Jason Alexander Sparks A Twitter War About Gun Laws

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:

[ Life]

Jason Alexander, best known for his role as the goofy and curmudgeonly sidekick George on the 90’s sitcom Seinfeld, has stirred up controversy once again after tweeting his opinions on gun control in light of the Colorado shootings. He was recently in the news for some questionable remarks made on a talk show regarding the game of Cricket, and he later took to Twitter to clear things up.

Update: Since this story was originally written, it appears that Alexander has utilized the situation to get a little marketing power of Twitter.

Now, the comment that started a heated debate was made on Twitter, and Alexander has written a lengthy post about it.

That comment sparked a rather large debate on whether or not the right for Americans to arm themselves was meant for private citizens, and after Alexander received a staggering amount of responses on Twitter, he composed a longer tweet to address his concerns in depth.

Among other things, Alexander argues that the type of guns we have access to are the problem; this only sparked more ire from Twitterers.

…I get messages from seemingly decent and intelligent people who offer things like: @BrooklynAvi: Guns should only be banned if violent crimes committed with tomatoes means we should ban tomatoes. OR @nysportsguys1: Drunk drivers kill, should we ban fast cars?

I’m hoping that right after they hit send, they take a deep breath and realize that those arguments are completely specious. I believe tomatoes and cars have purposes other than killing. What purpose does an AR-15 serve to a sportsman that a more standard hunting rifle does not serve? Let’s see – does it fire more rounds without reload? Yes. Does it fire farther and more accurately? Yes. Does it accommodate a more lethal payload? Yes. So basically, the purpose of an assault style weapon is to kill more stuff, more fully, faster and from further away. To achieve maximum lethality. Hardly the primary purpose of tomatoes and sports cars.

While shooting deaths have clearly been a problem in the U.S. for a long time, it’s been a recurring issue in recent years, starting most notably with Columbine and ending with the tragic ambush on the Aurora movie theater where 12 people lost their lives. And, judging by this Twitter debate, a change in gun laws isn’t something we will all agree on for quite some time.

Jason Alexander Sparks A Twitter War About Gun Laws
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • JD

    How many kids have been killed in the southside of Chicago so far this year?? Alot mote than twelve. There is a bunch of Jokers in that area every day. AR 15’S or any other gun is capable of killing.

  • Joseph Wesley Moats

    This is so stupid. A gun, regardless of type, is a tool just like any other tool. The problem is the jack wagons that use them in the wrong way. If you try and use a 25lb sledge to drive a 4d finish nail then clearly you don’t need access to hammers of any sort. It’s the same way with guns. A lot of people like the AR-15s because they look cool. I’m kinda parshall to a pump 12 gauge myself or a bow. Either way it isn’t the tool that is to blame it’s the operator. If Jason Alexander lived in the back country he may have more of an appreciation for a fine rifle. It’s a way of life.

    • mitch


    • Deborah

      I agree totally with you. Banning guns, rifles or any other firearm is not the answer. People kill people. Plain and simple.

    • todd

      what a brilliant argument. The way the AR-15 makes you look (like a toothless hick i’d bet) is reason enough not to ban it ! Heck, it only killed 12 innocent people, but how you look is what matters most !

    • Oaty

      parshall huh?
      Nice back country spelling there.

  • t stidham

    its the same old argument guns dont kill people people kill people banning guns isnt the answer if not an assault rifle then a 15 shot glock maybe not as many people killed or wounded but a massacre just the same god bless all the families of the victims my familys thought and prayers are with yall i say stone the the bastard back a truck up full of rocks and let the families stone him to death no matter how long it takes lethal injection is to humane let him feel the horror they must have felt

    • mitch

      SAYS IT

      • Duck Butter

        uhhh, mr or mrs or miss t stidham,
        where in the world is your punctuation?
        Good Lord…

    • todd

      if guns don’t kill people, and people kill people. Then why does the gov’t ban grenades and rocket launchers sale ? Heck, they don’t kill people, people kill people !

  • Brent Rankin

    Who really cares what this guy thinks?

    • toast

      You apparently do or else you wouldn’t have read the article

  • JFO

    When will Hollywood learn that unless someone has written it down and it’s in something called a script, they shouldn’t open their mouths.

  • MEM

    People don’t mention that the AR-15 was for sale to the public years before it was adopted by the military in the 1960s. The round that an AR15 fires is far less powerful than most hunting rounds and tens of thousands of ARs are used in hunting and competition shooting across the US every year.

