This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Oldest First
  • Mo Blues Jan 25, 3:53 p.m.

    Hundreds of young, black males die on the streets of Chicago every darn year. A psychotic freak kills some white children at school in a provably rare act, and NOW you want to talk "gun safety"? Why is that?

  • Worland Jan 25, 3:41 p.m.

    Feinstein's list of banned guns includes several hunting rifles. The Saiga & VEPRs are hunting rifles as defined by Clinton's 1998 trade agreement with Russia. She even bans the Saiga shotgun, which was also OK with Clinton. She also lists the Streetsweeper and Stryker shotguns which have already been banned by the ATF as destructive devises!

    The list includes just about any rifle and shotgun that's semi automatic, whether it's a hunting rifle or is already a low capacity weapon. About 90% of the rifles in the country would be banned.

  • davisgw Jan 25, 3:28 p.m.

    Patriotsrevenge needs the class on stasticis. 500 out of 9,752,073 would be stasticallt insignigfient. In other a wasted poll. It would require a minimum of 9,000 if the poll was conducted in a manner which included all of the demographic variables.

  • patriotsrevenge Jan 25, 3:20 p.m.

    "There is already a law in place... "Thou shalt not kill"

    NC_Beach_n_Mtn_guy

    Yet another person on WRAL confusing religion/bible with the law. Yes, there are laws against murder, but the bible is NOT the law here. This is NOT Iran. This is NOT a "Christian nation", it is a nation with a majority of Christians. There's a HUGE difference. Why can't people understand that?

  • redwolfone Jan 25, 3:03 p.m.

    make a good point and it will not get posted. They have to have approval from their DNC masters.

  • NC_Beach_n_Mtn_guy Jan 25, 2:57 p.m.

    There is already a law in place... "Thou shalt not kill"

  • wildpig777 Jan 25, 2:31 p.m.

    Why won't WRAL discuss those results from their OWN POLL? I grew up under Communism and the selective reporting I see from WRAL reminds me an awful lot of Pravda. Shame, shame, shame.

    Are you going to censor this too, tovarish (comrade)?- rargo

    WRAL CENSORS- are you listening? i'd say about 50-65% of my very reasonable posts never make it past the wral censors.

  • Fatheroffive Jan 25, 2:24 p.m.

    I think people who support expanded background checks are fooling themselves as to the government's end game here. While expanded background checks at "guns shows" seem reasonable to some, ultimately, the government seeks to regulate all gun transactions, which is unacceptable to me. Will the government decide if my father can leave me an old family heirloom shotgun in his will? Can I give my boys rifles for Christmas? If someone goes through a tough time and is prescribed an antidepressant, is that person now ineligible to posses a firearm? Don't be fooled by the rhetoric.

  • patriotsrevenge Jan 25, 2:10 p.m.

    "A survey of 500? out of a population of 9,752,073. Biased much WRAL?"

    apocalyptoconquistador

    Yes a survey of 500, it's called statistics. I could recommend a tutor if you'd like.

  • apocalyptoconquistador Jan 25, 1:56 p.m.

    A survey of 500? out of a population of 9,752,073. Biased much WRAL?

  • Vincent Vega Jan 25, 1:42 p.m.

    No Shots Fired: Home Intruders Decide Not to Stick Around After Seeing Their ‘Victim’ Holding an AR-15

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/24/no-shots-fired-home-intruders-decide-not-to-stick-around-after-seeing-their-victim-holding-an-ar-15/

  • ncvamd Jan 25, 12:52 p.m.

    ALL THIS IS TO GET YOUR MIND OFF THE POOR ECONOMY. BUT THIS IS THE LIBERAL PRESS AT IT WORST.

  • MitziGaynor Jan 25, 12:48 p.m.

    Noticed WRAL has had this up for DAYS. Hmmm think they are trying to brainwash? Maybe push their agenda?

  • highcountry Jan 25, 12:47 p.m.

    It is obvious that this poll was taken at the Carrboro farmers market last Saturday!!!

  • arfamr1007 Jan 25, 12:14 p.m.

    1500 randomly selected college sophomores...lol

  • rargos Jan 25, 11:50 a.m.

    WRAL keeps refusing to post my comment about the VERY biased way their OWN POLL is being presented : if you read the poll results, it also shows that a significant majority support better enforcement of existing laws than new laws, higher taxes (!) for armed guards in schools, etc. It also shows that more people view the NRA favorably than unfavorably.

