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
  • utfaninsc

    Since when do criminals follow the law?

    • lionheartwolf

      by that argument you are saying that there should be no laws because ‘bad’ people dont follow them anyway. unfortunately you are right bad people do not follow the law, but the laws allow us to punish those who do and help restrict those who might have given the chance to break them a second guess.

      • matt

        God sent Moses up Mount Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments.

        Thou shall not kill, that is one of them.

        By allowing the dispersion of weapons u r allowing this commandment to be broken.

        If I do take a bullet I will forgive as Jesus forgave but will never own a gun.

        • TraciR

          “By allowing the dispersion of weapons u r allowing this commandment to be broken.”

          Question: Who is “u”? Do you mean some particular individual?

          And guess what, its up to each person if they are going to “kill” or not. Maybe we should do away with steak knives too. Because you can kill with those too.

          • matt

            I do not eat dinner with an AK47…stake knives are for dinner use. Again if people raised their children with good values as taught in the Bible(Matthew 12 7, the golden rule also Corinthians 11 7 the roles of the parents under the direction of God, then they would not have the intention of murder.

        • Lee Dutra

          The true translation is, “Thou shalt not murder.” There is a huge difference between kill and murder.

          • matt

            thank u I make mistakes, I better keep studying the Bible.

            If families followed Corinthians 11 7 they would not raise a child that would go out and by an AK47 for the intention of mass murder.

    • http://WebProNews/life SilverWolf

      James Holmes was only a criminal after the fact, not before. It is also true of just every other wacko that went on the shooting spree. So the law wasn’t broken in the purchased of said weapons. The same way the Colombine and North Carolina shooting spree guns werer purchased LEGALLY!!!
      Real criminal require guns to commit other crimes like bank robbery, home invasions, jewelry heists, etc., but to simply kill people at random is EXTREMELY rare. Even in drive bys, gang members use regular or semi-automatic hand guns NOT ak-47s or ar-15s.

  • Carvel

    The Jason Alexander comment responses are quite interesting to read and wonder if anyone has put any thought to this. In our country you can make your personal opinion know in many ways but completely in the open to the community, government, etc. without worrying about being locked up for making it. This freedom came to us all because we were able to defend ourselves, our country and our rights as free Americans. Some choose to pickup a weapon and use it for harm, but they are the minority of people, the majority want to do the right thing and obey our laws. Guns are tools made by man and I doubt a gun has ever killed on it’s own, a human is always behind the trigger in one way or another. We need to do a better job of teaching people to act first with their mind and mouth, how to cool down, signs to look for in people that may need help and how to intervene to get them help if they do not recognize they need it on their own. We will always see these few react and take lives of the innocent but it does not mean we need to knee jerk react and add laws and regulations each time. If you think guns are the only way to kill one another you better take a look at history…………..there are many trained people that could have inflicted the same results with two machetes and some coke on board.


  • Joe

    First off, this NOT the same version the military uses, it may look like it, but it does NOT fire like one, and does not feel like one.

    He uses his 1st amendment right to say what he will, and that’s fine, just remember, I have my 2nd amendment and will use it to defend your ability to keep and use your 1st amendment right to the death. Having served 9 years in the military, I EARNED that right. I was willing to put my life on the line so that others can have those same rights. ONE PERSON should not change the rule for everyone.

    He needs to understand that we drive trucks and ‘hummers’ in the military, we can use them as weapons that kill just as effectively as a weapon, and yet, I do not hear the call for these vehicles to be banned, in fact, there are more deaths by car/truck than by a weapon. When do the people come out for the cars and trucks to be banned? Television, fast food, all lead to problems because we don’t exercise right and we don’t eat properly, and yet, they do not outlaw these things.. unless you’re in New York and they’ll try that one day (Think soft drinks here).

    Seriously, why are you wanting to take away my right to own and operate a handgun, because some guy took a dive off the deep end and decided today would be a good day to see if I could kill a ton of people? Let’s outlaw airplanes because terrorist use them as weapons. Let’s outlaw Politicians because they are to stupid and they breed. Do that, before you take away my right to carry or even own a handgun, rifle or shotgun. Personal protection or for sport, it’s my right to own one and operate one, and I have protected that right, I think I deserve to die with that right as well.

    • Lee Dutra

      With you 100% Brother. Seven years safeguarding liberty here.

  • http://yahoo sports man

    This isn’t about guns, its about guns with 100 round magazines and the ability to buy 6000 rounds on the internet without anyone saying – Really? WTF?
    You show me one sporstman that needs more than 6 rounds in a magazine to hunt and I’ll show you one sportsman that NO ONE wants to hunt with cause they are freaking dangerous, incredibly bad shots, and have several loose screws.
    When the second amendment was written they didn’t have 100 round magazines, semi or full automatics, or a-holes that snap under pressure and want 15 minutes of fame at the cost of human lives.
    Stop the madness – 6 round magazines max with jail time for anything bigger and any orders of more than 100 rounds of ammo goes to the fbi. Simple rules I can live with and still continue to hunt and enjoy the sport and gun ownership.

    • Mike

      I like your kind of thinking…

      • Jay

        Take off the narrow vision glasses for a minute Mike. I talked to a hunter before and yes that’s correct they don’t bring more than a box of 20 rounds on a hunt, but have you been to an outdoor range where target and recreational shooters go through 100 rounds in a few hours easy? They also buy in bulk for the discounts available so its not uncommon to get 1k of .223 rounds for a 30% discount due to buying on bulk. These shooters at the range are a direct threat to paper and metal targets so of course they should be watched closely by the FBI on their bulk ammo purchases right?

    • Zach

      are u a TRUE SPORTSMAN??????? you sound like a lib in disquise. you are so full of shit it is ridiculous. go back to the huffington post and jack off in a corner.

