Bloomberg to Obama and Romney: Where exactly do you stand on gun control?

posted at 6:01 pm on July 20, 2012 by Tina Korbe

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg joins the list of those who can’t bear to refrain from politicizing a tragedy for even one day:

“You know, soothing words are nice, but maybe it’s time that the two people who want to be [p]resident of the United States stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it because this is obviously a problem across the country,” Bloomberg said during an appearance on John Gambling’s radio show, the New York Observer reports. …

“I mean, there are so many murders with guns every day, it’s just got to stop. And instead of the two people – President Obama and [Gov.] Romney – talking in broad things about they want to make the world a better place, [OK], tell us how.”

Bloomberg’s immediate pivot from the movie massacre to one of his pet issues echoes tweets by Piers Morgan earlier today.

“More Americans will buy guns after this, to defend themselves, and so the dangerous spiral descends,” Morgan postulated. “When/how does it stop?”

Never mind that, as Michelle Malkin points out, armed Colorado citizens have, in fact, saved lives during mass shootings. The important point is to immediately pounce upon Americans’ natural response to this morning’s news. Morgan, Bloomberg and the rest know that Americans move quickly from “We mourn this moment” to “We must do something!” Not a minute to waste if they’re to ensure that the something Americans do is enact harsher gun policies!

Nor are they ashamed to so transparently seek to use heartache to advance their agenda.  Daily Kos editor David Waldman and fired John Edwards blogger Amanda Marcotte, for example, explicitly defend “the messy business” of dancing on graves.

But, really, why should they be ashamed? They sincerely believe in the efficacy of the “solution” they offer. If I thought for one minute that stricter requirements and a longer process to obtain a gun would somehow remove the violent streak so persistent in human nature, I’d join them in clamoring for ’em.

That’s just it, though: Violence has exerted itself again and again in the gruesome and glorious history of humanity and it will again. As Judge Janine said on Fox News this morning, “In a free society, it happens.” We seek reasons and explanations for it, but, all too often, we find none. It is — as we so often say — senseless. As the mother of Columbine shooter Dylan Klebold put it, “I will never know why.” A sense of alienation, depression, distress … Any or all might drive an otherwise passive soul to desperate, destructive action. Greed,  hunger and ambition drive violence, too. For that matter, so, too, at times, do a sense of honor, justice or love. None is sufficient to explain the existence or persistence of violence in general. We’re reduced to this admission: Violence is in our nature as humans.

It’s not necessarily, then, a “problem” to be “solved,” but a constraint under which we must live. We rightly seek to deter violence, for its effects are brutal, painful and altogether undesirable. How do we best do that? Most proximately, we ensure that justice is served in our legal system so that would-be criminals know they will not escape punishment should they perpetrate a crime — and we arm the law-abiding populace as a further deterrent. More indirectly, we support the institutions and systems — the family and church, for example —  that produce adults less likely to commit crimes. We might not know why children of two-parent homes are less likely to be violent delinquents, for example, but we know that they are. It makes sense that we would seek to foster the family if we wish to reduce violence. Sadly, none of the systems we put in place to deter violence will eliminate it entirely.

On the other side of violence, though, we see something more positive. The something we do in response to tragedy is as equally human as violence itself, but far more humane: We hurt alongside, we pray for, we speak words of comfort to, we hug, we feed and we love the victims and their families. Isn’t that enough for today?

Tina Korbe is Policy Impact Director at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs and a former associate editor at (but you knew that!).

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


And, as I think I’ve posted before, when you get a driver’s license you should be automatically permitted to carry a concealed firearm, and the right should be *taken away* from criminals instead of paid for and begged for (“Please let me, please?”) by lawful citizens to their local sheriff.
Just like the abortion argument: If you don’t want to exercise your right, fine. Don’t. But from that point on every criminal will have to wonder if the woman walking out to her car is a different type of victim.

rogerb on July 21, 2012 at 8:13 AM

Maybe Bloomberg and Morgan could use a little history lesson.

On the morning of October 1, 1997, Luke Woodham slit his mother’s throat then grabbed a .30-30 lever action deer rifle. He packed the pockets of his trench coat with ammo and headed off to Pearl High School, in Pearl, Miss.