    Domestic Policy advice from George Costanza? No thanks you DMF.

    • todd

      wow Mem, since the gun that is used for massacre of human lives is used by a bunch of toothless hillbillies that think killing an innocent bear is a sport, then we should just give them out with every single purchase of a carton of milk. Idiot

      • muffbumper

        I get a free AR15 with my milk too! Wow, Milk is way more awesome than anyone ever knew.

  • Pat

    Moviemakers have some responsibility here. Batman and Robin were not violent on TV or in comic books years ago, they were righteous and a little silly. What makes moviemakers (writers, producers, directors, actors . . .they are all culpable) come to the conclusion that they must play out the most contorted sick elements of being human and glorify the twisted evil? We already know that people will imitate “art”. Movie studios are reckless in their lust for money and take no responsibility for their actions, like pedophile priests.

    • Drey

      Really? You really think the movie makers have responsibility here? Real life trumps entertainment every day of the week! Crazy people will find ways to destroy. You know, they tried to blame video games first, but discovered that the only one he really played was “Guitar Hero”…..put the blame where it fully belongs…on the person who killed.

  • Joe

    Does anyone really care about Mr. Alexander’s opinion on gun control? He makes a living acting like someone else and that’s supposed to make him an authority on social and/ or Constitutional issues? I think not

  • jimrufino

    Where the hell were you during the Vietnam War…….and the rest of you Hollywood pieces of shit? I do not approve of what happened, but stand up and maybe you may have a say in the matter…………..Jim

  • rle

    People keep missing the point. There is no need to ban all types of guns. Just assault guns. Just by the name itself, it is meant to kill people (in the fastest and efficient way possible). I believe in everybody’s right to defend themselves. But assault guns that can spew 60 rounds/min is ridiculous.

  • rob

    george is gettin UPSET

  • tom tom

    remember Virginia Tech? 32 deaths? nothing changed, Pro gun Americans are so used to violence, nothing is shocking enough to change their beliefs.
    In England things didnt change untill a man walked in a school & did a mass shooting of 5 yr olds, but that hardly made news here because most Americans dont really care untill something happens to them or someone they know.
    Its a sad road to destruction, looks like these cases will pile up untill change is made & for change to be mad the most shocking story ever will have to happen
    I believe assault weapons & semi automatic weapons should be banned.

    • todd

      finally a voice of reason…these gun toting hicks are so painfully stupid, it’s tough to change their minds. Why can’t someone just get grenades, and rockets in the name of right to bear arms ? It’s right to bear arms only when it’s convienient to keep your AR-15, but not in other cases ? Ban all weapons except hunting rifles.

  • http://yahoo Pamela Koch

    I agree with Jason, something should be done about the easy availability of semi, and automatic weapons for sale to anyone. Don’t worry though, politicians will not touch this debate with a ten foot pole as it would be political suicide. And I don’t agree that only criminals will have guns.Most people that have guns, have them stored at home in a gun cabinet or dresser, they don’t take them out of the house because they have no intentions of hurting anyone, unlike the nuts who use the automatic firearms to hurt others. If one person can get saved by limiting the sale of automatic weapons then a ban is well worth it, in my opinion.

  • GLK

    Jason please! Just thank your lucky stars that fate landed you on a wildly lucrative TV show. Just because your lot in life was to parody Larry David in front of a camera doesn’t make your real life opinions special. in fact the only thing that mattered was that you’d make me laugh and you’re not doing that anymore.

  • Dave

    Spin it any way you want. Jason is right. Of course assault rifles should be not be readily available.

    Only gun freaks, uber-libertarians, hard-core rednecks, and gov’t conspiracy theorists disagree. Oh wait, that’s 60% of the population in Alabama.

    • Corey

      I agree, 100% and Louisiana also.

  • http://Yahoo Linda

    This debate will never end. I get so sick of hearing it.

  • bob jackson

    What if this guy waited until the movie was over and plowed into the lobby with a truck and did the same thing…..would we ban trucks? When someone wants to commit mayhem they will find a way.