    • thomas

      why have a car that goes over 80? Hell thats fast enought right? Its not about guns cars or whatever. People are crazy its that simple. More people kill each other drinking and driving why not just sell two beers in a night if you get caught with 3 you go to jail talk to the ATF. We are in a country that gives you freedom and with freedom you have responsibility period. If I want a gun with a 100000000000 rounds so what . If you have a car that goes 140 so what. If you get drunk so what. Just be responsible with it plan and simple. You can’t bann stupidity and clearly this is it boils down too. Everyone trying to make a case about this AR15 with 100 rounds you are all missing it (way off). Anything and everything could be banned its just what you feel stronger about that you speak your 1 sided opinion

  • Joy

    Jason, Jason………..so talented & yet not very intelligent. We just loved you & now we would like to pretend you don’t exist. People like you are creating the the fall of the United States. Before long you will realize your mistakes. All too late.

  • Zach

    Hey Jason,
    I have an AR-15 rifle. The reason I have it is to protect myself and my family. I do not have a desire to hurt innocent person or animal for that matter. I actually donate to the humane society. I will never hunt animals, because I would never hurt one. I do not judge, nor look down upon anyone who is a hunter. I do not judge others when it comes to that. However, if someone breaks into my home and trys to hurt me or my family, I will protect myself, my family, and MY PROPERTY NO MATTER WHAT. GUNS NEVER KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE WITH GUNS. IT IS THAT SIMPLE. THE VICTIMS ARE THE FAMILIES IN THIS HORRIFIC INCIDENT. LEAVE IT AT THAT.

    • Mike

      I agree with you Zach. But tell me why You need a AR-15 to do what you say… Just for sake of Argument… Wouldnt a smaller weapon be ok also????

    • Mike

      Are you protecting your family in the jungles of Central America?

  • Mike

    Great, I read all these arguments and cant understand them.. Get rid of guns????? It will not solve the issue. People who are insane and crazy will find some other way to kill people and create panic. If it were up to all you people who want to get rid of guns then what you are saying is get rid of things that people use to kill people. Dam, We should all at birth just have our arms and legs and hands and heads cut off and have just a torso. Guns arent the only things that kill people.

  • AH

    This is some funny sh^t.

  • AH

    Funny sh*t

  • marcia

    I agree with Jason Alexander, military style weapons have no place outside the military. They are designed for a specific purpose, to kill.

    • CommonSense

      If I would have been in that theater carrying my Sig Sauer 40 Cal semi automatic pistol that clown wouldn’t have gotten more than a couple of shots off. My laser sight would have been aimed right between his eyes and casulties would have been minimal. He could have done even more damage with gasoline and a match. What are you going to do do just arm the Idiots!!!!?????JASON WAKE UP AND QUIT FOLLOWING THE HOLLYWOOD KNOW IT ALL’S

      • Richard Nelson

        And if 25 others in the audience had had their Sig Sauers, you may have gotten the Joker, but chances you and several others would be dead pretty much instantly as you all tried to figure out what was what.

        Bravo Jason!!

      • joe

        marcia wake up, weed and pest killer are designed to kill , should we outlaw their use as well.

      • Mac

        CommonSense seems to be something you lack. All firearms were built to kill. It is skill with arms that has defined our nations for centuries. The Olympics were first held to test the skill of arms. Your argument is childish when placed in the context of history. The ten’s of millions of dead in Europe, Cambodia and Russia over the past 100 years also thought it could never happen to them, but it did. Jefferson said”fear the government” I say make the Government fear the people.

    • Bob

      Are there guns that are designed NOT to kill?

    • john cook

      marica you and jason are indeed intiedlled to your oppinions, but as a former police officer i was responding to fight in progress, upon ariving i was confronted by a man with an axe with a handle 36 in. long. at first i did not see him and before i could react i was hit in the chest by the blade knocking me backwards. thank God for my vest and my weapon i was able to save my self from the man swinging the axe ( NOT A GUN ) towards my head. people have been killing other people sence the begining of time way before the gun was invented. there is other uses for firearms then killing people.

    • alex

      don’t all guns kill???

  • http://yahoo John

    Well I guess we should just get rid of cell phones too for all the idiots who text and drive and kill people to. Wake up, it’s the user not the tool Jason.

  • gregg209

    I own an AR15 and use it responsibly like 99.999999% of gun owners.

    If you took into account the sheer number of firearms like mine that have been sold in the United States of the past 2-3 years (Millions of off-list lowers) and one whack job gets his hands on ONE and there is simply no other solution than to take them away from everyone.

    Living in CA I know more than my share of anti-gunners. I have found that most are simply scared of firearms, the ones that I can coax into going to the range with me and I let use my AR at some point say “I want one”.

    What happened in Colorado was devastating and my heart goes out to the victims and families involved but this was the act of one man whom clearly has issues, had he not been able to get the gun he would have done it some other way….we can all agree he has knowledge of explosives right?

    • Brad Ruhle

      Like you, I’ve shot an AR-15 as well. This was before the 1989 Stockton massacre, and a time when you could rent a semi-automatic so-called “assault rifle”. It was a 9mm version. I found it way more accurate than the other weapon I fired: an Uzi Carbine. You can’t hit anything with an Uzi; you just send bullets flying everywhere. (That makes it even more dangerous in a tragedy like the Colorado massacre.)

      My definition of an assault weapon is one that has a pistol grip, a large magazine of 30 round capacity or more, and is semi-automatic. The AR-15, Uzi, AK-47 and the Tech DC-9 used at Columbine all qualify for that. It doesn’t matter if the weapon has the capability for full automatic, which isn’t even used most of the time by soldiers or SWAT teams.

      My feeling is that instead of banning assault weapons, just ban the high capacity magazines. An AR-15 with a 10 round magazine is no longer an assault weapon. It’s a semi-automatic rifle. Not only that, it does not have the range and capacity a regular 5.56mm hunting rifle has, Why do you need a 30 round magazine, let alone a 100 round one like the one used in Colorado? (Besides, that magazine jammed from what I heard.)

