepdogs, and in those societies where they succeed, the wolves find the sheep to be very "useful idiots."

Then the sheep wake up one day to find they are not in charge at all... the wolves are. And the sheep wonder where all the sheepdogs went.

"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal." -- U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, December 1993

"If the opposition (citizen) disarms, well and good.

If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves." -- Josef Stalin

FYI for JBurtt-NRA mbr and all readers. Suzanne's parents and the others killed in Killeen at the Luby's in 1991 had nothing to do with Luby's policies, but rather with state laws at the time. She has a professional licence and was (rightly so at that time) concerned with the possible legal ramifications of unlicensed carry. Thank You, Jerry Patterson and many other politicos for the CCW laws we have now. Mike in South Texas...

In light of the Obama administrations defense of constitutionality of health insurance buy-in mandates, let's propose a federal law that requires (mandates) every citizen to buy, and learn how to use, a gun when they turn 21 years of age.

It would be hard to argue against such a law with the basic premise of the 2nd amendment rights.

Liberals would go nuts over this, and it would be interesting to see how they would defend against this requirement.

After all, what's good for the goose, is good for the gander, right?

AZ 57 cynic----I am treading lightly here, in that I question your comment. Not contradicting it. "Clips feed magazines, magazines feed the weapon." There is an apparent error in word choice. Example; the M1 Garand was loaded with an eight round CLIP. The M1 Carbine was loaded via a MAGAZINE. Pick a number; eight, doubles, or even a thirty double. Judging from your postname, you were around during the early Korean mess. As were the two firearms mentiond. The clip permitted placing eight rounds in position to feed the chamber. When the last round fired, the clip was ejected. A magazine, also, feeds the chamber, but when empty, it must be manually extracted, or released by pressure on the appropriate release. I am certain you know this, and I agree with the discomfort of improper definition. Both items, clip or magazine, are the reservoir of ammo to feed the chamber and place the round in position for firing thru the action of the bolt. I am certain you know this and mean no offense by my remarks. Others need to be enlightened, correctly. Thank you for your service.

You are absolutely correct, but it doesn't stop there. I'm a board member for a Motorcycle Safety Organization and have to deal w/ the same problems of the don't do's telling us what's good for the riding community.

Ann, aren't you a comedian? Your making way to much sense and using way too few jokes.

People might start to take you seriously. That would likely be bad for business.

I will tread lightly as well in an attempt to clarify the importance of clips and magazines which will be the topic of much discussion in coming weeks.

The original statement by 57 Cynic is I believe correct in that the M1 Garand "clip" is used to load an "Internal Magazine" which was designed as an alternative to "removable magazines" --which at the time American military planners believed would be lost by GI's in combat. That of course proved to be an unnecessary concern, and removable magazines are now the standard for use in both semi-automatic rifles and handguns.

The importance of distinguishing the "clip" from the magazine ( internal or removable ) is that there are still weapons in use that utilize "clips" to hold/organize cartridges in alignment prior to manually pushing them into the internal magazine. The SKS uses a linear clip to feed a single line of cartridges into the top of the internal magazine. The M1 Garand has a "clip" with a more complex design which is pushed as a single unit into the internal magazine.

Finally there is the "stripper clip" which is similar to the SKS clip and is used to align cartridges for easy loading into a removable magazine for weapons such as the AR-15 or its military counterpart the M-16.

In all of these cases, the term "clip" is used in reference to rifles , rather than handguns. Most handguns use a removable magazine. ( There may be handguns which use a clip fed internal magazine but I am not familiar with any.)

While most folks know that a clip and a magazine have something to do with firearms, it is important to understand that "clips" of any kind are not the same as "removable magazines", which are the current target of the leftist gun grabbers. Some jurisdictions require that removable magazines be made non-removable in an attempt to limit utility, ( essentially converting them into "internal" magazines that protrude from the bottom of the weapon). Of course, these can be rapidly reloaded by the use of - you guessed it "Clips".

If guns kill people, then spoons make people fat and pencils make them stupid.

Visit your local Gun range and take an introductory lesson - You will be glad you did.

Well---lets see now. High capicity magazines, say of 5 rounds(?) would be considered dangerous? I myself have some weaponery with 20 round mags It seems to me that the best comparison to this discussion would be with a Fire Extingusher--------it ain't no good if it ain't loaded!

Anyone who's interested in Lt.Col Dave Grossman.U.S.Army(retired)Sheep,Wolves and Sheepdogs.Can find it in a copy of The American Legion Magzine.January 2006 issue.Or his book"On Combat"(PPCT Research Publications.Sept 2004.It's available in bookstores and online at. www.amazon.com You may also find it at your local library.It is an excellent article.Semper Paratus.

Bob W, take a look at the Militia Act of 1792. It was passed by the same Congress that ratified the Bill of Rights. Based upon Act, most males are required to have a military firearm with sufficient ammunition. That would be a M-16. As for me I am a knuckle dragger, so I will hang on to my M-1. I will take a .30-06 over the 5.56 mm any day. Some guy by the name of George Patton considered the M-1 to be the best military rifle. Hats off to John C. Garand.

Bob W, take a look at the Militia Act of 1792. It was passed by the same Congress that ratified the Bill of Rights. Based upon Act, most males are required to have a military firearm with sufficient ammunition. That would be a M-16. As for me I am a knuckle dragger, so I will hang on to my M-1 Garand. I will take a .30-06 over a 5.56 mm any day. George Patton said the M-1 was the best military rifle ever developed. Hats off to John C. Garand.

Two bills are in the Teas legislature that concern the Gifford shooting and school security. One would protect employees from employer "no-gun" policies for company parking lots, where a legal firearm might be stored during a worker's shift.