The moment Vice Principal Myrick heard shots, he ran to his truck. He unlocked the door, removed his gun from its case, removed a round of bullets from another case, loaded the gun and went looking for the killer. “I’ve always kept a gun in the truck just in case something like this ever happened,” said Myrick.

Woodham knew cops would arrive before too long, so he was all business, no play. No talk of Jesus, just shooting and reloading, shooting and reloading. He shot until he heard sirens, and then ran to his car. His plan, authorities subsequently learned, was to drive to nearby Pearl Junior High School and shoot more kids before police could show up.

But Myrick foiled that plan. He saw the killer fleeing the campus and positioned himself to point a gun at the windshield. Woodham, seeing the gun pointed at his head, crashed the car. Myrick approached the killer and confronted him. “Here was this monster killing kids in my school, and the minute I put a gun to his head he was a kid again,” Myrick said.

Myrick and his gun, no matter how one looks at it, saved lives. His actions saved the lives of waiting victims at a nearby junior high. He may have kept Woodham from shooting police, who would have arrived at the scene disoriented, without Myrick’s home turf frame of reference. Arguably, Myrick and his gun even saved the life of the killer, who likely would have killed himself or been shot by SWAT cops after spilling more blood. By any sane, rational view, Myrick is a life-saving humanitarian, but his heroic act will be marred by an asterisk in the annals of history.

Myrick is as much of a hero as the law would allow. He was only seconds away from the shootings, yet the law had him far away from his gun. Federal law precludes anyone but a cop from having a weapon in or near a school. The modern spree of school shootings began sometime shortly after this law was enacted. In most places, state and local laws needlessly duplicate the federal law, serving only to accommodate political grandstanding.

In his book More Guns Less Crime, Yale law professor John Lott ran the numbers every which way possible. He set out to write a book about guns being bad, and found that every gun law ever enacted in this country has resulted in more violent crime.

If you want to save lives, the answer is simple. Stop keeping guns from the hands of would-be heroes-the only people who obey gun laws.
Joel Myrick had a gun, legally in his truck. Myrick and his gun saved lives, but they could have saved more.

The lesson: Some guns save lives.

bartonbulletin on July 21, 2012 at 8:22 AM

As all of the reseach shows. The easy availability of legal guns to responsible citizens (most of us) lowers crime. I was taught to shoot in Boy Scouts when I was 10 or 12 years old. We went through several hours of gun safety and care before we ever went to the range to actually fire a weapon. Support for this type of program teaching respect for the weapon and its proper use and care is what we need, certainly not more restrictions on legal gun owners.

conservativecaveman on July 21, 2012 at 8:22 AM

First of all, the shooter evidenced outstanding gun control in that he appears to have hit the majority of what he was aiming at.

Secondly, it is all very well being an anti-gun zealot when you are a little billionaire with a close protection squad composed of highly trained armed men who operate 24.7.

Finally – the little man needs to write out the exact text of the 2nd amendment on the blackboard 1000 times. Then he can write an essay explaining what he thinks it means.

CorporatePiggy on July 21, 2012 at 9:18 AM

The constitution and the supreme court say I have an individual right to keep and bear arms Mr Bloomberg. Unless they amend the constitution through the defined process you cannot have resrictive gun control. If you and your leftist gun grabbing buddies tr to ignore the second amendment you will see the citizens of the country exercise their second amendment right as envisioned by the founders. If you want a civil war feel free to try to grab our guns….

Doomsday on July 21, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Another reason the Swiss have low gun crime rate: universal conscription and education on firearms.

A gun is a tool, nothing more nor less. To use it for self-defense you must be skilled in its use and respect what it does as a tool. This requires not just practice on the firing range (next to and amongst others utilizing everything from target pistols to 50 BMG rifles and damn are those things loud) but the cleaning, maintenance/troubleshooting of the firearm and either self-repair or realizing a gunsmith is necessary if it is beyond your skills.

Your average car needs less maintenance, less training, and less skilled use than a firearm used for self-defense.

Why does this matter? Anyone who realizes that they feel the need for a firearm for self-defense realizes that they may have to use it. To defend yourself you must control yourself which requires concentration and practice.