      As for your statistics on the number of incidents VS the number of rifles sold to civilians I only have to say one thing:

      Try telling that to the family of that 6-year old child who was gunned down in Colorado.

      • http://webpronews.com John


        that’s great that you have your own definition of what an “assault weapon” is, but that doesnt mean it is correct. The main idea you’re missing is that an “assault weapon” is fully automatic. if a rifle is semi-automatic then by definition, it is not an “assault weapon”, no matter if it has the other attributes you stated. if you take a semi-auto rifle, change the magazine capacity to 10, it is still a semi-auto…no difference. you could add a 100 round drum to it and it is still a semi-auto rifle. it’s very possible that if the colorado shooter had 5-6 10 rd magazines, he would have more kills simply because they would not have jammed. no one is doubting this is a tragedy but going after a tool, which the rifle is, rather than the person behind it makes absolutely no sense…at all…
        i think the demonrats are smart enough not to make this issue about gun control, especially since they still remember the last time they did. the American people realize that gun control isnt a good idea, even though there are many other that think like you, this issue wont get very far in todays political climate.

        • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

          they make 5.56 ar 15 and bigger moron california has a 10 round max. but criminals can get or make 30 round magazines. they will still get them. I would hate to have to fight someone with several 30 round mags and I have 10 round mags and a bullet button

  • Lee Dutra

    O.K., number one, an AR 15 is not an assault weapon. By definition an assault weapon not only has high capacity magazines, but will fire full automatic if set to. Number two, there are many weapons that are far more powerful than said AR 15. Number three, it does no good to even try to educate people who will not consider a different viewpoint, so I say, let them line-up and drink the Kool-Aid since they are determined to anyway. In my opinion Jason Alexander has problems that go way beyond his view on guns.

    • Donny

      I couldn’t agree with you more Lee!!! Anyone who believes that some kind of ban on ANY type of guns, will keep firearms away from criminals or terrorists, is truly diluted!!!

      So which criminals abide by the gun laws that are in effect now??

  • who cares

    I’m not gonna argue for or against the topic of gun control.

    I just wanted to point out the fact that a standard “Deer Rifle” shoots with better accuracy at long-ranges, is more accurate, and hits harder than an AR-15.

    So, from point one, this Kastanza has no clue what he is muttering. (just like on Steinfeld)

  • Scott

    Timothy McVeigh accomplished his destruction without a gun. If someone really wants to kill, he or she will find the way, gun or not.

    • think b4utype

      stupid argument. I think the conversation is much deeper than your comment. Should we just give up and live in anarchy?

      • bill

        Don’t we already live in anarchy?

      • Donny

        The conversation is just that!!! It’s about a single person killing a 2 digit number of unarmed civilians and children!!! Had this orange haired idiot NOT used the guns that he had. He may have planted his exorbitant amount of home made explosives in that same theater. Killed 10 times as many victims, and hidden from the police/feds for some time!!!

        THEN how paranoid would you people be??

    • Mike

      There is absolutely no reason for assault weapons to be available to private citizens. Timothy McVeigh had a large stockpile of automatic weapons, he just chose to go the cowardly way and use explosives to kill the children. If an automatic weapons ban would prevent even one loonie from killing innocent people, it would have served it’s purpose.

      • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

        they would still have the weapons only honest citizens would give them up idiot

  • human

    I love how we can buy all the guns you want but get caught with marajuana, and you go to prison.
    Guns, Sure, Gay Marridge “oh god please protect the children”

    • Jenkins

      You don’t include just one red herring argument but TWO for good measure, eh?

      You’re a doofus!

    • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

      you dont have to buy them if you dont want them most people dont go to prison for weed unless they are selling it. you should go to jail for being a major moron

  • Dave Prescott

    “Let’s see – does it fire more rounds without reload? Yes.”

    Ding! One right.

    “Does it fire farther and more accurately? Yes.”

    BZZZZZ. WRONG on BOTH counts.
    Two wrong. One right.

    “Does it accommodate a more lethal payload? Yes.”

    You got one for four. Your opinion means nothing.

  • John

    The whole point he was trying to make is regarding gun control in general. However that will never happen because of the NRA and their henchmen (lobbyists). That is unfortunate. I just wonder how they would feel if someone they loved died from this tragedy. If you think about it and do what’s right, there would be “logical” gun control.

    • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

      many NRA members have lost family to criminals with guns. I am one of them. That does not change my mind about the right to bear arms. These criminals would still have guns and still murder if there was a world ban on guns. People murder in states where there is the death penalty but they still do it

  • Ray

    Many people think that the founding fathers added the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution to give citizens the means to defend themselves. That is not the reason. It was added to the Constitution as a means to stop a tyrant from ruling over the nation. It was a valid concern then and it is a valid concern now. A nation whose citizens fear the government is by definition tyrannical. A nation whose government fears the citizens is a nation of freedom.

    • Davilyn

      I applaud you that you know this tidbit of information. Most people have never even read the Constitution let alone understand it. Kudos to you. As an additional argument – the whole gun control issue would be better addressed spiritually. It does say in the Bible “Thou shall not kill”. This statement does not have sub-paragraphs of exceptions. It means just what it says – we should not kill anything, people or animals, especially for sport. People who think otherwise are the same kind of people who don’t understand what the Constitution was all about.

      • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

        more than half the worlds population does not believe in the bible. not a valid arguement

      • Michael

        Davilyn, I will address the Bible comment that you make about the, “Thou shall not kill.” There are two versions murder/ and killing Christ speaks about it in Matt 5:21 Christ teaches that harboring anger is LIKE murder so that when Cain murdered Able in Genesis that is EXACTALY what it is. What Christ is saying is that Premeditation as well as action is murder. When King David kills Bathsheba’s husband he is committing murder. BUT, when he KILLS Goliath there is no premeditation. It is like the difference between a dead body from a crime of passion or self defense.


