September 21, 2017
Nation Latest News | Poll Questions | Stephen King | Hurricane Jose | Aaron Hernandez

Comments for: Obama to speak at Newtown, Conn., vigil today

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    Maybe some more fake tears?

  • Anonymous

    If we can look the other way on the 4th and 5th amendments in the name of “homeland security” – the 2nd amendment can be reconsidered too.

    • Anonymous

      why would you look away? Most educated people haven’t

      • Quoting a colleague. “The idea that we need to go back to the way things were in the past in order to reduce school violence has a problem. School violence is not actually happening at a greater rate than in the past (when TV violence was more regulated, when there was mandatory school prayer, when there was less gun control, etc.).”

        • Anonymous

          “Mandatory school prayer”……seriously?

          Let me guess…….and no gay marriage, and no abortions…….hey, now there is an interesting subject. Many of the very same people that don’t want ANY changes to gun laws are also fighting tooth and nail to save the lives of fetuses……..which once again tells me that many conservatives fall all over themselves trying to save fetuses, but once the child is born……….they really wash their hands of those young little lives. How else can you explain their disregard for life after birth???? This goes even further as it concerns support for unwed mothers and their children, as well as our education and healthcare systems. It’s beyond pathetic the hypocrisy that I hear and read from so-called “pro-life” drum beaters.

          • I lost you? Are you being critical of the comment or supporting it? You seem to be supporting it.

            The quote I shared argues that durring the era when we DID mandate prayer, regulated violence on TV MORE, and had much LESS gun control legislation, we had MORE school violence.

            The point? There is no evidence that trending in reverse on these issues is the right course.

  • I do agree with Obama that military style assault rifles should be banned from the public. There’s no reason to need to have an assault rifle or even an automatic for that matter. Weapons should only be used for home defense not for in public(open carry)

    • Anonymous

      Nope. The second admendment is there for people to protect themselves from the government.. So the Government should not have a say in it whatsoever.

      • There’s no need to carry automatic or assault style weapons out in the open. I’m not saying get a rid of guns all together

        • Anonymous

          Tell me Kirk (or anyone else), other than the APPEARANCE, the difference between a semi-auto deer rifle, and a semi-auto “assault” rifle. Would you please? And leave the size of the clip out of it.

          • I have no idea. It’s acceptable for hunting, but not to walk down a city sidewalk with

          • Anonymous

            Thanks for being honest. There is no difference. They shoot the same ammo. One shot for each pull of the trigger. Difference is one looks all evil to the people that want to ban guns.

          • I will agree, but auto’s can kill more people faster then a handgun could

          • Anonymous

            Autos are already illegal unless you have difficult to obtain license. When was the last time you heard of a crime committed with a full auto?

          • This issue is not as simple as gun control. However, suggesting that gun control is off grounds to discuss is simply immature.

            Suggesting that the design of guns doesn’t consider the purpose for using the gun is like suggesting tools are not designed to do a specific task.

            A nail gun and a hammer are the same by your argument as they each drive a nail.

          • Anonymous

            How can you leave the size of the clip out of it when this is the type of weapon (that uses 28/30 rounds of ammo in seconds) that was used to murder 26 people in a matter of a couple of minutes???? The 7 children that the chief medical examiner autopsied had 3 to 11 bullet wounds. What do you say to that????

          • Anonymous

            Thanks for showing that you know nothing about guns.

            What part of the clip size statement did you not understand? Ban big clips. Problem solved. Not the guns.

          • Regulating clip size is a form of gun control. Do you interpret gun control to me absolute disarmament?

          • Thats like saying, “The size of the knife is irrelevant when you stab someone.”

            Hunting riffles are designed to be optimal for hunting. Assault riffles are designed to be optimal for killing people efficiently.

          • Anonymous

            When two guns use the exact same ammo, one shot per trigger pull, you tell me exactly what the deference is other than appearance. You can’t? Thanks BJ.

