You sir, have captured my sentiments exactly.  I am a registered Republican, and I absolutely hate it when people generalize and stereotype Republicans in general based on Bush.  Republicans are supposed to advocate fiscal responsibilty, and Bush has done a 180 on that front increasing spending across the board.

Anyway, gun control is a two-sided issue and I'm tired of debating it instead of playing and discussing games. It truly is a debate that could go on forever.

They should just make it so that you have to take a gun course to own a gun. Simple as that.

plus you would probably give some people jobs as instructors so in turn it will assist unemployment. 

That would certainly be a beneficial program.  There are a lot of things that could be done to decrease gun related deaths other than just simply removing them or adding extremely strict laws.  This much is true.

Banning guns does not help, criminals will always get them and use them regardless. So in essence then the ban only hurts law abiding honest citizens, and no government has a right to hurt honest law abiding citizens.

Didn't hear or care about Obama's speech, I don't see how we as the most advanced nation on earth would still be talking about the color of ones skin and make an issue of it, shameful!.

His pastors speech was disgusting but that has nothing to do with Obama. I know without a doubt Obama doesn't believe the US govt manufactured AIDS to kill people of color.

@source

actually it was a madrassa that he attended, that was the word HE used to describe his school in Indonesia.

and your Catholic school analogy doesnt work, it isnt like he went to a Muslim school in Kansas, he went to Indonesia. Why was the move to Indonesia necessary?? well thats where the radicals are.

Bush has ties to Saudi oil but he sure didnt live, learn, grow up in Saudi Arabia. And Ron Paul was never a MEMBER of the KKK, unlike Obama who has been a MEMBER of this anti american church for 20 years!!!

and i dont know how Paul reacted to support from KKK, but I do know Obama has played coy/stupid with this issue. Going so far to say that he has NEVER heard these kinds of statements in his 20 years at the church, but his preacher just now starts this crap when Obama is in the national spotlight?!?!?!

Obama is telling some BIG LIES on a regular basis. He isnt even trying to hide it.

@nazna
you are right, gun control only works if everyone does it. but why is a criminal going to do it? by definition the criminal disregard's laws. you think guns should/will be totally banned worldwide? even then criminals will have guns. gun laws just keep guns out of the hands of people who DO follow the law, not criminals.

and i never said Obama was a terrorist, so do but

Hey you ever heard of a politician that did not lie?

 I can't tell if you're a troll or a legit account so I'll assume its the second.

1st. Or a liberal or somebody from a country with gun control laws that work. I live in NZ, we have one of the highest numbers of guns per capita in the world. We also have low gun crime due to extremely tight regulation and control. Thats what America needs.

2nd. It isn't a fact that 'around 2 million violent crimes are stopped' show me a study that states that, taking into account confounding variables. In fact according to Wikipedia (and cited on wikipedia) its more like 65,000 times a year guns are used defensively.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

3rd. This is the supreme court, not the government. Although I must admit your government has worryingly large amounts of control of the courts (the president appointing judges?), but that is a deeper flaw in the system. Also I would be far more worried about your current governments attack on peoples rights in Guantanamo Bay, things like the right to counsel, the right to a fair trial, the right to habeas corpus are all being ignored. To me thats fucking scary.

4th. If a person breaks into your house with a gun, and you have a gun, one of you is going to be shot - or plausibly your family. If a person breaks into your house with a gun, and you don't have a gun, most likely neither of you are going to be shot. Personally I prefer the version without the shooting.

As for the Wendys situation, does the incredibally slim chance of this happening even come close to outweighing the negative effects of having guns so incredibaly easily accesible? 

I'm amazed at what liberal means in terms of government. Also, since some people really love their guns (Hey, when you feel helpless and weak, a small piece of machinery that could drop anyone feels... good? I dunno), any talk at all about federal gun law will get far more attention.

Anyway, even if people didn't have guns, they'd have weapons. Some would use them to rob (See, knife robbery) and commit other crimes. It's not really a deterrant to have or not have. Though an age where convenience stores were at danger of being robbed by battle axes seems... interesting.

Take responsible use to a new level. Anyone puts a bullet in someone else for a purpose other than self defense gets a bullet put through them. Don't have a gun, you aren't likely to shoot someone. Have a gun, be responsible with it.

It's nice to talk like the above statement, but nothing in life is ever clear enough to make that satisfactory, so I can't advise it to be logical, just wishful thinking. It would also require non corruption in any judicial or legal sense, and clearly, that's entirely true!

The right for women to defend themself (the right to self defense via firearms) is far more important. Obama is a little better than Clinton but the difference is not black and white :)