  • mitch


  • http://yahoo.com mark

    But, cricket IS gay

    • Snow

      hillarious Mark

  • cm

    It’s obvious that this star who’s made millions making people laugh has just done it again…..NEWS FLASH moron….. don’t blame the weapon for the idiot behind it…TAKING GUNS FROM THE PEOPLE WHO LEGALLY CAN HAVE THEM WILL ONLY MAKE ILLEGAL GUN RUNNING GO ON AN ALL TIME HIGH….stop blaming guns and start fing blaming the people behind them…you wanna find a cure for something cure cancer cause your never gonna cure an insane act of violence from any of these psychopaths out there….never happen so put your money and your brains somewhere else…..sincerely an AR-15 owner……

    • mitch


  • http://webpronews james

    A Ar15 does not have a more lethal payload than my 30/06 or my .308 and they are hunting rifles that are semi-auto also.

  • Jake

    Too bad Mr. Alexander has no idea what he is twitting about.

    The rifle that the suspect used in Colorado is not
    fully automatic, it is semi automatic.

    If he lived near me I’d invite him to my range to get
    him an education.

  • Jake

    Folks, more citizens are killed every day
    from intoxicated drivers and other incidents,
    no firearms required.

    Firearms are tools, like cars, computers, CNC machines,
    hammers and microwave ovens.

    It is what the individual used the tool for that makes the

  • Mike

    It’s always amazing to see people (Liberal Celebrities) that haven’t the slightest clue on a subject believe that they have a right to give their opinion. He needs to stick to what he knows, which definitely is not gun control nor acting.

    • Corey

      So you do not believe in the constitution, that he should have a right to freedom of speech??? I agree, I am a Captain in the military, no citizen should have automatic weapons, you should have weapons for safety and food.

      • Roland Heights

        @Corey – If indeed you are really a military captain you are very much in the minority among military people that I know. The second amendment was written to enable people to fight against a tyrannical government. To do this people clearly need appropriate weapons and if that means full-auto, then so be it. Besides, any criminal in the world can illegally obtain a full auto or anything else.

        And regardless of whether the Supreme Court might decide that civilians should have flame throwers, missiles or tanks, there can be no question that in Heller v. DC and McDonal v. Chicago, that the 2nd amendment refers to rifles, shotguns, pistols and revolvers of all kinds.

  • muffbumper

    The only thing that determines the proper use of an object is the intent of the user. Just because a gun makes killing easy does not make it’s main purpose to kill indiscriminately.

  • Kevin

    Jason who?

    • mitch


  • mike s

    Maybe we should ban all cars and motorcycles that go above the speed limit…they make it easier to go fast…

  • John

    Not sure who that guy is but he looks a lot like George Castanza

  • jaxonbox

    I believe most anything, including my cooking, could someone if done correctly. We keep trying to regulate stupidity and it’ll NEVER happen. Even if the gun he wanted was a dart gun, machine gun, marshmallow blow gun, deer rifle or pistol, if we make them ALL illegal it will NEVER stop an irrational person from getting their hands on one. Making guns illegal doesn’t keep them from the wrong hands. Period !!!!!

    • jaxonbox

      Ooops, my comment should have said ” ….. could KILL someone if done correctly.”

  • http://yahoo aaron

    Gun laws shoul come in to force so this dont happen. Tell me again how crimials “OBEY LAWS.”

  • Roland Heights

    Hey “George Costanza,” why make public display of your abject stupidity and terminal ignorance? A military style weapon was NOT used. But more important, if you were better educated than you are, you’d know that guns are used for self-defense far more frequently than for any criminal purpose.

    Finally, the BEST GUN to use for self-defense is a semi-automatic or a “double action” revolver. Both give the shooter one shot per trigger pull. This enables the shooter to fire more than once without having to consume time manually reloading gun in a desperate life-or-death self-defense situation.

  • Elle

    Gun slingers always use drunk driving as a rebuttal, look. Assault riffles should be illegal in private hands period. Why the hell do you need to fire that many rounds to “protect your home”? Stop it!

    • Roland Heights

      @Elle – please educate yourself. Article II (the 2nd amendment) was written to enable the people to defend themselves against the government. Period. This being the case, it is reasonable to include fully-automatic weapons.

      As for “need” it’s irrelevant. We don’t “need” people like you expressing a misguided viewpoint, but that doesn’t nullify the first amendment,… does it???

      As for “gun slingers” always using drunk driving as a rebuttal: I’m a gun owner and I’ve never used it.