    Why won't WRAL discuss those results from their OWN POLL? I grew up under Communism and the selective reporting I see from WRAL reminds me an awful lot of Pravda. Shame, shame, shame.

    Are you going to censor this too, tovarish (comrade)?

  • jlyn67 Jan 25, 11:20 a.m.

    Anyone that wants to purchase a handgun in Wake county must apply for a permit to buy at the Sheriffs office and part of the process is a criminal background check. The problem is the sellers that undermine this requirement and sell under the table, those are the people that need to be looked at. And I agree that people that have mental health issues should not be allowed to purchase a firearm until deemed by their doctor to not be a threat to anyone!

  • highcountry Jan 25, 11:01 a.m.

    Nobody believes in this...fun y thing about these polls...it seems like everywhere I go, everyone I meet is strongly against this government taking and or restricting the United States Citizens weapons and right to them. I have not met one person who agrees. These news articles are nothing but salt licks for the sheep!!

  • livinggood2 Jan 25, 10:58 a.m.

    Who did they poll?

  • robjustrob Jan 25, 10:53 a.m.

    Why haven't the Mothers Against Drunk Driving called for a ban on cars and alcohol? Why haven't they demanded mandatory criminal background checks on anyone who buys a vehicle or a case of beer? How about a limit on how fast a vehicle can go? No one needs a vehicle capable of speeds over 65MPH. And nobody should be allowed to purchase more cans or bottles of spirits capable of raising one's blood/alcohol level beyond the legal limit. Matter of fact, why haven't they demanded that the legal limit be looked at as well? The members of MADD have every reason to be as outraged as any parent of those killed by firearms in a movie theater or a school. One death is every bit as heinous as twenty-one. Yet, common sense prevails when a group like MADD calls for more personal responsibility and more severe penalties for drunk drivers even before the deaths begin to occur. Per 2nd Amendment stipulations, we ARE going to need more than cars and beer to "throw off an oppressive government."

  • junkmail5 Jan 25, 10:21 a.m.

    Think your missing the point, 67% of the guns confiscated by the police came from the United States.- Bill Brasky

    No, they didn't.

    67% of the guns THEY COULD TRACE did.

    Only about 34% of the total guns did.

    (and some of THOSE were due to the US government explicitly allowed them to be smuggled of course)

  • BELLA28 Jan 25, 10:13 a.m.

    Sigh. The background checks should not be the only concern. What about those with mental issues with clean backgrounds? What about those with no mental issues and clean backgrounds that just snap? What about those with clean backgrounds, clean mental state that forget to lock up or put their gun away safely? So many what if questions.

  • davisgw Jan 25, 9:58 a.m.

    The devil is in the details on background checks. If it left up to the local law enforcement I am aganist it. Some sheriffs like the one in Hoke use the wording of the law to limit purchases. Permits in each county in North Carolina are still subject to the local sheriffs office. We need to take the personal opinions and politics out of the mix and stop discriminating.

  • davisgw Jan 25, 9:54 a.m.

    The report from Mexico which indicated 67% of small arms came from the US was later shown to be an outright lie. 80% of small armes came from Central America and Almost all fully automatic weapons and grenades came from Central America. Many of the products were made in the US but had been given to foreigh government under defense contracts.

  • lazyrebel Jan 25, 9:42 a.m.

    Who did WRAL poll, I think there numbers are wrong. NRA membership went up almost 500000 members the frist week Dear Leader wanted the ban

  • Bill Brasky Jan 25, 9:20 a.m.

    "hence the point of those not in favor of gun control...look at the amount of violence in Mexico...
    more control does not equal less crime."

    Think your missing the point, 67% of the guns confiscated by the police came from the United States. If it wasn't for our lax gun laws Mexico wouldn't be in such bad shape.

  • Dnut Jan 24, 8:05 p.m.

    "you just try to pretend that education is a bad thing."
    No... he's just pointing out that you're poorly educated on this issue. And he's correct.
    Ripcord
    ....and those we're Rachael's talking points to a tee, and spewing hateful speech for the 2nd amendment and what the framers actually intended for it...but hey, don't let a little thing like the law of the land stand in your way...hasn't stopped you yet!

  • Ripcord Jan 24, 7:47 p.m.

    "you just try to pretend that education is a bad thing."

    No... he's just pointing out that you're poorly educated on this issue. And he's correct.