Different Nations have different gun laws, and while we can look at the over-regulated European Nations a few, like the Czech Republic that underwent a top-down and bottom-up takeover by the USSR, point to us and say ‘well we need to hit the broadside of a barn, but once you get the license we can get FA arms while you have to pay the IRS for a transfer fee.’ When asked why they trust their fellow citizens with FA arms, the response is: we remember what happened with the USSR and want to stop that from ever happening again.

And the best and most delicious part of the USSR is that even IT recognized that its own citizens could make arms and that it was USELESS to try and stop them from doing so. Especially in Siberia and other places in the wilderness, you needed a 12ga shotgun just to survive against things like bear and wolves. The problem of production of firearms going small scale is increasing over time, not going down, as the lowest end lathes and mills are now cheap enough and with good enough tolerances to produce not just barrels, but action pieces from steel and aluminum raw cast stock. For home and personal use of SA weapons, that is perfectly legal so long as you don’t sell them, and MT is fighting that as they have a couple of home crafter shops that want to sell to fellow citizens inside MT at the onsies-twosies per month rate. For under $5K you can get a computer rig, digital readouts and free software to put on your lathe or mill and so long as you understand the equipment, you can do a set and forget deal for turning out pieces. The problem for the gun-grabbing Left and politicians isn’t at the high end, any more, but the dedicated low end as they would then have to try and outlaw the very basic machine tools used to create a modern civilization.

Would I put that past them? No.

What is the definition of those who fear technology and seek to sabotage the advances of technology? Luddites.

Those wanting State control to end firearms and their manufacture are thus: Marxist/Leftist/Socialist Luddites.

They typically hate modern power sources, hug trees, and tell you that you can exist on just sunshine and lollipops. And want the government to force you to live as they say, not as they do by and large.

As self-defense is the positive liberty of the right of war, and the means to ensure that your property is safe, it cannot be taken from you. Any attempts to disarm the civil and law abiding population is attempting to disarm you in the face of natural law that is born as part of you. They want to make you accountable only to government, to apparatchiks, to bureaucrats, and throw you in jail if you do not assent to have your positive natural liberties and rights disrespected. Yet I am the actor that grants power for the use of arms in my name in society, but withhold the right of self-defense for myself as it cannot be taken from me even if I wanted it to happen. Every slave can rise up to attack an overseer to gain freedom, every felon has an inalienable right to defend themselves and then be held to account by the rest of the population and have that right acknowledged and upheld in the court of law. The era where this is possible, where we are dependent upon large factories for arms is ending. No amount of kicking and screaming by politicians will stop it: it is too late already.

I welcome this new era of personal liberty and accountability as it means greater, not less freedom, for all if we but choose to use our tools wisely. I recommend teaching children the use of tools, their maintenance, and the safety precautions that go with them… by parents if no one else will do this. The Swiss have shown that this can work and you don’t even need universal conscription to achieve it. I do not fear guns any more than I fear my table saw, miter saw, router, or drill press. And maybe I’ll build a lathe table and get a lathe for it… and start writing my own declaration of independence in steel and aluminum.

ajacksonian on July 21, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Pardon a decidedly theological interlude on this ostensibly political discussion…

The killer in that film theater was not a gun, the gun was merely an instrument. The killer was a spirit — namely, the spirit behind the character of the Joker, which is the spirit of death, even Satan himself.

It even killed the man who glorified the Evil One in the previous Dark Knight film — which should have been a clue to the discerning about its power.

No gun law avails when the spirit of a man is defiled, and seeks only the death of others and ultimately himself. He will find a way, legal or otherwise.

For this reason it is most unwise to blame an inanimate object for the evil deed of a living soul possessing a free will. Or we should then have to ban all inanimate objects.

We try in vain to find a logical reason or cause — something we can pass a human law to fix — for what are truly spiritual manifestations of a reality behind the one we see, and touch, and feel.

bobcalco on July 21, 2012 at 9:39 AM

bobcalco on July 21, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Nicely said.

kingsjester on July 21, 2012 at 9:41 AM


“Speaking on behalf of the cast and crew of ‘The Dark Knight Rises,’ I would like to express our profound sorrow at the senseless tragedy that has befallen the entire Aurora community. I would not presume to know anything about the victims of the shooting but that they were there last night to watch a movie. I believe movies are one of the great American art forms and the shared experience of watching a story unfold on screen is an important and joyful pastime.