      • jwaters327

        The defense against the government argument is also specious as that ship sailed a long time ago. Unless we are going to let private citizens own rocket launchers, tanks, and ultimately nuclear weapons there is no hope for a civilian group to stand against the US military. If a coup were ever necessary in this country, the only option is to convince the military itself to turn in defense of the people. At the time the second amendment was written, it would have been impossible to imagine the kind of firepower that would be available for such reasonable prices. While in theory I agree with its principal that people have the right to defend themselves, it is beyond time that we find some reasonable limits on it based on the newly available information. At the very least we should be able to come to an agreement on limiting clip size. An extended magazine serves only to allow one to kill more people in a shorter amount of time. That wouldn’t even serve well in a theoretical revolution, because spraying bullets against a trained marine regiment only makes you an easier target. American politics slips way too easily into idealism and its time for us to get a healthy dose of reality.

        • mitch

          WELL SPOKEN

          • jwaters327

            thanks, we move the debate by having well reasoned coversations, not by trading barbs, or at least I’d like to think so.

        • ben

          Funny it worked for our forefathers.

      • Snow

        words to avoid in life:
        SHOULD (I’m guilty on this one)

        • Troy

          See, I agree with that. Why not get our hands on every kind of military weapon available, like rocket launchers, nuclear weapons, flame throwers, etc. Why stop at assault rifles? When that guy breaks in and you have that golden opportunity, you gotta do it big.

  • John

    Is this country mad? Jason Alexander is 100% right, there is no need for the calibre of weaponry that is available to the public. And im not saying this in light of the Colorodo tragedy, im saying this because its common sense. Yes, guns are a tool, just like everything else. We use them to hunt, or to defend ourselves from criminals. We do not need guns that can fire 60 rounds per minute among public citizens, what are you looking to accomplish with a weapon like that? If that is legal, then why not bombs, nukes, etc. Where does it end? Im not going against the 2nd amendment or anything, but its just out of control. Meanwhile, marijuana is still illegal. Look, you can believe in whatever you want to believe in, but if you have an ounce of common sense in your body then you gotta believe thats fucked up.

  • Snow

    It seems as though people who use guns like an AR-15 to murder or commit crimes are not the same type of people who own guns and use them appropriately. I have taken the NRA safety courses. Every January I purchase an annual hunting/fishing license. I have 15 or so guns in my gun SAFE. I also believe that we have the right to bear arms, but I am beginning to wonder if we make it TOO easy to obtain guns. I don’t agree with Constanza, but I am beginning to wonder if something needs to change. Maybe rather than gun control we need more media control? Stop glorifying the criminals and we wouldn’t get so many people beating down doors to be the next one? Maybe if we glorified jumping off buildings all the broken, attention hungry people out there would just do that??? Still needing to think on this some more:
    Signed – SNOW – aka kinda confused right now

    • Jeff Lukens

      vambri I think the caliber of the person holding the weapon is more deadly than the weapon itself. The reason I know this is because I served our countries shot weapons you have only seen on tv I can shoot over 800 yards and hit my targets. I don’t because I know better. your judging the actions of one loser wanting to get famous, people like myself know how and when to use our weapons not to commit violence but to defend those that can’t defend themselves. Did you ever serve in the military? If not your ignorance shows, if you have I feel sorry for you. People like you are the reason people like me raise our voices to keep our guns. If there were no guns in this country we wouldn’t be a country would we. so go back and rethink your position, then you can go to another country were there are no guns and see how happy you are. Think about this switzerland gives guns and trains it people to shoot they have the lowest gun related deaths in the world but what do I know I’m just a dumb Marins.

      • Mac

        I know this has been going on for a few days but I just had to respond. Your comment reeks of sincerity and I believe every word you have written and thank you for your comment. I want you encourage you to consider looking into the history of firearms ownership in this country and the attempts at passing laws to control that ownership. Look at who those laws ultimately affect, not the stated intentions. Then draw your own conclusions. Decade after decade there is always some new threat from some new wiz bang weapon or ammo or….. It is in interesting education and I have no doubt what you will discover.
        Semper Fi

  • vcambri

    He is right of course. If you insist on owning assault weaponry you are plain selfish. You don’t care that your fun will be paid for with blood of innocent people. Here’s why: There is no doubt that the presence of more efficient guns results in more death and injury in general. Assault weapons have no legitimate self defense or hunting utility. They are usually used for a vain show of brawn. Assault weapons are toys for the idiot and tools for the insane. They should be banned.

