Daniel E. Jacobs

Putting in his own words what people have been trying to say about this debate for some time, as well as offering so of the same answers that seem to be the most reasonable one out there. Speaking as a gun owner brought up by in a family of them who father was in vet I have respect for them but I know what they are for and they are not for. They aren't toys that aren't tools they are for killing. when you Hunt you kill something, King reminds us what guns are for, and what we should be thinking about.

"those who stand firmly, even hysterically, against any kind of control love their neighbors and their communities, but harbor a distrust of the federal government so deep it borders on paranoia (and in some case passes that border without so much as a howdy-do at the check point)" and "If Lanza had been reloading after shooting his way in, she migh have succeeeded. He was crazy, but he was also a scrawny wisp of a kid, the bushmaster was his equalizer, he had plenty of ammo left, so he shot and killed Hocksprung before she could get to him. I wish with all my heart that she had tackled him and beat that crazy little *beep* head bloody against the floor, and gotten a medal from the president on national tv. she was too brave to die the way she did"

This adds a voice to the debate that is well thought out and well done