The movie theater is my home, and the idea that someone would violate that innocent and hopeful place in such an unbearably savage way is devastating to me.”

Does Christopher Nolan and most of the entertainment industry realize that they bring unspeakable senseless violence and depravity into their “home” on a regular basis?

Hollywood has long left the “innocent and hopeful” approach to moviegoers. Now, with very few exceptions our movies are filled with profanity, blasphemy and every sort of depravity that would make people from just 50 years ago shocked.

……….and Hollywood will not learn from this either. Television will go on exploiting tragedy, promoting crime and magnifying evil in all it’s forms, with just a faint hope every once in awhile.

PappyD61 on July 21, 2012 at 9:54 AM

I welcome this new era of personal liberty and accountability as it means greater, not less freedom, for all if we but choose to use our tools wisely. I recommend teaching children the use of tools, their maintenance, and the safety precautions that go with them… by parents if no one else will do this. The Swiss have shown that this can work and you don’t even need universal conscription to achieve it. I do not fear guns any more than I fear my table saw, miter saw, router, or drill press. And maybe I’ll build a lathe table and get a lathe for it… and start writing my own declaration of independence in steel and aluminum.

ajacksonian on July 21, 2012 at 9:21 AM an adjunct to your screed, I would hasten to add that black powder fire replica firearms — quite literally the weapons of our forefathers — are considered antiques under the current federal law and, as such, are largely exempt from the usual restrictions. They may be mail ordered and sent to you without intervening FFL processing. Your state law may vary, of course, and they are largely subject to the open/concealed carry laws of each state. Once you learn how to load and fire these — particularly the black powder replicas — they may be used for home defense. But there is far more skill to operating one than there is, say, a Glock or Sig Sauer or 1911.

That said, the federal government will actually sell you a firearm and UPS it to your door. The Civilian Marksmanship Program will sell you a Garand U. S. Cal 30 M-1 and ammunition. Of course, you will go through federal background checking, but the rifle is shipped to your address without any intervening FFL.

The War Planner on July 21, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Fatal stabbings reach 2011 levels
By Tracy Swartz posted July 11, 2012 at 12:00 a.m.
A man and a woman were stabbed to death in separate incidents on the North Side Tuesday morning, police said.

A 22-year-old man was fatally stabbed in the 1400 block of North Sedgwick Street on the Near North Side, and a 53-year-old woman was stabbed to death in the 6100 block of North Sheridan Road in Edgewater, according to officials.

Twenty-seven stabbing deaths have been recorded in Chicago so far this year, the same number in all of 2011, according to a RedEye analysis of preliminary police data. About half of the stabbing deaths this year occurred on the South Side, RedEye determined.

killings in Chicago are just Aurora CO in slower motion….

ted c on July 21, 2012 at 10:01 AM

most guns save lives and are the deterrent, rather than the taker of life.

ted c on July 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM

If there is a responsible party here besides the perpetrator himself, who by all accounts was not your typical deranged lunatic until recently, it’s the Hollywood film industry, or, looking at the matter more democratic-capitalistically, the film-goers who fund that industry and reward creators of such evil-glorifying, murder-desensitizing tales and games and merchandize with their hard-earned dollars by flocking, in ever increasing numbers, to consume their blackened fruit.

One of the more telling Drudge headlines of the past 24 hours was one which asked ‘What was a six year old doing at a midnight screening?’ This keen observation is indeed closer to the root of the problem than wondering whether our gun laws are strict enough.

Again: The film is not the issue, and banning it is just as silly as banning guns. The point is to discern the spirit behind.

We need as a nation to purify our hearts, for they have become very, very unclean. We don’t do this by punishing other people so much as bringing our own hearts into alignment with our Creator’s.

bobcalco on July 21, 2012 at 10:06 AM

bobcalco on July 21, 2012 at 10:06 AM


kingsjester on July 21, 2012 at 10:13 AM

I’m sorry. I thought that we already had laws which made it illegal to murder people. Perhaps murders occur because CRIMINALS don’t obey laws. But I’m certain if we just had MORE LAWS, criminals would become law-abiding and crime would be eliminated.

oldleprechaun on July 21, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Why not ask the candidate where they stand on “movie control?” An easy argument that a murdered who tells police he was the “joker” suggests that the killer was highly motivated by sick Hollywood movies. He just used guns to to express his infatuation with the Hollywood movie. So let’s pass a bunch of laws to tie down Hollywood.