        Animals were killed in the Bible and so were people. Many were killed in war and the animals were killed for sacrifice to God and for food.

      • Donny

        translate your bible again…its REAL translation is “Thou shall not MURDER”!!!

    • chase

      Obviously you don’t understand yourself. The Bill of Rights is to protect the rights of peoples liberty and property. The militia referenced in the 2nd amendment is the people. Not the military. A militia is made up of civilians. If the people aren’t allowed to own guns how do you think the militia would have guns to fight? They wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter if the gun holds only 5 round or 100. If no one else has a gun to protect themselves or others around them who is going to stop the guy shooting? Any person can carry extra ammo or magazines and keep on harming people. You don’t need a high capacity magazine to cause lots of harm.
      “The strongest reason for the PEOPLE to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”-Thomas Jefferson

  • Bob Davis

    Jason is 100% correct.
    Nobody has ever been able to proviude a convincing argument that citizens should own assault rifles/automatic weapons.

    Gun nuts: knock it the fuck off. You can have your handguns and shotguns. Let’s just keep the killing to one at a time.

    • Donny

      The 2nd amendment guarantees that I retain the right to own a shotgun, a handgun, an AR-15 OR a bolt action model 70 Winchester (Military’s favorite for a sniper rifle) Without infringement whether you like it or not…So you can knock THAT the f***off Bob Davis!!!

  • http://webpronews.com John

    How about you stick to something you know, which is making jokes, not furthering a political agenda in the wake up a tragedy such as this.

    • Shawn

      Jason Alexander is a actor. He has no concept of fire arms or how to use them. An AR-15 is a .223 caliber round. I use a bolt action army surplus 30-06 for hunting and target shooting. That is more powerful round. I do have an AR-15 I use it for target shooting In my state I can not hunt with it. It is a nice gun to shoot if you know what you are doing. I repeat know what you are doing. You need to learn how to respect fire arms and the lethality.

      • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

        AR 15 can be larger rounds than .223 I have one much larger caliber but that does not matter it is still a semi auto and not an auto the military has

  • Manny Po

    America is the real Anti-Christ nation..hiding under the flagship of democracy. Freedom (to kill, to marry the same sex, drugs)..sick..

    • Matt

      Then move back to Mexico you spic.

      • looking 4 u

        hey asshole, if you took your ass to Mexico the zetas would have your head rolling down the highway, go there you racist piece of sh*t tough guy.

        • Donny

          While I don’t agree with Matt’s hateful spew…Mexicans are nationals from Mexico…there “Race” is Hispanic and just because this guy Manny Po gave his opinion…it seems that there are alot of people that have no “smart” reply and must spit this type of venom!!!

          I disagree with a ban on any guns by type or look, and I disagree with throwing racial slurs at someone because I didn’t like what they said!!! Don’t make it about Race…

          It’s been skinny little Caucasian kids committing these heinous crimes that stir up a whole new gun debate every time another idiot wants to hurt people!!! The other racial demographic seems to stick to individual or smaller scale killings!!! Take THAT Aryan…err Matt!!!

  • Matt

    Jason Alexander is an idiot. Yes, a screwed up american makes the rest of the gun holders in America look bad. If it was not for the freedom to bare arms Obama would have turned us into a socialist nation. For the ones who do not believe in this amendment that have Phd’s please feel free to contact me. I have plenty of yard work you can do. This is what incentive you will have after a socialist reform is implied. My prayers and thoughts go to the families of this tragedy. It is very unfortunate. What has happened to holding the responsible party responsible? Guns are not bad: ignorant people are. Hell is warm, and Florida is nice, may peace be with the families and heat be with the JOKER……

    • Mo

      Did you bother to read what he was saying? WHY SHOULD ANY CITIZEN OWN A WEAPON MADE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE MILITARY??? Do you own those types of weapons, and if so, why?

      • Chris

        I’m for gun control on a licensing level like as a driver’s license level, proper training and approval from a non-gun store agency test before you have a “right” (sarcasm towards NRA) to a gun… but Jason Alexander and you make assumptions that the AR-15 is a military gun. I personal know people that use it for hunting… And the thing is, it shoots the same bullets and only shoots one bullet for every trigger pull like every other gun sold today.

        • Haywood Jablowme

          Ok…Chris, on this post I agree with you. Instead of taking guns away from the mass of people who respect guns and aren’t using them to kill people. Maybe they need stronger laws to obtaining them. There are MORE people in this world that own guns that don’t go ape shit and kill people. Why is it that the few always take away from the many?

      • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

        I own an AR 15 because I like how it looks and how it shoots. The military has AUTOMATIC weapons the average HONEST person has semi automatic CROOKS have AUTOMATIC weapons big difference I own one because it is my right by the constitution. If the honest person gave up their weapons the criminals would still have theirs and they would still shoot up theaters and I wouldn’t have my gun to try and stop them.

        • Haywood Jablowme

          toomuchgovernment is absolutely correct. In the long run tougher laws make it harder for the good law abiding citizens to obtain guns, but if just one gun isn’t issued because someone doesn’t pass the background check than the whole system worked that time. On the other hand, criminals with always be able to obtain whatever weapons they want regardless of what law or laws are past.

  • Jermaine Lett

    Bottom line is, if you have a gun, your going to shoot the gun…..period..how and what you shoot is the issue…

    • Manny Po

      got it man..Gn=uns were made to kill..period.

    • Mac

      Are you paying attention? You must have slept through American history class. At the time the 2nd was written, the “militia” was every man capable of bearing arms. This is not up for debate as it was stated as fact by SCOtUS on several occasions. If you do not like it at least have the courtesy to understand your argument.