          • I can Bitter_Pill (rather cynical name there): How about you get 20-30 pulls vs 3-5? In some magazines that fit the AR-15 you can have up to 100.

            You have a rifle designed to handle the heat produced by rapid succession fire, so that you can reload quickly and keep killing without over heating the gun.

            The gun is designed to replicate battle field class weapons for a reason. To communicate the killing that takes place on the battle field. This is a marketing tactic.

            The AR-15 was used by the last three mass shootings in the US. Sold at Walmart for the “lowest price, guaranteed…. Save money, Live better.” Ironic. Newton, Colorado and Oregon… each of those mass shooters chose an assault rifle rather then a hunting riffle. Tell me why they EACH chose the AR-15? Was it because its a good hunting riffle?

            Your sarcasm is unfortunate.

            http://www.walmart.com/search/search-ng.do?search_query=ar-15&ic=16_0&Find=Find&indexId=13ba75f3fb8c&cdnHost=search-cdn.walmart.com&searchdropdowndiv=com.wm.module.305715.constraint&search_constraint=0

            http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/us/lanza-used-a-popular-ar-15-style-rifle-in-newtown.html?_r=0

      • Anonymous

        That was a great argument back in the seventeen and eighteen hundreds. Do you really feel you are a match for an M1A2 tank?

  • Anonymous

    Does anyone have a clue on why we have the second amendment?? Seems like some don’t.. Do you actually think that we, you included would have freedoms if the citizens weren’t armed?. We would have a Ruler not elected officals.. Countries that have rulers haven’t done well for their people.

    • Anonymous

      there’s got to be some middle ground between nra craziness and anti gun hysterics.

      • Anonymous

        I don’t think it is anti-gun hysterics to want assault rifles out of the hands of the public. I am not against all guns per se, just guns like the ones that always seemed to be used in massacres like this most recent incident. It should not be so easy to go on a rampage and kill so many people at once if you are not in a war zone. I am against guns being so readily available to the clearly mentally unstable. I saw something posted the other day that made sense to me. It said “You have to have a psych eval to get a gastric bypass surgery, but not to buy a gun?” Why would people literally buying the power to cause death not have to be shown to be mentally stable first? We have all seen what happens when guns get into the hands of the unstable, all too often.

    • There is no evidence to support this argument newer then the revolutionary war.

      The US military could take control of the US under martial law even if every
      civilian was armed. Democide is not an American problem.

      The military resources available to our military make the argument that civilians need guns to protect themselves from the government in the US, idiotic and indefensible. How would the citizens of Maine, for example, defend themselves from warships, missiles, unmanned aircraft etc?

      This over simplified argument is made by people with myopic paradigms of the facts in this world. Ironically hijacking civilized debate on how we can, IN FACT, promote safety in our civilization.

  • Anonymous

    Some of these comments reveal, once again, the impossibility of discussing any gun control with those who insist that ordinary citizens must protect themselves from the govt.–at any level–and who shed no tears for innocents killed with high–powered weapons. Nothing new will come of the CT tragedy, and the NRA can continue to impose its will on the American people.

  • Anonymous

    I wonder if Barry will address the hundreds of innocent women and children he’s murdered in foreign countries? Hmmmm? His rhetoric holds no water in light of such facts. Or fast and furious? Again, innocent women and chidlren killed as a result. Sorry mr. President, your words ring hollow when you have sentenced 177 women and children to die via drone in Pakistan alone.
    Maybe he’ll talk about his murder of anwar alwakis son? A us citizen murderd because he was collateral damage…..

  • Anonymous

    December 15, 1791

    The date that the 2nd Amendment was adopted. Were semi-automatic assault rifles available at that time? If they weren’t then how can someone argue that our current state of affairs in this country was even in the realm of thought of these men in 1791???

    • Anonymous

      Oh but argue they will. Why does anyone need an assault rifle ? It’s not to go out and shoot 25 deer at one time….it’s to shoot 25 people at one time.

You may also like