The other would allow holders of concealed carry licenses from entering the building of a school, college, or university while armed.

And a suit aginst the State of Texas has come up because 18 through 20-year old individuals are unable to obtain Texas Concealed Carry licenses because they are under age 21, unless they are on active duty military service, or veterans. In part, this affects the rights of being otherwise legal adults such as jury service, voting, drinking alcohol,entering into contracts, etc., but unable to buy or carry a firearm.

Actually, 18 through 20 year old people can buy rifles or shotguns. They cannot legally buy handguns, and they cannot obtain concealed carry licenses.

The first part of your article hit the nail right on the head. Really, how can people that have no clue about firearms, or self defense tell a person that has be raised with firearms what I can or can't have for self defense.

Right-on Howard. I believe the qoute went on to say "Give me a Battlion of Marines with M-1"s, and I"ll kick the German's asses back to Berlin". The 2d Amendment says I can carry a weapon, that's my permit, as well as everyone else's. I have the training as well as the skill's to handle a firearm. I can defend from 2000 yrds to 3 ft. if need be. My favorite is the one I call "MA BELL" and the other is the one I call "MY AMERICAN EXPRESS CARD", I never leave home without it. If I can't kill it with the firearms I own, then it dosen't need killing.

...the fact is, they want to take everyones gun rights away... how else do you think they can gain total control over all of us..?

...but you can bet, only smart people will remain armed... the rest of the sheeple will be led to waiting stalls... just like lambs to slaughter...

...not me, and not any of my friends, we know the deal, we know what they want, we ain't giving, taking, or buying it... and anyone who does deserves what they get... everyone know the Illuminati is in charge... and they don't want us armed...

MOLON LABE

Marine, my father had an all expense paid tour of Europe during part of 1944 and 1945. The tour director was a G. Patton. His outfit waited for a week so the communists (oops FDR's best friend's Stalin's army) could take Berlin. Patton wanted to march right into Moscow. Who the hell could stop him? It would have saved us from having to deal with the bastards (I should not insult bastards) for a half century. What they still control Russia!

Dr. Timms,

Just because it does not detach, does not mean it is not a magazine. On the M1 Garand, the thing in the weapon into which the clip was fed was the MAGAZINE. It is said that the Garand was clip fed but had an internal magazine. This is similar to the Springfield, which had a five round internal magazine fed by a stripper clip. Check out the field manuals or the wikipedia article on the weapon, and you will see what I am talking about.

Honzie

The

The left's attempts to control murders, without actually saying that they wish that The Second Amendment was abolished, have brought us a Byzantine, piecemeal approach which will, if allowed to continue, lead to their ultimate goal of eliminating firearm ownership by "We, the People..." All of these myriad restrictions and infringements upon a Constitutionally-guaranteed right are having the same effect that would come from attempting to stop drunk driving by making automobiles and their accessories difficult to purchase.

Note: The distinction relative to "infantry" arms, as I was taught, is that a magazine has one or more springs.

Honzie1885,

Thank you for making my point, better than I did. Cynic57 originally stated correctly that "clips feed magazines, magazines feed the weapon". USN.Ret then responded to suggest that in the case of the M1Garand, the gun was fed by an 8 round CLIP.

I was attempting to point out - as you have - that the M1 has an internal magazine, which is not removable, but is indeed fed by the clip. You are of course correct in pointing out that magazines do not have to be removable, and in fact most semi and fully automic weapons that do not have a removable magazine , will have an internal one. As 57 Cynic said, The clip is used to feed the magazine

(internal or removable)and the magazine feeds the weapon!

I propose that we all get some ammo and go shoot together at the Patriot Post Gun Show and Target Match. I can see it now --Paper targets, steel targets, pistol, carbine and 3-Gun matches, with conservative conversation! I would love to meet some of my fellow posters who also enjoy the shooting sports and exercising their 2nd Amendment Responsibilities. For those interested in learning more about responsible firearm use, check with your local Range, the NRA, or Frontsight.com for information on firearms training.

Note: Ed, That is a great point! I know of no clips with springs, and every magazine, even the internal ones, have springs of some sort to move or position the ammo for feeding.

Interesting to note that this article has garnered the most commentary from Ann's readers in some time. I would guess that like myself, most Americans are very passionate about our right to bear arms and engage in sports/activities using weapons. It was interesting to read the discussion of several readers on "clips v magazines". I too have an M1 and a M1A and the distinct "chink" of the clip leaving the Garand and the satisfying "thwack" of the magazine being loaded into the M1A are visceral sounds of gun ownership.

Limits:

1 gun purchase per month,

5 bullets per gun,

3 church services per month,

3 peaceable assemblies per year,

3 people max per peaceable assembly,

1 newspaper per week,

1 magazine (reading type) per month,

1 book per year,

1 pursuit of happiness per month,

1 warrant per lifetime,

1 Miranda warning per lifetime,

1 civil right per year.

Does any person really need more rights than that?

I've got it! Outlaw springs! Problem solved! Next!

Don't give'm any ideas!

the only way to eliminate killings is to eliminate guns! when will we all understand that???

in the mid 1960s att general sills passed a law that one needed a permit to acqurie a firearm. the local paper reported a roberry where 2 firearms were stolen. iwrote a letter to att sills asking him to check wether a permit was issused.he repplied are you insinuating that a person would brake in a home to get a firearm ? Iwishi could find his reply. Iforgot to add that was in New Jersey. Scott sorry for the spelling

These rediculous liberal pansies blame everyone and everything for all sorts of shooting incedents its like that stupid BILL MAHER blaming the 2nd AMENDMENT for the shootings becuase he is a total blabbering numbskull too ignorant to count to 5 and absolutly rediculous as well