    • Haywood Jablowme

      That’s right….blame the guns, not the idiots shooting it. By this logic maybe we should outlaw cars too. When someone gets drunk and drives and kills someone, well darn it was the cars fault huh?

  • Reader of complete text

    People use the Bill of Rights the same way people use biblical scripture to bolster their arguments— very selectively. e.g., Why do those citing the Second Amendment to condemn any restriction on firearm ownership always conveniently forget the important “A well regulated Militia…” component that frames the entire amendment that follows? Read the text in its entirety… and then ask yourselves “how many gun nuts drooling over their stockpiled weapons are actually members of a WELL-REGULATED militia?”

    • Chris

      If you are going to argue a point… know the Second Amendment is on the US Constitution, not the Bill of Rights.

      • Haywood Jablowme

        Hmm…Chris, hate to break it to you, but the “Bill of Rights” is the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. So, if you’re going to “TRY” to make someone look stupid by responding like a jackass….do you’re research first, so you don’t look like a “tard” yourself. BTW welcome to the internet!!!!

  • Mike

    All this screaming about the type of gun used. People making comments about Timothy McVeigh having all those types of guns, when he didn’t use a single illegal gun. Instead he put together a bomb out of two chemicals, sadly proving that you don’t have to pull a trigger to kill many people without a single cause or reason. Personally I own 2 of these “type” of weapons. One came from my dad, and M1 he carried in the military. A M16 given to me by my uncle from Vietnam. An AR15 I bought on my own. Two of these weapons count as pure military weapons. The M1 while a military weapon didn’t have a huge capactiy. I also own a few hunting rifles, some handguns and yes I have a carry permit in TX. There is lots of ammo for all of these weapons and I’ve been around them all of my life. At NO TIME in my 50 plus years have I felt the need to load up and go find human targets…With an egnineering degree and my best friend with a degree in chemistry you could say we have all the things required, but we aren’t out looking for a reason to cause harm in any way shape form or fashion. For people like Jason Alexander and others to say its because of the “gun” and its design is just plain foolish. I’m sure he supports removing all the trees along highways and replacing them with breakaway versions so that nobody can hit one in a car and be injured. The weapons aren’t the cause of this tragic events and they never have been. I support the one thing that would make a difference and that is a change in the background checks. Making them a bit stronger is the only step you can take to keep a legally purchased weapon out of the hands of a killer with nothing on his mind but destruction. I hate that anyone would take any weapon and kill another human being. Without your own life being in mortal danger there is no reason to fire. I’ve been asked what I do with those high capactiy weapons and its simple. They are rifles, they are capable of hunting, but not ideal. What they are used for by everyone I know who owns one is to waste money sport shooting at targets. We’ll virtually never have to use such a weapon to defend ourselves. Its very much like the person who buys a 500 horsepower Bently. You don’t need it, but its something you collect. Perhaps some people have $50,000 in movie collectables which most of us see as a waste, but its neat I suppose. For the time being I can think of a lot of Hollywood types that I wouldn’t allow to own any firearm..

    • Donny

      Very well articulated Mike!!!

      However I don’t completely agree that stricter backround checks will stop nutcases from getting and USING weapons against us average citizens. I’m sure it would deter some, and possibly delay any planned crimes. However exactly how often are “legally” purchased guns are used in violent crimes such as this?? In fact this is the FIRST time I have ever heard of someone using guns that they bought from a gun store in a crime like this!!!

  • http://yahoo toomuchgovernment

    3 words for Mr Alexander no talent moron

  • Richard

    We were absolutely right in the 1960s “MAKE LOVE, NOT WAR!” Only one way to solve this…No Guns At All Period. The madman couldn’t kill 12 people with a baseball bat. End of story.

  • Frank

    I now own a Colt AR-15 as I fear the tyranny of the Tea Party!

  • Rob

    Jason Alexander–what a colossal display of arrogant ignorance. So much for thoughtful dialogue on a serious subject. Stick to acting, no wait, skip that.

    • John

      Rob? Rob who? what have you done?
      Probably nothing!! Alexander actually makes sense,and his contribution to the debate is far greater than youts!!

      • Donny

        That’s only because your opinion mirrors Jason Alexander’s. So you must AGAIN try and attack someone for exercising his rights protected by the FIRST amendment only because his opinion differs from your own!!!

  • dropdufn

    I love when people bring up gun registration, “oh we can find and register the couple hundred million firearms out there easily” but talk about illegal immigration and its “It would be impossible to find the fifteen to twenty million undocumented persons out there!”.

    • John

      Most people would agree that gun laws (registration,etc) would have little to no impact on your average criminal.
      It Is however,reasonable and attainable to ensure that assault-type weapons only be available for military applications.

      • Donny

        If you truly believe that than you have bigger issues John!!!

    • lefty

      On your point everyone has already forgotten about the DC sniper. WHo used a hunting rifle.

  • Ryan

    Jason Alexander – One american who speaks a morsel of sense. I don’t think he went far enough. All weapons should be outlawed. Plain and smple.

    • dropdufn

      I can kill you with a rock, fork, spoon, dental floss, etc etc. Anything can be a weapon if you want it to be and are crazy enough to go that route. Do you shit your pants when you see the mailman come to your door, people have been killed by mail bombs in the past.

      • John

        Your comment is irrelevant. Stop mixing apples and oranges and throwing mud in the waters of important debate.
        Can you kill 12 people in a couple of minutes with a fork or dental floss? doubt it.
        We are talking about military assault-type weapons. These weapons are designed to cause the maximum amount of damage in the littlest time. There is no good reason for these weapons to be in the hands of civilians.
        Just to put things into perspective, think for a sec, about which you would prefer; being attacked with a fork or an AK-47? which would you be more likely to survive?