    • Charles Pingley

      how would you like it if they took your fun or your toys or your hobby away from you. (cry like a baby)

  • Roland Heights

    Hey Jason – I’ve taken a deep breath and now I’m going to hit send.

    Your ideas are so ignorant it’s extraordinary. First, you ask

    The purpose it serves is to allow the hunter to shoot a “followup” shot or shots if he needs to to quickly and humanely kill the animal he’s hunting. And yes, AR15-style rifles are widely used in hunting.

    You ask

    NO. NO. NO!! A regular AR-15 does NOT shoot further and more accurately than most other rifles. It does NOT carry a more leathal payload. The AR-15 shoots a freaking .22 caliber bullet! Please get a clue.

    Finally, why not go back to high school and try to graduate this time. The purpose of Article of the Bill of Rights (2nd amendment) was to enable the people to defend themselves against the government! Regardless of what you think about the feasibility of this it is the intention of the law and so AR-15’s should continue to be available to law-abiding citizens.

    • steve

      Your ideas are so ignorant and extraordinary to me. I guess this is why we live in America.. We can all have our own opinion, so I’m not going to sit and here and bash for having an opinion. Maybe you should do the same.

    • Jim

      I think you should educate yourself on not being a A-hole. Who cares about the specific”s when peoples lives are what we are talking about. People do not need semi automatic weapons at all. This crap about the 2nd amendment is ridiculous. That’s more people twisting the laws to prove a point.While Jason Alexander may not have said the 100% right thing in your eyes because he’s not perfect, he held a good point still. When all is said and one semi-automatic weapons kill and whether your a law abiding citizen or not, there is chance you could snap one day and then there’s that gun you bought just sitting there waiting.

    • mitch


      • Mac

        Wow. Are you a citizen of this country? Do you have any idea what the 2nd is about? Have you ever read the congressional record to hear Adams opinion on the words he wrote? Do you think it is ok to just tweak the parts you disagree with? Just what the hell do you think has allowed the people of this nation to thrive and prosper for the last 230 years? From about 1750 on we have been fighting and dying to win then preserve what we call America. If there is one thing sorely lacking right now it is a cure for the apathetic and misinformed. This is exactly the kind of thinking that will lead us to a collapse.

    • http://WebProNews/life SilverWolf

      Roland Heights an AR-15 will not protect you from the gov’t if they decide to come for you. They have much BETTER and MORE LETHAL weapons, plus chemical weapons, and air attack. Only bad and lazy hunters need assualt weapons like AR-15 for hunting. As a hunter, i only need a simple rifle and i have much success. If you can hunt with a simple rifle, you should either not go hunting or it was just not you day. Since white people tend to be arrogant, insecure, lazy, impatient, and egotistical, it is no wonder why a gun like an AR-15 is appealing.

      • mgh

        hhmmm, good old fashioned American racism to make your argument sound more uneducated than we all know you are. Good job!

    • mgh

      Amen Brother

  • Charles Pingley

    i said it yesterday, there were no guns used on 9-11 and timothy McVay did not use guns. If some one goes nuts and wants to kill they will find away. Its not the guns it the NUT pulling the trigger that kills.

    • Randy

      Sense we can not remove all you nuts let`s limit the carnage they create by limiting the type of weapons they easily get a hold of that can cause these mass carnage .

      • jaxonbox

        Randy – I’m not being a smart a** but I’m curious how “limiting the type of weapons” would have stopped Jeffrey Dahmer. We have nut jobs all over our great country but criminals are criminals are criminals.

  • Randy

    IF YOU PEOPLE WANT AR-15s and AK-47s. And want to shoot them why don`t you join the military and fight all over the world. Or where ever big business directs you to go. It would certainly relieve the current soldiers from having to due multiple tours of duty !!!!!!!!

    • Charles Pingley

      then you would cry about that like you cryed about us going after Bin Laden. Face it this world is not a pretty place

    • mgh

      if you want to live in a communist or perhaps controlled socialist environment why don’t you move then you will be happy.