BillCarson on July 21, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Who cares what Nanny Bloomturd thinks???

LevinFan on July 21, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Scissors don’t cut anything, by themselves……….they are only dangerous if Hands are using them.

Hey, Mayor Big Gulp……’s the person, not the tool.


PappyD61 on July 21, 2012 at 11:01 AM

It is easy to wonder: Why did God let it happen?

But this is the point. Unlike Satan, He never, ever uses force. His Spirit will defend the defenseless, but only where He is welcome to be the Defender.

In the case of this theater, every member of the crowd chose to be there, to take part or otherwise delight in that film. So the spirit behind it — one of anarchy, chaos, death and destruction — had authority to rule. This is how the spirit realm works.

If God allows a great evil to occur, rest assured it was only because He was unwelcome to be control, or some other strongman was given rights by someone in authority where it happened.

The spiritual covering behind a place determines much about what happens within its boundaries. This is why boundaries of nations matter, and why the character of our leaders matters.

bobcalco on July 21, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Hey, Mayor Big Gulp……’s the person, not the tool.

Well, in Big Gulp’s case, he is a tool — of spirits. Most of our politicians are, and most of them don’t even know which spirits are using them to work their iniquity. Most of them naively think they’re good guys.

This is what is meant when we speak of ‘powers and principalities’… the ruling spirits are what really run the show. You don’t need finely tuned conspiracy theories to make sense of it.

bobcalco on July 21, 2012 at 11:31 AM

I read elsewhere that the movie theater was a “gun free zone”. Fewer people might have been killed if that were not the case.

JayDick on July 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM

As Judge Janine said on Fox News this morning, “In a free society, it happens.” We seek reasons and explanations for it, but, all too often, we find none. It is — as we so often say — senseless. As the mother of Columbine shooter Dylan Klebold put it, “I will never know why.”

There is so much that is immediately lacking in this entire narrative:
Paranoid Schizophrenics decompensate and “act out”, sometimes in a grandiose manner.
Much like Loughner in Tucson, the Aurora shooter is schizophrenic. That didn’t stop the erroneous reporting: “He belonged to the Tea Party!” – whoops
The only difference being that Loughner’s parents were in close proximity to their son when he went “off the rails”, but the ‘rents of this schizoid were far removed at the time – although they knew there was a problem.
As for the Columbine Kids, they were disaffected nobodies out to make a name for themselves. No schizophrenia there, but rather “anomie”.
Different actors, different motivations and compulsions.

Karl Magnus on July 21, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Why does Bloomberg, being the babbling fool that he is, think that anyone outside of New York City gives a crap what he says? I know narcissism is a trait of the progressive mental disorder known as liberalism, but Bloomberg takes it into insanity.

volsense on July 21, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Gun control does not work. Look at Norway in Canada – it still can happen:

91 Killed in Norway Island Massacre, Capital Blast

Movie Massacre Victim Narrowly Missed Toronto Mall Shooting

Bad guys will always get guns. In TX Mexican drug cartels are armed to the teeth. If Romney comes out and says anything along the lines of making assault rifles illegal, I honestly may not vote. That will piss me off to no end and I won’t care who runs the country at that time, because the Republic is all but guaranteed at that point. He gets my vote if he uses these examples and others from countries around the world where gun control is so severe the populace has not way to defend themselves. That is how he needs to answer this. The Norway idiot was killing kids. There will always be idiots. And the number of people who died in car accidents yesterday is less than the number of people who died in the theater. While a tragic event, to co-opt it for political reasons is pathetic and the left should be exposed for it by someone willing to fight.

gmerits on July 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Republic is all but guaranteed to be on the path to death at that point. My bad.

gmerits on July 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

It’s probably already been cited above, but I like the William S. Burroughs quote that goes something like: right after a shooting spree they always want to take guns away from the people who didn’t do it.

jackmac on July 21, 2012 at 1:21 PM

have you seen the size of the sodas they sell at movie theaters ????!!!!! let alone the vats of salt and fat drenched popcorn…

who cares about guns when it’s sodas that clearly kill people… Nanny Dearest.