  • Ripcord Jan 24, 7:46 p.m.

    "Has anyone ever considered that we need to go back to basics such as the family unit and morality?" - Hip Shot

    I agree, but your suggestion isn't "Progressive" so these things must be destroyed.

  • jackflash123 Jan 24, 7:35 p.m.

    "........Somebody's been watchin' Rachel Maddow....you so edumacated!!"

    Actually, no, I don't care for her, either. She is also too extreme, just like the NRA. I like how instead of challenging any point I made, you just try to pretend that education is a bad thing.

  • Ripcord Jan 24, 7:35 p.m.

    "We're still trying to get the extremist gun nuts (not to be confused w/ gun owners) to recognize the limits of the 2nd."

    You say "We're still..." Who is "We"? And please define "extremist gun nut".

  • RKBA Jan 24, 7:33 p.m.

    Wayne LaPierre was wrong, the "jack booted thuhgz" exist in the blue uniforms in Congress, not in the ATF.

  • Plenty Coups Jan 24, 7:33 p.m.

    ".......That's a lie, I just left a friends shop today,"

    More anecdotal comments unbacked by evidence.

  • Hip-Shot Jan 24, 7:31 p.m.

    I support the notion that people that are mentally impaired should not have ownership to firearms. I don't believe we need more laws to control law abiding citizens. I do believe there are plenty of laws on the books that simply need to be enforced. Making things harder on law abiding citizens is not solving the problem.

    Has anyone ever considered that we need to go back to basics such as the family unit and morality? We've turned our backs on these and are cursed as a result.

  • RKBA Jan 24, 7:30 p.m.

    So, let me understand.

    The the liberal/gun grabber

    "Shall not be infringed" really means "It's OK to infringe".

    Additionally, does ANYONE truly believe that immediately after our country had fought and won a guerrilla war against a tyrannical government, that the second item in our Bill of Rights was defined to protect duck hunting or the rights of sportsmen?

    The fact that people can assert such nonsense with a straight face demonstrates their extreme ideology.

  • Ripcord Jan 24, 7:28 p.m.

    "They resist EVERY gun law, claim the ones we have are sufficient, make it more difficult to enforce those laws, and make claims such as the only thing that will stop a bad guy w/ a gun is a good guy w/ a gun." - jackflash123

    Your answer was predictable. You clearly know nothing about the NRA. The NRA doesn't "resist EVERY gun law". You can thank the NRA for pushing congress to institute the NICS background checking system. The NRA has also been demanding for years that the gov't start prosecuting people who make straw purchases (less than 10% of straw purchases are actually prosecuted). Read it here:

    http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2013/1/biden-says-administration-doesn%27t-have-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks.aspx

    Educate yourself before you rant.

  • atheistswillrule Jan 24, 7:27 p.m.

    I resist every gun law. What part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" are you having difficulty parsing? rkba

    What part of "state militia ..shall not be infringed" do you have difficulty parsing? It says nothing about private gun ownership. That issue has been ruled on in specific cases by the supreme court, Much like the abortion issue. Like abortion? Wish the court would overturn that? Guess what? The private gun ownership issue can be overturned by the court just as easily.

  • jackflash123 Jan 24, 7:23 p.m.

    "I resist every gun law."

    Then you are an extremist who is completely out of touch with reality.

    "What part of 'SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED' are you having difficulty parsing?"

    That part earlier in the same sentence where it says "well regulated."

  • Dnut Jan 24, 7:21 p.m.

    "Exactly what is their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment?"

    They resist EVERY gun law, claim the ones we have are sufficient, make it more difficult to enforce those laws, and make claims such as the only thing that will stop a bad guy w/ a gun is a good guy w/ a gun. They refer to federal agents as "jack-booted th*gs" (prompting President George HW Bush to resign his membership and WRAL to censor that word) and create ridiculous commercials about the PRESIDENT's kids getting armed protection, as if that's a personal choice and not a matter of national security. You tell me: where does the NRA demonstrate and honor the idea of a "well regulated" militia? The NRA isn't defending the Constitution; they're the political mouthpiece of the gun industry.
    jackflash123
    ........Somebody's been watchin' Rachel Maddow....you so edumacated!!

  • Dnut Jan 24, 7:17 p.m.

    Current estimates put about 50% off all gun violence in the US tracks back to 1% of licensed dealers. Current law doesn't require those 1% to keep an inventory, submit sales records in any useful way, and actually bars the feds from inspecting them more than once a year.