  • Charles Pingley

    As long as the PUBLIC HAS GUNS we will be free. This is why no other country has invaded this country with troops on the ground. They have to use other means like terrorism. If this country was run like the Hollywood nuts want it to be they would not get to voice there stupidity, it would be like the old Soviet Union. That worked did it not (NO)

    • Mac

      You jest. Ban scary looking guns like the AK and AR. Hundreds of shooting ranges across the nation being closed by the EPA including the range where I have been shooting for over 40 years. Get rid of mags that hold more than 10 rounds. My Browning HP holds 13 so it is evil because of those three rounds. As we speak the UN is slicing up small arms trade into an international control event that our president supports and Hillary has said she will sigh even though she has not read it yet. For decades, one little step at a time the laws have been passed so we can all be safer. One leads to another. A few years ago the scare was small easy to hide handguns and if there was not something done we would all be shot by a $20.00 pistol. There is no end to the foolishness and the real problems continue. Why do you refuse to learn the lessons of history? How can any American think that our constitution is something that can be dissected and reassembled to suit you delicate sensibilities? There are over 150million gun owners in this country that did not murder anyone and when one mad man goes on a rampage you want to punish the other 149,999,999 of us at the expense of trampling all over our rights. You may not want to own a gun but generations of Americans have fought and died so that you can. Show some respect.

  • Mac

    Yes the AR style rifle is a very good defense weapon, just ask a Marine. If AR rifles and hi cap mags are the problem what will become the next target to ban after the Alexander’s of the world have their way. Let me give you an example. I shoot a rifle originally sold in the mid-1870s; it holds 10 rounds and is a lever action. In timed competition I can empty that rifle hitting multiple man sized targets in about six seconds, reload using a speed loader and have the gun back up and running in about 2.5 seconds, and I am an old slow guy. Please understand, the gun grabbers do not want the ARs and AKs. They want them all and it has nothing to do with your safety. It is not in the least bit altruistic. It is all about power and control. If you are snickering at that concept, ask yourself why there have been those in power for almost as long as we have been a nation trying to disarm us. This is not a new idea. It has been around long before the AR and AK. When JFK was killed the evil guns came from mail order catalogs. Laws were passed and yet people still kill each other and presidents (Regan) get shot. Do not fall for it. It is a fall you will never recover from.

    • Charles Pingley

      thats right. These people do not understand it is the other Nations that want our guns that way they can control us with out fear

    • robert

      Mac; My god man who is trying to disarm you?

  • Jeff Lukens

    Listen to all those people who think we need gun control you are all a bunch of idiots. Guns don’t kill people, people use them as a tool to do so. If this dude would have used swords to do it there would be people comin out and saying we need sword control. The person behind the gun is the one that needs to be dealt with not the guns. My daughter is 2 years old and she is there when I shoot my guns. I will teach her to shoot when she is 5. I shot my first gun when I was 6. I served my country for over 7 years in the Marine Corps. I should be able to buy any gun that I choose, because it is my right. You people who want to control that should step into the front lines of combat and see if you feel the same way.

    • jwaters327

      This is true that almost any object can be used as a weopon, but the fact remains that countries that have gun control have barely a fraction of the homicide rate that countries that don’t do. The same goes for suicides. When you have death at your fingertips, you’re much more likely to wield it than if you have to improvise something. Im not in favor of outlawing guns altogether but why can’t we at least find ways of limiting violence while at the same time preserving the right to self defense or the sport of hunting? I say its mainly because the Gun industry’s main lobby (and that is what the NRA is, never forget that. they don’t care about your right to own guns, only their right to sell them) has convinced people that this is what it means to be an American, to be blindly idealistic in the face of overwhelming statistical evidence. Every other right in the bill of rights has had some sort of limit placed on it either by congress or the supreme court through jurors prudence. I have freedom of speech, but if I say something damaging about you that is provably a lie, I am guilty of libel, etc.

      • Serko

        This what they said when the NRA was founded, you know, to protect the right of newly freed slaves to bear arms so that they could defend themselves and their families.

    • http://WebProNews/life SilverWolf

      It is absolutely clear that 7 years in the marine corp and growing up with guns have made your humanity, reasoning, and logic skills deminish. Your argument just lkiek the rest of your kind is a red herring and based on a fallicy. It ONLY sound logical to you because you have something to benefit from it…
      Your kind will ignore all the research and empirical data because it doesnt fit into your narrow minded, hypocritical view of the world around you. You have a problem when someone else tells or attempts to make laws that will change how you live, but you have no problem telling or attempting pass laws that will affect others lives. Typical narrow minded, prejudice, self absorbed, egotistical, and hypocritical right-wing conservative.