        • badbasic

          It amazes me how narrow minded some people are.The civilian who just walked into a crowded train station with a bomb made from forks, nails and so on has no good reason for having it, yet he has one. He probably learned how to make it on the internet. I better hurry and post this before the internet gets banned.

        • dropdufn

          I can go to the local home improvement store, go home and make a bomb that will kill as many people, actually probably more then what happened in Colorado in as much time as it would take for my happy ass to the local gun store and get my background check done and what not.

          Most military sniper rifles can be compared to common decent bolt action hunting rifles. Should we ban those too because the military uses them and in the hands of someone that wants to can stand back from afar and accrue the same amount of fatalities inflicted in Colorado in short oder?

          Firearms nor what type used has any bearing on what happened in Colorado in my opinion. There are laws on the books to stop people from getting them that we have deemed shouldnt have them yet people get them and sometimes crazy is just crazy and hasnt been picked up yet.

          I think the discusion should be focused more on better mental health in this country rather then what those with mental issues use to carry out thier acts of violence because like I said earlier, you want to kill someome or groups of someone there is always a way and outlawing a “scary” looking rifle wont change the outcome of anything if someone wants to commit evil vile acts that leads to the deaths of many.

          There are four times more guns then cars in this country and yet more deaths happen due to vehicles. And thats including suicides with the use of firearms in that total tally wich I think shouldnt be in there considering if someone is going to kill themselves they will no matter what. Should we ban cars? Of course not, they serve a purpose, well guess what, firearms serve a purpose too!

          I have had to use my cc side arm once to stop a crim in progress against myself and my family. Purpose served. I like to hunt, purpose served. I like shooting shit at the range because its fun and a great stress reliever, purpose served!

        • Tommy

          When you have a gang of (fill in the ______) approaching you with the intent of killing, I would choose an assault rifle every time. If all I had was a small calibre single shot weapon, I would go ahead and shoot my self to prevent being tortured to death.

          I know zombies are not real, but they give proper context.

        • Donny

          John…To say that ANYONE’S comment, that differs from your own, is irrelevant is like trying to force your agenda on that person!!! Forks can (and HAVE) been used as shrapnel in bombs. Does that make it okay for you to try and violate the 1st amendment in your agenda to violate our 2nd??

          I truly believe that when the proverbial crap hits the fan…That YOU will be the first guy complaining that REAL assault rifles aren’t available!!!

          No gun available for purchase by a regular citizen is an assault rifle!!! You need to do some research so that you can at least SOUND like you’re educated!!!

  • John Smith

    Hmmm, funny, I own 13 guns and I’ve shot fewer than half of them (I collect pieces of history). Of the guns that I have shots, I have only shot as wood, metal, and paper targets. Maybe I’m using them wrong?

    • John

      A collection of pieces of history is far different from a collection of AK-47 type weapons.Someone who collects weapons surely knows this. If all you do is shoot at targets etc., nobody has a problem with that; but if your goal changes and you now want to shoot as many people as you can in the shortest time possible, we want to keep the type of weapon that you would need out of your reach.

      • lefty

        Ak-47’s are a piece of history.

      • Donny

        They already ARE out of our reach!!! First you push to ban guns that merely LOOK like the weapons our military uses to defend our freedom to own them!!! Next thing is the ban on any handgun that holds more than 6 rounds. Then we should go after pump style shotguns that hold more than 3 shells.

        Okay now that we have been able to accomplish these bans we need to take all of he guns away completely because people can hunt on a Wii without making YOU feel unsafe!!!

        After all of the guns are banned from the country and the criminals are the only ones with guns now…we need to take away your freedom to complain about the fact that violent crime has increased by 4 times it ever was!!! Then where will it end??

        What does “FREEDOM” mean to YOU John??

  • John Neuburger

    I totally agree with Alexander.There is no reason to possess military assault-type weapons outside of a military setting.

  • blitzen2010

    he’s right…cricket is gay…unless they all get ak-47s…then it might be ….no….its still gay

  • Clod_menez

    i come from a third world country with enough of its share of poverty and discrimination etc. however, guns are something that an ordinary criminal cannot get his hands on. Given the proclivity to violence in such a society, we dont hear about mass shootings here and usual (otherwise frequent) violence is within street gangs or sometimes organized gangs or street muggings using knives or swords. we cant imagine giving a gun to these people and the amount of crime it will result in. it will mean anyone “with a bad intention” can kill without a moment’s hesitation and go on. Physically stabbing to kill one with a knife is much more personal than just shooting from a distance. we realize that. one thing i cannot understand is, if a small country like ours understands the gun menace, why cant a supposed super power and advanced civilization understand it.

    • Laurel

      Clod – You may not hear of mass shootings in your third world country but what about the people that will strap a bomb to their body or their childrens bodies?

  • DC

    Guns don’t kill people…

    HAMBURGERS kill people…

  • badbasic

    “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” I have seen this sticker for years. By nature, we as humans are a destructive breed. I do not quote Bible verses nor the constitution because I am not an authority on either. Plenty of states have no cell phone use while driving, yet we still do. Before someone jumps on that cell phones don’t kill, as a paramedic I have seen first hand that they do. The point that I am trying to make is that regardless of what laws are on the books to try and protect us, they will always fail due to our destructive nature. The United States of America has given me the right to own certain guns(I have a small caliber rifle and a shotgun)to protect my family and property as well as recreation. An outlaw by definition is someone who is lawless. When you are speeding tomorrow going to work, you are an outlaw. Do we ban the cars? There will always be outlaws as long as humans are allowed to exist. Just don’t take away my right to protect myself and family from the outlaws who could care less that they gun they are robbing me with is illegal.

  • W.S

    I am so greatful that I’m not enabling those Whack-Jobs out there,because 9 out of 10 I wouldn’t even need that type of gun for protection.