    .......That's a lie, I just left a friends shop today, and he didn't even sale a weapon, he just worked on it, when the lower or breach of a weapon comes in to be worked on, he must log it in his firearms record data book, and if ATF, state or feds comes in, identify's themselves, he must shot them the record. Whether it's once a year or once a day, PERIOD! That's what licensed dealers must do. Oh, and I understand why licensed dealers are ABSOLUTE about everyone doing backgrounds on everything, because they'd cut out by law people who just buy sale and trade, (legally), with friends and others.

  • RKBA Jan 24, 7:16 p.m.

    I resist every gun law.

    What part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" are you having difficulty parsing?

  • jackflash123 Jan 24, 7:13 p.m.

    "Just because there are limits this does not mean that the Federal government has unlimited power to create more limits."

    Why would you need to point out to someone who just said there were limits that there are also limits to the federal govt? The extremists in this discussion aren't the people supporting the inclusion of gun laws in the larger discussion; it's the people who think more guns everywhere is the only solution and who refuse to accept that guns are even one of many factors to look at.

  • jackflash123 Jan 24, 7:09 p.m.

    "Just because there are limits this does not mean that the Federal government has unlimited power to create more limits. There are limits to the federal government, as much as that idea pains you."

    Why would you assume that someone pointing out those limits wouldn't think that also applied to the federal govt? We're still trying to get the extremist gun nuts (not to be confused w/ gun owners) to recognize the limits of the 2nd. That's hardly an extremist counter-balance; it's not fighting fire w/ fire. Yet you automatically go to the opposite extreme? That the feds are coming to take your guns w/o any limits whatsoever?

  • jackflash123 Jan 24, 7:03 p.m.

    "Exactly what is their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment?"

    They resist EVERY gun law, claim the ones we have are sufficient, make it more difficult to enforce those laws, and make claims such as the only thing that will stop a bad guy w/ a gun is a good guy w/ a gun. They refer to federal agents as "jack-booted th*gs" (prompting President George HW Bush to resign his membership and WRAL to censor that word) and create ridiculous commercials about the PRESIDENT's kids getting armed protection, as if that's a personal choice and not a matter of national security. You tell me: where does the NRA demonstrate and honor the idea of a "well regulated" militia? The NRA isn't defending the Constitution; they're the political mouthpiece of the gun industry.

  • Dnut Jan 24, 7:00 p.m.

    All they asked him for was a drivers license and he handed them the cash and came out 20 minutes later with a laserMax glock.
    welfarequeen
    It's just a laser for a glock, so maybe he did come out in twenty minutes, last I checked the laser sights don't need a back ground check.

  • Ripcord Jan 24, 6:52 p.m.

    "Even Justice Scalia admits there are limits to the 2nd amendment."

    Just because there are limits this does not mean that the Federal government has unlimited power to create more limits. There are limits to the federal government, as much as that idea pains you.

  • Plenty Coups Jan 24, 6:24 p.m.

    "The 2nd amendment is very simply stated. The NRA doesn't need to define it. Just as we don't need to define the first amendment."

    Not true at all. The supreme court has consistently maintained that there are limits to the bill of rights. Even Justice Scalia admits there are limits to the 2nd amendment.

  • Plenty Coups Jan 24, 6:23 p.m.

    "According to the update book they sent me last year it clearly states they can. I have many friends who hold FFLs and have been visited unannounced by the ATF more than one time a year."

    This is just anecdotal, unprovable stuff. Their own rules are wrong? Give me a break. Please don't make claims that you can't back up.

  • junkmail5 Jan 24, 6:05 p.m.

    The 2nd amendment is very simply stated. The NRA doesn't need to define it. Just as we don't need to define the first amendment-emtp2k

    Eh...we kind of do though.

    We don't let you yell fire in a crowded theater (legally anyway)

    We don't don't let you say untrue things that harm and defraud others (legally anyway)

    We don't let you own working RPGs

  • emtp2k Jan 24, 6:01 p.m.

    Not legally and without a warrant according to the ATF.
    From their website: "With certain exceptions, the Gun Control Act allows ATF to conduct one warrantless, annual compliance inspection of a federal firearms licensee (FFL)."

    According to the update book they sent me last year it clearly states they can. I have many friends who hold FFLs and have been visited unannounced by the ATF more than one time a year. They can come and inspect every month for all I care.

Oldest First