    • mitch


    • Dirk P

      Hey Jeff. How about hand grenades? Why not just allow corner stores to sell them. It’s people that are the problem, not the grenades. Seriously a ban on large magazines and assault rifles shouldn’t crimp anyone’s style and might limit the damage of these massacres.

  • rsvp

    *sigh* I thought this thread had run its course yesterday. Now more than ever, what makes Jason Alexander’s opinion newsworthy?

    • Charles Pingley


    • mitch


    • http://WebProNews/life SilverWolf

      I’ll tell you what makes his opinion newsworthy. HE’S JASON ALEXANDER – tv/movie star, populaity, money, celebrity status, and someone more liked, more well-known, and more important than YOU…. So get over yourself!!! He has as much as anyone to voice his views – its called THE FIRST ADMENDMENT!!! Making it more important that the second admendment. If you ever become famous, ultra-rich, or a celebrity, your poorly thoughout ideas, comments, and opinions will also be newsworthy…. :-)

      • mitch


      • roadrunner

        Funny thing is, I had to wiki ‘JASON ALEXANDER’ to even find out who everyone was talking about.

      • mgh

        Why don’t you give him a hummer already….

    • mitch


  • http://yahoo Ross Thompson

    Geez, how predictable was this? Another psycho goes on a rampage with a gun and now ALL gun owners pay the price? Many of us use these weapons every day responsibly and LAWFULLY! If you talk to any reasonable gunowner, they would all tell you that they would gladly give up all their guns if they thought it would stop psychos like the one in Aurora. But all REASONABLE people know this will not stop the wacko’s. I have all these types of weapons and more. One day you will be crying for people like me to come and save you from your own government that wants to take more of your freedoms every day!

    • jwaters327

      Thats the thing though, these incidents keep happening and nothing is ever done about it. The last piece of major gun control legislation enacted federally was the assault weopons ban in the mid ’90s and that expired a few years ago with barely a wimper. What price have you paid other than having a light shown upon what is a bleeding wound in this country? These imagined slights are a big part of the problem with the debate in this country. I can’t tell you how many times Ive had gun rights voters try to convince me that President Obama is coming for their guns, when in reality gun rights have only been expanded under his presidency. You guys are winning, yet you refuse to even acknowledge it!

      • peter

        And how exactly are you going to save us,Ross? Do you really think you can win with the government these days pulling your AR-15? You are living in the past my friend.But I tell you what happened to one of our customers(law abiding citizen) years ago when I worked in the gun shop.Couple guys armed with pepper spray broke into his house thru patio door,beat the crop out of him and emptied his gun safe.They shot a clerk at the liquor store and robbed couple of gas stations before getting caught.Just my 2 cents…

    • http://WebProNews/life SilverWolf

      Ross Thompson just another typical red herring and illogical response. An average gun owner DOES NOT need a military grade assualt weapon. Simple example, 50 yrs ago when they were not allowed there was no incendent of some wacko shooting at people with an assault weapons. The wackos of that time use simple guns and rifles. Before you bring up organized crime and criminals, remember we are just refering to the crazies that one day decide to go on a shooting spree for no other reason than to kill and injure inoccent people. So if you respond, stay on topic!!!
      No it is not all gun owners that need to be regulated just those with semi-automatic, fully automatic, and military grade weapons. So stop exaggerating and whinning…
      The state governments already is taking freedoms away. (same sex marriage, voting rights/regulations, overturn abortion, health care laws, marijuana laws, etc.) I’m pure sure you have no problem with your gov’t restricting others rights just as long as they dont restrict yours, right?!?!?! Typical hypocrite…

  • Troy

    I know many gun owners and vendors, and it’s not that they NEED guns, they WANT guns. Just like the pro athlete doesn’t NEED another $10 million, he WANTS it. Understanding gun owners as a whole is an important perspective in all of this. I know half a dozen people who own assault rifles. Why? Cuz they freaking love guns and want to own one or more (usually more). Do all people who own assault rifles want to commit mass killings? No, and it’s almost impossible to determine who does and who doesn’t.

    Shouting “The 2nd Amendment” is frivolous; yes it’s a right but it was conceived when the world was a different place, and despite that, it will not change. There’s nothing anyone can do about it, one way or another.