the deeper issues behind all this horror is sociopathy and narcissism. humans always have and always will kill each other for often mindless irrational reasons-if they do not have guns they can do it with a knife, a hammer, a potted pucking plant. they will find a way.

our culture has many rather disturbing ways of glorifying mass and serial murder along with rape and random destructive degrading violence-criminal , clinical sociopathy is the new rebellion. there is even a subset of mass murderers who do it for the glory- to make a name for themselves. celebrity through homicide.

i wonder at how shamelessly and destructively narcissistic our culture has become- because it seems to feed the sociopathy that leads to these outrageous sorts of crimes. not that such crimes haven’t basically always been with it but we consider our rule of law a hallmark of civilization. we pride ourselves on our respect for the individual and the personal freedoms of the individuals. yet the first person we blame for a brutally senseless crime isn’t a person at all but an inanimate object- the same object that could have handily stopped this man.

self defense and guns are part of the responsibility of freedom in a democracy- otherwise one starts to urge legislation of a police state, a tyranny where that responsibility is ceded to the government because of a very small-really minute- percentage of Holmeses. mass murder is rare- it would be rarer if the gun rights of the law abiding and sane were more respected then the rights of the criminal and power hungry politicians with no respect for the rights of others.

mittens on July 21, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Look closely folks, thats the Face of Evil.

Micheal Bloomberg is Americas Pol Pot.

The sooner he is removed from the gene pool the better.

orbitalair on July 21, 2012 at 2:11 PM


Man shoots armed burglar

Man clears of any wrong doing

Four months later he is still waiting to get his gun back

He’s a smart dude luckily. He has a back up gone. Another reason to have several firearms: THE GOVERNMENT.

CW on July 21, 2012 at 2:15 PM

bartonbulletin on July 21, 2012 at 8:22 AM

I would love for Bloomberg and every other anti-gun idiot out there to once again remind us who stopped the Giffords carnage last year.

riddick on July 21, 2012 at 2:35 PM

The sooner he is removed from the gene pool the better.

orbitalair on July 21, 2012 at 2:11 PM

I think we’re already lucky with that one unless he left hefty deposits in sperm banks.

riddick on July 21, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Ebert: Gun-Free Theater Proves Concealed Carry Doesn’t Work

Boy, those Progs sure are smart!

Resist We Much on July 21, 2012 at 2:49 PM

The people to bloomberg: Do us a favor and stay in nyc forever and keep your trap shut.

Fuquay Steve on July 21, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Sure wish someone, someday would ask one of these anti-gun turds why they need armed security but Mrs. Jones, shopping at Albertson’s and going to the parking lot at 11:00 PM doesn’t.

arnold ziffel on July 21, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Who respects this chump?

BoxHead1 on July 21, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Where exactly do you stand? It’s kinda hard to explain. Watch this video, the guy at 2:25 shows exactly where to stand.

Dollayo on July 21, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Funny. Local economy is in bad shape, unemployment numbers suck (Las Vegas valley). My wife and I stopped by a local gun shop, she finally relented and said “Let’s go look”. The place was mobbed, a line at a cash register and all the sales guys busy with customers. ALL MSRP, of course, and i don’t blame them, business is good.

riddick on July 21, 2012 at 11:57 PM

Mayor Blumturd wants gun control. I would agree as soon as he bans all movies and plays in New York City where there is a gun or where gun violence occurs. He can regulate soda, so why can’t he regulate that. Then I will give what he says some credibility. Until then he needs to just shut up and maybe regulate cotton candy.

manjodad on July 22, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Mitt COULD bring up the 5,430 murders in New York City and the controversial Stop-and-Frisk policy there. That is what a smart politician would do.

Then he could ask why 0bama is hiding the evidence from the failed Fast and Furious program which reportedly caused the deaths of over 300 people. That is what a smart politician would do.

So what is Romney going to do? He is going to hone his foreign policy overseas. Yep! That will win this election all right. /s

DannoJyd on July 22, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Where exactly do you stand? It’s kinda hard to explain. Watch this video, the guy at 2:25 shows exactly where to stand.

Dollayo on July 21, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Different rifles. Were they all that same caliber? I’ll pass on trying this one and accept my status as wimp.

swinia sutki on July 23, 2012 at 7:50 AM