    • dropdufn

      That type of gun? Would you say a 9mm pistol or a .22 pistol would be a good gun that could be used for your defense? Guess what, Seung-Hui Cho wracked up 32 deaths with pistols at Virginia Tech, didnt use any of those scary looking “military assault-type” weapons. Like I said before, crazy is just sometimes crazy and mental health should be the issue, not what is used to carry out said crazy acts of violence.

  • Randy

    I have an AR-15 that I use for hunting and target shooting. Use 20rd and 30rd mags for targets. With a 5rd mag it is very compact and light weight and is great for hunting.

  • jo mama

    Most of these horrific incidents involve a young male gone mad…maybe there should be a ban weapon ownership from anyone under 35.

    • dropdufn

      And what of the tens of thousands of examples over the years of those under the age of 35 that have legaly and responsibly used legally owned firearms (weapon) to stop crimes such as loss of life, pass another law to outlaw crimes against those younger then 35?

      Sorry but that one wont fly either, still going to have those that are crazy or could give two flying facks about laws, like I dont know, criminals. That just leaves those under the age of 35 that follow the laws defensless. Like others have stated, more laws just mean less protection and freedoms for the law abiding masses out there but does nothing to those that will break laws regardless of what they are. Punishing law abiding citizens is not the answer.

  • John B

    In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia[1][2] and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

    Alexander can’t understand the right to protect oneself is not only from foriegn armies, home invaders, people shooting at you in movie theaters and to protect one from an opressive government. Jason go back to acting and leave the heavy thinking to the smarter people.

  • goog22

    Jason AR style weapons don’t shoot farther or more accurate or more lethal than hunting rifles. AR15 actually use much smaller ammo than many hunting style rifles.

    • cody

      what the hell is wrong with you? The mans got a point here, and if that’s not clear for you, then something is wrong with you.
      You need assault weapons just to do massacres with them, not for defense, not for hunting.

      • dropdufn

        Well good thing an assault weapon wasnt used in Colorado.

      • G

        actually the 5.56mm round is subpar, its simply lacks the stopping power which is why the US military is looking for a better round. Th AR-15 is not an assault rifle in no way possible. AR stands for armalite the creator of the original design. Commercial AR-15 have only created advances in the Military weapon the M-16(a true assault rifle). An Ar-15 in the hands of me is only a recreational device. In the hands of a moron is a accident waiting to happen, JUST AS HE COULD HAVE WITH ANYTHING INCLUDING A CAR. Its amazing how people let things get bad without doing anything to stop. Someone could have been legally carrying a took this sad excuse for a human being just a easily as PENN STATE could have stopped a child molester. I carry and believe carrying a firearm legally should be treated the same as those who sit next to a emergency exit on a plane. They should act to help and assist others not run and flee.
        deterring tyrannical government
        repelling invasion
        suppressing insurrection
        facilitating a natural right of self-defense
        participating in law enforcement
        enabling the people to organize a militia system

    • Alfred Garcia

      Exactly.They are not for hunting deer or wild boar.They are for gunning down people.The AR-15 uses a .223 round which was designed for close quarters fighting but thankfully they jam up frequently(which saved a few lives in Colorado).Why this gun is so easily purchased by any lunatic is a question that every candidate should answer but they are afraid of the gun lobby led by NRA.Why Mr Holmes was able to have 5-6,000 rounds of ammo delivered to his apartment is another question to be asked.

      • dropdufn

        Actualy ar-10’s are excellent for culling wild boar herds on ranches at night. Think about this, if the police think they need such weapons for the protection of the public, why wouldnt you need it also?

        Nothing wrong with 6000k rounds sadly only have about 1.5k at the moment. Wish I had a 25k student grant to blow on crap other then school, recreational shooting can be a bit pricey, especialy when you get into .308 and 45acp rounds so when you see good deals its smart to buy in bulk.

      • Matt

        The .223 was not designed for “close quarters fighting”. It was designed for shooting varmints. The government adopted its designed and made some changes calling it a 5.56mm (used by the M16). It was adopted so that troops could carry more rounds in combat because it is significantly lighter to carry 5.56mm rounds than to carry 7.62mm rounds.
        Who of you actually believe CRIMINALS will follow the Gun Laws? Gun control only disarms LAW ABIDING CITIZENS!

    • http://n/a sharon joyce

      So it makes a smaller hole in the person who is shot. Are you crazy?

  • Borko

    The most moronic comment is “Drunk drivers kill, should we ban fast cars”….no, cars are not made as lethal weapons, they are made as a source of transportation. Weapons of any kind have only one use, to harm people, they are produced as a mean of war.

    • dropdufn

      And a means of protection, means of putting food on the table, means of recration, etc, etc…

      As stated earlier, over 4 times as many firearms in the country as registered vehicles yet more people die from vehicles then firearms in this country. Where is teh outrage there?

  • TONY


    • Maximus

      The dingo, you mean the dingo should have eaten George.

  • David A. Laibow

    Mr. Alexander (whose acting I admire) is partly right: assault weapons should not be in the hands of the public. On the other hands, if they were unavailable, the Aurora shootings would have taken place with handguns, because of how many shots you can fire if you have a weapon in each hand with long magazines.
    I am a former resident of New Jersey, and I think that state’s firearms registration law is a model for the nation (I live in the Philippines, where non-citizens can’t own guns, but a high proportion of the adult population is armed (and banks and fast-food outlets have signs asking patrons to check their guns with the security guards [who typically carry a 2-shot pistol-grip shotgun] at the door).
    The New Jersey law requires a 6-month waiting period before you can make the actual purchase from a registered gun dealer. If you want a carry permit, you file a petition to do so with the Superior Court of your county of residence.
    A person who wants a gun illegally can always obtain one, of course — you don’t even have to go to New York City or Philadelphia, there are plenty available for sale in urban areas. But the law does not conflict with the Second Amendment. The solution, as I see it, is a waiting period to weed out criminals and the unstable, and also life imprisonment without the possibility of parole if you commit a crime with a gun, or act in concert with someone who commits such a crime. Most people who are going to commit a gun crime won’t be deterred by such a penalty, but the penalty can be applied, short of a death penalty.