    I believe in all this mess, vendors have to be responsible about selling guns since gun buyers have no difficulty buying guns legally and have no responsibility in this at all until they kill someone. Gun owners that don’t plan on murder shouldn’t even be in the conversation; they own guns legally and aren’t hurting anyone.

    Self-defense is a frivolous argument when used with thieves as an example. Thieves break in when no one’s home unless they’re stupid, and you can’t shoot someone when you’re not home. Thieves do not normally break into a house when someone’s home, knowing they might get killed. So you come home to find all your stuff gone, even your guns. Guns don’t kill by themselves, and guns don’t protect you by themselves. Now that’s an argument worth making.

    P.S., if you live in a neighborhood where gang-bangers live, it might be smarter moving somewhere else than waiting for that glorious moment when they break in and you can blow their head off (if you see them before they see you). When the hell you gonna sleep?

    • mitch


    • matt

      Jesus is against violence, and died on the Cross as our Savior to forgive all for their sins and those who use weapons in any attempt to kill another human. If I take a bullet I will forgive as Jesus forgives us. I also cannot judge as that is up to the hands of God, so unfortunately the case of owning firearms is at the mercy of mans laws.

      I am against the ability of non military use of weapons, Gods commandments must be lived by and Jesus died for the forgiveness of sin.

      • mgh

        our god is a vengeful god

    • Dirk P

      From a common sense perspective if you completely flood a society with guns, you will get significantly more gun crime.

      Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. But so do monkeys if you give them guns.

  • mitch


    • http://WebProNews/life SilverWolf

      He actually has a career…. Where he makes more in one day than you make in a year or more… Stop being jealous that there a whole population of people that care more about what he says than they do you… Maybe if you get a career with near the status of his, the news media might care to print what you say…

      • mitch


  • Lee

    Wow. It’s obvious that not ONE of you read what Mr. Alexander had to say. What a shame. You are all complete idiots.

    • mitch


      • Lee

        You’re simply proving my point, Mitch. Now get your car off the cinder blocks in your FRONT yard and see if you can actually make something of yourself.

        • mitch



    I agree with Jason Alexander. These types of guns do not need to be out on the street or so easy to get. The arguement about committing crimes with tomatoes and banning tomatoes is stupid and ridiculous. The comment about banning fast cars is also stupid. Maybe banning these types of weapons isn’t the only solution when it comes to crimes like what happened in Colorado, but I think it is part of the solution.

  • mitch


  • Scott

    Everybody forgets history. The 2nd amendment is in place because the law abiding gun owners are the militia. We with our AR-15’s and AK 47s would be on the front lines if this country was to ever be invaded. Just like our ancestors the minute men. If not for them, there would be no USA. Its the only amendment to the constitution that shall not be infringed…..Just like you dont take a knife to a gun fight, you dont take a hunting rifle to war…

    • gman

      Invaded? What year do you think this is? Also, the line is WELL-REGULATED MILITIA. Meaning that there should be regulation and training, not simply buy as many powerful guns as you like. There should be classes taken and certification for owning and operating certain types of guns.

      Again, Invaded?

      • http://Yahoo Conbeist

        Yeah Invaded – kind of like the Mexican Cartels are doing and killing a border guard 18 mikes inside of AZ

      • mgh

        the reason for a well regulated militia and the 2nd amendment is to protect the people from their government. idiot

    • http://WebProNews/life SilverWolf

      Scott, you dont seem to acquately remember history. The minutemen were not the only reason for the usa. If it would have just up to them, there never woulf have been a usa… The minute DID take simple rifles and muskets to the revolution… The chances of the usa getting invaded is less than 1/100 trillion. So again, the average citizen DOES NOT need AR-15s and AK-47s. Simple logic that seems to be over your head…

      • mgh

        but if the people were not armed the government could do whatever they want.. kind of like now.

  • Scott

    If someone in the theater would have been armed it would have been a different ball game.

    • gman

      Yep, a lot more people would have been killed. WIth all that smoke and mayhem, more people would have been injured. HOWEVER, if there had been even a semblance of a system to notify authorities that this kid had been buying a TON of guns and ammo or had there been a waiting list to check on the status of other purchases going on concurrently, THAT would have been a different ball game.

      • eric shin

        are maybe less. did you see the video of the old man that stopped two armed robbers with his peace maker?

  • Join for Access to Our Exclusive Web Tools
  • Sign Up For The Free Newsletter