    • PatriotPete

      Benjamin Smith, in the 1990’s this man killed a basketball coach for northwestern university and several other people in the chicagoland area. He was NOT supposed to be able to buy a gun legally with the risk of going to jail if he tried. Illinois has a 3 day wait, more than enough time for the state police to find this out. After 3 days Benjamin Smith went back to the gun shop and was told that he couldn’t get the gun. His money was refunded and the state police NEVER showed up. He then went and got a gun illegally and went on a murder spree.
      Wait times aren’t the answer, and you’ll never get all the guns off of the streets.

    • http://facebook ml

      I wanted to correct myself before it would have been rightfully brought to my attention. I meant to write 2007, not 2010. These numbers are also backed up by the CDC. Sorry about that.

  • http://facebook ml

    I don’t know what the answer is. According to Time magazine we had over 31,000 firearm deaths in 2010(I picked a year from random). That includes murder, accidents, suicides, etc. I don’t know any of those 31,000 personally, do you? Maybe if it was someone I loved or cared about that was killed I would have a definitive answer. Maybe we just like to shoot each other. Maybe it’s violent movies, violent video games, violent song lyrics even though other countries get those same movies, songs, and games and it is not happening in other countries like it does here. We’ve had 4 assassinated presidents, murdered civil rights leaders, thousands upon thousands of dead citizens but dammit there might be a zombie apocalypse heading our way and I want to be prepared. Seriously I have no problems with the weapons, what I don’t like is being able to go on the internet and buy ammo by the thousands like you are buying toothpicks. As a military vet I am always running into civilians who act like their latest weapon is an extention of their penis. My answer is always the same, if you wanna play with the big boys then get your ass down to the recruiting station and sign up. That hardly happens though. Suprised? Not me. Anyway we will have the same conversations the next time this happens and if our short 200 plus year history has taught us anything, it WILL happen again. We don’t build much in this country anymore but dammit when it come to gun violence we are still the best in the industrialized world!

    • mkimber

      ml, you are right on here…I have always thought the exact same thing about playing with the big boys..especially everyone so addicted to playing “fake” military video games to obsession and civilians with their guns. Yes, by all means, go volunteer to serve! We do indeed lead the industrialized world when it comes to gun violence, so horrible. Thank you for your insightful comments!

  • PatriotPete

    Sir: The 2nd ammendment was placed into the constitution NOT so the People could hunt or shoot for sport BUT to protect THE PEOPLE from a tyrannacle government. Even if you do not believe that at such a time as this time in history that our government is going down that road you Must believe that somewhere down our future we Could go down that road. The founders and authors of the Constitution stating that fire arms shall not be debarred use of freemen thought that that would mean that ANY arm that the government used SHOULD be afforded to THE PEOPLE, fore if the government took up arms against THE PEOPLE how else would WE THE PEOPLE be able to defend ourselves against these same types of arms used AGAINST us? And yes I believe that if a person could afford a military jet with all the trimmings they Should be able to purchase said jet.
    I hope to God that we never ever need to go to that place BUT, if we need too we should be ready. Look at owning one of these firearms like you would a health insurance policy, you have one you hope you won’t need one but if you do you’re glad you got one.
    One more point, in all these years we have never been invaded onto our shores… do you wonder why?

    • PatriotPete

      Oh yes, if you look at Switzerland the people all have firearms, military in use.

      • tp

        Let me guess, we’ve never been invaded because we have paid large sums of money to arm our military? Wait, you were going to guess ,because the American people were armed with assault rifles waiting for the invasion. We also pay good money to arm our police to protect those of us who want to live in peace from wanna-be Rambos like yourself. I hope you’ll live an easier life in the future by not arming yourself anticipating the “big” invasion you feel you’re protecting America from. Here we all thought the real heroes were the ones in American military uniforms, we didn’t even know about you. lol

  • Russell

    Jason (George) is showing us that his role in the sitcom shows his true mental capabilities and or limitations!

  • George Hashower

    To argue that an AR-15 (M-16) is of smaller calibre than a hunting rifle (normally a 7.62 mm) is immaterial to the issue. Mr. Alexander is absolutly right when he says they are more lethal. They are more lethal because of their capacity and rapididy of fire power. Any ligitimate hunter needs only a weapon that uses a manually operated mechanism to re-load the chamber. A bolt action, lever action, or pump action weapon with a magazine capacity of two or three rounds is sufficient for hunting purposes. Anyone who argues that a weapon that will fire and reload as fast as one can squeeze the trigger with a mega magazine capacity does not argue from a hunters perspective. It is more like Rambo identity complex. I totally agree with Mr. Alexander that such weapons should be banned from public access.

    • woodrow minchener

      The second ammendment gives the right to keep and bear arms not just hunting rifles. The most sane statement regarding this subject is that if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns. If this coward had believed that half of the people in the theater were carrying guns would he have attempted his assination? And if he did would he have made as many kills. I bet there are many people who lost love ones who wish that many people would have been armed that night. Most any gun can be modified. Guns are not that hard to fabricate. Taking guns out of the hands of good citizens would only make it easier for those who wish to do evil. Its just common sence. That’s the problem. No common sence.

      • tdog

        If half the people in that theater did turn around and start firing I’ll bet there would be far more than 12 funerals being planned right now.

    • vspk

      You are an idiot. A shotgun with 3 buckshot carries just as many pellets as a loaded assult rifle.
      Everyone forcing strict gun control is just making it easier for the criminals in this word to get guns by disarming the law abiding people.
      How about all the fat people in the world blame spoons for their weight gain, then people like you can chime in and try to ban spoons…

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